Floor Statements

I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Hollings), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``nay.''

Mr. President, in response to the leader's statement, we also believe in energy independence and the security of the Nation.

Fine. I will withhold.

Mr. President, I say through the Chair to my colleagues, we also believe in energy independence. We also believe in the security of this Nation. This was a bipartisan vote that just took place. I think we would all be well advised, this late in the session, to recognize that we should take this bill back to the committee, conference, if necessary, but I suspect it would be better off going back to committee and coming up with a different piece of legislation. People over here want badly to have a bill. The 58 votes we have are firm votes. It would not be advisable to have a vote, say, on Monday or Sunday. Cloture is not going to be invoked.

But let's assume it were for purposes of this argument. Then we have the situation where there are hours following that debate, and I just think we should recognize where we are. The reality is, it is late in the session. We need to go to some other matters. With this vote, we did the Senate a favor, as everyone knows. There are points of order, rule XXVIII. This bill was going nowhere. We just did it quickly rather than prolong it. It doesn't help the Senate to prolong the inevitable. The inevitable is this bill is history. It is not going to go anyplace.

We really did the Senate a favor. Cloture was not invoked. There are points of order against this bill, as we all know. There would be bipartisan votes on those matters. I think we should go on to something else. This was a very good debate. I think we should look back at this as something that is good for the Senate in the sense that the tone was good, and look forward to the very important issues we have facing us, difficult issues. We have the omnibus bill. We have the important Medicare bill. I hope that we would not prolong things on this much longer because this bill, in its present form, is just not going anyplace.

Mr. President, I wish I listened to the speech before I had lunch.

On a serious note, Senator Durbin is here and he will start talking about the Medicare bill that will soon be taken up in the Senate. I think the leader would agree that people should come now and start talking about this most important piece of legislation.

Senator Durbin is in the Chamber to talk about it. I think we should invite all Senators because the time later could be a little more constrictive.

I also say, on a serious note, about the speech the distinguished majority leader just gave, one of the reasons the leader has such high respect on both sides of the aisle is we know of his background. It is not often we have someone of his medical talents come to this body. In fact, no one has ever had the same background. He uses it in such a dignified way, in his charitable work when we are on break, doing things for the less fortunate in Africa and other places. And here, it is always good for us to know that when we do deal with health issues, he is here.

So I speak for the entire Senate when I say this presentation he just delivered on obesity is something we should all pay attention to because I know this is not a speech that someone prepared for him; this is something he spoke to with his knowledge as one the finest physicians in America.

Reserving the right to object, I would like to extend the appreciation of the entire Senate, especially on this side, to those who worked to allow us to be at this point: Senators Lautenberg, Dorgan, and Rockefeller, and the ranking member of the committee, Senator Hollings, and the cooperation of Senator Lott, and others. This is a very important piece of legislation for the State of Nevada but also for the entire country. I underscore the very good work of the individuals I mentioned.

This is not perfect, but it goes a long way to protecting working men and women who make it possible for everyone to fly safely in America today.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that copies of a letter from Marion C. Blakey, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, we received word Senator Domenici would not be here this morning. Of course, he is managing this bill. Whenever he comes, we will work him into the order.

Mr. President, it is my understanding that it works better if people know when they are supposed to come. The order locked in now is Senator Leahy will be recognized at 1:45; is that right?

That is now the order before the Senate.

The only other Senator I know, either Democrat or Republican, who wishes to speak is Senator Durbin. I ask that he follow Senator Bunning.

Mr. President, it is my understanding that we are expecting Senator Graham as part of an order.

I will speak for a few minutes until he comes.

I am happy to yield.

Will the Chair announce the schedule before the Senate as to what speakers will appear.

I ask unanimous consent that following Senator Graham, the majority be recognized if they desire, and then following that, Senator Schumer have an opportunity to speak.

Mr. President, as we look around the world today, we see blackouts and we see wild price spikes in electricity markets. We see turmoil in the Middle East. We see global warming caused by fossil fuel emissions. We see air pollution that contributes to asthma attacks among our smallest citizens--our children. We see our parks that are smog-ridden. We see all these things, and we realize the United States needs a national energy policy with a purpose and a vision.

We don't need more of the same old thing--more drilling, more burning, more shortages, more blackouts, more price spikes, and ever larger vehicles with inefficient engines. We need a national energy strategy that will protect our environment, provide a reliable supply of electricity for our consumers, and bolster our national security.

Instead, we get a $75 billion grab bag that I believe has serious problems with the three P's--process, pork, and policy.

The process of this bill was fatally flawed. The genesis of the bill, I believe, was hatched in secret almost 3 years ago by the Cheney task force and completed in secret just a few days ago.

The usual policy--and we have tried to live up to that--is the Senate does a bill, the House does a bill, and both parties--that is the Senators from the Senate and Congressmen from the House, Democrats and Republicans--sit down together to try to work out an arrangement. In this instance, the ranking member of the committee, Senator Bingaman, who was also the former chairman of the committee, was not consulted. The first he saw the bill was when it was printed. The distinguished Senator from Vermont, the ranking member and former chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, Senator Jeffords, was not consulted, even though 100 titles of this legislation that is now before the Senate were under the jurisdiction of the Environment and Public Works Committee.

The pork was best summed up by Senator McCain's description of this bill: Leave no lobbyist behind. It is shameful that two-thirds of the tax incentives in this bill go to oil, gas, coal, and nuclear energy. This is an investment in the past, not an investment in the future.

This bill will lavish more than $55 billion of taxpayer money on some of the wealthiest corporations in the world; namely, oil, gas, and coal companies. It would be better if the companies were all U.S. companies, but some of them are not even U.S. companies getting these benefits.

The most disappointing aspect about this bill is its failure to enact a policy with vision. After pouring billions of dollars into oil and natural gas, we need to invest in clean technology, in a clean energy future. Sadly, this bill is more of the same old, same old. It endangers the environment; it does nothing to help consumers; and it will not break our dependence on foreign oil, a dependence that jeopardizes our national security.

Let's start with the assaults on the environment that are included in this bill.

There have been hours of speeches given in the last 2 days of how it endangers our water supply by granting MTBE producers immunity from claims that the additive is defective in design or manufacture and by weakening the leaking underground storage tank regulations.

It allows large metropolitan areas to extend deadlines for ozone nonattainment areas to comply with the Clean Air Act, and it relaxes regulatory requirements for energy production on Indian reservations and public lands.

It is beyond my ability to comprehend how anyone who is supportive of tribal sovereignty, reservations, and economic development with our Indian tribes could support this legislation.

This bill also falls short of the real steps needed to guide America toward energy independence.

For example, it is a great disappointment to me that higher fuel efficiency standards have not been included in this bill. If all cars, trucks and sport utility vehicles had a CAFE standard of 27.5 miles per gallon, the country would save more oil in 3 years than could be recovered economically from the entire Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. A comprehensive energy strategy must include conservation, efficiency, and expand generating capacity.

Certainly our Nation must promote the responsible production of oil and gas, but that doesn't mean we should sacrifice the environmental protections of our public lands.

We can't drill our way to energy independence. America only has 3 percent of the world's oil reserved, but we use 25 percent of the world's supply.

This bill also fails to protect consumers.

In the past few years, people in my home State and other Western States have experienced severe spikes in the price of electricity. The policies of the past are not the answer. Like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, the solution is literally right at our feet--under the ground, in the wind around us, and emanating from the Sun. In Nevada and other Western States, we have the potential to generate enormous amounts of electricity with geothermal, wind, and solar power. That is why I am disappointed this energy bill does not contain a renewable portfolio standard requiring that a growing percentage of the Nation's power supply come from renewable energy resources.

I am proud that my home State of Nevada has adopted one of the most aggressive renewable portfolio standards of any State. It requires us to produce 5 percent of our electricity with renewable sources, not counting hydropower, by the end of this year. In 10 years, the goal jumps to 15 percent. We already have developed 200 megawatts of geothermal power, with a long-term potential of more than 2,500 megawatts.

Utilities in Nevada have also signed contracts to provide 205 megawatts of wind power in 2 years, and an additional 90 megawatts is proposed. By some estimates, we could potentially produce more than 5,700 megawatts from wind power--meaning we could meet our entire electricity needs with geothermal and wind. So I wish this bill included a Renewable Portfolio Standard.

Thankfully, it does extend and expand the production tax credit on renewable energy resources from wind and poultry waste to include geothermal, solar, and open-loop biomass. I have spent years fighting for this tax credit, because it will give businesses the certainty they need to invest in geothermal and solar generating facilities. We know the production tax credit will work because it already has. With the benefit of the existing production tax credit, wind energy is the fastest growing renewable energy source. In 1990, the cost of wind energy was 22.5 cents per kilowatt hour. Today, with new technology and the help of a modest production tax credit, wind is a competitive energy source at 3 to 4 cents per kilowatt hour. I applaud the fact that wind, geothermal, and solar energy will receive a production tax credit of 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour.

I had hoped the bill would provide geothermal and solar energy the same 10-year tax credit that wind energy enjoys, but a 5-year credit is a good start. The facilities to develop these energy resources are very capital intensive, and a 10-year tax incentive is needed to fully realize our renewable energy potential.

Developing these renewable resources will not only help consumers, it will create thousands of jobs. And many of these jobs will be in rural areas that are desperate for economic growth. A report from the Tellus Institute, ``Clean Energy: Jobs for America's Future,'' found that investment in renewable energy could lead to a net annual employment increase of more than 700,000 jobs in 2010, rising to approximately 1.3 billion by 2020, and that each State would experience a positive net job impact. This is why we must be bold. We must not cling to the fossil fuel technology of the past. We must explore and seize the potential of the future.

I opened my remarks a few minutes ago by talking about all of the problems we see if we look around the world today. But I also see much that could be positive. I see renewable energy resources--the brilliance of the sun, the power of the wind, the eternal heat within the Earth. And I see the good old American ingenuity to unlock that enormous potential.

With a little bit of incentive and investment, we can develop the technologies to efficiently develop our renewable resources. And as fantastic as it sounds, with the use of hydrogen fuel cells, oil will eventually be phased out as the primary transportation fuel.

If we choose to invest in energy efficient and renewable technologies, we will create thousands of new jobs, we will protect our environment, we will provide consumers with reliable sources of energy, and we will bolster our national security. That is the vision our Nation needs. That is the leadership we must provide.

If the Senator has finished his comment on the passage of this important legislation, I would like to briefly say John Lewis's name was mentioned, and rightfully so. Everyone the distinguished majority leader mentioned has played a significant role in this legislation before us, but when John Lewis came to Washington, this became a personal crusade of his.

John Lewis is one of my heroes. I have such great admiration and respect for him. I think this is the culmination of a dream he started many years ago. I want the record to be clear as to how much this means to him, the people of Georgia, and this country.

Reserving the right to object, I appreciate the majority leader allowing the full 60 minutes after the prayer and pledge.

I ask, so there is no confusion on this side--this has been cleared with Senator Bingaman--the time on our side be allotted as follows: Senator Lieberman, 4 minutes; Senator McCain, 4 minutes; Senator Cantwell, 3 minutes; Senator Schumer, 4 minutes; Senator Jeffords, 4 minutes; Senator Collins, 4 minutes; and the final 5 minutes, as pursuant to the intended order be Senator Bingaman.

Mr. President, it is my understanding on the conference report it is privileged, but it could require a vote. On our side, we have no request for a vote to get the conference report on the floor. So on our side we do not need a vote, and I want the leader to know that. We worked last night with a couple of people who thought a vote would be necessary, but they no longer believe it is necessary, so we are ready to move to that as soon as it is here.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, on the minority side, we have a number of Senators who are going to speak. I will ask unanimous consent that they speak. I have three who wish to speak now, and we have a time at which they want to speak. If there are Senators from the majority who want to come in between those, that would also be part of the order. I think that would be fair.

I ask unanimous consent that on our side Senator Kennedy be recognized for \1/2\ hour, Senator Cantwell be recognized for \1/2\ hour, and Senator Dorgan be recognized for 30 minutes. As I indicated, if there are Senators from the majority who wish to speak following Senator Kennedy, Senator Cantwell, and Senator Dorgan, that would be appropriate. If not, we have other Senators who have indicated a desire to speak. This is not in the order which they will appear.

So that everyone knows, there are a number of speakers who want to talk: Senators Akaka, Reed of Rhode Island, Feinstein, Stabenow, Feingold, Landrieu, Sarbanes, and Clinton.

I ask unanimous consent that Senator Kennedy be recognized for \1/2\ hour, Senator Cantwell for \1/2\ hour, and Senator Dorgan for 30 minutes. If there are Republicans who wish to

speak in between, those Senators will be part of the order.

Senator McCain can come at any time he wants, either after Senator Kennedy or Senator Cantwell or Senator Dorgan. Whenever the distinguished senior Senator from Arizona shows up, we always give him the floor anyway.

That would be perfect.

Mr. President, the other statement I made was just to inform both the minority and the majority that the Members who desire may speak sometime this evening without any specified time or in any necessary order.

Mr. President, the distinguished senior Senator from Arizona has called and wishes to speak following Senator Cantwell. I ask unanimous consent that that be a part of the order, following her statement, the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, be recognized for whatever time he may consume.

No objection.

Mr. President, I see the manager of the bill. Senator Dorgan is going to speak. It is my understanding that Senator Collins wishes to speak following Senator Dorgan. Does Senator Domenici wish to speak in between?

Does the Senator from Maine have an idea how long she is going to speak?

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that she be given 15 minutes.

On our side, the next speaker would be Senator Akaka. As we have done during this day, we have gone back and forth on speakers, so after Senator Collins, Senator Akaka would be recognized.

Would you like to be recognized after Senator Collins?

And do you have any idea how long you wish to speak?

So Senator Domenici for 15 minutes and then Senator Akaka. How long would he like?

Just so we don't get the time out of balance, Senator Akaka wants 30 minutes. So Senator Domenici would follow Senator Inhofe. Because we are taking a little extra time here, we would have two Republican speakers, Inhofe for 15 minutes and Domenici for 15 minutes following Senator Akaka.

That would be fine. He would be followed by Senator Domenici, and then we would have Senator Jack Reed go after that for 20 minutes. Senator Akaka for 30 and Senator Reed for 20. I so ask the Chair to approve our unanimous consent request.

Madam President, if the Senator will yield for a question, through the Chair, how long does the Senator wish to speak? There are other Senators who wish to speak. There is no rush. I want to know when they should come over.

Mr. President, I want to thank Senators Enzi, Ensign, Boxer, and Allen for their hard work and continued efforts on this issue.

It is with pleasure that I introduce bipartisan legislation, the Stock Option Accounting Reform Act of 2003, that is good for economic growth and the American way.

We have to protect investors and stockholders by ensuring that our Nation's accounting standards are transparent, open and balanced. At the same time, we don't want to choke the entrepreneurial spirit of start-up companies with too much bureaucratic red tape.

This legislation achieves just the right balance. It gives regulators a framework to protect the integrity of the accounting process, but it doesn't stifle free enterprise.

This bill requires a joint study by the Department of Labor and Department of Commerce to help FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) treat stock options fairly. It will help regulators valuate stocks for accounting purposes. It will curb stock option abuse by requiring the top five executives at large companies to expense their options. This will provide a true picture of a company's financial health.

Finally, it will protect small businesses and start-ups that rely upon stock options to attract good employees.

This bill is good for emerging companies and good for consumers. It's a balanced approach that deserves broad bipartisan support.

Mr. President, I want to thank Senators Enzi, Ensign, Boxer, and Allen for their hard work and continued efforts on this issue.

It is with pleasure that I introduce bipartisan legislation, the Stock Option Accounting Reform Act of 2003, that is good for economic growth and the American way.

We have to protect investors and stockholders by ensuring that our Nation's accounting standards are transparent, open and balanced. At the same time, we don't want to choke the entrepreneurial spirit of start-up companies with too much bureaucratic red tape.

This legislation achieves just the right balance. It gives regulators a framework to protect the integrity of the accounting process, but it doesn't stifle free enterprise.

This bill requires a joint study by the Department of Labor and Department of Commerce to help FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) treat stock options fairly. It will help regulators valuate stocks for accounting purposes. It will curb stock option abuse by requiring the top five executives at large companies to expense their options. This will provide a true picture of a company's financial health.

Finally, it will protect small businesses and start-ups that rely upon stock options to attract good employees.

This bill is good for emerging companies and good for consumers. It's a balanced approach that deserves broad bipartisan support.

Mr. President, we worked for several hours this afternoon on the conference on the omnibus. Significant progress was made. The DC title was closed. The VA-HUD title was closed. The Commerce-State- Justice is one open item. But that should be resolved quickly tomorrow, which leaves Agriculture and Labor-HHS.

I think that is what we have left. I think progress was made. Another couple of hours tomorrow and we should be able to finish that. That would bring that very important bill to the floor. At this stage, it appears that Senators Stevens and Byrd have done an outstanding job, having just dealt with those appropriations bills and not extraneous materials, as some talked about doing.

I think this is something that, in a relatively short period of time, if things continue like this in conference, should not take a lot of floor time.