this last vote was a historic vote for America. This was a decision about whether we were going to look to the future to change to an energy policy and a environmental policy consistent with America's best interests. Pitted in that vote were the oil companies, the energy companies of years gone by, and those energy sources for our future. The energy companies of years gone by prevailed. The irony is that the Republicans, Senator McConnell and others, have stood steadfast in protecting the subsidies for the oil companies of America. That is a time-honored tradition in the Senate. Whether you agree with it or not, the Senate, by and large, has been very kind to the oil companies and the oil industry throughout our history. We couldn't have seen a vote they would have been happier with than the last one, because in the last one, the last vote, we suggested that subsidies for oil companies should give way to tax incentives for new sources of energy, sources of energy that are clean, renewable, sustainable, and that vote failed by one vote. Isn't it ironic, at a time when oil companies in America have enjoyed the highest profit margins in their history, that the Republican argument is we must continue the tax subsidies for those oil companies?
On the recordDecember 13, 2007
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a recent vote on energy policy and subsidies for oil companies.
Share
More from Dick Durbin
Aug 19, 2026
I have threatened some of these for-profit schools as a way of getting them to drop the loans that they were enforcing on these students, because I know what happens in the end.
Aug 26, 2026
I secured $1 million in federal funding for Lurie Children’s to help create this community health clinic in Austin and now, that investment comes to life.
Aug 14, 2026
I still have five or six months at this job and I’m planning on running through the tape.
Aug 24, 2026
The lawmakers also emphasized that the Trump Administration’s definition of medical frailty far exceeds what is outlined in the law itself and creates additional onerous barriers for both patients and states.





