Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on Mar 15th, 2011 :: 2:16:25 to 2:26:35
Total video length: 2 hours 29 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:66 Duration: 0:10:10 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

James Inhofe

2:16:21 to 2:16:41( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: the floor of the senate. with that, yield the floor. the pres senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: mr. president, first of all, let me thank the senator from nebraska for

James Inhofe

2:16:25 to 2:26:35( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: James Inhofe

James Inhofe

2:16:42 to 2:17:04( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: allowing me to come in immediately following his remarks. mr. president, an amendment was just offered by the majority leader -- minority leader. let me explain what this is. as the former chairman of the environment and public works committee and then now the ranking very much concerned for a long period of time over what they're

James Inhofe

2:17:05 to 2:17:25( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: trying to do with cap-and-trade. all the way back to the kyoto treaty, we recognized and then all the different bills debated on the senate floor, we recognized the cost, incredible cost of what it would be to the american people if we were to pass cap-and-trade legislation. the interesting thing about this

James Inhofe

2:17:26 to 2:17:47( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: is the most votes that were in the united states senate at any one time in order to pass cap-and-trade were about 30 votes. obviously it takes a lot more than that. and so what this administration did was say all right, if you're not going to pass cap-and-trade regulation, keep in mind what that is, that would end up being the largest tax increase in the

James Inhofe

2:17:48 to 2:18:12( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: mystery of america on the american people -- if you're not going to do it through legislation, we'll do it through our regulations through the environmental protection agency. and so there was an endangerment finding. the administrator of the e.p.a. had the endangerment finding, and it was based on the ipcc flawed science. nonetheless, it was there.

James Inhofe

2:18:13 to 2:18:35( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: and so they started on a route to regulate co2 through regulations. let's stop and think about what that would be. the cost that we have determined over a period of ten years now to take over the regulation and have -- tph-fbgs a type of cap-and-trade -- in fact a type

James Inhofe

2:18:36 to 2:18:56( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: of cap-and-trade through regulation would be about $300 billion to $400 billion a year. i estimated what that would cost an average family in oklahoma. it was about $3,000 for each family that pays, that actually files a tax return. you have to ask the question: what you get if you pass this.

James Inhofe

2:18:57 to 2:19:20( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: first of all, i think most of the people right now are concerned with the price of gasoline at the pump. it's going up again. and i would suggest to you that it's not market forces that are forcing the price up. it is nothing less than just the regulation. we have an administration, mr. president, who is doing all

James Inhofe

2:19:21 to 2:19:43( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: they can to kill fossil fuels in america. right now the most recent -- let's put the chart up there showing that we have in the united states -- and this has all happened within the last year. reserves in oil, coal, and gas of any other country in america. in fact, our reserves right

James Inhofe

2:19:44 to 2:20:05( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: there, you can see recoverable reserves, are astronomical compared to china, iran, canada and some of the other countries. now the problem we have is a political problem. we have a political problem. we are not allowed to go ahead and exploit our own reserves.

James Inhofe

2:20:06 to 2:20:30( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: and so it's as simple as supply-and-demand thing. i think there's probably not a person listening to us right now who hasn't studied supply and demand, the basics back in school. if we have all of this supply over here, then why can't we exploit this supply? right now -- let's see the chart

James Inhofe

2:20:31 to 2:20:51( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: you have on -- the other to give you an idea of what we have -- and let's just take coal reserves. we have 28% of all the world's coal reserves. we're exploiting right now clean coal t-pblg; being very -- clean

James Inhofe

2:20:52 to 2:21:12( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: coal technology, being very successful. the problem we have is a political problem. it was the secretary of energy, steven khao urbgs who made this statement. it was in the "wall street journal." he said somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to levels in europe. i want to you listen to that, mr. president. to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in europe. right now the levels in europe

James Inhofe

2:21:13 to 2:21:33( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: are $8 a gallon. that's what this administration wants us to pay. why do they want that? they want that so that we'll be forced, priced out of using fossil fuels. and we're talking about oil, gas, and coal. so right now we are faced with this.

James Inhofe

2:21:34 to 2:21:59( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: and, quite frankly, as we speak this very moment over in the house of representatives they are taking up what they call the upton-inhofe amendment or bill, and that's the same amendment we just now filed, or the minority leader just filed. what that does is take the content of the inhofe-upton bill which says the e.p.a. does not

James Inhofe

2:22:01 to 2:22:21( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: have the jurisdiction over the, controlling co2. that should be a legislative matter. now you have to say who would agree with that? a democrat from montana, max baucus, said i mentioned that i do not want the e.p.a. writing those regulations. continuing's too much power in the hands of -- i think it's too much power in the hands of one agency but rather climate change

James Inhofe

2:22:22 to 2:22:42( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: should be a matter essentially left to congress. the senator from nebraska who justified walked off the floor a minute ago, he said controlling the levels of carbon emissions is the job of congress. we don't need the e.p.a. looking over congress's shoulder telling us we're not moving fast enough. further, the e.p.a. regulations would be a government-directed

James Inhofe

2:22:43 to 2:23:03( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: command and control regime, they would raise the price of energy in his state and all the other states. well, this is something that i think we have talked about and talked about. but there's one thing that seems to keep getting overlooked. let's assume -- somebody asked me the other day, they said inhofe, what if you're wrong in

James Inhofe

2:23:04 to 2:23:24( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: terms of how co2 would affect, talking about catastrophic global warming. i said it's very simple because i have a great deal of respect for the director of the environmental protection agency. she actually said, lisa jackson, in response to my question, live on tv in our committee, i said let's say we pass a cap-and-trade either by

James Inhofe

2:23:25 to 2:23:47( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: regulation or by legislation. what do you think that's going to do in terms of the overall emissions of co2? her response was: it really wouldn't affect them because that would only affect the united states. i go on further and say, if we were to restrict these and stop us from producing oil, gas and coal in the united states

James Inhofe

2:23:48 to 2:24:08( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: necessarily our power would be reduced. that would move it to china to, india, to mexico, to places where they don't have these regulations and don't have restrictions on emissions. it would have the effect of actually increasing, not decreasing, co2. even have to keep in mind that it would not make any difference.

James Inhofe

2:24:09 to 2:24:29( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: so i would -- i know there are several others who want to talk about this. i think it's very exciting that we now have this as a pending amendment to adopt what i refer to as the inhofe-upton bill. he refers to it as the upton-inhofe bill. it would merely take out the jurisdiction of the e.p.a. to

James Inhofe

2:24:30 to 2:24:51( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: regulate greenhouse, or co2. and i would say also in the case of the director, lisa jackson, when i asked the question -- this was a year ago in october, i say to my good friend from louisiana. i said if you are going to go ahead and try to have an endangerment finding so that

James Inhofe

2:24:52 to 2:25:12( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: that would allow the e.p.a. to regulate just the same as a cap-and-trade would, it has to be based on science. what science would you base it on? her response was the united nations ipcc. what is that? we all remember climategate. it happened a year ago. this was cooked science. i can remember standing at this podium, standing here in the

James Inhofe

2:25:13 to 2:25:35( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: senate many, many times talking about how they have tried to falsify the science to make people believe catastrophic global warming is going to come as a result of co2 emissions. so, i'm glad this has come up. we have the opportunity right now we're looking at gasoline approaching $4 a gallon. it's a supply-and-demand situation.

James Inhofe

2:25:36 to 2:26:00( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: my friend from louisiana has a lot of oil and gas in her state. we do in oklahoma. we need to get the regulators or the politicians from allowing us to go ahead and exploit our own resources. 83% right now of the federal planned where we could be producing oil and gas is off limits. the last thing i'll say before

James Inhofe

2:26:01 to 2:26:22( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: yielding the floor is that it's -- if we were to take just the recoverable oil and the recoverable gas and take away the political obstacles that are in the way, we would have enough to run this country for 90 years in terms of the supply of oil and for 90 years in the supply of gas, all produced here in the united states. that would mean we wouldn't have

James Inhofe

2:26:23 to 2:26:35( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: to be relying upon the middle east for our ability to run this machine called america. so let's pull away those. the way to do that is to vote for, in favor of this amendment. and i'm very excited that we

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid