[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 42 (Wednesday, March 9, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H1381-H1389]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2471, HAITI
DEVELOPMENT, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND INSTITUTIONAL TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE
ACT; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 75, EXTENSION OF
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2022; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF
H.R. 6968, SUSPENDING ENERGY IMPORTS FROM RUSSIA ACT
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules,
I call up House Resolution 972 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 972
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R.
2471) to measure the progress of post-disaster recovery and
efforts to address corruption, governance, rule of law, and
media freedoms in Haiti, with the Senate amendment thereto,
and to consider in the House, without intervention of any
point of order, a motion offered by the chair of the
Committee on Appropriations or her designee that the House
concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment consisting
of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-35. The Senate
amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The
motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees.
The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
motion to its adoption without intervening motion. The
question of adoption of the motion shall be divided for a
separate vote on all of the matter proposed to be inserted by
the amendment of the House other than divisions B, C, F, X,
and Z, and titles 2 and 3 of division N. The two portions of
the divided question shall be considered in the order
specified by the Chair. If either portion of the divided
question fails of adoption, then the House shall be
considered to have made no disposition of the Senate
amendment.
Sec. 2. The chair of the Committee on Appropriations and
the chair of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
may insert in the Congressional Record not later than March
11, 2022, such material as they may deem explanatory of the
Senate amendment and the motion specified in the first
section of this resolution.
Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J.
Res. 75) making further continuing appropriations for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for other
purposes. All points of order against consideration of the
joint resolution are waived. The joint resolution shall be
considered as read. All points of order against provisions in
the joint resolution are waived. The previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on any
amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion
except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled
by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Appropriations or their respective designees; and (2) one
motion to recommit.
Sec. 4. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 6968) to
prohibit the importation of energy products of the Russian
Federation, and for other purposes. All points of order
against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall
be considered as read. All points of order against provisions
in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment
thereto to final passage without intervening motion except:
(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways
and Means or their respective designees; and (2) one motion
to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Garcia of Texas). The gentleman from
Massachusetts is recognized for 1 hour.
{time} 0915
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), who
is my good friend, pending which I yield myself such time as I may
consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is
for the purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, let me wish a good morning to my good
friend, Mr. Cole. It feels like just a couple of hours ago I was saying
good morning. Let me say to the gentleman that he looks marvelous for
getting no sleep, and it is great to be with my friend.
Madam Speaker, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House
Resolution 972, providing for consideration of the Senate Amendment to
H.R. 2471, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022. It provides for a
motion to concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 2471 with a House
amendment and 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.
It divides the question on adoption of the motion into two votes in the
order specified by the chair, and provides that if any portion of the
divided question fails, then the House shall be considered to have made
no disposition of the Senate amendment.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 75, the
Extension of Continuing Appropriations Act, 2022, under a closed rule.
It provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations
and provides for one motion to recommit.
Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6968, the
Suspending Energy Imports From Russia Act, under a closed rule. It
provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means and
provides one motion to recommit.
Madam Speaker, the bills contained in the rule are about investing in
our communities and families here at home and living up to our values
abroad.
Throughout last summer, House Democrats were hard at work passing
appropriations bills funding nearly all of the Federal Government to
build on the momentum of our economic recovery. This full-year omnibus
is the product of extensive bipartisan, bicameral negotiations. Both
sides have come together to produce an agreement to fund the government
that I think has resulted in a very, very good bill.
That means this agreement does not include everything I wanted, and I
know it doesn't include everything my Republican friends wanted. But I
think, at the end of the day, it is a good package that is going to
benefit the American people.
I especially want to recognize Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking Member
Granger and thank them for forging a bipartisan path forward. I also
want to take this opportunity to thank the incredible staff of the
Appropriations Committee as well as the incredible staff of the Rules
Committee--Democrats and Republicans--who have worked tirelessly to
bring this legislation to the floor today. I think most of my
colleagues here do not appreciate how hard the staff works, and I think
the American people ought to be proud of those who serve up here in
both parties for their public service.
The work of Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking Member Granger could not
have come at a more critical time. We are at a moment in history that
demands a strong and confident America,
[[Page H1382]]
and the certainty provided by this omnibus will allow us to tackle some
of our country's biggest challenges by helping to support good-paying
American jobs; by building ladders of opportunity for hardworking
families; by confronting the existential threat of climate change; and
by investing in lifesaving research into maternal health, mental
health, and opioid abuse.
I am proud that we negotiated a government funding package that
centers on the needs of middle-class and working families, not the rich
and not on powerful special interests.
I am particularly proud that one of the provisions included in this
package--funding for a White House Conference on Food, Nutrition,
Hunger, and Health--is something that we have worked together on in a
bipartisan way at the Rules Committee and with Democrats and
Republicans in the Senate.
We live in the United States of America, the richest country in the
history of this planet, yet as we gather here today, close to 40
million of our fellow citizens don't know where their next meal is
going to come from. There is not a single congressional district in
America that is hunger-free. We ought to be ashamed of that.
Hunger is a political condition. We can solve this problem, but we
need to have the political will. This conference, I hope, will provide
that political will.
I will remind my colleagues the last time we had a conference on this
subject was 54 years ago, so I am looking forward to working with the
White House and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to forge a
path forward to end hunger in America once and for all.
Madam Speaker, this rule also provides for consideration of a short-
term continuing resolution that keeps the government funded at current
levels through March 15 to give the United States Senate adequate time
to pass this full-year omnibus agreement and get it to President
Biden's desk so that he can sign it.
And in the wake of the unprovoked and horrific invasion of Ukraine at
the hands of Russian President Vladimir Putin, this Congress is taking
urgent bipartisan action to protect global peace and security and hold
Putin's corrupt regime accountable.
Yesterday, I co-chaired a meeting of the Tom Lantos Human Rights
Commission. We had a detailed discussion about what was happening in
Ukraine and the fact that what is happening has risen to the level of
war crimes, and there needs to be accountability.
We have all seen the awful pictures and the awful videos, Madam
Speaker, families gunned down, apartment buildings bombed, and the
indiscriminate use of force, yet still the people of Ukraine are
courageously standing up for freedom. Congress, the Biden
administration, and the people of the United States must stand with
them, and that is exactly what this measure does.
By encouraging World Trade Organization members to suspend
concessions to Russia; taking steps to review Russia's international
trade status; and, very importantly, by reauthorizing a strengthened
Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act so that the United
States can impose further sanctions on human rights abusers in Russia
and around the globe, America is standing up to bullies like Putin who
think they can invade their way into an empire and blackmail the world
with their oil.
I want to commend President Biden for taking action to stop the
import of Russian energy products into the United States, action which
our legislation supports.
I should also say, Madam Speaker, that I had kind of hoped that this
could have come up under suspension because I like to think there is no
dissent on what we are doing in this legislation. I am concerned that
some of my friends on the other side objected to the strengthening of
human rights provisions in the Magnitsky Act.
Ironically, the language that we are using is language very similar
to the executive order put forward by President Trump. I don't agree
with him on a lot of things--almost nothing--but I think he was right
signing an executive order to actually strengthen the human rights
criteria for the Magnitsky legislation. We ought to hold human rights
abusers--those guilty of corruption--accountable. And for anybody--
anybody--to want to weaken the standard and to want to let some people
off the hook, I think, is unconscionable. So I hope there is a strong
bipartisan vote on this.
Finally, I want to highlight that our bipartisan omnibus agreement
includes $13.6 billion in emergency military, humanitarian, and
economic support for Ukraine. This week, the United Nations has warned
that this is the ``fastest growing refugee crisis in Europe since World
War II.'' I am proud that we are taking the moral obligation of
humanitarian assistance seriously.
Together, these measures, in addition to the strong leadership shown
by President Biden working quickly and in close consultation with our
allies and partners, have placed enormous pressure on President Putin
and his corrupt oligarchs to end this war. I hope that he does that
immediately.
The final thing that I am going to say is to echo what I began with.
This bill is not perfect through the eyes of anybody, whether you are a
liberal Democrat like me or whether you are a conservative Republican,
and this rule allows people to express their support and their lack of
support for different parts of this bill very clearly.
Some think that the defense section is too high. I personally do. But
we have an opportunity to be able to vote yes or no on that.
Some think that the investments in domestic spending are too high. I
think they are not high enough, but whatever. People have an
opportunity to be able to vote yes or no on that.
So, I hope that we can get support for the rule. I hope that we can
get this legislation passed today, sent over to the Senate, and help
the American people.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I thank my very good friend, the
distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts, Chairman McGovern, for
yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Today's rule covers three items. The first item is a bill to ban
imports of Russian oil into the United States and to impose additional
sanctions following Russia's unprovoked and unjust invasion of Ukraine.
Madam Speaker, although I will be supporting this bill, I cannot help
but feel that this is a half measure and a missed opportunity to
exhibit unified support on immediate steps to confront Putin's evil
regime.
Yesterday, Senators Wyden and Crapo introduced a much stronger bill,
one that was negotiated over the weekend by Republicans and Democrats
in both the House and the Senate. But rather than taking yes for an
answer, the majority instead put forward a weaker bill, one that is
watered down and leaves loopholes wide enough to drive a tanker
through.
Banning Russian oil imports in the wake of Vladimir Putin's invasion
of Ukraine should be an obvious no-brainer, just like it ought to be a
no-brainer for the President to reverse his misguided policies and
unleash development of America's own energy sources. But instead of
doing so, the Biden administration continues to discourage domestic oil
and gas production and is asking every other oil producer in the world
to make up the difference.
Instead of encouraging our own domestic sources of energy, which
could meet our needs, critically supply our allies, and strengthen
American energy independence, President Biden instead is taking steps
like unilaterally canceling the Keystone XL pipeline, imposing a ban on
new oil and gas exploration and leasing on Federal lands, and telling
hardworking Americans who are struggling to buy expensive gasoline to
instead go buy more expensive electric vehicles.
Failing to develop America's energy resources is a missed
opportunity, Madam Speaker, just like this bill. We had a better
option. I wish we had taken it.
Our second item today is an omnibus appropriations package covering
the remainder of the year 2022, and the third is a short-term
continuing resolution to ensure continuity of government funding while
Congress processes a larger bill.
Madam Speaker, it has been a very, very long road to get to this
point. But
[[Page H1383]]
today, the House will act on a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations
package. As vice ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, I am
encouraged that we are finally nearing completion of this fundamental
function of Congress to provide full-year funding for the government.
We are here today in a time of great crisis. Two weeks ago, Russian
President Vladimir Putin launched an unprovoked and unjust war against
Ukraine, its democratic neighbor to the west. Inflation has skyrocketed
to a 40-year high, and due to the administration's reckless action, gas
prices have continued to soar month after month after month.
{time} 0930
Yet despite these crises, the Members of this body have worked
together and have found common ground on today's legislation.
As I have said many times, one of the most consequential duties of a
Member of Congress is to fund the government and keep it open and
operating. At a time of crisis, this is more important than ever.
Last year, the Appropriations Committee passed all 12 appropriations
bills out of committee and succeeded in passing nine of those bills
across the floor before the August recess. Unfortunately, these bills
were partisan and did not receive support from any Republican Members,
with good reason.
Today, we are 5 months into fiscal year 2022, and despite the long
process, the path forward has always been clear. It was clear last
July, just as it is clear today.
In order to reach a final bipartisan, bicameral deal on
appropriations for FY 2022, four conditions needed to be met. I am
greatly pleased that this bill meets all four.
The first is to ensure that the longstanding, bipartisan pro-life
provisions historically included in the appropriations bills are
restored. These include the Hyde amendment, which prevents Federal
dollars from being used to pay for abortions, except in limited cases
of rape, incest, and the life of the mother, and the Weldon amendment,
which protects American doctors, nurses, and other healthcare
professionals from participating in and providing abortions if they
have a moral objection.
The inclusion of these and other broadly popular provisions was and
is an absolute necessity for this bill to have any chance of becoming
law. I am personally deeply grateful that they are included in this
package.
Second, partisan policy riders that were included in the bills that
passed the House last summer needed to come out. These are provisions
that both sides did not agree to and do not enjoy bipartisan consensus.
At the end of the day, we needed to reach an agreement on these items
to move forward. Fortunately, each of these provisions has been
removed.
Third, the level of defense spending absolutely needed to come up.
Unfortunately, last year, President Biden proposed a budget that
underfunded national defense, repeating the mistake of the Obama-Biden
administration of chronically underfunding our national defense. But
earlier this year, the House Armed Services Committee and the Senate
Armed Services Committee, both controlled by Democrats, worked together
in a bipartisan manner to authorize an increase in defense spending of
$25 billion over the fiscal year.
In today's bill, appropriators actually went beyond that, ensuring a
robust increase in defense spending. This increase is necessary to
ensure that our Armed Forces will have the funds needed to maintain our
readiness and to procure the weapons and assets the warfighters of
tomorrow will need to continue to succeed on the battlefield.
This includes increases for defense assets based in my own home State
of Oklahoma. If the present crisis in Ukraine shows us nothing else, it
should show us the need to continue to adequately fund our national
defense.
Finally, the fourth condition that needed to be met was that the
proposed levels of nondefense spending had to come down. In the initial
set of bills that passed the House, my friends in the majority sought
to include a 17 percent increase in nondefense spending. While that no
doubt included many worthy items, Republicans generally felt that 17
percent was excessive, particularly given the substantial needs on the
defense side of the ledger.
But the bill before us today increases nondefense spending by just
6.7 percent, which will allow for increased investments in key areas
while also ensuring that we will continue to be responsible stewards of
taxpayer dollars.
Of course, this 6.7 percent ensures that there will be significant
and important investments in nondefense areas across the government. I
am particularly pleased that the National Institutes of Health will
receive a robust $2.25 billion increase, which will help advance
medical science, help address future pandemics, and continue our
progress toward defeating the scourge of cancer.
We are also funding ARPA-H, one of the President's highest
priorities, at $1 billion in its first year of operation. I am also
encouraged that this bill provides significant increases for TRIO and
GEAR UP, two programs that are close to my heart, that help first-
generation students go to college. These are just a few of the programs
that I could point to that are worthy of increased funding and
investment, and this bill has done that.
The legislation before us today represents a negotiated compromise
between the House and the Senate and obviously between Democrats and
Republicans. Given that, it is a compromise. That means neither side
got everything that they wanted. As I have often said, in a compromise,
you have to give up more than you would like to get less than you want.
Indeed, this is not the bill I would have written had I written it
alone. But at the end of the day, it represents a good balance for
Congress and for the Nation.
Before I finish, I want to congratulate my friends and colleagues on
the Appropriations Committee, particularly Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro and
Ranking Member Kay Granger, without whom we would not have gotten to
where we are today.
I also want to extend my huge thank you, as the chairman did, to the
Appropriations Committee staff and to the Rules staff on both sides of
the aisle. These staffers are truly unsung heroes who spent many long
and sleepless nights over the preceding weeks, including this past
weekend. We would not be here today without them.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Let me just say that I have enormous respect for the gentleman from
Oklahoma. There is this old adage that says you don't have to agree on
everything to agree on something. Much of what he cited is something
that I think we can all agree on: investments in medical research,
support for the NIH, investments in trying to find ways to manage and
cure cancer. All of those things are incredibly important, and I think
they bring us together.
Some of the things he said I disagree with. I believe it is a mistake
to deny women their legal reproductive rights, and I think the defense
budget is way too big. Spending more on something doesn't necessarily
get you a better result. We need to spend more efficiently and more
effectively. We have a military budget that is so bloated, that is so
excessive, so filled with cost overruns, that even Dr. Strangelove
would be impressed. We need to do better.
Having said that, I am aware that we have to be able to deal on
legislation within the reality that we live in. We have a 50/50 Senate;
we have a majority here in the House, not as big as I would like.
Hopefully, that changes in November. But the bottom line is, we have to
work with what we have. I think that is what has occurred here.
We continue to hear this claim that President Biden's climate
policies are somehow to blame for the latest spike in gas prices. I
think we need to just set the record straight here. Domestic energy
production is up, it is rising, and it is approaching records. There
are over 9,000 approved drilling permits the oil industry is not using.
The truth is that changes in domestic energy policy often take years to
impact global energy markets.
Instead, what is happening here is oil companies are using Putin's
war as an excuse to jack up prices at the pump even more. They argue
for looser regulations, cheaper drilling, and more pollution.
This is Putin's price hike. Quite frankly, at this time of global
crisis, I
[[Page H1384]]
would like to appeal to the patriotism of Big Oil in this country to
not make record profits their priority, to actually put the American
people's interest and, in fact, the global interest first. Let's not
fool ourselves that greed isn't at play here.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a March 4 opinion article
written by the House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Raul
Grijalva, entitled ``Oil and gas lobbyists are using Ukraine to push
for a drilling free-for-all in the U.S.''
[From the Guardian, Mar. 4, 2022]
Oil and Gas Lobbyists Are Using Ukraine To Push for a Drilling Free-
for-All in the US
(By Raul M Grijalva)
Last week, we all watched in horror as Vladimir Putin
launched a deadly, catastrophic attack on Ukraine, violating
international treaties across the board. Most of us swiftly
condemned his actions and pledged support for the Ukrainian
people whose country, homes and lives are under attack.
But the fossil-fuel industry had a different take. They saw
an opportunity--and a shameless one at that--to turn violence
and bloodshed into an oil and gas propaganda-generating
scheme. Within hours, industry-led talking points were oozing
into press releases, social media and opinion pieces, telling
us the key to ending this crisis is to immediately hand US
public lands and waters over to fossil-fuel companies and
quickly loosen the regulatory strings.
Our top priority must be ending Putin's hostilities, but as
chair of the US House committee on natural resources, I feel
duty-bound to set the record straight. We can't let the
fossil-fuel industry scare us into a domestic drilling free-
for-all that is neither economically warranted nor
environmentally sound.
Despite industry's claims to the contrary, President Biden
has not hobbled US oil and gas development. In fact, much to
my deep disappointment and protest, this administration
actually approved more US drilling permits per month in 2021
than President Trump did during each of the first three years
of his presidency. Before the pandemic, oil and gas
production from public lands and waters reached an all-time
high, and the current administration has done little to
change that trajectory over the last 13 months.
Fossil-fuel companies and their backers in Congress also
profess that more drilling on public lands and waters would
lower gas prices for Americans. But if that's true, why
hasn't record oil extraction from both federal and non-
federal lands over the last decade done anything to
consistently lower, or at least stabilize, prices at the
pump?
The fact is that crude oil is a volatile global commodity.
Worldwide supply, demand, and unpredictable events--like
wars--influence the price of gas, not the current
administration's decision to approve a few new leases or
permits.
Even if we take industry's claims at face value, nothing is
keeping fossil-fuel companies from more drilling on public
lands right now. The oil industry already controls at least
26m acres of public land and is sitting on more than 9,000
approved drilling permits they're not using.
They have a similarly gratuitous surplus offshore, where
nearly 75% of their active federal oil and gas leases,
covering over 8m acres, have yet to produce a single drop.
Any new leases issued today wouldn't produce anything of
value for years, or even decades in some cases.
If industry did start to ramp up production from federal
leases, the overall increase to the total US supply would
likely be marginal. In 2020, public lands and waters only
accounted for 22% and 11% of oil and gas production,
respectively. The vast majority of oil and gas resources are
beneath state and private lands--not public lands or federal
waters.
With the facts laid bare, we see the fossil-fuel industry's
crocodile tears for what they are--the same old demands for
cheaper leases and looser regulations they've been peddling
for decades. These pleas have nothing to do with countering
Putin's invasion or stabilizing gas prices, and everything to
do with making oil and gas development as easy and profitable
as possible.
The US is the world's top oil and gas producer. Doubling
down on fossil fuels is a false solution that only
perpetuates the problems that got us here in the first place.
And quite frankly, we can't afford to maintain the status
quo. In its newest report the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) issued its most dire warning yet on the
rapidly accelerating climate crisis. If we fail to enact
major mitigation efforts, like curbing fossil-fuel
development, both quickly and substantially, we will ``miss a
brief and rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a
livable and sustainable future for all''.
Fortunately, there is a path forward that simultaneously
cuts the lifeline to fossil-fuel despots like Putin,
stabilizes energy prices here at home, and creates a safer,
more sustainable planet. We must wean ourselves off our oil
and gas dependence and make transformational investments in
cleaner renewable energy technologies, like those in the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Build Back Better Act and
the Competes Act, and we must do it now.
The fossil-fuel industry has had hold of the microphone for
far too long. It's time we let the facts speak for
themselves.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, let me thank the gentleman for
yielding, and let me add my appreciation to Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro and
Ranking Member Granger and admit that the world now sees this every day
in American newspapers and around the world: the pillage, the
desperation, the violence, and the death of women and children in
Ukraine, the worst humanitarian crisis that we have seen in a century
and the absolute outrage of the killing machine that Putin is and the
terroristic acts. He is a war criminal.
I rise today to support H.R. 6968 and to thank my friend from Texas
(Mr. Doggett) for joining us together to be able to move forward on
language that works to hold Russia accountable for its invasion of
Ukraine by denying its preferential trade treatment and seeking to
remove it from the World Trade Organization.
This legislation bans Russian energy imports and suspends
preferential trade treatment with Belarus. I was at the border of
Belarus as it was hosting 30,000 to 40,000 Russian troops and its
reckless attitude of incarcerating and detaining its own political
opposition. The head of Belarus is no better.
The President receives the ability to further increase tariffs on
Russian or Belarusian goods. Congress is empowered to disapprove any
Presidential decision to restore normal trade relations or to remove
the import ban.
It further closes yet another avenue for Russian participation in the
world economy by revoking most-favored-nation status dealing with
exports as well as its participation in world trade and denying Belarus
membership.
Further, with this ban on Russian energy imports, Americans will no
longer be contributing to Putin's most violent actions. He is a war
criminal. He is killing children.
Let me also rise in support of H.R. 2471. I call it working Americans
response act. It is an appropriation that deals with healthcare and
education. It deals with climate change, and it also deals with
responding to the needs of the American people.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Texas an
additional 30 seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, it additionally responds to the
potential of those that are facing domestic violence and sexual assault
with the Violence Against Women Act that I led and had passed in this
House just a few months ago.
So let me say that this is a job well done to all of those who have
been working but let us do this in a bipartisan manner.
The people of Ukraine cry out in pain. Russia is now brought to its
knees. Let's make sure that Vladimir Putin never stands on the world
stage again.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
just quickly respond to my friend's comment about the energy industry.
I am from an energy district. I am from an energy State. My
constituents and their forebearers have produced more energy than they
have consumed for over a hundred years, and they have shared it all
over the world, but particularly across this country.
Thank God for them because, quite frankly, what Americans would be
paying at the pump now would be astronomical were it not for them.
Since 2005, American oil production has doubled, and that is due to
their ingenuity. Frankly, we pay almost the lowest energy prices in the
world.
I am sorry, but to put all of these energy price increases off on
Vladimir Putin--he is certainly responsible for those this week, but
the reality is, for the entire Biden Presidency, energy prices have
been going up. That is because the President, on his very first day,
effectively declared war on the fossil fuel industry. He canceled the
Keystone Pipeline. He changed the leasing and drilling rules on Federal
lands. The hostility has simply been overwhelming.
Now, where does that put us? The United States is going to Iran to
ask them to increase energy production, the largest sponsor of state
tyranny.
[[Page H1385]]
We are sending representatives to Venezuela. Why don't we just call
people in Houston and Oklahoma City and Cheyenne? We have got lots of
places that know how to produce energy and have been doing it cheaply,
efficiently, fairly, and cleanly for decades.
The reality is, let's not attack them. They are our salvation in a
time of trial, and they are our national security moving forward. I
feel very strongly about that.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Burgess), my good friend and distinguished member of the Rules
Committee and the Energy and Commerce Committee.
{time} 0945
Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I also am from an energy State, and I
want to associate myself with the remarks of Ranking Member Cole as far
as the energy industry is concerned. Quite correct, the hostility of
the Biden administration to American energy was front and center from
day one when the President took the oath of office, and it is only the
last 6 weeks that we have seen the hostility from Putin and Russia, but
the seeds were set for record high energy prices because of the
activities of the Biden administration and the Democratic leadership in
this Congress, quite frankly.
But I am here today to speak about the spending bill that is in front
of us. Halfway through the fiscal year, we finally have the
appropriations bills for the spending for this year, and I am grateful
to see a copy on the Speaker's desk. That is the only copy that I have
seen. Certainly, we didn't have a copy last night in the Rules
Committee.
I am gratified to know that there actually does exist a copy of this
spending bill; but, once again, no Member of the people's House has
really had the opportunity to look at and weigh in on, no ability to
amend last night in the Rules Committee, no ability to really affect
this massive spending bill that is in front of us.
I planned to offer several amendments to improve this bill. The
public health mandates are easing around the country, but the
Department of Transportation still requires patrons to wear masks on
public transportation, on airlines. This could and should be rescinded,
and this was an opportunity to do just that.
As Mr. Cole mentioned, we are experiencing some of the highest gas
prices in over a decade, maybe even in this generation, and no funds in
this bill should be expended to restrict the operation or development
of oil and gas pipelines to get that vitally needed energy out of
places like the Permian Basin to population centers--Dallas, Houston,
Oklahoma City--where they can be consumed or where they can be
liquefied and exported to other countries.
Federal agencies are behind, veterans' services are severely
backlogged. I would have loved to have submitted an amendment to
appropriate some additional dollars, $2 billion, to the Department of
Veterans Affairs so that they could relieve this backlog for our
veterans. And, in fact, the budget neutrality requirements in the
Medicare physician fee schedule could have been waived, and we could
have done so with the excess funds in the Provider Relief Fund and
given our frontline health personnel a little bit of a break from the
fact that they have been on the front lines battling the coronavirus
for 2 years, and what do they get for that effort? A pay cut.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Texas an
additional 1 minute.
Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, the Congressional Budget Office did
provide to the Budget Committee, of which I am also a member, a list of
the top 20 agencies that are overfunded with funds that have been
appropriated over the last 2 years. The totality of those 20 accounts
is $340 billion. There were moneys available. A lot of things that are
in this bill could have been offset if we had simply taken the time to
do it. I will say, since I am a member of the authorizing committee,
going forward our authorizing committees have to do their work. They
have to do the study because we can't expect it to all happen at the
Appropriations Committee at the eleventh hour.
Madam Speaker, I think it is important that people be able to see
where those moneys exist. The results of the study, which was compiled
by the Congressional Budget Office, are contained on a spreadsheet and
can be found at: https://burgess.house.gov/UploadedFiles/COB-
UnspentCOVID.pdf.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to correct the record on one thing. The gentleman said he
didn't get a copy of the text of what we are considering here today. It
was put into his Dropbox, and he could have downloaded it. It was
emailed to his staff. It was posted online. Yeah, we didn't print off a
3,000-page bill because I believe in saving trees. But it was
available, and I just want to point that out for the record. I will
also just say--and again with great respect for my two colleagues on
the Rules Committee--I don't share their enthusiasm about big oil
companies. I just don't. They are making all-time-high record profits
while Americans are paying more at the gas pump.
I will remind my friends that when Donald Trump was President, we had
unemployment at about 14.9 percent, which was terrible. It is now down
to 3.8 percent, which is driving up demand. Nobody is questioning the
fact that there is a supply-and-demand problem here. But we also ought
to understand that part of these price hikes, in addition to the Putin
price hike, is the oil company price hike, and as we try to figure out
how to alleviate the burden on the American people, which we are trying
to do, we also have to figure out how we do it in a way where any
savings or any tax incentives that we might provide are actually passed
on to the consumer because the oil industry in this country, the big
oil companies, have a history of price gouging, and the fact that they
are doing it now I think is unconscionable.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I
will refrain from correcting my friend again and just send him
something to read.
If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the
rule to bring up H.R. 6858, the American Energy Independence from
Russia Act for immediate consideration.
Two weeks ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin shocked the world by
launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In doing so, Mr. Putin
revealed his true self, and that is a bully, a thug, a tyrant bent on
subverting his democratic neighbor to the west. In challenging not only
Ukraine, but also the rest of the civilized world, Mr. Putin's powerful
weapon is not his army, potent though that may be, but the dependence
of much of the rest of the world on Russian oil and gas. Already he has
begun to put the squeeze on democratic states seeking to challenge his
invasion of Ukraine by threatening to cut off their supplies of energy.
The American Energy Independence from Russia Act would address the
challenge and would reposition the United States to be energy self-
sufficient. It would immediately approve the Keystone XL pipeline,
would restart oil and gas leasing on Federal lands and waters, and
would expand liquid natural gas exports at the moment Europe needs the
most. In doing so, it would ensure that America remains energy
independent and can act to address Russian aggression without risking
economic damage.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my
amendment in the Record along with extraneous material immediately
prior to the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Oklahoma?
There was no objection.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Crenshaw), my good friend and a distinguished member of the
Energy and Commerce Committee, to further explain our amendment.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question
so we can immediately consider the American Energy Independence from
Russia Act, led by my friend and the Republican leader of the Energy
and Commerce Committee, Cathy McMorris Rodgers.
[[Page H1386]]
This week our President, our American President, asked Venezuela and
Saudi Arabia to increase oil production, asked them to boost their
output so that American consumers wouldn't see a spike in gas prices.
It seems like a noble cause at first glance, but I couldn't help to
think to myself what a strange thing to ask because surely he knows
that we can also boost domestic production right here at home. Surely
he knows that domestic production supports American jobs, and surely he
knows that domestic production is cleaner, by far, than foreign
production; far better for the environment than Venezuelan oil unless
that Socialist dictator suddenly became a devout green energy disciple
without any of us knowing it.
Surely President Biden knows that energy demand doesn't just
disappear because you tell middle-class Americans to go buy a Tesla.
Surely he knows all of this, right? The answer is, of course, yes, he
does know that, and the entire Democratic Party knows this. It is
impossible not to know these things because these things are called
hard facts. They are indisputable. Those facts are simple and worth
repeating.
Number 1: The world will demand at least 50 percent more energy in
the next 50 years. That is a fact.
Number 2: The energy demanded will be reliable energy; electricity
that turns on when you want it, heat that keeps you alive in the
winter, and air conditioning that keeps you cool in the summer.
Fact number 3: Solar and wind cannot and will not ever provide this
reliable energy, no matter how often you worship and pray to the
deities of wind turbines and solar panels; proudly made, of course, by
the Communist genocidal country of China.
Fact number 4: American production of oil and gas is far cleaner than
any other country, except maybe Canada.
These are indisputable facts. So where does that leave us? For anyone
wise in the ways of common sense, it leads to one conclusion. It is in
the American interest to pursue absolute American energy dominance. If
you don't believe me, let's outline the alternative. Let's imagine we
go the way of Germany and invest half a trillion dollars in building
out unreliable wind and solar production, only to watch our energy
prices rise faster than anywhere else and yet still be forced to turn
on coal plants and import Russian gas because your green energy just
doesn't work the way you wanted it to.
The rest of Europe wasn't all that different. They increased their
reliance on Russian gas from 10 percent to over 40 percent now, and I
cannot help but notice that the Democratic Party seems intent on
pursuing this very path, canceling leases and pipelines, increasing
regulations, chastising our industry. If no one else here noticed,
someone in Russia certainly did.
Fast forward to 2022, and Putin, with his newfound leverage over
European energy supply, realizes it may just be the right time to
exercise his imperialistic ambitions and retake the old Soviet
territory of Ukraine, leaving thousands of innocents dead and a Western
world order completely upended.
We are all left thinking the same thought, wouldn't it be better if
it was America supplying Europe its energy? Wouldn't it be better if
Europe wasn't held hostage to the whims of a dictator? Wouldn't it
be better if we didn't have to wonder where the extra oil would come
from after we rightfully ban Russian imports?
Most of us are thinking that, of course. Unfortunately, those in the
majority, those in power are not. I pray that you start.
We should defeat the previous question, pass the American Energy
Independence from Russia Act and pursue true American energy dominance.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Give me a break. I hope my friends know better, and I hope they know
what drives the price of oil. They talk as if there is just one little
switch you can turn on. I hear them talking, just bring the Keystone
pipeline back online. By the way, it was never built, and it was years
away from bringing any oil to the United States--foreign oil, by the
way; Canada is another country. Even if it were built, we are told it
may lower prices by maybe one cent a gallon and lock us into the same
dependence on fossil fuels that got us into this mess to begin with.
We have been arguing for years with my friends to make the transition
away from fossil fuels to greener, cleaner energy so every time there
is a world crisis we are not having this discussion, but instead they
continue to be in the pockets of the oil companies. Follow the money.
Follow the money. Look where the oil companies are putting their money.
By the way, when they say we should do more drilling, the oil
companies now have been provided 9,000 new drilling permits on public
lands. Much to my disappointment, the Biden administration is actually
outpacing even the Trump administration in approving new drilling
permits on public lands and water. So give me a break.
Here is the reality, and let me spell it out for my friends; and I
think they know better, but again it is politics as usual: Oil is a
global commodity. Prices rise when supply chains are disrupted or
demand is interrupted, like we saw during COVID. Prices rise when oil-
producing countries launch destabilizing invasions; and, yes, when oil
companies think they can use either of these as an excuse to jack up
the prices, they do.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a March 4 article from
Newsweek entitled, ``'Little Evidence' Keystone Pipeline Would Level
Prices Despite GOP Claims.''
[From Newsweek, Mar. 4, 2022]
`Little Evidence' Keystone Pipeline Would Level Prices Despite GOP
Claims
(By Alexandra Hutzler)
Republicans are hitting President Joe Biden over his
decision to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline as gas prices
rise across the country in the wake of Russia's invasion of
Ukraine.
Former Vice President Mike Pence said last week ``gas
prices have risen across the country because of this
Administration's war on energy--shutting down the Keystone
Pipeline, shutting down oil and gas leases in this country--
while they were incomprehensibly green-lighting the Nord
Stream 2 deal for the Russians.''
Senator Tim Scott told Fox News on Wednesday canceling the
pipeline was ``catastrophic'' and that ``the prices we're
seeing today are reflective of his decisions a year ago, not
reflective of the conflict that started days ago.''
But James Glynn, a senior research scholar at Columbia
University's Center on Global Energy Policy, said the
Keystone pipeline--even if operational--likely wouldn't have
had an impact on the global energy markets.
``There is little evidence to back up the argument that
Keystone XL would have averted some of this price spike,''
Glynn told Newsweek. ``The Keystone pipeline capacity is less
than one-tenth of Russian oil exports.''
``Even if Keystone XL was filled with fully additional
Canadian export capacity, which would have been an unlikely
scenario, it would not balance the global oil markets where
the price of oil is set through a global arbitrage of the
last marginal available barrel,'' Glynn continued.
The current national average for a gallon of gasoline is
$3.837, according to the American Automobile Association
(AAA). That's an increase of over 20 cents from the national
average reported the week before.
The White House has also emphasized that the Keystone
Pipeline was never running, and was less than 10 percent
completed when the project was shut down, amid criticism from
the Republican Party.
``The Keystone Pipeline has never been operational,'' press
secretary Jen Psaki told reporters on Thursday ``It would
take years to have any impact. I know a number of members of
Congress have suggested that, but that is a proposed solution
that has no relationship or would have no impact on what the
problem is we, here, all agree is an issue.''
The pipeline project would have expanded an existing
conduit for transporting tar-sands oil from Canada through
the U.S. to the Gulf Coast. After years of legal challenges
and environmental activism to shut the project down, the
company behind it officially halted construction in June 2021
after Biden revoked a key permit.
``The Keystone pipeline is not a viable solution because
you can't build a pipeline in an hour, right?'' David Sacco,
a practitioner in residence in the finance program at the
University of New Haven, told Newsweek. ``The company that
was building it shut it down a year ago. So that's not
viable. But I think the argument that our energy policies
have been a pretty significant contribution to this [crisis]
are certainly valid from an economic standpoint.''
Sacco said there's an argument to be made that the U.S. and
other nations purchasing oil from Russia has ``allowed their
economy to strengthen, has allowed Putin to basically fund
his military and expansion policies.''
In addition to rising prices, Republicans have hit the
Biden administration for energy policies they say make the
U.S. more dependent on foreign oil.
[[Page H1387]]
``Biden has given up the best defense we had against
Putin's evil vision for the world--energy independence,''
Senator Marsha Blackburn said in a statement this week. ``We
need to make America energy independent again. It's time to
divest from Russian energy and stop funding Putin's war, and
reauthorize the Keystone Pipeline.''
One energy proposal that has received bipartisan support on
Capitol Hill is to ban Russian oil imports. House Speaker
Nancy Pelosi said Thursday she was ``all for'' the proposal.
While Biden has said ``nothing is off the table,'' the
administration has so far resisted slapping Moscow's energy
sector with sanctions because it could further drive up
prices at the gas pumps.
Sacco said he believed gas prices could go up to $5 per
gallon as the Russia-Ukraine crisis unfolds.
Biden has said it's a priority for his team to ease the
financial burden on Americans as prices rise. The
administration just announced it is coordinating with other
nations to release 60 million barrels of oil in global
reserves, half of which would come from the U.S. Strategic
Petroleum Reserve.
``The American people understand that defending democracy
and liberty is never without cost,'' Biden said last month
while speaking on the Russia-Ukraine crisis.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I also urge all my colleagues to do a
little research and look at the profits of Big Oil in this country.
Look at what they are making. While Americans are paying more at the
pump, their executives are making more and more and more. You can
defend Big Oil if you want. And I get it, maybe there is some benefit
politically to doing that. Again, follow the money. But I have to tell
you, I think people are sick of this. We have seen this movie before.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Doggett).
{time} 1000
Mr. DOGGETT. This rule makes proper for our consideration legislation
that I have offered to respond to the brutal aggression of Vladimir
Putin destroying, hour by hour, Ukraine, and its people, with death and
destruction.
I am pleased to hear from the gentleman from Oklahoma that he
supports this legislation because it will be stronger if we are united
in sending this message.
Like so many Americans, I have watched the horrors in Ukraine. I have
seen the people standing with their blue and yellow Ukraine banners and
flags on the steps of the State capitol in Austin day after day, rain
and shine, to express their concern.
And like them, and like so many of us of all political persuasions,
we wonder what we can do to prevent what is happening that we see
played out, in real time, on our televisions?
Well, in my case, it has been advocating that we get all of the
weapons that Ukrainians need to defend themselves to them yesterday.
Immediately.
But to recognize that to put a squeeze on the Russian empire, we
should respond with the most effective sanctions that we can. One of
those sanctions arising out of the Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee is
the ability to respond with reference to the World Trade Organization
and Russia.
The week before last, I introduced with Mr. Blumenauer, the chairman
of that subcommittee, legislation concerning the trade status of the
Russian Federation.
The legislation that I introduced yesterday that this rule puts into
effect is different from that, and I will discuss that in the course of
our consideration of the bill.
But it continues to urge the expelling of Russia from the World Trade
Organization, which I think we should do to attempt to isolate as
completely as we can Russia from any benefits from the world economy.
To see now one American-owned company closing down hundreds of its
locations throughout Russia, one American company, including some of
the big oil companies withdrawing from the Russian Federation, they are
acting in a way that supports what we need to do--put Russia in an
economic vise.
I believe that there is much more that we need to accomplish but that
we respond today on the number one issue on the world agenda, and that
is what is happening in Ukraine and what we can do to prevent it.
Now, I understand some people continue to have their own ideological
agenda to defend and ignore the climate crisis, deny climate science,
and promote more and more fossil fuels.
They choose the Keystone pipeline, which is exactly 8 percent
completed. It uses the dirtiest form of oil in the tar sands.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Texas an
additional 1 minute.
Mr. DOGGETT. From the cold tar sands of Canada, completing the
Keystone pipeline will not save one Ukrainian life nor will the
adoption of the rest of their agenda.
Let me just say, I have only one agenda in this matter, and that is
to respond to the aggression and do all we can to try to stop the
brutal attacks unprovoked on the Ukrainian people.
I am very pleased that this legislation that I introduced yesterday
incorporates the good work of Chairman McGovern on the Global Magnitsky
Act.
That is legislation that fits so well with what I have been urging
about Russia because it combats human rights abuses there and all over
the world.
He has strengthened the provisions of the Global Magnitsky Act, which
would have expired at the end of this year. By incorporating it, it
fits well with our agenda to respond to Russian aggression and human
rights abuses that are going on as people are being murdered as we
speak today.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, to further discuss the need for America to
be energy independent, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Stauber), a member of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee and my good friend.
Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the
previous question so this Democrat-controlled House can finally do the
right thing: pass the American Energy Independence from Russia Act.
This morning, Americans are seeing even higher gas prices on their
way to work than they saw on last night's commute home. Sadly, tonight,
tomorrow morning, next week, and next month, they are going to see the
same episode play out on those commutes to and from work over and over
again.
With the cost of living and inflation over the last year spiraling
out of control, the last thing American families need is $7 to $8 a
gallon gasoline.
Due to the policies of President Biden, we are more reliant on Putin
and Russian energy than in recent history.
I agree that we must immediately halt the import of Russian oil and
LNG. However, it is a false narrative pushed by President Biden that it
should be an unavoidable hit to Americans' pocketbooks. This was
avoidable, and it didn't have to be this way.
Since Biden's first day in office, he has forced executive orders and
supported policies that have made us more dependent on Russian energy.
These policy choices are directly to blame for the increased pain at
the pump that middle-class Americans are feeling.
Take, for example, the opening line of an AP article 2 weeks ago:
``The Biden administration is delaying decisions on new oil and gas
drilling on Federal land.''
Sure, some of these leases are not utilized, but that is because they
are tied up in litigation from far left anti-jobs groups or because
they are awaiting delayed approvals from the Biden administration.
So, instead of approving rights-of-way, following the science, and
putting our oil and gas developers to work, Joe Biden is making
American families suffer.
On behalf of the American people, the Ukrainian people, and just
basic common sense----
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. COLE. I yield the gentleman from Minnesota an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. STAUBER.--I joined my colleagues Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Bruce
Westerman in offering an American energy solution.
While Biden's solution is to buy oil from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia,
our solution is to put blue-collar workers, American workers, to work
here at home and develop our God-given natural resources.
We have the ability to bring costs down by unleashing the economic
engine of American energy production.
[[Page H1388]]
We can do that by defeating this previous question and passing the
American Energy Independence from Russia Act.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
We are all trying to figure out a way to alleviate the burden of
energy costs on consumers. I mean, it is brutal for a lot of families
in this country.
Listening to some of the speeches here, I kind of feel like we should
have an amendment that would require Members of Congress to take a
basic course in economics to understand how supply and demand works.
Again, the oil companies have 9,000 leases that they are not
utilizing as we speak.
I include in the Record an article titled ``Exclusive: Oil companies'
profits soared to $174 billion this year as U.S. gas prices rose.''
[From the Guardian, Dec. 6, 2021]
Exclusive: Oil Companies' Profits Soared to $174bn This Year as US Gas
Prices Rose
(By Oliver Milman)
The largest oil and gas companies made a combined $174bn in
profits in the first nine months of the year as gasoline
prices climbed in the US, according to a new report.
The bumper profit totals, provided exclusively to the
Guardian, show that in the third quarter of 2021 alone, 24
top oil and gas companies made more than $74bn in net income.
From January to September, the net income of the group, which
includes Exxon, Chevron, Shell and BP, was $174bn.
Exxon alone posted a net income of $6.75bn in the third
quarter, its highest profit since 2017, and has seen its
revenue jump by 60% on the same period last year. The company
credited the rising cost of oil for bolstering these profits,
as did BP, which made $3.3bn in third-quarter profit.
``Rising commodity prices certainly helped,'' Bernard Looney,
chief executive of BP, told investors at the latest earnings
report.
Gasoline prices have hit a seven-year high in the US due to
the rising cost of oil, with Americans now paying about $3.40
for a gallon of fuel compared with around $2.10 a year ago.
The Biden administration has warned the price hikes are
hurting low-income people, even as it attempts to implement a
climate agenda that would see America move away from fossil
fuels, and has released 50m barrels of oil from the national
strategic reserve to help dampen costs.
But oil and gas companies have shown little willingness so
far to ramp up production to help reduce costs and the new
report, by the government watchdog group Accountable.US,
accuses them of ``taking advantage of bloated prices,
fleecing American families along the way'' amid ongoing
fallout from the Covid-19 pandemic.
``Americans looking for someone to blame for the pain they
experience at the pump need look no further than the wealthy
oil and gas company executives who choose to line their own
pockets rather than lower gas prices with the billions of
dollars in profit big oil rakes in month after month,'' said
Kyle Herrig, president of Accountable.US.
The analysis of major oil companies' financials shows that
11 of the group gave payouts to shareholders worth more than
$36.5bn collectively this year, while a dozen bought back
$8bn-worth of stock. This apparent focus, rather than on
further drilling, has caused some frustration within the
federal government, with Jennifer Granholm, the US energy
secretary, stating that ``the oil and gas companies are not
flipping the switch as quickly as the demand requires.''
A glut of new oil drilling has made the US awash with oil
in recent years, turning the country into a top-level
exporter as well as domestic supplier, but this has kept
prices low to the displeasure of investors.
``A lot of this has been driven by investor sentiment,''
said Helima Croft, head of global commodity strategy at RBC
Capital Markets, of the current reluctance to expand
production. ``They don't want them to spoil the party.''
The situation has left the White House in an awkward
position with its commitments to rapidly reduce planet-
heating emissions, with environmentalists furious at
administration attempts to expand drilling and fossil fuel
companies also unhappy over some of its earlier climate-
related moves, such as shutting down the controversial
Keystone XL pipeline.
The oil and gas industry has fought Joe Biden's attempts to
pause new drilling permits on federal land, despite its
unwillingness to expand operations in order to reap the
returns of costlier oil and the fact the industry currently
sits on 14m acres of already leased land that isn't being
used, an area about double the size of Massachusetts.
``It's not the government that is banning them from
drilling more,'' Pavel Molchanov, an analyst at Raymond
James, told CNN. ``It's pressure from their shareholders.''
Aside from its role in the current high gasoline prices,
the oil and gas industry is a leading driver of the climate
crisis, the reality of which it sought to conceal from the
public for decades. and is a key instigator of the air
pollution that kills nearly 9 million a year, a death toll
three times that of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.
The American Petroleum Institute, a leading industry lobby
group, pointed to a blog that blamed the Biden administration
for policies that ``significantly weaken the incentives to
invest in America's energy future'' but did not answer
questions on production rates of oil companies.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I love the fact that we can't even get
anybody to express the slightest bit of outrage over the fact that oil
companies are gouging us, making record profits, while Americans are
paying more at the gas pump.
I mean, I get it. They are very supportive of some on the other side,
but, I mean, give me a break. I think the American people understand
this.
We need to figure out a way to lower gas prices to alleviate the
burden on working families here. But to get up and defend oil companies
and oil company executives and put forward bills and ideas that are oil
companies' wish lists when they have 9,000 leases right now that they
are not utilizing--and why? Because they are making record profits.
I would also say to my colleagues that the underlying bill that we
are dealing with here today contains a lot of good stuff. The gentleman
from Oklahoma alluded to it in his opening remarks about the incredible
investments in medical research.
I was at the White House, as was the gentleman from Oklahoma, when
President Biden announced the relaunch of his Cancer Moonshot program.
I mean, the issue when it comes to curing cancer is not whether we can.
The issue is when we will do it. That depends on investments. That
depends on supporting innovation and medical research. This bill does
that. That is a good thing. It should bring us all together.
As we have talked about, we are going to deal with a bill to help
Ukraine, especially with humanitarian assistance, given the refugee
crisis. We are going to strengthen the Global Magnitsky law so that we
have stronger human rights language, which some of my friends on the
other side of the aisle, unfortunately, have opposed.
I am reading in The New York Times today an article, ``Republicans,
Once Harsh Ukraine Critics, Pivot to Strong Support.'' I am glad about
that. I am hoping that the people who called Ukraine the most corrupt
country in the world under the previous administration will now at
least vote to support that country as they are under attack by Vladimir
Putin.
Anyway, there is some really good stuff in this bill, and I am
looking forward to getting to the debate on this.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Just to remind my friend, it was the last administration that
actually began lethal aid to Ukraine. The Obama administration did not.
The record there is pretty clear as to who has helped the Ukrainians.
Madam Speaker, to further discuss the need to get America out from
under the thumb of Russia, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Pfluger), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and my
good friend.
Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to oppose the previous
question so we can immediately pass the American Energy Independence
from Russia Act. I would like to thank Ranking Member Cathy McMorris
Rodgers for her leadership on this.
Really, the question is simple. I think we are missing the point. The
question here is: Is the President of the United States going to pick
America, or is he going to pick our enemies? That is the debate here.
Step one was great, and I am glad that we are going to support
Ukraine. I was there 5 weeks ago; we need to support Ukraine.
Step two is we need the President to support America. Energy security
is national security, Mr. President. It is time to put Midland over
Moscow.
Unfortunately, that security has been under assault for decades but
most recently beginning on January 20, 2021. The administration is
leading the assault on energy. The reality is that American energy is
the cleanest in the world, but the President and my colleagues on the
other side of the aisle refuse to acknowledge that fact and unleash it.
[[Page H1389]]
Instead, they are choosing, the President is choosing, our
adversaries, terrorists, and begging them to produce more when we can
do it right here.
Instead of calling on the 10 million Americans who do it every single
day, we are outsourcing production to adversaries like Russia, Iran,
Venezuela, and they are harming our environment even more.
The war on Ukraine is horrifying, and it is heartbreaking. When I sat
with President Zelensky, he said that the impetus to invade his country
came from the fact that Nord Stream existed.
Our President green-lighted Nord Stream but canceled the Keystone
pipeline. Right now, today, there are six LNG terminals that the
President, with the stroke of a pen, could approve.
Are we going to pick the United States of America, or are we going to
pick our adversaries?
The United States should not be energy dependent. We should be energy
dominant. Put Midland over Moscow. Unleash American LNG. Restart oil
and gas leasing on Federal lands, and protect our own country. Pick our
country.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, the gentleman asked a question: Are we
going to pick America or our adversaries? Interesting question. My
friends on the other side have spent all of their time criticizing
President Biden and very little mention of Putin. I think that says it
all.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, for further explanation of our energy
independence bill, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma
(Mrs. Bice), my very good friend and fellow Oklahoman.
Mrs. BICE of Oklahoma. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Cole for yielding.
I rise today in opposition to the previous question so that we can
immediately consider H.R. 6858, the American Energy Independence from
Russia Act.
Gas prices are at a record high, and unfortunately, they will
continue to rise.
While the Russian invasion of Ukraine has worsened the crisis, it is
not the sole cause. The root cause of high energy and gas prices is due
to the anti-energy policies of the Biden administration, which
suspended all oil and gas leasing on Federal lands, slow-walked
liquefied natural gas exports, and halted construction of the Keystone
XL pipeline while green-lighting Russia's Nord Stream 2.
These steps allowed Putin to corner the energy market and fund his
invasion of Ukraine. American dollars can no longer go to countries
whose interests run counter to America.
{time} 1015
America produces some of the cleanest oil and gas in the world. If my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to lower emissions and
promote clean energy, they would rely on American oil and gas
production in States like my home State of Oklahoma, not foreign
countries like Russia, Venezuela, and even Iran.
Oklahomans are tired of inaction from Washington. They expect
solutions. We cannot continue to tap into the strategic petroleum
reserve, which is at some of the lowest levels since 2003. In addition,
releasing 30 million barrels is only enough to meet our Nation's energy
requirements for about a day.
Sadly, this week House Democrats are not bringing forward a single
piece of legislation to address the energy crisis.
Under the Trump administration, America was energy independent and a
net total energy exporter for the first time since 1952.
Madam Speaker, energy security is national security. Sadly, under
this administration, we have neither.
Congress must act immediately to take up the American Energy
Independence From Russia Act.
This legislation would promote America's oil and natural gas
production and unleash American energy independence once again.
____________________