[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 19 (Monday, February 6, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H477-H478]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  HOUSE REPUBLICAN TRANSPORTATION BILL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Capps) for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, there is an old saying that goes: when all 
you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
  These days, it seems the Republican toolbox is down to just one tool. 
Because for all of the energy choices available to America, every 
Republican energy plan centers on one thing, drilling for more oil.
  First it was simply: drill here, drill now. Well, we are. There is 
more drilling taking place in the U.S. lands and water now than during 
the Bush administration. Indeed, last year, we relied less on foreign 
oil than in any of the past 16 years. Clean, renewable energy usage is 
at an all-time high as well.
  Then it was: drill for energy independence. It sounds great, but 
unfortunately we can't simply drill our way to energy independence. 
Even with all of the expanded drilling we are doing, the plain fact is 
that we use too much oil and have too few domestic reserves.
  Next it was: drilling will create jobs and put everyone back to work. 
That claim was based on borderline fictional numbers in a report bought 
and paid for--surprise--by the oil industry.
  Now House Republicans have found a new problem that can only be 
solved by opening more of the country to risky and reckless drilling: 
filling the funding gap in the highway trust fund. Their latest 
proposal would combine three bills to open more of America's most 
sensitive lands and waters to drilling. Supposedly, this is how we are 
going to fund repairs to America's crumbling bridges and highways.
  It shouldn't come as a surprise that again the numbers don't add up. 
Proponents of this approach now claim that we can make up the $6 
billion a year in the highway trust fund by mandating oil drilling just 
about everywhere. Yet according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget 
Office, drilling for oil and gas in protected coastal waters, as they 
wish, at best would produce only about $80 million per year of assets. 
That's a small fraction of the funds needed to repair and upgrade 
America's roads and bridges.
  They also want to open up a pristine coastal plain of Alaska's Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge--a special place I've visited--and speed up 
development of Federal oil shale deposits across the West. Any 
potential revenues from this drilling, however, will not come close to 
meeting the needs of the highway trust fund either. Whatever minimal 
funds do materialize would not be available for several years, maybe a 
decade. In other words, it is too little and it is too late.
  Mr. Speaker, the only way to make progress in solving our current 
fiscal mess is not to create a new round of giveaways and favors to the 
oil industry. It would be better to start cutting some of the 
unnecessary tax breaks that the oil and gas industry now receives, and 
use that money to pay for the transportation bill. That's because they 
are unnecessary. Of the world's 12 most profitable corporations last 
year, fully half are oil companies. Repealing these tax breaks would 
save more than $40 billion over 10 years, which would alone cover 
almost all the gap in the highway trust fund revenues. Americans are 
already squeezed at the pump. There is no reason why they should be 
handing over tax dollars to these wildly profitable companies.
  Mr. Speaker, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was the worst in 
history, crippling the gulf coast economy, destroying livelihoods of 
fishermen and tour operators, and killing wildlife for hundreds of 
miles. It was eerily similar to the destructive oil spill of 1969. 
That's when Santa Barbara beaches were smothered with oil--that's where 
I come from--that killed thousands of birds, fish, and sea lions.
  Now House Republicans want to expose more of our coastal communities, 
including Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties, to the tender mercies of 
the oil and gas industry. They want to mandate new drilling off central 
coast beaches despite our community's long-held view that the current 
drilling should be ended, not extended.
  They want to gut the environmental laws of our State that our 
community has used to protect its coastline from the kinds of 
devastation that the 1969 oil spill brought to Santa Barbara.

[[Page H478]]

This might be good news for oil companies, but it is bad news for my 
constituents; and it is bad energy policy.
  Perhaps most ominously, Mr. Speaker, this proposal is bad news for 
the prospect of a new transportation bill. These new oil-drilling 
provisions are poison pills and could doom passage of this desperately 
needed jobs legislation.
  This is very reminiscent of the manufactured crisis we saw last year 
to keep the government funded, pay our bad debts, and continue the 
payroll tax. We all saw the chaos and gridlock those fights produced. 
We need to put aside this effort to use the transportation bill as a 
means to push forward the favored policies for an already-pampered 
industry.

                          ____________________