Congressional Record, Volume 157 Issue 63 (Tuesday, May 10, 2011)

[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 63 (Tuesday, May 10, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H3120-H3126]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

PUTTING THE GULF OF MEXICO BACK TO WORK ACT

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 245 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1229.

{time} 1601

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 1229) to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to
facilitate the safe and timely production of American energy resources
from the Gulf of Mexico, with Mr. Womack in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) and the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Holt) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. LAMBORN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, families and businesses across the country are
struggling with skyrocketing gasoline prices that in many places have
already passed $4 per gallon. Everyday activities, such as commuting to
work or taking the kids to soccer practice, have strained family
budgets, forcing Americans to make tough choices and sacrifices.
Unfortunately, rising gasoline prices are not the only energy crisis
currently hurting our country. For over a year, communities along the
Gulf of Mexico have suffered through a real and then de facto
moratorium on offshore drilling imposed by the Obama administration.
The administration's intentional slow-walking of drilling permits has
cost 12,000 jobs according to their own estimates. According to
economist Dr. Joseph Mason, this could cost over 36,000 jobs nationwide
if businesses and their employees are not allowed to return to work
soon. Over the past month, the Natural Resources Committee has heard
from numerous small businesses in Louisiana that have had to lay off
hundreds of people, eliminate benefits and diminish their savings just
to try to stay afloat.
The bill being considered by the House today will help address all of
these concerns. It will put the people and businesses along the gulf
back to work by requiring the administration to act on new drilling
permits in a timely manner. For Americans across the country who are
suffering from rising gasoline prices, this bill acts now to expand
American production to help lower costs. H.R. 1229, the Putting the
Gulf Back to Work Act, sets a firm time line for the Secretary of the
Interior to act on permits. Let me be very clear. Action does not
necessarily mean approval. Action simply means that the Secretary must
make a decision either to approve or to deny a permit. The bill gives
the Secretary 30 days to act, along with two 15-day extensions. This
30-day time frame is consistent with the time line for approving
exploration plans, which are far more complicated. A deadline is
necessary in order to stop the endless bureaucratic delays and inaction
that are currently taking place and to provide companies with some
certainty.
There are over 50 permitted projects in the Gulf of Mexico that were
under way when the Obama administration imposed the moratorium in May
2010. Nearly a year later, over 40 of those same 50 projects have yet
to resume work. This bill would give the Secretary 30 days to restart
these projects that have already been approved.
I want to stress that H.R. 1229 will have an immediate impact on jobs
and energy production. Each drilling platform supports 800 to 1,400
jobs. Each permit that is issued translates into several hundred people
returning to work. In addition, there are production wells just waiting
for permits to resume work, meaning that more American energy could
come online within months of a permit being issued. Perhaps most
importantly, H.R. 1229 also makes significant safety improvements. U.S.
offshore drilling helps create American energy and American jobs, but
it must be done in a safe and responsible manner.
The bill reforms current law by requiring a drilling company to
obtain a permit to drill from the Secretary. Currently, such a permit
is not required by law, only by regulation. The bill further reforms
the law by requiring the Secretary to conduct a safety review. The bill
ensures that all proposed drilling operations must, quote, meet all
critical safety system requirements, including blowout prevention, and
oil spill response and containment requirements.
Finally, this bill establishes an expedited judicial review process
for resolving lawsuits relating to gulf permits. This reform ensures
that ending the de facto moratorium imposed by the Obama administration
isn't replaced by paralyzing and frivolous lawsuits that could take
years to resolve.
What we will see today during the course of this debate are two very
different approaches to America's energy future. Republicans are
pursuing an all-of-the-above energy approach to American energy
production to create jobs, generate revenue, lower gasoline prices, and
strengthen our national security. The Obama administration and
congressional Democrats, on the other hand, want to make energy more
expensive. Their agenda is to raise taxes to make energy production
more difficult and costly. We saw proof of this last Congress when they
did everything they could to push through the job-destroying Waxman-
Markey national energy tax. Now they are trying to increase taxes on
American energy producers.
While Americans are looking for solutions to lower gasoline prices,
the Democrats' proposals would increase prices even higher. How in the
world higher prices and taxes on energy would help Americans at the gas
pump is beyond me.
It's time for Congress to take steps to end the economic pain in the
gulf by allowing people to return to work. It's time to ease the pain
of high gasoline prices by expanding American energy production. I urge
my colleagues to support this important legislation to create jobs, to
lower prices, including the price of gas at the pump, and to strengthen
our national security.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1229. Need I remind the Members
of this body that 1 year and 19 days ago, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig
exploded, killing 11 workers and creating economic and environmental
havoc. For 87 days following the explosion, more than 4 million barrels
of oil spewed from the blown-out Macondo well, coating nearly 1,000
miles of gulf coastline and temporarily closing over 88 square miles of
some of the Nation's most productive fishing grounds. Yet this Congress
has not enacted a single legislative reform to improve the safety of
offshore drilling. Instead, the majority now brings forward in the name
of spurious claims a bill to encourage more domestic offshore drilling
without applying the lessons learned from the gulf blowout. With the
spurious claim that more domestic offshore drilling will lower gas
prices, they claim that we have to grease the skids, we have to open
the doors, we have to give further breaks to the oil companies.

{time} 1610

Now, sadly, it seems their motto is ``Ignore the spill. Drill, baby,
drill.''
Frankly, the majority's trio of offshore drilling bills were written
as though the Deepwater Horizon disaster had never occurred. That's why
I refer to them as the ``amnesia acts.'' Collectively, they will make
offshore drilling less safe while opening up vast new swaths of our
coastlines without adding any new safety requirements or environmental
safeguards on the oil and gas industry.

[[Page H3121]]

So today we are taking up the second ``amnesia act.'' H.R. 1229 would
impose artificial and arbitrary deadlines on the Department of the
Interior to approve permits to drill. Specifically, this legislation
would require the Department to act on a permit to drill within 30
days. After 60 days, whether or not--whether or not, let me emphasize
that--the safety and environmental review has been completed by the
Interior Department, the drilling application would be deemed approved.
Need I remind my colleagues, Mr. Chairman, that offshore drilling in
U.S. waters was determined by the spill commission, the bipartisan,
independent spill commission, to be four times more deadly than in
other parts of the world prior to the Deepwater Horizon tragedy. It was
four times more deadly to drill in the gulf by the same companies than
to drill, for example, in the North Sea, hardly a comfortable
environment. Now, under this bill, we could actually have less careful
oversight and review of offshore drilling than we had before the
Deepwater Horizon disaster.
This bill is a dangerous solution in search of a really nonexistent
problem. Since the implementation of new safety and environmental
standards in June of last year, the Department has added staff,
improved its review, and has issued 52 shallow water drilling permits.
Only six more permits currently are pending. Since the oil industry
demonstrated the capability to contain a deepwater blowout in mid-
February, we think, the Department has issued permits for 13 new
deepwater wells. There are only 12 permits in the queue for approval;
yet the majority is claiming we've got to grease the skids, that we've
got to remove any impediments for the oil companies, that we have to
``drill, baby, drill.''
Ironically, the enactment of H.R. 1229 could halt this progress. This
bill could hamper new permits being issued or stop new permits
altogether because the Department might be forced to deny permits if
the safety and environmental reviews are not completed in the arbitrary
60 days.
Moreover, Mr. Chairman, this legislation would issue a blanket
extension of existing leases. In contrast to this across-the-board
approach, the Department is working on a case-by-case basis to extend
existing leases affected by the temporary suspension of new drilling,
where such action is warranted, not on a blanket basis but on the basis
of the actual facts, of the actual evidence. H.R. 1229 would give a
free ride to companies even if their leases are many years from
expiring.
With regard to the comment that has been made already in this debate,
that this is about prices at the gasoline pump, need I remind my
colleagues--now, this was under the George Bush administration--that in
2008, the Energy Information Administration said, if all drilling over
the entire east coast Continental Shelf were opened up, the effect on
oil prices would be ``insignificant.''
H.R. 1229 also contains language designed to close the doors of the
courthouse to citizens who believe that the Federal Government is not
complying with the law. Imagine that. Citizens who are trying to be
diligent citizens would not be able to make sure that the law is being
applied. Citizens from Florida or Alabama would be forced to bring any
lawsuits regarding energy projects in the Gulf of Mexico to Louisiana
or Texas courts. In addition, H.R. 1229 contains language that would
prevent attorneys' fees from being awarded in successful cases--a
deterrent if I've ever heard of one. These provisions are aimed at
environmental plaintiffs, but will almost certainly impair the legal
rights of many other potential plaintiffs, including other oil and gas
companies.
In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, the principles guiding
offshore drilling should be smart and safe. If H.R. 1229 is enacted,
the guiding principles will be fast and loose. This is the wrong
response to the largest oil spill in U.S. waters. We should not rush to
allow drilling permits to be deemed approved without the appropriate
safety and environmental checks. We should not provide blanket
extensions to existing leases. We should not close the doors of the
courthouse to American citizens. We should not pass this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to a new member of the
Natural Resources Committee, a member who is jumping in and making an
immediate impact on the need for increasing our energy production, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson).
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, today we are taking up the Putting
the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act, which will accomplish two very
important goals: create jobs and help lower energy costs. It will end
the Obama administration's de facto drilling moratorium in the gulf in
a way that is safe, transparent, and responsible.
A study from Louisiana State University predicted that keeping this
permitorium in place for 18 months could cause the loss of more than
36,000 jobs nationwide. We simply can't afford the Obama
administration's job-killing policies. Rather than putting Americans
back to work, they're seriously impacting America's energy production.
The ``March 2011 Short-Term Energy Outlook'' from the Energy
Information Administration noted that production from the Gulf of
Mexico is expected to fall by 240,000 barrels per day this year.
If we're going to become energy secure, we need to increase our
energy production, not limit it; and we need to commit ourselves to
developing our own resources. The Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to
Work Act will help do that.
Mr. HOLT. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to a Member who is doing
an excellent job of pointing out the need for bringing jobs and
production back online in Louisiana and in the gulf, the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).
Mr. FLEMING. I thank the gentleman for allowing me to speak on this
important issue, H.R. 1229.
Mr. Chairman, as you know, it is one of a trifecta of bills that
we're passing out of the House, once and for all and after 40 years, to
begin actually putting together a cogent energy policy for this
country. Now, before I talk about it, I do want to make a couple of
comments.
Our President has been saying over and over again that our energy
production, our oil production is at the highest level it has ever
been. Ed Markey, the ranking member of the committee said the same
thing. Mr. Salazar of Interior, Mr. Bromwich just the other day, and
Ms. Wasserman Schultz said the same thing.
Why are you saying this?
Very clearly, right now we are producing oil at a level of 6 million
barrels a day, down from a high in 1972 of 9 million barrels a day; and
off the gulf coast, where you claim that production is its highest
ever, we were down from 1.7 million barrels a day last year to 1.59
million today, and it will be going down by another 225,000 barrels of
oil per day by next year.
For heaven's sake, there's a reason we have a structural increase in
the cost of our energy. It is, very simply, that we're constraining the
output of oil. So let's get on it. Let's finally start producing oil in
this country, and let's become energy independent once and for all.
Louisiana is being hurt in two ways. Number one, of course, is the
increasing price of gasoline; but it's also jobs. As the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Johnson) just mentioned, Dr. Joseph Mason from Louisiana
State University, from my home State, said that we're looking at a loss
of 36,137 jobs over an 18-month period out of the gulf coast alone. In
February, Seahawk Drilling, which owned and operated 20 rigs on the
gulf coast, filed chapter 11 due to the Obama administration's de facto
moratorium.

{time} 1620

The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LAMBORN. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. FLEMING. I thank the gentleman.
We have lost 12 rigs so far to such countries as Nigeria, Egypt, the
Congo, and Brazil, and guess who we just gave $2 billion to drill oil?
Brazil, of all places. So we gave them the rig, we gave them the money
so they can drill oil to sell back to us and to put tax money into
their coffers. For heaven's sake, this is crazy.

[[Page H3122]]

So in conclusion, I'd like to say today, let's get our Louisiana and
Texas and other people back to work. Let's invest in our energy across
this country, and let's get the gas prices down.
Mr. HOLT. The gentleman used the term ``trifecta.'' It's a curious
selection of words because, indeed, you could see the oil companies
right now lining up at the ticket window to cash in their trifecta
winnings if this goes forward.
The oil companies are currently sitting on 60 million acres of public
land onshore and offshore in which they are not producing. The oil
industry is sitting on more than 11.5 billion barrels of oil, nearly as
much as they could ever get from drilling up and down the east coast
and the west coast. This is where they should be directing their
attention, but instead, where are they directing their attention as
they bring in profits that for this year looked to be something like
$100 billion? They are using those profits not to provide more
resources for the American people but to buy back stock. Exxon, which
had about a $10 billion profit in the first quarter of this year, just
the first three months, used most of its money, more than half of it,
to buy back stock.
So it is curious that my colleague used the phrase ``trifecta''
because, indeed, this is a bonanza, a big winning ticket for the Big
Oil companies.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, at this point I would like to yield 1
minute to a new member of the committee who represents a district right
on the gulf coast and is passionate about what is happening and not
happening down there and what should be happening, the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Landry).
Mr. LANDRY. Mr. Chairman, my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle should listen to this story. It's a true life story very well. It
talks about the face of Big Oil, and I'm going to tell you what it is.
There's a little community in my district named Coteau Holmes which
has been around since the Cajuns were kicked out of Acadian and settled
down into Louisiana. It's a fishing village. There's a gentleman down
there who graduated high school in 1968 and began to work in the oil
and gas industry, and for 30 years, he worked in the oil and gas
industry. He raised two children in that oil and gas industry, never
asked the government for anything other than to ply his trade.
The experience he gained in the Gulf of Mexico led him to work on the
first Deepwater projects in the Gulf of Mexico. He worked for Shell Oil
and Gas--Big Oil--and guess what. When he retired, he was making in
excess of $1,750 a day. He put two kids through college.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LAMBORN. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. LANDRY. If this is not the American Dream that my colleagues on
the other side of the aisle claim to tout so much, what is? This is a
gentleman who doesn't have a college education. Who actually his
children were the first generation in his entire family ancestry to
ever make it to college, and he could not have paid for them to go to
college if not for the opportunity to drill in the Gulf of Mexico.
My colleagues should understand that down there we create jobs. We
create good-paying jobs, not minimum-wage jobs, the type of jobs that
provide for the American family and allow the American Dream to be a
reality.
Mr. HOLT. We are indeed concerned about jobs. For the example that my
friend from Louisiana gives about someone whose livelihood is at stake,
I could produce dozens of others, maybe a shrimp fisherman. You know,
my friends maybe remember the ``Forrest Gump'' movie. They've seen
those pictures. In fact, my friend from Louisiana probably has been out
on one of those shrimp boats. Well, they were sitting idle. They were
sitting idle for weeks and weeks.
The breeding grounds, the fisheries, were and still are in jeopardy.
People all over the country are not buying the fish that drank of this
black gold. In fact, 88,000 square miles, as I said earlier, of
fisheries were polluted by this tremendous spill, and need I remind my
colleagues that the coastal communities of the Gulf of Mexico, the
heart of offshore drilling, that the jobs that are dependent on tourism
and fishing exceed all the natural resource extraction and mining jobs
by a factor of five, five times as many jobs dependent on tourism and
fisheries.
Yes, we should learn the lesson, rather than hurrying through these
permits. We should learn the lessons of last year's oil spill and
protect those jobs.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Arizona, who's a new member of the committee and understands these
issues well, Mr. Gosar.
(Mr. GOSAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, the people in my district are hurting.
Rising gas prices are cutting deep into family budgets. Food prices are
skyrocketing. Communities that are home to destination locations like
the Grand Canyon are bracing themselves for fewer summer visitors
because families simply cannot afford to travel.
Main Street America can no longer afford inaction from the President
and his administration, and that is why I stand here today in support
of H.R. 1229. The bill not only will put thousands of Americans back to
work, it would increase our production of oil here at home and lower
the cost of gas.
It is time we put our country back to work and use our resources here
at home instead of abroad, and it is time the government makes a
serious commitment towards energy independence and an all-of-the-above
approach that America wants.
Mr. HOLT. I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from
Santa Barbara, California (Mrs. Capps), who has experienced firsthand
the economic cost of oil spills.
Mrs. CAPPS. I thank my colleague from New Jersey for recognizing me.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1229. A year ago
BP's Deepwater Horizon rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, leaving 11
people dead and over 1,000 miles of shoreline oiled. It also left the
local economy in shambles. The once lucrative fishing and tourism
businesses were devastated by this spill. Many gulf residents are still
struggling, and yet the oil industry would have us believe it suffered
greatly during the temporary moratorium on new drilling. The fact is
the gulf produced 1.6 million barrels of oil per day last year, an all-
time record, and still the industry is clamoring for more.
Today, we're considering another bill on their wish list that
sidesteps safety and environmental safeguards. H.R. 1229 forces this
administration to unreasonably rush the permitting process for drilling
activities. These permits are a final review opportunity for the
Federal Government to ensure that everything is in place before an oil
company drills deep into our ocean floor, but the majority is using the
strain of high gas prices to push Americans into thinking that drilling
is safe and that hurrying these permits will bring down costs.

{time} 1630

It's as if we learned nothing from the BP oil disaster. Mr. Chairman,
we cannot say drilling is safe when Congress has not taken necessary
steps to strengthen protections for rig workers and the environment. We
cannot say drilling is safe when the industry has yet to prove it has
better means of preventing or cleaning up a spill than we saw that it
did a year ago, and we cannot say drilling is safe when the government
lacks the resources it needs to police an industry that for years
policed itself, to perilous ends.
While the Obama administration has started acting on the lessons of
the spill, Michael Bromwich, the head offshore drilling regulator, told
the New York Times that his agency ``still lacks the resources,
personnel, training, technology, enforcement tools, regulations, and
legislation that it needs to do its job properly.''
Mr. Chairman, we know how to reduce the risk of oil spills. The
President's oil spill commission laid out a list of recommendations for
how Congress can prevent another spill from occurring. Many of my
colleagues have amendments to put those recommendations in place. I
hope this House will adopt them so we can say that drilling is safer.
Vote ``no'' on H.R. 1229. Let's not promote reckless drilling that
will fail to

[[Page H3123]]

lower gas prices and endanger our coastlines. Let's instead strengthen
safety and environmental safeguards for offshore drilling and support a
quicker transition to cleaner, safer energy policy for America.
Mr. LAMBORN. I would like to inquire of the Chair how much time is
remaining for both sides.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado has 18 minutes remaining, and
the gentleman from New Jersey has 16 minutes remaining.
Mr. LAMBORN. Then I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from California (Mr. McClintock).
Mr. McCLINTOCK. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, when I was listening to the gentlelady from California
and her colleagues, I was reminded of Mark Twain's warning that we
should be careful to get out of an experience only the wisdom that is
there and then stop, lest we be like the cat that sits on a hot stove
lid. That cat will not sit on a hot stove lid again--and this is good--
but, also, it will not sit on a cold stove lid again.
The cost of the irrational reaction by this administration to what
was, in essence, a mechanical failure of a blowout preventer is
horrific, as measured in unemployed families, higher energy prices,
lost business to shops throughout the region, and lost royalties to the
Nation's Treasury. It is said that the economic damage done by this
administration in response to the oil spill could be far greater than
that done by the oil spill itself, and I believe it. I would suggest a
little common sense will go a long way, and this bill provides it.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, earlier the gentleman mentioned Brazil. The
bill before us would grant a blanket extension for leases in the gulf
that are about to expire. And according to the Interior Department,
this amendment would extend about 100 leases and costs about $6 million
over 10 years. Well, 12 of those leases that would be extended
automatically belong to Petrobras, the Brazilian oil giant. It would,
indeed, provide a windfall given from American taxpayers to the State-
owned Brazilian oil giant Petrobras. Yes, this bill in front of us now.
I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida,
Representative Castor, who, unlike some of the debaters today, is
someone who actually lives on the Gulf of Mexico.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. I thank my colleague for yielding time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1229.
This Republican proposal is very poor public policy. And as a Member
who represents a community that is dependent on the gulf coast's
economy, frankly, it is appalling for my Republican friends to press to
eliminate safety standards on oil companies who want to continue to
drill and come closer and closer to our beautiful beaches. Really, it
is beyond the pale. And I have to ask, did my colleagues not learn
anything from this disaster?
In our economy on Florida's gulf coast, we depend on clean water and
clean beaches, and when you bring up a bill like this, it feels like a
direct challenge to our economic recovery. We have not recovered. The
hotels and motels on the beach, the seafood industry, all the mom and
pop shops who are dependent on the tourism industry, we are still
struggling to come back. We want to adopt the recommendations of the
oil spill commission that recommends stronger safety standards,
something like that which was passed on a bipartisan basis here in the
House last year.
Now to add insult to injury, my Republican colleagues recently passed
a budget that gives taxpayer subsidies to the Big Oil companies. In the
face of a burgeoning debt and deficit and in the face of huge profits
by the oil companies, why should the American taxpayers be subsidizing
the bottom line of the most profitable corporations in the world?
Instead, it is time for a meaningful, comprehensive energy strategy to
lower gas prices because it appears that that's what we all are in
agreement to do. But to do that, it's not to eliminate safety standards
for drilling. That's silly. What we should do is end the giveaways to
Big Oil, eliminate the $5 billion in subsidies and loopholes that the
oil companies receive each year. Let's prohibit Wall Street speculators
from artificially driving up oil prices. Let's develop super-efficient
cars and clean alternative energies that will create good jobs in
America and then bring down gas prices.
Mr. Chairman, finally, I caution the oil companies and their friends
in Congress that the BP Deepwater Horizon blowout was only 1 year ago.
Most of the necessary safety standards and recommendations of the
bipartisan oil spill commission have not been adopted. No one should be
pressing for unbridled drilling without ensuring that another blowout
disaster would never happen again. Otherwise, many of us on the gulf
coast view the blind-eyed push as a serious threat to our multibillion
dollar tourism and fishing industries and our coastal environmental
resources.
Florida's long-term economic health is dependent on clean water and
clean beaches and clean oceans. Our economy is struggling right now. I
am confident that Florida's economy will recover, but Florida's long-
term economic outlook will suffer immensely if we have to suffer
through another blowout disaster.
Mr. Chairman, we need an honest dialogue on energy solutions based on
facts. Americans are clamoring for comprehensive long-term energy
solutions so we are less dependent on foreign oil.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that anyone who
reads the bill will see on the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2,
``Safety review required. The Secretary shall not issue a permit under
paragraph one without ensuring that the proposed drilling operations
meet all, A, critical safety system requirements, including blowout
prevention; and B, oil spill response and containment requirements.''
So when we look at the facts, we should start with the text of the
bill itself.
At this point, I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
the State of Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).
Mr. FLEMING. I thank the gentleman.
I wanted to respond to a couple of things from the other side. First
of all, Mr. Landry and I are both from Louisiana. We are not potted
plants. We are actually from a State that is on the coast. In fact, Mr.
Landry lives, actually, on the coast. So I think we speak from
experience and knowledge on that.
With respect to seafood, yes, there is a problem with the seafood.
It's a perception problem. Seafood in Louisiana is the safest seafood
in the world. We have just got to get that message out to the American
people.
Let's talk about subsidies. We hear about subsidies. Well, you know
there is a profiteer when it comes to oil: 36 to 63 cents per gallon is
swept off the top. And who profits from that? The government profits
from it. And what does the government do with much of that money? It
puts it into so-called alternative energy with so-called phony green
jobs that we are yet to see being produced, wind and solar, et cetera.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LAMBORN. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
Mr. FLEMING. Now, it's also been suggested, Well, perhaps we should
punish these evil oil companies by taxing them. Mr. Chairman, who pays
the taxes? It's the consumers. It's the American people. You add a 10
percent tax to oil exploration or gasoline or whatever, and it's us,
it's we--we are the ones who will have to pay that, not the oil
companies.

{time} 1640

Like any company, they pass these costs along to the consumer. So I
want to see gas prices go down, not up, like the other side.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I am now pleased to yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the ranking
member on the full committee, and someone who has done as much as
anyone in this body to create green jobs in America over the decades.
Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey very much, and I
thank him for his leadership on these issues. We're partners in this
effort to try to move toward a new energy direction.
So last week we had a debate on the issue of whether or not the $4
billion

[[Page H3124]]

that the oil industry gets in tax breaks per year from the American
consumer should be taken away at this time when ExxonMobil reported $10
billion worth of profits in the first quarter, that is just January,
February and March. Shell reported $8.8 billion; BP, $7.1 billion;
Chevron, $6.2 billion; ConocoPhillips, $3 billion. That's in the first
3 months of this year.
But you know what the argument is, from the Republican side, is that
they would be punished if the consumer, if the taxpayer didn't also
give them an additional $4 billion in tax breaks.
So let's just look at this chart. This is how much they made as
people are pulling up to the pump paying $3.80, $4, $4.20 all across
America. Now, you know what the oil companies could do? They could say,
You know what? I think we made too much. I think what we should do in
the first quarter is just lower the price at the pump so we don't make
so much. Maybe we don't have to have the consumer paying $4 a gallon.
Maybe we, ExxonMobil, maybe we could have made 9.7. Maybe Shell could
have made 7.8, maybe BP could have made only $6.1 billion, maybe
Chevron could have made only $5.2 billion. In other words, maybe they
each could have made $1 billion less, and that would be $4 billion in
the first quarter.
But, no. They decide that if the war in Libya is going to take 1.2
million barrels of oil off the market, if the Saudi Arabians are going
to take 800,000 barrels of oil off the market, that that's a free
market. And so if the price goes up to skyrocketing heights, we have a
right to take all that extra money out of the consumers' pockets.
That's the free market. The war in Libya is a free market. Saudi Arabia
taking 800,000 barrels off the market, that's a free market.
Now, the American consumer, they look at it and they say that's not a
free market. The American taxpayers, they look at it and they say
that's not the free market. We're sending over more bombers. We're
sending over more troops. We're adding more to the defense budget of
the country. Why would we do that? What does that have to do with the
free market? What does this increase in defense expenditures and the
number of young men and women that we send over to the Middle East to
protect this cordon of oil tankers coming into the United States have
to do with the free market?
But nonetheless, that's the argument of the Republicans and, by the
way, of ExxonMobil and Shell and BP. They deserve these profits, they
say, just for 3 months.
By the way, you can multiply each one of these numbers by at least
four, at least the next three quarters of 2011 as well, and project
ExxonMobil making $40 billion this year and Shell 34 or $35 billion, et
cetera, et cetera.
But the Republicans say they still need the extra $4 billion from the
taxpayer pocket. So they dip into one pocket, the consuming pocket, and
they tip the consumer upside down, and they take all this money out of
their pockets. And you don't see any restraint on the part of the oil
companies taking advantage of the war in Libya. And then they want to
dip into the other pocket of the consumer, the consumer as a taxpayer,
and then they say you can't take away those tax breaks either.
So that's a very interesting position to have to defend at this point
in time, especially since they're saying that they want to cut back on
the benefits for Grandma on Medicare. They want to cut back the budget
by 70 percent on wind and solar, on geothermal and biomass. They want
to cut back the budget to help Grandma stay in a nursing home with
Alzheimer's.
But one thing you should never touch, and that's the $4 billion for
ExxonMobil, Shell and BP from the taxpayers, even as they're reporting
the largest profits in the history of the world that any corporation's
made.
And now, today, they have the temerity to come out here on the floor
and they're looking for more. What this first bill that we're about to
consider does is it legislates possible intimidation of Federal safety
reviewers and puts a time clock on looking at the most controversial
leases.
Now, mind you, just 1 year ago in the Gulf of Mexico we were looking
with amazement at the worst single environmental disaster in American
history, and that is BP with no idea about how they were going to stop
4 million barrels of oil going into the Gulf of Mexico. They had no
idea how to stop it. And the American people, the world was tuned into
the spill cam, almost, you know, fixated on this complete lack of
safety, complete lack of preparation to protect the life and the
livelihoods of the people who live around the Gulf of Mexico.
So what's the response of the Republican Party 1 year later? Is it to
pass a safety bill? Is it to implement the recommendations of the BP
Spill Commission, this blue ribbon panel of experts that identified
that there are systemic failures in the safety precautions built into
drilling in the United States? Is it to deal with the fact that they
identified that there are four times higher fatalities on American rigs
as there are on European rigs drilling off the shores of Europe?
No. All that legislation is stopped dead in its tracks. What they
argue is we have got to give, you know, kind of a shot clock. You know
how in the NBA, when you're watching TV and you only have 24 seconds to
shoot a basketball, and so that creates a real intensity or else you
lose the ball? Well, that's kind of what they want to say now to the
Department of the Interior. We're putting you on a shot clock. You have
60 days. You have 60 days to decide: Is that drilling rig safe? Have
the precautions been put in place to ensure that a catastrophic
accident can't happen?
And if you don't make a decision in 60 days, Department of the
Interior, on a rig that's out there at 3,000 or 5,000 or 10,000 feet
and off the shore miles and miles and you can't figure it out,
Department of the Interior--now, mind you, this is the same company
that couldn't figure it out a year ago, and they're amongst the
wealthiest companies in the world. But if you, the Department of the
Interior, if you can't figure out what we can do, we the company can do
in 60 days, we get to have the lease and we get to go ahead.

{time} 1650

It is kind of like the NBA, except the consequences aren't that your
home team loses; it's that your home team loses its job, your home team
loses its environment because another catastrophic accident has
occurred. That's what they do with this bill. They put a shot clock on
it.
So I think if the American people are looking at the absurdity of
this situation with these companies, look at the companies that are
lobbying for this: ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips.
These are the companies that 1 year ago said that they could evacuate
walruses from the Gulf of Mexico. They had an emergency response plan
in the event of a spill. Well, the problem was, of course, that they
each had put it in writing; they had each put it in as an application
to the Department of the Interior to drill in the Gulf of Mexico. But
walruses, as every sixth grade child knows, have not lived in the Gulf
of Mexico for 3 million years. So these are the companies that we are
now supposed to trust.
Put it on a shot clock, they say. Just let the Department of the
Interior try to figure out everything that we are planning for Florida,
Alabama, Louisiana, Texas.
And, by the way, the way the gulf stream works is pulling a lot of
that pollution, if it's bad, in God knows how many directions, and the
fish that get exposed to it put into the food chain with endocrine
disrupters, cancer-causing agents, potentially harming families. But 60
days is all you have got.
It's kind of like the NBA, when we think that's how oil drilling
should be, too, because we trust these companies. They are obviously
the most safety conscious companies that this world has ever known,
because we can see how really responsible they are in dealing with
consumers.
They had a chance not to charge $4 a gallon because we are having a
war in Libya and the Saudi Arabians took 800 barrels off the market,
believe it or not, our friends the Saudis, over the last 6 weeks. But
now we are just going to pretend that they are really good and
responsible companies, and for them, so they can get all the leases
that they want, they are on a shot clock--60 days.
Good luck to the Department of the Interior. Good luck to the
environment. Good luck to the consumer.

[[Page H3125]]

Good luck to the taxpayers if another accident occurs.
So, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to have an incredible debate
here on this issue, because these are the same people that just passed
the budget that cut the wind and solar budget by 70 percent.
You know, if you are a kid in America and it is 2011 and you are
looking at this debate, you're saying to yourself: They cut the solar
and wind budget in 2011 by 70 percent, and they are giving the oil
companies unlimited profits, unlimited tax breaks, and unlimited access
after 60 days to wherever they want to drill off of the coastline? Now,
that's an upside-down agenda.
And you have already heard some of the denigrating comments about
wind and solar, which does reflect, I hate to say it, a deep-seated
attitude about these renewable energy resources. But, you know,
politics.
And I think America is all about the future, and the future is about
wind. It's about solar. It's about moving to all electric vehicles.
It's about the agenda that they just pretty much defunded in their
budget that they had the votes here on the House floor.
So I would urge that we would defeat this piece of legislation.
And their legislation, they say it's all of the above, but do you
want to know what it is? It's oil above all. That is really what it is
all about. Give the oil companies everything they want, and slash the
budget for renewables. Slash the budget for all the other new
technologies that we need to enhance our future.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to inquire how much time is
remaining to our side and if any remains on the other side.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado has 15 minutes remaining. The
time of the gentleman from New Jersey has expired.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say, I have been listening
very closely and I still haven't heard a clear answer as to how $4
billion of additional taxes on energy companies will translate into
lower costs at the pump. Now, I don't think it can be done, but I
haven't even heard a cogent argument to establish that. So I am still
listening, and maybe I will hear that later.
At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana, who
lives on and represents a district on the Gulf of Mexico, Mr. Landry.
Mr. LANDRY. Mr. Chairman, I do. I live on the coast. I represent most
of coastal Louisiana. And what I wonder is, where were my colleagues in
2008? I was not in this body; they were.
They were worried about my shrimpers? In 2008, almost every shrimp
boat from Venice to Delcambre was at the dock. Why? Because they had
run diesel to just about $5 a gallon. You see, it takes energy for
those shrimpers to go out there on the Gulf of Mexico.
They worry about the tourism in Florida? There are already multiple
articles in the paper that say that high gas prices are killing tourism
in Florida.
This is a responsibility bill. You see, they want to punish those who
make a profit while they give taxpayer money to those who fail, who are
too big to fail. They punish the companies who make profits in this
country while they give our money to those who fail to make a profit.
It amazes me, because what really matters here, what really creates
jobs not only in my district but in everyone else's district is
affordable energy. Affordable energy is what powers the U.S. economy.
If they want to bring the profits of those four Big Oil companies
down, they should vote for this bill. Because when we drive the price
of oil down and when we drive the price at the pump down, we are going
to drive those profits down and we are going to take away our
dependency on those foreign countries that are making way more profits
than those private companies.
So I urge my colleagues to remember that the responsible thing to do
is to vote for this bill so that we can bring the price at the pump
down.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to address the issue of
safety that has been raised a couple of times here.
I quoted from the bill text earlier to show that there, indeed, are
safety requirements that have been put into the bill as part of H.R.
1229:
The Secretary will not issue a permit unless critical safety system
requirements, including blowout prevention and oil spill response and
containment requirements, have been satisfied.
At this point, Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to another gentleman
from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate my colleague yielding to talk
about this important legislation; because, Mr. Chairman, as I just got
back home from New Orleans over the weekend, of course people all
throughout the gulf coast, people all throughout the country are
frustrated and angry about the high gas prices we are paying at the
pump.
In south Louisiana you don't need to look any further than the area
that I represent to see the devastating impact of this administration's
policies, not only on high gas prices but also on jobs.
We have lost over 13,000 jobs in south Louisiana just because of this
administration's refusal to let our people go back to work, people that
were drilling safely, exploring for energy in America, that are
literally on the verge of being put out of business because this
administration won't let them go back to work where there are known
barrels of oil, billions of barrels in some of these areas in the Outer
Continental Shelf that are closed off because of this administration.
They say there is no moratorium anymore, but we call it a
permitorium, because they don't allow companies to go back to work,
hiring people, creating jobs, allowing our country to become energy
independent.
If you look at the results of their policies, not only has it yielded
higher gas prices at the pump, but for anybody on the other side that
suggests that cutting off the supply has nothing to do with the price
of oil, they need to go back and take a basic economics course.
I don't think OPEC could have developed a better policy than what
they have got right now, because they are saying basically we are not
allowing our people to go back to work in the United States, but the
President wants to encourage drilling in Brazil. He asked the Saudis to
produce more energy. We have got billions of barrels in America, and
our people can't even go back to work.
So this legislation at least says, enough of this delay, enough of
the foolishness and the games and blaming everybody else while gas
prices continue to skyrocket. Prices have more than doubled at the pump
since President Obama took the oath of office, and it is his policies
that are causing this.
So I am glad that this leadership is bringing legislation to the
floor here in the House to finally say we are going to do something
about it; we are not going to look the other way. Our plan isn't to
raise billions more in taxes so people pay even more at the pump and so
we are even more dependent on foreign oil. We are actually going to
make America energy independent by saying let's let our people go back
to work.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LAMBORN. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I will conclude by saying this: If you go
throughout south Louisiana and you see the 13,000 jobs that we have
lost; you talk to families who are hanging on by a vine; you talk to
small business owners who barely can make ends meet and they are just
struggling to hold on to their business, and all they want to do is go
back to work, and this administration is saying ``no.'' But, no, they
want to drill in Brazil. They want our people across the country to pay
higher gas prices.
There is a better way. There is an answer. There is a solution, and
that is in this legislation being brought forward. I urge that my
colleagues from across the country vote to lower gas prices and pass
this bill.

{time} 1700

Mr. LAMBORN. I thank the gentleman and the others from the Natural
Resources Committee on the Republican side who have spoken on this
issue or are with the Energy and Commerce Committee and made great
comments about how we do need to do what

[[Page H3126]]

we can in Congress to lower the price of gasoline. We do that by
increasing production. The two go together. We don't do it by
increasing taxes on the energy producers. We allow for policies to
allow for more production.
We have to pass H.R. 1229 to make sure that, whether it is deliberate
or not, this administration will not continue to stonewall the
permitting process. It is a long and lengthy process. There are
multiple environmental reviews that take place. Then to hold it up at
the last and not allow for a permit to be issued is just not
acceptable. All the work has been done when it becomes time to issue
the permit.
So what this bill says is you have 30 days, with a couple of
extensions, if necessary, to make the final decision. And you don't
have to issue the permit. You can say no, if that is the best decision.
Just take action, and let's have a little certainty in the business
world and in the economy of our country, especially the Gulf of Mexico
and the coastal States like Louisiana that are so heavily affected.
On the issue of safety, Mr. Chairman, we all do share the goal of
wanting to make sure that offshore drilling is the safest in the world.
Significant and fundamental changes have taken place over the past year
to improve offshore drilling safety and response. Regulations have been
enhanced and strengthened, standards have been increased, new
technology has been developed, reviewed, tested and is being currently
deployed.
BOEMRE Director Michael Bromwich came to our committee and testified
in front of the Natural Resources Committee and he said, ``We have
confidence that offshore drilling can be conducted now more safely than
it had been before and that we would be better able to deal with a
blowout than we were before.''
Now, if anyone on the other side of the aisle wants to act as if
nothing has been changed and there have been no safety reforms imposed,
they are indicting the Obama administration in saying that they have
turned a blind eye to the situation since the BP crisis took place, and
that is simply not true. As I said a minute ago, new regulations have
been imposed and standards have been strengthened. So I am not going to
sit here and indict the administration on the safety aspect. There have
been a lot of safety regulations by bureaucratic regulation put into
place.
This bill does acknowledge that two additional things will be part of
our law when this bill passes. H.R. 1229 says, number one, the
Secretary will issue a permit. The need for a permit has not been ever
codified, so we are requiring that a permit has to be issued before
drilling can take place. Number two, the Secretary is to conduct a
safety review. That is being mandated and put into law.
Mr. Chairman, I would urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R.
1229. We are going to be looking at some amendments shortly.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R.
1229, the Putting the Gulf Back to Work Act, and I thank Natural
Resources Committee Chairman Hastings for yielding me time.
At a time when hardworking Georgians are paying $3.88 per gallon at
the pump, it is critically important that we enact commonsense energy
production policies to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create
jobs. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has adopted policies that
have stifled energy production in this country, and have led to 12,000
jobs lost during the moratorium imposed in the Gulf of Mexico last
year.
Mr. Chair, H.R. 1229 will end the ongoing ``de facto'' moratorium
caused by the White House's refusal to approve permits in the Gulf by
requiring the Department of the Interior to grant permits for
exploration of oil and natural gas. This commonsense legislation will
create thousands of jobs, help recapture $4.7 million that the Federal
Government is losing on a daily basis from a lack of energy production,
and will lead us to greater energy independence.
I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 1229.
Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to
H.R. 1229 and H.R. 1230.
In April 2010, our Nation watched as millions of gallons of oil
spilled into the Gulf of Mexico from an oil drilling rig off the coast
of Louisiana. We saw photos of the disaster that ensued, the impact on
our environment (including the damage caused to marine and coastal
wildlife) and the devastating economic impact on communities in the
Gulf Coast region. From the loss of fishing jobs and revenue from
tourism to the harm of biodiversity in fragile wetland ecosystems and
marine life breeding grounds, this oil spill caused immense destruction
to a resource rich area.
I am concerned that without changes to the offshore drilling industry
standards, a disaster like the Deepwater Horizon explosion of April
2010 could happen again. Today, the majority in the House is asking us
to pass H.R. 1229 and to forget about the tragic events of last April
and the inadequacies of our national energy policy in order to grant
Big Oil access to the Gulf with less oversight--rushing lease sales in
the Gulf of Mexico at an unprecedented pace and without proper
environmental review. This bill is not only ill-advised, but it is
unnecessary as well because the Obama Administration is already moving
forward with the lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico with added reviews
to ensure sound safety and environment protections.
In addition, H.R. 1230 would require the Interior Department to hold
additional lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico over the next 4 to 8
months and open the eastern seaboard for drilling by requiring a lease
sale off the coast of Virginia this year. This bill would require the
Interior Department to rely on environmental reviews for these areas
done by the Bush Administration prior to the Deepwater Horizon
disaster, with many of the same demonstrably flawed and dangerous
assumptions and inadequate review processes as the BP lease that led to
the disastrous spill in April 2010. The majority in Congress is using
rising gasoline prices as an excuse to grant large, multi-national
energy companies greater access to even more of our precious shores,
including on the Atlantic Coast which could affect New Jersey in the
event of a spill.
I believe opening our coastal waters and protected wilderness areas
to oil drilling is harmful, ineffective, and a step in the wrong
direction that will damage our environment. We are currently drilling
at a higher rate than we ever have and onshore production increased by
5% in 2010. Production in the Gulf of Mexico is at an all time high.
Yet, of the 41 million acres of public lands now leased for oil and gas
development, just 12 million acres are producing. Offshore, 38 million
acres of the outer continental shelf are leased for oil and gas
drilling, but just 6.5 million acres are producing. We have approved
drilling leases on land where no drilling is taking place; the
potential for higher production is there without expanding leasing to
environmentally sensitive wildlife refuges or populated shore regions.
Moreover, the proposed drilling will not significantly lower gas
prices. According to a 2009 study from the Energy Information
Administration, opening up waters that are currently closed to drilling
off the East Coast, West Coast and the Gulf coast of Florida would
yield an extra 500,000 barrels a day by 2030, meaning that gas prices
might drop a total of 3 cents a gallon. And that is years away. In the
meantime, Big Oil companies continue to rake in record profits while
taxpayers subsidize their costs. The American people have had enough,
New Jersey has had enough and I have had enough. We need to stop Big
Oil subsidies and explore alternatives.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Landry) having assumed the chair, Mr. Womack, Chair of the Committee of
the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1229) to amend
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to facilitate the safe and timely
production of American energy resources from the Gulf of Mexico, had
come to no resolution thereon.

____________________