Statement of Congressman John D. Dingell, Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce

STATEMENT
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON RULES
H.R. 3893, THE "GASOLINE FOR AMERICA'S
SECURITY ACT OF 2005"

October 6 , 2005

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Rules Committee, just two months ago I appeared before you with our Chairman in support of the conference report for the Energy Policy Act of 2005. While reasonable people could disagree on the merits of that bill, we had just concluded a fair and open conference, and developed consensus legislation.

I regret that the same cannot be said about the bill before you today. It was put together without a single legislative hearing. Our Republican colleagues delivered the bill to us on a Friday night, and the bill was marked up in a 16-hour session beginning at 8 a.m. on Wednesday. Whole sections were rewritten by our Republican colleagues when they realized problems with their bill, and I would not be surprised if they need to do more rewriting.

I do not want to suggest this was primarily our Chairman’s fault. It was clear to me that he was under specific orders to report a bill on Wednesday for Floor consideration this week, whether there were an adequate record or not. We have already seen that the Committee on Resources, which was under similar orders, reported a bill that had to be pulled from the schedule. The same decision should apply to this bill.

Democrats do favor more refining capacity in this country, and particularly during supply emergencies. That is why we offered a substitute to have the President establish a Strategic Refinery Reserve to complement the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The Strategic Refinery Reserve could operate year-round to supply the needs of the Defense Department and the Federal fleet, but could be ramped up in capacity during emergencies that may have closed other refineries.

The substitute also included real enforcement authority for the Federal Trade Commission to prohibit price gouging. Unlike the bill before you today, which focuses on the small mom-and-pop gas stations, this provision would be applicable to all sectors of the industry. The penalties would be up to three times the overcharges, as opposed to the bill’s provision which limit penalties to $11,000 – a drop in the bucket to a major oil company.

As you may know, every Democrat on the Committee opposed this bill for a variety of reasons. We do not believe that the regulatory provisions in the bill relating to refineries are needed or wise. They could put taxpayers on the hook for the costs of delays in building refineries, and would allow the President to designate closed military bases for refineries, over the objections of the local governments and the public.

In addition, the bill contains major changes in the Clean Air Act. Whether you support or oppose these changes, they are mostly unrelated to Katrina and gas prices, and should be addressed through the regular order of hearings and markups.

For these reasons, we oppose the bill and believe it is not ready for proper Floor consideration. At a minimum, we ask that the substitute offered in Committee by Representatives Stupak and Boucher, which was unanimously supported by the Committee’s Democrats, be made in order.

- 30 -

(Contact: Jodi Seth, 202-225-3641)