Pete Domenici

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Might we amend that, then, and have Senator Bond go first, Senator Talent, and then the Senator from Nebraska? Is that all right? We will proceed in that manner. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I say to fellow Senators, we are on this bill until 11:30 a.m. for purposes of discussing the pending amendment. So I say to anybody who wishes to discuss it, we have this additional time now. There may be time in the future, but this is assured time now for anybody who wishes to speak. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I will proceed to discuss a proposed ethanol amendment that will be offered to this pending bill later in the proceedings when it is in order. When I am finished within a few moments, I will yield to the minority leader who will speak, and thereafter we will rotate back and forth for as long a time as we have this morning to discuss this measure. Today the Senate will consider what will soon be offered as an amendment to S. 14, which I hope will become the renewable fuel standards portion of the comprehensive energy bill. The amendment offered today by the majority leader and the minority leader, and Senators Inhofe, Dorgan, Lugar, Johnson, Grassley, Harkin, Hagel, Durbin, Voinovich, Nelson of Nebraska, Talent, Dayton, Coleman, Edwards, Crapo, and DeWine--and if there are any others who desire to join in the amendment, it is obviously open for submitting their names as additional cosponsors. This represents the culmination of a long and difficult debate about the U.S. transportation fuels policy. The amendment is the product of more than 4 years of work by the stakeholders and Members of this body and represents a solid compromise between disparate groups. The amendment establishes a renewable fuels standard providing that a portion of the U.S. fuel supply will be provided by renewable domestic fuels, primarily ethanol, growing to 5 billion gallons a year by the year 2012. In addition to full support from the affected parties, the amendment also enjoys the administration's full support. The Frist-Daschle amendment will promote increased domestic energy development, reduce oil imports, protect the environment, bolster our economy, and stimulate rural economic development by increasing production and use of domestic renewable fuels. I know there are a number of Senators who strongly opposed a similar amendment when it was offered and adopted last year. I expect them to offer a number of second-degree amendments this year again. This is their right, but I do expect--as the Senate did last year--the Senate to adopt the language of the Frist-Daschle amendment. In view of the significant amount of work that has been put into this amendment and the consensus it represents among the affected parties, I urge my colleagues to adopt the amendment as offered, without amendments. I yield the floor at this point.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I failed to indicate at the outset what has been mentioned by the distinguished minority leader at the outset. This is a jobs-producing measure. The entire energy bill, as we consider it, is a measure that will produce literally thousands of jobs for the American people. Right at the outset, the very first amendment is a clear indication of how in this bill we intend to produce, in this instance, agricultural jobs but not pure agriculture--industrial, as it relates to agriculture with the construction of ethanol plants in and out and around and about agricultural America. Having said that, I know there are a number of Senators who want to speak. It was not for me to say that we have no consent agreement as to how we will proceed, but I saw the distinguished Senator, Senator Talent, standing first. I might suggest, just for some orderliness, he proceed next, and the distinguished Senator from Nebraska follow that. Then, if other Senators are here, and they seek recognition--

Mr. DOMENICI. I wonder, considering the condition of the distinguished Senator, if he might proceed first.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to offer legislation entitled the ``Jesse Spiri Military Medical Coverage Act of 2003.'' The purpose of this legislation is to close a gap in medical coverage that leaves a certain group of military officers without health care benefits. Named in honor of a young New Mexican who fell victim to this gap, this bill would extend coverage to commissioned officers who are awaiting active duty status. Jesse Spiri grew up in the heart of southwestern New Mexico where his family instilled in him both a sense of patriotism and an appreciation for higher education. Following his graduation from high school, he enrolled at Western New Mexico University where he served in the United States Marine Corps Reserves. His dedication to each of these endeavors culminated on May 11, 2001 when he received both his bachelors degree and his commission as a 2nd Lieutenant. Clearly, Jesse had laid a solid foundation for success in his life and, naturally, his family was extremely proud. Unfortunately, the pride and all the hopes that accompany such a crowning moment were short-lived, because one day after his graduation Jesse was diagnosed with brain cancer. Under any circumstances, such a prognosis is demoralizing, but Jesse's situation was even more grave because receiving his commission had the effect of triggering his military status to that of ``inactive reservist.'' Jesse was not scheduled to gain ``active duty'' status until he began basic officer training in November, and since TRICARE does not fully cover reservists, his family was left with the burden of enormous medical bills--a burden they simply could not meet. Despite the heroic efforts of the Spiri family, inquiries by my staff and others in the New Mexico congressional delegation, as well as efforts by Marine Corps lawyers to find a legal solution to the problem, Jesse Spiri, an officer of the United States Marine Corps, went without health care coverage and, hence, without proper treatment. He lost his battle with cancer in July of 2001. It is inconceivable to me, as I am sure it is for all Americans, that because of a legislative quirk, an officer of the United States armed forces could be left completely exposed to a dread disease without even the hope of receiving available treatments. But Jesse's battle is proof that if we do not, through legislative enactment, extend full medical coverage to commissioned reservists, another promising life may be lost in similar fashion. I know that Jim Spiri, Jesse's dad, has vowed to dedicate his life to ensuring that no family has to face what his experienced. This goal, however, should not take a lifetime to achieve. By passing the ``Jesse Spiri Military Medical Coverage Act of 2003,'' we can help give Jim and the entire Spiri family peace in knowing that others will have hope where Jesse did not. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to offer legislation entitled the ``Jesse Spiri Military Medical Coverage Act of 2003.'' The purpose of this legislation is to close a gap in medical coverage that leaves a certain group of military officers without health care benefits. Named in honor of a young New Mexican who fell victim to this gap, this bill would extend coverage to commissioned officers who are awaiting active duty status. Jesse Spiri grew up in the heart of southwestern New Mexico where his family instilled in him both a sense of patriotism and an appreciation for higher education. Following his graduation from high school, he enrolled at Western New Mexico University where he served in the United States Marine Corps Reserves. His dedication to each of these endeavors culminated on May 11, 2001 when he received both his bachelors degree and his commission as a 2nd Lieutenant. Clearly, Jesse had laid a solid foundation for success in his life and, naturally, his family was extremely proud. Unfortunately, the pride and all the hopes that accompany such a crowning moment were short-lived, because one day after his graduation Jesse was diagnosed with brain cancer. Under any circumstances, such a prognosis is demoralizing, but Jesse's situation was even more grave because receiving his commission had the effect of triggering his military status to that of ``inactive reservist.'' Jesse was not scheduled to gain ``active duty'' status until he began basic officer training in November, and since TRICARE does not fully cover reservists, his family was left with the burden of enormous medical bills--a burden they simply could not meet. Despite the heroic efforts of the Spiri family, inquiries by my staff and others in the New Mexico congressional delegation, as well as efforts by Marine Corps lawyers to find a legal solution to the problem, Jesse Spiri, an officer of the United States Marine Corps, went without health care coverage and, hence, without proper treatment. He lost his battle with cancer in July of 2001. It is inconceivable to me, as I am sure it is for all Americans, that because of a legislative quirk, an officer of the United States armed forces could be left completely exposed to a dread disease without even the hope of receiving available treatments. But Jesse's battle is proof that if we do not, through legislative enactment, extend full medical coverage to commissioned reservists, another promising life may be lost in similar fashion. I know that Jim Spiri, Jesse's dad, has vowed to dedicate his life to ensuring that no family has to face what his experienced. This goal, however, should not take a lifetime to achieve. By passing the ``Jesse Spiri Military Medical Coverage Act of 2003,'' we can help give Jim and the entire Spiri family peace in knowing that others will have hope where Jesse did not. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: What is the subject matter before the Senate?

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, S. 14 is the comprehensive energy bill produced by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. It is accompanied by a report as contemplated by the rules of the Senate. For those who are interested in the bill, there is a report and it will be available tomorrow. The 1-day delay is because of printing problems. Under the rule, there would be no amendments that can be offered today, in any event. It will be a day for discussion. Those who are looking toward the text in terms of what they might want to do to the bill and for the bill, the report will be in their hands before amendments are allowed. I will start with some opening remarks and then yield to my friend, Senator Bingaman, for remarks on his side, and any other Senators on either side who desire to comment. I might ask again a parliamentary inquiry: How much time has been set aside for this bill today pursuant to previous order?

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, our citizens need to know that they can, with some reasonable level of assurance, budget what their annual heating and cooling costs will be. This is not an area in which we can have much tolerance for those who propound politically correct policies. Let me be blunt. I am a strong supporter of solar and renewable energy, and as chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, which appropriates the money for the research and development in those areas, I have supported millions, indeed billions, of dollars for research to develop less expensive solar and renewable energy technologies. However, they only represent a niche market, and they are not capable of providing a baseload power to our cities, our hospitals, and our factories. The bill before the Senate today is comprehensive. It encourages the conservation of energy through efficiency programs. But it also takes steps to ensure reliable and cleaner production of electricity from coal, and provides adequate--in fact extremely significant--research and development programs to make coal burning cleaner; it ensures nuclear power and gas, and decreases our reliance on imported energy sources by increasing production of energy here at home. The bill, in my opinion, is pragmatic. I am a strong supporter of opening ANWR. I believe oil and gas can be produced from ANWR with a minimal impact on the environment and a substantial positive impact on the U.S. energy security and ultimately on prices since it would cause a very substantial amount of new oil to be put into the pool from which the world purchases its oil. Those who say we should do without ANWR production, in my humble opinion, are cavalier about our energy needs. ANWR holds estimated reserves equal to three times as much oil as in the entire State of Texas, and I know of no one who proposes we close all the production in Texas on behalf of the environment, nor do I know anyone who thinks the production of oil in Texas is insignificant to the energy needs of America. The impact on our economy is too easy to predict, but somehow they get away with arguing against ANWR--and they have in this body to date. However, I have not included ANWR in this bill, even though I understand there were votes to do so on the Energy Committee the committee I chair, because I know the 60 votes are not here on the floor to break a filibuster. I think that is a shame. But I also am not about to sacrifice a broader energy policy over that single, though important, issue. In this committee, we have deferred to the floor in debate over climate change. I know the debate is coming. I saw no reason for consuming the time of the committee on a matter sure to be considered on the floor and a matter which is technically not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources which produced this bill. Recognizing that we agreed to defer some controversial issues to the floor, it is important that the Senate recognize the bill before it is the product of several years of work by the Energy Committee. It is very much, in that context, a bipartisan measure. Earlier this year, I instructed the staff of the committee to circulate a staff draft of legislation that would incorporate the provisions and ideas that had been considered by the Senate and the conference held last year on H.R. 4. We then worked with our minority and all members of the committee to refine that text. Members on both sides of the aisle had constructive comments and recommendations. While we could not always agree, I do not think there is any Member of the body who can say that I and the committee staff were not open to suggestions or willing to work to clear potential amendments that might have been appropriate for this committee. The end result of the process I have just described was a series of chairman's marks on the various titles of the legislation before us. While the media only comments on the matters where we could not reach agreement, I think it is accurate to say that every member of the committee had provisions that are very important to them included in the chairman's mark and cleared on a bipartisan basis. An enormous amount of work and careful perfecting of language was done on a bipartisan basis before the chairman's mark was circulated. I also think my colleagues will agree that we followed an open process. While we moved things along at a rapid pace, I insisted that the chairman's mark of each title be circulated at least 48 hours in advance. That was followed, to the best of my knowledge, uniformly. The most contentious issue clearly was electricity, and in that case I circulated a chairman's mark a full week in advance. Achieving a consensus on that title proved more than elusive. In the end, Republican members of the committee reached an agreement on an electricity title that is included in the legislation before the Senate. I sincerely hope this important legislation does not become wrapped up in partisan delaying tactics. I know there has been speculation in the media that some want to deny President Bush his energy bill. This is not President Bush's energy bill. This is not Pete Domenici's energy bill. At the moment, what you have before you is a recommendation of your Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and I am proud to bring it before you. Yes, many of the provisions and suggestions come from the President's task force, which took many days and many weeks to put together their recommendations. Yes, many of the suggestions come from past energy bills put together by this committee when it was controlled by the other side of the aisle. This bill contains numerous provisions that had bipartisan support. Many were initiatives offered by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that I was happy to support. Senator Akaka, for example, made major contributions to the hydrogen title, as did Senator Dorgan and others. While the President has provided important support for the hydrogen section, for which I congratulate him, I want to make it clear that the Senate has before it a comprehensive hydrogen title crafted over many weeks on a bipartisan basis by your committee. The same can be said for all of the titles. Not one title is the same as the original staff discussion draft. In every case, I included amendments in the chairman's mark that were suggested by my colleagues, both Democrat and Republican. The extent of that bipartisan consensus was not evident in our business meetings where attention obviously was on provisions where we could not come together. But, in fact, this legislation is bipartisan in its substance. I expect to fully support other amendments here in the Chamber that will have bipartisan support, such as a carbon sequestration provision that Senators Wyden and Craig have been working on for a long time. Let me summarize the 12 titles of this bill. The oil and gas title: This permanently reauthorizes the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and provides production incentives for marginal wells so that those sources will continue to be produced. It provides royalty relief for production in extremely deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico and for natural gas production in those areas of the gulf that are beyond 15,000 feet deep. It creates a pilot program in five regional Bureau of Land Management offices to coordinate all the Federal permitting necessary to produce oil or gas on Federal lands. It authorizes the construction of the Alaskan natural gas pipeline. This will bring gas to the United States in large quantities--not next week or next month, but without this provision it may never come to this part of the United States from Alaska. With the provisions in this bill, which essentially are indemnification provisions for those who will construct this pipeline, which is extremely fragile--fragile both in construction nature and fragile as to financing, we have provided underpinning for it to become a reality. The coal title is a major part of this bill because coal is a major resource of the United States as we look to our future with reference to energy. The coal title authorizes approximately $2 billion for clean coal technology. The program is a major one. It is not the result of any one Senator's thinking. A number of Senators on the committee and a number of Senators not on the committee with general interest in the subject of coal and coal development are interested in this section. My thanks go out to all of them. There isn't any separate section on Indian energy. The Indian people of the United States are the proprietors of large amounts of property. On this property and in this property lie various assets and resources. This section authorizes the Indian tribes of this country to enter into agreements with the Secretary of the Interior to develop their energy resources. Once agreements between the Indian people and the Secretary of the Interior are entered into, the tribe can then enter into leases or production on their tribal lands with the same rights as if they were private landowners. This last section of the Indian lands title will be the subject matter of significant debate, and I welcome and look forward to that debate. In the end, however, the purpose of this bill will be to say to our Indian people, if you want to develop resources in the field of energy that lie within your lands, we are giving you the authority to do so and hopefully in a streamlined manner so that it will not be forever bogged down in the redtape and bureaucracy of Indian lands being subject to the Federal Government's fiduciary relationships. There is a title on nuclear energy. We call it the nuclear energy title. This permanently reauthorizes the Price-Anderson law of the land. Price-Anderson has taken on a name and a meaning all of its own. It stands for the proposition that a law adopted by Representative Price and Senator Anderson which makes it possible for nuclear power to exist will remain the law of the land indefinitely. Second, we authorize funds for an advanced fuel cycle initiative to develop ways to reduce the volume and the toxicity of spent nuclear fuel. It authorizes the Secretary of Energy, subject to appropriations, to enter into loan guarantees to assist in the construction of 8,400 megawatts of new nuclear power if the Secretary determines that the plants are necessary for energy diversity, security, or clean air attainment. Last, it directs that an advanced reactor will be built in Idaho to demonstrate new safety, efficiency, and proliferation resistance to produce hydrogen and prove to the world that a new generation of nuclear powerplants substantially different--if not completely different--from the plants we have today can be built. This entire nuclear section is of great concern for some. For others, it is an exciting challenge for a new future for the United States and the world, and indeed for more energy for more people with less air pollution. The next title is called renewable energy. This mandates that the Federal Government purchase 7 \1/5\ percent of its energy requirements from renewable resources by 2011, thus saying that the U.S. Government has a weighted portion--that 7 \1/5\ percent of the energy that it needs will be from renewable resource acquisition. It will become the market, so to speak, the driving force for the purchase of renewable energy. Under renewable energy, a second provision will authorize renewable energy production incentives. These will be discussed in more detail, and obviously from this Senator's standpoint they are exciting and necessary. Perhaps for others, they are insufficient and unnecessary. We will see which view prevails. We streamline the licensing of hydroelectric facilities. This issue is long overdue. Hydroelectric facilities clearly must be relicensed. It is contended that currently the process is far too difficult, cumbersome, onerous, and in many respects unnecessary. We have streamlined it. That will be debated, and one way or another we will streamline the processes for hydroelectric facility licensing. We encourage the exploration and development of geothermal resources, and we provide grants for turning forest materials from the areas of high-risk fire or disease into biomass energy--something that is long overdue and something that may, indeed, accomplish at least two goals at one time. It may, indeed, produce energy which will be clean, and at the same time it may clean up our forests, which many of us from the West have been anxiously wondering and waiting patiently to see happen. In addition, there is an energy efficiency title in this bill. It requires a 20-percent improvement in the Federal Government's efficiency over the next 10 years. It authorizes grants for energy efficiency projects in low-income and rural areas. It sets several new standards for items such as transformers, compact fluorescent lamps, ceiling fans, and commercial refrigerators and freezers. The transportation title is another section of this bill which stands out. It encourages the use of alternative fuel vehicles, and it requires Federal agencies to increase the fuel efficiency of their fleets by 3 miles per gallon by 2005. It improves the efficiency of locomotives and expands the authority of the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration to set fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks, taking into account passenger safety and the impact on U.S. employment. Incidentally, that provision is similar to a provision adopted in the Senate last year by a bipartisan vote of two Senators who said that is the way they want it, to direct further modification of CAFE standards for the United States. We then have a new and exciting title, driven, to some extent, by a rather late pronouncement of our President regarding hydrogen and the American automobile engine. This hydrogen title authorizes $1.8 billion for the President's hydrogen fuel cell initiative to develop clean, renewable hydrogen cars. It reauthorizes and increases funding for existing hydrogen research programs. It amends the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to require agencies to purchase 5 percent of new vehicles as hydrogen-powered vehicles in 2005 and 2007, increasing to 20 percent in subsequent years. The research and development title addresses research and development needs to energy efficiency, distributed energy and electric energy systems, renewable energy, nuclear energy, fossil energy, science and energy and environment and management. There is funding for research in many areas, such as nanotechnology, high-temperature superconductivity, and Genomes to Life. A new Under Secretary position for energy and science is provided. Two new Assistant Secretary positions--one for science and one for nuclear energy--are provided. The personnel and training title contains a number of programs to ensure that we have an adequate energy workforce in the decades to come. Then we have, last but not least, a very difficult title, the electricity title. This title remands proposed rulemaking on Standard Marketing Design, SMD, and prohibits FERC from issuing a final order until July 1, 2005. Second, it provides a sense of the Congress that membership in regional transmission organizations is voluntary. It amends the Federal Power Act to protect access to transmission lines, repeals PURPA's mandatory purchase requirement, repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act, makes the electricity market more transparent and resistant to manipulation, and increases the penalty for violations of the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act. Mr. President, I understand there is an agreement that no amendments will be offered until Thursday. On Thursday, I expect an ethanol amendment to be offered, and I understand there are discussions underway as to who will offer that amendment and when. For my part, I support the agreement reached last year on ethanol that was reported out of the Environment and Public Works Committee last month. The reason I raise this subject is, this is another provision that is really not within the jurisdiction of this committee, as are three or four others that will become contentious and will be very deliberate and take much time. But there is no question, we cannot leave the floor without the subject matter of ethanol being considered, debated, and voted upon. That is why I have just stated what I believe the protocol will be. Again, for my part, I do not do this in an effort to usurp the jurisdiction of the Public Works Committee but to face up to the reality and to urge that they consider this and offer to work with them in an effort to get what they have passed incorporated in this bill or at least put before the Senate as their effort with an opportunity for it to be passed and then, if necessary, amended. I know there are some who oppose that proposal, and there will be amendments offered. Clearly, if history is revealing, there will be such occurring once that amendment is before the Senate. I look forward to the debate and encourage my colleagues who support the ethanol proposal to offer their amendments as early as possible on Thursday. My staff and Senator Bingaman's staff is on the floor and available, as I gather, now to begin the process of reviewing and clearing amendments where possible. I hope Members will take advantage of that and bring their amendments to the floor as soon as possible. The leader has indicated he will give us sufficient time, with some intervening work obviously, to complete this bill as soon as the Senate deems practicable. I yield the floor for my colleague, Senator Bingaman.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague for his remarks and do hope some of the matters he has raised wherein we disagree can be worked out. As to others, we will remain in a state of disagreement and hopefully the Senate will be the referee and we will see where we end up.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, on behalf of the leader, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to immediate consideration of S. Res. 132, which was submitted earlier today by Senator Stevens.

Mr. DOMENICI. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to this matter be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I understand there are two bills at the desk which are due for a second reading.

Mr. DOMENICI. I ask that it be in order to read the titles of the bills en bloc.

Mr. DOMENICI. I would object to further proceedings en bloc.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now resume consideration of S. 14, the energy bill.

Mr. DOMENICI. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, on behalf of the leader, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period for morning business.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on National Parks of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 6 at 10 a.m., to receive testimony regarding S. 324, to amend the National Trails System Act to clarify Federal authority relating to land acquisition from willing sellers for certain trails in the National Trails System; S. 634, to amend the National Trails System Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to carry out a study on the feasibility of designating the Trail of the Ancients as a National Historic Trail; S. 635, to amend the National Trails, System Act to direct the Secretary to update the fleasibility and suitability studies of four national historic trails, and for other purposes; and S. 651 to amend the National Trails Systems Act to clarify Federal authority relating to land acquisition from willing sellers for the majority of the trails in the system, and for other purposes.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Personnel of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 6, 2003 at 4:30 p.m. in closed session to mark up the Personnel Programs and Provisions contained in the Department of Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004.