Jim Inhofe

We need to wean ourselves off of foreign oil, at least the excessive reliance we have, and this will not do it.

The public perception has totally changed.

The science is mixed. And the louder they say the science is settled, the greater, to me, it seems that they have nothing else to say.

Somebody is going to pay that. That works out to be about $900 per family the way my math figures it.

If the President would give the same kind of aggressive interest to building 100 new nuclear power plants that he does to building windmills, we could solve global warming in a generation.

But for the next 20 years, if we really want to deal with global warming, we really only have one option. And that is to double the number of nuclear power plants we have.

If what we are really interested in is reducing carbon, which is the principle greenhouse gas, we could focus first on smokestacks and say, let us start building 100 new nuclear power plants.

So, my question to the committee, and it will be throughout all of this, is why are we ignoring the cheap energy solution to global warming, which is nuclear power?

I would note that the Senate has voted on cap-and-trade three times: in 2003, in 2005, and in 2008. In each and every instance, we defeated it.

We say yes to a greater access to all sources of clean and reliable energy we have right here at home.

We say no to higher energy costs, no to subsidizing the East and West Coasts at the expense of the heartland, no to more bureaucracy and red tape, no to the largest tax increase in American history, and no to sending our manufacturing jobs…

The public will find out. And when they do, they will reject those schemes and reject the spin and they will look instead for solutions that create jobs, strengthen energy security and increase our global competitiveness.

The public is already on record rejecting energy taxes, considering a new poll, a Rasmussen poll.

You can be sure of this: once the American public realizes what this legislation will do to their wallets, they will resoundingly reject it.

The American people and their elected representatives deserve an open transfer and thorough review of any legislation that, as the Washington Post described it, 'will reshape America's economy in dozens of ways that many people don't…

I believe that this committee, when the votes are eventually taken on our bill, will reflect our President's attitude which is yes, we can, and yes, we will.

I am hopeful that Congress will pass legislation that brings financial stability to the Trust Fund for remainder of fiscal year 2009 and 2010 while also working on a multi-year bill prior to Highway Trust Fund insolvency.

If we want to compete, we need to have these corridors working. We need to get rid of congestion.

I do not think they get it right now about what this is.

I am hopeful that Congress will pass legislation that brings financial stability to the Trust Fund for the remainder of fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year 2010.

There is going to be one large crescendo in this Country during the next couple of months to let the people of America know just exactly where we are today.

I know a clean extension is something that the Republicans want.

This is exactly the sort of shovel-ready infrastructure spending for which there is a broad bipartisan consensus.

I think this is very important, if we do an extension, an 18-month extension, that will take us out of this crisis in time.

If those exist in the budget, those should be used to pay down debt and pay down spending.