ok? let me get down here and then you can respond. the problem is with that, now you want people to plug in their cars and the electric grid in this country cannot even provide electricity to our homes in the summertime. if you really want to get serious about doing something, first off we are the cola opec of the world. -- the coal opec of the world. there are ways to get fuel to burn from that than from refineries. .

why is it you want to get rid of all these cars? right now i could not afford to buy a new car. guest: a couple of things -- your choice is never going to be taken away. it is up to you whether you want to buy a used or new car. what this bill does is it creates a new incentive to get all rosales back up so we can put people back to work. the idea is what we want people working and pay taxes then drawing benefits, whether unemployment or whatever, trying to help the auto industry get

through this. more than just the big three. toyota supported this, honda, mazda, and a number of other countries. you still maintain the right you have to drive whenever vehicle you want, whether it is a use for a new car. you are right on when you talk about coal and oil from tar sands and that kind of thing. i'm a big supporter of all of the above. we need to do it all. in my district in michigan this past week and gas went up to $2.95 and when i go back i guess it will be a little bit higher as the summer season continues. we are importing most of the oil we consume, better than 70%, in fact. that price is driven by opec and what is the world wide price. the more we can do for all of

the above to develop domestic sources of energy -- whether it is oil shale out west, tar sands, and obviously electric cars, anything we can do to reduce the dependence on foreign oil, we are better off. electricity is just one of the options we ought to be able to pursue. one of the reasons why electricity generation in this country is going to go up by 30% to 20% by 2013, we have to be prepared for that, which is why the nuclear option is a good one, as well as clean coal. the last caller, from current -- host: the last call is from kentucky. bruce, you are on the line. caller: i'm wondering why you are not talking about mass transit. everybody is talking about cars and saving gas and all of these countries in europe have mass transit -- trains, buses. you cannot even find a bus or

train in louisville, ky. guest: i have long been a supporter of amtrak and i at least hope we would see high- speed rail, something europe has had for decades. there is a big investment to look at high speed rail, to connect people from cleveland, detroit, chicago, st. louis, milwaukee. but obviously transit in urbanized areas, you need that. my district is fairly rural. we do not have things like subway cars. i think we only have one bus in my congressional district. in fact, that needs to be part of the equation, to get people off the road. host: we will have to leave it there. thank you for joining us. up next, we will talk to republican congressman scalise.

we will be right back. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> every weekend, the latest nonfiction span offers on c- span2. saturday, how you run for congress with $7,000 and your sixth grade students managing the campaign? she gave it a shot in ms. cahill for congress. sunday, joel rosenberg takes you how the followers of g hyde, jefferson, and jesus are battling to dominate the middle east. and what his neck for the economy? -- what is next for the economy?

taxes and the and the prosperity. later, foreclosure nation, florida real-estate attorney on the housing crunch and where it is headed. every weekend is filled with books and authors on "booktv." look at the entire schedule online. >> here is our policy. we are anxious, willing, eager to start the bombing, just as we are eager to stop the war. >> the final months of lyndon johnson's presidency -- vietnam, un, and his pick for justices. on c-span radio, and in the washington-baltimore area at 90.1 fm, and and nationwide on xm satellite channel 132. >> how is c-span funded? >> private donations?

>> taxpayers? >> i don't really know. >> public television? >> donations. >> i don't know where the money comes from. >> contributions from donors? >> how is c-span funding? 30 years ago america's cable companies created c-span as a public service, a private business initiatives. no government mandate, no government money. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined by congressman steve scalise, republican, talking about the energy bill republicans unveiled. first-come a clip from congressman pence on the bill. >> today house republicans are introducing the american energy act. it is part of an all of the above strategy that offers energy independence, more jobs, and cleaner environment without imposing a national energy tax. our solution focus is on more domestic exploration for oil and

national -- natural gas, renewed commitment of clean coming emissions-free nuclear energy, and investments in real and alternative energy technologies, and the creation of incentives for conservation. of the plan was offered today is the comprehensive energy solution that this country so desperately needs. it advances our energy independence, it saves and creates millions of american jobs, and even does a better job protecting the environment. since the pelosi bill will actually drive manufacturing plants overseas to countries without our safeguards. the american people want energy independence and a cleaner environment without a national energy tax. the american energy act is the answer. host: congressman, tell us about the bill. what are the major provisions? guest: using our own natural resources to provide energy independence so we can reduce our dependence on middle eastern oil, but while opposing the cap

and trade energy tax proposed by this administration or they want to literally run millions of jobs overseas and tax people on the household utility bills. it is a big contrast. by using our natural resources, exploring more oil and natural gas and going on and unleashing the ability to use oil shale in the midwest, to use tar sands, clean coal technology and advanced those, by using the natural resources we have here in america we can create millions of jobs but also create billions of dollars of revenue that we will partially used to go and fund the alternative sources like wind, soil, -- solar, and nuclear. it is a different approach but it uses the natural resources we have here in america to, number one, decrease dependence on middle east oil but also create great jobs in america and ensuring energy independence. i think it needs to move forward and we need to first defeat the captain and trade pact that will

literally run millions of jobs out of the country and raise electricity prices. i think you will see a different contract in our approaches. host: a key component appears to be a dramatic increase in nuclear power. can you talk specifically about that? guest: it has been about 30 years cent in new nuclear facility has been built. we have about 100. our goal is to build another 100 facilities in the united states in the next 20 years. we have over 30 applications already pending. there is a very long bureaucratic process, very expensive and cost prohibitive for people to build nuclear power but it emits no carbon and it is a reliable source of energy and cheaper than many other options. most of europe has gone to nuclear power. it is a safe and reliable way to the use energy. unfortunately in this country we have had some any bureaucratic hurdles that made it almost impossible to build a new facility. we have a target of 100 new

nuclear plants in this country in the next 20 years. host: talking about the republican energy alternative unveiled wednesday. talking to congressman steve scalise from louisiana. if you would like to call in -- there is a provision of the bill that i believe you are specifically involved in, involving an issue close to your home state on the drilling in the intercontinental shelf. can you talk about what this issue is and how it would help louisiana? guest: finally last year we were able to release the moratorium that existed, but this administration has literally block the ability to go and least some of the areas. the estimates are you got over 100 billions of barrels of oil in the shelf, 500 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. you have so much energy that

could help our country that literally is being blocked off by the federal government. we want to unleash the potential. we want to open that up. what is great about it, the states would be the to participate -- states would have the option of participating. but if the state -- they can't dissipate and revenue-sharing. in a state like louisiana, we have a constitutional amendment in our book signing any money we get from the federal government from after continental's of drilling we can use for our coast. coastal erosion, we want to read -- reduced that trend and restore our coast and is very expensive. what we used to fund it is primarily the revenue sharing we would get and this bill provides us with a fair share of revenue from out the continental shelf drilling. so we can rebuild our coast, a big environmental issue and a hurricane prevention issue

because the coast that used to exist 20 years ago would block the winds of it were not so strong. without that coast, you see the damage that storms have done even more to people in the areas where people are concentrated. coastal erosion has actually made hurricane damage worse. so we want to reverse that trend. this bill with revenue-sharing from outer continental shelf drilling actually gives us the revenue. host: 1 more question -- it seems like a lot of components increase nuclear power, exploration, and drilling in arctic national wildlife refuge in alaska. all of these issues have been debated and defeated in congress in recent years, particularly the issue of and more, and even dispute even among republicans -- anwr. why will this work now when it was rejected even when republicans were in control?

guest: first of all, i think you've seen attitudes shift, especially last year and august when you saw gasoline prices go over $4 a gallon. you saw americans across the country saying, what is congress going about actually helping us to ensure energy independence? why is it we don't have a national energy policy in a country so great as america when they saw the effects of what it did in changing their lifestyles. people cutting back on things they do day-to-day because gasoline is so expensive. while a drop of a little under $2 a gallon just a few months ago, already back creeping toward $3 a gallon. people realize we cannot just go on the roller-coaster ride. that means exploring natural resources so we are not so dependent on middle eastern oil. we can eliminate our ability to depend on the middle east for oil by using the natural resources we have here in this country. so many of those are blocked by hurdles placed here in washington.

things that we have on the books, policies that stop us from using our own resources. let's create the millions of jobs and billions of dollars of revenue we would bring in the economy just by using our own natural resources. because the debate paunch shifted so much -- because the debate shifted so much, people realized the technology has advanced a month that the things that might have hurt the environment years ago and not exist anymore because companies operate in a different way, the restrictions already in place are pretty severe and actually have led to us being able to do this in an environmentally safe way. host: us hear from callers. on the democratic line, we have jerry from north carolina. are you there? caller: congressman, a real good spiel.

question for you. why haven't we done what mr. roosevelt did in 1941 and do a thing called rationing? it seems all of you are afraid of that word, rationing. i don't know why everybody in this country cannot get along on 7 gallons a week for their registered automobiles. i can do that and pay to dollars and 50 cents a gallon and be happy, but if you want more than that, you pay $10 a gallon. don't make me pay for your bad behavior and bad driving practices. i don't think it is fair and i think you people are missing the boat with this cap and trade. the vehicles on the road are making most of the pollution. you have to start restricting the amount of gasoline you put in them. guest: first of all, i strongly disagree with your assertion is rationing something we should look at. rationing was tried in the 1970's, and you saw what led to. lines at the pump when jimmy carter literally limited

people's ability to buy gasoline and you can only buy on a survey based on your license plate. people changing license plates day today so they can buy gasoline. this is america, this is not russia, we don't need a rationing. we have their natural resources. what we need is better policies. it is the policies holding our country back. what we are trying to do is change the policies. what we can look at in cars -- especially trucks and larger vehicles -- if we shift to natural gas for those. we have trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that are just sitting underneath our soil that are pent-up because -- we have the ability, just in louisiana, the largest natural gas find was found three years ago there, and there is enough natural gas to run the entire country's needs for 10 years. and they are finding more and more of these types of places throughout the country. we've got lots of natural

resources. unfortunately there are policies in washington holding us back. host: oklahoma, jay on the republican line. caller: the morning. a couple of comments on energy use in this country -- good morning. a couple of comments. first of all back in the 1970's, you mentioned it several times this morning, after that ended, what did congress do? what did they do with cafe standards? every time someone came up and there was time for one to be enacted, what did congress do? my question is, with that history, going forward, how do we know that anything is going to be done? secondly -- i think that is something congress will have to deal with, they will have the show the public they are serious about this. because we are watching now. it is on everybody's mind. talking about natural gas, i don't think the american people

are really informed as to how natural gas can be used. when i was a boy, 16 years old, and i am over 60, i was driving tractors powered on propane, driving trucks and pickups powered by propane. i have never and all of my years heard of anyone having an accident that injured anyone with propane. we have the ability to do this. and another thing -- and i will let you go -- there is another thing about propanes that people unfamiliar with. you can change -- about propane that people are not familiar with. you can change your oil and may not have to change it for a year and you pull your dipstick out and it is as clean as it can be. guest: you touched on points that i think are important. on the policy, i am glad people are watching more what is happening in washington. last year when gas prices

exceeded $4 a gallon, i think people got very bad about the pot -- mad about the policies because they saw we don't have a real comprehensive national energy policy and in fact there are a lot of policies here in washington blocking our ability to use our own natural resources to reduce our dependence on middle eastern oil and to get a real consistent policy in place that will allow us to use natural gas and a better way. it is a much cleaner burning fuel -- that allows us to explore more nuclear capabilities that many countries use to generate power. to go look at the midwest where they have more reserves of shale than there are oil reserves in the middle east. when people have looked at this they say, wait a minute, let us go to that kind of policy. i don't think people in this country want a cap and trade and attacked where this administration is literally proposing a plan that the national association of manufacturers would run -- would

run 3 million jobs to 4 million jobs out of our country into china. that is why we presented this alternative. when you look at the american energy act, this address is comprehensively all the things we can do to utilize our natural resources here in america, to create good jobs and to create more energy that we can reduce our dependence on middle eastern oil. host: independent line. robert from washington. caller: thank you. i would ask the congressman why is it that they are a bunch of cowards in washington. they are holding the american people hostage over the energy situation and the doing nothing about. this guy is not going to do anything. he is not out there telling people the truth. he is trying to come up with a different plan. they have a different plane in washington, and that is to rob us. host: ok. guest: not sure how to respond,

but if you look at a lot of the policies, spending is out of control, we have to rein in and get fiscal discipline back. but we also need a sound energy policy, which we don't have appeared rather than more taxes, which they have been proposing all kinds of things, especially energy, we don't need to tax energy but we need to unleash the potential of the country by releasing the resource is bottled up in washington. host: robert on the democratic line. are you there? caller: yes. i have a question. what about the nuclear plants mothballed in this area and that chrysler gas turbines energy -- engine, this engine could heat your house and you could run it on water and all of a sudden this disappeared -- internal

combustion energy. it seems like anything that comes around that is that good, disappears. guest: of there are a number of technologies that and not been pushed and up -- there are a number of technologies. our bill generates billions of dollars for the federal government by opening up all of these areas, areas and the altar continental shelf that currently this administration will not least -- going into the midwest and allowing them to explore the midwest shale. by generating all of that money we are also finding alternative sources of energy, creating incentives for people to advance the technology is so we can get more wind and solar and nuclear give abilities. output host: beatrice, republican line, pipe creek, texas. caller: i have a question in a statement. are you there? host: yes. caller: the statement, i think you gentleman up there ought to pack your bags and go home.

everyone of you. you are not listening to the people, you did not care, you want to stay forever, and you are not listening. you are ruining the united states of america. we are no longer a sovereign country. the next thing is, what you going to do with nuclear waste? you just keep pounding on nuclear waste. i am in my 70's, i have seen a lot of changes over the years and i can tell you that socialistic government does not work -- if you put all of this on us, including your health care plan, you live on it, too. you don't get any perks. guest: first, beatrice, you might be mistaken but -- mistaking me for some in the leadership. i have disagreed with these policies. i voted against the bailout and the stimulus bill that spent $800 billion of money we don't have and i voted against the budget that doubles our national debt because i need -- think we need to regain responsibility. in my district what people want to see is sound fiscal policy,

but also want a comprehensive energy policy. talking about the nuclear waste from it is something we add to the address in our bill in the american energy act, which is our alternative. we actually open up yucca mountain -- right now bureaucrats in washington are blocking our ability to put the spent fuel in the mountain where the taxpayers have spent billions of dollars to build that facility to store the nuclear waste, and yet bureaucrats in washington are blocking us from using the facility that we spent billions of dollars to build. we open it up and remove the hurdles and also recycling spent fuel. in europe they recycle a great deal of their waste so you can use it to create more energy instead of having to put it in a storage facility. we are addressing that in a comprehensive way so we can change some of the policies that you think are destructive. host: she has a question about storage of nuclear waste -- yucca mountain, that has been

one of the controversial elements of energy policy. are you confident the american people -- you will have to store it somewhere. will you build new or facilities? and what your constituents want a nuclear waste facility? guest: right now every facility stores its own waste on site. everywhere where there is a facility, they are storing it on sight. so that it currently is addressed in policy. but as a long-term strategy, the country years ago decided and spent billions of taxpayers' dollars to build you come out and in nevada where the action would store all of the nuclear waste -- yet the mountain. but because of some people here in washington, not necessarily people from nevada, but people in washington stopped the facility from being opened even though billions of dollars had been spent to build it to be capable of storing that nuclear waste. what we do in our bill is remove the bureaucratic hurdles and say yucca now was a place that was decided years ago and we are

opening it up. host: melanie on the independent line. caller: can you hear me? i think mandatory reading for everyone, not only who is in politics but everyone out there is a book that i actually found out about on c-span, written -- called "green hell: how's environmentalists plan to control your life and what you can do to stop them." if you can't pick up the book, then at least look on junkscience.com, because it will help you understand the agenda of the greens, and it is pretty scary. i would like to at least help people understand that the green agenda has nothing to do with real science. thank you. guest: spain had done a study, because spain went to this kind

of cat and trade global warming plan they are trying to propose here -- cap and trade, they found after 10 years of their economy went to tatters, but what also happened is all of these green jobs that were supposed to be created, for every one job and they created, they lost 2.2 jobs in spain, and of the jobs were created, 90 percent or temporary jobs. a lot of people are saying this would create millions of jobs. it will create millions of jobs, in china, because many of our manufacturers will leave and many have testified to exactly that thing. host: jim on the democratic line from silver spring, maryland. caller: booed morning. i want to ask -- i wanted to correct him on and he said most nuclear waste is stored on site. i am originally from south carolina, so i know that is not true. the waist as far as michigan and other places was trucked to south carolina because that is

where it was being deposited. there also situations -- where they don't want nuclear waste trucked through their state. that is an understatement. guest: that act to restore it on site. caller: i happen to know about it, but if you want to debate that. guest: i have board nuclear facilities. caller: now there is not one in south carolina -- guest: i have been a nuclear facilities -- nuclear facilities and louisiana -- caller: correct? host: do you have a question? caller: republicans are set against general motors and such, the auto industry, having higher mileage on their vehicles and what not. that