Peter Visclosky: “I would point out to my colleagues that the amendment, as stated by the gentleman, would eliminate all funding for the…”

“I would point out to my colleagues that the amendment, as stated by the gentleman, would eliminate all funding for the Office of Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The bill already includes a reduction of $491 million from the current year level, which is a 25 percent cut. The debate, relative to energy policy in this House--and not necessarily restricted to this amendment--talks about subsidies. But there are two parts to a Federal budget: There are spending-side issues and there are revenue- and tax-side issues. I would hazard a guess as we stand here that there is not an energy source in the United States of America, be it coal, be it nuclear, be it gas, be it solar, be it wind, that does not somehow receive some benefit either by loss revenue or direct spending of the Federal Government in its endeavors. What we do have to do is necessary research to make sure that we do expand the mix of energy utilization in this country, and certainly that is the purpose of the Renewable Energy Program Research at the national level. With 70 percent of our energy now generated through coal or natural gas, this cannot continue. As I have said in earlier debates during the week, my senior Senator from Indiana, Senator Lugar, has always described our energy problem as a national security issue given where petroleum products tend to be bought in the United States of America.…”