Ken Salazar

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate extend morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 381, which was received from the House.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow, Thursday, July 17; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the majority leader be recognized for a motion to proceed; following the majority leader's motion, the Senate proceed to a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the Republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the next 30 minutes.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, following the prayer and the pledge, it is the majority leader's intention to move to proceed to the consideration of S. 3268, the speculation bill.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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 Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. SALAZAR

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to again urge my colleagues to join in the leadership of Senator Dodd and his efforts to address one of the crises of economics we have going on in America today and that is the housing crisis which is causing so much pain all across America, in each of our respective States. It is causing pain to those who own their homes and are losing their homes, but it is also causing pain to so many homeowners across America whose dream of home ownership is being torn asunder as they are seeing their home value decline in unprecedented ways. I think it is incumbent upon this Congress to take action to move forward to try to create an environment that puts together this cornerstone of our economy which has been so crumbled by all of the difficulties it has had over the last several years. In my home State of Colorado, we have seen a very significant increase in the number of foreclosures. In 2007 in Colorado, as you can see on this chart, approximately 1 per 45 households--1 per 45 households--filed foreclosure. That is the equivalent to nearly 40,000 foreclosures that were filed across my State of Colorado. That is up nearly 200 percent in a 5-year time period. If you look back at the years 2003 and 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, we see what is happening: The number of foreclosures is rising at an extraordinary level. That rise in foreclosure levels is not something we can say is over. We can't say this is an economic phenomenon we have been through and that we have already gotten to the end and, therefore, the times ahead of us are rosy. We are facing some difficult times ahead of us as we deal with the housing crisis. This next chart is a projection of where we see ourselves going in Colorado. This is information provided by the Center for Responsible Lending, which indicates that in the year 2008 and the year 2009, as the adjustable rate mortgages continue to adjust upward, we are going to see additional foreclosures in the State of Colorado. It is expected that this year, 2008, and into 2009, we are going to have almost 50,000 additional foreclosures. So if we have an additional 50,000 foreclosures in the State of Colorado, what is the consequence to others? First, there is a consequence, of course, to those who lose their homes. There are some from whom I have heard, including people who are in their 60s, who are not able to continue to make the payment on their homes and who end up in their later years of life essentially losing their dream of home ownership because they cannot afford the higher rates, the higher payment rates that come about through adjustment of the ARMs. So it definitely affects those people who have to go through foreclosure in huge, significant, and very painful ways. But it also affects others, because it is surrounding homes in the neighborhoods that are affected by the decline in home values. In my State alone, it is estimated that about 750,000 homes will have declining values over the next several years. That is almost half of the housing stock within the State of Colorado. So we have a lot of pain going on with respect to what is happening in the home world. There are many people who have seen these signs, I am sure, as people have driven through their neighborhoods throughout the State of Colorado. We see these kinds of signs. They are commonplace. We see them in counties such as Adam County, Denver, Conejos County; we see them in Pueblo County and all over the place where people have had a hard time selling their homes. We see these signs that say ``Price Reduced'' time and time again. That is, in fact, something which is commonplace. It is also true that there are things that can be done to help us address this issue. This is a sign from our foreclosure hotline in Colorado. That foreclosure hotline has been set up as our central source for people who are having a problem with respect to staying in their homes to be able to make a telephone call to try to see whether they can get some assistance to be able to stay in their home. We have had more than 29,000 Coloradans call this foreclosure hotline over the last several months. The foreclosure hotline in Colorado has been able to provide major assistance to the people of the State of Colorado who call in for assistance. About 80 percent of the people who call the foreclosure hotline end up creating some kind of negotiation with their lender that ultimately allows them to stay in their home. That is good for the homeowner because they can stay in their home, and it is good for the lender as well because they don't go through the things they have to go through with the costs incurred in foreclosing on a home, restoring the home, and selling the home. Senator Dodd and his committee have been working on trying to address one of the most significant pains affecting the people in America today--and rest assured, there is pain in America. This dream of our economic engine is somewhat teetering. When we look at what is happening with the high rise in the cost of gas, and we see what is happening with the high cost of health care, and all the rest of the costs that are economic pocketbook issues affecting America, they are saying why isn't our Government helping in terms of addressing some of the fundamental issues at stake here? The housing legislation, which has been crafted and worked on by Senator Dodd and others, is an effort to try to address this housing crisis. I hope we are able to move forward with that legislation very soon, because we need to start restoring confidence on the part of the American people that we can address some of these critical issues facing us in America at this time. This is not a Republican or Democratic or Independent issue. The issue of home ownership and the issue of having a strong housing market, a strong housing construction industry, that is an American issue, an American challenge we all face. So we need to come together to push this legislation and get it done and get it to the President for his signature as soon as possible. For those who will try to create obstruction along the way to have us continue to not be able to get to this are doing a disservice to the American people. We need to address this housing crisis. Senator Dodd and those who have worked on this legislation for a long time are giving us that opportunity. I hope before the end of the day we will be able to take a significant step toward creating the remedy that will provide some relief to those suffering from this housing crisis in America today. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR. I thank the Senator.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Con. Res. 91, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak as in morning business for as much time as I may consume.

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I come to the floor this evening to speak a few minutes about the issue of oil shale and gas prices. Earlier today, the President of the United States, George W. Bush, spoke to the Nation at a press conference in which he said there were some things we could do immediately to try to address the energy crisis we are facing in America. One of the things he said could be done immediately was to begin the development of oil shale in the West, specifically the oil shale which now exists and is found in my State of Colorado. With all due respect to the President of the United States, he is wrong. There is nothing about the oil locked up in these shales, in these rocks of western Colorado that will bring about the kind of relief we somehow hope to be able to bring about to the consumers of oil in our country. The fact is, we are a long ways from knowing whether oil shale can be a part of the portfolio of fulfilling the energy needs of the United States of America. To be frank about this, oil shale has been looked at as a possible source for oil for now nearly 100 years. There have been many booms and many busts with respect to oil shale development in the West and in my State of Colorado. I feel particular ownership of this issue because of the fact that 80 percent of the oil shale reserves we know of in the United States of America are located in my State. Oftentimes, what will happen is people will make a comparison to the tar sands of Alberta in Canada, and they will say: You have the same kinds of possibilities within the State of Colorado. Nothing is further from the truth. The tar sands, the oil sands in Canada, essentially, are developed simply by putting water and mixing it with the sands, with the temperature being 200 to 300 degrees, and the oil is then separated from the sands. That is because of the way the hydrocarbons exist in those sands. They could be easily separated from those sands. Today, millions of barrels are flowing into the United States from that development in Alberta, led by companies such as Suncor. In contrast, what we are talking about in my State of Colorado, across the great and most beautiful part of our Nation, the Western Slope of Colorado, is oil that is locked in shale. Notwithstanding the billions of dollars that have been spent on research, no one has yet found the key to unlock the oil from that shale. So to say somehow giving away hundreds of thousands of acres of land for this, where this oil shale is contained, and allowing that land to be leased for oil shale development and saying that is a panacea for the gas price problem we are facing today is simply wrong. It is not true. It is not doable. In 2005, I worked very closely with my Republican chairman, whom I call a great friend. The two Senators from the land of enchantment, Senator Domenici and Senator Bingaman, have now changed places. One is chairman and one is ranking member. But in 2005, Senator Domenici was the chairman of the Senate Energy Committee. We worked very closely to come up in our committee with legislation on oil shale development that allowed us to move forward to examine the possibility of oil shale as one of the items in our portfolio for our energy future. We came up with an approach that said we would go ahead and provide research and development leases to oil companies so they could go out and do the kind of research and development that is needed to take place in order to determine whether oil shale can be developed. So there are now some leases that have been issued for research and development in the State of Colorado. For each of those companies that has been given these 160 acres of leased land for research and development, they also are given a right under the law to get an additional 5,000 acres of land they can lease. So that is over 25,000 acres that can be developed into oil shale if, in fact, we can discover the technology that will let us do that. But let us not fool the world. Let's not fool the world in the way the world has been fooled since the 1920s about the possibility of oil shale. Let's not let oil shale be allowed to be used as a political tool, as the President and others try to address the gas crisis our country is in. The fact of the matter is we are a long way from being able to say oil shale can be developed in a commercial way for the United States of America, and the approach we developed out of our Senate Energy Committee and passed out of this Chamber in the 2005 Energy Policy Act is the right way to go. It embraces a thoughtful and constructive way forward to determining whether we can, in fact, develop the oil that is currently locked up in the rock. I am not the only one who is saying these things. Chevron, one of the major oil companies of the world, in its own statement to the programmatic environmental impact statement comments submitted to the BLM, said the following: Chevron believes that a full scale commercial leasing program should not proceed at this time without clear demonstration of commercial technologies. That is an oil company that obviously has the capacity and the expertise to know the reality of oil shale and is, frankly, being candid and honest and straightforward with the American people about the possibility of oil shale. Next, I would also point to the statements we have heard from the Department of the Interior. A few months ago, we had a hearing in front of the Energy Committee where the Assistant Secretary of the Interior, Assistant Secretary Allred, appeared before the committee. I asked the Assistant Secretary a number of questions. I will quote, again, as I did last week, what I asked and what his answers were. I asked Assistant Secretary Allred the following: When I look at your chart on oil shale development on public lands, you have at some point on that chart this little brown dot that says ``project completion: phase 3-- commercial.'' When do you think that will happen? What year? The Assistant Secretary Allred responds: Senator, it is hard to predict that because . . . And then there was silence. So I then asked: 2011? He responded: Oh, no, I think, I think . . . Silence. I asked again: 2016? He says in response to that: Probably in the latter half. I say: 2015 and beyond? 2015 and beyond. So I continued to question him along these lines. The bottom line is that even within the Department of the Interior, at the highest levels, they are saying that if we ever get to commercial production of oil shale, it is probably out until 2015. That is 7 years from now. Don't tell me that is going to have any effect today on gas prices, and yet, it is one of the cornerstones of what the President of the United States proposed to be the solution to the energy crisis we face in America today. I beg to differ with the President of the United States, and I will not let the President of the United States or the Department of the Interior run roughshod over the State of Colorado. Not today, not next month, not next year, not in 10 years. It is not going to happen. We can develop oil shale in the State of Colorado, but if we are going to do it, we are going to do it in a thoughtful and deliberate way. I am proud of the fact that the leading newspapers of the western part of Colorado, including the Denver Post and the papers in Utah, have essentially said the same thing. These papers have lived with the history of the booms and the busts, including the big bust of the 1980s, with respect to oil shale. The Denver Post in its editorial says: Developing oil shale has been a dream since the early 20th century, but careful planning is needed to make sure the dream doesn't turn into a nightmare. It goes on to say some other things that are very supportive of a thoughtful and deliberative approach that I have tried to bring to oil shale development. The Grand Junction Sentinel, which essentially is the newspaper that covers all the Western Slope of Colorado, some 20 counties, a paper whose editorial board knows good economics can come from thoughtful development of our natural resources but also a newspaper that has stood tall in terms of making sure we are protecting the long-term sustainability of the Western Slope. Here is what the Grand Junction Sentinel says in its editorial page. The Grand Junction Sentinel probably knows as much about water and public lands and natural resources as much as any other newspaper around the West. They know it because they live it. They know because they know that across the western part of Colorado, most of the land is owned by the Federal Government. The Federal Government owns 33 percent of the State of Colorado and most of that is located on the Western Slope. Here is what the Grand Junction Sentinel, a conservative editorial board, had to say about this oil shale development. It says: The notion that the one-year moratorium on commercial leasing approved by Congress last year is somehow a barrier to commercial development is nonsense. If anything, that moratorium should be extended. It continues. The editorial was titled: ``Congress is Pushing Another Shale Sham.'' Continuing, it says: Whatever technology is used to recover oil from shale, the impacts will include massive surface disturbance, huge demands for additional electric generation, and reservoirs full of Colorado's limited water, not to mention the hordes of additional workers who will descend on this area. The Grand Junction Sentinel says in its editorial, joining the Denver Post, that as we move forward to look at oil shale as a possible energy source for our country, then we need to be thoughtful in terms of how we move forward. The Salt Lake Tribune. There are some--a much smaller percentage of the shale we are talking about is actually located in Utah, but the Salt Lake Tribune essentially has said the same thing. It says: The development of oil shale deposits in eastern Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado would be an expensive undertaking, risky for the environment, and a drain on dwindling water resources, with no quick return in additional oil supplies to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil. `` . . . with no quick return in additional oil supplies to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil.'' So when the President of the United States stands and he says to the American people that here is the answer to your high cost of gas and diesel and jet fuel today, and he says we are going to go to oil shale, there is a misrepresentation on what the contribution is going to be from oil shale development and a misstatement and a misapprehension, frankly, of what the facts and reality are with respect to oil shale development in the Western Slope of Colorado. I wish to focus on a couple of those issues in a little more specific way. One of the realities we all know in the West--those of us who share the water of the Colorado River Basin--is that we live in a place that has a very limited water supply. The Colorado River supplies water to seven States: Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and California. For 100 years, we have figured out a way of living together and sharing the supplies of water within the river. It is said today that there are some 500,000 to 1 million acre feet of water that can still be developed and then used within my State of Colorado under the compacts that govern the sharing of water on the Colorado River. Those compacts are very important. There is also a truth about oil shale and how it will use the water that is allocated to Colorado under those compacts. But we don't know how much water is going to be required for oil shale development. We don't know whether it is 500,000 or 1 million or 2 million acre feet, and we don't know what the consequences, therefore, would be on agriculture within Colorado or on the municipalities that so depend on that water. So it is no surprise that most of the water entities involved in protecting Colorado's water compacts have come out against a head-long rush into oil shale development because they are concerned about what will happen with respect to the water supplies of the Colorado River if, in fact, we move forward at the full-scale commercial oil shale leasing program in a premature way. So it would be my hope that as we look at the possibilities for dealing with the current energy prices, that we try to focus on real solutions. The real solutions, first and foremost, are for us to look long term and to avoid the failed policies of the past 30 years under, frankly, both Republican and Democratic administrations that have gotten us to the point today where we are so overdependent on foreign oil that not only our national policy but our economic reality is being driven by that massive overdependence. So embracing the new world of energy, where we are looking at greater efficiencies, where we are looking at alternative fuels, where we are looking at advanced technologies such as those of the hybrid plug-in vehicle, and where we are looking at the development of our conventional resources in a thoughtful, honest, and balanced way is a way forward. It has to be the kind of energy policy we can sustain, not over a week or a political season or even the term of one President, but over a longer period of time. It is the kind of challenge for America that should summon the kind of political courage among all those who are involved in this debate, in the same way we were able to take on the Manhattan Project and build the atomic bomb in less than 4 years, where we were able to move forward and put a man on the Moon in less than 10 years from the time President Kennedy announced that vision and that goal for America. That is important, and that is long term. It is also important that we do what we can in the short term to address this issue. We have had conversations about speculation of the markets and how speculation might be accounting for somewhere between 25 and 40 percent of the high price of oil we see today. We need to look into that question and see whether we can bring the rapid speculation under control. Those are undertakings we can take on and take on in the very near term. In addition, I have heard my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say what we need to do is to open up all the lands in ANWR and other lands within the interior and offshore in order for us to be able to bring in additional supply into our energy stream for America. There is a possibility for us to open additional lands. There are lands, for example, within the gulf coast of Mexico, which we opened in the 2006 Energy bill, where we added some 8 million acres of additional land in the gulf that we said is now open for exploration. We have done a lot to try, in my view, to bring in additional supply in terms of our energy pipelines. But we should not kid ourselves because we know today there are more than 60 million acres of public lands, both onshore and offshore, which have already been leased to the oil companies--60 million acres, far surpassing the acreage of ANWR, far surpassing any of the acreages being talked about now even on the gulf coast of Mexico that might be opened. So what is happening with all these public lands, resources of the United States of America under which lie significant reserves of oil? I would say there are huge opportunities there for oil and gas companies to go out and to develop the resources that are underneath those lands. I conclude by saying, first, let us be honest about oil shale and its possibilities. Let's not oversell to the American public that this is somehow a panacea for America's energy needs. Secondly, let's look long term, knowing there is going to be some pain but that we need to look long term at a new energy policy for the United States of America. As a parenthetical, I would say that is why these energy tax incentives we have been working on are so important for us to try and harness the energy of the Sun, the energy of the wind, the energy of biofuels, the energy of cellulosic and ethanol as we move forward on that frontier. Thirdly, as we look at short-term solutions to help, in some way, alleviate the pain all Americans are feeling today with respect to high gas prices, that we be realistic with respect to the solutions to that particular challenge we face. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res 337, which was received from the House.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, Thursday, June 19; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume the motion to proceed to H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, tomorrow we expect to begin legislating on the very important housing legislation. Senators should be prepared to vote throughout the day in relation to amendments to the bill.