September 5, 1974
Page 30335
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I have decided reluctantly to vote against H.R. 8193, the Energy Transportation Security Act of 1974. This decision did not come easily. I understand and appreciate many of the merits of this legislation. In recent years, this country has passively stood by while other great maritime powers have greatly expanded their merchant marine. At the same time, we have allowed ourselves to become increasingly dependent on foreign sources of oil. The undesirable consequences of these two developments were never more apparent than during the recent petroleum embargo last winter when this country was virtually at the mercy of the Middle Eastern oil-producing countries for our fuel supplies.
I believe we must not let this situation repeat itself. I believe we must encourage and develop greater self-sufficiency in terms of our domestic energy sources. I believe we must take steps to expand our merchant marine and to increase maritime and maritime-related employment of U.S.– rather than foreign – nationals.
I also believe, though, that we must be concerned with the cost of expanding our domestic sources of energy and our energy transporting capabilities. And in regard to this legislation, after extensive study, I have concluded that enactment of this legislation would place an intolerable burden on the American consumer, especially those consumers in New England who import 92 percent of their oil needs.
A recent Federal Energy Administration study indicated that enactment of this legislation would cost American consumers between 0.3-1.0 cent per gallon for their oil imports. The New England Fuel Institute has estimated that this legislation, if passed, would cost the American consumer 2.3 cents per gallon, and would raise New England fuel costs by $77 million this winter.
I believe in this highly inflationary period the American consumer must not be forced to pay increased fuel prices. Hence, I have decided to vote against this legislation.