[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 24, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E191-E192]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      THE CLEAN ENERGY ACT OF 2007

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                             HON. DAVE CAMP

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, January 18, 2007

  Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Madam Speaker, we all agree that reducing 
America's consumption of foreign oil and gas is important. But, sadly 
this legislation is a missed opportunity. In fact, it will likely 
increase the country's dependence on foreign fossil fuels.
  H.R. 6 will increase taxes on domestic oil and gas producers and 
place the additional Federal revenues in a fund that will pay for 
future legislation to subsidize alternative energy programs. Imposing 
higher taxes one sector of the economy that is responsible for creating 
millions of jobs and accounts for 3.5 percent of total national 
employment is nothing short of terrible economic policy. H.R. 6 is a 
recipe for layoffs, lowered U.S. investment, and higher prices at the 
pump.
  One of the main provisions in the bill is to deny tax benefits 
enacted in 2004 to oil and gas companies. The tax benefits in the 2004 
bill did not single out the oil and gas industry. In fact, the 2004 
legislation lowered the corporate tax rate for all domestic 
manufacturers. The goal of the bill was to encourage companies, from 
tool and die manufacturers to the film industry, to remain in the 
United States instead of moving operations to lower-taxed

[[Page E192]]

countries. By singling out oil and gas companies and raising their 
taxes, H.R. 6 will have the effect of encouraging them to expand 
production overseas, limit U.S. investment, and cut their American 
workforce.
  Another source of concern is the millions of Americans who invest 
their pension and retirement savings in the oil and gas sector. Many 
State and local pension funds, as well as individual stockholders, 
invest in these companies. Retirees and investors depending on high 
performing stocks will likely be negatively impacted by Congress's 
decision to single out this sector.
  I am also concerned that H.R. 6 will force companies who signed 
leases with the Federal Government in 1988 and 1999 for drilling rights 
in the Gulf of Mexico to renegotiate the terms of the contracts they 
signed. Under the Clinton administration, the Department of Interior 
failed to insert a clause in these contracts that would require firms 
to pay royalty fees when the price of oil exceeded a certain amount. 
Now, realizing the mistake, the Government has begun to renegotiate the 
leases on a voluntary basis with the affected companies. Some of them 
have agreed to begin paying royalty fees while others have not. The 
Government should continue to voluntarily negotiate with these firms. 
But, for the Government to force companies to pay new, higher fees as a 
penalty for not renegotiating legitimate contracts seems akin to what a 
Russian, Venezuelan, or Bolivian government would do.
  As a sponsor of legislation to expand tax incentives for solar energy 
and hybrid vehicles, I am committed to the improvement of energy 
conservation and new technologies. Reducing oil and gas consumption is 
important, but I do not believe H.R. 6 is not the right policy for 
achieving this objective. I urge my colleagues to resist policies like 
H.R. 6 that arbitrarily penalize American oil and gas companies and 
practically incentivize them to move operations overseas.

                          ____________________