[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 95 (Wednesday, June 23, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H4721-H4727]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
GRANTING SUBPOENA POWER TO COMMISSION INVESTIGATING BP DEEPWATER OIL
SPILL
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 5481) to give subpoena power to the National Commission on
the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5481
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SUBPOENA POWER OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE
BP ``DEEPWATER HORIZON'' OIL SPILL AND OFFSHORE
DRILLING.
(a) Subpoena Power.--The National Commission on the BP
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling established
by Executive Order No. 13543 of May 21, 2010 (in this section
referred to as the ``Commission''), may issue subpoenas to
compel the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the
production of books, records, correspondence, memoranda, and
other documents.
(b) Issuance.--
(1) Authorization.--A subpoena may be issued under this
section only by--
(A) agreement of the Co-Chairs of the Commission; or
(B) the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of
the Commission.
(2) Justice department coordination.--
(A) Notification.--The Commission shall notify the Attorney
General or his or her designee of the Commission's intent to
issue a subpoena under this section, the identity of the
witness, and the nature of the testimony sought before
issuing such a subpoena. The form and content of such notice
shall be set forth in the guidelines to be issued under
subparagraph (D).
(B) Conditions for objection to issuance.--The Commission
may not issue a subpoena under authority of this Act if the
Attorney General objects to the issuance of the subpoena on
the basis that the taking of the testimony is likely to
interfere with any--
(i) Federal or State criminal investigation or prosecution;
or
(ii) pending investigation under sections 3729 through 3732
of title 31, United States Code (commonly known as the
``Civil False Claims Act'') or other Federal statute
providing for civil remedies, or any civil litigation to
which the United States or any of its agencies is or is
likely to be a party.
(C) Notification of objection.--The Attorney General or
relevant United States Attorney shall notify the Commission
of an objection raised under this paragraph without
unnecessary delay and as set forth in the guidelines to be
issued under subparagraph (D).
(D) Guidelines.--As soon as practicable, but no later than
30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Attorney General, after consultation with the Commission,
shall issue guidelines to carry out this subsection.
(3) Signature and service.--A subpoena issued under this
section may be--
(A) issued under the signature of either Co-Chair or any
member designated by a majority of the Commission; and
(B) served by any person designated by the Co-Chairs or a
member designated by a majority of the Commission.
(c) Enforcement.--
(1) Required procedures.--In the case of contumacy of any
person issued a subpoena under this section or refusal by
such person to comply with the subpoena, the Commission shall
request the Attorney General to seek enforcement of the
subpoena. Upon such request the Attorney General shall seek
enforcement of the subpoena in a court described in paragraph
(2). The court in which the Attorney General seeks
enforcement of the subpoena shall issue an order requiring
the subpoenaed person to appear at any designated place to
testify or to produce documentary or other evidence, and may
punish any failure to obey the order as a contempt of that
court.
(2) Jurisdiction for enforcement.--Any United States
district court for a judicial district in which a person
issued a subpoena under this section resides, is served, or
may be found, or where the subpoena is returnable, shall have
jurisdiction to enforce the subpoena as provided in paragraph
(1).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Hastings) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
General Leave
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from West Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, last month President Obama issued Executive Order
13543 establishing the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon
Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling. The measure we are considering today,
introduced by our colleague, Representative Lois Capps, would authorize
the commission to issue subpoenas, if necessary, to gather information
and compel testimony.
With it, we are giving the commission some teeth. The commission
should be demanding and receiving a full and fair accounting to carry
out its important mission. Without subpoena power, the commission runs
the risk of allowing BP to write its own history of what happened in
the gulf.
As amended, H.R. 5481 includes language worked out with the Justice
Department to ensure that any commission subpoena does not interfere
with any present or future criminal investigation or prosecution or
civil litigation involving the United States.
I want to commend the bill's sponsor and a valued member of our
Committee on Natural Resources, Representative Lois Capps, a valued
member not only on our Resources Committee but in this body who has
experienced oil spills in her history as many of our colleagues are
today. Having lived through the Santa Barbara oil spill which was in
her congressional district in 1969, Representative Capps has a deep
understanding and a commitment to oil spill prevention and mitigation.
Madam Speaker, H.R. 5481 is just one of a number of actions that this
Congress will need to take to help gather information on the causes of
the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster and develop safety and environmental
measures to prevent such a disaster from occurring again.
I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 5481, a
commonsense bill that will help shed some light on what happened the
night of this tragic explosion.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, at this very moment, oil continues to flow into the
Gulf of Mexico, and the urgency to address this crisis should not be
forgotten or dismissed. It is important that we get to the bottom of
the causes of this terrible tragedy. We need to know what went wrong
and who did precisely what wrong. At the same time, we should not lose
sight of the most immediate priorities.
Those priorities are, first, the leak must be stopped. Second, the
oil must
[[Page H4722]]
be cleaned up because the livelihood of families and communities all
along the gulf coast need help and support, and the well-being of
wildlife and the environment must be cared for. And third, BP must be
held 100 percent accountable and pay all the costs associated with this
disaster.
This bill, as the distinguished chairman said, simply grants subpoena
authority to the seven-member commission established and appointed by
the President to look into the causes of the Deepwater Horizon
accident, the resulting spill, and the response.
I support this bill and the commission having subpoena power to
compel the disclosure of documents and the testimony of witnesses.
Congress has passed laws to give subpoena power to similar commissions
in the past, and it is fully appropriate to do so here.
To be clear, the authority granted in this bill allowing the
commission to issue subpoenas covers BP and the companies involved in
the drilling of this well, but it also fully covers the agencies and
departments of the Federal Government. Not only must we get to the
bottom of what these companies did and the failures that occurred, but
we also must know what failures occurred by the government in their
regulatory oversight and in responding to this spill.
{time} 1450
But there is one concern with the wording of this bill, Madam
Speaker, and the impact that it could have in prolonging the work of
the commission beyond its 6-month timeframe set out by the President.
The bill allows the Attorney General to object to the commission
issuing subpoenas for certain specified situations. Those situations
are when criminal investigations and certain civil litigation may be
harmed by the taking of testimony. That's understandable, Madam
Speaker. Under the wording of the bill, however, the Attorney General
must act to make known such an objection to a commission's subpoena
``without unnecessary delay.'' This vague term places no real time
frame on the Attorney General to act.
When the commission itself is supposed to complete its work within
180 days of its first meeting, an open-ended delay that could occur due
to the inaction of the Attorney General must be highlighted. This is
particularly important, Madam Speaker, because the administration has
partly justified its deepwater drilling moratorium upon allowing the
commission to complete its investigation.
Under the way this bill is drafted, the moratorium--which I might add
suffered a serious legal blow yesterday by a Federal judge in
Louisiana--could drag on much longer than publicly promised by the
President. The economic toll that a prolonged commission and a
prolonged deepwater moratorium could have on the economy of the gulf
and the jobs of tens of thousands is very, very real. A stricter
timeline for the Attorney General to review subpoenas could have
prevented such a scenario. This was not done, and there is no
opportunity, obviously, to offer amendments to this suspension bill. So
Madam Speaker, I raise this as an issue because the Commission and the
Attorney General need to be diligent to avoid such a scenario.
This oil spill has unleashed a tragedy on the people and the
environment in the gulf, but the Federal Government must not take
actions that exacerbate this tragedy by not completing their work in a
timely manner. The power to issue subpoenas is necessary to the
commission's technical abilities to do their investigative work, but I
must point out that questions are being raised about the seven persons
selected and appointed by the President to his commission. So Madam
Speaker, I would like to enter into the Record a selection of three
pieces covering the commission.
The first is an Associated Press article entitled, ``Obama Spill
Panel Big on Policy, Not Engineering.'' Another news article from The
Times-Picayune entitled, ``Oil Spill Commission Coordinator Has
Represented Environmental Groups.'' And third, a Wall Street Journal
editorial entitled, ``The Antidrilling Commission: The White House
choices seem to have made up their minds.''
The questions posed in these pieces and in other venues include: Do
the past statements made and positions taken by several commission
members in opposition to expanded offshore drilling affect their
ability to act fairly and impartially? Will the general lack of
engineering expertise among the commission members hinder their ability
to fully grasp and get to the bottom of what happened in this accident?
Will the absence of any drilling expertise among all seven commission
members affect their pace of work or understanding of the matters they
are charged with investigating? Will the pro cap-and-trade positions of
several commission members transform this from an investigation into
what went wrong with this incident into a pitch for a national energy
tax? Will the commission's report ultimately be credible to all or be
compromised due to the personal perspective of the members that the
President appointed? Madam Speaker, only time will answer these
questions.
I hope the commission is able to fully and fairly conduct its
investigation into this incident and the government's response to it.
We do need to know what went wrong so that reforms can be made to
ensure American drilling is the safest in the world. We've got to have
the facts in order to develop informed, effective solutions to make
certain an accident like this never happens again.
So, Madam Speaker, the President's commission isn't the only entity
looking into these questions. Congress too has a responsibility, and
Congress should act when the facts are known. As subpoena power is
necessary for this commission to undertake its work, I encourage my
colleagues to support this bill.
[From the Associated Press]
Obama Spill Panel Big on Policy, Not Engineering
(By Seth Borenstein)
Washington.--The panel appointed by President Barack Obama
to investigate the Gulf of Mexico oil spill is short on
technical expertise but long on talking publicly about
``America's addiction to oil.'' One member has blogged about
it regularly.
Only one of the seven commissioners, the dean of Harvard's
engineering and applied sciences school, has a prominent
engineering background--but it's in optics and physics.
Another is an environmental scientist with expertise in
coastal areas and the after-effects of oil spills. Both are
praised by other scientists.
The five other commissioners are experts in policy and
management.
The White House said the commission will focus on the
government's ``too cozy'' relationship with the oil industry.
A presidential spokesman said panel members will ``consult
the best minds and subject matter experts'' as they do their
work.
The commission has yet to meet, yet some panel members had
made their views known.
Environmental activist Frances Beinecke on May 27 blogged:
``We can blame BP for the disaster and we should. We can
blame lack of adequate government oversight for the disaster
and we should. But in the end, we also must place the blame
where it originated: America's addiction to oil.'' And on
June 3, May 27, May 22, May 18, May 4, she called for bans on
drilling offshore and the Arctic.
``Even as questions persist, there is one thing I know for
certain: the Gulf oil spill isn't just an accident. It's the
result of a failed energy policy,'' Beinecke wrote on May 20.
Two other commissioners also have gone public to urge bans
on drilling.
Co-chairman Bob Graham, a Democrat who was Florida governor
and later a senator, led efforts to prevent drilling off his
state's coast. Commissioner Donald Boesch of the University
of Maryland wrote in a Washington Post blog that the federal
government had planned to allow oil drilling off the Virginia
coast and ``that probably will and should be delayed.''
Boesch, who has made scientific assessments of oil spills'
effects on the ecosystem, said usually oil spills are small.
But he added, ``The impacts of the oil and gas extraction
industry (both coastal and offshore) on Gulf Coast wetlands
represent an environmental catastrophe of massive and
underappreciated proportions.''
An expert not on the commission, Granger Morgan, head of
the engineering and public policy department at Carnegie
Mellon University and an Obama campaign contributor, said the
panel should have included more technical expertise and
``folks who aren't sort of already staked out'' on oil
issues.
Jerry Taylor of the libertarian Cato Institute described
the investigation as ``an exercise in political theater where
the findings are preordained by the people put on the
commission.''
When the White House announced the commission, Interior
Secretary Ken Salazar and others made compared it with the
one that investigated the 1986 Challenger accident. This one,
however, doesn't have as many technical experts.
The 13-member board that looked into the first shuttle
accident had seven engineering
[[Page H4723]]
and aviation experts and three other scientists. The 2003
board that looked into the Columbia shuttle disaster also had
more than half of the panel with expertise in engineering and
aviation.
Iraj Ersahaghi, who heads the petroleum engineering program
the University of Southern California, reviewed the names of
oil spill commissioners and asked, ``What do they know about
petroleum?''
Ersahaghi said the panel needed to include someone like Bob
Bea, a prominent petroleum engineering professor at the
University of California, Berkeley, who's an expert in
offshore drilling and the management causes of manmade
disasters.
Bea, who's conducting his own investigation into the spill,
told The Associated Press that his 66-member expert group
will serve as a consultant to the commission, at the request
of the panel's co-chairman, William K. Reilly, Environmental
Protection Agency chief under President George H.W. Bush.
Adm. Hal Gehman, who oversaw the Columbia accident panel,
said his advice to future commissions is to include subject
matter experts. His own expertise was management and policy
but said his engineering-oriented colleagues were critical to
sorting through official testimony.
``Don't believe the first story; it's always more
complicated than they (the people testifying) would like you
to believe,'' Gehman said. ``Complex accidents have complex
causes.''
The oil spill commission will not be at a loss for
technical help, White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said.
For one, he said the panel will draw on a technical
analysis that the National Association of Engineering is
performing. Also, members will ``consult the best minds and
subject matter experts in the Gulf, in the private sector, in
think tanks and in the federal government as they conduct
their research.''
That makes sense, said John Marburger, who was science
adviser to President George W. Bush.
``It's not really a technical commission,'' Marburger said.
``It's a commission that's more oriented to understanding the
regulatory and organizational framework, which clearly has a
major bearing on the incident.''
____
[From Times-Picayune, Tuesday, June 22, 2010]
Oil Spill Commission Coordinator Has Represented Environmental Groups
(By Bruce Alpert)
The commission created by President Barack Obama to
investigate the Gulf of Mexico oil spill appointed a
Georgetown University environmental law professor Tuesday as
its executive staff director.
Bob Graham, a Democrat, and William Reilly, a Republican,
lead the seven-member commission to investigate the Gulf of
Mexico oil spill.
Richard Lazarus, a graduate of Harvard University Law
School where he was the roommate of Supreme Court Chief
Justice John Roberts, has been given the task of coordinating
the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
and Offshore Drilling, which will determine what new
regulations will govern future deepwater drilling operations.
The appointment was announced by the commission's co-chairs
Bob Graham, a former Democratic governor and U.S. senator
from Florida, and Republican William Reilly, a former
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator.
The Obama administration established a six-month moratorium
on deepwater drilling to give the seven-member commission
time to make recommendations, although a federal judge in New
Orleans issued a temporary injunction Tuesday to block the
order, saying it lacked justification and was doing economic
harm to businesses and workers.
Reilly told the New York Times Monday that the panel won't
meet until mid-July and probably won't complete its
recommendations until early next year, signaling that, if an
appeals court reverses the temporary injunction, the
moratorium well be extended past the six-month deadline.
Lazarus, a former associate solicitor general, has
represented the United States, state and local governments
and environmental groups in 37 cases before the U.S. Supreme
Court.
His primary areas of legal scholarship are environmental
and natural resources law. For the past three summers, he has
taught a course on Supreme Court history with his old
roommate, Chief Justice Roberts.
``As staff director I would expect him to be exceedingly
thorough, ask a lot of questions, seek probative answers, and
reduce the chaos of the unknown to manageable proportions,''
said Oliver Houck, who teaches environmental law at Tulane
University and co-authored a book with Lazarus. ``I also
expect him, as a lawyer and former associate solicitor, to be
quite aware that he is a staff member and aide and not a
decision-maker.''
His appointment, though, led some to question whether the
commission is too heavily weighted with those who favor
strong environmental regulation and have been critical of the
oil industry.
``The vast majority of those on the oil spill commission,
as well as the staff, appear to have a predisposed bias
against drilling, and it appears their conclusions will be
based more on politics than on safety, which is
disappointing,'' Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson, said.
But White House spokeswoman Moira Mack said the commission
has ``broad and diverse representation,'' including
environmentalists, academics, scientists, a former EPA
administrator and former governor and senator.
``The National Association of Engineering is conducting a
technical analysis that the commission will draw upon,'' she
said. ``The commission will consult with the best minds and
subject matter experts in the Gulf, in the private sector, in
think tanks and in the federal government as they conduct
their research.''
The oil and gas industry needs a thorough examination, Mack
said.
``There's no doubt that Minerals Management Service has
been too cozy with the oil and gas industry and there are
many instances in which it has allowed the industry to
dictate regulations,'' Mack said. ``No more. The commission
will bring a set of fresh eyes to conduct a top to bottom
review of offshore drilling regulation and the assumptions
that have guided it, to ensure that the BP Deepwater Horizon
Spill will never be repeated.''
Obama has asked Congress to provide $15 million to finance
the commission's work.
Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said she wasn't surprised when
Reilly said the commission won't be able to meet the six-
month deadline established by Obama. She said that federal
commissions ``often extend their timeline, and their
jurisdiction,'' though she said it's important the panel
complete its work fairly and expeditiously.
____
[From the Wall Street Journal, June 22, 2010]
The Antidrilling Commission
The President has appointed a seven-person commission to
take what he says will be an objective look at what caused
the Gulf spill and the steps to make offshore drilling safe.
But judging from the pedigree of his commissioners, we're
beginning to wonder if his real goal is to turn drilling into
a partisan election issue.
Mr. Obama filled out his commission last week, and the news
is that there's neither an oil nor drilling expert in the
bunch. Instead, he's loaded up on politicians and
environmental activists.
One co-chair is former Democratic Senator Bob Graham, who
fought drilling off Florida throughout his career. The other
is William Reilly, who ran the Environmental Protection
Agency under President George H.W. Bush but is best known as
a former president and former chairman of the World Wildlife
Fund, one of the big environmental lobbies. The others:
Donald Boesch, a University of Maryland ``biological
oceanographer,'' who has opposed drilling off the Virginia
coast and who argued that ``the impacts of the oil and gas
extraction industry . . . on Gulf Coast wetlands represent an
environmental catastrophe of massive and underappreciated
proportions.''
Terry Garcia, an executive vice president at the National
Geographic Society, who directed coastal programs in the
Clinton Administration, in particular ``recovery of
endangered species, habitat conservation planning,'' and
``Clean Water Act implementation,'' according to the White
House press release.
Fran Ulmer, Chancellor of the University of Alaska
Anchorage, who is a member of the Aspen Institute's
Commission on Arctic Climate Change. She's also on the board
of the Union of Concerned Scientists, which opposes nuclear
power and more offshore drilling and wants government
policies ``that reduce vehicle miles traveled'' (i.e.,
driving in cars).
Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources
Defense Council, who prior to her appointment blogged about
the spill this way: ``We can blame BP for the disaster and we
should. We can blame lack of adequate government oversight
for the disaster and we should. But in the end, we also must
place blame where it originated: America's addiction to
oil.''
On at least five occasions since the accident, Ms. Beinecke
has called for bans on offshore and Arctic drilling.
Rounding out the panel is its lone member with an
engineering background, Harvard's Cherry A. Murray, though
her specialties are physics and optics.
Whatever their other expertise, none of these worthies
knows much if anything about petroleum engineering. Where is
the expert on modern drilling techniques, or rig safety, or
even blowout preventers?
The choice of men and women who are long opposed to more
drilling suggests not a fair technical inquiry but an
antidrilling political agenda. With the elections approaching
and Democrats down in the polls, the White House is looking
to change the subject from health care, the lack of jobs and
runaway deficits. Could the plan be to try to wrap drilling
around the necks of Republicans, arguing that it was years of
GOP coziness with Big Oil that led to the spill?
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel took this theme for
a test drive on Sunday when he said that Republicans think
``the aggrieved party here is BP, not the fisherman.'' He
added that this ought to remind Americans ``what Republican
governance is like.'' The antidrilling commission could feed
into this campaign narrative with a mid-September, pre-
election report that blames the disaster on the industry and
Bush-era regulators and recommends a ban on most offshore
exploration. The media
[[Page H4724]]
would duly salute, while Democrats could then take the
handoff and force antidrilling votes on Capitol Hill.
Even as this commission moves forward, engineering experts
across the country have agreed that there is no scientific
reason for a blanket drilling ban. The Interior Department
invited experts to consult on drilling practices, but as we
wrote last week eight of them have since said their advice
was distorted to justify the Administration's six-month
drilling moratorium.
Judging from that decision and now from Mr. Obama's
drilling commission, the days of ``science taking a back seat
to ideology'' are very much with us.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
I appreciate the gentleman's listing and submitting for the Record
the backgrounds of this commission appointed by the President. I will
not at this time, although I almost feel compelled to, ask for
submission into the Record the financial and political background of
the Federal judge that just issued a decision against the
administration's moratoria this week, but I won't do that; nor the fact
that the commission had some 150 scientists at their disposal as well,
but I won't submit their backgrounds and history at this time.
Instead, I will yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from California
(Mrs. Capps).
Mrs. CAPPS. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this
legislation to give the National Commission on the BP Oil Spill the
power to issue subpoenas.
I want to thank three chairmen--Chairman Rahall, Chairman Oberstar
and Chairman Conyers--for expediting the consideration of my bill, and
I really appreciate the tireless effort of Chairman Markey, who has
worked with me on this bill and our earlier bill which was the basis
for the President's order to set up the commission in the first place.
I also appreciate the Speaker and the majority leader for bringing H.R.
5481 before us today.
As we witness the continued destruction affecting the livelihood of
gulf residents and the environment, a full and thorough investigation
must be conducted. The American people want answers from those
responsible for the devastating gulf oil spill. Providing subpoena
power to the commission will ensure that no stone goes unturned, and it
will enable the American people to get the truth about how and why this
disaster occurred.
While the President has committed the full cooperation of the Federal
Government to the commission, he does not have the authority to give it
subpoena power; congressional action is required. With the
investigation expected to start soon, it's vital the commission has the
tools and the resources it needs to get the job done.
As I've said repeatedly on the House floor, oil drilling is never
without risk, but if we're going to make it as safe as possible, we
need to provide the commission with every means available to find out
exactly what caused the BP disaster so we can do everything possible to
prevent such a disaster from ever happening again. Arming the
commission with subpoena power will help us accomplish these goals and
will help the affected communities to recover.
Madam Speaker, the need for subpoena power is certainly indicated by
BP's wholly unsatisfactory response to this crisis. Unlike the gush of
oil, BP has tightly controlled the flow of information following its
spill. It has regularly stonewalled requests by Members of Congress,
independent researchers, and the public to provide accurate and timely
information.
BP has failed to tell us the amount of oil it's spilling into the
gulf waters every day. BP has failed to provide health and safety data
to the public, to the scientists, and the Federal Government. And BP
has failed to prepare for the capture of all the oil being siphoned up
from the well. Simply put, BP's behavior raises major doubts about its
willingness to provide a full accounting of what went wrong when they
appear before the commission.
The only way to get the information we all need from BP, Transocean,
Halliburton and other private entities is for the commission to have
the power to compel its disclosure. The commission just won't be able
to do its work without complete access to the information it needs. So
passing this bill is the appropriate and responsible thing to do. It's
also consistent with Federal commission investigations that followed
previous disasters, such as that on Three Mile Island.
Madam Speaker, the people of the Gulf of Mexico and the Nation
deserve an explanation for all the circumstances and the decisions that
led up to this disaster. Only a comprehensive, independent review with
subpoena power will ensure the necessary lessons to be learned,
practices changed, and future disasters averted.
So I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important
legislation. Subpoena power is critical to hold all the parties
accountable, protect taxpayers, and successfully clean up the disaster
in the gulf.
{time} 1500
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, how much time remains on
both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 13 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from West Virginia has 14 minutes
remaining.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. At this time, Madam Speaker, I am very
pleased to yield 5 minutes to a member of the Natural Resources
Committee, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).
Mr. FLEMING. I thank the gentleman from Washington for the time.
Madam Speaker, I stand in favor of H.R. 5481, which gives subpoena
power to the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
and Offshore Drilling.
As we stand here today, oil is still pouring into the Gulf of Mexico
off the coast of Louisiana, and 242 miles of Louisiana shoreline are
impacted by this oil. The highest priority for us must be to stop this
leak and to get this mess cleaned up. BP must be held 100 percent
accountable for their actions, and the administration must be
accountable for their role in the response and oversight. Many
questions are still without answers, the most pressing being what went
wrong.
The bill we have before us today would provide subpoena power to the
National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore
Drilling. This commission has been tasked by the President with
providing recommendations on how we can prevent and mitigate the impact
of any future spills that result from offshore drilling. Future
tragedies that we are currently experiencing can only be prevented if
we know what went wrong. We must find out who made the mistakes, who
made the erroneous judgment, what failed, and just exactly what went
wrong.
I will also interject, Madam Speaker, that, in operations like this,
there are many backup systems; there are many redundancies. So, for a
tragedy and a disaster like this to happen, there had to be gross error
and gross negligence. This sort of thing just doesn't happen out of
whole cloth.
I will support the bill today, but I share the concerns raised by my
colleagues on the scope of the subpoena authority. I will voice my own
concern and will urge Congress, this commission, and the administration
to keep their eye on the ball to resolve the crisis affecting my State
and our country and not to use this as an opportunity to advance an
agenda, to shut down offshore drilling, or to impose a national energy
tax.
The people of Louisiana have been hurt enough by BP's failures and by
the inability of the administration to timely and effectively deal with
this disaster. The last thing we need is the Federal Government's
adding to this disaster by crippling one of the largest economic
drivers in my State of Louisiana. The moratorium imposed by the
administration would do just that. A Federal judge recently temporarily
stayed the moratorium, affirming that it would cause irreparable harm.
Any action by the administration, by this commission, and by this
Congress must be based on science and not politics. Let's get the
answers to what happened in order to stop the oil, to clean up the
gulf, and to help Louisiana.
Also, I want to point out a couple of things on this bill about the
actors in this situation. First of all, I want to say that I condemn BP
and its actions. It is very clear that BP was negligent, if not
criminal, in its actions by putting profits ahead of safety.
[[Page H4725]]
Let's talk about the administration for a moment. The administration
failed to address well-known problems with the Minerals Management
Service even well into the first 18 months of the administration. It
held off high-volume skimmers from other countries that were offered
within 3 days of the disaster. They barely acknowledged the spill for 9
days. They did not give permission for berm construction for almost 60
days in my home State of Louisiana. They repeatedly stopped emergency
cleanup operations for trivial or unknown reasons, and that is
happening even today. They repeatedly slapped moratoria, as I mentioned
before, on offshore drilling that is over 500 feet, which is not,
truly, deep water, and when all of the experts on this panel said that
it was perfectly safe to do so.
I would like to say there is one silver lining in this entire
situation, and that is my own Governor, Governor Jindal. Governor
Jindal has been standing point each day in this process, doing
everything that a Governor should do and must do while our President is
on the golf course and while, of course, the CEO of BP is out on a
yacht.
So I just want to say, in summary, Madam Speaker, that I do support
H.R. 5481. This is one step in many toward finding out what happened
here. We do need subpoena power to find out every bit of this, which
will be going on for years, but so will the cleanup and so will the
impact on my State of Louisiana, which at this point means that our
tourism industry and our fisheries will be devastated, and now that the
moratorium is shutting down 33 rigs, it is devastating our economy and
our jobs.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I thank the chairman very much. I thank
him for his excellent work and for his timely hearings on this
catastrophic event.
I thank the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) for her
excellent work on this indispensable piece of legislation and for
working together in a bipartisan fashion with the minority to ensure
that we have an historically accurate assessment of what has happened
in the Gulf of Mexico.
Madam Speaker, President Obama established a bipartisan National
Commission to investigate the causes of the BP disaster through
Executive order. However, the President does not have the authority to
give the commission subpoena power. That requires the Congress to act.
BP's response continues to be marked by catastrophic failures. Just
today, an accident with an underwater recovery at the bottom of the sea
has forced BP to remove the containment cap, and oil is now gushing
into the ocean at a rate of 25,000 to 50,000 barrels per day. BP's
mistakes seem to be without end.
BP said the rig couldn't sink. It did. BP said they could respond to
an Exxon Valdez-sized spill every day. They couldn't. BP initially
claimed that the oil spill was 1,000 barrels a day. It wasn't. BP knew
it. Internal BP documents show that, in the first week of the disaster,
BP estimated the size of the spill could be as high as 14,000 barrels
per day. It took BP 23 days to finally agree to release video footage
of the oil spill. Even then, BP initially only released video of one of
the 12 remote operating vehicles on the ocean floor.
All along, it seems that BP has been much more concerned about its
own liability--they pay a fine per barrel of oil per day--than they
have been with the livability of the Gulf of Mexico and with the
livelihoods of the people who are dependent upon the Gulf of Mexico for
their livings.
BP's actions raise significant concerns about whether it will fully
cooperate with the commission. We need to ensure that neither BP,
Halliburton, Transocean nor any other party could prevent the
commission from getting to the bottom of what went wrong at the bottom
of the ocean on April 20, 2010, when the Deepwater Horizon exploded.
Congress has granted subpoena power to Presidential commissions
investigating national crises in the past, including the Kemeny
Commission, which investigated the disaster at Three Mile Island, and
the 9/11 Commission.
As the worst environmental disaster in our Nation's history continues
to unfold in the gulf, the American people and the people of the gulf
coast deserve answers so that we can prevent similar disasters in the
future. This legislation will ensure that the National Commission has
the power it needs to get those answers for the American people.
We have to make sure that this never happens again. We have to make
sure that the lessons learned are implemented. If the oil industry is
going to drill in ultradeep waters, we have to ensure that it is
ultrasafe and that there is an ultrafast response that can, in fact,
ensure that there is a minimization of the harm done to the residents
of the gulf. Every oil company now says they have no capacity to
respond ultrafast to a catastrophic event the size of what is happening
in the gulf right now. We have to make sure that none of this occurs
again. Only with the subpoena power can we understand everything that
happened--only with the passage of that today.
Again, I urge all Members to cast an ``aye'' vote.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, may I inquire again as to
how much time remains on both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 8 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from West Virginia has 9\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
{time} 1510
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4
minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Cassidy), a member of the
Natural Resources Committee.
Mr. CASSIDY. Madam Speaker, it's been 64 days since the Deepwater
Horizon exploded, sank, killed 11 rig workers, and began spilling oil
into the Gulf of Mexico. So I think we all agree that, first and
foremost, we must stop the leak, clean up the spill, protect our coast,
and hold BP accountable for damages.
Next, though, we've got to get to the bottom of what happened. And
like my colleague just said, if we're going to go ultra-deep, make sure
that it's ultra-safe. Now, for that to happen, we have to know the
facts--a detailed account informed by understanding of what did take
place, and then put in these ultra-safe safety and enforcement measures
to make the United States the safest place to drill to get the
resources to power our economy.
Now this was supposed to be the purpose of the National Oil Spill
Commission. Instead, the members of this do not appear to be up to the
challenge. Instead of appointing independent experts with knowledge and
expertise of deepwater drilling, the President has packed the
commission with people who lack expertise in the issues we're
confronting.
First, let me say, Madam Speaker, I am for this commission having
subpoena power. I am for them learning as much as they can learn. My
concern is they do not have the members capable of understanding what
they need to understand. There are no petroleum engineers in this
commission, nor anyone else with experience in deepwater drilling.
Now, if you're going to have a commission to figure out what went
wrong in a petroleum engineering circumstance in deepwater drilling,
you need members who have expertise in those issues. And if we don't
learn from this, if we don't figure out how not to repeat these
mistakes, then we're dooming ourselves to either repeat these accidents
or to have an energy future which is far less secure.
Now, Candidate Obama pledged to put science before politics, but it
appears the President is rejecting science and professional expertise
in responding to this. He recently imposed a moratorium that his
handpicked experts said should not be put in place. These experts
stated this moratorium ``will have a lasting impact on the Nation's
economy which may be greater than that of the oil spill.'' They
specifically said that the moratorium should not be blanket, but rather
targeted to those rigs at risk.
Madam Speaker, I speak as someone from Louisiana. We have over
150,000 jobs at stake here. These are jobs in the energy production
field, fisheries, wetlands, and our ecosytem. At stake is not only
these jobs, though, but the
[[Page H4726]]
ability of our country to provide the energy we need to power our
vehicles and our businesses, to provide jobs, in a sense, to make our
economy go.
Now, this spill is a disaster for the gulf coast and especially for
my State. The citizens have had their lives and livelihoods upended by
this spill, but the commission we're debating here today is a
disappointment. To get to the bottom of what happened, we need people
who are up to the task. We need to put science before politics for the
sake of the gulf, our Nation, and for those whose jobs are at risk.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Holt), a member of our Committee on Natural Resources.
Mr. HOLT. I thank the chair of our committee for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5481, which Mrs. Capps has
brought before us, that would grant subpoena powers to the Presidential
Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. Our Nation is in the
midst of a great environmental disaster of historic scale--tens of
thousands of barrels gushing into the gulf, hundreds of miles of coast
line contaminated, thousands of people suffering from the economic
impact. With today's news that the cap has been removed, this
environmental catastrophe continues only to get worse.
BP has not been forthcoming over the past months--not forthcoming in
what they were doing or how it was done or how much oil was gushing out
and on and on and on. We owe it to the American people that they have
an answer for what has happened; why it has happened; how it will be
brought under control; what actions are being taken to prevent future
spills. We can't let corporate prevarication and delay and feigned
ignorance stand in the way.
I support the President's action in creating a commission to
determine the answers to these questions. And as the commission begins
to investigate the spill in the coming weeks, we must ensure that it
has the tools necessary to succeed. Granting the commission subpoena
powers will ensure that they undertake a complete inquiry on the causes
of the spill and make meaningful recommendations on how to prevent
similar disasters. I urge support.
I also want to point out that we need to ensure that the responsible
parties are held accountable for the economic damages they've caused.
The Big Oil Bailout Prevention Act, which has the support of nearly a
fifth of this body, would raise the liability limit for economic
damages from the laughably small $75 million. It's my hope that
Congress will also act on this important legislation in the near
future.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), a member of the
Energy and Commerce Committee.
Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the legislation to give subpoena
powers to the commission. I would hope the commission would be an
objective commission that actually looks into and helps us find out
just what went wrong because I think we all need to know what went
wrong on that rig to lead to the explosion that, unfortunately, took
the lives of 11 people and has led to not only this human loss but this
environmental loss.
I would hope that they would be objective in their deliberations. I
think I do have concerns that some of the members appear to maybe come
to this with a predisposed outcome. And they would be well served and
the country would be well served if they put their political agendas on
the side and actually focused on finding out what went wrong and coming
up with real recommendations.
Now, if we look at the legislation not only here before us but also
some of the problems we're dealing with on the ground, we continue to
have problems and we seem to be spending more of our time fighting
against this administration rather than fighting the oil because we're
not getting the leadership we need from the President. Just yesterday,
the sand barrier plan brought forward by our Governor that the
President himself bragged about helping approve last week was stopped,
halted by the Federal Government. Yet again, this kind of
administrative red tape is something that's holding us back from
properly responding to this disaster.
But if you look at what's happening with this ban on drilling in
general, Secretary Salazar had initially put a commission together to
come up with recommendations. They had a 30-day report that they
issued. And these were scientists that were put together on
recommendation by the National Academy of Engineers, and they came up
with some solid recommendations to improve safety; but they opposed a
ban on drilling. Unfortunately, Secretary Salazar set that ruling on
the side, set that report on the side, and ignored the reports of
scientists and put politics over safety and science and went forward
with the ban that yesterday a judge ruled was not legal, not proper.
And so as this commission moves forward, I would hope that they would
actually follow the rule of law and come up with objective decisions.
But I think the Secretary would be well served and the President would
be well served to go back to the report that was issued by his own
scientific panel that came up with suggestions to improve safety on
rigs without shutting down an entire industry.
Unfortunately, the President and the Secretary continue to set those
kinds of scientific recommendations on the side and allow politics to
trump the science by continuing to pursue this ban, even though the
judge said that their decision was arbitrary and capricious; that they
did not have the legal authority to have a complete ban on drilling. In
fact, the scientists recommended and suggested that a complete ban, as
this moratorium that's in effect would currently have, would actually
decrease safety on rigs.
So, again, I would urge the President and the Secretary to go back
and read that report and follow the recommendations of his own
scientists.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Capps), the sponsor of the pending resolution.
{time} 1520
Mrs. CAPPS. I thank the chairman for recognizing me.
I just want to give some information about the nature of the
commission for the Record and to clear up some misinformation that
apparently is being circulated. The truth is that the commission is not
designed to be technical in nature. It is more oriented to
understanding the regulatory and organizational framework, which
clearly has a major bearing on the incident.
The commission is going to consult the very best minds and subject
matter experts as they do their work. The commission members bring
expertise in a range of relevant fields, from oil drilling to
engineering to environmental science. The appointment of the commission
is another step from the Obama administration to hold the oil industry
accountable by ensuring that independent experts review the facts of
the spill and recommend necessary environmental and safety precautions
to address this disaster and to prevent future disasters. At the
request of co-chair William Riley, there is a 66-member expert panel
led by Robert Bea that will serve as a consultant to the commission.
These technical experts are critical to sorting through all of the
information that's presented, and the commission is required to draw on
the technical analysis that the National Association of Engineering is
currently performing.
I just want to add that Congress is also providing oversight on
efforts to contain the spill and to mitigate the devastation. There are
thorough investigations into what led to this tragedy, with dozens of
House hearings in the past 2 weeks alone in order to hold responsible
parties accountable, as well as to inform what changes must be made so
that it never happens again. Although Republican leaders have scoffed
at these efforts, Democrats will continue to provide the necessary
oversight to hold responsible parties accountable and to ensure that
every measure is taken to ensure that a disaster like this never occurs
again.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1
minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Madam Speaker, let us note that this catastrophe
could well have been avoided in a number of ways. What we are talking
about
[[Page H4727]]
now is the fact that standards that already are in place were not
followed, and we had best practices that, of course, are required of
the industry that were not being followed. And I think we're going to
find that out. So the last thing we want to do is cripple the United
States' production of domestic energy in order to find out and hold a
certain group of people accountable for the fact that they did not
follow the practices or the standards.
But let's put it this way: Congress has not done its job as well. We
have spent billions of dollars on research and development for the
Department of Energy. That money has been channeled into nonsense, like
proving global warming rather than spending some money--which we have--
spending money on research and development to make the technology that
we need to have safe oil and gas production, which our country
currently depends upon for our standard of living.
So we haven't done our job here. We haven't set our priorities here.
And on top of that, we did not develop the technology necessary to deal
with a spill of this magnitude. Kevin Costner came to our office and
testified at a hearing. He's put his own money into this. So we need to
set our own priorities. We need to deal with this crisis.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, this commission is necessary so the commission has
subpoena power. I think everybody understands that and supports that.
But we need to do the three things that I had mentioned earlier. And
that is to cap the well, to clean up all of the oil that has spilled
out, and to hold BP accountable. Those things I think have very, very
strong bipartisan support.
The only issue is what has been addressed a few times at least from
my perspective and in print about the objectivity of this commission.
And of course, Madam Speaker, we all know that only time will tell when
that judgment will be made. But if they work in an objective way, look
at the facts, and come to a decision based on the facts rather than a
political point of view, I think we'll all be better served by that.
And with that, I urge support of this legislation.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.
5481, as amended, to give subpoena power to the National Commission on
the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling.
On April 20, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon, a mobile offshore drilling
unit (MODU) operating in the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana, suffered a
blowout and an uncontrollable release of gas and oil. This touched off
an explosion and fire that claimed the lives of 11 men, injured many
others, and resulted in the loss of the rig.
This casualty has also resulted in the release of millions of gallons
of gas and oil into the Gulf of Mexico, the destruction of critical
shoreline and ocean habitats, impacts to the health of potentially
hundreds of workers engaged in the clean up, and catastrophic economic
losses that will not be known for some time for the people of the Gulf
Coast region. Gas and oil continue to gush out of control from the well
nearly 65 days since the explosion.
On May 22, President Obama issued Executive Order 13543 to establish
the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling Commission.
The Commission's mission is to:
1. examine the facts and circumstances concerning the Deepwater
Horizon oil spill disaster;
2. develop options for preventing and mitigating the impact of oil
spills associated with offshore drilling including: improvements to
Federal laws, regulations, and industry practices and reforms to
federal agencies; and
3. submit a public report to the President with findings and options
for consideration within six months of the Commission's first meeting.
There are many serious questions that need to be answered surrounding
this catastrophe. The President's Executive Order establishes a
framework for pursuing these questions and providing needed policy
improvements regarding offshore oil drilling. However, the Commission
lacks a critical tool: subpoena power.
Unfortunately, it is in the interests of certain parties to withhold
important information, rather than to provide it voluntarily. I know
from our own oversight work on the Committee that subpoena power is
absolutely necessary to identify and to get the information required to
make better policies and to protect public health, the environment, and
to prevent the mistakes of the past. For the Commission to fulfill its
critical mission, it must have the power to compel parties to provide
it with information. Congress has provided similar powers to prior
commissions and provided this same investigatory power to the Offices
of Inspector General pursuant to the Inspector General Act of 1978.
The gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) has introduced
legislation (H.R. 5481) to ensure that the BP Deepwater Horizon
Commission has the ability to pursue critical questions and lines of
inquiry wherever they may lead. The bill allows the Commission to issue
subpoenas to compel the attendance and testimony of witnesses, and
produce records and correspondence, among other items.
Passage of this legislation will give the BP Deep Horizon Oil Spill
and Offshore Drilling Commission a central tool that it needs to get to
the truth.
I thank the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps) for introducing
this important bill and for her unwavering commitment to this issue.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 5481.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RAHALL. I yield back the balance of my time, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5481, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________