eMediaMillWorks
Thursday, May 17, 2001

Following is the transcript of a news conference held by House Minority Leader Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) on President Bush's energy proposal.

RICHARD GEPHARDT: Thank you very much.

Good morning, everybody in California. Glad to have you with us.

We are pleased to have a chance to talk to you from the Democratic power room, where all day we're going to be talking with the American people about the differences between the president's energy plan and our own.

We think the president's plan makes the wrong choices for America and for the American people. It was crafted behind closed doors with a lot of input from energy executives and in a highly secretive way that doesn't serve the public interest.

It focuses on drilling and production at the expense of our environment and conservation, and it does nothing to help people who need relief right now, as you're going to hear in just a moment.

I was in San Diego a week or so ago, and I know that this crisis is having a very painful impact on people's lives. Small businesses are going bankrupt. Families have no way of paying their energy bills. Rolling blackouts are a matter of life and death for people on respirators.

Consider this: If milk had gone up as much as energy prices in California in recent months, Californians would be paying $190 a gallon for milk.

We have a responsibility and an obligation to act on these issues. Democratic caucus members and I will be in Los Angeles and San Francisco later this month, where we will do everything we can, as we are today, to understand this crisis, so we're better equipped to respond to people's everyday concerns.

We have a long-term plan that increases supply, invests in conservation and maintains our environment. But we also have a short-term solution that asks federal regulators to investigate allegations of price gouging and restore some sanity to the huge increases in prices at the pump and in the home.

Today, we're very grateful to have three people taking part in this event from San Diego, people the president and vice president have not listened to and have not included in their energy task force. Patty Finnegan (ph) runs an ice cream business in San Diego. Michael Brunker is executive director of a local YMCA. And Jaime Salazar (ph) is an education counselor at Southwestern Community College.

We're going to ask them to talk about the impact of this crisis on their everyday lives. I want to thank them for joining with us today, and I want to start by calling on Patty Finnegan (ph) who is going to say a few words about what this crisis has meant to her.

PATTY FINNEGAN (ph), BUSINESSWOMAN: Thank you, Congressman Gephardt.

I'm Patty Finnegan (ph), owner and CEO of Nino Frank (ph) Ice Cream Factory here in National City, California. I'm also the president of the National City Chamber of Commerce and very aware of the business impact that this energy crisis is having.

When it first hit us here in San Diego last summer, my electricity bill was ranging between $400 and $500. It escalated, first, double, triple and then, quadruple, going from $800 to $1,000 today, with a balancing account that is being accrued against us, accumulating a debt of $10,000 to $20,000 now.

The most ridiculous thing about this entire crisis is the fact that I've reduced my energy use by approximately 25 percent, yet I continue to pay 200 percent on a monthly basis and accrue an additional 200 percent on top of that.

The prices aren't the only problem in my business. The fact that I produce a perishable product, rolling blackouts have the potential to put me out of business. If I have no warning and I'm in the middle of production, I stand to lose thousands of dollars in ice cream.

We need help now. I understand that we need more supply. But in the mean time, I don't think thieves should be out legally taking our money like this.

Thank you.

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, BOB FILNER (D-CA): Thank you, Patty Finnegan (ph).

My name is Bob Filner. I'm the congressman from the San Diego area where all these three folks come from. And believe me, Patty (ph) is a model citizen. She's president of one of the local chambers of commerce. She is struggling to save in business. She was seen as the entrepreneur of the year a couple of years ago.

She has to make a choice, as 65 percent of people in our county are going to have to make this year, a recent report showed. They are--65 percent of small businesses in San Diego County are facing bankruptcy. And of the 105 recommendations that have come out in the president and vice president's report, not one out of 105 can help Patty Finnegan (ph) or any of the small business people in our district.

It does not address the basic problem of prices. You heard Patty (ph). You're going to hear other people, of how we have been charged and over-charged, criminally charged since this crisis began last June. And this is not an issue for Patty (ph), as you've heard, of supply and demand or of environmental regulations. This is an issue of price, of a manipulated market which has run up the prices, 100, 200, 300, 1,000, 2,000 percent in the last year.

We know now, more than ever, what GOP means. It means ``gas, oil and pollution.''

FILNER: We have a balanced approach which stresses both the long term and the short term, which gets prices down, which gets refunds to our consumers who have been criminally overcharged, which looks at renewables, which looks at conservation, which looks at increased supply. It is a balanced approach. We need to pass the Democratic alternative.

One of the saddest things in San Diego, as I watch every day, is the effect that this crisis has had on the people and the organizations who serve other people--our seniors and our young people.

The Jackie Robinson YMCA is just such an agency. It's a shining light in a neighborhood that has lots of needs. It's a remarkable place, and we have been, I think in our district, fortunate enough to have people who work there, who are dedicated to our young people, and Michael Brunker is just such a man.

He has expanded the Y's program to serve the rising demand for after school activities. He has successfully solicited private donations. For example, he has floodlights on a baseball diamond so kids can play at night, but now he can't afford to turn the lights on. He's worked hard to have a fiscally sound organization. But now he has had to close his doors almost half the time, and the kids are back on the streets with unregulated activities.

Michael, please, let these folks know what is going on with the San Diego neighborhood that you have contributed so much to.

BRUNKER: Thank you, Bob (ph).

What I would like to start by saying is that in times of disaster in this great country, the federal government has been quick to lend assistance--floods, hurricanes, tornadoes. I mean, you've stepped up and helped when people were in need.

But on July 1 of this fiscal year, it was like a bomb dropped in our community, where we're suddenly getting utility bills that are double and triple what we normally have. My bills at the Jackie Robinson Family YMCA, which is the urban YMCA in San Diego County, you know, are usually around $3,000 a month, '99 to 2000. And then when I pick up the bill and it's $7,000 in August--our Christmas gift was a $12,000 utility bill--somebody explain to me how we're going to make up this variance right now?

There's many nonprofit organizations that are doing God's work. The mission of our YMCA is to improve the quality of human life and help all people realize their fullest potential as children of God through the development of spirit, mind and body. We're spending our heaven doing good on earth, helping those in need. The majority of our constituents are on financial assistance or subsidy. I can't go and increase their rates so we can make up this variance. But the crime behind all of this is, could anybody tell me that this was going to happen this fiscal year?

We need to balance our budget, yet nobody's coming to our support to help us do that. That means I have to lay off people. I have to reduce hours of operation. I have to eliminate programs. And the biggest crime of all of this is, can any of you listening to this today tell me what to budget for next year so that we don't have to run into this same dilemma this time next year? That's the crime.

I challenge all of you to try and understand that we need your help now. I picked up the San Diego Daily Tribune this morning and read the president's proposal for the future and how we're going to try and cap things and make things better. But I'm telling you there is a need today to address the issues of the nonprofit organizations, service organizations that are working with children during critical hours, working with youth and families that need this right now.

I'm asking you, where are these kids and families going to go when we have to close and reduce our times of operation? I hope that this country steps forward today and thinks of how we can put all the politics aside and think of how we continue the greatness of this. This has been a disaster for our organization similar to a bomb dropping effective July 1, 2000.

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE SUSAN DAVIS (D-CA): Very well said, Michael, and Patty (ph) as well. We thank you very much for your stories because it's really these personal stories that are the crux of this problem.

I think if you look at the Bush energy plan, you could probably agree that it's a really great plan if you're a seller of energy. But if you are consumer of energy, if you are a faith-based program, if you're a small business owner, if you're just any of us out there in the community that are working hard, trying to take care of your family, trying to make ends meet, this is not a good energy plan. And that's why we think it is important to hear from individuals because they weren't at the table.

DAVIS: A lot of the big folks were who work for energy companies and are heads of those energy companies, but the real people who this really matters for were not at the table. And that's why they're at our table. And we want to hear from them.

And I'm delighted that I'm also able to introduce Jaime Salazar (ph). Jaime Salazar (ph) is an education counselor at Southwestern Community College. And he's seen his home electricity bill rise from $82 to $526 a month since November of 2000. And in January, although his family was on vacation and not home for two weeks--and I can assure you, I heard from many constituents last summer that were away for the summer and came home to this big surprise--he was not home for two weeks, his bill still doubled.

His home is less than 1,000 square feet. And he has had absolutely no luck in disputing his bill with the local utility or with the state public utilities commission.

Jaime (ph), it's delightful to have you with us. Thank you. And we look forward to hearing from you.

JAIME SALAZAR (ph): Thank you, Congressman Davis.

It is an outrage, what's happened here. And I'm just one of the many people affected in this way. We, in fact, had an average of about $82 a month in our regular bill for eight months. And then, all of a sudden, it went from $82 to $116, to $160, to $280, and then it went up to $526. And the ironic thing about this whole thing is that we had gone on vacation, out of town, for two weeks during the month that it went up to $526.

At first, I thought it was a mistake. So I called the utility company and tried to dispute the bill. And they told me that, no, that in fact that was the right reading on the meter and that they were adjusting for the past, that they hadn't charged me correctly.

At this point in time, they actually have taken--they have removed the evidence. In other words, they've taken the old meter away and put a new meter. My bill now has gone to $125. So now it has been reduced after we've gotten air and local radio stations and local TV stations, but in other words not until then did it happen.

Well, this, today, I just got my bill and I opened it up, and it went up again to $192. What's going on? You know, people like me that can afford to pay some of the bill, I'm OK. But what about indigent people? What are they doing?

So what I have decided to do is to join the political organizations that are around, such as the South Bay Forum. And we're putting a coalition of PACs together that will have a forum to educate people about what can be done, such as getting together and filing individual lawsuits in small claims courts and also putting an effort to join the United Consumer Action Network and having a class-action suit.

So those are the kinds of things that we want to do, but we need your support and we need your help in Washington.

Thank you.

GEPHARDT: I want to thank our friends from San Diego. And I want you to know it is not just a California problem. This is a problem that affects the entire West Coast. And as my good friends Jay Inslee and Peter DeFazio will vouch for, we are in seriously difficult straits in the Pacific Northwest. Hundred-year droughts have led to our reservoirs being low, and we are seeing the same kind of price increases that we're hearing from California--100, 200, 300 percent price increases are possible in Washington State and in Oregon.

A recent study suggested it might cost as many as 100,000 jobs in Washington state alone. We're seeing seniors come to food banks and bringing their energy bills and saying, ``I have never been to a food bank in my life and I'm a proud individual, but I can't make ends meet.''

We're seeing our major industry shut down and lay off workers. We're seeing small businesses close their doors. And in one school district alone, they are anticipating a $1 million increase--that's one school district, $1 million increase in their energy bills for the coming year.

DAVIS: A lot of the big folks were who work for energy companies and are heads of those energy companies, but the real people who this really matters for were not at the table. And that's why they're at our table. And we want to hear from them.

And I'm delighted that I'm also able to introduce Jaime Salazar (ph). Jaime Salazar (ph) is an education counselor at Southwestern Community College. And he's seen his home electricity bill rise from $82 to $526 a month since November of 2000. And in January, although his family was on vacation and not home for two weeks--and I can assure you, I heard from many constituents last summer that were away for the summer and came home to this big surprise--he was not home for two weeks, his bill still doubled.

His home is less than 1,000 square feet. And he has had absolutely no luck in disputing his bill with the local utility or with the state public utilities commission.

Jaime (ph), it's delightful to have you with us. Thank you. And we look forward to hearing from you.

JAIME SALAZAR (ph): Thank you, Congressman Davis.

It is an outrage, what's happened here. And I'm just one of the many people affected in this way. We, in fact, had an average of about $82 a month in our regular bill for eight months. And then, all of a sudden, it went from $82 to $116, to $160, to $280, and then it went up to $526. And the ironic thing about this whole thing is that we had gone on vacation, out of town, for two weeks during the month that it went up to $526.

At first, I thought it was a mistake. So I called the utility company and tried to dispute the bill. And they told me that, no, that in fact that was the right reading on the meter and that they were adjusting for the past, that they hadn't charged me correctly.

At this point in time, they actually have taken--they have removed the evidence. In other words, they've taken the old meter away and put a new meter. My bill now has gone to $125. So now it has been reduced after we've gotten air and local radio stations and local TV stations, but in other words not until then did it happen.

Well, this, today, I just got my bill and I opened it up, and it went up again to $192. What's going on? You know, people like me that can afford to pay some of the bill, I'm OK. But what about indigent people? What are they doing?

So what I have decided to do is to join the political organizations that are around, such as the South Bay Forum. And we're putting a coalition of PACs together that will have a forum to educate people about what can be done, such as getting together and filing individual lawsuits in small claims courts and also putting an effort to join the United Consumer Action Network and having a class-action suit.

So those are the kinds of things that we want to do, but we need your support and we need your help in Washington.

Thank you.

(UNKNOWN): I want to thank our friends from San Diego. And I want you to know it is not just a California problem. This is a problem that affects the entire West Coast. And as my good friends Jay Inslee and Peter DeFazio will vouch for, we are in seriously difficult straits in the Pacific Northwest. Hundred-year droughts have led to our reservoirs being low, and we are seeing the same kind of price increases that we're hearing from California--100, 200, 300 percent price increases are possible in Washington State and in Oregon.

A recent study suggested it might cost as many as 100,000 jobs in Washington state alone. We're seeing seniors come to food banks and bringing their energy bills and saying, ``I have never been to a food bank in my life and I'm a proud individual, but I can't make ends meet.''

We're seeing our major industry shut down and lay off workers. We're seeing small businesses close their doors. And in one school district alone, they are anticipating a $1 million increase--that's one school district, $1 million increase in their energy bills for the coming year.

(UNKNOWN): They're talking about not re-hiring certain teachers, about not renewing their text books, about canceling after school programs. and what is this happening in? This is happening in a time of record profits for oil companies and record bonuses for oil company CEOs.

George Bush, Dick Cheney and their merry band of oil CEOs are Robin Hoods in reverse. They're taking from the middle class, they're taking from our seniors, they're taking from our small businesses, and they are giving to the wealthiest oil executives in the entire world. This is wrong.

The Democrats have a plan that protects consumers, protects the environment and makes responsible investments in a responsible, environmentally sound energy policy. I've got to tell you, I am ashamed and embarrassed of what this administration is doing while these good people in San Diego and elsewhere in California and while people throughout the Pacific Northwest are suffering severely from this energy crisis.

GEPHARDT: Thank you, Brian (ph).

Let me sum up--this is the president's energy report. It's slick. It's full of pretty colored pictures. It really looks like the Exxon Mobile annual report, and maybe that's really what it is.

This is an energy report that offers no short-term relief to these folks on the West Coast who need relief now. There is nothing in here about price caps on wholesale prices. There is nothing about the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission doing something to help these people when they need help right now.

There is nothing in here for relief for gasoline buyers all over the country, where gasoline prices are going to $2 and $3. There is nothing in here about tapping into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help bring down these prices. There is nothing in here about the mergers between the big oil companies and the anti-competitive effect on gasoline prices around the country.

There is nothing in here, as President Bush, when he was a candidate said, that President Clinton ought to do something with OPEC, which President Clinton did. There is nothing in here about going to OPEC or to Mexico or to Canada to try to get some relief on the price of the basic oil that's coming into the country.

There is only one thing in here--really, when you get to the bottom of it, there is not even anything real in here on research on renewables and alternatives and conservation. Yes, they pay lip service to it. There isn't anything in their budget to actually do it. So it's an illusion.

This is a report that calls for something that won't work six years from now, and that's drilling in all the environmentally sensitive places in our country. This is a plan for production. It's not an energy plan that's good for the people of this country.

And as you just heard, we could have had lots more speakers from San Diego, from Los Angeles, from San Francisco, from San Jose, from Portland, from Seattle--up and down the coast--telling you their tales of woe that they're experiencing right now. And the president's plan is not going to help them in any way today when they need help.

And I, frankly, don't think it will help them six years from now. It just plain doesn't help them.

It helps the big oil companies. It does not help the people of this country.

Yes?

QUESTION: One of the speakers from San Diego mentioned the time is now to put politics aside and try to get something done. Of the proposals here, what do you see that you and the White House will be able to work on and move forward, or even not from this list, what do you see actually happening this year?

GEPHARDT: We would be thrilled to death if we could get the president to ask FERC--let me just tell you the first thing that ought to be done, and it's one of the first things in our plan. The president needs to ask FERC to put price caps on wholesale prices on electric on the West Coast and across this country.

He could do that right now. That could be done today. And we call on him to do it. If he won't do it, we're going to try to pass a bill next week in committee, hopefully, in a couple of weeks on the floor that requires FERC to do what we think they ought to be doing anyway and won't do.

Now, he has the ability to ask them to do it. We're going to try to force them to do it through legislation in the next two weeks. That's number one.

Number two, he could put real effort behind what is in here about tax incentives for hybrid cars, for solar, for wind, for research--real money for research so that we can find these new technologies--and clean-burning coal and all the other things that are talked about in here. But there's not money in the budget to do it.

He could put real money in here for LIHEAP, low-income energy assistance. Listen to what these people are saying. You've got lots of seniors and poor people out on the West Coast who simply are not able to pay their energy bills. There is not the funds in LIHEAP in this budget to do it.

GEPHARDT: That's the second thing that he ought to do.

Third, he ought to take out of this plan, in my view, and we will encourage him to do it, the ideas of trying to produce energy in the most environmentally sensitive places in our country. We believe with a balanced energy plan, which we think ours is, you can have plentiful energy. It can be cheap and affordable. And we can save our environment while we do it.

QUESTION: Are there Republicans who will vote for those caps you're looking for?

GEPHARDT: I think you're going to see a lot of--I asked Mr. Filner and Ms. Davis to talk to us about some of their colleagues in California.

FILNER: Let me just say, in San Diego, California, where Susan Davis and I are Democrats, which was the epicenter of this whole crisis, the three Republicans who represent San Diego County--Duncan Hunter, Duke Cunningham and Darryl Issa--support our legislation for caps.

Why? They had the same experiences we had. We looked death in the eye. These people are all going out of business. As that pain is felt, another Republican in the central part of the...

(AUDIO GAP)

(UNKNOWN): That's where he ought to be--listening to the people of this country. These are not made-up stories. I was out there a week or so ago. There are a zillion stories like this. And when you hear the people and you listen to them close up...

(UNKNOWN): The blackouts started today.

(UNKNOWN): That wasn't so bad. When you see them close up and hear them close up, you really--you can't do anything but respond. I heard one of the Republican members on television from the San Diego area the other day saying that he is ideologically totally opposed to price caps. But he said this is an emergency. We've got to have them.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) from an oil-producing state. The president, the White House began saying last night that this program will help with the short-term crisis because of the fact that it's getting done, that will have an effect on prices and will depress prices by this summer. Do you believe that?

(UNKNOWN): Well, these are the same people who say pass their tax cut, and that's the solution to energy problems and gasoline prices. That was trickle down in terms of tax theory. I'm not sure that this is even trickle down in terms of we have a long-term policy and somehow people are going to change their conduct. They're going to change their practices because of things that are going to happen five or six years from now.

And, Jim, I want to point out that people in my state of Texas are consumers, too. We have a lot of people who are concerned about the price of energy in Texas. We have a lot of people who drive long distances, and we're concerned about what may happen with electricity in our state, too.

QUESTION: Regarding the president's plan, are you trying--leaders in the Senate have indicated that they're trying to get a fast track for this energy legislation.

QUESTION: Senator Lott has said that he wants to get something to the floor by the Fourth of July. Yesterday, Senator Murkowski said he wanted to get something out of his committee by the middle of next month. Is this the same kind of timetable that you're looking at? Or what are you...

GEPHARDT: The energy bill that I talked about is moving through the Commerce Committee right now. And we could have had on the floor--I said yesterday in the tax debate, instead of debating this bill, which gives little help to people in the middle class and people trying to get in the middle class, we ought to be talking about a price cap bill on wholesale electric prices, rather than the tax bill.

We could have had that bill on the floor this week. And I really think that's what ought to be happening. They could bring up this bill next week, before Memorial Day. It's in the committee. They could bring the bill up. So that's the first thing that needs to happen.

As to the rest of the energy policy, we're ready to go. We've been ready to go for weeks. These folks have been listening to this difficulty from their constituents for weeks. This president's been in office for almost six months.

We can move on this, and we will work with them, trust me. We want to solve the problem. There's no point in this in trying to make political points because, as you just heard, people don't care about that. They care about us doing something to affect their lives and their everyday problems in a positive way.

So we're ready to go.

I want to say good-bye to our San Diego speakers. Thank you for being with us. We really appreciate it.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up: Last week, the Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee tried to get--Democrats tried to get price caps put on to the Martin bill, and that failed. All California Republicans voted against that. What makes you think that you can get enough Republicans to cross over on that issue?

GEPHARDT: When you feel the heat, you see the light.

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) provision comes forward to the flood, do you have any doubts about being able to pull enough Democrats and moderate Republicans together to defeat it?

GEPHARDT: You know, I think the American people are way ahead of everybody. They do not want us drilling monuments, national parks, environmentally sensitive areas like ANWR. You know, they understand there are other, better answers that are environmentally safe.

Let me give you one. We could build--and we call for in our plan the building of a natural gas pipeline from existing areas that have been drilled already in Alaska that would bring lots of natural gas, which is clean burning, to the West Coast to help take care of their electric generation problems. We're for that. We're ready to go. We're ready to give tax incentives to get that pipeline built. Let's start the construction.

There are a lot of things we can do, if you keep in your mind--and this is what we're asking our Republican friends to do. Keep in your mind that the American people, yes, they want energy; yes, they want oil; yes, they want gasoline at reasonable prices, but they want it consistent with keeping our environment clean. That's what we have to keep in our mind.

And we believe with all our hearts that that can be done.

One more.

QUESTION: Mr. Gephardt, you were saying that the renewables and conservation measures aren't in the president's budget. Yet in this plan, they're talking about using new fees, new royalties...

GEPHARDT: Well, that's the folly of it. You see, what they're saying in this plan is, we're ready to fund research in renewables and tax credits for solar and all these good things that everybody wants, but the only way we're going to fund it is by taking royalty fees from drilling in ANWR and other environmentally sensitive places. I don't think that's much of a solution.

Thank you very much. Thank you, San Diegans.