On the recordApril 17, 2002
I am not going to be debating the specific amendment on the floor now but, rather, a context in which I believe this amendment and most other aspects of this energy legislation should be considered. There are three principles I would like to discuss at this hour of the evening. First is, when should we, the Congress of the United States, adopt an energy policy? When can we legislate dispassionately, not in response to an immediate emergency? Second, an energy policy for when? It makes a considerable difference if we are developing a policy for the next 10 years as opposed to what I think should be the more appropriate timeframe, at least the next 50 years, that we are legislating not for ourselves but for our grandchildren. And third, an energy policy should include a recognition of other affected issues--economic, environment, and more. A persistent problem in crafting energy policy is the fact that our willingness to act is greatest in the midst of a crisis, a disruption, or spikes in prices. History has repeatedly shown us that energy crises are the worst time to try to solve our problems. Short-term policy initiatives that deal with things such as market upheavals are often counterproductive. They respond to temporary circumstances. They might be political; they might be economic. They could even be climactic. California blackouts were the initial impetus for the energy legislation we have today. Those blackouts are now hopefully a thing of the past.
Source
govinfo.gov




