[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 25 (Thursday, February 11, 2016)]
[House]
[Page H717]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROPOSED CRUDE OIL FEE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Tipton) for 5 minutes.
Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Speaker, at this time of year, we are starting to
work on budgets in Washington, D.C.
The President recently proposed his eighth budget. If we want to give
credit to the President, he is consistent. He believes that we are just
one tax increase, one regulation, one more government program away from
prosperity in America. But the reality is, Americans in my district are
struggling. They are struggling to be able to maintain the jobs they
have. Far too many Americans are struggling to be able to find a job.
One area where we have had an opportunity to be able to provide good-
paying jobs has been in responsible energy development in this country.
Today, I would like to be able to speak to some of the deeply flawed
logic by the Obama administration in trying to eliminate the use of
fossil fuels in America.
Mr. Speaker, over the last year and a half, despite the
administration's best attempts to stifle production, one of the few
areas of the economy that has provided some financial relief to the
poor and middle class has been the low price of energy. The cause of
this has been the result of American productivity and American
ingenuity driving down the costs, making it more affordable for people.
It is a surprise to no one then that, with his latest budget
proposal, the President is trying in earnest to take the little savings
Americans have welcomed into their wallets and now feed it back to Big
Government.
Effectively, what the President is stating is that government--
Washington--needs those resources more than the American people do.
Two days ago, the President presented a budget that included a $10
per barrel tax on crude oil. His budget stated that if tax would result
in $319 billion in revenues that would be used to fund transportation
infrastructure, ``reduce America's reliance on oil,'' and ensure
``electric cars and other alternatives to oil-based vehicles have the
technology and charging infrastructure they need.''
I believe we need to be clear. I firmly back the notion that we need
to have an all-of-the-above strategy. That is highlighted in the bill I
have introduced in this Congress, Planning for American Energy Act,
which literally calls for all of the above. It explicitly states as
such.
Those resources and technologies are only part of what should be a
multi-pronged strategy. If true energy independence is our goal, we
cannot simply price ourselves out of using traditional energy resources
and transportation fuels. Yet, that is unmistakably exactly what the
President is proposing.
So, while cheap energy is one of the few things keeping the economy
out of a nose dive into a further deep recession, the President
proposes a tax cut on crude oil--whether produced domestically or
abroad--that will cut directly into already low revenues, and will
undoubtedly be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices at
the pump.
An additional $10 per barrel will be a significant sum, even with a
healthy commodity price, but on the day that the President submitted
his proposal, the spot price for a barrel of oil was just under $30.
Given that our oil and gas energy sector is already struggling mightily
with this downswing in price, what exactly does the President hope to
accomplish by wresting away a third of that sum? The economic impacts
of this policy on an industry that is already struggling would be
extremely harmful.
Now, I assume that when we envision who the industry is, the picture
comes to mind of large, multinational corporations. Make no mistake:
they, too, will feel the impacts. But the brunt of an ill-conceived
policy, such as what the President has put forward, will fall squarely
on the shoulders of small- and medium-sized companies that make up the
backbone of our domestic oil and gas industry.
It will also fall squarely on the many contractors who work in those
companies. They are geologists, engineers, construction companies, well
servicing companies, and the hospitality industry. They are the many
hardworking Americans working to provide for their families and working
to provide the rest of us with an invaluable resource that we too often
take for granted.
The President wishes to move us away from oil as a transportation
fuel, so he pursues a purely ideological strategy to force it, never
mind who is trampled in the process.
The President wishes, instead, to pursue electric vehicle sales,
which, in 2015, accounted for less than 1 percent of the total car
sales in the country. Yet, he takes measures to halt coal leasing and
bludgeon coal-fired power plants into nonexistence. Coal, of course, is
the single largest source of electricity in the United States.
These two incoherent policy pursuits are a perfect demonstration of
the complete lack of vision this administration has when it comes to
achieving actual energy independence.
Let's stand up for the American consumer and American jobs and reject
the President's budget proposals.
____________________