Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on May 15th, 2008 :: 3:22:21 to 3:40:27
Total video length: 9 hours 38 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:130 Duration: 0:18:06 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

3:22:04 to 3:22:21( Edit History Discussion )

but i feel very good about this bill. obviously i feel very good about the overwhelming vote. i -- i still remain hopeful that the president will sign it. i hope anyway. hope springs eternal. that

Chuck Grassley

3:22:21 to 3:22:31( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: he would sign it. if he doesn't, i -- i guess we'll have to face that down the road someplace and i hope we'd have the votes to override. a team effort. cooperation. conciliation. bipartisanship. those

Chuck Grassley

3:22:21 to 3:40:27( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Chuck Grassley

Chuck Grassley

3:22:31 to 3:22:43( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: are the keys to successful legislation. and i'm just thankful that i could be a part of getting this bill through. with that, madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding

Chuck Grassley

3:22:43 to 3:22:54( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: we have 30 minutes on the republican side and i'd like to proceed to use probably most of that, may not use all of it. the presiding officer: there is

Chuck Grassley

3:22:54 to 3:23:11( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: a unanimous consent agreement i believe that speakers are limited to ten minutes each. mr. grass: i would ask unanimous consent to proceed -- mr. grassley: i would ask unanimous consent to proceed

Chuck Grassley

3:23:11 to 3:23:28( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: for a longer period of time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: madam president, i come to the floor to rebutt the scapegoating of ethanol which is part of the food vs. fuel debate.

Chuck Grassley

3:23:28 to 3:23:44( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: for almost -- and i don't do it just for a one-way conversation. i hope that i can encourage conversation on this subject among my colleagues so that we can look at this from a scientific and economic

Chuck Grassley

3:23:44 to 3:24:01( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: point of view and avoid scapegoating. for almost 30 years, i've been leading an effort with many of my colleagues to promote policies to grow a domestic renewable fuels industry. we've proceed home

3:24:01 to 3:24:21( Edit History Discussion )

grown renewable fuel as a way to lessen our dependence upon foreign oil and to improve our air quality. for all these years, we've hardly heard anything negative about these policies. now ethanol and other

3:24:21 to 3:24:35( Edit History Discussion )

biofuels are being made a scapegoat for a whole variety of problems. never before in 30 years have the virtuous benefits of ethanol and renewable fuels been so questioned and so criticized. the problem

3:24:35 to 3:24:56( Edit History Discussion )

is: none of these criticisms are based on sound science, sound economics, or, for that matter, even common sense. hi the opportunity to hear an intelligent discussion of this this -- maybe it only lasted a

3:24:56 to 3:25:12( Edit History Discussion )

couple of minutes -- on a program on fox newsaturday night called "the beltway boys." and these people are very intelligent people. i heard mort kondrake, a veteran journalist, falling prey to some

3:25:12 to 3:25:27( Edit History Discussion )

of the same erroneous talking points that we've heard over and over for the past couple of weeks. mr. kondrake is at one-half of that intelligent duo on fox news that i referred to as "the beltway boys."

3:25:27 to 3:25:42( Edit History Discussion )

maybe mr. kondrake has just spent too much time inside the beltway and could use a little real-world explanation from a family farmer like me from the midwest. some of my colleagues in the senate have

3:25:42 to 3:26:02( Edit History Discussion )

also gotten involved in this misinformation campaign, and that's why i don't come to the floor to just speak, i come to the floor to encourage dialogue with my colleagues on this subject. because

3:26:02 to 3:26:20( Edit History Discussion )

it seems there is a group-think mentality when it comes to scapegoating ethanol for everything from high gas prices, global food shortages, global warming and even deforestation. but as was recently reported,

3:26:20 to 3:26:39( Edit History Discussion )

this antiethanol campaign is not just a coincidence. it's been well thought out, well-programmed and that program is going on. it turns out that a $300,000, six-month retainer of a beltway public relations

Chuck Grassley

3:26:39 to 3:27:04( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: firm is behind the smear campaign against ethanol and they've been hired by a trade association referred to as the grocery manufacturers association. they've outlined their strategy of using environmental,

Chuck Grassley

3:27:04 to 3:27:19( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: hunger, and food aidroups to demonstrate their contrived crisis. and it's right here in a 20 -- i think it's a 26-page document put out by the glover park browp called "the food and fuel campaign."

Chuck Grassley

3:27:19 to 3:27:38( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: and they elicit the support of these other nonprofit groups that are involved with the environment and hunger. i think it's important for policy-makers and the american people to know who's behind this

Chuck Grassley

3:27:38 to 3:27:57( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: effort. according to reports, downtown d.c. lobbyists, the glover park group, and the dutco worldwide are leading the effort to undermine and den grade the -- denigrate the patriotic achievements of american

Chuck Grassley

3:27:57 to 3:28:16( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: farmers to reduce our dependence upon foreign oil while also providing a safe and food -- affordable food environment. the principal leaders behind the glover park group's 21-page proposal reads like a who's

Chuck Grassley

3:28:16 to 3:28:35( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: who of democratic operatives. the effort is led by former president clinton's press secretary, joel lockhart. another is the eight-year veteran of the clinton-gore white house, michael feldman. other

Chuck Grassley

3:28:35 to 3:28:51( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: leaders in this misinforming campaign include carter eskew, mike donnelyn, joel johnson, susan brofey, all of which proudly display their ties to the clinton-gore whe house and their credentials of

Chuck Grassley

3:28:51 to 3:29:09( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: helping elect democratic candidates. this campaign against ethanol is more sophisticated than anything i have seen put on by big oil over the last 30 years, as big oil has been a constant fighter.

Chuck Grassley

3:29:09 to 3:29:28( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: but just to show you how this is well -- how this is a well-sophisticated political operative and public relations effort. for instance, the media relations public affairs responsibility comes under the partners

Chuck Grassley

3:29:28 to 3:29:49( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: in charge, joel lockhart, michael feldman. the advocacy and image advertising comes under the leadership of partners in charge carter eskew and mike donelyn. the legislative affairs part of it is directed

Chuck Grassley

3:29:49 to 3:30:03( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: by partners in charge joel johnson, susan brofey. now, these people are outstanding people. they're going to be able to deliver what they have said they could do.| that's that's why we have to take

Chuck Grassley

3:30:03 to 3:30:15( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: it seriously. i suggest that democrats in the senate who claim to support our nation's crime toward energy -- nation's drive toward energy independence should be alarmed by this group's campaign and

Chuck Grassley

3:30:15 to 3:30:34( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the tactics being used. i happen to be one who fought president clinton during his eight years in office at every turn when he tried to undermine our renewable fuels industry and the outstanding example

Chuck Grassley

3:30:34 to 3:30:53( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: i remember is when california made application to e.p.a. for a waiver under the clean air act at the very time that mtbe was being outlawed because it was poisoning the groundwater and the only oxygenate

Chuck Grassley

3:30:53 to 3:31:09( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: you could use in gasoline, then, was ethanol. california sought an exemption and we were able to win that by the clinton administration not allowing it. now, of course, we find ourselves fighting president

Chuck Grassley

3:31:09 to 3:31:22( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: clinton's former staff and staff that worked for the gore-kerry president am campaigns leading an effort for the grocery manufacturers to smear ethanol after 30 years of developing an industry because

Chuck Grassley

3:31:22 to 3:31:39( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: people called for more renewable energy. they wanted renewable, clean-burning energy. they didn't want to be relying upon dirty burning petroleum. they didn't want to be relying upon importing

Chuck Grassley

3:31:39 to 3:31:52( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: so much. i imagine they're leading this effort partly because they're being paid well if for doing it but maybe they cannot stand the fact president bush has proved to be the best friend the renewable

Chuck Grassley

3:31:52 to 3:32:07( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: fuels industry has had bows their old -- because their old boss, president clinton did not help policies with ethanol they are tearing down the success that president george w. bush has helped foster.

Chuck Grassley

3:32:07 to 3:32:24( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: a lot of intelligent people have been misled by the campaign and are simply wrong. they're using, in their speeches, a lot of the rhetoric that comes out of this effort. the facts don't back up

Chuck Grassley

3:32:24 to 3:32:44( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the argument. i invite my colleagues to look at the facts, to challenge me, to have dialogue on this subject so we can use science as a basis for what we're doing -- and economics for the basis of what

Chuck Grassley

3:32:44 to 3:33:01( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: we're doing. so it's time to dispell the myths perpetuated by one of the beltway boys. he was probably reporting this misinformation because he is a smart person. the glover park group and others --

Chuck Grassley

3:33:01 to 3:33:17( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the grocery manufacturing association, i've come to the conclusion, needs an excuse to gouge the consumers of america with higher fad prices and an easy scapegoat is, of course,th not. one myth that

Chuck Grassley

3:33:17 to 3:33:37( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: pops up, again and again, is that ethanol takes more energy to produce than it provides. i heard the columnist say that. let's look at the facts, what in twiewf twief the argonne national laboratory

Chuck Grassley

3:33:37 to 3:33:57( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: study concluded that it takes only 0.7 unit ofs fossil energy to make one unit of ethanol. that is a positive net energy balance. in comparison, it takes 1.23 units of fossil energy to make one

Chuck Grassley

3:33:57 to 3:34:16( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: unit of petroleum gasoline. so why isn't the grocery manufacturers of america bringing up the point that petroleum processing into gasoline is not energy positive? because gasoline requires more

Chuck Grassley

3:34:16 to 3:34:34( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: than one b.t.u. of energy to deliver one b.t.u. to your car. that's a negative net energy balance. a 2004 u.s. department of agriculture study concluded that ethanol yields 67% more energy than is used

Chuck Grassley

3:34:34 to 3:34:50( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: to grow and harvest the grain and to process that grain into ethanol. these figures, i want you to know, take into account the energy required to not just process grain into ethanol, it takes into consideration

Chuck Grassley

3:34:50 to 3:35:12( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the energy that the farmer takes to plant, to grow, do harvest the corn, as well as the energy required to manufacture and distribute the ethanol. of 15 different peer review studies we've looked at

Chuck Grassley

3:35:12 to 3:35:35( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: and that have been conducted on this issue, 12 of the 15 found that ethanol has a positive net energy balance. only a single individual if from cornell university disagrees with this analysis. cornell

Chuck Grassley

3:35:35 to 3:35:57( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: studies have consistently used old data -- some from 1979. remember, in 1979, farmers weren't producing as much corn per acre as they do today. corn yields in 1979 were 91 bushels per acre. it was at

Chuck Grassley

3:35:57 to 3:36:15( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: 137 bushels per acre in the year 2000. the average now is up to 150 to 160 bushels per acre. the flawed studies rely on 1979 figures for energy used to manufacture ethanol. this energy consumed --

Chuck Grassley

3:36:15 to 3:36:32( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: this energy consumption was cut in half between the years 1979 and 2000 and continued efficiency gains every year. i think i could quantify that better than just using a broad sweep. i think in the

Chuck Grassley

3:36:32 to 3:36:50( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: early 1980's we were producing about 2.3 gallons of ethanol from a bushel of corn. today we're producing 2.8 gallons of corn per bushel. pretty soon the industry feels they might be able to produce

Chuck Grassley

3:36:50 to 3:37:09( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: three bushels per gallon. so these erroneous cornell conclusions have been refuted by experts from entities as diverse as the u.s. department of agriculture, the department of figure, the argonne

Chuck Grassley

3:37:09 to 3:37:29( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: national laboratory, michigan state university, and the colorado school of mines. the fact is, studies using old data overestimate energy use by not taking into aount efficiencies gain, the greater

Chuck Grassley

3:37:29 to 3:37:45( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: use of fertilizer and ethanol production. i don't understand how intelligent people, then, can continue to argue that ethanol has a negative net energy balance but that's what i heard on televison

Chuck Grassley

3:37:45 to 3:38:13( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: saturday night from very intelligent people. that's what i hear in this smear campaign. the net energy balance of ethanol production continues to improve because ethanol production is becoming more

Chuck Grassley

3:38:13 to 3:38:32( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: efficient. a march 2008 study by argue by argue again national laboratory found significant gains just since 2001. ethanol production since 2001 has reduced water use by 27%, reduced reduced electricity use

Chuck Grassley

3:38:32 to 3:38:52( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: by 22%. another myth being perpetuated by opponents of renewable fuels effort and by mr. kondracke is that ethanol harms the environment and contributes more in greenhouse gases than petroleum does. this

Chuck Grassley

3:38:52 to 3:39:09( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: claim is, likewise, hogwash hogwash. "science" magazine and times magazine made claims about cornth not that are now being used by the detractors claimingthan produron is the driving force behind

Chuck Grassley

3:39:09 to 3:39:29( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: rain forest deforestation and grassland diversion to agriculture production. this is an oversim oversimplification, to say the least. how can intelligent i people ignore the effect of a growing global

Chuck Grassley

3:39:29 to 3:39:51( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: population if how can one simply ignore theurging global demands for food from growing populations in china and india? and wouldn't urban development and sprawl also be a contributor to the increased

Chuck Grassley

3:39:51 to 3:40:06( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: demand for arable land? secretary of agriculture and energy secretary of stated in a letter to the "time" magazine when they ran this outrageous story that was based on "science" magazine article, they

Chuck Grassley

3:40:06 to 3:40:27( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: said if their in their letter to the magazines, -- and i quote -- "it was unsided and scientifically uninformed." they further stated that the "science" magazine article was -- quote -- "thoroughly

3:40:27 to 3:40:45( Edit History Discussion )

rebutted by leading scientists at the department of energy's argonne national laboratory." in fact, dr. wang at thatt argonne laboratory stated -- quote -- "there has been no indication that the u.s. corn

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