Billy Tauzin

Mr. TAUZIN

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me put this in perspective for the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown). The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) is correct. The last time America built a major refinery was in my district over a quarter of a century ago. Over a quarter of a century ago was the last time we licensed and built a major refinery in America. That is pretty sad. The result has been that our refinery is at 93 percent capacity right now. They are making gasoline and fuel oil to heat our homes and jet fuel, as fast as they can make it; diesel fuel for our vehicles, as fast as they can make it. The result is we are importing more refined products now than ever. We are importing more refined jet fuel, gasoline, diesel, fuel oil, everything else because we have stopped building refineries in America. That is pretty sad. On top of that, we have got a fuel blend requirement in our system that causes regions of the country to switch blends every now and then, winter grade, summer grade, different blends to meet air quality standards, the result of which if there is any breakdown in the system, we have got real problems. But building gasoline reserves and having the Federal Government intervene in those sales and marketing and circulating these sales every year is just going to make it worse, I promise. I hate to pick on the post office, but if my colleagues think the government running the Postal System is a good idea, and delivering all the mail and the e-mails of America and running the Internet, for example, put them in the gasoline business and see what a mess we have got. This is not going to work. It is a terrible idea. And, to boot, I can see what happens at the end of the year. We have got all these blends and all these products sitting in these tanks we have not been able to market, and all of a sudden we are going to have an old gasoline disposal bill and we are going to be fighting over whether to put it in Yucca Mountain or somewhere else. I mean, I can see what happens at the end of this thing. It just does not work. If my colleagues want a system that works, help us build a good energy policy that produces more in America, that builds a refinery every now and then when we need one, instead of not having one built in a quarter of a century. That will work. I ask the Members to reject this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and the author of the electricity title, which would get stripped by the Dingell amendment. He will close on this dastardly amendment by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell). (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the great pickup truck State of Montana (Mr. Rehberg).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman will yield further, yes, I would.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, that is precisely the intent that was in fact discussed and acknowledged when we accepted the gentlewoman's amendment in full committee.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this amendment proposes to establish a gasoline reserve, 20 million barrels. That is 840 million gallons of gasoline. With one site each in the Northeast, Midwest and California, there would be over 6 million barrels or nearly 280 million gallons of gasoline at each one of these three locations. To put it in proper perspective, Port Mobil in New York, one of the largest in the world, has a storage capacity of only 2.5 million barrels. This amendment more than doubles it at each of three locations. A large gasoline storage tank can hold about 300,000 barrels. This amendment would require 22 such tanks at each location. Gasoline, as we all know due to its extremely volatile nature, has to be stored above ground. Vaporization is a major problem. Gasoline is extremely flammable. It is explosive. I find it very ironic if a private company proposed to build one of these facilities anywhere with this kind of magnitude, every environmentalist in the country, every safety advocate in the country would be there to oppose it, and it would likely not get built. Here we propose for the government to do it. Gasoline, worst of all, has a shelf life of 1 year or less. Now I want to put this in perspective so we all understand what I am talking about. Have Members ever tried to use the lawn mower with last year's gasoline in it? Have you ever tried to start it? Now try 840 million gallons of old gasoline in lawn mowers and cars all over America. But the amendment says the Secretary of Energy is authorized to conduct purchase and sales of gasoline for maintenance purposes such as maintaining gasoline quality. So now let us talk about market manipulation. Here the government, the Secretary, is buying and selling 840 million gallons of gasoline in order to turn over the inventory on a 1-year cycle. That would disrupt markets in the private sector as they tried to anticipate the Federal buy-and-sale plan. This is just a ploy for the Federal Government to begin regulating gasoline prices. We have to understand it for what it is. The amendment requires the storage of regular unleaded gasoline. Depending upon the time of the year, there are between 20 and 24 different types of regular unleaded gasoline blends at any one time in America. In the Northeast alone, there are five different types of regular unleaded gasoline. Would the reserve have winter grade or summer grade, in addition to the various blends? Members can see what I am getting to. This is an extraordinarily complex market that is made even more extraordinary because the government requires all of these different blends, and now we are going to put the government in the business of creating massive storage tanks all over America, manipulating sales and purchases all over the place with all of these different blends to boot, and having to do it on a regular cycle because old gasoline will not start the lawn mower. The enactment into law of this amendment would be a disaster. It would be a disaster to communities where the site is located, it would be a disaster for the gasoline markets that would be disrupted by government built-in manipulation, and it would be a disaster to the Federal Government for wasting rather precious tax dollars. I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment and claim the time in opposition.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. TAUZIN

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the honorable gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, as we begin to debate the various titles of this bill, I think the American public will see that the work of the Committee on Ways and Means incentivizing energy production, incentivizing new fuels, incentivizing renewable fuels, combined with the work we have done in increasing programs like we do in this bill to make sure that clean coal technology is advanced, the STAR program on efficiency is advanced and other programs are advanced to increase conservation and efficiency in the country, as well as the programs that the Committee on Energy and Commerce will bring to us to make sure that we take full advantage of the resources of the lands that are producible in this country in an environmentally safe manner, when you look at all these provisions together, and the technology, science and technology provisions that the Committee on Science will bring, this is the most comprehensive energy package we have brought to the floor in many decades. This deserves to be the law of the land for more than just one reason, more than just national security. This country is ready for an economic revival. This is the first step. Stable energy prices and stable supplies mean solid economic performance. This is our first step in revitalizing the American economy.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, let me take a second to say that, coming from the master himself, I take the words of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) as a compliment, but mainly to compliment him for the civility and the cooperation that he was provided as our committee has worked through these difficult issues. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to close to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns). (Mr. STEARNS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, just quickly, I want the gentleman to know that we will be accepting 9 of the 15 amendments that will be offered and supported by Democrats on the bill.

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, and I ask unanimous consent to yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell).

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood).

Mr. TAUZIN

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I want to advise the gentlewoman that we support her amendment. In fact, as she well knows, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations chaired by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) has done some extraordinary work and uncovered some massive and seriously disturbing problems with inventory management and theft of government property at Los Alamos. The efforts of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) already demonstrate very clearly why this amendment is such a good idea. Our oversight has revealed the troublesome story of looting and the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations has revealed what appears to be a lack of interest by senior laboratory managers to do anything about the theft and the fraud that is going on right under their noses. What we found most astonishing about the theft and fraud is that it took place at such a vital facility. Los Alamos is a facility that our Nation trusts with some of our most sensitive information. So we reviewed this abuse of purchase cards and found that DOE has been quick to distribute purchase cards to employees and contract workers, but very slow to implement management procedures to monitor and control abuse and to cut down on fraud. So, Mr. Chairman, the Schakowsky amendment is a clear sense of Congress that DOE should get its act together with respect to procurement and inventory control. I am pleased and proud to support her amendment.