Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
QUORUM CALL:
THE
SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.
I ASK CONSENT THE
QUORUM CALL BE SUSPENDED.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
AND TO SPEAK AS IF
IN MORNING BUSINESS.
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT, THERE
ARE MANY ISSUES THAT COME BEFORE
THE SENATE.
SOME ARE SIMPLE, SOME ARE
THE ISSUE WHICH I AM GOING TO
SPEAK TO TODAY WHICH YOU ARE
PERSONALLY AWARE OF AS THE
SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA AND
MORE AND MORE MEMBERS ARE
BECOMING AWARE OF AND IT'S THE
SWIPE FEES.
FOR THOSE WHO DON'T FOLLOW THIS
CLOSELY, EVERY TIME YOU USE A
CREDIT CARD OR A DEBIT CARD IN
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
THE RETAILER OR MERCHANT THAT
YOU DO BUSINESS WITH PAYS A FEE
TO THE BANK THAT ISSUED THE
CARD.
THE FEE IS ESTABLISHED BY THE
MAJOR CREDIT CARD NETWORKS, VISA
AND MASTERCARD.
THEY TELL THE BANKS HOW MUCH
THEY'LL RECEIVE EACH TIME A
CUSTOMER USES THIS CARD.
AND WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IS
THAT THE FEE THAT IS BEING
CHARGED, THE DEBIT CARD FEE, HAS
CONTROVERSY.
LET'S GO BACK IN HISTORY A
LITTLE BIT.
I CAN STILL REMEMBER WHEN PEOPLE
USED CHECKS, AND SOME STILL DO,
BUT NOT AS FREQUENTLY.
NOW WE USE THE PLASTIC FORM OF A
CHECKING ACCOUNT.
INSTEAD OF WRITING OUT A CHECK
AND PUSHING IT THROUGH THE
BANKING SYSTEM AND FOR A FEW
CENTS WATCH IT BE PROCESSED, WE
USE A DEBIT CARD AND A DEBIT
CARD DRAWS MONEY DIRECTLY OUT OF
OUR CHECKING ACCOUNT TO THE
WITH.
SO THE DEBIT CARD HAS IN FACT
CHECKS.
IN MANY INSTANCES, REPLACED CASH
AS MORE AND MORE PEOPLE ARE
USING PLASTIC FOR TRANSACTIONS.
SO I STARTED HEARING FROM
MERCHANTS AND RETAILERS ALL
AROUND THE UNITED STATES ABOUT
THE FEE THAT WAS BEING CHARGED
FOR DEBIT CARD TRANSACTIONS.
NOW, DEBIT CARD TRANSACTIONS ARE
DIFFERENT THAN CREDIT CARD
TRANSACTIONS IN THIS RESPECT.
WHEN I USE MY CREDIT CARD, I'M
GOING TO BE BILLED EACH MONTH
FOR WHAT I PUT ON MY CREDIT
THERE IS A COLLECTION ISSUE,
WILL DURBIN ACTUALLY MAKE HIS
ON TIME?
IS HE ABLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENT,
AND THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS GOING TO
BE PROCESSED.
SO THERE IS, I GUESS, AN
UNCERTAINTY INVOLVED IN CREDIT
CARD TRANSACTIONS AND MUCH LESS
SO WHEN IT COMES TO DEBIT CARD
TRANSACTIONS BECAUSE THAT MONEY
IS COMING DIRECTLY OUT OF YOUR
CHECKING ACCOUNT TO YOUR
MERCHANT.
SO IN TERMS OF RISK, THERE IS
GREATER RISK WITH A CREDIT CARD
THAN THERE IS WITH A DEBIT CARD.
NEVERTHELESS, OVER THE YEARS,
WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IS THE SWIPE
FEE OR FEE CHARGED THE MERCHANT
FOR THE USE OF A DEBIT CARD
KEEPS GOING UP, UP AND UP.
AND PEOPLE WOULD SAY WELL, WHY
DON'T THE MERCHANTS AND
RETAILERS BARGAIN WITH VISA,
MASTERCARD AND THE BANKS TO MAKE
SURE THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY
AN INCREASINGLY LARGE FEE EVERY
TIME A PERSON USES A DEBIT CARD?
AND THE ANSWER IS THEY HAVE NO
POWER TO BARGAIN AT ALL, NOT AT
AND SO THE RETAILER, THE
MERCHANT ENDS UP ACCEPTING THE
DEBIT CARD, SWIPING THE DEBIT
CARD, PAYING FOR THE TRANSACTION
AND THEN PAYING A FEE.
TO THE POINT WHERE YOU LOOK AND
IT?
THE AVERAGE DEBIT CARD FEE FOUND
BY THE RECENT STUDY OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE IS ABOUT 40
CENTS A TRANSACTION.
40 CENTS MAY NOT SOUND LIKE MUCH
IF YOU'RE BUYING A TELEVISION --
PERCENTAGE.
BUT THINK ABOUT 40 CENTS TO THE
PERSON STANDING IN FRONT OF YOU
IN LINE AT THE AIRPORT BUYING A
PACKAGE OF BUBBLE GUM.
THAT 40 CENTS IS ALL THE PROFIT
THAT THAT RETAILER COULD EVER
EXPECT, AND IT'S GOING RIGHT OUT
THE WINDOW.
IN FACT, THEY ARE LOSING MONEY
ON THE TRANSACTION BECAUSE OF
THE DEBIT CARD.
SO FOR YEARS, RETAILERS AND
CONVENIENCE STORES, HOTELS,
CHARITIES, UNIVERSITIES, WENT TO
VISA AND MASTERCARD AND SAID YOU
FEE.
IT'S NOT FAIR TO US.
YOU'RE NOT JUSTIFYING IT IN
TERMS OF YOUR COST OF DOING
BUSINESS, AND WE'RE PAYING MORE
AND MORE AND MORE OUT OF EACH
TRANSACTION EVEN THOUGH YOUR
COST IS NOT GOING UP.
AND BASICALLY, VISA AND
MASTERCARD TOLD THEM GO TAKE A
WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE WHAT WE
WANT TO CHARGE, TAKE IT OR LEAVE
IT, BUDDY.
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO TAKE
PLASTIC, THAT'S YOUR BUSINESS.
TRY TO DO BUSINESS WITHOUT IT.
YOU CAN'T.
SO RETAILERS AND MERCHANTS WERE
ON THE LOOSING END OF THIS
CONVERSATION.
SO THEY CAME TO ME AND SAID IS
THERE A WAY TO DO A STUDY, A
STUDY ON THIS ISSUE AND
DETERMINE WHAT'S FAIR?
SO A FEW YEARS AGO, I JOINED
WITH SENATOR BOND OF MISSOURI
AND THE TWO OF US ON CREDIT
CARD -- ON THE CREDIT CARD
REFORM BILL ASKED FOR A STUDY.
IT TURNED OUT THE BANKING
INDUSTRY DIDN'T WANT ANY STUDY
THEY KILLED OUR REQUEST FOR A
STUDY AND TOLD PEOPLE, ALL THE
PEOPLE IN THE SENATE, DEMOCRATS
AND REPUBLICANS, VOTE AGAINST
EVEN A STUDY OF THE SWIPE FEE,
THE DEBIT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE.
SO WE ENDED UP EMPTY-HANDED.
AND THE DAY CAME LAST YEAR WHEN
WE REVISITED THE ISSUE.
THIS TIME, I CAME TO THE FLOOR
WITH AN AMENDMENT AND SAID
HERE'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO.
I'D LIKE TO GIVE TO THE FEDERAL
RESERVE THE POWER TO PROMULGATE
A RULE WHICH SAYS THAT THE FEE
CHARGED FOR THE USE OF A DEBIT
CARD IS GOING TO BE REASONABLE
AND PROPORTIONAL TO THE COSTS
INCURRED BY THE BANK IN
PROCESSING THIS TRANSACTION, AND
WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN A FACTOR
HERE FOR FRAUD.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING THEY NEED
TO ADD TO TAKE CARE OF FRAUD,
ADD IT IN.
WE WENT A STEP FURTHER.
WE SAID THIS IS NOT GOING TO
APPLY TO EVERY BANK AND CREDIT
UNION THAT ISSUES A DEBIT CARD.
WE ARE GOING TO EXEMPT THE
OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF
COMMUNITY BANKS AND CREDIT
UNIONS ACROSS AMERICA.
MR. PRESIDENT, THERE ARE ABOUT
15,000 COMMUNITY BANKS, I SHOULD
SAY, BANKS AND CREDIT UNIONS
ACROSS THE UNITED STATES,
SO WE SAID IF YOUR BANK OR
CREDIT UNION HAS A VALUATION OF
LESS THAN $10 BILLION, YOU'RE
NOT COVERED BY THIS LAW AT ALL.
YOU'RE EXEMPT.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT MEANT
THAT ABOUT 100 BANKS ACROSS
AMERICA WERE SUBJECT TO THIS NEW
LAW, AND THREE CREDIT UNIONS.
ALL THE REST ARE EXEMPT.
SO YOU SAY WELL, DURBIN, IF YOU
EXEMPTED ALL THESE BANKS, ALMOST
15,000 OF THEM AND YOU ONLY
AFFECTED ABOUT 100 OF THEM, HOW
CAN THIS HAVE ANY IMPACT?
WELL, IT TURNS OUT THAT OF THE
LARGEST BANKS IN AMERICA, THREE
OF THE BIG ONES.
THAT WOULD BE CITIBANK -- PARDON
ME, CHASE, RATHER.
CHASE, WELLS FARGO, AND BANK OF
AMERICA, THEY REALLY COMPRISE
OVER HALF OF ALL THE DEBIT CARD
TRANSACTIONS IN THE COUNTRY.
SOME SAY EVEN MORE, 60% OR EVEN
MORE.
SO BY JUST MAKING THIS A LAW
THAT APPLIES TO THE LARGEST
BANKS, WE'RE AFFECTING THE
MAJORITY OF DEBIT CARD
TRANSACTIONS AND WE'RE
ESTABLISHING A REASONABLE AND
TRANSACTION IS.
SO THE RETAILER AND MERCHANT,
THE PERSON RUNNING THE MOM AND
POP STORE, OR THE PERSON RUNNING
A BIG BOX STORE, IS GOING TO GET
FAIR TREATMENT IN TERMS OF HOW
MUCH IS CHARGED.
SO YOU SAY TO YOURSELF WELL, HOW
MUCH ARE THEY CHARGING NOW?
THE FEDERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES
THEY ARE CHARGING ABOUT 40 CENTS
A TRANSACTION, AND THE ACTUAL
COST TO THE BANK AND THE CREDIT
CARD COMPANY IS ABOUT 10 CENTS.
THEY ARE CHARGING FOUR TIMES AS
MUCH AS THEY SHOULD ON EACH
TRANSACTION.
HOW MUCH MONEY IS IT WORTH TO
THE BANKS?
THE ESTIMATES RANGE FROM
FROM $1.3 BILLION TO
TO $1.7 BILLION A MONTH.
A MONTH.
NOW, THESE BANKS, THE BIG BANKS
THAT I'M ADDRESSING WITH THIS
LAW, THEY'RE NOT HAVING LITTLE
COLLECTIONS OUTSIDE THE BANK TO
KEEP THEMSELVES IN BUSINESS.
THEY ARE BRINGING IN QUITE A BIT
OF MONEY.
THEY'RE VERY PROFITABLE.
AND TO SAY THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE
A REASONABLE CHARGE FOR
RETAILERS AND MERCHANTS ACROSS
AMERICA, SMALL BUSINESSES, LARGE
BUSINESSES ALIKE I DON'T THINK
IS UNREASONABLE.
AND REMEMBER, WE EXEMPTED THE
COMMUNITY BANKS.
WE EXEMPTED THE CREDIT UNIONS.
IT'S ONLY THE BIG ONES THAT ARE
GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THIS.
WELL, YOU WOULD THINK THAT I HAD
DONE THE WORST THING IN THE
WORLD TO THESE BANKS AND CREDIT
CARD COMPANIES.
THEY HAVE UNLEASHED WITH THE
GREATEST FURY YOU CAN POSSIBLY
PUT TOGETHER ON WALL STREET THIS
ATTACK AGAINST THE DURBIN
AMENDMENT.
THEY ARE SENDING OUT LETTERS,
CHASE IS, TO ALL THE PEOPLE WHO
HAVE DEBIT CARD ACCOUNTS AND
CREDIT CARD ACCOUNTS AND SAY IF
THIS DURBIN AMENDMENT GOES
THROUGH, WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE
THERE.
WELL, AT THE END OF THE DAY,
THAT'S THE THREAT WE ALWAYS HEAR
FROM THEM, AND THE FACT OF THE
MATTER IS SINCE THEY ARE VIRTUAL
MONOPOLIES IN THEIR BUSINESS,
THEY ARE INCREASING THEIR FEE
CHARGES REGULARLY.
PEOPLE ACROSS AMERICA KNOW IT.
EVERY TIME WE PUT IN A REFORM,
THEY RACE TO RAISE THEIR
INTEREST RATES AND RACE TO RAISE
THEIR PENALTIES.
THEY GIVE YOU THESE FREE
PENALTIES.
IF YOU STUMBLE AND DON'T PAY ON
THE EXACT DAY OR WHATEVER IT
HAPPENS TO BE.
BATTLE.
IT'S A BATTLE BETWEEN VISA,
MASTERCARD AND THE BIGGEST BANKS
IN AMERICA VERSUS THE RETAILERS
AND MERCHANTS OF AMERICA, AND
THEY ARE BOTH ENGAGED.
NOW, THE RETAILERS AND MERCHANTS
REALLY CAN'T HOLD A CANDLE TO
THE BIG BANKS AND CREDIT CARD
COMPANIES WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR
INVESTMENT IN THIS FIGHT, BUT
THEY ARE TRYING VALIANTLY.
WE ARE ORGANIZING SMALL
BUSINESSES ACROSS THE UNITED
STATES, IN ILLINOIS, WEST
VIRGINIA, ALL OVER THE PLACE, TO
STEP UP AND SAY COME ON, THIS IS
AN IMPORTANT PART OF BUSINESS.
I RAN INTO ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES
ON THE FLOOR HERE, AND SHE SAID,
YOU KNOW, WHAT I AM WORRIED
ABOUT IS EVEN IF YOU REDUCE THE
FEE CHARGED TO THE RETAILER FOR
USING THE DEBIT CARD, HOW IS
THAT GOING TO HELP THE CUSTOMER?
HOW IS THAT GOING TO TRANSLATE
INTO ANYTHING MORE THAN PROFITS
FOR THE BUSINESS?
MR. PRESIDENT, YOUR FAMILY
INVOLVED IN BUSINESS.
IF YOU HAVE GOT A COMPETITOR
ACROSS THE STREET, WHETHER IT'S
A GAS STATION, A DRUGSTORE, A
GROCERY STORE, A RESTAURANT, YOU
KNOW THAT YOUR PRICE COMPETITION
IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF WHETHER
THE PERSON CHOOSES YOUR STORE
OVER THE OTHER STORE.
SO WHEN YOU GIVE THE OWNER OF
THE STORE A BREAK ON THE FEE
THAT'S BEING CHARGED BY THE
CREDIT CARD COMPANIES AND BANKS,
THEN YOU GIVE THEM AN
OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE IN MORE
PRICE COMPETITION.
OH, BUT WHAT ABOUT WAL-MART?
THIS IS THE MONSTER OF RETAILERS
IN TERMS OF SIZE.
10% OF ALL THE SALES IN AMERICA.
I CAN TELL YOU, EVEN WITH
WAL-MART, TARGET IS LOOKING OVER
THEY ARE WATCHING THE PRICES OF
GOODS AND DECIDE WEATHERING THEY
CAN BE COMPETITIVE.
SO THERE IS COMPETITION AT THIS
LEVEL.
AND IF YOU GIVE RETAILERS A
BREAK WHEN IT COMES TO THE
AMOUNT THEY HAVE TO PAY TO BANKS
AND CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, I
THINK IT'S GOING TO END UP IN
CONSUMER BENEFITS AND THE
CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS, THE
MAJOR ONES IN THIS TOWN SUPPORT
WHAT I'VE DONE.
THEY AREN'T SUPPORTING THE
POSITION OF THE BIG BANKS AND
CREDIT CARD COMPANIES.
WELL, ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT
COMES DOWN IS -- IT'S
INTERESTING, THE LION'S SHARE OF
THE ARGUMENT AGAINST MY
AMENDMENT IS NOT COMING FROM THE
PEOPLE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY IT.
YOU'RE NOT HEARING AS MUCH IN
WASHINGTON FROM THOSE BIG BANKS
ON WALL STREET OR THE CREDIT
CARD COMPANIES, AND THEY'RE THE
WHY?
THEY DON'T HAVE MUCH CREDIBILITY
AROUND HERE.
THESE ARE THE FOLKS THAT CAME
FILING IN FOR A BAILOUT WHEN
THEY MADE SOME PRETTY BAD
DECISIONS AND GOT BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT TO BAIL THEM OUT, AND
THEN, OF COURSE, THEY TURNED
AROUND AND GAVE BONUSES AND ALL
SORTS OF HIGH-LEVEL COMPENSATION
TO THEIR OFFICERS.
SO THEY'RE NOT THE MOST POPULAR
CROWD ON CAPITOL HILL, SO THEY
HAVE BROUGHT IN SURROGATES TO
ARGUE THEIR POSITION, AND THE
SURROGATES, AS YOU KNOW, ARE THE
SMALL BANKS AND SMALL CREDIT
UNIONS, SAYING THE DEROUCHIE
AMENDMENT IS TERRIBLE.
SAYING THE DURBIN AMENDMENT IS
TERRIBLE.
THE FIRST THING YOU HAVE TO SAY
IS YOU YOU'RE EXEMPT.
YOU'RE NOT COVERED BY THE DURBIN
IF YOU HAVE $10 BILLION OR LESS,
YOU'RE NOT COVERED.
US.
SO YOU'VE TAKEN AN EXTRA STEP
HERE BEHIND BEYOND THE LAW TO
TRY DEAL WITH SOME OF THEIR
CONCERNS BECAUSE I VALUE THESE
UNIONS.
I WORRY THAT THEY HAVE NOW
BECOME PART OF THE BANKING
INDUSTRY -- IN CAPITAL LETTERS
-- INSTEAD OF WHAT THEY WERE
TRADITIONALLY, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
BANKS, OUR SMALL-TOWN BANKS, OUR
LOCAL CREDIT UNIONS.
THEY'VE NOW BECOME PART OF THIS
BIG BANKING INDUSTRY THING.
I DON'T THINK IT'S HEALTHY FOR
THEM, THE ECONOMY, OR THEIR
SO WHAT I DID WAS TO GO TO THE
MERCHANTS' COALITION -- ON MY
SIDE ON THIS ISSUE, THE
RETAILERS -- AND ASK THEM TO PUT
OUT A STATEMENT OF POLICY WHEN
IT COMES TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY
ARE GOING TO DISCRIMINATE ON THE
CARD THAT IS PRESENTED.
LET ME BE MORE SPECIFIC.
IF YOU'RE RUNNING A RESTAURANT
IN WHEELING, WEST VIRGINIA, AND
SOMEBODY WALKS TO THE DOOR AND
PUTS A DEBIT CARD DOWN TO PAY
FOR THE MEAL, WILL YOUR
RESTAURANT TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AND
SAY, OH, THAT'S A COMMUNITY
BANK, THAT'S A HIGHER
INTERCHANGE FEE THAN IT MIGHT BE
WITH A CARD FROM CHASE BANK, FOR
EXAMPLE, AND THAT IS ONE OF THE
CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY THE
UNIONS.
EVEN THOUGH YOU EXEMPTED US,
ULTIMATELY, THESE RETAILERS
COULD DISCRIMINATE AGAINST US
BECAUSE OUR SWIPE FEE IS HIGHER
THAN NIGHT BE COMING OUT OF
CHASE.
WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, WE ENDED UP
WITH A LERKS AN IMPORTANT LERKS
WHICH I HAVE SHARED WITH EVERY
ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES.
AND IT A LETTER FROM THE
MERCHANTS' PAYMENT COALITION
WHICH I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO
PUT IN THE RECORD AT THIS POINT.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
THIS IS A LETTER
TO ME DATED MAY 2.
SOME IN THE FINANCIAL INDUSTRY
ARE CLAIMING THAT THE DURBIN
AMENDMENT EXEMPTION FOR
INTERCHANGE FEE REGULATION FOR
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH
ASSETS UNDER $10 BILLION WILL
NOT BE EFFECTIVE IN PRACTICE
BECAUSE MERCHANTS WILL
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST DEBIT CARDS
WITH HIGHER FEES, HIGHER SWIPE
ON BEHALF OF THE UNDERSIGNED
TRADE ASSOCIATIONS AND TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF MERCHANTS AND
RETAIL ASSOCIATIONS WE
REPRESENT, WE'RE WRITING TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE HAVE NO PRACTICAL
ABILITY TO TREAT DEBIT CARDS
ISSUED BY SMALL FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS OR CREDIT UNIONS
DIFFERENTLY THAN THOSE ISSUED BY
LARGE INSTITUTIONS.
FURTHERMORE, OUR MEMBER
COMPANIES ARE COMMITTED TO
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND IT IS NOT
IN THEIR INTEREST TO
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST DEBIT CARDS
THAT SO MANY CUSTOMERS CARRY.
CURRENTLY MERCHANTS ARE SUBJECT
TO VISA AND MASTERCARD NETWORK
RULES THAT REQUIRE US TO ACCEPT
ALL VISA AND/OR MASTERCARD DEBIT
REGARDLESS OF WHICH BANK OR
CREDIT UNION ISSUES THE CARD.
THIS IS CALLED THE "HONOR ALL
CARDS RULE" AND WE RISK THE
THREAT OF 5,000-A-DAY FINES OR
HIGHER IF WE BREAK THIS RULE.
SO WE ASSURE YOU THAT MERCHANTS
HAVE NO INTENTION OF VIOLATING
THIS TERM OF BRAND ACCEPTANCE.
THESE RULES ALSO PREVENT
MERCHANTS FROM PRICING GOODS
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION THAT
ISSUED THE CARD."
THE NUMBER-ONE COMPLAINT OF
COMMUNITY BANKS AND CREDIT
UNIONS ABOUT DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST THEIR CARDS IS ADDRESSED
DIRECTLY BY THIS LETTER.
RECORD.
IT IS BEING SENT TO EVERY MEMBER
OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE.
THERE'S A SECOND PART OF THIS
ARGUMENT:
THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT
VISA AND MASTERCARD, THE
NETWORKS, WILL CONTINUE TO ALLOW
THE COMMUNITY BANKS AND CREDIT
UNIONS TO CHARGE A HIGHER
INTERCHANGE FEE THAN THE BIG
UNDER OUR LAW, THERE IS NO
REASON TO CHANGE IT.
SO I AM CHALLENGING VISA AND
MASTERCARD AND THESE CARD
NETWORKS TO STATE CLEARLY AND
UNEQUIVOCALLY, AS THIS LETTER
HAS STATED, THAT THEY WILL NOT
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THESE
SMALLER BANKS, COMMUNITY BANKS,
AND CREDIT UNIONS.
THE MERCHANTS HAVE COME FORWARD,
AS A MATTER OF RECORD, AND IT
HAS BEEN PUT IN THE
"CONGRESSIONAL RECORD" THIS DAY,
TO SAY THERE'LL BE NO
DISCRIMINATION.
TEND OF THE DAY, IF VISA AND
MASTERCARD WILL MAKE THE SAME
PROMISE OF NO DISCRIMINATION,
THEN ULTIMATELY THERE IS NO
DISADVANTAGE TO THE COMMUNITY
BANKS AND CREDIT UNIONS, NONE.
NOW THE BURDEN IS ON THE BIG
CREDIT CARD NETWORKS TO STEP UP
TO THE PLATE.
I'VE SENT A LETTER TODAY TO THE
PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF THE
ILLINOIS BANKERS ASSOCIATION,
ILLINOIS CREDIT LEAGUE AND THE
COMMUNITY BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF
ILLINOIS AND WE'RE GOING TO SEND
TO TO THEIR NATIONAL AFFILIATES
AS WELL, SENDING THEM A COPY OF
THIS MERCHANTS LETTER SO THAT
THEY CAN NO LONGER MAKE THE
CLAIM THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE
VICTIMS OF DISCRIMINATION BY
MERCHANTS AND RETAILERS AND
ASKING THEM TO NOW STEP UP AND
JOIN US IN CHALLENGING VISA AND
MASTERCARD AND THE MAJOR CARD
NETWORKS, THAT TO ME RESOLVES
THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE
THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO THE
SENATE.
THEY CAN NO LONGER CLAIM THAT
THESE RETAILERS ARE GOING TO
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THEVMENT AS
A MATTER OF RECORD, THEY WILL
NOT.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US
TO CHANGE THIS, AND I THINK IT
IS IMPORTANT FOR THESE VIRTUAL
MONOPOLIES OF VISA AND
MASTERCARD TO BE HELD
I THINK WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE IN
PASSING THIS LAW, IN GIVING THE
FEDERAL RESERVE THE AUTHORITY TO
ESTABLISH THIS RULE, IS THE
RIGHT THING TO DO.
NOW THERE IS A BIG EFFORT AFOOT
TO STOP US.
YOU KNOW THAT, MR. PRESIDENT.
THEY ARE LOBBYING LIKE I'VE
NEVER SEEN BEFORE ON CAPITOL
YOU'D THINK THERE'S $1 BILLION A
MONTH AT STAIFNLGT AND STAKE.
AND THERE IS.
THEY ARE DETERMINED TO STOP THE
FEDERAL RESERVE FROM ISSUING A
RULE THAT SAYING THAT MERCHANTS
AND RYE RETAILERS WILL BE
TREATED FAIRLY.
I'M HOPING THAT MY COLLEAGUE WHO
JOIN ME IN THIS VOTE WILL STAND
WITH ME.
I KNOW THE ALTERNATIVE.
THE ALTERNATIVE IS THE LARGEST
BANKS IN AMERICA AND THE CREDIT
CARD COMPANIES, THEY'VE GOT A
LOT OF FRERCHEDZS AND THEY'RE
VERY POWERFUL.
BUT I THINK WIT TO GIVE THE
FEDERAL RESERVE THE THE CHANCE TO
ISSUE FINAL RULES.
TALK TO ANY BANK ACROSS THE
COUNTRY AND THEY'RE DOING FELL
YOU THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS
WORKING JUST FINE.
THEY DON'T WANT REFORM.
THEY WANT TO KEEP IT AS IS.
IT IS WORTH BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
TO THE MAJOR BANKS TO KEEP THIS
CHARGE AS IT IS.
AT THE EXPENSE OF BUSINESSES
TRANSPARENCY AND I FAVOR
COMPETITION, AND I WISH WE
DIDN'T HAVE TO BRING THE FEDERAL
FLEECE THIS CONVERSATION.
BUT WE LOOKED FOR A NEUTRAL
REGULATORY AGENCY THAT WOULD
ESTABLISH A REASONABLE AND
PROPORTIONAL FEE, PROMULGATE A
RULE, ISSUE IT AFTER A PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD, AND IMPLEMENT T
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE STRIVING TO
THE C.E.O. OF J.P. MORGAN CHASE
-- THIS IS A FRIEND OF MINE, OR
AT LEAST HE D. USED TO BE -- HAS
CALLED INTERCHANGE REFORM
DOWNRIGHT IDIOTIC.
HE SPHENTS A GOOD SHARE OF HIS
SHAREHOLDER LETTER CRITICIZING
THIS REFORM.
CHASE HAS SENT LETTERS TO ITS
SHARE MEMBERS ABOUT THIS AND
THEY HAVE THREATENED TO RAISE
PRICES TO THEIR CUSTOMERS UNLESS
THEY STOP THE DURBIN AMENDMENT
OF I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT
THE LETTER I SENT TO JAMIE
RECORD.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
THANK YOU.
I HAVEN'T HAD A REPLAY YET FROM
MR. DIMON.
RESPONSE.
I ENCOURAGE HIM TO SHARE MY
LETTER WITH THE SAME
SHAREHOLDERS AND CUSTOMERS TO
WHOM HE'S WRITTEN.
AFTER ALL, IN HIS SHAREHOLDER
LETTER, MR. DIMON SAID HE WANTED
-- QUOTE -- "ANALYSIS IN THE
FULL LIGHT OF DAY" -- OF THE
DURBIN AMENDMENT SO I FIGURED
HE'D WANT HIS AUDIENCE TO BE
INFORMED.
THAT YES.
I HOPE THEY WILL.
I KNOW THAT THE BANKING INDUSTRY
PREFERS FOR THE GIANT WALL
STREET BANKS TO STAY IN THE
BACKGROUND CH IT COMES IN THIS
POPULAR.
ESTIMATES INDICATE THAT ABOUT
HALF OF ALL DEBIT SWIPE FEES GO
TO JUST TEN BIG BANKS.
BANK AMERICA, CHASE, AND WE WILL
FARGO MAID MAKE THE MOST OF ALL,
WELL OVER $1 BILLION EACH.
BUT THE BANKING INDUSTRY KNOWS
THAT THE PUBLIC ISN'T HAPPY WITH
BIG BANKS.
INDUSTRY ARGUES THAT EVEN MY
AMENDMENT EXEMPTS ALL BUT THE
LARGEST 1 FRR REGULATION, IT
JUST WON'T WORK AND SMALL BANKS
WILL GET HURT.
THIS LETTER MAKES IT CLEAR THAT
WHEN IT COMES TO RETAILERS AND
MERCHANTS THERE WILL NOT BE ANY
PAIN INFLIBLGHTED.
THEY ARE IN FACT EXEMPT UNDER
THE LAW.
THEY WILL BE EXEMPT IN PRACTICE.
I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM 20 OF
THE NATION'S LARGEST RETAIL
ASTHEETIONZ REAFFIRMS WHAT I
JUST SAID.
THE MERCHANT GROUPS MAKE IT
CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE THE
CONTRACTUAL AUTHORITY, THE
PRACTICAL ABLGHT ABILITIER OR
THE ECONOMIC IN MY VIEW TO
DISCRIMINATE.
THEY POINT OUT THAT VISA AND
MASTERCARD CONTRACTS -- THEY
POINT OUT THAT IN MANY IF NOT
MOST RETAIL ENVIRONMENTS THE
MERCHANT DOESN'T HAVE THE
PRACTICAL ABILITY TO DISTINGUISH
BETWEEN A SMALL BANK OR LARGE
BANK CARD AT THE POINT SALE.
I HAD WENDY KRONISTER, WHOSE
FAMILY OWNS A CHAIN OF GAS
STATIONS IN DOWNSTATE ILLINOIS,
COME INTO MY OFFICE AND TALK
ABOUT THIS.
I HAVE KNOWN HER MOM AND DAD A
THE BUSINESS.
SHE SAID, SENATOR, FOR GOODNESS
SAKES, WHEN THEY PUT THE PLASTIC
ON THE COUNTER, WE TAKE T WE'RE
NOT GOING TO SIT THERE AND ARGUE
WITH THEM ABOUT WHO ISSUED IT.
THAT JUST STNDZS TO REASON.
MERCHANTS ALL POINT OUT THAT
THEY AREN'T IN THE POSITION TO
TELL CUSTOMERS TO PUT THEIR
DEBIT CARDS AWAY.
THEY'LL LOSE SALES AND CUSTOMERS
WHEN THEY DO IT.
THE MERCHANTS MAKE THE
OBSERVATION THAT MOST CUSTOMERS
ONLY HAVE ONE DEBIT CARD.
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THE SALE,
YOU ARE GOING TO TAKE THAT DEBIT
CARD.
WHAT I'VE TRIED TO DO WITH THIS
LETTER IS TO SHOW THAT MY SIDE
ON THIS DEBATE, THE SMALL
BUSINESSES, THE RETAIL
BUSINESSES ARE TRYING TO BE
REASONABLE, HAD THE CREDIT CARD
COMPANIES AND MAJOR BANKS BEEN
REASONABLE ON THIS ISSUE, I
NEVER WOULD HAVE INTRODUCED THIS
AMENDMENT.
THEY'VE REFUSED, REFUSED TO
MERCHANTS.
THEY SAID IT WAS TAKE IT OR
LEAVE T THEY DID IT IN THE
OBSCURITY OF LENGTHY CONTRACTS
AND REGULATIONS THAT IT'S ALMOST
THROUGH.
I THINK THOSE WHO ARE ASKING FOR
A DELAY AND STUDY OF THIS ISSUE
SHOULD BE CALLED OUT FOR WHAT
THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
EVERY MONTH THAT THEY DELAY
MEANS THAT MUSTERS CAN CUSTOMERS AND
CONSUMERS WILL PAY OVER $1
BILLION MORE IN PHENES THESE
DEBIT CARDS, TAKEN TAKEN AWAY
FROM OUR ECONOMY WHVMENT THESE
SMALL BUSINESSES HAVE THE
ADVANTAGE THAT THEY CAN GET
UNDER THE DURBIN AMENDMENT, THEY
ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE MORE
PROFITABLE, EXPAND THEIR
BUSINESSES AND HIRE MORE PEOPLE.
HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HEARD THE
SPEECH ON THE FLOOR THAT THE KEY
TO ECONOMIC RECOVERY IS SMALL
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU CANNOT
VOTE FOR THIS TWO AND A
HALF-YEAR DELAY AND STUDY OF
THIS ISSUE.
IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE IN SMALL
BUSINESS, I THINK THE ISSUE IS
VERY CLEAR.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES NOT TO FALL
FOR THIS ARGUMENT, THAT THE
BANKS AND CARD COMPANIES ARE
PLAYING.
DON'T LET THEM DELAY AND DERAIL
THE SWIPE FEE REFORM THAT MAIN
STREET AMERICAN BUSINESSES AND
CONSUMERS NEED SO BADDERLY.
THE SENATE HAS ALREADY VOTED TO
ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR
IMPLEMENTING ENTER CHANGE
REFOMPLET WE SHOULD LET THE
FEDERAL RESERVE ISSUE THEIR
RULES, WHICH THEY ARE PLANNING
TO DO IN JUST A MATTER 6 WEEKS.
I THINK AT THAT TIME WE'LL SEE
THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE WAY
TO DEAL WITH THIS THAT DOESN'T
CREATE A DISADVANTAGE FOR
UNIONS.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK THAT THE
STATEMENT I AM ABOUT TO MAKE NOW
BE PUT IN A SEPARATE PLACE IN
THE "CONGRESSIONAL RECORD."
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT,
ACCORDING TO THE U.S. ENERGY
INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, THE
AVERAGE PRICE OF GASOLINE IS
$3.96 A GALLON NATIONWIDE.
I HAVE MY OWN SPECIAL APPOINTED
MONITOR OF GASOLINE PRICES IN
THE STATE OF ILLINOIS: MY
WIEVMENT AND I CALLED HER
YESTERDAY MORNING AND SHE SAID
TO ME, SENATOR, IT IS UP TO
$4.20 IN SPRINGFIELD.
WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO?
SO SHE PUT ME ON THE SPOT.
SINCE SHE'S MY NUMBER-ONE
STIRKTS I SAID I'LLCONSTITUENT, I SAID, I'LL AT
LEAST MAKE A SPEECH.
EVERY TIME THEY GO TO THE PUMP,
FAMILIES AND SMALL BUSINESSES
FEEL THE PINCH.
AT THE SAME TIME, THE FIVE
LARGEST OIL COMPANIES IN THE
COUNTRY MADE $33.9 BILLION IN
PROFIT BETWEEN JANUARY AND MARCH
THIS YEAR.
EXXONMOBIL EARNED ALMOST $11
BILLION IN THE FIRST THREE
MONTHS OF THIS YEAR.
69% GREATER PROFITS THIS YEAR
COMPARED TO LAFLT YEAR.
THE HIGH OIL AND GAS PRICES ARE
FORCING MANY AMERICAN FAMILIES
TO MAKE TOUGH CHOICES ABOUT WHAT
TO FOREGO MOSQUITO THEY CAN FILL
IT GETS WORSE.
WHILE OPERATING AT SUBSTANTIAL
PROFITS, OIL COMPANIES WILL GET
AN ESTIMATED $4 BILLION THIS
YEAR IN FEDERAL SUBSIDIES.
THINK ABOUT THAT.
THESE COMPANIES MAKING $11
BILLION IN THE FIRST THREE
MONTHS OF THE YEAR ARE ASKING
FOR FEDERAL SUBSIDIES?
WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO
IN FACT WE HAVE TO BORROWER IT.
PRICES IN AMERICA?
YOU ARE GOING TO PAY IT THREE
FIRST, YOU PAY AT THE PUMP,
SOMETIMES $80 OR $90 TO FILL
YOUR BANK, EVEN IN MARYLAND.
SECONDLY, YOU ARE GOINGS PAY,
WHEN YOU PAY YOUR TAXES BECAUSE
YOUR TAX DOLLARS ARE GOING BACK
TO THE OIL COMPANIES TO
SUBSIDIZE THEIR OPERATIONS.
BUT, MR. PRESIDENT, YOU ARE
GOING TO PAY A THIRD TIME.
YOU KNOW WHY?
BECAUSE WE HAVE TO BORROW 40
CENTS FOR EVERY DOLLAR WE SPEND
IN AMERICA AND WE BORROW IT
PRIMARILY FROM CHINA AND WE HAVE
TO PAY CHINA BACK WITH INTEREST,
SO YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR
GRANDCHILDREN ARE GOING TO PAY
INTEREST ON THE MONEY WE
BORROWED TO PROVIDE A SUBSIDY, A
$4 BILLION ANNUAL SUBSIDY, TO
OIL COMPANIES THAT ARE MAKING
RECORD-BREAKING PROFITS.
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
IS THERE ANYBODY LEFT IN THIS
TOWN WHO'S WILLING TO FIGHT FOR
FAMILIES AND SMALL BUSINESSES?
WHO ARE GETTING NAILED WITH
THESE HIGH GASOLINE PRICES.
THE INTERESTING THING -- AND I KNOW THE SENATOR WHO
IS A FORMER CONGRESSMAN FROM
MARYLAND -- IS ACCURATE.
THERE ARE RITES OF SPRING IN
THE OPENING OF THE BASEBALL
SEASON, EASTER EGG HUNTS.
SEDER DINNERS FOR OUR JEWISH
FRIENDS AND SKYROCKETING
GASOLINE PRICES EVERY SINGLE
YEAR.
RIGHT BEFORE THE SUMMER VACATION
SEASON, THE OIL COMPANIES RAISE
GASOLINE PRICES AT THE PUMP AND
POLITICIANS TALK ABOUT HOW
FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR IT IS AND
THEN WE REPLAY THIS MOVIE NEXT
YEAR.
EVERY YEAR, YEAR AFTER YEAR.
AND FOR THE OIL COMPANIES, WHY
DO THE PRICES GO UP?
ANY EXCUSE WILL DO.
THIS YEAR IT WAS LIBYA.
QADHAFI'S IN TROUBLE, WE'RE
GOING TO RAISE PRICES AT THE
PUMP BY 40 CENTS, 50 CENTS OR
IT TURNS OUT LIBYA IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR ABOUT 3% OF THE
WORLD'S OIL SUPPLY.
AND EVEN IF THERE IS AN
INTERRUPTION OF SUPPLY FROM THAT
PLACE, MOST OF THAT OIL GOES TO
AS I SAID, ANY EXCUSE WILL DO
WHEN IT DOMS RAISING GASOLINE --
WHEN IT COMES TO RAISING
GASOLINE PRICES.
NEXT YEAR WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP
A BILL I SUPPORT.
HAVE YOU SEEN ADVERTISING?
THESE OIL COMPANIES LIKE
EXXONMOBIL THAT MADE $11 BILLION
IN THE FIRST THREE MONTHS OF THE
YEAR SAY IF WE CUT THEIR
SUBSIDIES, THEY'RE GOING TO
RAISE GASOLINE PRICES EVEN
HIGHER.
TALK ABOUT BEING AT THE END OF
THE GUN HERE, YOUR MONEY OR YOUR
THEY TO CLOSE THE BIG -- TO
CLOSE THE BIG OIL TAX LOOPHOLE
GULF OF MEXICO.
THESE COMPANIES HAVE BEEN
ALLOWED TO DRILL WITHOUT PAYING
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE
OIL THEY EXTRACTED.
ENDING THIS WILL GENERATE
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
WE SUGGEST -- I SUGGEST -- LET'S
TAKE THE MONEY THAT'S GOING TO
THESE HIGHLY PROFITABLE,
RECORD-BREAKING PROFITABLE OIL
COMPANIES AND PUT IT IN TO
REDUCE THE DEFICIT.
HOW ABOUT THAT FOR A START?
REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE
BORROWING FROM CHINA SO WE DON'T
HAVE TO PAY INTEREST ON IT.
THIS BILL IS NOT INTENDED FOR
PUNISHING THE OIL COMPANIES FOR
TURNING A PROFIT BUT IT IS NOT
GOING TO REWARD THEM.
IT SIMPLY ASKS LARGE, WEALTHY
INTERNATIONAL COMPANIES IN AN
INDUSTRY THAT EXISTED FOR OVER
100 YEARS TO PAY THEIR FAIR
SHARE AND NO LONGER DEPEND ON
THE GOVERNMENT FOR A HANDOUT.
SOME OF THESE TAX BREAKS STARTED
ALMOST 100 YEARS AGO.
THEY WERE OP RATED -- OR THEY
WERE CREATED, RATHER, TO
ENCOURAGE COMPANIES TO EXPLORE
FOR OIL.
HOWEVER, AT $113 A BARREL, HOW
MUCH MORE ENCOURAGEMENT DO THESE
OIL COMPANIES NEED?
DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION,
INCIDENTALLY -- I HEAR THIS ALL
THE TIME FROM SOME OF THE
CRITICS.
DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION IN THIS
COUNTRY HAS BEEN INCREASING
CONSISTENTLY SINCE THE YEAR
2008.
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION WAS 1.8
BILLION BARRELS IN 2008.
IT'S 2 BILLION BARRELS IN 2010.
IN 2004, ABOUT 60% OF OIL
IMPORTS.
AND IMPORTED OIL AS A PERCENTAGE
OF CONSUMPTION HAS DROPPED A
LITTLE MORE EACH YEAR.
LAST YEAR IT DIPPED TO 50%.
STILL TOO MUCH, BUT THE AMOUNT
OF IMPORTED OIL HAS COME DOWN AS
THE UNITED STATES IS CURRENTLY
THE THIRD-LARGEST OIL PRODUCER
IN THE WORLD BEHIND SAUDI ARABIA
THIS IS DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE
HAVE LESS THAN 2% OF THE WORLD'S
TOTAL PROVED OIL RESERVES.
OIL PRODUCTION, INCIDENTALLY,
HAS ALSO BEEN INCREASING ON
FEDERAL LANDS AND WATER SINCE
2008.
SOME OF THE CRITICS ARE SAYING
YOU KNOW WHY GAS PRICES ARE UP.
THEY WON'T LET THESE OIL
COMPANIES GO OUT AND DRILL IN
THE GULF OF MEXICO AND OTHER
PLACES.
SHOULD WE BE CAREFUL ABOUT
DRILLING IN THE GULF OF MEXICO?
I THINK SO.
B.P. TAUGHT US THAT LESSON LAST
YEAR.
HAVING SAID THAT, OIL PRODUCTION
HAS INCREASED ON FEDERAL LANDS
AND WATER SINCE 2008.
IN THE LAST TWO KWRAOERBGS OIL
PRODUCTION FROM THE -- LAST TWO
YEARS, OIL PRODUCTION FROM THE
FEDERAL OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF
HAS INCREASED BY MORE THAN A
THIRD, MORE THAN 600 MILLION
BARRELS IN 2010.
OIL PRODUCTION ON FEDERAL LANDS
INCREASED 5% IN 2010 OVER 2009.
BUT GREATER DOMESTIC PRODUCTION
OF OIL HASN'T LED TO LOWER
GASOLINE PRICES.
WE'VE GOT HIGHER GASOLINE
PRICES.
DRILL, BABY, DRILL ISN'T THE
SOLUTION TO RISING GAS PRICES IN
THE SHORT OR LONG TERM.
THE UNITED STATES CONSUMES 25%
PRODUCED IN THE WORLD.
WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO PRODUCE
2% TO 3%.
WE CAN'T DRILL OUR WAY OUT OF
THIS CHALLENGE.
CRUDE OIL PRICES WENT UP IN
FEBRUARY WITH THE SPREAD OF
POLITICAL UNREST IN THE MIDDLE
EAST, NORTH AFRICA, EVEN THOUGH
UNITED STATES WAS GOING UP TOO.
THE OIL INDUSTRY HAS ACCESS TO
MILLIONS OF ACRES OF FEDERAL
LAND AND WATER, LAND THAT THEY
HAVE BOUGHT LEASES ON AND LAND
THAT THEY WILL NOT DRILL ON.
FOR THEM TO ARGUE THE
GOVERNMENT'S STOPPING THEM FROM
DRILLING, THE OBVIOUS QUESTION
IS: SO WHAT ABOUT THE LAND YOU
CURRENTLY HAVE TO DRILL ON?
WHY AREN'T YOU TAKING THAT LEASE
PRODUCTION?
OUT OF THE 41 MILLION ACRES
UNDER LEASE ACROSS THE UNITED
STATES, THE OIL INDUSTRY IS ONLY
USING 12 MILLION ACRES FOR
PRODUCTION.
THAT LEAVES 29 MILLION ACRES
UNDER LEASE TO OIL COMPANIES
THAT IS NOT BEING USED TODAY.
38 MILLION OFFSHORE ACRES ARE
CURRENTLY UNDER LEASE, BUT ONLY
6.5 MILLION OF THEM ARE IN
AFFECT PRODUCTION.
THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
ISSUED OVER 4,000 DRILLING
PERMITS LAST YEAR -- 4,000 OF
THEM -- AND APPROXIMATELY 2,500
OF THEM STILL REMAIN UNUSED AT
THE END OF THE YEAR.
SO THIS ARGUMENT THAT THE
REQUEST FOR PERMITS DRILL ARE
STACKING UP IN SOME BUREAUCRATIC
OFFICE IN WASHINGTON AND IF
THEY'D JUST APPROVE THEM, THESE
OIL COMPANIES WOULD START
DRILLING MORE OIL AND GAS PRICES
WOULD COME DOWN ISN'T THE TRUTH.
THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
ISSUED 4,000 DRILLING PERMITS
UNUSED.
I SUPPORT MEASURES PROPOSED BY
MY COLLEAGUES TO FORCE THE OIL
COMPANIES TO USE THEIR LEASES OR
LOSE THEM.
THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE
NONPRODUCING LEASES TO PAY AN
ANNUAL FEE OF $4 AN ACRE.
THESE LEASES OF PUBLIC LANDS
SHOULD BE AFFECTIVELY USED FOR
DOMESTIC ENERGY PRODUCTION, NOT
PRICES.
I RECENTLY RETURNED FROM A TRIP
TO CHINA, TEN DAYS IN CHINA.
AND CHINA IS AN INANYTHING MA.
-- AN ENIGMA.
ON THE ONE HAND THEY ARE A
SIGNIFICANT PARTNER OF THE
UNITED STATES BECAUSE THEY ARE
OUR LARGEST CREDITOR.
AND ON THE OTHER HAND, THEY ARE
OUR MOST SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC
COMPETITOR.
PARTNER AND COMPETITOR, AND
THAT'S THE RELATIONSHIP.
WHEN YOU GO TO CHINA, YOU ARE
STRUCK BY THE FACT THAT THEIR
AIR POLLUTION IS HORRIBLE.
IN EVERY CITY WE VISITED.
I CANNOT IMAGINE HOW PEOPLE LIVE
THERE FULL TIME AND DON'T
DEVELOP SERIOUS HEALTH PROBLEMS
BECAUSE OF THE TERRIBLE
POLLUTION THAT THEY HAVE IN
THEIR COUNTRY.
BUT DESPITE THE POLLUTION, THEY
ARE CREATING AN EXPANDING
ECONOMY.
THEY ARE BUILDING RIGHT AND
AND WHAT ARE THEY FOCUSING ON AS
THE NUMBER-ONE AREA WHERE CHINA
WANTS TO DOMINATE THE WORLD?
CLEAN ENERGY.
IN EVERY DIRECTION SOLAR PANELS
AND WIND TURBINES AND NEW
RESEARCH ON CLEAN ENERGY.
I WISH I COULD SAY THE SAME FOR
THE UNITED STATES, BUT I'M
WE DO NOT HAVE AN ENERGY POLICY.
WE ARE STILL DEPENDENT ON
WE STILL RECOGNIZE THAT THOSE
FUELS CREATE ENVIRONMENTAL
ISSUES THAT WE HAVE TO FACE, AND
UNFORTUNATELY WE'RE NOT.
AND WE'RE NOT ACKNOWLEDGING THE
FACT THAT IF WE'RE NOT CAREFUL,
CHINA IS GOING TO DOMINATE IN
THE WORLD WHEN IT COMES TO CLEAN
ENERGY THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF
THIS CENTURY.
WE NEED AN ENERGY POLICY IN THIS
COUNTRY NOT JUST TO DEAL WITH
THE TERRIBLE GAS PRICES WE'RE
FACING TODAY BUT TO DEAL WITH
THE FUTURE WHICH MAKES US LESS
DEPENDENT ON FOREIGN OIL.
MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE FLOOR
QUORUM.
THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL OF THE
SENATE.
QUORUM CALL:
INTELLIGENCE THAT WAS AVAILABLE,
AND THE TACTICS THAT MIGHT BE
USED IN THAT COMPOUND AND GAVE
THE ORDER.
SOME SAID IT WAS THE MOST
COURAGEOUS ORDER A PRESIDENT HAD
GIVEN IN THEIR MEMORY OR
LIFETIME.
THEY WERE ALL FROM THE
QUESTION.
I DON'T THINK IT WAS THE MOST
COURAGEOUS.
IT DIDN'T LACK COURAGE.
BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER
BIG DECISIONS THAT STAND UP
THERE I THINK IN A HIGHER
PROFILE THAN THIS ONE.
BUT IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION.
IT WAS A GOOD DECISION.
THE PRESIDENT HAD TO TAKE A
CHANCE.
HE COULD HAVE ORDERED MASSIVE
BOMBING RAID ON THAT COMPOUND
ANDURNED IT INTO, AS SOME HAVE
SAID, TURNED IT INTO A GLASS
PARKING LOT.
WHICH WOULD HAVE RAISED THE
LEVEL OF DEGREE OF SUCCESS, BUT
PROBABLY ELIMINATED THE CHANCE
TO SHOW THAT OSAMA BIN LADEN WAS
IN THAT COMPOUND.
HE COULD HAVE DROPPED A SINGLE
BOMB, ONE-TON-PLUS BOMB FROM A
PREDATOR THAT WOULD HAVE HAD A
REASONABLE CHANCE OF SUCCEEDING
AND TAKING OUT THMOST EVIL MAN
ON THE PLANET.
OR HE COULD HAVE JUST SAID
NOTHING OR ORDERED THE SPECIAL
FORCES IN, TO FAST ROPE INSIDE
THAT COMPOUND AND DO WHAT THEY
DID.
OF THOSE OPTIONS I BELIEVE THE
PRESIDENT CHOSE THE RIGHT ONE.
AND I CONGRATULATE HIM FOR THAT
DECISION.
AND SITTING HERE AND LISTENING
TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM
CALIFORNIA, MR. LUNGREN, TALK
ABOUT THE SITUATION WH THE
INTELLIGENCE THAT WE HAD, IT'S
CLEAR TO ME, AND IT'S BEEN CLEAR
TO ME FOR A LONG TIME, THAT ONE
OF THE ESSENTIAL LINKS IN THE
INTELLIGENCE THAT LED US TO
OSAMA BIN LADEN AND THE COMPOUND
IN PAKISTAN WAS INFORMATION THAT
WAS GIVEN UP IN PART BY CAN
LEAGUE SHAKE MUHAMMAD -- CAN
LEAK SIKH MUHAMMAD AND THE
ENCOUNTERS HE HAD PROBABLY
BEFORE HE WENT TO GET KNOW.
THAT INFORMATION THEN WAS WORKED
AN
OBJECTION.
AND THE SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA IS
RECOGNIZED.
MR. PRESIDENT, I
RISE TODAY TO ONCE AGAIN TOUCH
ON A SUBJECT THAT IS IMPORTANT
TO ME AND I KNOW VERY IMPORTANT
TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER.
THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AND
THE GREAT STATE OF MARYLAND ARE
BLESSED TO HAVE A LARGE NUMBER
OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
AND AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER
KNOWS, THIS WEEK WE CELEBRATE
PUBLIC SERVICE RECOGNITION WEEK
TO HONOR PUBLIC SERVANTS AT ALL
LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT FOR THEIR
ADMIRABLE PATRIOTISM AND
CONTRIBUTIONS TO OUR COUNTRY.
I WANT TO BEGIN BY AGAIN
COMMENDING OUR MILITARY
INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR
THE COORDINATED AND PAINSTAKING
WORK THAT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR
TRACKING DOWN OSAMA BIN LADEN.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF NAMELESS,
FACELESS FEDERAL WORKERS WHO
HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATING HIS
WHEREABOUTS FOR MORE THAN A
DECADE.
I WAS PROUD TO BE IN THIS
CHAMBER WITH THE PRESIDING
OFFICER AND COLLEAGUES FROM BOTH
SIDES OF THE AISLE WHEN ON
TUESDAY AFTERNOON THIS BODY
RECOGNIZED THEIR WORK.
BUT OUR MILITARY INTELLIGENCE --
AND INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS
ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES ON THE
FRONT LINE OF KEEPING OUR
COUNTRY SAFE.
TODAY I RISE TO HONOR A RESIDENT
OF RESTON, VIRGINIA -- CARL
PIKE, THE ASSISTANT SPECIAL
AGENT IN CHARGE OF THE SPECIAL
OPERATIONS DIVISION AT THE DRUG
ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION,
D.E.A.
THIS IS CARL AND HIS WHOLE TEAM
HERE THAT WE'RE HONORING.
WE'VE ALL SEEN REPORTS IN RECENT
YEARS DETAILING THE VIOLENT AND
INHUMANE ACTS OF THE MEXICAN
DRUG CARTELS THAT TERRORIZE
CITIES AND CONTROL A SIGNIFICANT
PERCENTAGE OF THE NARCOTICS
FLOWING INTO THE UNITED STATES.
MR. PIKE IS HEAD OF A COMPLEX
MULTIAGENCY TASK FORCE SET UP TO
CATCH MANY OF THESE VIOLENT
CRIMINALS AND DISRUPT THE FLOW
OF DRUGS.
LAST YEAR HE AND HIS TEAM LED
THE LARGEST STRIKE EVER AGAINST
LA FAMILIA, ONE OF THE MOST
RUTHLESS MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS
AND A MAJOR TRAFFICKER OF
STATES.
THE STRIKE DUBBED "PROJECT
CORANODO" WAS AN OPERATION THAT
SPANNED 20 STAYS, 50 CITIES, TWO
COUNTRIES AND MULTIPLE FEDERAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER
SAID THE -- QUOTE --
"UNPRECEDENTED COORDINATED U.S.
LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTION WAS A
SIGNIFICANT BLOW TO LA FAMILIA'S
SUPPLY CHAIN OF ILLEGAL WEAPONS,
DRUGS AND CACHE FLOWING BETWEEN
MEXICO AND THE UNITED STATES.
THIS STRIKE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN
POSSIBLE WITHOUT MR. PIKE, AS SO
MANY OF HIS COLLEAGUES ATTEST.
ONE D.E.A. SPECIAL AGENT IN
CHARGE SAID HE OVERSAW THE BROAD
INTERESTS OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT
COMMUNITY, DISPLAYED PHENOMENAL
NEGOTIATING AND PLANNING SKILLS,
FACILITATED COLLABORATION
BETWEEN AGENCIES AND
INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS THAOFPB
HAD COMPETING INTERESTS -- THAT
OFTEN HAD COMPETING INTERESTS.
IN THE END PROJECT CORANODO LED
TO THE ARREST OF 1,200
ASSOCIATES OF LA FAMILIA AND
SHAOEUR OF -- SEIZURE OF TONS OF
WEAPONS.
CARL PIKE AND HIS TEAM SHOULD BE
RECOGNIZED FOR REMOVING
DANGEROUS DRUGS AND CRIMINALS
OFF OUR STREETS, SOMETHING FOR
WHICH WE CAN ALL BE
GRATEFUL.
I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES WILL JOIN
ME IN HONORING MR. PIKE AS WELL
AS HIS TEAM AND ALL THOSE AT THE
D.E.A. FOR THEIR EXCELLENCE AND
SERVICE.
I WAS PROUD TO BE PART OF A
GROUP EARLIER TODAY RECOGNIZING
A NUMBER OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES,
NINE FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF
VIRGINIA AND I KNOW MANY FROM
THE STATE OF MARYLAND WHO WERE
PART OF A NATIONAL COMPETITION
THAT RECOGNIZES QUALITY WORK OF
GOVERNMENT WORKERS.
AS WE -- AS WE SAW THIS WEEK IN
BROAD DISPLAY OF THE MILITARY
PROFESSIONALS IN THIS MOST
DRAMATIC ACTION AGAINST OSAMA
BIN LADEN AS WE SEE MR. PIKE AND
HIS TEAM TAKING ON THE DRUG
CARTELS AND THE HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF OTHER FEDERAL
WORKERS WHO DAY IN AND DAY OUT,
OFTEN WITHOUT RECOGNITION, DO
THE JOB OF KEEPING OUR
GOVERNMENT OPERATING, IN MANY
WAYS KEEPING OUR COUNTRY SAFE.
I HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES WILL
JOIN IN SALUTING THOSE -- THOSE
EFFORTS, AND, AGAIN, RECOGNIZE
THAT THIS WEEK IS THE PUBLIC
SERVICE RECOGNITION WEEK TO
HONOR ALL OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS.
WITH THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, I
YIELD THE FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI.
A SENATOR: DO I UNDERSTAND THAT
WE ARE CONTINUING IN MORNING
BUSINESS?
SENATOR'S CORRECT.
MR. PRESIDENT, ON
SEVERAL OCCASIONS I'VE RISEN TO
ADDRESS MY COLLEAGUES ON THE
TOPIC OF RUSSIA AND THE
CONTINUING SAD STATE OF THE RULE
OF LAW IN THE RUSSIA FEDERATION.
I RISE TODAY TO ADDRESS THE
LATEST INFORMATION REGARDING THE
ABSENCE OF RULE OF LAW FRAMEWORK
WITH RESPECT TO BUSINESSES AN
INVESTORS.
SPECIFICALLY THIS SITUATION
NEGATIVELY IMPACTS THE UNITED
STATES AND THE ENTIRE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.
THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF
COURT DECISIONS AROUND THE WORLD
RELATED TO THE U UCOAST OIL ISSUE
THAT HIGHLIGHT RUSSIA'S
HOSTILITY TOWARD INVESTMENT AND
BUSINESS.
AS MY COLLEAGUES MAY BE AWARE,
G.M.L., THE MAJORITY SHAREHOLDER
OF THE UCOAST OIL HEADED BY
BUSINESSMAN AND FORMER
BUSINESSMAN HAS A $1 BILLION
ARBITRATION CLAIM TO OBTAIN
COMPENSATION FOR THE UCOAST
ASSETS WHICH WERE TAKEN BETWEEN
2003 AND 2005.
SEVERAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
DEMONSTRATE YET AGAIN THAT
INTERNATIONAL COURTS DO NOT
RECOGNIZE RUSSIAA 2003 EX
APPROPRIATION OFYOUCOAST --
UCOAST AN FORMER STAKEHOLDERS OF
THE COMPANY MAY PURSUE
COMPENSATION FOR THEIR ASSETS
SEIZED IMPROPERLY AND IN ESSENCE
NATIONALIZED BY THE RUSSIAN
STATE.
COURT VICTORIES HANDED TO
SHAREHOLDERS INVOLVED IN THE
DISPUTE INDICATE THAT THE
INTERNATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEM WILL
NOT RECOGNIZE THE VALIDITY OF
RUSSIA'S BANKRUPTCY OF UCOAST.
IN DECEMBER 2009, "THE NEW YORK
TIMES" DETAILED ONE OF THESE
VICTORIES IN WHICH AN
INDEPENDENT ARBITRATION PANEL
MADE A JURISDICTIONAL RULING
THAT SHAREHOLDERS OF THE FORMER
UCOAST OIL COMPANY G.M.L. HAD A
RIGHT TO PURSUE AN ESTIMATED
ESTIMATED $100,000 IN DAMAGES,
THE TRIBUNAL INDICATED THAT
RUSSIA WAS BOUND BY THE ENERGY
CHARTER TREATY AND MUST ADHERE
TO ITS PROVISIONS.
THIS CLAIM NOW MOVES TO THE NEXT
STAGE WITH A DECISION EXPECTED
IN OCTOBER 2013.
SURELY.
THE MOST RECENT VICTORY OCCURRED
IN DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR AND
INVOLVED A SECOND INTERNATIONAL
ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL IN
STOCKHOLM WHICH HAD A MINORITY
SHAREHOLDER OF UCOAST
UCOAST $3.5 MILLION FOR THE
DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE RUIN
GOVERNMENT'S ACTIONS.
MR. PRESIDENT, THIS WAS THE
FIRST CASE IN WHICH ANYONE
SERIOUSLY EXAMINED THE CLAIMS OF
AN INDIVIDUAL UCOAST
SHAREHOLDER.
THE PANEL INDEPENDENTLY AND
UNANIMOUSLY CONCLUDED THE RUIN
FEDERATION WAS -- RUSSIAN
FEDERATION WAS LIABLE FOR
EXAPPROPRIATEING ASSETS.
I WOULD STRESS THAT THIS WAS A
UNANIMOUS DECISION EVEN THOUGH
THE TRIBUNAL INCLUDED A RUSSIAN
I BRING THESE DEVELOPMENTS TO
THE ATTENTION OF MY SENATE
COLLEAGUES BECAUSE I BELIEVE
THEY DEMONSTRATE A GROWING
MOVEMENT IN THE INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNITY THAT HOLDS RUSSIA
ACCOUNTABLE FOR ITS ACTIONS
TOWARDS INVESTORS AND IT IS A
MOVEMENT THE UNITED STATES
SHOULD SUPPORT.
MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS SUCH AS
RALS AND VESCO ARE THE TIP OF
THE -- AS A RESULT OF THE
SEIZURE OF UCOAST ASSETS.
IN THE UNITED STATES ALONE
SHAREHOLDERS WERE STRIPPED
OF $6 BILLION TO $12 BILLION.
RUSSIA'S ACTIONS TOWARD UCOAST
REMIND US THAT INVESTMENT IN
RUSSIA IS EXTREMELY RISKY.
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY IS
TAKING NOTE OF THIS.
AMERICANS ARE TAKING NOTE OF
THIS.
AMERICAN LEGISLATORS SHOULD TAKE
NOTE OF THIS, MR. PRESIDENT.
AND RECENT COURT DECISIONS
INDICATE THE LEGITIMACY OF THE
RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT'S CLAIMS OVER
UCOAST ASSETS ARE SUSPECT AT
WITH THESE THOUGHTS IN MIND, I
URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO CONTINUE
WORKING TO ENSURE PROTECTION AND
ADEQUATE MECHANISMS FOR U.S.
SHAREHOLDERS AND BUSINESSES
DOING BUSINESS IN RUSSIA.
AND I YIELD THE FLOOR.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA.
THANK YOU,
MR. PRESIDENT, VERY MUCH.
MR. PRESIDENT, TOMORROW, MAY
6th, WILL MARK THE ONE-YEAR
ANNIVERSARY OF THE FORMAL
MORATORIUM PLACED ON GULF OF
MEXICO ENERGY PRODUCTION BY
SALAZAR.
SO I WANTED TO SPEAK ON THAT
OCCASION ON -- ON THE EVE OF
THAT OCCASION PARTICULARLY AS
OUR CONSTITUENTS CONTINUE TO SEE
THE PRICE AT THE PUMP GO UP AND
UP WITH REALLY NO END IN SIGHT.
AND I THINK THOSE TWO FACTS ARE
DEEPLY RELATED.
BECAUSE I THINK THIS MORATORIUM,
WHICH CONTINUES WITH THE DE
FACTO MORATORIUM, A
PERFORMATORIUM, A PERMIT LOGJAM
TO THIS DAY IS REALLY ONE OF THE
MOST POORLY THOUGHT OUT,
MISMANAGED AND ILL CONCEIVED
ENERGY DECISIONS IN TERMS OF
DOMESTIC ENERGY PRODUCTION IN
OUR HISTORY.
NOW THE FIRST OF THESE
MORATORIUMS IN THE GULF -- THERE
ARE ACTUALLY THREE DIFFERENT
FORMAL MORATORIUMS, WAS
ANNOUNCED ON BEHALF OF PRESIDENT
OBAMA BY SECRETARY SALAZAR,
AGAIN, ONE YEAR AGO TOMORROW,
MAY 6, 2010.
AND IT WAS DONE IN RETROSPECT,
WE FIND OUT, VERY HASTILY, AND
WITHOUT SCIENTIFIC BACKING AND
I SAY THAT BECAUSE AFTER THAT
FIRST MORATORIUM WAS PUT DOWN ON
MAY 6, 2010, ON JUNE 22, A
FEDERAL JUDGE, JUDGE MARTIN
FELDMAN OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT
OF LOUISIANA RULED AGAINST THIS
JOB-CRUSHING MORATORIUM.
IT BANNED DRILLING BELOW
500 FEET OF WATER FOR SIX
MONTHS, BUT JUDGE FELDMAN PUT IT
ON HOLD BECAUSE HE FOUND THAT
UNDER FEDERAL LAW IT HAD FAILED
TO PROPERLY WEIGH A NUMBER OF
FACTORS, INCLUDING THE ECONOMIC
IMPACT IT WOULD HAVE ON THE
INDUSTRY AND SURROUNDING
AND I MIGHT ADD IN A HEARING WE
HAD IN THE SENATE ABOUT THE
ADMINISTRATION DECISION TO PLACE
THE MORATORIUM, IN EFFECT, IT
WAS SHOCKING TO HEAR
ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS SAY
VERY DIRECTLY NO HOLDS BAR THAT
THEY NEVER CONSIDERED ANY
ECONOMIC IMPACT IN THE DECISION
WHATSOEVER.
NOW, AGAIN, THIS FAILING TO
PROPERLY WEIGH THE ECONOMIC
IMPACT OF THE DECISION HAS BEEN
A CHRONIC PROBLEM IN SOME
UNFORTUNATELY THIS
ADMINISTRATION SEEMS TO HAVE
BROUGHT THAT SAME KNEE-JERK
REACTION OF THE INTERIOR PROBLEM
WITH THE SAME ECONOMIC
IN THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT'S
INFINITE WISDOM ON JULY 12th,
SECRETARY SALAZAR ISSUED A
BACKUP SECOND MORATORIUM.
THE COURTS STRUCK DOWN THE FIRST
MORATORIUM ON THE BASIS OF
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW SO HE JUST
CAME AND ISSUED A SECOND
MORATORIUM ON DEEPWATER
THIS SECOND MORATORIUM WOULD
SOON BE MET WITH RESISTANCE AND
DISAPPOINTMENT AS COASTAL
LOUISIANA COMMUNITIES WOULD
REALIZE THERE WAS NOTHING THEY
COULD DO FROM INTERIOR THAT
SEEMED TO BE ABSOLUTELY HELL
THEIR JOBS.
NOW, ON OCTOBER 12th,
SECRETARY SALAZAR CELEBRATED A
VICTORY BY LIFTING THAT
MORATORIUM AND AT THAT TIME HE
CLAIMED -- QUOTE -- "THE POLICY
POSITION THAT WE ARE
ARTICULATING TODAY IS THAT WE
ARE OPEN FOR BUSINESS."
THAT'S WHAT THE SECRETARY, KEN
SALAZAR, SAID LAST
UNFORTUNATELY THOSE OF US WHO
LIVE IN LOUISIANA AND ALONG THE
GULF COAST KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT
TRUE.
WHAT HE SHOULD HAVE SAID IS, THE
POLICY POSITION THAT WE'RE
ARTICULATING TODAY IS, WE'RE
OPEN FOR BUSINESS AS LONG AS YOU
DON'T NEED A PERMIT FROM THE
INTERIOR DEPARTMENT.
BECAUSE THAT SECOND FEDERAL
MORATORIUM WAS LIFTED, BUT THAT
BROUGHT US TO THE INITIATION OF
THE THIRD MORATORIUM, NOT AN
OFFICIAL MORATORIUM, BUT A DE
FACTO MORATORIUM, A COMPLETE
LOGJAM IN THIS ADMINISTRATION
INTERIOR.
AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN COMMONLY
AND ACCURATELY REFERRED TO AS A
DE FACTO MORATORIUM, AN ABSOLUTE
LOGJAM AND SECRETARY SALAZAR HAS
PER PEP WAITED THAT AND --
PERPETUATED THAT THAT REPEATEDLY
STATED THAT IT DOESN'T EXIST,
BUT THE FACTS, THE STATISTICS,
THE NUMBERS MAKE -- NOW IT
WOULDN'T BE UNTIL FOUR MORE
MONTHS UNTIL FEBRUARY 28th OF
THIS YEAR THAT THE INTERIOR
DEPARTMENT WOULD ISSUE THE VERY
FIRST PERMIT TO DRILL IN DEEP
WATER, AN EXPLORERY WELL.
SO, AGAIN, BIG CELEBRATION, BIG
MORATORIUM WAS LIFTED.
BUT FOR FOUR MONTHS ZERO PERMITS
AN ONLY FOUR MONTHS LATER THE
PERMIT.
TO DATE, EVEN SINCE
FEBRUARY 28th, OF THIS YEAR,
THERE HAVE ONLY BEEN 12
DEEPWATER PERMITS ISSUED IN THE
GULF.
NOW, THAT PACE IS WELL BELOW THE
PACE BEFORE THE NORM OF THE B.P.
DISASTER, 60% SLOWER THAN THE
PRESPILL PACE.
THE PACE OF ONLY DEEPWATER NEW
WELL PERMITS THAT WOULD DECREASE
DOMESTIC SUPPLIES ARE
FORTHCOMING AT THE AVERAGE PACE
OF ONE PER MONTH, JUST A
TRICKLE -- JUST A TINY
PERCENTAGE OF THE PREDISASTER
PACE.
SO TOMORROW'S ONE YEAR SINCE THE
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IMPLEMENTED
THIS MORATORIUM POLICY.
THE FIRST OF THREE CRUSHING
MORORUPS, TWO -- MORATORIUMS,
TWO FORMAL MORATORIUMS, THE
ONGOING DE FACTO MORATORIUM.
THE ENERGY DIVISION IS NOW
ESTIMATING THAT THE FALLOFF IN
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION THIS YEAR
ALONE WILL BE ABOUT
200,000 BARRELS PER DAY.
THAT'S A LOT OF OIL,
200,000 BARRELS PER DAY.
AND AN ADDITIONAL
200,000 BARRELS PER DAY IN 2012.
TO PUT THIS FALLOFF THAT IS
EXPECTED FROM THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION'S POLICY IN
PERSPECTIVE, AS A RESULT OF THE
LOGJAM BY 2012 WE WOULD LOSE AS
MUCH IN THE GULF OF MEXICO AS WE
CURRENTLY IMPORT FROM BRAZIL AN
THESE ARE THE TWO COUNTRIES, BY
THE WAY, WHERE WE SUPPORTED WITH
TAXPAYER FUNDED GUARANTEES
PROJECTS RELATED TO THEIR ENERGY
PRODUCTION.
THIS FALLOFF IS ROUGHLY
EQUIVALENT ALSO TO WHAT WE
IMPORTED IN JANUARY FROM IRAQ.
NOW, THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS
I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT FOR
TOMORROW'S ANNIVERSARY OF THE
POLICY.
FIRST, THE PRICE OF GASOLINE AT
THE PUMP IS NOW $3.00 8 A --
A -- $3.98 A GALLON.
IT MORE THAN DOUBLED SINCE
PRESIDENT OBAMA TOOK OFFICE.
THERE'S PERHAPS NOT A GREATER
ANTI-STIMULUS FOR OUR ECONOMY
THAN THAT DOUBLING AT THE PRICE
AT THE PUMP.
SECOND, SEVEN DEEPWATER RIGS
HAVE LEFT THE GULF OF MEXICO.
THEY'RE GONE AND THEY'RE NOT
COMING BACK ANY TIME SOON.
AND, IN ADDITION, FIVE ARE COAL
STACKED ARE WITHOUT A CONTRACT.
THAT'S A TOTAL OF 12 RIGS.
IRONICALLY THAT'S EXACTLY THE
SAME NUMBER OF DEEPWATER PERMITS
THAT THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT
ISSUED, A TRICKLE COMPARED TO
PRE-B.P. LEVELS.
NUMBER THREE, WHAT MINOR CREDIT
I SHOULD GIVE THE INTERIOR
DEPARTMENT FOR THIS ABYSMAL BASE
OF PERMITTING WILL BE NOTED WHEN
I RELEASE MY HOLD ON THE
NOMINATION OF DAN ASH.
I'M CURRENTLY HOLDING THAT
NOMINATION OF A TOP-LEVEL
INTERIOR DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL AND
I SAID I WOULD HOLD IT UNTIL WE
GOT AT LEAST 15 DEEPWATER
EXPLORERY PERMITS.
AT THE TIME I INITIATED THERE
WAS ZERO.
TO 12.
I SAID I WOULD LIFT THE HOLD
WHEN I GOT TO 15.
WE'RE JUST THREE AWAY.
WE'LL GET THERE, WE'LL GET THE
HOLD BUT THAT IS MERELY A
TRICKLE OF WHAT OUR PACE NEEDS
FOURTH, I'LL BE INTRODUCING AN
IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION,
IT'S CALLED THE AGENCY OVERREACH
MORATORIUM ACT.
WE NEED A MORATORIUM.
WE NEED A MORATORIUM ON
REGULATORY OVERREACH, AGENCY
OVERREACH AS WE SEE IN THE
INTERIOR DEPARTMENT, IN E.P.A.,
IN MANY OTHER AGENCIES.
SO THIS LEGISLATION IS INTENDED
TO PREVENT FEDERAL ACTION THAT
YOU WOULD -- YOU WOULD
UNILATERALLY DESTROY JOBS ON
FEDERAL LANDS, ON THE O.C.S.
THAT IS HAPPENING EVERY DAY AT
THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT.
INSTEAD OF ISSUING PERMITS TO
FIND AMERICAN ENERGY, THEY'RE
ISSUING REGULATIONS, THE MOST
RECENT ON A WHOLE NEW CATEGORY
OF CONTRACTORS COMPLETELY
UNNECESSARY BECAUSE THEY'RE
ALREADY REGULATING THE DRILLERS
AND THAT IS REGULATORY OVERREACH
AND THAT IS JOB-KILLING ACTION.
MY AGENCY OVERREACH WILL LAY OUT
THE REAL MORATORIUM WE NEED ON
JOB-KILLING ACTION OUT OF
WASHINGTON, OUT OF THIS
ADMINISTRATION, NOT ON DOMESTIC
ENERGY PRODUCTION.
MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO THANK
ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES AND I HOPE
WE'LL ALL COME TOGETHER SOON
AROUND A COMMONSENSE PRO-ACTIVE
DOMESTIC ENERGY POLICY.
THINGS.
I'M A FERVENT BELIEVER IN ALL OF
THE ABOVE.
BUT IT CERTAINLY NEEDS TO START
ON LIFTING THE CONTINUING DE
FACTO MORATORIUM ON U.S. ENERGY
PRODUCTION, ON U.S. JOBS, ON
GOOD ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO THE
U.S. TREASURY TO LOWER OUR
DEFICIT IF WE'RE GOING TO GET ON
THE RIGHT ENERGY PATH. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT,
QUORUM.
THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL OF THE
SENATE.
QUORUM CALL: