Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding 03-15-11 on Mar 15th, 2011 :: 0:40:30 to 0:54:55
Total video length: 4 hours 57 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:185 Duration: 0:14:25 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

James Inhofe

0:40:26 to 0:40:46( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: amendment and we agreed earlier to allow that to happen. so i'll turn the floor over to him. the presiding officer: the senatothesenator from oklahoma is recognized. ms. landrieu: i thank the senator. first of all, we are currently on, my understanding, amendment 183. i would like to set aside the current amendment for consideration of amendment 161

James Inhofe

0:40:30 to 0:54:55( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: James Inhofe

James Inhofe

0:40:47 to 0:41:08( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: by senator johanns, and ask for its consideration. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from

James Inhofe

0:41:09 to 0:41:29( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: oklahoma, mr. inhofe, for mr. joe hangars proposes amendment numbered 161. at the end be, add the following: title 6 -- mr. inhofe: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent at that dispense with the readi the pres there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. inhofe: i ask unanimous consent to return to the underlying amendment, 183. the presiding officer: with no objection, so ordered. mr. inhofe: thank you.

James Inhofe

0:41:30 to 0:41:50( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: and again i thank the senator from lure--i thank the senator from lewis liewssments this is the amendment to the underlying bill. it is a very significant one. to give you a little background, mr. president, for the last nine years i've had an effort to stop a legislation called cap-and-trade legislation.

James Inhofe

0:41:51 to 0:42:11( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: it's one that i think everyone now -- no one used to hear of it but s familiar with it now after these nine years. it goes all the way back to the kyoto treaty. people realized at that time that we were not -- in the clinton administration, we were not going to ratify that treaty. in fact, president clinton never brought it up for ratification.

James Inhofe

0:42:12 to 0:42:33( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: people realize this is something that would be very, very expensive for america. so after that in 2003 and 2508, 205 and on up, there are about seven different times that members of the senate brought up cap-and-trade legislation. it was not 2003 when the m.i.t. and the wharton school came out

James Inhofe

0:42:34 to 0:42:56( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: with analyses of what it would cost to do a cap-and-trade bill. the amount always ranged between $300 billion and $400 billion a year. now, i quite often say when you're talking about billions and billions of dollars, you have to bring this home so people understand what we're talking about. in this case, in my state of oklahoma, this would equate to something a little bit over

James Inhofe

0:42:57 to 0:43:17( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: $3,000 for every family, every family that files a tax return. now, the reason i bring this up at this time is that they tried to pass this all throughout the years -- the last one i think was the waxman-markey bill over in the house that came over to the senate and of course they didn't have near the votes to pass it over here. i think the most votes they

James Inhofe

0:43:18 to 0:43:38( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: could have gotten at any time in the senate to pass a cap-and-trade bill was about 30 votes. obviously that's not enough. so this administration decided, since they won't do it legislatively, we will do it through regulations. that's where the environmental protection agency came along and of course back when republicans

James Inhofe

0:43:39 to 0:44:01( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: were in the majority, i was the chairman of the environment and public works committee. now it's senator boxer of california. and i am eight rank member. so we have jurisdiction over the environmental protection agency, and i think it's very important that we draw this in and make the -- connect the dots and let people lalls that what we're

James Inhofe

0:44:02 to 0:44:24( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: talking ab-- --and let people realize that what we're talking about now is there is an increase in the cost of gas at the purchls. it is approaching $4 a gallon. and this is something that is of great concern to my wife and to everybody else i know in my state of oklahoma. and the problem that we have is a problem that is a bureaucratic problem.

James Inhofe

0:44:25 to 0:44:45( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: it is a -- it is a problem that this administration, not allowing us to exploit the reserves that we have in this country. we hear over and over again -- or we did -- haven't heard it recently -- that we have only 28 billion barrels of proven reserves and that isn't enough to really provide for our own

James Inhofe

0:44:46 to 0:45:09( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: consumption here in this country. but i ask you now to go to the r.r.s. report. this is less than a year ago, senator requested a c.r.s. report and they came out and said that it would be -- that right now the united states

James Inhofe

0:45:10 to 0:45:31( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: of america has more oil, gas, and coal reserves than any other country in the nation. let's take, first, the reserves. now, this is what they're talking about in -- okay, the oil reserve. this is the proven reserves here. the problem with using the -- the word proven instead of -- instead of recoverable is that you can't use proven -- a proven

James Inhofe

0:45:32 to 0:45:52( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: one has to be a result of drilling. in other words, you have to drill and you know it's there. well, obviously, if we have obstacles so that the majority of people, along with the administration, doesn't want us to drill offshore, doesn't want us to drill on public lands and you can't get in there and -- and -- and prove it, then we have to go back and take the

James Inhofe

0:45:53 to 0:46:15( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: recoverable thing. this is what all of the geologists and everyone says that we have in this country. no one has refuted this. instead of being 28 billion barrels, it's 135 billion barrels of oil. now, if you carry that further and you realize that -- that this report is -- is one that

James Inhofe

0:46:16 to 0:46:36( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: shows that clearly we could -- we could have these huge reserves. if you want to go on now to the -- to the -- well --

James Inhofe

0:46:37 to 0:46:57( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: the -- oh, to natural gas and see what this same c.r.s. report said about natural gas. let's put that -- put the chart that shows all three of them. what this shows is the combination of the fossil fuel. that's gas, coal, and oil, and this is the united states of america.

James Inhofe

0:46:58 to 0:47:19( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: second is russia, but it shows the united states has greater recoverable reserves than saudi arabia, china, iraq, and these countries all combined. so it's a huge reserve that's out there. in fact, our reserve of oil that we're talking about, we have the equivalent to replace our

James Inhofe

0:47:20 to 0:47:45( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: imports for the persian gulf for more than 90 years. in other words, if we just lift the restriction that's we currently have placed on drilling for oil, it would be 90 years. on gas it turns out to be just about the same thing. based on the c.r.s. report, it says that the -- 2009 assessment of the potential gas committee, c.r.s. states that america's

James Inhofe

0:47:46 to 0:48:09( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: future supply of natural gas is 2 -- is 2 -- 2 quadrillion. i'm getting an -- 2 quadrillion it would be enough to meet the natural gas for 90 years. the coal reserves are more than 28% of the world's coal.

James Inhofe

0:48:10 to 0:48:30( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: in fact, c.r.s. cites that the recoverable coal reserves to be 262 billion short tons. for perspective the united states consumes 1.2 billion short tons per year. a major expert opportunity for us in -- as well as for jobs.

James Inhofe

0:48:31 to 0:48:51( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: so when we talk about our reserves that we have in oil, gas, and coal, there is a lot more out there. but just what we know is recoverable. for example, i did not include oil and gas shale that's out there. the green river formation located in colorado, wyoming, and utah contains the equivalent

James Inhofe

0:48:52 to 0:49:13( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: of six billion -- six trillion barrels of oil. the department of energy estimates of this six trillion approximately 1.38 trillion is potentially recoverable. that is more than five times of the oil reserves in saudi arabia. i didn't include these when i said we have enough to sustain

James Inhofe

0:49:14 to 0:49:36( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: us 90 years. another source is the methane hydrates. while the estimates vary, the united states geological service recently testified that the mean in place gas hydrate resource for the entire united states is estimated at 320 quadrillion

James Inhofe

0:49:37 to 0:49:57( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: cuban feet of gas. for perspective, it's just 3% of this resource can be commercialized in the years ahead at current rates of consumption, that level of supply would be enough to provide america natural gas for more than 400 years. but i didn't include that. so i'm only including what is recoverable and what is out

James Inhofe

0:49:58 to 0:50:18( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: there for more than 400 years and that's what i call energy security. i guess we need to also realize that it's not just energy that we could do when we're talking about -- there's nothing more basic than supply and demand and if we're stopping our supply of oil and gas in this country, then the demand's going to go up and we have to go elsewhere. if you want to become

James Inhofe

0:50:19 to 0:50:40( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: independent, and we could become independent, if we were to exploit our own -- explore our own resources. we have other reports that talk about the number of jobs at stake here. only two deepwater well permits have been issued in the last 11 months. i thought at the time that when we had the -- the oil spill in

James Inhofe

0:50:41 to 0:51:05( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: the gulf, there are going to be people around saying, we're going to parlay this into stopping production, stopping exploration, and, sure enough, they did. while the moratorium on the gulf has been lifted, the -- only two deepwater well permits have been issued in the last -- in the last 11 months. the delays in -- and continue aiftion the current permitting

James Inhofe

0:51:06 to 0:51:27( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: pace could cost 125,000 jobs in 2015. and getting down to the developing the alaska's offshore, for example that would create 55,000 jobs a year. so we're talking about a lot of jobs. we're talking about a lot of reasons that we should go ahead and pass this amendment. now, let's keep in mind what the amendment is. it's an amendment that would take away the jurisdiction from

James Inhofe

0:51:28 to 0:51:48( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: the environmental protection agency to regulate greenhouse gas gases and leave that as something that should be done and should be done by members of the -- of the -- of the senate and the house. senator baucus, from montana, said i mentioned that i do not

James Inhofe

0:51:49 to 0:52:10( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: want the e.p.a. writing those regulations, i think it's too much power in the hands of one single agency, but, rather, climate change should be a matter essentially left to congress, and that's what we're talking about. as we speak today, the house is macking up the bill. it's called the upton-inhofe bill and that is to stop them from the -- the e.p.a. from this

James Inhofe

0:52:11 to 0:52:34( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: regulation. senator nelson from -- from nebraska said, controlling the levels of carbon emission 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. he we have some eight democrat senators joining them saying that the e.p.a. should not have the authority -- doesn't have the authority and should not be doing it.

James Inhofe

0:52:35 to 0:52:55( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: we are talking about such as senators as senator begich, senator brown, senator casey, and senator baucus. that's the reason i feel optimistic that if we can get this amendment up for a vote, we're going to have a favorable

James Inhofe

0:52:56 to 0:53:16( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: vote on this thing. i know all the republicans are going to vote on it and i think an awful lot of the democrats are. i think when we're facing a situation where we have gas that's going so high it's going to be very difficult to not -- not give serious consideration to this -- to this amendment.

James Inhofe

0:53:17 to 0:53:37( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: and i would go further to say that we -- the -- the administration has been no help. i have the quote that i've used several times on the floor, steven chu who is secretary of energy told "the wall street journal," that somehow we have to figure out to boost the price

James Inhofe

0:53:38 to 0:53:59( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: of gasoline to the levels in europe. that's $8 a gallon. they're saying that they want to do away with fossil fuels and before you can go to other forms of energy, you have to do that. in the mean time, how do we run this machine called snerk you can't do it -- called america? you can't do it without oil, gas, and coal. the bottom line is we do have

James Inhofe

0:54:00 to 0:54:21( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: enough oil, gas, and coal to run this country. we can be independent from the middle east after a short period of time. some people said if you were to open up all these places it would be another five or six years before we're able to actually produce all of this oil and gas that we so desperately need in this country, but in response to that, i say, first

James Inhofe

0:54:22 to 0:54:42( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: of all, it won't be that long, and, secondly, heard that same argument five and six years ago, if we had done it then, we'd be there today. we have a very serious problem that's looming out there. i know that others want to come down. i know that senator barrasso -- by the way senator barrasso has an amendment that is a different amendment than this.

James Inhofe

0:54:43 to 0:54:55( Edit History Discussion )

James Inhofe: he is a cosponsor of this amendment, number 183, his would go into things such as nepa and other things that the e.p.a. is trying to use the regulation of greenhouse gas to change our

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