Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ELLISON. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ELLISON. Madam Chair, my amendment is simple and straightforward. It is designed to reduce wasteful spending, which I think we all would like to do around here.
This year Republican appropriators increased taxpayer-funded fossil fuel research and development by $45 million above the President's request. My amendment would simply reduce the funding for the Office of Fossil Energy by $45 million, down to the President's requested level, and then dedicate these funds to the spending reduction account, which is something that I think all of us want to do, given how much we talk about wasteful spending and deficit reduction around here.
The five most profitable oil companies--Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, ConocoPhillips--together made more than a trillion in profits last decade. A trillion dollars of profit; I think that is pretty good. Fossil fuels are reaping $550 billion a year in subsidies, four times the amount of $120 billion paid out in incentives for renewable energy. So fossil fuels are not getting the short shrift.
Air pollution from fossil fuels costs money. Nationwide the hidden health costs of electricity generated by fossil fuels adds up to as much as $886 billion annually, or about 6 percent of gross domestic product. I am from Minnesota, and I live in north Minneapolis, and I can tell you, Madam Chair, that children there suffer greater rates of asthma than the rest of the State, partially as a result of emissions from vehicles that run on fossil fuels.
Climate change costs money, too. Climate change will make our electricity costs go up. Greenhouse-gas-driven changes in temperature will likely increase demand for electricity. This will make it necessary for construction of up to 95 gigawatts of new power generation over the next 5 to 25 years.
Residential and commercial ratepayers will pay up to $12 billion more per year, and people living in coastal communities could pay as much as $35 billion a year within the next 15 years because of sea level rise and hurricane activity.
Conclusion: let's lower the deficit; let's cut wasteful spending; let's stop wasting taxpayer money on dirty fossil fuel resources that cost all of us a lot more in the long term.
I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ELLISON. Madam Chair, surely my friend and I can join together on the spending reduction account on this particular measure. It is not that much money in the scope of this big event. The fact is, we should all be trying to reduce the deficit where we can, particularly when we are talking about industries that have combined profits of a trillion dollars. A trillion.
I do not think my constituents in the Fifth Congressional District of Minnesota need to foot the bill for R&D for Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and ConocoPhillips. I think they should pay their own R&D if they are banking money like that. I think they are doing just fine, and they don't need more of the average taxpayer's dough.
Let me also say that we are already giving the fossil fuel industry $550 billion a year in subsidies. Isn't that enough? Can't they live with a little less, given that they are making a trillion dollars in combined profits? We are giving them $550 billion in subsidies, and they want more, and they just cannot possibly do with $45 million less than we are giving them already?
I have got to tell you, I have just got a feeling that if they don't get this extra money, they will be fine. I feel ConocoPhillips and Chevron will somehow make it if they don't get our American taxpayers' $45 million.
I urge a very strong ``yes'' in favor of this amendment for deficit reduction and to end a little bit of corporate welfare.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ELLISON. Madam Chair, surely my friend and I can join together on the spending reduction account on this particular measure. It is not that much money in the scope of this big event. The fact is, we should all be trying to reduce the deficit where we can, particularly when we are talking about industries that have combined profits of a trillion dollars. A trillion.
I do not think my constituents in the Fifth Congressional District of Minnesota need to foot the bill for R&D for Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and ConocoPhillips. I think they should pay their own R&D if they are banking money like that. I think they are doing just fine, and they don't need more of the average taxpayer's dough.
Let me also say that we are already giving the fossil fuel industry $550 billion a year in subsidies. Isn't that enough? Can't they live with a little less, given that they are making a trillion dollars in combined profits? We are giving them $550 billion in subsidies, and they want more, and they just cannot possibly do with $45 million less than we are giving them already?
I have got to tell you, I have just got a feeling that if they don't get this extra money, they will be fine. I feel ConocoPhillips and Chevron will somehow make it if they don't get our American taxpayers' $45 million.
I urge a very strong ``yes'' in favor of this amendment for deficit reduction and to end a little bit of corporate welfare.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source