CONTENTS (The same table of contents appears in parts 1, 2, and 3) 1. Public Law 96-294, the "Energy Security Act". Page 1 171 3. Joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference on S. 932 175 317 10. S. 932 as passed by the U.S. Senate, November 8, 1979-- 11. Report of the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, to accompany H.R. 3930, May 15, 1979. 12. Report of the Committees on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, to accompany S. 932, October 30, 1979. (S. Rept. 96-387) 13. Report of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, to accompany S. 932, May 15, 1979. (S. Rept. 96–166) - (V) 7. DEBATE IN THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON H.R. 3930 (SUBSEQUENTLY S. 932), JUNE 26, 1979 DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1979 Mr. DODD. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 324 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. RES. 324 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to move, section 401 (a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344) to the contrary notwithstanding, that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 3930) to amend the Defense Production Act of 1950 to extend the authority granted by such Act and to provide for the purchase of synthetic fuels and synthetic chemical feedstocks, and for other purposes, and the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. After general debate, which shall be confined to the bill and shall continue not to exceed one hour, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs, the bill shall be read for amendment under the fiveminute rule. At the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dodd) is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. DODD. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Quillen) for the purpose of debate only, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. DODD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. DODD. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 324 provides for the consideration of H.R. 3930, the Defense Production Act Amendments of 1979. It provides for an open rule with 1 hour of debate to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs. It waives section 401 (a) of the Budget Act which prohibits consideration of bills which contain contract authority in excess of levels established in the most recent budget resolution. The rule also provides for one motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3930 represents congressional initiative to reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil by encouraging the production of nonpetroleum synthetic fuels from coal, shale rock, and organic waste. The bill would extend the Defense Production Act of 1950 for 1 year and grant authority to establish a joint Government-private industry program for the development of synthetic fuels and synthetic chemical feedstocks for national defense purposes. (613) The technology for the production of synthetic fuels is already available particularly from synthesizing gasoline from coal and for making wood alcohol. During World War II, Germany used synthetic fuels made from coal. However, the anticipated cost of producing synthetic fuels is higher than the current world price of oil. The committee has supported financial incentives for industry participation in the program in order to achieve the national production goal for national defense purposes of at least 500,000 barrels per day of synthetic crude oil by 1985. The administration has endorsed the development of synthetic fuels in budget proposals and the President has suggested that some revenues from the proposed windfall profits tax on oil be used for the program. H.R. 3930 is supported by the Speaker, House majority leader, majority whip, the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee and others. The bill would also: Raise the dollar limits on the value of direct and indirect loans, broaden the applicability of the Defense Production Act of 1950 to specifically include energy, establish guidelines for awarding contracts, and authorize appropriations of $2 billion to achieve the production goal through purchase guarantees. Similar proposals for synthetic fuels subsidies were introduced during the 95th Congress but were not enacted. Provisions which spurred a jurisdictional dispute in 1976 between the Committees on Ways and Means, Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Science and Technology and the Banking Committee have been deleted from H.R. 3930. Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may con sume. (Mr. Quillen asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dodd), has ably explained the resolution. We are here today on this synthetic fuel bill because the American people have demanded action by the Congress that something be done. It is long overdue. I am very happy that it is on the floor today, because it is so important that we develop synthetic fuels and chemical feedstocks. The bill calls for 500,000 barrels of synthetic fuels per day. That would almost take care of the defense needs of this country when it comes into effect in 1984, but 500,000 barrels of synthetic fuels is not enough. I understand some amendments are going to be offered to increase the number of barrels per day, and I shall support them. One can go anywhere in this country of ours and see long lines of people queued up and waiting to get to the gasoline tanks for gasoline. I think that the Congress and the White House should have taken action years ago to do just exactly what we are doing now. We have a coal supply that will last for more than 300 years, and we ought to be tapping it. We ought to be using it to its fullest extent. We ought to be letting the utilities of this country burn coal to produce electricity. We should be making gasoline and oil from coal, as did the Germans, as now they are doing in South Africa. So the action brought about today is action demanded by the American people. Mr. Speaker, I support the bill. Mr. DODD. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Perkins). (Mr. Perkins asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution and support the bill. Mr. Speaker, the gravest danger facing the United States today, both militarily and economically, is in its reliance upon an interruptible supply of imported oil. This country's whole economy is based upon its consumption of energy. But today half of our liquid fuel is supplied by other nations— some of whom are unfriendly and potentially hostile. Recent testimony before the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity by a well-known chemical engineer indicated that one supertanker sunk by saboteurs in the narrow channel through Hormuz Strait could effectively bottle up half the oil that passes from the Persian Gulf to the free nations of the West. That includes shipments from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and other areas. Even a temporary interruption of supplies from that region would have far-reaching repercussions in the American economy. It is prob able that a great many jobs held by American men and women would simply evaporate. The longer the interruption, the more drastic the economic dislocation. Reliance upon foreign sources for such a significant portion of our energy needs already has robbed the United States of its freedom of action in many areas of foreign policy. Our policy decisions are vulnerable to international blackmail by our petroleum suppliers. Our national security is jeopardized, and the continued outflow of upwards of $50 billion a year for foreign oil purchases will surely bring ruin to our economy. Because of this situation, I welcome and support the efforts that have been made by Chairman Moorhead and the Subcommittee on Economic Stabilization, and by its parent committee. I urge the House to pass without delay H.R. 3930, the Defense Production Act amendment and extension. By directing the startup of a synthetic fuels industry based upon coal, shale, peat, and the other domestic resources, the committee is moving us in the direction of energy independence. My only regret is that the measure before us starts us toward energy self-sufficiency at a crawl when we should be going at a full gallop. I recognize that the measure reported by the committee addresses only one small segment of our total energy needs. It deals with the half-million barrels a day of crude oil equivalent required by our peacetime defense systems. But our domestic economy uses at least 18 million barrels of crude oil a day-and we are at the mercy of foreign producers, the OPEC brethren, to sell us half of that, at their price. I will vote for this bill gladly, but I don't have any illusion that it provides any substantial contribution to our overall energy requirement. Even if it succeeds to the full limit of the committee's expectation, it will not shorten the gasoline lines by one car or one-quarter hour. |