John Thune

Whenever you call the next hearing, Mr. Chairman.

I do not understand why Iowa has more wind energy production when we are up there breaking the wind for you all the time in South Dakota.

And raise pheasants.

I hate to see us go backwards and allow waivers of the RFS because we are not getting to where we need to be in terms of the goal.

Just one, and then I will yield back, Tom.

How soon are we going to be competitive in cost of production with corn-based ethanol and, beyond that, with petroleum-based gasoline?

So I do not see where we need more land to produce food and fuel in this Country.

What are the environmental impacts of using, of approving E-15?

The result will be a growing and sustainable biofuels industry that will create jobs in rural communities.

The Federal Government has made biofuel production the cornerstone of our energy policy.

I would say that I think today that our biofuels industry is at a crossroads.

Yes, it has prompted a lot of questions, Mr. Chairman. I think we could probably keep this discussion for a long time.

I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, as we pursue these policies that are so important to the growth of this industry.

I think we need to make sure that we continue the forward momentum and continue to put policies in place that will encourage greater expansion and growth in that industry.

We've got to get more of the heavy stuff to the railroads and the heaviest of stuff off the highways.

They're both high priorities. The tax credit has been a high priority within the short-line industry.

It seems like a kind of a one-size-fits-all type of legislation that was put in, and it, quite frankly, isn't working on the actual crew fatigue.

Well, all that has done is affected the paychecks.

I think it's difficult for any Member of Congress to get it right when we're talking about something that has been collectively bargained for 100 years.

If there's not real reform, I think it'll be a missed opportunity for the future of the highway system.

Well, let me just, in closing, say there's no question this is a hugely important issue to South Dakota.

How about this $9.3-billion investment that has zero cost benefit?

Well, we ought to get the rest of you guys in this discussion, right?

But, some of the ideas under consideration, I think, would involve more dialogue between shippers and railroads.

On that point, Ms. Richardson, have you ever, sort of, quantified or been able to figure out, when you talk about some of the inefficiencies and what that costs South Dakota agricultural shippers on an annual basis?