On the recordJanuary 20, 2015
I appreciate this debate. It is an important debate to have. Clearly, the Senator from Massachusetts and I have very different ideas about how this should be addressed, but this is the debate we should have. This is about the energy future we are building for this country. I am pleased we are engaged in this debate. Let's work to build the kind of energy plan that is going to truly make our country energy secure. To do that, we not only need to produce energy domestically, we need to work with our closest friend and ally, Canada. At the same time, as we produce that energy, we need the infrastructure to move it to our markets rather than sending it overseas. So it is ironic on the one hand the Senator is proposing an amendment saying: Oh, no. If we get any of this oil, we have to have all of it. He is making an argument that doesn't work in a global economy, where he is saying if we can't have 100 percent of it every single day--not one drop leaves--then export all of it. I want 100 percent or nothing. That doesn't make sense. The whole point is we have just finished showing that the oil will be used here, and for any of it to be exported we need the Secretary of Commerce's approval. But we have to talk about it in a larger context because this debate we are having isn't only about the Keystone Pipeline, it is about the future of energy security for our country. Are we going to work to produce oil and gas domestically?…
Source
govinfo.gov




