[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 10588-10589]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            AMERICAN ENERGY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MULVANEY. I come before you today to talk a little bit about 
energy. Later on today, we'll be talking more about the Offshore Energy 
and Jobs Act, part of the Republican Party's all-of-the-above energy 
program. It's a good opportunity for us to talk about various different 
things in energy.
  I was home, Mr. Speaker, a couple of weeks ago going through one of 
my manufacturing facilities in my district, and I asked some of the 
folks who were working there what we could do here to help create more 
American manufacturing jobs. And I was struck by the answer. The answer 
was very clear. They said, Keep our energy costs down.
  They also talked about regulation. They also talked about health 
care. They talked about a lot of the things we hear all over the place. 
But the first thing that they mentioned to me, which was to keep energy 
costs down, was very interesting.
  I said, Why is it so important? They make rolled rings, they do heavy 
manufacturing. It's a metal foundry. And they said that not only does 
lower energy keep their costs of materials down and make them more 
competitive in the world, but lower energy also keeps their cost of 
operations down, which makes them more competitive in the rest of the 
world, and, obviously, kept the cost to their employees down of simply 
getting back and forth to work.
  Low energy costs were the best thing we could do for this heavy 
manufacturer back in South Carolina. I think that's very instructive to 
us, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to answering the question of what we're 
doing for jobs. We're here today to talk about not just energy but 
about jobs.
  One of the big pieces to our all-of-the-above proposal is the 
Keystone pipeline. Many people have heard about

[[Page 10589]]

it. I want to talk for a few minutes about it today.
  One of the biggest objections the President made to it originally 
when it came out was environmental; and many people saw this map from 
Alberta, Canada, down to the Gulf of Mexico, in which the 
administration very prominently featured that this went through a large 
aquifer with a name that I cannot pronounce, in all seriousness. The 
administration wanted to draw attention to the fact that, Oh, my 
goodness, this pipeline went through this aquifer and it was going to 
poison the drinking water in all these Midwestern States and wasn't 
that a terrible thing. This is the map the administration wanted all of 
us to see.

                              {time}  1110

  This is the map of the real world. This is the map that shows where 
these pipelines already function and function extraordinarily well. 
There are pipelines all over the central part of this country, all over 
this aquifer already, without any harm to any person. Aquifers usually 
are several hundred feet deep and pipelines are 10 or 20 feet deep. We 
have the ability, we have the know-how, to do this safely and soundly. 
We've been doing it for over a century in this country. There are no 
environmental risks to going in this particular location through this 
particular aquifer. We know how to do it, and we know how to do it 
well.
  Now we hear a new objection, Mr. Speaker. We hear an objection that 
the administration doesn't want to backslide. I heard an interview 
today where a Democrat activist used that word six or eight times in 
about 2 minutes--didn't want to backslide on carbon, that we couldn't 
do this pipeline because it would encourage additional use of gasoline. 
It would make gas cheaper and that would be bad because we would use 
more of it. That's the administration's current position.
  It's absolutely absurd. If you go to Canada, if you go to where the 
oil sands are, to where this raw material is, who will you see? You'll 
see the Chinese. If we don't use this oil, if we do not refine this 
oil, if we do not take advantage of this particular natural resource 
that is right across our border, the Chinese will; and it will be used 
in a fashion that would offend the sensibilities of most of the people 
who care about the environment.
  I've been to China. I remember landing at the runway and not being 
able to see the end of the runway out of the window because the 
pollution was so bad. That is how this material is going to be used if 
we allow it to go overseas.
  We have the ability now to keep this material in this country. We 
have the ability now to help keep our energy prices down. We have the 
ability now to help keep Americans at work and put additional Americans 
back to work. And to the extent we keep it out of the hands of the 
Chinese where there are no rules on how they use this material, we 
actually have a chance to help the environment.
  The Keystone pipeline keeps energy prices down, puts American people 
back to work, and protects our environment. It is absolutely absurd 
that it hasn't been approved already, Mr. Speaker, and it needs to be 
approved now.

                          ____________________