[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 27, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S177-S178]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Wyden, Mr.
Merkley, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Booker,
Mr. Markey, and Mr. Sanders):
S. 58. A bill to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to
permanently prohibit the conduct of offshore drilling on the outer
Continental Shelf off the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington;
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the ``West
Coast Ocean Protection Act.''
This important legislation would prohibit oil or gas drilling in
federal waters off the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington.
After four years of an Administration intent on allowing drilling off
the West Coast and in waters across the United States, I am hopeful we
will finally pass this bill to ensure no drilling ever occurs in
Pacific waters.
I'm pleased to be joined today by Senators Padilla, Wyden, Merkley,
Murray, Cantwell, Menendez, Booker, Markey, and Sanders in introducing
this bill, which has been introduced in every Congress since the
Deepwater Horizon disaster in April 2010.
11 people were killed and 17 others injured when the Deepwater
Horizon well blew out. Oil and gas spewed into the Gulf of Mexico for
87 days.
Oil slicks covered the Gulf. Tar balls and toxic sludge covered
beaches and wetlands. More than one-third of federal waters in the Gulf
were closed to fishing.
While the Deepwater Horizon disaster reminded the world of the
dangers of offshore drilling, Californians never had to be convinced;
before Deepwater Horizon and Exxon Valdez, there was the tragic 1969
oil spill in Santa Barbara.
A well blowout on an offshore rig spilled more than 3 million gallons
of crude oil according to some estimates--the worst spill in U.S.
history at the time.
The spill closed local beaches--which were covered by a thick layer
of oil--and thousands of marine mammals and birds were killed.
Tourists were turned away and commercial fishing operations were
halted, hurting the local economy.
After the Santa Barbara spill, California had enough. The State
blocked all new offshore drilling in state waters--which extend three
miles from the shore--and in 1994 enacted a permanent offshore drilling
ban.
Through local ordinances, congressional opposition, and presidential
moratoria, all new drilling in federal waters off California has been
blocked since 1984.
Today, opposition to offshore drilling is higher than ever. A 2018
poll found that nearly 70% of Californians oppose new drilling off our
coast. The evidence is quite clear: Californians do not want any more
drilling.
The California coast is an economic engine of growth for the state
and the nation. A 2015 report produced by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration found that California's 19 coastal counties
created $662 billion in wages and $1.7 trillion in GDP in 2012.
Overall, California's ocean economy supports over 1 million jobs and
generates significant growth for the U.S. Because of the unique nature
of the West Coast ocean shelf, potential drilling would occur near the
coastline and directly threaten the environment and robust economy.
It is long past time to respect the view of California and our fellow
West Coast states by passing the ``West Coast Ocean Protection Act'' to
permanently ban offshore drilling and protect the Pacific coast for
generations to come.
I yield the floor.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Reed, Mr. Cardin,
Mr. Merkley, and Mr. Leahy):
S. 67. A bill to support efforts by international financial
institutions to provide a robust global response to the COVID-19
pandemic; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Mr. DURBIN.
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S177, on January 27, 2021, in the third column, the
following appears: By Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr.
Portman, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Young,
Mr. Moran, Mr. Rounds, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Blunt, Ms. Ernst, Mr.
Sullivan, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Toomey, Mr. Sasse, Mr. Lee, Mr.
Cassidy, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Braun, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Johnson, Mr.
Crapo, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, and Mr. Risch): S. 68. A bill to amend
chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide that major
rules of the executive branch shall have no force or effect unless
a joint resolution of approval is enacted into law; to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
The online Record has been corrected to read: By Mr. DURBIN (for
himself, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Reed, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Merkley, and Mr.
Leahy):S. 67. A bill to support efforts by international financial
institutions to provide a robust global response to the COVID-19
pandemic; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. Mr. DURBIN.
========================= END NOTE =========================
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 67
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Support for Global Financial
Institution Pandemic Response Act of 2021''.
SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR A ROBUST GLOBAL RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC.
(a) United States Policies at the International Financial
Institutions.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
instruct the United States Executive Director of each
international financial institution (as defined in section
1701(c)(2) of the International Financial Institutions Act
(22 U.S.C. 262r(c)(2)) to use the
[[Page S178]]
voice and vote of the United States at that institution--
(A) to seek to ensure adequate fiscal space for world
economies in response to the global coronavirus disease 2019
(commonly referred to as ``COVID-19'') pandemic through--
(i) the suspension of all debt service payments to the
institution; and
(ii) the relaxation of fiscal targets for any government
operating a program supported by the institution, or seeking
financing from the institution, in response to the pandemic;
(B) to oppose any loan, grant, document, or strategy that
would lead to a decrease in health care spending or in any
other spending that would impede the ability of any country
to prevent or contain the spread of, or treat persons who are
or may be infected with, the SARS-CoV-2 virus; and
(C) to require approval of all Special Drawing Rights
allocation transfers from wealthier member countries to
countries that are emerging markets or developing countries,
based on confirmation of implementable transparency
mechanisms or protocols to ensure the allocations are used
for the public good and in response the global pandemic.
(2) Report required.--The Chairman of the National Advisory
Council on International Monetary and Financial Policies
shall include in the annual report required by section 1701
of the International Financial Institutions Act (22 U.S.C.
262r) a description of progress made toward advancing the
policies described in paragraph (1).
(b) IMF Issuance of Special Drawing Rights.--
(1) United states support for issuance.--The Secretary of
the Treasury shall instruct the United States Executive
Director of the International Monetary Fund to use the voice
and vote of the United States to support the issuance of a
special allocation of not less than 2,000,000,000,000 Special
Drawing Rights so that governments are able to access
additional resources to finance their responses to the global
COVID-19 pandemic.
(2) Authorization to vote for allocation.--Notwithstanding
section 6(a) of the Special Drawing Rights Act (22 U.S.C.
286q(a)), the United States Governor of the International
Monetary Fund may vote to allocate up to 2,000,000,000,000
Special Drawing Rights under article XVIII of the Articles of
Agreement of the International Monetary Fund.
(c) Termination.--Subsections (a) and (b) shall have no
force or effect after the earlier of--
(1) the date that is one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act; or
(2) the date that is 30 days after the date on which the
Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary
of Health and Human Services and the heads of other relevant
Federal agencies, submits to the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Financial
Services of the House of Representatives a report stating
that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is no longer a serious threat to
public health in any part of the world.
____________________