Jeb Bush on Energy & Oil Former Republican FL Governor

Economic growth pays for environmental clean-up

Create a North American energy strategy

BUSH:ÿI think we ought to be all in on energy. We need to create a North American energy strategy, which means approve the XL Pipeline, allow for the export of crude oil and dramatically improve the licensing of LNG plants (liquefied natural gas). But it's more difficult to do.ÿExpand the possibilities of leasing on federal lands and waters, particularly where states have an interest in doing so. There's a lot that we can do to create high growth for our economy, lower utility prices and I'm total

Why is State Department in permit business for XL pipeline?

The crowd capitalized on the conservative theory of why Obama had been elected president: Republicans only lost when they went easy on Democrats. "Jeb Bush is always apologizing," said one attendee. "Just recently it was over him saying that we didn't need $500 million for women's health. Hillary went after him, so he 'clarified'"

Embrace the energy revolution and build the XL pipeline

On global warming: I'm a skeptic; I'm not a scientist

It's also not how a functioning adult acts. When I was told by my doctor that I had breast cancer, I didn't reject their diagnosis because I wasn't an oncologist myself. I listened to the advice of people who knew more than I did and started immediately on a course of action that would solve the problem. Republicans like Jeb Bush may not be scientists. But do you know who are? The more than 300 experts who compiled the third U.S. National Climate Assessment, which found that man-made climate change is detrimental to our environment. (Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Editorial, 7/2/2014)

Replace crony capitalism with free-market strategy

"We should let market forces, not crony capitalism, decide where to invest and how to incentivize citizens to conserve," Bush said, advocating approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, "rational" regulations on fracking, and opening federal lands to drilling. "A real energy strategy could add an additional 1% growth over the long haul.

A "patriotic energy policy" will yield far more revenue

BUSH: I wouldn't say "no, heck, no," and that's it. What I would do is advocate policies that would create high growth because the revenue collected by government when you're growing at 3.5% instead of 1.5% is exponentially more. And high growth over a sustained period of time by having a patriotic energy policy, bringing regulation to the 21st Century, immigration reform would be a good one, reforming our education system, tax policy--all those things would yield, I think, far more revenue. That should be where there's the common ground. And in return, there should be some give and take as it relates to entitlement reform. You could get to a place where our fiscal house would be in order if we achieved that. The president has not been willing to discuss that but in the last week, he's begun to at least reach out to Republicans which is quite encouraging.

I'm a skeptic about global warming

A: I'm a skeptic. I'm not a scientist. I think the science has been politicized. I would be very wary of hollowing out our industrial base even further. It may be only partially man-made. It may not be warming by the way. The last six years we've actually had mean temperatures that are cooler. I think we need to be very cautious before we dramatically alter who we are as a nation because of it.

We're vulnerable because we don't control our energy sources

A: We don't have control over our energy sources, and it puts us in a vulnerable position. We're the only country in the world that would consider it appropriate policy not to take advantage of our own natural resources to provide stable, low-cost sources of energy.

During hurricanes, prosecutes gas stations for price gouging

When asked how it could be defined as price gouging if the hurricane in question had not struck anywhere near the service station with the higher- priced gas: "I would consider it price gouging even if it's in Alaska. It's price gouging if you are raising your price, irrespective of cost, beyond a certain threshold. The same commodity, if you buy it at X and you sell if at Y for a profit, that's great. But when you take advantage of the situation and raise prices even more, I think that's price gouging."

Just to make sure I was hearing this right, I asked what a reasonable profit would be on a gallon of gasoline. His answer: "2 or 3 cents."

2005: 125-mile no-drill zone; then 75 miles ok for drilling

In 2005, Jeb was ready to deal away half of that protected water. Instead of preventing drilling anywhere in a 200-mile-wide strip around Florida--the entire extent of the US's economic zone--Jeb was ready to give up the outer 75 miles of that in exchange for a permanent 125-mile zone that would be under state control.

Jeb argued that higher oil & gas prices made Florida's outright ban untenable--Jeb suggested acidly that he could take up such an idea with his fairy godmother--and that a permanent ban of any kind was better than a series of moratoria that could eventually end.

Eliminate automobile emissions testing

Senate Bill 772 eliminates emissions testing otherwise known as the motor vehicles inspection program (MVIP) in six Florida counties where automobiles are currently tested. I support the elimination of emissions testing in Florida for a number of reasons.
• Foremost, in all six counties, the air quality is substantially cleaner than it was a decade ago.
• Cleaner burning fuels, cleaner running vehicles and better business practices have also made emissions testing unnecessary.
• As well, the elimination of the testing in six counties will not harm Florida’s air quality, and DEP has the science to back it up.
• There are other reasons to support the elimination of emissions testing, but the one that in the end makes the most sense to me is the unnecessary financial burden imposed on motorists. Florida taxpayers are currently spending $52 million a year to keep the emissions testing program on life support.

Voluntary partnerships reduce greenhouse gases economically.

Considering the evidence and the risks of both overreaction and underreaction, the Governors recommend that the federal government continue its climate research, including regional climate research, to improve scientific understanding of global climate change. The Governors also recommend taking steps that are cost-effective and offer other social and economic benefits beyond reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In particular, the Governors support voluntary partnerships to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while achieving other economic and environmental goals.
• The Governors are committed to working in partnership with the federal government, businesses, environmental groups, and others to develop and implement voluntary programs that reduce greenhouse gas emissions in conjunction with conserving energy, protecting the environment, and strengthening the economy.
• The Governors urge that those who have successfully achieved reductions of greenhouse emissions receive appropriate credit for their early actions. The Governors strongly encourage these kinds of voluntary efforts.
• The Governors believe that federally required implementation of any treaty provisions, including those that mandate limits or reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, must not occur before the U.S. Senate ratifies an international agreement and Congress passes enabling legislation.
• The Governors support continued federal funding for research and development technology in this area. They also believe it is essential to engage the private sector by fostering technology partnerships between industry and government. Public-private partnerships serve to achieve desired environmental goals, speed the introduction of new technologies to the marketplace, and meet consumer needs and product affordability goals, while avoiding market distortions and job losses.

Kyoto Treaty must include reductions by all countries.

The Governors recommend that the federal government continue to seek the advice of state and local officials and nongovernmental organizations with expertise in economic, trade, jobs, public health, and environmental issues and assess the potential economic and environmental consequences of proposed policies and measures, including a thorough and broadly accepted analysis of costs and benefits. The Governors recommend that the US:
• not sign or ratify any agreement that mandates new commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the US, unless such an agreement mandates new specific scheduled commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for developing countries within the same compliance period;
• aggressively undertake strategies for including emissions-reduction commitments from developing countries;
• not sign or ratify any agreement that would result in serious harm to the US economy;
• support flexible policies and measures in continuing negotiations that provide an opportunity for the US to meet global environmental goals without jeopardizing US jobs, trade, or economic competitiveness;
• insist on flexible implementation timetables in continuing negotiations that permit affected parties adequate time to plan strategies for meeting commitments; and
• ensure that no single sector, state, or nation is disproportionately disadvantaged by the implementation of international policies.

More funding to develop domestic energy supplies.

• Whereas, our nation is lacking in the infrastructure necessary to drive our growing technology-based economy with reliable, high-quality, affordable energy supplies; deficient in efficiency improvements that enable the balance of supply and demand; and subject to the market volatility of some fuels;
• Whereas, in order to maintain the world’s strongest economy coupled with a clean environment, we need to support and develop policies and technologies that enable a diversity of domestic energy resources to be utilized throughout the region;
• Whereas, the United States’ electricity transmission grid is the most reliable in the world, but the increasing demand for electricity, the expanding competitive electricity market and related regulatory and jurisdictional issues create a challenge to maintaining national reliability of the transmission grid that was designed and constructed to serve local needs rather than to serve a rapidly growing national wholesale market;
• Resolved, that the Southern Governors’ Association urges Congress and the President to provide in any national energy policy:
  • adequate funding and incentives for further development of clean and efficient technologies and systems to provide an effective approach to increasing domestic energy supplies, improving the efficiency of energy use and enhancing the environment;
  • full funding for the State Energy Program (SEP) to expand development and deployment of technologies appropriate for each state and each region and to develop and maintain energy emergency response mechanisms, exercises and programs in the states and the region;
  • consolidated and efficient method for siting of electric transmission lines across multiple jurisdictions while maintaining the states’ primary authority and developed in close consultation with the nation’s governors.

Use federal funds for nuclear cleanup, with state input.

• Whereas, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of our citizens by maintaining safe and clear strategies for the transportation, disposition and environmental clean-up of the nation’s nuclear materials, including nuclear weapons materials, at DOE nuclear energy and weapons complexes; now, therefore, be it
• Resolved, that the Southern Governors’ Association urges Congress and the President in any national energy policy:
  • provide full funding for all of DOE’s past and present commitments related to clean-up operations at DOE nuclear energy and weapons complexes and disposition plans for nuclear materials, including nuclear weapons materials;
  • provide full funding for all state public health and environmental sampling and analysis activities at DOE nuclear energy and weapons complexes;
  • and provide clear instruction to DOE that states’ rights must be respected and that plans regarding DOE sites for processing of DOE research and weapons waste must be made in consultation with the various states concluding in mutually agreeable terms.

Share offshore oil development revenue with states.

• Whereas, the coastal regions of the US are fragile environmentally and under intense pressure from onshore support activities for the development of the nation’s oil and natural gas resources on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS);
• Whereas, each year the federal government receives billions of dollars in revenues from the development of oil and natural gas resources on the OCS, a capital asset of this nation;
• Whereas, the federal government does not share directly with the coastal states a meaningful portion of the revenues from the OCS, but it does share 50 percent of the revenues with the state for the development of onshore federal mineral resources within the state’s borders;
• Whereas, states that host onshore activities in support of offshore OCS mineral development should receive a share of these revenues to offset the impacts of this development;
• Whereas,, at least a portion of the revenues from this capital asset of the nation should be:
  • reinvested in infrastructure and environmental restoration in the coastal region of this nation;
  • used to fund the state and federal portions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund;
  • used for the primary objective of increasing conservation programs for non-game wildlife species and for programs that support fish and wildlife -dependent recreation;
  • used for preventing declining species from falling into the categories of threatened or endangered;
  • used to preserve and restore our nation’s historic places and to rehabilitate critically needed recreation facilities in our country’s urban areas;
• Resolved, That the southern governors urge the US Congress to pass and the President to sign legislation sharing a meaningful portion of OCS mineral revenues with all states and territories for the purposes stated above.

Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025.

A resolution that it is the goal of the United States that, not later than January 1, 2025, the agricultural, forestry, and working land of the US should provide from renewable resources not less than 25% of the total energy consumed and continue to produce safe, abundant, and affordable food, feed, and fiber. [Governors also signed letters of endorsement at www.25x25.org]

Rep. SALAZAR: "Our resolution establishes a national goal of producing 25% of America's energy from renewable sources--like solar, wind and biofuels--by 2025. The "25x'25" vision is widely endorsed, bold, and fully attainable. If implemented, it would dramatically improve our energy security, our economy, and our ability to protect the environment.

"I am pleased that more than 20 of my colleagues in the Senate, from both sides of the aisle, are cosponsoring this resolution. In addition, the "25x'25" vision has been endorsed by 22 current and former governors and several State legislatures across the country. The Big Three automobile manufacturers--Ford, Chrysler, and General Motors--are all behind "25x'25" So are many agricultural organizations, environmental groups, scientists, and businesses, ranging from the Natural Resources Defense Council to John Deere.

"These Americans understand that we cannot continue to import 60% of our oil from foreign countries, many of which are hostile to the US, if we aim to be strong and secure in the world. They know that we will have to build a clean energy economy if we are to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It is time for Congress to take a more active role in our clean energy future. Establishing a national goal--"25x'25" is the first step."