Congressman Steve King
GLENN: So let me just, I just -- first let me start here. I compiled a list just a few minutes ago. See if I'm missing anything. So far congress has said no drilling in the ANWR, no drilling off the coast of Florida and California, we're not getting any new 100-year leases to drill in the Gulf while China and Venezuela and Cuba are going in. Congress, as well as all three presidential candidates, said there's a cap and trade legislation that will increase the price of gas according to the EPA by $1.50 a gallon. We're shutting down oil fields in Colorado, we won't develop shale oil fields in western states. Yesterday -- love this -- we pass legislation that let us sue OPEC. I'm sure they're not going to retaliate. We have allowed environmental attorneys to sue the oil companies for possible future destruction of an Alaskan Eskimo village. We also have protected the polar bear and its habitat right where the oil deposits are located. We're talking about seizing windfall profits, won't allow anybody to drill in some small areas -- no, I'm sorry. We have allowed them to drill in small areas in Alaska while creating very generous environmental laws that have tied up the very production because the oil companies are in court. We've also not allowed anybody to build a new refinery for 30 years. In fact, we've cut our operational refineries in half since 1982. We won't develop coal-to-oil, and also we're telling the oil companies which blends they have to make. What -- these evil oil companies, why is the price of gas so high?
KING: Well, that is the most extensive list that I have heard. Compared to the list that I've been rolling out here and when I hear that and just the weight of it all, it almost makes me want to go to my knees, let alone think what happens to the economy of the United States of America, which would be brought to its knees if this isn't reversed. I just stepped out of a conference this morning and listened to a presentation by the Heritage Foundation and I've been convinced of this for a long time. They've got empirical data and it's very convincing that the people that are advancing this cap and trade want to slow our economy down, want to reverse our economy, and they know that if they shut down energy, they back the economy off and they are doing it all because they worship mother nature.
GLENN: Dan, do we have the audio of Bill Clinton saying that in a speech? We have -- we'll have to find it. We have audio of Bill Clinton talking to an environmental group. He was talking about green energy and everything else and he said we all know that the only way to really do this is to halt the economy. And we were dumbfounded that this man would actually admit to that. But we have it on tape. We'll try to find it for you.
KING: Occasionally Bill Clinton told the truth evidently.
GLENN: Evidently he did. So right now overnight long-term oil futures went up $9. They are saying now that oil per barrel will be at least $140 a barrel. T. Boone Pickens says that we're looking at $200 a barrel coming our way. What are we doing? Is there anybody in Washington that is, besides you, that is saying, okay, we've got to go and get every bit of resource out of the ground we can?
KING: There are a few that are doing that. It's a growing number of Republicans. And there's also a certain amount of apprehension on the part of other Republicans. You know, one of the green movement environmentalists line up their lobby and they start to come after and target members of congress because they utter things that are logical and rational about energy supply, there's a significant political punishment that's there, and the environmentalists have not been held accountable to answer up to the facts and the data that they are putting together and so politically what this is is a reflection of the voices of their constituents. And it has not -- the American people are not well enough informed. They have chosen sides on the global warming issue, for example, and I would say you can walk the streets anywhere in America and you can't find anybody that actually knows the science behind it. They just decide who they want to believe and that's really going to bring us to our knees in the next generation.
GLENN: So tell me about the ANWR. What did you find out when you threw over the ANWR and you went up to check things out?
KING: I flew over and I also went down on the ground, I talked to the Eskimos there that want to drill. It's 19.6 million acres. There's not a single tree in that entire area, not for 700 miles from where they want to drill for oil. This is a carbon copy of the ecosystem that we drilled in the north slope of Alaska in the early Seventies.
GLENN: Didn't they say that was going to cause all kinds of ecological problems in the north slope?
CALLER: I think it was because the caribou herd quadrupled than what it was in 1970. They all said of course the caribou multiplied because they shot the wolves. Now they didn't have any guns up there. I was signed up. It's just they will contrive any argument. If there ever was a safe place and a good place for this to be oil, it's up in ANWR. There is no caribou herd in the ANWR region. There are a few musk oxen, I saw a few white birds. They are going to do fine whether we drill or whether we don't. So if the question I ask, it goes off of the question of if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one there to hear it, did it make any noise? If we drill environmentally friendly wells in the ANWR and no one is there to see them, did it damage the scenery? That's the question. And are we going to starve this nation for energy because somebody is afraid that they will have to look at a drill rig up there in ANWR. By the way, when they get the drilling done, they put submersible pumps in. You don't see a pump jack above the ground. You just see a little workover pad that's a square patch of rock that they will go out and pull the pump out if it needs work in the wintertime. It couldn't be any more environmentally friendly. Dennis Kucinich couldn't identify the north slope oil fields today. They would be a lot harder to identify in ANWR.
GLENN: There is enough natural gas in this country that we could tap that environmentalists won't let us tap. How much natural gas do we have?
KING: Well, the numbers are different, reports there are out. One is out of Continental shelf itself, at least 406 trillion cube I can feet of natural gas.
GLENN: How much is that? What does that mean?
KING: I don't know if I can equate that into how long that will work for us, how long it will last, but another one, some data that was produced here about three years ago was underneath our nonnational park public lands in the United States, there's enough natural gas to heat every home in the United States for the next 150 years. That's another way to quantify it. We have a lot of natural gas. And as we know from the oil finds, there's a lot of gas out there that we haven't identified and haven't declared to be a reserve at this point.
GLENN: What do you think the reaction from OPEC is going to be if the Senate decides to slap OPEC and say we're going to see you?
KING: Well, I think the futures have already indicated that overnight. I took to the floor and debated against the NOPEC bill as they call it, the one that outlaws OPEC. And if OPEC is making those decisions and they are watching congress and they think there's going to be a bill that will grant the authority to the Department of Justice and the attorney general to sue them, that means that the ultimate result of that suit, if it's successful, would be the freezing of their assets in the United States. So I think that they freeze -- they hold their oil production where it is now, they are certainly not going to increase it to try to get ahead of the criticism of congress. So they either stop it where it is or they reduce their production and I think there's going to be talk about whether they will pull assets out of the United States to avoid them being frozen. That's going to be the natural thing that would happen. All of that makes it harder for our economy to function and all of it makes harder to have more energy on the marketplace.
GLENN: We've got them right where we want them. We went over there and begged them for oil, we went over there and begged them to prop up our financial sector. We got them where we want them, congressman.
KING: Well, at the beginning of the program, I don't know how anyone can contrive more things to do to drive up the cost of energy and slow our economy than the list of things that the Democrats have done to take energy off the marketplace and intimidate the futures market as well.
GLENN: Well, for anybody who thinks that it is not their intent, Dan, roll the speech from Bill Clinton. Listen to this clip.
BILL CLINTON: We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse emissions because we've got to save the planet for our grandchildren.
GLENN: There it is. We've got to slow down our economy to save the planet for our grandchildren. If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know, nothing will.
KING: I think Bill Clinton has told the truth on that. That is their agenda. I've been saying it from the floor of congress, this whole 110th congress that they have convinced me that they want to increase the cost of energy and they want to do that and it will slow down the economy. And increasing the cost means people will use less energy. If they use less energy, there will be fewer carbon emissions and they believe that it keeps the greenhouse gases out of Bill Clinton said it and it will save our planet. Now, it doesn't matter to them that the science doesn't necessarily support that and that there are 31,000 scientists that have signed up that said they don't buy the global warming argument.
Let me make maybe a new argument out here, one that I've been making and that is that I think this Earth has a built-in thermostat and in this way, that 4/5ths of the Earth is covered by water. If the Earth warms, there will be more evaporation of that water and the evaporation has to come down in the form of rain. If it rains more, there will be more plant growth, which means more photosynthesis which means more carbon sequestration just by formula. So there has to be a built-in thermostat in this Earth. I don't know if it's 1 or 2 degrees or if it's 7 or 8, but I do believe that if the Earth is going to warm, we'll get more rain, we'll get more photosynthesis and that will pull the carbon out of the air. It has to. That's the environmentalist formula. They just don't want to admit the Earth has that built into I.
GLENN: Congressman, best of luck to you, my friend.
KING: Glad to be with you today. Thank you.