[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 2]
[House]
[Page 1922]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         OPPOSING PIONEERS ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to 
the so-called PIONEERS Act that, among other things, repeals the Gulf 
of Mexico Energy Security Act, or GOMESA.
  It's hard to believe that the lessons of the Deepwater Horizon oil 
spill are already being forgotten, less than 2 years after almost 5 
million barrels of oil flowed out into the ocean and devastated the 
gulf region's environment and economy.
  Through this horrible tragedy, we learned firsthand the dangers of 
drilling at extreme ocean depths and the difficulties in stopping a 
spill once it occurs. We also learned the dangers posed by the powerful 
Gulf of Mexico loop currents in the eastern gulf. These loop currents 
are capable of transporting spilled petroleum into the Florida Straits, 
through the Florida Keys, and onto shorelines up the Atlantic side of 
my home State, endangering hundreds of miles of coastline in Florida, 
and beyond up the east coast.
  We were extremely lucky that more of Florida was not affected by the 
Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010 and that the site of the spill was not 
within these normally-occurring loop currents. Allowing drilling in the 
eastern Gulf of Mexico would place leasing directly within the strong 
loop current and is the height of folly.
  Even if we didn't have such a powerful precautionary tale as the 
Deepwater Horizon accident, drilling near Florida's coast simply 
doesn't add up. Florida's $65 billion tourism industry relies on 
pristine beaches. Florida is also home to 85 percent of the United 
States' coral reefs, which are profoundly sensitive to oil spills.
  Coastal resources like mangroves and sea grasses would also be put in 
harm's way, as well as Florida's vibrant commercial and recreational 
fishing industries. That is why so many bipartisan members of Florida's 
congressional delegation have lined up in opposing drilling near our 
shores. In fact, a few weeks ago, Congressman John Mica held a field 
hearing in Miami to discuss the dangers of offshore drilling by Cuba 
that is within 100 miles of Florida's shores. The Florida Lieutenant 
Governor--a Republican--Jennifer Carroll stated at the hearing that:

       The Deepwater Horizon incident in 2010 has shown that a 
     spill that poses even a potential of impacting Florida's 
     water or land causes a huge negative impact on the economy.

  I could not have said it better myself. This is why we simply should 
not allow drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico.
  I would welcome a debate weighing the harms against the benefits of 
expanding offshore exploration off Florida's coastline if the benefits 
were comparable to the risks, but they're not--not even close. 
Expanding drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico would not lower gas 
prices or produce enough oil to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
  In short, opening the eastern Gulf of Mexico is not the answer to our 
energy concerns. If we are serious about weaning our dependence on 
foreign oil, we need to continue the clean energy policies of the Obama 
administration and efforts in recent years by Congress. We have more 
domestic oil production today, right now, than we have ever had. For 
example, the 2007 bipartisan effort to increase the fuel efficiency of 
cars over the next decade will have a profound effect on the demand 
side of the supply-demand equation.
  The Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that by 2020 the new 
auto fuel standards will save consumers $65 billion in fuel costs by 
cutting consumption by 1.3 million barrels a day--more than could be 
produced in the eastern gulf in an entire year.
  Finally, a little history lesson on the 2006 law that this bill will 
repeal. In 2006, Republican leadership in both Houses of Congress 
enacted GOMESA, which opened 8 million acres for new oil drilling 
leases off Florida's panhandle in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. In 
exchange, the 2006 law placed the rest of the eastern gulf under a 
statutory moratorium until 2022. That agreement should be honored, not 
tossed aside less than 6 years later.
  Our word must be our bond, or negotiations and handshakes are 
rendered meaningless. In my 19-year legislative career, your word being 
your bond was always supposed to be paramount. In this case, apparently 
there are some Members of the Republican leadership that don't believe 
that and are willing to cast it aside.
  Beyond the economic and environmental reasons for honoring the 2006 
deal, protecting our military training areas is also important. The 
military uses the eastern Gulf of Mexico for training operations, and 
the Pentagon has said that drilling structures and associated 
development are incompatible with military activities, like missile 
flights, low-flying drone aircraft, and training. For this reason, the 
Pentagon has long opposed expanding offshore drilling in the eastern 
gulf.
  The 2006 law incorporates an agreement between the Department of the 
Interior and the Defense Department to set aside waters east of the 
``military mission line'' to preserve military readiness. On behalf of 
Florida's tourism industries, fishing industries, and on behalf of the 
needs of the Defense Department and in the name of military readiness, 
I urge my colleagues to remove this terrible provision from this 
legislation.
  To add insult to injury, it is unconscionable that House leadership 
has refused to even allow a vote on a bipartisan amendment that I 
cosponsored with my Florida colleagues that would have stripped out the 
GOMESA repeal. If they had the courage of their conviction, they would 
allow a fair and open debate on this. But when you don't have much to 
back up your argument, you can't allow a fair fight.

                          ____________________