[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 101 (Thursday, June 26, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H5790-H5798]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LOWERING GASOLINE PRICES TO FUEL AN AMERICA THAT WORKS ACT OF 2014
The Committee resumed its sitting.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7
printed in House Report 113-493.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title I (page 54, after line 24) add the
following:
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Provisions
SEC. 25001. ELIGIBILITY FOR NEW LEASES AND THE TRANSFER OF
LEASES.
(a) Issuance of New Leases.--
(1) In general.--Beginning in fiscal year 2016, the
Secretary of the Interior shall not accept bids on any new
leases offered pursuant to this title (including the
amendments made by this title) from a person described in
paragraph (2) unless the person has renegotiated each covered
lease with respect to which the person is a lessee, to modify
the payment responsibilities of the person to require the
payment of royalties if the price of oil and natural gas is
greater than or equal to the price thresholds described in
clauses (v) through (vii) of section 8(a)(3)(C) of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(C)).
(2) Persons described.--A person referred to in paragraph
(1) is--
[[Page H5791]]
(A) a person that is a lessee that--
(i) holds a covered lease on the date on which the
Secretary considers the issuance of the new lease; or
(ii) was issued a covered lease before the date of
enactment of this Act, but transferred the covered lease to
another person or entity (including a subsidiary or affiliate
of the lessee) after the date of enactment of this Act; or
(B) any other person that has any direct or indirect
interest in, or that derives any benefit from, a covered
lease.
(3) Multiple lessees.--
(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), if there
are multiple lessees that own a share of a covered lease, the
Secretary may implement separate agreements with any lessee
with a share of the covered lease that modifies the payment
responsibilities with respect to the share of the lessee to
include price thresholds that are equal to or less than the
price thresholds described in clauses (v) through (vii) of
section 8(a)(3)(C) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(C)).
(B) Treatment of share as covered lease.--Beginning on the
effective date of an agreement under subparagraph (A), any
share subject to the agreement shall not constitute a covered
lease with respect to any lessees that entered into the
agreement.
(b) Transfers.--A lessee or any other person who has any
direct or indirect interest in, or who derives a benefit
from, a covered lease shall not be eligible to obtain by sale
or other transfer (including through a swap, spinoff,
servicing, or other agreement) any new lease offered pursuant
to this title (including the amendments made by this title)
or the economic benefit of any such new lease, unless the
lessee or other person has--
(1) renegotiated each covered lease with respect to which
the lessee or person is a lessee, to modify the payment
responsibilities of the lessee or person to include price
thresholds that are equal to or less than the price
thresholds described in clauses (v) through (vii) of section
8(a)(3)(C) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(C)); or
(2) entered into an agreement with the Secretary to modify
the terms of all covered leases of the lessee or other person
to include limitations on royalty relief based on market
prices that are equal to or less than the price thresholds
described in clauses (v) through (vii) of section 8(a)(3)(C)
of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1337(a)(3)(C)).
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Covered lease.--The term ``covered lease'' means a
lease for oil or gas production in the Gulf of Mexico that
is--
(A) in existence on the date of enactment of this Act;
(B) issued by the Department of the Interior under section
304 of the Outer Continental Shelf Deep Water Royalty Relief
Act (43 U.S.C. 1337 note; Public Law 104-58); and
(C) not subject to limitations on royalty relief based on
market price that are equal to or less than the price
thresholds described in clauses (v) through (vii) of section
8(a)(3)(C) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(C)).
(2) Lessee.--The term ``lessee'' includes any person or
other entity that controls, is controlled by, or is in or
under common control with, a lessee.
(3) New lease.--The term ``new lease'' means a lease issued
in a lease sale under this title or the amendments made by
this title.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 641, the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, this is an old friend to the committee and the floor
and my friend, Congressman Hastings, and we couldn't have him retire
from Congress without doing this one more time.
By way of background for those who haven't walked through this
before, in 1995, Congress--desiring to encourage bidding on leases in
certain deepwater areas of the Gulf of Mexico--provided relief from the
normal applicable royalties payable to the United States.
What we found, in the course of this, is it worked. People bid on the
leases, they went in; but we found out that there was no provision for
eliminating the royalty exemption if the market price of oil rose back
up to reasonable levels.
According to some accounts, this omission might have been an
administrative error. What we have found about the mismanagement of the
Minerals Management Services--people literally in bed with the people
that they were supposed to regulate--it may not have been an
administrative oversight, but whatever, it was wrong. It shouldn't have
been there.
{time} 1015
As a result, now with oil up to $100 a barrel and higher, they are
pumping this oil without paying anything to the Federal Government, far
beyond what was ever contemplated.
Now my amendment is simple. It gives these companies a choice. They
can either renegotiate and execute leases for this oil, which was
obviously the intent--there was never any intent to make this permanent
on an ongoing basis--and pay reasonable royalties to the United States,
especially since a number of these companies are foreign companies,
state-owned enterprises, or they simply wouldn't be able to bid for new
leases. Their choice. No coercion. But the taxpayers stand to benefit
$15.5 billion over the next 10 years, and, in fact, over the life of
these leases, $31 billion or more. I respectfully suggest, it is time
to approve this amendment.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for offering the amendment, and I
thank the gentleman for his kind remarks. I guess my career would never
be complete unless we did this one more time.
But this amendment, Mr. Chairman, is identical to an amendment that
failed 2 years ago in this House, and, I might say, it failed by a
broad bipartisan vote.
I will also remind my friend from Oregon that this issue has been
repeatedly settled in the Nation's courts of law, with the courts
determining that rewriting the terms of these leases to include price
thresholds would be a direct violation of contract law. That is what
the issue is here really with this.
Now it was during the Clinton administration that this happened. And
I agree with the gentleman; it shouldn't have happened. But it
happened. And the courts have spoken very clearly on this.
The U.S. Supreme Court found that the Department of the Interior did
not have the authority to rewrite these contracts that were issued
under the 1995 law. And I will remind the gentleman that the Department
of the Interior has lost this issue in the district court, the
appellate court, and the Supreme Court.
Ultimately, this amendment seeks to force U.S. companies to break a
contract legally negotiated under government law, or else be denied the
opportunity to do business in the U.S. The amendment aims to back
companies into a corner and attempts to force them to break legally
binding contracts. And that, from my point of view, is essentially
extorting these companies to undo these contracts.
Now, I want to, again, speak on this just a little bit broader. I
would acknowledge that we have the right in this Congress to pass
legislation to change that. After all, we are the body that makes the
law. But there is a fundamental issue here that I think that we really
have to address beyond this: Should Congress be passing legislation
that breaks contract law when courts have said repeatedly that contract
law should be inviolable? I think that is what the issue is here today.
I understand my friend from Oregon having perhaps some heartburn
because this is dealing with oil and gas. I understand that. And
frankly, I respect that. But I think that the larger issue here is that
we should not be doing what we could do because I think that we should
hold contracts, private sector contracts with government, in a higher
area than probably some people think we should.
So with that, I urge rejection of the amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Chairman, we are not seeking to break contracts. What we are
doing is providing an opportunity for people to renegotiate these
contracts, to stop making a profit by exploiting a loophole or a
mistake that both of us agree was unintended and unfortunate.
This would be their choice. Contracts are renegotiated on an ongoing
basis routinely with government and in the private sector. And I would
respectfully suggest that this is a contract that is long overdue to be
renegotiated.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests
for time and am prepared to close.
[[Page H5792]]
So at this point, I will reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. How much time remains?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
DeFazio), the ranking member.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, what we are talking about here is
obscenely profitable oil companies getting a giveaway while we are
running massive deficits.
Now, everyone says that they want to run government like a business
and lower deficits. The GAO has estimated that if this is allowed to
run its course without any of these leases being renegotiated, it will
be a $50 billion windfall to the oil industry--not million, $50
billion.
Now that would be a nice piece of change, both for revenue sharing
for the States and for the Federal Treasury. We could apply it all to
deficit reduction or other needs, maybe even fund the continuation of
the national transportation system. Who knows.
The bottom line is, as the gentleman pointed out, it may or may not
have been intentional on the part of people at the then-Minerals
Management Service to give away these assets to the oil companies.
But for 3 years before they slept with them--or whatever happened--
they did include it in the leases. And then what the Court found was
that the law that the Republicans passed in 1995 didn't allow those
sorts of conditions to be in the leases.
So this is a new approach. The Republican law was defective. The
Clinton administration--at least some members of it--were corrupt. It
is a bipartisan problem. Let's fix it in a bipartisan way.
This would just say, if the companies who got this windfall and won
that Court case want new leases, we would condition new leases upon
them negotiating and paying a fair return to the taxpayers on the old
leases and, in that process, make the taxpayers whole.
It is a legal and simple way to fix a problem that was caused both by
the law, as written, by the then-majority Republican party and the few
corrupt members of the Clinton administration.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, let me just say, there is an excellent
report from the Congressional Research Service on this subject that
makes clear that it is not illegal or in violation of contract law. The
argument is very sustainable.
And it is not the oil company that gives me heartburn, to my dear
friend. I would think any of us would have heartburn if the Federal
Treasury, the taxpayers, were cheated out of $25 billion to $50 billion
due to an error or an omission. That ought to give heartburn to
anybody. This amendment will fix it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself the balance of the time.
The observation has been made that these maybe should be
renegotiated. Listen, Mr. Chairman, any contract can be renegotiated,
as long as both sides want to renegotiate. But that was the law at the
time. And what concerns me with this piece of legislation is that it
implies there has to be a renegotiation.
Mr. Chairman, I would suggest to some that they would say that this
is the heavy hand of government forcing somebody to do something that
they could do under law right now. In some areas, they call that
extortion. They may not use that strong of a word, but I am sure that
would be implied by some people if they were subject to this.
Again, this amendment has been rejected on a bipartisan basis for the
last couple of years. The courts have ruled against this. I think we
should follow with that.
With that, I urge rejection of the amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Bishop of Utah
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8
printed in House Report 113-493.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, I have a brilliant amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 69, after line 4, insert the following (and
redesignate the subsequent subparagraphs accordingly):
``(F) After the conclusion of the public comment period for
a planned competitive lease sale, the Secretary shall not
cancel, defer, or withdraw any lease parcel announced to be
auctioned in the lease sale.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 641, the gentleman
from Utah (Mr. Bishop) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, so last night, I am watching the
Cubs game. And the shortstop, who is on a tear right now as far as
hitting, bounces off a foul tip that the replay clearly shows bounced
onto the ground. The catcher trapped the ball, and then held it up as
saying he had actually caught it. And the umpire, even though this
violates the rules of the game, had the power to pick the catcher over
the hitter, and he declared that the batter had struck out.
Now even though the Cubs manager went out there, claiming how unfair
this was--and I was yelling at the TV screen for hours afterwards--
history books will still say that Castro had a strikeout at this
particular event.
Now, of course, the unfortunate thing is that our administration and
the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Land Management plays
this same game of picking catchers over hitters all the time, even
though it violates some of the rules.
So, 77 leases were put up for bid in Utah. It took the BLM on the
ground 7 years to go through the process. They checked all the boxes.
They did the environmental analysis. And the Secretary of the Interior
simply canceled them. His reason was, 'cause.
Recently, 56 leases were also set out there for auction. Once again,
all the boxes were checked. They got through the process. They did the
environmental analysis. The environment assessment was done. Public
comment was done. The protest period was finished. And 5 days--5 days--
before the auction, a letter comes from a special interest group to the
State director for the Bureau of Land Management, a group that had been
silent through the entire process. They said nothing during the
assessment. They said nothing during the public comment. During the
protest period, they said nothing. Here, 2 months after the record was
closed, 2 months after the decision had been done with no more access
for public comments, the director of the BLM simply says, I am going to
pick a special interest group over another interest group, and he
canceled these leases.
Schools, the chance of jobs in my State went out, the chance of
actually getting royalty payments that would help the kids of my State
pay for their education. It was simply done on a whim.
The industry had spent $500,000. Half a million dollars from their
recreation and development funds were spent getting ready for this
auction. And all of a sudden, a special interest group is given special
treatment, and it is taken away.
Now, what government needs, especially out in the local areas, and
what business needs is simply certainty. You tell us what the rules
are, and they can play by those rules. It is a business necessity to
have certainty and not have administrative officials simply change the
rules on a whim at some particular time.
It is kind of like, to paraphrase the old Tom Cruise movie: You
screwed up. You trusted me.
If we have a policy that is long and it is hard, it gives ample
opportunity. But it is proven meaningless if, indeed,
[[Page H5793]]
the Bureau of Land Management is able to fervently yield at the
eleventh hour to the opinion of some special interest group. All we are
asking them to do with this amendment is to simply follow the rules.
Don't change things on a whim. Don't pick one group over the other.
Don't pick the catcher or the hitter.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, first my condolences to the gentleman from Utah
for being a Cubs fan. I am a Red Sox fan, and we have had some problems
too. But that was an interesting moment and an interesting analogy
made.
Mr. Chairman, I am not aware of the specifics of the instance of
which he speaks. But I would say that this, as a remedy for a past
action, would apply in the future, and it would not undo whatever took
place in the past that the gentleman is referring to. And the principle
here is fairly extraordinary. It kind of says, Federal bureaucrats
never make mistakes.
So we have proposed leases in an area. We go through a public comment
period. Local people comment. A hunting and fishing group comes in and
says, you know, this is absolutely, like, the primo area for hunting or
fishing or something else. Or it becomes apparent that this is, like,
right in a main recreation corridor, something that the Federal
bureaucrat overlooked in drawing up the lease boundaries.
But if this were adopted and became law in the future, at the end of
the public comment period, it would be, We are the Federal Government.
Thank you very much for pointing out that we really screwed that up,
that we were just about to wipe out a prime habitat, that we were just
about to block or really degrade a prime recreation corridor. We are
bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. We didn't realize that. But we are
sorry; public comment periods don't mean anything anymore. We cannot
condition, withdraw, or change the lease. And that would be it.
{time} 1030
I don't think that would be good. I really don't. So, there may have
been--and, again, I am not aware of the circumstances to which the
gentleman is referring in the specific, but I believe that this
amendment, looking forward to whoever is in the White House and whoever
is administering these programs, would really preclude any part of the
public from having meaningful comment and getting a meaningful response
from the Federal bureaucracy which has proposed leasing in their
neighborhood.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Chairman, before I make a comment about the
Red Sox, may I inquire about how much time I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Utah has 1\3/4\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. With that, I would like to yield 45 seconds to a
Mariners fan--tough day down here--the chairman of the committee.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to make this point again. What does this
amendment say? It prohibits the Secretary from canceling lease sales
previously announced to be auctioned based on public comments received
after the comment period was ended.
In other words, what the gentleman is simply saying is let's follow
the law. I know he said that, but it is worth repeating. You have a
comment period, then a decision is made. Once that decision is made,
that should end the issue. Why? Because there is a great deal of
capital that has been invested, and as the gentleman from Utah said,
that is the certainty that our energy producers need.
Mr. Chairman, what was done in Utah with the canceling of those sales
at that time I thought was totally wrong. It was wrong then, it is
wrong now, and the court has found that.
Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. DeFAZIO. I do have the right to close, so I will yield myself 90
seconds.
Mr. Chairman, as described, that might be an amendment that would be
much more acceptable, but it actually doesn't say that. It says that,
after the conclusion of the public comment period for a planned
competitive lease sale, the Secretary shall not cancel, defer, or
withdraw any lease parcel announced to be auctioned in a lease sale.
Now, what the gentleman described is not what this section F would
do. This basically says we listen to people--we listened, we heard, it
goes forward. Maybe that is not the intent, and if it isn't the intent,
then it would need to be modified. So I believe that the public comment
period for leases that are drawn up by bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.,
headquarters should be meaningfully commented upon through a process by
people in the vicinity, and their comments should be given some weight
in whether or not the lease is modified or goes forward, as I
previously described, if it impedes upon prime habitat or particularly
on a recreational corridor.
Mr. Chairman, with that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I assume the gentleman has no other speakers?
Mr. DeFAZIO. I do not.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Good. I will finish this. And I appreciate
knowing the gentleman from Oregon is a Red Sox fan. That explains so,
so much here.
Mr. Chairman, I have to admit that this is probably a needless
amendment. One would assume that if you write a law or you write a
rule, that is what you do. This amendment basically says that you abide
by the rules. Even though you have great and awesome power--never mind
the man behind the curtain--you don't change the rules to pick winners
and losers and one special interest group over another. You abide by
the rule.
In the first 77 lease issue, they had 7 years to go through the
process of finding out what it is. This is one of the concepts in which
it simply says we are going to obey the law. We are going to abide by
the rules so everyone knows what is there and everyone knows with
certainty what they can do and for what they should plan, and you don't
change it at the last minute because you want to favor one group over
another group.
That is why we are doing this. It has happened in the past, it can
happen in the future, and it should not.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, again, the sentiments expressed by the gentleman having
to do with a particular experience in his State--perhaps his district--
is one thing, but this is really clear in the statutory language. It
says that we will hold the public comment period. When it closes, the
lease goes forward, no matter what we heard.
What the gentleman is talking about is that there was a public
comment period. The public comment period was closed, and he says that
some time later, outside of the public comment period, someone
submitted information which was used and overcame all of the other
testimony and/or comments that were provided.
That is a whole different circumstance than what this is. This is
very simple. It just says that there will be a public comment period;
we will listen; and at the end of that, we don't care what we heard, it
has to go forward as proposed.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah will be
postponed.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 113-493.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
[[Page H5794]]
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Add at the end the following:
TITLE __--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
SEC. 01. ESTABLISHMENT OF OFFICE OF ENERGY EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING.
(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of the Interior shall
establish an Office of Energy Employment and Training, which
shall oversee the hiring and training efforts of the
Department of the Interior's energy planning, permitting, and
regulatory agencies.
(b) Director.--
(1) In general.--The Office shall be under the direction of
a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Employment and
Training, who shall report directly to the Assistant
Secretary for Energy, Lands and Minerals Management, and
shall be fully employed to carry out the functions of the
Office.
(2) Duties.--The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Employment and Training shall perform the following
functions:
(A) Develop and implement systems to track the Department's
hiring of trained skilled workers in the energy permitting
and inspection agencies.
(B) Design and recommend to the Secretary programs and
policies aimed at expanding the Department's hiring of women,
minorities, and veterans into the Department's workforce
dealing with energy permitting and inspection programs. Such
programs and policies shall include--
(i) recruiting at historically black colleges and
universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, women's
colleges, and colleges that typically serve majority minority
populations;
(ii) sponsoring and recruiting at job fairs in urban
communities;
(iii) placing employment advertisements in newspapers and
magazines oriented toward minorities, veterans, and women;
(iv) partnering with organizations that are focused on
developing opportunities for minorities, veterans, and women
to be placed in Departmental internships, summer employment,
and full-time positions relating to energy;
(v) where feasible, partnering with inner-city high
schools, girls' high schools, and high schools with majority
minority populations to demonstrate career opportunities and
the path to those opportunities available at the Department;
(vi) coordinating with the Department of Veterans Affairs
and the Department of Defense in the hiring of veterans; and
(vii) any other mass media communications that the Deputy
Assistant Secretary determines necessary to advertise,
promote, or educate about opportunities at the Department.
(C) Develop standards for--
(i) equal employment opportunity and the racial, ethnic,
and gender diversity of the workforce and senior management
of the Department; and
(ii) increased participation of minority-owned, veteran-
owned, and women-owned businesses in the programs and
contracts with the Department.
(D) Review and propose for adoption the best practices of
entities regulated by the Department with regards to hiring
and diversity policies, and publish those best practices for
public review.
(c) Reports.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress an
annual report regarding the actions taken by the Department
of the Interior agency and the Office pursuant to this
section, which shall include--
(1) a statement of the total amounts paid by the Department
to minority contractors;
(2) the successes achieved and challenges faced by the
Department in operating minority, veteran or service-disabled
veteran, and women outreach programs;
(3) the challenges the Department may face in hiring
minority, veteran, and women employees and contracting with
veteran or service-disabled veteran, minority-owned, and
women-owned businesses; and
(4) any other information, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations for legislative or Department action, as the
Director determines appropriate.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the
following definitions shall apply:
(1) Minority.--The term ``minority'' means United States
citizens who are Asian Indian American, Asian Pacific
American, Black American, Hispanic American, or Native
American.
(2) Minority-owned business.--The term ``minority-owned
business'' means a for-profit enterprise, regardless of size,
physically located in the United States or its trust
territories, that is owned, operated, and controlled by
minority group members. ``Minority group members'' are United
States citizens who are Asian Indian American, Asian Pacific
American, Black American, Hispanic American, or Native
American (terminology in NMSDC categories). Ownership by
minority individuals means the business is at least 51
percent owned by such individuals or, in the case of a
publicly owned business, at least 51 percent of the stock is
owned by one or more such individuals. Further, the
management and daily operations are controlled by those
minority group members. For purposes of NMSDC's program, a
minority group member is an individual who is a United States
citizen with at least 1/4 or 25 percent minimum
(documentation to support claim of 25 percent required from
applicant) of one or more of the following:
(A) Asian Indian American, which is a United States citizen
whose origins are from India, Pakistan, or Bangladesh.
(B) Asian Pacific American, which is a United States
citizen whose origins are from Japan, China, Indonesia,
Malaysia, Taiwan, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, the
Philippines, Thailand, Samoa, Guam, the United States Trust
Territories of the Pacific, or the Northern Marianas.
(C) Black American, which is a United States citizen having
origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa.
(D) Hispanic American, which is a United States citizen of
true-born Hispanic heritage, from any of the Spanish-speaking
areas of the following regions: Mexico, Central America,
South America, and the Caribbean Basin only.
(E) Native American, which means a U.S. citizen enrolled to
a federally recognized tribe, or a Native as defined under
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
(3) NMSDC.--The term ``NMSDC'' means the National Minority
Supplier Development Council.
(4) Women-owned business.--The term ``women-owned
business'' means a business that can verify through evidence
documentation that 51 percent or more is women-owned,
managed, and controlled. The business must be open for at
least 6 months. The business owner must be a United States
citizen or legal resident alien. Evidence must indicate
that--
(A) the contribution of capital or expertise by the woman
business owner is real and substantial and in proportion to
the interest owned;
(B) the woman business owner directs or causes the
direction of management, policy, fiscal, and operational
matters; and
(C) the woman business owner has the ability to perform in
the area of specialty or expertise without reliance on either
the finances or resources of a firm that is not owned by a
woman.
(5) Service disabled veteran.--The term ``Service Disabled
Veteran'' must have a service-connected disability that has
been determined by the Department of Veterans Affairs or
Department of Defense. The SDVOSBC must be small under the
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code
assigned to the procurement; the SDV must unconditionally own
51 percent of the SDVOSBC; the SDVO must control the
management and daily operations of the SDVOSBC; and the SDV
must hold the highest officer position in the SDVOSBC.
(6) Veteran-owned business.--The term ``veteran-owned
business'' means a business that can verify through evidence
documentation that 51 percent or more is veteran-owned,
managed, and controlled. The business must be open for at
least 6 months. The business owner must be a United States
citizen or legal resident alien and honorably or service-
connected disability discharged from service.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 641, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to set a standard for
answering the call of 500,000 to 800,000 jobs being created by 2020
that addresses the work in our ongoing and growing energy industry.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the Natural Resources Committee
chairman, Mr. Hastings, and Ranking Member DeFazio for their leadership
on diversifying our employment base. I also want to wish the chairman
well as he moves on to other endeavors. He will be missed on his
insight.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of the Jackson Lee Amendment
No. 9 to H.R. 4899. The Congress has an affirmative duty to increase
diversity in Federal Government as there is an undeniable lack of
participation for veterans, women, and minorities in regards to
employment, entrepreneurial, and ownership opportunity.
The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 9 to H.R. 4899 directs the Secretary of
the Interior to establish an office of energy employment and training
to create economic opportunities that support the agency's hiring and
training of veterans, women, and underrepresented minorities. It sets
the standard for the private sector.
Mr. Chairman, as a Member of Congress from Houston, the energy
capital of the Nation, I have always been mindful of the importance of
having strongly advocated for national energy policies--really, all of
the above--and to make our Nation energy independent, preserve and
create jobs, and keep our Nation's economy strong.
The recent increase in production of unconventional oil and natural
gas has provided a lift to the U.S. economy, and Americans are seeing
the benefits not only because of the jobs created, but also because
household incomes have gone up. It is up to us to have the regulatory
structure that protects the
[[Page H5795]]
environment but also provides the opportunity for growth and creates
jobs.
Mr. Chairman, I would be remiss if I did not point out that both the
chairman and ranking member have been resolute in their pursuit of the
expansion of opportunities in the energy industry. I share that
commitment with them, and this amendment is an example of what happens
when Members work in good faith across the aisle to find viable
solutions.
In this amendment, veterans, minorities, and women recognize that
they are significantly underrepresented in the oil and gas industries
at all levels and severely underrepresented in the senior managerial,
professional, board, and ownership ranks. U.S. competitiveness requires
that this Nation increase the number of successful underrepresented
minorities in STEM education and careers, which is more essential than
ever.
A pipeline of qualified veterans looking for employment will play a
key role as the energy industry seeks quality, highly skilled workers.
I am committed to honoring our obligations to our Nation's veterans and
utilizing the talents of veterans to help the government meet today's
dynamic challenges.
Mr. Chairman, the Office of Energy Employment and Training will
provide an opportunity to align military and utility job
classifications, identify veterans with their desired basic skills,
access military personnel during the off-boarding process, and hold
training programs.
It is interesting to note that in 2013, the number of STEM jobs in
North Dakota increased by 37.2 percent as a direct result of the oil
and gas boom in that State.
Mr. Chairman, I hope my colleagues will support this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to
claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time
as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is the product of a collaborative
process between the gentlewoman from Texas and the Natural Resources
Committee. For most of this year, the Subcommittee on Energy and
Mineral Resources has held a series of hearings on American energy jobs
focusing on the tremendous job opportunities and demand for educated
and skilled workers in the oil and gas industry. A number of those
hearings focused directly on veterans, opportunities for veterans,
opportunities for women, and opportunities for minorities, not only in
the industry, but also within the Department of the Interior.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment builds on that work by establishing an
office in the Department of the Interior to centralize and focus
specifically on the dismal record of the Department in these areas. And
why do I say that, Mr. Chairman? I say that because we have learned
earlier this year from a GAO report that the Department of the Interior
has trouble staffing these agencies and fails to utilize all of the
tools at their disposal to hire, to train, and to retain staff in these
particular areas. And so what this amendment does is centralize what
DOE should already be doing, with the focus on veterans, women, and
minorities.
So I am prepared to accept this amendment, and I look forward to
working with the sponsor on this and other areas that we can agree
upon.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman for his
astute reflection on the work that we have done and I have done over
the years. I introduced H.R. 70 and H.R. 3710 that dealt with coastal
restoration and the utilization of training for our young people and
our veterans.
So as I conclude and thank the chairman for his acknowledgment, along
with the ranking member, of their work on the committee dealing with
diversification, the Jackson Lee amendment will help prepare a diverse
population of workers from across the country with diverse backgrounds
to enter in exciting and rewarding careers in American energy jobs.
Our Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Centers of
Excellence, Tribal Colleges and Universities, Native American-Serving
Nontribal Institutions, and women colleges and universities will become
engaged by a direct pipeline into the Department of the Interior that
will foster collaboration, mentorships, and partnerships through
effective job training that will yield employment opportunities. The
Department of the Interior will be responsible for fostering diversity
in management, employment, and business activities. It will be the
light at the end of the tunnel creating a pathway for the 800,000 jobs.
Mr. Chairman, at this time, I would like to put into the Record the
Employment Outlook for African Americans and Latinos In the Upstream
Oil and Natural Gas Industry.
[An IHS Report, Nov. 2012]
Employment Outlook for African Americans and Latinos in the Upstream
Oil and Natural Gas Industry
(Prepared for the American Petroleum Institute, API)
key findings
Oil and natural gas will remain as the main source of fuel
for decades to come as other forms of energy also become
commercially viable. In fact, in early November 2012, the
International Energy Agency (IEA) projected that the United
States will become the world's top oil producer by 2020 and
that North America would be in a position to export more oil
than it imports by 2030.
These findings underscore the critical importance of the
analysis and findings of a new IHS report entitled Employment
Outlook for African Americans and Latinos in the Upstream Oil
and Natural Gas Industry (2012). Principal findings of the
new IHS report Include:
More than 500,000 jobs projected to be created by 2020 and
over 800,000 jobs created by 2030 in the upstream oil and
natural gas industry under pro-energy development policies.
Job growth would be geographically diverse. Over half of
the job growth, 417 thousand jobs, is expected in the Gulf
region. The East region is expected to contribute nearly 140
thousand job opportunities and the Rockies region nearly 116
thousand job opportunities. The West, Alaska, and Central
regions will combine to contribute approximately 138 thousand
job opportunities.
Central to this analysis is workforce training critical to
the projected U.S. petroleum industry growth to keep the
nation at a competitive advantage and to provide the energy
the nation depends upon. African Americans and Hispanic
Americans represent a critically vital and available talent
pool to help meet the demands of the projected growth and
expansion. For African Americans and Hispanics to be
competitive for the 800,000 potential new jobs it will
require:
Significant improvement in minority preparation in Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) related
disciplines at the primary and secondary school levels--a
national priority;
Significant improvement in high school completion rates for
Hispanics and African Americans;
Secondary and post-secondary staff (i.e., principals,
deans, teachers, faculty, counselors) should be trained to
inform their students on the workforce opportunities in the
petroleum industry, specifically in the regions identified,
and the training required;
An increase the labor force participation rates of African
Americans and Hispanics;
Sixty-two percent of the job growth are estimated to be in
blue collar jobs that would require a high school diploma and
some additional training such as community college vocational
degrees and certificates;
Twenty-one percent of the job growth will require training
in engineering (petroleum, etc.), geoscience fields,
management, business, and finance, and as technicians;
Partnerships between higher education and industry,
especially at the community college level would yield near
term positive results;
Hispanic and African American students with high school
diplomas and some additional training at community colleges
in skills related to the oil and gas industry are immediately
competitive for current job opportunities;
African American and Hispanic students who successfully
complete college degrees related to the oil and natural gas
industry, e.g., petroleum engineering, would be highly
competitive for workforce placement;
Wages in the upstream oil and natural gas industry, across
many professions, far exceed the national average wage rate;
Some portion of the job opportunities would be in
geographic locations away from segments of minority
populations and may require relocation;
Employment in the oil and gas industry can provide a
reliable means to a better than average quality of life for
Hispanics and African Americans for decades to come.
Both challenges and opportunities exist going forward.
Raising educational achievement for large segments of the
upcoming generation is resource intensive and will take
decades to achieve. However, the payoff of an increased
skilled labor pool would be enormous to society in general
and U.S. industry in particular. This report illustrates
[[Page H5796]]
that there are significant opportunities for African
Americans and Hispanics throughout the petroleum industry
currently and well into the future at each level of education
and training.
III. Minority and Female Employment in the Oil & Gas and Petrochemical
Industries in 2010
employment by industry
The three segments of the U.S. oil and gas industry and the
petrochemical industry together employed a total of 1.2
million people in 2010 (see Table III.1).
The upstream segment, with employment of 721 thousand,
accounted for 60% of the total, followed by the downstream
segment with 23%.
African American workers held 98 thousand jobs in these
industries in 2010, accounting for 8.2% of total employment.
Their share within the petrochemical industry was 11.2%.
Hispanic workers held 188 thousand jobs across all four
industry segments--15.7% of the total. They accounted for a
higher share of employment in the upstream segment than in
the other segments.
Table III.1--AFRICAN AMERICAN AND HISPANIC EMPLOYMENT IN THE OIL & GAS AND PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES BY SEGMENT:
2010 TOTAL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petro-
Total Upstream Midstream Downstream chemicals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................... 1,198,590 720,911 42,079 279,162 156,438
African American................ 97,789 57,886 2,262 20,043 17,598
Hispanic........................ 188,088 136,265 4,440 28,426 18,957
Minority Shares by Segment
Total........................... 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
African American................ 8.2% 8.0% 5.4% 7.2% 11.2%
Hispanic........................ 15.7% 18.9% 10.6% 10.2% 12.1%
Shares by Segment in Each Occupation
Total........................... 100.0% 60.1% 3.5% 23.3% 13.1%
African American................ 100.0% 59.2% 2.3% 20.5% 18.0%
Hispanic........................ 100.0% 72.4% 2.4% 15.1% 10.1%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment by Gender
Women accounted for 19% of total employment in the combined
oil and gas and petrochemical industries. Their share is
higher in the downstream and petrochemical segments (25%) and
lower in the upstream and midstream segments (15-16%). (See
Table III.2.)
The female share of employment in these industries is much
lower for the Hispanic population--only 13%.
The incidence of female employment for the African American
population in the oil & gas industry generally mirrors the
nation-wide pattern for the industry, at a share of 19%. In
the midstream industry there is a higher female share.
TABLE III.2--FEMALE EMPLOYMENT IN THE OIL & GAS AND PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES BY SEGMENT: 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petro-
Total Upstream Midstream Downstream Chemicals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................... 1,198,590 720,911 42,079 279,162 156,438
Female...................... 225,687 110,350 6,840 69,140 39,357
Male........................ 972,903 610,561 35,239 210,022 117,081
Percent Female.................. 19% 15% 16% 25% 25%
African American................ 97,789 57,886 2,262 20,043 17,598
Female...................... 18,953 9,239 594 4,806 4,314
Male........................ 78,836 48,647 1,668 15,237 13,284
Percent Female.................. 19% 16% 26% 24% 25%
Hispanic........................ 188,088 136,265 4,440 28,426 18,957
Female...................... 25,335 13,648 554 5,647 5,486
Male........................ 162,753 122,617 3,886 22,779 13,471
Percent Female.................. 13% 10% 12% 20% 29%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. JACKSON LEE. So, in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, let me indicate
that our task here is to create jobs. We understand that there are
300,000 vets that, in fact, may need unemployment insurance. We want
them to have jobs, along with women and minorities, and so I would ask
my colleagues to accept the Jackson Lee amendment, and I thank the
committee.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I would like to thank Natural Resources Committee Chairman
Hastings and Ranking Member DeFazio for their leadership and
commitment.
I also wish the Chairman well as he moves on to other endeavors. He
will be missed.
Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in support of the Jackson Lee Amendment #9
to H.R. 4899, the Lowering Gasoline Prices to Fuel an America that
Works Act of 2014.
Congress has an affirmative duty to increase diversity in the federal
government as there is an undeniable lack of participation for
veterans, women and minorities in regards to employment,
entrepreneurial and ownership opportunities.
The Jackson Lee Amendment #9 to H.R. 4899 directs the Secretary of
the Interior to establish an Office of Energy Employment and Training
to create economic opportunities that support the Agency's hiring and
training of veterans, women and underrepresented minorities.
As the Member of Congress from Houston, the energy capital of the
nation, I have always been mindful of the importance and have strongly
advocated for national energy policies that will make our nation more
energy independent, preserve and create jobs, and keep our nation's
economy strong.
The recent increase in production of unconventional oil and natural
gas has provided a lift to the U.S. economy and Americans are seeing
the benefits not only because of the jobs created but also because
household incomes have seen an increase as a result of lower energy
costs.
I would be remiss if I did not point out that both the Chairman and
Ranking Member have been resolute in their pursuit of the expansion of
opportunities in the energy industry. I share that commitment with
them--and this amendment is an example of what happens when Members
work in good-faith across the aisle to find viable solutions.
We all know that while government may not be able to solve all
problems--it can be a bridge to solving some--and ``the great
mitigator'' for others.
Veterans, minorities and women are significantly underrepresented in
the oil and gas industries at all levels and severely underrepresented
in the senior managerial, professional, board and ownership ranks. U.S.
competitiveness requires that this nation increases the number of
successful underrepresented minorities in STEM education and careers,
is more essential than ever.
A pipeline of qualified veterans looking for employment could play a
key role as the energy industry seeks quality, highly skilled workers.
I am committed to honor our obligations to our Nation's veterans;
utilize the talents of veterans to help the Government meet today's
dynamic challenges; and create a program worthy of emulation by the
private sector.
The Office of Energy Employment and Training will provide an
opportunity to align military and utility job classifications, identify
veterans with the desired basic skills, access military personnel
during the off-boarding process and hold training programs specifically
for targeted veteran cohorts.
Underrepresented minorities seeking STEM jobs cannot solely rely upon
advanced degree programs, but must be able to pursue a number of routes
to good paying STEM jobs. A highly focused area for STEM education and
job opportunities can be found in the oil and gas industry.
For example, 2001-13 the number of STEM jobs in North Dakota
increased by 37.2 percent as a direct result of the oil and gas boom
[[Page H5797]]
in that state. North Dakota exceeded the nation in life, physical and
social science technicians and the state is close to the national
average for engineering technicians, physical scientists and life
scientists.
Nationally, in 2010 there were 1.2 million people employed in the oil
and gas industry of those persons only: 98,000 or 8.2% are African
Americans; 188,000 or 15.7% are Hispanics; and 225,687 jobs or 19% are
women.
The 2014 report prepared by the American Petroleum Institute states
the oil and gas industry and petrochemical industry could create
between 940,000 to 1.3 million employment opportunities between now and
2030.
Only a small fraction of these new jobs will come as a result of
retirements.
The major factor for employment demands for the oil and gas industry
is natural growth that will occur and investment by the industry and
the influence of energy demand by a growing economy.
There a significantly larger number and variety of good paying jobs
in the oil and gas industry. In 2011, the average oil field worker
earned $35,590, slightly higher than the national average; those
working in natural gas distribution earned an average of $38,870 per
year. The states with the highest pay included Alaska, at $48,370;
Montana at $45,870 per year; Wyoming, at $41,130; and North Dakota, at
$40,340 per year.
Minorities comprise 26% of the oil and gas labor force in 2010 and
that number is expected to grow to 325 by 2030. In 2010 women were 17%
of the oil and gas labor force and their number is expected to drop to
less than 15% in 2030.
The lower employment prospects for women are a direct consequence of
the extreme level of underrepresentation in the energy sector.
A closer look at the employment prospects for minorities' reveals
that African-Americans like are projected to experience a decline in
employment in the oil and gas industry due to underrepresentation of
African Americans.
The level of underrepresentation of minorities and women is reflected
in oil and gas industry senior and professional ranks. Minorities
comprise 15% of management and professionals working in the oil and gas
industry and are projected to comprise 17% by 2030.
When compared to all blue collar jobs2-minorities make up 21% of the
jobs, and in 2010 they comprised 38% of blue collar jobs.
Women do slightly better with a 24% in 2010, and are expected to hold
this percentage of the blue collar job market to 2030.
Our booming energy sector has been one of the greatest American
success stories in the last decade, and remains a bright spot in our
economy as it continue to fuel job creation. To continue this success
we need a diverse energy workforce that is equipped to meet the
challenges and opportunities of our new energy landscape.
The Jackson Lee amendment will help prepare a diverse population of
workers from across the country with diverse backgrounds to enter into
exciting and rewarding careers in American energy jobs.
Our Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Centers of
excellence, Tribal Colleges and Universities, Native American-Serving
Non-Tribal Institutions and Women Colleges and Universities will become
more engaged by a direct pipeline into the Department of Interior that
will foster collaboration, mentorships and partnerships through
effective job training that will yield employment opportunities.
In closing, I ask my colleagues, to support the Jackson Lee amendment
that will address the ability and potential of people who are
traditionally underrepresented in energy-production activities by
creating an Office of Energy Employment and Training, which will
oversee the hiring and training efforts of the Department of Interior's
energy planning, permitting, and regulatory agencies.
The Department of the Interior will be responsible for fostering
diversity in management, employment, and business activities.
Again, I thank Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member DeFazio for their
outstanding leadership.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. DeFazio
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in House Report 113-493.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of title II, add the following:
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Provisions
SEC. 25001. CERTAIN REVENUES GENERATED BY THIS ACT TO BE MADE
AVAILABLE TO THE COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION TO LIMIT EXCESSIVE SPECULATION IN
ENERGY MARKETS.
The Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) is amended
by redesignating section 44 as section 45, and by inserting
after section 43 the following:
``SEC. 44. REVENUES TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE COMMODITY
FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION.
``(a) Establishment of Treasury Account.--The Secretary of
the Treasury (in this section referred to as the `Secretary')
shall establish an account in the Treasury of the United
States.
``(b) Deposit Into Account of Certain Revenues Generated by
This Act.--The Secretary shall deposit into the account
established under subsection (a) the first $10,000,000 of the
total of the amounts received by the United States under
leases issued under this Act or any plan, strategy, or
program under this Act.
``(c) Availability and Use of Funds.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the amounts in
the account established under subsection (a) shall be made
available to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to use
its existing authorities to limit excessive speculation in
energy markets.
``(2) Subject to appropriations.--The authority provided in
paragraph (1) may be exercised only to such extent, and with
respect to such amounts, as are provided in advance in
appropriations Acts.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 641, the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
{time} 1045
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned earlier, the chief
executive officer of ExxonMobil, under oath before the United States
Senate, testified 3 years ago that the price of oil was $30 to $40
higher than it should have been, and the price at that time was about
$100 a barrel, a little less than it is today. So $30 to $40 of the
cost of each barrel of oil didn't have to do with the company passing
through exploratory costs or lease costs or anything else; 30 to 40
percent of the cost of every barrel of oil is due to speculation by
commodities traders on Wall Street, flash traders, derivatives traders,
and others.
This isn't your grandfather's swaps market or commodities market. It
is not users hedging themselves against future inflation. It is not
producers hedging themselves. No, it is rampant speculation by people
who have no intention of ever accepting delivery of a barrel of oil,
have no use for a barrel of oil, except to manipulate its price to make
it more expensive to make money for themselves and the people they
represent, which is a very small minority of Americans, less than 1
percent. Meanwhile, the other 99 percent of Americans pay more at the
pump.
We should do something about this. Now, there are those who think the
modest position limits in Dodd-Frank will be a horrible, onerous burden
on these speculators, and that maybe they can only extract $20 a
barrel--maybe only $10 a barrel out of us--so you would only be paying
an extra 30 cents at the pump to Wall Street. But as it stands today,
after you take out other associated costs, about 60 cents a gallon that
every American is paying at the pump today, no matter what the price
is, where they live in the country, whether it is very high or very
low, is going to Wall Street speculative interests.
We should do something about that. If we want to provide relief to
the American people at the pump, we should do something about that.
This amendment is very simple. It establishes an account where money
from lease sales would go to this account, and it would be made
available to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission so they could
upgrade their computers and do other things to better track and rein in
speculators. Basically, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has
been choked to the point, in terms of personnel and equipment, I think
they are still using Commodore 64s, and they are trying to chase
supercomputers. We can do better, and we could do something real for
the American people here today other than Groundhog Day on the fifth
anniversary and repassage of this legislation that will not become law.
Now there are those who will say you are increasing the deficit or
whatever. No, it just says those leasing moneys would be put into this
account, and they would be subject to appropriation. We would then have
to convince the Appropriations Committee that it would be a good thing
to upgrade the Commodity Futures Trading Commission so they could crack
down on some
[[Page H5798]]
of the flash trading and speculation that creates volatility and higher
prices for Americans. I think this would be a very good thing to do.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is another attempt to prove the
unfounded position that speculation in energy markets is impacting
energy prices. Last year the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
released a study showing that:
Speculation had little, if any, effect on prices and
volatility.
So this amendment then distracts from focusing really on future
energy needs in our country and increasing our energy supply and
production in our country.
The underlying legislation simply ensures that American energy
production can move forward to create jobs and reduce our dependence on
foreign imports, therefore increasing revenues to the Federal treasury,
and, of course, contribute to economic growth.
Instead, this amendment I think would waste millions of dollars to
try to find proof that speculation increases energy prices--a fact that
has been disproven.
I might add too, Mr. Chairman, that an amendment of this nature has
repeatedly been defeated on a bipartisan vote in the committee, and not
only in the committee but also in the full House of Representatives. I
urge rejection of the amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I have an article from Oil Daily in 2008,
and it is on the subject of a 1-day increase of $17.51 in the price of
a barrel of oil, and they go on to say nothing in the world happened,
that traders were astonished and horrified with the volatility, and
this should really settle the argument whether this is speculation or
fundamentals at work. There is massive speculation in this market.
Even the chairman of ExxonMobil says that a good deal of the price
being paid at the pump has to do with speculation. We can whistle past
the graveyard and continue to bow to Wall Street and defer to them, but
this is the reality. I wish that we would do something about it, but I
fear we won't because they are very generous in even-numbered years.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance
of my time.
Since it was established in earlier debate that the gentleman from
Oregon is a Red Sox fan, let me quote here from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, which of course they are in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, and probably most of them are Red Sox fans. I will
conclude here again on the issue of speculation. They conclude with
this sentence:
When we focus on four specific periods of price runups, we
find that speculation may have decreased prices by about 1.4
percent on average.
In other words, what the gentleman is saying, in suggesting in his
amendment that we should be studying speculation because it raises
prices, here is a report from presumably a lot of Red Sox fans who
believe that speculation might have driven prices down. Again, we have
gone through this before not only in the committee but also in the
House. It has been rejected. I urge we reject it one more time.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will
be postponed.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. 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.
Simpson) having assumed the chair, Mr. Woodall, Acting 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. 4899) to
lower gasoline prices for the American family by increasing domestic
onshore and offshore energy exploration and production, to streamline
and improve onshore and offshore energy permitting and administration,
and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________