avenues that we can proceed down in addition to producing -- increasing domestic production. and that the american people need something fresher and newer on this than being sabotaged every few years about the price at the pump while we, the taxpayers, are giving subsidies to big oil to drill while they are making profits in the first quarter of one year almost more than what we would save for the taxpayer. they don't need a subsidy to drill. they don't need an incentive. they have the profit motive and it has served them well. . so we have to think about the future, how to prevent this from happening again and how we can have an effect at the pump.

congressman bishop gives us that opportunity today, recognizing that we want to have the full diversity of energy possibilities available to us so that the american taxpayer and the american consumers are well served. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question to allow mr. tim bishop to bring up an initiative that he will talk about that addresses concerns of the american people that they know about, that they want to end subsidies on big oil, especially when we're talking about it in the context of we must cut investment in medicare. seniors must pay more, but don't ask us to cut subsidies to big oil. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields her time. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from louisiana, who lives in this area and understands the situation

firsthand. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for throw minutes. mr. scalise: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague from utah for yielding. couldn't disagree more with the comments that were made by the minority leader from california. what we're talking about here is high gas prices that people are paying at the pump today and why we are in this situation. we're in this situation because of this administration's policies that have shut off american energy supply. this is supply and demand. why do prices go up? well, gee whiz, if the president says by policy we are going to close off billions of barrels of known reserves in america, what do you think that does to prices? do you think that lower prices? of course, as you're seeing prices skyrocket at the pump, it's because of these policies. that's why we've seen the price of gasoline more than double since barack obama's been in office. and so, mr. speaker, what we're bringing today and what this rule addresses is the ability to start opening up some of those known areas.

here in america. because, again, our demand continues to increase for oil here in this country. and while the president's out tilting that windmill, the prices at the pump continue to skyrocket because the president's saying, he's bragging that he wants to create more energy jobs in bra sflill. what we're saying is, -- in brazil. what we're saying is, mr. president, we have thousands of jobs that we can create here in america today. we have billions of dollars that are being sent to foreign countries, many don't like us, by the way, it can help us pay down the national debt that's out of control right now. and that's what in it bill addresses. and what's their answer on the other side? my god, the president's talking about raising taxes on american energy. and the minority leader from california just emphasized that she talked about a $30 billion tax increase on american energy production. you want to talk about a warped policy, if you look at what their plan is -- you know, we're saying let's open up

supply. let's create jobs in america. i've seen it in south louisiana. we've lost over 13,000 jobs in the energy industry just because of the president's policies in the last year when he shut down production. you can't go back to work drilling safely for known oil in america but he wants to run those jobs off to foreign countries. and that's what's happening. we saw some of the deep-water rigs go to egypt just in the last few months. an employer saying i want to take 1,000 jobs and it's bitter to do jobs in egypt because of these radical policies on energy right now. so we are trying to turn that around and say, let's actually explore for energy here in america, creating thousands more jobs in america and bring in billions to pay down our deficit. and they say raise $30 billion in taxes. and talk about big oil. big oil is not going to pay that. big oil is leaving. they're going to foreign countries. the our local energy producers in america who pay that tax. you know what ends up happening and equating to? that means higher prices at the pump.

$30 billion in higher prices at the pump because of their policy and they're bragging about it. they're saying let's raise taxes on energy. it doesn't apply to energy produced in saudi arabia. what do you think is going to happen? more oil will come in from saudi arabia because of their policies. we have to reverse this radical approach and actually create jobs in america, create energy in america and bring down the skyrocketing price of gasoline at the pump. it can all be accomplished with this legislation here today that i stroppingly support and with that, mr. speaker -- that i strongly support and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i'd like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, the ranking member of the natural resources committee, mr. markey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. markey: the big oil companies are making wind fall profits right now. look what happened in the last three months. exxonmobil made $10 billion. shell $8 billion.

b.p. $7 billion. $6 billion for chevron. $3 for conoco. and yet the republicans oppose allowing the democrats to bring out here a motion that will take away tax breaks that are meant for companies that make toasters or alume null foil but not the oil industry -- aluminum foil but not the oil industry. they don't need a subsidy from the american taxpayer as they're tipping consumers upside down at the pump every single day. we need to take back those tax breaks and use them, use them to reduce the deficit, use them to help grandma with medicare, use them for things that are important. but not for oil companies at this time. so what have the republicans decided to do? the republicans instead have decided to squeeze, to squeeze medicare, to squeeze the program for grandma so that they can find the revenues to

give tax breaks to oil companies. i tell you, the g.o.p. has set up a legislative drill rig on top of the medicare program to poke holes in our seniors' safety net. that's right, mr. speaker. the republicans are building a pipeline into the pocketbooks of our seniors so they can pump them dry. no money for medicare but plenty of breaks for the oil companies and they're going to deny the democrats the ability to have a vote here on the house floor on those tax breaks for oil companies here today. there's one thing we can do in order to ensure that the speculators in the marketplace are told there is a cop on the beat and that's to deploy the strategic petroleum reserve right now. in 1991, bush i used it. the price went down 33%. in 2000 the president used the

strategic petroleum reserve. president clinton. it went down 18%. bush ii used it in 2005 after katrina. the price went down 9%. that's the weapon we can use right now and send a message to big oil, to opec and to the speculators that we mean business. what the republicans are saying here today is, we are going to cut medicare in order to have tax breaks for the wealthiest oil companies in the history of the world. that is not what the american people want to hear at this time of energy crisis in our country, with the danger pointed right at the heart of the american economy and that is what owe eck peck and the speculators and big oil are doing today. vote no on the bill so we can get relief to the american taxpayers. vote no on the rule and yes on

the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the distinguished gentleman and i rise to ask in particular that we have a reasoned debate on this question. i come from the gulf region and was appalled at the horror of the b.p. oil spill. my constituents are still suffering from that spill, and i recognize that we have a dual responsibility. that is to ensure that those individuals are made whole and i might add that a better compensation system needs to be in place but also that we

restore jobs. a civil discussion is what is needed, and as an oil and gas lawyer and also a member of the homeland security committee we have to find a way to restore offshore deep-water drilling in a safe and secure manner. i am disappointed that the rules committee did not take an amendment that i offered that would have modified the processing procedures of h.r. 1229 to restart that heesing process to extend the time for the department -- leasing process to extend the time for the department to review safely and securely and also the deemed provision, though i am supporting the holt amendment, and, of course, the moran amendment. but, frankly, i think the issue is energy at this time is multitasking. from nuclear to energy to solar to wind to biofuels. if we are in agreement with brazil to do offshore deep-water drilling off the coast of brazil, we need to

restart it here in the united states safely and securely. as it relates to the expanded lease sales, the question has to be whether states are prepared for that offshore drilling and whether or not we have secured the kind of technology that will allow us to do it safely and securely. energy companies have organized something called a containment group to develop that new technology. what i would say is this should not be captured in special interests where we try to get you politics of the department of the interior or get you politics by president obama. this is time to bet the politics ready by the american people, bring down gasoline prices, invest in energy which includes deep-water drilling in oil and gas and let's get going on helping the american people. i yield back the balance of my time and ask for a reasoned discussion on this important issue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: please to yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr.

speaker. you know, we heard from our friend from massachusetts that the allegation that we over here on this side of the aisle are squeezing medicare. good grief. even now, has the gentleman from massachusetts not read the obamacare bill? it cuts $500 billion out of medicare. man. $500 billion out of medicare. now, we heard from the minority leader pelosi that we have a moral obligation to create jobs. what this administration has done under her definition is immoral because this administration has been killing jobs. and you hear so much on the other side about the working poor. well, coming from an area in texas where we have lots of hardworking poor folks, that's

who is being hurt by this administration's policies. when you shut off the jobs in the fuffle gulf, when you come out and -- gulf of mexico, when you come out and say we are going to tax these companies even more, we are going to take away their subsidies. they are called business deductions, the cost of drilling, the cost of doing business. who will be taxed? american companies. we will be furthering tariffs on not foreign products but american companies. we drive ourselves more and more to foreign oil, and that's a mistake. price control is what president carter did. he was going to show the energy companies and as a result we didn't have gas, we ran out of gas. that was a disaster. salazar shut down leases that was let after a seven-year process that could have produced as many as a trillion

barrels of oil. you could have an immediate effect if you would encourage -- if you would -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. gohmert: if you would encourage your president's party to change course and start creating jobs. the energy industry would create a million jobs across the country if we open up the o.c.s. we heard the testimony, a million jobs if anwr was opened. a million jobs if the north slope was opened. and what is more, we've also heard from people that know that a dollar out of $4 is most likely attributable to speculation. the speculators look at what we do, and we make it harder and harder to produce our own energy, the speculation keeps going up. you could turn around a dollar out of $4 overnight if we

showed the world, we're going to use our own energy. this country has been blessed with more natural resources when you put them all together and this administration and the former majority has done more to put them off-limits. the time to get back to what the former speaker said was our moral obligation. you lower energy prices by using more of our own energy. you create jobs, you bring down the price that's killing the working poor and that's a moral obligation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. i'll yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, a former member of the rules committee, ms. castor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. castor: i thank my colleague from colorado. i rise in strong opposition to this -- to the rule and the underlying bill. in the state of florida, we are still recovering from last year's b.p. oil blowout disaster. we're recovering economically and environmentally. .

from the policies of the past that elevated oil company profits over safety. to add insult to injury, every summer the price of gas goes up. and we see it in florida because our economy is largely tied to tourism. and we see it and it pains us and consumers know that they are messing around with the american consumer. they understand that the wall street speculators are making a profit, maybe 20% in the price of gas. and that is not fair. why don't we start with a meaningful energy policy that acrests -- addresses those speculators. why don't we start instead with continuing oil company give aways, why don't we start with ending the taxpayer subsidies to the big oil companies? just in the first quarter of this year b.p. has made over $5 billion in profit. exxon has made over $10 billion in profit. with the skyrocketing debt and

deficit, why is it fair for the american taxpayer to be subsidizing the most profitable companies in the world? that is where we should begin this debate today. ending those oil company subsidies to bring down the price of gas. tackling the outrageous profits that go to the oil companies while the consumer is paying through the nose at the pump. my republican friends are on the wrong track when it comes to energy policy. we've got to prohibit wall street speculators from artificially inflating prices. we've got to adopt the oil spill commission's recommendations to make drilling safe before we charge ahead and open up new areas to drill. there are millions of acres to drill. millions of acres. all we are asking is fairness and safety as they proceed in doing so-so the american taxpayer will not have to pay anymore. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: pleased to recognize

the gentleman from louisiana, mr. landry, for two minutes. a member of the resources committee that provides a great deal of insight from his personal background. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. landry: thank you. what amazes me is that the gentlelady from florida must have missed the a.p. report a couple weeks ago when it says that florida was getting ready to experience another oil crisis and it was in the fact that the price at the pump is going to impact tourism. tourism. that's what i hear here all the time. are tourism jobs, jobs that normally pay minimum wage. when in my state oil and gas jobs pay much better than that. if we want to get this economy rolling, we have to provide that economy with affordable energy. not make believe energy. not energy that comes in possibly 40 to 50 years from

now. we need to apply affordable energy to this economy now. it will not get any better in this country until we give middle class americans affordable energy. so that they can get to and from their job. repealing section 199 will endanger 600,000 barrels per day. 10% of our domestic production by 2017. boy, that's really going to lower the price at the pump. they are concerned about medicare and medicaid? what do you think those profits -- where do you think those profits go? to shareholders. do you know who those shareholders are? they are the american people. you know how many pension funds hold those shares of exxon and chevron in their portfolio?

why are we picking those winners and losers? why again it just amazes me as a freshman, it's hard for me to understand how we continue in this town to reward failure. and punish women. it just amazes me. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields his time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. moran: thank you, mr. chairman. so, mr. chairman, one thing we do know is that our constituents are paying about $4 a gallon for gas. what they have to ask is, where's all this money that they are paying going? well, as you have seen it's going in profits to the biggest oil companies. in fact, almost $30 billion went just in the last three months to the top three oil companies. about $11 billion to exxon,

about $9 billion to shell. and over $7 billion to b.p. remember b.p.? well, what are they doing with their profit? what they are doing is spending 90% of it on stock buybacks so that of course the repaining stock outstanding becomes even more valuable, thus enabling their executives to become even wealthier and stop dividends for their shareholders and 10% to oil and gas exploration. and to tv advertising so they can convince the american public otherwise. what this bill will do is to enable those who own oil company stock and run oil companies to grab up our last remaining oil reserves at a cost of $30 to $40 a barrel so they can then sell it at $100 a barrel to make more

profit. the bill is more about scoring political points and currying favor with the oil and gas industry that the current house majority can't seem to get enough. they are betting the next oil spill disaster that this legislation could enable to a return to weaker regulation, weaker regulation than we had before the gulf oil spill disaster. but they are betting that it will not be on their watch. in fact, that oil spill disaster that spilled 200 million gallons into the gulf coast waters occurred at a time of even tougher regulation that this bill will create. this bill returns us to a last regulatory climate that existed before the disaster. it should be defeated. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to yield one minute to

the gentleman from new jersey, the ranking member of the energy and natural resources subcommittee, mr. holt. we can yield the gentleman a minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. holt: mr. speaker, thank you. this bill -- this rule brings forward two bills that are the first of the majority party's amnesia acts which ignore the safety and environmental concerns that were laid bare last spring and summer by the largest oil spill in the united states waters. for the sponsors of this bill, it's as if the worst and most costly oil spill in history never happened. last week the big five oil companies reported $32 billion in profits. that's just for the first three months of this year. yet the majority solution is to protect the billions of dollars of tax breaks each year for these companies. just to give you an idea, exxon

pays an effective tax rate of 0 .4%. i imagine every person in america would like to have a tax rate of essentially zero. yet the majority solution is to protect these tax breaks. furthermore, they deem the environmental and safety regulations that existed before this accident in the gulf as satisfactory. let's be clear, how much will these bills reduce gas prices for the american people? zero dollars and zero cents. scientists, engineers, our best energy analysts say we cannot drill our way to lower gas prices. this won't do it. let's address the financial speculation we heard about. the real cause of high gasoline prices. exxon with those huge profits, what do they do? they buy back their stock. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized for another 15 seconds. mr. holt: these actions needlessly endanger the lives of offshore workers, imperil the resources and livelihoods of fishermen. this legislation is designed to give big oil more handouts. these companies are not being responsible citizens. vote no on the rule. vote yes on my amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. speaker. may i inquire of the gentleman from colorado how many more speakers he has? mr. polis: we have one remaining speaker. mr. bishop: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. keating. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one minute. mr. keating: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to oppose this rule. americans are feeling pain at the pump. rising gasoline prices and they are rising folks, it's going to cost the average person another $800 per year at the rate of these increases.

that wipes out the tax breaks that most americans have just received. it's going to hurt our economy. it's hurting our national security. these oil companies are making increased profits as the money in our ballets flies right into the gas tanks. now is the time to consider a sensible energy policy to strip subsidies from oil companies. you know, it shocks every american taxpayer to know that they are required to fork over an additional $40 billion plus over the next decade. to give tax subsidies and give aways to these enormously profitable companies. what are they doing with that money? they are taking up to 90% of that and buying their stocks back, increasing their own personal wealth. let's be clear. oil companies don't need it. if you don't believe me, ask them. the former c.e.o. of shell oil says with higher oil prices the subsidies aren't necessary. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. polis: 15 seconds.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 15 seconds. mr. keating: thank you. friend on the other side of the aisle say, they are for the all of the above strategy when it comes to oil. let's be clear. they support oil above all, above medicare, above putting police on the streets, above increasing reading teachers, and above protecting our coastal communities. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: i yield one minute to the gentleman from south carolina another great new member of the resource committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. this isn't about oil company profits. this about supply and demand, we don't have the supply necessary to meet the energy needs in this country. you know what? the american people know that we've got the resources here in this country whether it's offshore, on the outer continental shelf, federal lands that are currently under this administration been taken off the table for energy production. supply and demand prifes the price. -- drives the price. we are reliant on foreign sources of oil and foreign group known as opec determines the price of that oil they sell to

us. we have the resources in this country. this legislation will put the gulf back to work, meeting the energy needs for the american people. i'm a small business owner. i doubt many people that serve in this body have ever run a business, met a payroll, and tried to meet their overhead. i can tell you what $4.85 a gallon in august of 2008 meant to my small business, only running two trucks on the road. i can only imagine what the loggers, what the truckers, what the farmers and the other industries in the third congressional district of south carolina feel today with the experience of rising oil prices. mr. duncan: the lady from massachusetts said that summer, prices go up. you know what? we are not in summer yet. prices are going up because of supply and demand. we have the opportunity to meet our demand right here by harvesting american resources for american ingenuity. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i'm prepared to close. i would like to ask the gentleman if he has remaining speakers? thank you. i ask the speaker how much time remains.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado has three minutes remaining. mr. polis: i yield myself the remainder of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. with referring to the last comment, it's the oil cartels that drive prices, not the normal functions of the market and supply and demand. with regard to the oil subsidies, mr. speaker, we have an opportunity here today to see where the republicans and democrats in the house stand on deficit reduction. mr. speaker, by defeating the previous question we will, we can, and we will reduce the deficit by over $12.8 billion. we have the chance to have a discussion around the continuing resolution, around the budget, around deficit reduction. and here we have an opportunity without impacting the price of oil, without impacting what consumers pay at the pump. to reduce the deficit by $12.8 billion. by defeating the previous question. i think that's what the american people want to see. the american people spoke out in the last election. let's reduce the deficit.

let's work across the aisle to see what we can do to cut unnecessary government expenditures, to make those decisions, to help make sure that we can leave something other than a legacy of debt to the next generation. i think, mr. speaker, this is an easy one. let's defeat the previous question. reduce the deficit by $12.8 billion. mr. speaker, i'd like to submit to the record from the general explanations of the administration's fiscal 2012 revenue proposals page 73 regarding repealing domestic manufacturing production for oil and gas companies. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. polis: in this document from the treasury department it says that the manufacturing deduction for oil and gas effectively provides a lower rate of tax with respect to a favored source of income. it distorts the market by encouraging more investment in oil and gas industry than would occur under a neutral system. again by returning to the free market, we are able to reduce the deficit by over $12.8 billion instead of trying to -- instead of having big government try to pick winners and losers

in the economy with regard to tax policy. i would like to submit to the record an article from july 3 "new york times" regarding oil subsidies. . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. polis: thank you again. this talks of the oil subsidies that continue to benefit this industry to the detriment of taxpayers and for future generations that will continue to suffer unless we defeat the previous question here today. mr. speaker, one year after the national tragedy of the deepwater horizon, the majority party has denieded no the to address a single problem. instead, the majority is pushing through these bills that simply rubber stamp offshore drilling, main -- maintain tax subsidies. a member on the other side all you need is an eighth grade understanding of supply and demand to unwhy gas prices are

high. fortunately, those who have more than an eighth grade education, america cannot drill its way out of high gas prices. even the american petroleum institute, the mouthpiece for big oil, can't help out. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the bill and defeat the previous question so we can reduce the deficit and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. speaker. the democrats is using negative cue words like subsidies. please realize the american and natural gas industry does not receive subsidize payments from the boston. tax deductions should in no way be confused with the concept of subsidies. they are, though, tax deductions that go all industry. section 199 which has been

talked about by the democrats is a manufacturing deduction. extracting gets a 9% of earned income deduction, not credit, except for oil and gas, where they are limited to 6%. there is similarity. they ask us, talk about safety. but the ideas of safety are codified in the legislation before us. they then say, let's produce -- increase our production by raising taxes. even if you raise taxes against somebody else and try to create some kind of strawman to attack, that's simply a -- we don't have a tax problem in this country. we have a production problem, we have a jobs problem, and these two bills go directly to that problem. they increase production and increase jobs. we are not trying to pick winners and losers. we want the americans to be winners and that's what our choice is to be. these are two good bills in the time of $4 and $5 gasoline

prices that is devastating our economy. these bills is something every member should support. mr. speaker, with that i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the yoist have it. mr. polis: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: than i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minute minimum time for electronic vote on the question of adopting the resolution. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the

the speaker pro tempore: on this motion the ayes are 241. the noes are 171. the previous question is ordered. the question is on the adoption of the resolution.

so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. polis: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman asks for a recorded vote? a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. five-minutes. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s.ouse of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 235. the nays are 167.

the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington i recognized. >> i ask that all members have a five legislative days t revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. pursuant to house resolution 245 and rule 18, the chair

declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r. 1230. the chair appoints the gentleman from arkansas, mr. womack to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the considering of h r. 1230, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to require the secretary of the interior to conduct certain offshore oil and gas lease sales and for other purposes. the chair: pursuant to the rule the bill is considered read the first time. the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. markey, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from meash. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, the committee is not in order. the chair: the gentleman is correct. the house is not in order.

the house will come to order. the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you very much. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: the average price of gasoline has gone up 10 cents just in the last week and is now about a cent and a half nationally from $4 a gallon. my compare -- by comparison, the price was $1.84 a gallon when president obama was sworn into office. in my home district in central washington last week, i heard from farmers, the foundation of our region's economy, who are finding it harder and harder to pay these high energy prices. i have no doubt my colleagues from other parts of the country have heard similar stories. the pain is being exacerbated by the actions of this

administration. this administration who for the past two years has repeatedly blocked, hindered and raised the cost to access our american energy resources. the house natural resources committee recently passed three bills, h.r. 1239, 1230 and 1231 , all of which reverse specific action taken by the obama administration to block offshore drilling. they will increase energy production, create jobs and lower energy pices. these are the first of an array of bills that will be introduced by our committee as part of the american energy initiative that will focus on expanding renewable energy, on shore production, and address offshore drilling revenue sharing an other needed reforms. today we are debating h.r. 1230, the restart american

offshore drilling act. this bill requires the secretary of the interior to conduct oil and natural gas lease sales in the gulf of mexico off the coast of virginia that have been delayed or canceled by this administration. the leas sale was supposed to otissue the lease sale was supposed to occur this year but because of the actions of the obama administration the earliest it could occur is 2013. i will note that very soon after this bill passed out of the committee with bipartisan support, the obama administration announced that it would move forward on one gulf lease sale. prior that sudden action, the obama administration was on course to make 2011, the -- 2011 the first year since 1958, since 1958, that the federal

government would not have held an offshore lease sale. squeezing one conveniently timed offshore lease sale was not undo the obama administration's record of blocking american energy production. this bill is necessary to hold their feet to the fire and ensure these sales move forward. americans instinctively understand the pain inflicted by rising gasoline prices. but yet we continue to hear the same excuses on why we shouldn't act. let me give you several examples. my colleagues across the aisle will say that expanding drilling will do nothing to lower gasoline prices, the truth is, and this is the important part, it will send a strong signal to the world markets that the u.s. is serious about producing our own resources and bringing more production, american production, online. furthermore, this argument has been used by opponents to

american energy production for decades. we can no longer delay and prevent access to our own american resources. my colleagues will also propose increasing taxes on american energy production. let me repeat that, mr. chairman. they will also propose increasing taxes on american energy production. i have to ask, when has raising taxes lowered the price of anything? and of course the answer to that is never. and it won't happen with energy. whether it's raising american energy -- taxes american energy producers or proposing a cap and trade national energy tax, the democrat's plan will only further increase the price at the pump and ultimately cost jobs. we are also likely to hear my colleagues reiterate the old use it or lose it myth. claiming that there are thousands of acres of nonproducing leases.

mr. chairman, in reality, use it or lose it is already the law of the land. the moment a company pays for and receives a lease, the clock starts ticking. leases have a timeline. if action doesn't occur on that lease, the lease is lost. according to the lease. in addition, and this is important too, only about a third of the leases contain oil or natural gas. one thing we can't do, sometimes you think we're very powerful, but one thing we can't do is mandate production where there is no oil or natural gas. finally, i -- my colleagues will undoubtedly attempt to claim that these bills ignore the need to ensure safety in offshore drilling. nobody has forgotten the tragic deepwater horizon accident. i harr that -- i hear that especially from my members of the gulf and i heard that when i was down at the gull inform a

hearing only two weeks ago. however, we must not forget the fact the economic threat of high gasoline prices has to our economy and our need to move forward. the administration has slowly started to issue deep water permits in the gulf of mexico, which is in direct recognition that it can be done safely or responsibly, or they wouldn't have done it. yet my colleagues act as if nothing has changed at all as far as safety reforms. but by doing so, they are completely ignore regularality and the actions of their own parties -- party's administration. they are ignoring the fact that regulations have been enhanced and strengthened and new technologies have been developed, tested and deployed. an i might add, mr. chairman, we heard this at the hearing i attended in louisiana two weeks

ago. furthermore, this bill makes changes to current law, it requires that the secretary issue aer permit to drill and requires that the secretary conduct a safety review. neither of those provisions are in current law today. in 2008, the last time gasoline prices reached $4 a gallon, congress stepped up to the challenge and took bold action to end decades-long ban on new offshore drilling. although this administration has effectively reimposed that ban, the american people are once again calling on congress to act. by passing h. reform 1230 today, congress can show the american people that we heard their concerns and that we are taking action. so i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the bill and -- that will lower gasoline problems, create jobs and create energy indepefpbles i reserve my time.

. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. markey: one year ago today we were two weeks into the b.p. oil spill in the gulf of mexico. we were two weeks into what would ultimately become the worst environmental disaster in our nation's history. with more than four million barrels of oil spilling into the gulf. since that disaster we have learned many things about the safety of offshore drilling. we learned that the blowout, that the oil industry doubted as fail-safe, could be sure to fail if an actual blowout was under way. we learned that the only technology the oil industry had been relying upon in the event of a spill was a xerox machine. the spill response plans for major companies were so similar that they contained plans to evacuate walruses from the gulf of mexico even though the walruses had not called the gulf home in more than three million years. and they were such dead ringers for each other that they

contained the same name and phone number of the same long deceased expert. we learned that the oil companies had neither the resources nor the ability to stop a deep water blowout. b.p. spill response included an attempt to shoot golf balls and bits of rubber into the well. when we were told that the industry was relying on the most sophisticated technologies, we assumed that they meant technologies developed by m.i.t. and not the p.g.a. and we learned from an independent b.p. spill commission that the root causes of the deep water horizon disaster were systemic to the entire oil and gas industry. and yet here we are. debating legislation that would do nothing to improve the safety of offshore drilling and could actually make drilling less safe. the legislation before us represents a return to the prespill mentality of speed over safety. h.r. 1230 would force the interior department to rush to hold new lease sales in the gulf

of mexico by deeming the shoddy environmental analysis conducted by the bush administration's mineral management service before the b.p. spill as sufficient for future lease sales in the gulf. just looking at some of the conclusions contained within the bush administration's 2007 environmental analysis exposes the absurdity of deeming this work as sufficient for new leasing in the wake of the deep water horizon disaster. in its 2007 multisale environmental impact statement, completed in april of 2007, the interior department determined, quote, the most likely signs of an offshore spill greater than or equal to 1,000 barrels that is predicted to occur is 4,600 barrels of oil. the b.p. deep water horizon disaster led to more than four million barrels spilling into the gulf. that's 1,000 times the size of

the largest spill this analysis concluded was likely to occur. in 2007, m.m.s. analysis concluded that the total volume of oil that would be spilled from all spills in the central and western gulf over the next 40 years would be roughly 47,000 barrels of oil, that is less than what was spilled in the deep water horizon in one day. m.m.s. concluded in 2007 a worse case scenario, only 19 to 31 miles of gulf coastline would be impacted by a spill. the deep water horizon disaster resulted in oil reaching over 950 miles of gulf coastline. and m.m.s. determined that a deep water blowout would not present a cleanup problem because the oil would rise in the water column, surfacing almost directly over the source location, but in fact the oil spewing from the ocean floor remained an enormous subsurface

plumes that spread across the gulf. the obama administration is already moving forward to hold these lease sales in the gulf later this year and early next year. and they are going to be more responsible. even the congressional budget office analysis of h.r. 1230 concludes, c.b.o. estimates that implementing the bill would have no significant impact on proceeds from lease sales in the gulf of mexico because the proposed schedule is similar to the plan included in the d.o.e.'s budget for 2011. so really all the majority is accomplishing with this legislation is ensuring that we don't do any new environmental review of the impacts of these lease sales. instead of actually reviewing the lessons of the b.p. spill, the majority wants to lessen the environmental review. and in addition, this legislation would force the department to move forward with a lease off of the coast of virginia within one year. well, i have very bad news for

the majority. the overwhelming majority of the area that would comprise this lease sale would infringe on critical training areas for the u.s. navy, the department of defense concluded that 78% of the area offered in the virginia lease sale would occur where military operations would be impeded by drilling structuring and related activities. moreover, much of the remaining area is comprised of a major shipping channel. this bill is really a solution in search of a problem. the bottom line is that the oil production is at its highest level in nearly a decade, and natural gas production is at record levels. we should instead be debating legislation that would protect the lives and the livelihoods of the people in the gulf and that could actually help consumers at the pump this summer. so at that point i would like to reserve the balance of my time, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman's time is reserved. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, i

yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. goodlatte. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for 90 steckeds. mr. goodlatte: i rise to engage the chairman in a colloquy. mr. chairman, as you know i am committed to ensuring that revenue sharing of the benefits of o.c.s. development are returned to those coastal states where drilling is occurring or may occur, like virginia. can you share with me and other members of this body whether this will be addressed by the committee? i yield to the chairman. mr. hastings: i thank the gentleman for yielding. the answer is we will be a focus and a priority. when i first introduced the bill before us today i stated these are only the first steps in this congress' efforts to increase american energy production. the committee will continue to move on an array of bills that will introduced in advance as part of the american energy initiative. coming soon will be the bills focus on expanding offshore production, on shore production, critical minerals and revenue sharing. today only a few select states receive revenue sharing from o.c.s. activities. this committee will be working

to reform those revenues to ensure there is a fair treatment to all states that produce oil and gas in the o.c.s. revenue sharing will be a priority and action will be forthcoming. i yield back. mr. goodlatte: i thank the chairman for his comments. i commend him for this legislation and i thank him. mr. hastings: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the energy and commerce committee, the gentleman from michigan, mr. upton. the chair: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for 90 seconds. mr. upton: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. speaker, most americans understand the concept of supply and demand and in fact a third of our oil now comes from the gulf. department of energy information agency tells us that last year's production in the gulf was 20% less than projected in 2007. and in 2012, we are going to be getting a half a million barrels a day decline in production from 2010. what happens when the production goes down an the demand goes up?

the price goes up, way up. add to that the uncertainty and unrest in the middle east, and there is no surprise that we have gas prices at $4 and $5 in this country and who knows where they are headed. this legislation, we pass it today, get it enacted, helps turn the key to unlocking the door on domestic energy production. this is not -- this legislation is not about new lease sales, it's simply catches up with the leases already approved. let's pass it. i yield my time back to the chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield two minutes to the ranking member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. holt: mr. chairman, i thank my friend from massachusetts. i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 1230. this is the first in the republican amnesia acts that

ignores what happened last year in the gulf of mexico. it would force the department of the interior to rush into holding new leases in the gulf of mexico and off the coast of virginia, not far from new jersey, i might add, even though congress has not enacted a single piece of legislation to improve the safety of offshore drilling. the president's spill commission reported that offshore drilling in u.s. waters is four times more deadly than drilling elsewhere in the world, even for the same companies. clearly there's a safety problem that must be addressed. and i must emphasize because they have talked about it again and again, they are talking about high oil prices, high prices at the pump. we feel it. everybody in america feels it. do they address it? no, they do not address gasoline prices. it actually accelerates the handouts to big oil. this legislation does. and in addition to being silent on safety concerns, this

prohibits any further environmental review in the gulf based on the lessons learned in the deep water horizon last year. that tragedy exposed the woefully inadequate ways in which the environmental reviews had been done in the gulf of mexico. need i remind the speaker or the majority that there are no walruses to protect in the gulf of mexico? as you heard from mr. markey, that's the level of quality in the environmental review that they want to apply from here on out. the analysis assumes the blowout preventers were capable of preventing blowouts. we now know, we have learned, they are not. the post spill investigations have clearly demonstrated the assumptions of the environmental review are not sufficient. i will offer an amendment shortly to drop the language that would deem this environmental review to be adequate. despite the poor and safety environmental record accumulated

in the gulf, h.r. 1230 recklessly puts the atlantic coast -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for an additional half minute. mr. holt: h.r. 1230 recklessly puts the atlantic coast at risk of experiencing an oil spill such as what we have seen before. that's why i call this the amnesia act. there are two more bills we will be seeing here on the floor that are similar. this is not in the interest of the u.s. consumer. it is not in the interest of fishermen. it is not in the interest of coastal residents. this is not in the interest of america. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, the chairman of the subcommittee dealing with this legislation. the chair: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this bill is the first step for republicans to bring a new energy policy to this country, the american energy initiative.

mr. lamborn: look at this chart. it says it all. under barack obama an had -- and his regulators, the average price of gasoline in this country has gone up from $1.84 a gallon when he took office, to just under $4. under his watch, gasoline has more than doubled. we need more supply and everyone agrees it should be our own energy not foreign. under the law of supply and demand, which my friends across the aisle have not found a way to repeal, more supply means lower prices. in addition, the thousands of more jobs for americans and billions of revenue dollars for the treasury. h.r. 1230 requires that four promising lease sale areas, three in the gulf and one off virginia, must be opened up for production. no more stonewalling by this administration and extreme environmentalists. after the spill came out of my subcommittee and the full natural resources committee,

this administration belatedly said it would start acting on one of these four lease areas. if the only way we can get action is to shame them into it, republicans will do so. if the administration still refuses, we will do our best to force action by changing the law. this bill is the first step to get gasoline prices down. the american people deserve no less. thank you, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio. the chair: the gentleman oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. defazio: we are headed toward 425, $4.50 a gallon by memorial day. the usual memorial company run-up when the driving season starts of the the rushing dreams of american family, small business, and our economic recovery. hey, the profits are up. it's good.

republicans say it's just supply and demand. it's simple. so if we add a small increment to future domestic supply, five or 10 years from now, that will bring down the price. no, it won't. remember, it's a world price commodity. in fact, supply is up. u.s. has 12.6 million more barrels in storage than the five-year average. demand, it's down. americans can't afford the price and the economy is depressed. libyan lost production been made up by the saudis. every gallon of that has been made up. what's really going on? it's market manipulation, price gouging, profiteering, and speculation, but the republicans won't take on their benefactors from big oil and wall street. even goldman sachs says that $20 of a barrel is excessive speculation, $20 a barrel. that's 60 cents a gallon. we can stop that tomorrow. put a tax on speculators, or in

college the commodities future trading -- encourage the commodities future trading commission to try to block what you are doing. on the nigh next -- nymex exchange, 45% of the trades in one day were driven by computers, they traded twice the world's daily oil consumption by computer in one day, driving up the price, and the republicans said, it's supply and demand. it's not supply and demand. it's market manipulation, it's price gouging, it's speculation. do something about it. those tools are before us. if you want to have a debate about future supply and future domestic supply from natural gas or offshoring drilling or biodiesel or whatever, let as have that debate. you want to get people relief this year, save our economic recovery, save american families, take on wall street, take on big oil, take on the speculators. or, i guess you are afraid they won't contribute to the next

campaign. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. . mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcclintock: the majority of the american people an the majority of this house recognize it is long past time to put american energy and independence and prosperity first. by opening up these resources we assure energy abundance for the next generation, we begin to ares the rues now increase in prices at the pump, we assure productive, high-paying jobs, not only for the thousands of american workers directly employed in the industry, but for many times more. the employed in support and spinoff jobs. we ensure billions of dollars of oil royalties paid directly into this nation's treasury at a time when the treasury is empty. we assure that our growing

reliance on foreign sources is reversed. to those who were clamoring for more tax revenues, this is the healthy way to get them, by removing the impediments that have prevented a prosperous and expanding economy. it is prosperity and prosperity alone that creates tax revenues. with this measure we begin to change the policies that have produced the pathetic and self-inflicted spectacles. mr. hastings: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. mcclintock p: of the most oil-rich nation in the world importing its energy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. moran: we know our constituents are paying too much at the pump. but we also know where that money is going. almost $30 billion just in the last three months went to the top three oil companies, exxon, shell, and b.p.

remember b.p.? over $7 billion just this quarter. and in fact that's after the american taxpayer, which we say we're so concerned about, shelled out $5 billion in subsidies to the oil and gas company. that's revenue of about $100 billion on an annual basis, more than that. that's where the money is going. and within that profit, not revenue, profit we're talking about, what do they do with it? 90% of it is for stock buy pbacks and dividends to enrich the executives and the shareholders. and to spend on tv advertising to convince the american public they're spending on just the opposite. 10%. 10% is going for drilling. now what this legislation would do is to bring us back to a period of even weaker regulation than we had before

the gulf oil spill. imagine it just happened, 200 million if gallons of oil spilled into the gulf coast waters and now we want to repeal that, and we want to open up off the shore of virginia with thousands and thousands of jobs are dependent upon the naval operations offshore, which would not be able to be conducted. if we go ahead and drill on these properties. plus the remaining 22% is devoted to shipping lanes for two of our busiest commercial ports, hampton roads and baltimore. do we want to lose those jobs and the jobs in tourism, virginia beach. we should be about creating jobs, not jeopardizing jobs, defeat this bill. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: i would note the

two democrat senators from virginia and the governor of the state are in favor of this legislation. with that, mr. chairman, i'm more than happy to yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. johnson. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. johnson: i rise today in strong support of the restoring american offshore leasing now act. last night, i had a telephone town hall with hundreds of anymy constituents. the overwhelming concern was the high price of gas. seniors, students, working families and small businesses want to know what we're doing to help lower fuel costs. they want us to stop being dependent on foreign energy and start really developing america's resources today -- resources. today we're doing that. unfortunately, our colleagues across the isle -- the aisle believe raising taxes on oil companies will lower the price of gas. this defies both logic and common sense. not only would raising tacks

ensure job losses in america but it would result in the increase of america's dependence on foreign sources of oil. raising taxes on american energy companies would give a competitive advantage to the russians, the chinese and opec countries that are operating without anti-growth and anti- self-sufficient energy policies. mr. speaker, my constituents in southeastern and eastern ohio understand the negative impacts these proposed tax increases -- mr. hastings: i yield 15 seconds to the gentleman. mr. johnson: that these proposed increases would have on gas prices and they oppose these efforts. i strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill and i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from santa

barbara, california. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. capps: h r. 1230 is a collection of bad ideas. it's -- it mandates the administration offer new lease sales even though they're -- they say they're not prepared to oversee them. they act as if the worst oil spill in history never happened and it pushes billions of dollars into already overstuffed industry coffers. the only thing it adds up to is a false promise. the republican majority is hoping to delude the public that this rush to new offshore drilling will provide a quick fix to oil prices but the harsh reality is we will never control oil supply or gas prices through drilling. we don't have the supply. we have the ability to control

prices by lowering our consumption. that's what we're starting to do. for example, the e.i.a.'s latest report says we're lowering oil usage thanks in part to the president's fuel saving standards. we will be in yol of our energy future by making car cars that go further on a gallon of gas. if in 10 or 20 years oil and gas are still the focus of our energy debate, then we have miserably failed. we will have followed the path that george w. bush and dick cheney charted an we've seen where that leads. high gas prices and billions in oil company profits. it's about time we break free from our addiction to oil. so i urge a no vote on this misleading bill that accelerates new dirty an dangerous drilling. i yield back the plan of my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. chairman. can i inquire how much time on both sides?

the chair: the gentleman from washington has 15 3/4 minutes, and the gentleman from massachusetts has 16 minutes remaining. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from new mexico, mr. pearce. the chair: the gentleman is recognize. mr. pearce: i'm pleased to rise in support of h.r. 1230 to restart american jobs. the current five-year lease plan would have aloud for the sale of four leases off the coast of virginia and three in the gulf of mexico. the president and his agencies are continuing to block these sales. it's time to stop that blocking. we're talking about jobs, the nation is faced with 8% to 9% continuing unemployment. the jobs offshore are good, high-paying jobs, $400 a day, $50,000 a year. recently the president had strong rhetoric to georgetown university, saying he's going to increase oil and gas production in america, yet the administration's actions are moving us the opposite direction.

tax increases kill jobs, that's an economic truth. our friends across the aisle want to kill american jobs by raising taxes at a time when unemployment is too high, when we're dependent on too much foreign oil. in a speech last month at georgetown, president obama said the fact of the matter is that for quite some time, america is going to be still dependent on oil an making its economy work. we're exploring and assessing new frontiers for oil and gas developments from alaska to the south and mid atlantic states. in this bill we are giving the president the bill he is saying he's going to implement. now let him sign it. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield two minutes to the gentleman vermont, mr. rush. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. rush: i thank the gentleman. imagine what we could do for

the american consumer at the pump if we stop lobbing rhetorical grenades back and forth and decided to focus on the concrete things it is within our power to do today that would lower the price at the pump. there's three things. one, why are we giving tax breaks to oil companies? you do have to wonder, $1 trillion in profits, nothing wrong with that, but do they need to reach into the pockets of the american consumer and get $40 billion on top of that? that's number one. number two, have the futures market be about protecting the consumer, not enriching the hedge fund wall street speculator. it is astonishing what's going on and it's so bad that even goldman sachs acknowledges that at least $27 on the price of $110 barrel of oil is about speculation. why in the world do we allow that?

because every time you and i go to the pump, our constituents go to the pump, they're paying for wall street and they're paying for tax breaks to oil companies. the third thing we can do is we can do it short-term and that's going to the strategic petroleum reserve. two republicans presidents and one democratic president have done that with great effect, lowering the price 33%, 19%, and 9%. it gives immediate relief to the consumer at the pump. we can do this together. if we the agenda is about doing something fb your constituents an mine and not just having this political food fight. end speculation, end the tax breaks and foe into that asset belonging to all of us, the strategic petroleum reserve and bring prices down immediately. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from south carolina, mr. duncan, a member of the natural resources committee. the chair: the gentleman is

recognized for one minute. mr. duncan: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. chairman, for your leadership on this issue. our friends across the aisle want us to use this debate to demagogue this issue and demonize oil producers. this administration's policy of drill there not here, has led us to what we face today. they have fueled overseas oil producers by shutting of domestic exploration. now today we hear the other party tell us that raising taxes on american energy production will somehow make prices go down. this is insane. mr. chairman, as any economist can tell you. we need to end the de facto moratorium on the gulf of mexico permit we need to reopen the west to exploration, we need to open up anwr for exploration, we need to allow american entrepreneurs to do the work of the free market and get this economy moving again this bill will begin the

possess of releasing the potential of american nrnl this means tens of thousands of american jobs producing american energy for american households an businesses. i urge us to pass this bill and put americans back to work producing american energy. god bless america and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield myself three minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. markey: this is the wrong debate to be having here today. the republicans are debating more drilling without more safety. even though the b.p. spill commission that examined what wept wrong last year concluded there is a systemic failure in our country to deal with the safety issues that confront the offshore drilling industry. in fact, they concluded that there are four times greater fay talities -- fatalities in drilling off-the-shores of europe than the united states.

four times more fatalities. we should be number one in drilling, but we should be number one in safety as well. what the republicans are doing here today is they are saying that they believe in all of the above, but the truth is, that with this bill they are saying once again it is really an agenda of oil above all. they have nothing out here on renewable energy resources, wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, plug-in hybrids,, all electric vehicles. none is part of that debate. they go back to the same old agenda of oil above all. do we need, do we need to give more to the oil industry? $10 billion in profits for exxonmobil in january, february, and march? $10 billion they made. shell, $8 billion. b.p. $7 billion. chevron, $6 billion. conoco phillips, $3 billion. shouldn't we talk a little bit about safety as we are talking about new drilling off our shore

line? no, that's not the republican agenda. should we be talking about taking away the tax breaks from the oil industry? the $40 billion which the american taxpayer gives to the oil industry. do we really need to have the oil industry in the consumer's pocket at the gas pump and then in their other pocket as taxpayers to give even more money to exxonmobil? that's what the republicans should bring out here for a debate. they do not do that. on the new york mercantile exchange, that's where they trade for oil prices. that's now 45% of the trading. on the commodities futures trading floor of the new york mercantile exchange. what do the republicans do to deal with the fact that it has turned into a crude oil casino? where gambling is going on, as the speculators of our country anti-world look at saudi arabia, look at libya as the price of

oil sprokets, goldman sachs concludes that $20 a barrel of the increase in the price of oil just comes from the speculation from the gambling that's going on and the nymex. you might as well put las vegas over the new york mercantile exchange. it is a crude oil casino, ladies and gentlemen. what do the republicans do? they have slashed the budget for the commodities futures trading commission who are the cops on the beat. they are saying we need fewer cops to police these speculators. they slash the wind and solar budget by 70% in their budget that just passed last month. i yield myself an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. markey: i thank you. this is their agenda. nothing on safety. nothing on wind and solar. nothing on corraling the speculators. and what do they say? what they say is, they are going to in fact go into the medicare

budget of grandma and grandpa and cut their program and then put an oil rig on top of it to suck out the money. like a pipeline out of the pockets of grandma or grandpa and put it into the profits of the oil industry by more tax breaks for them, even as they report the greatest profits in the history of any company in the history of the world. ladies and gentlemen, vote no on this legislation. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield myself two minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized tore two minutes. mr. hastings: sometimes i am absolutely baffled by the rhetoric that i hear here. let me remind my colleagues that 2 1/2 years ago in 2008 when gasoline prices went to $4 a gallon, we republicans came in to the house even though we weren't in session and talked about the potential resources that we have in this country to make america self-sufficient. and american people got it.

they got it and they said, you know, we ought to utilize those resources. they said we should drill. we should drill in the outer continental shelf, and we should drill on shore. the american people get it. and yet the rhetoric we hear here is entirely different from the economic issues that are facing us. here's the whole point. when america ended the moratoria on offshore drilling, the prices went down. it's never been explained by the other side, but it's pretty darn obvious. when you send a signal to the markets you are serious about becoming less dependent on foreign energy, the markets responded. and they responded 2 1/2 years ago and they will respond the same way. but all we hear from this side is you have to have a bogeyman, everybody's against us. baloney. the market is what drives this -- the price of oil and it's in

our best interest in this country to become less dependent on foreign energy, and that's what these three bills do. i reserve my time, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. tonko. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. tonko: i thank the gentleman for yielding. let there be no doubt, americans that are worried about the price of gasoline, it's recent spike has once again put us on notice. this bill that relieves regulation provides the wrong tools. america knows we can do better. we cannot afford to mindlessly give billions of dollars to big oil companies while they make record profits. in the short-term, we must ensure that speculators and wall street quit playing games with the price of oil. and finally, we must provide motorists with fueling options at the pump. it is unconscionable we would give $4 billion of taxpayer money to big oil companies this year alone while they are on

track to make nearly $100 billion in profits in 2011. with prices this high, does big oil really need even more money? taxpayers know they don't. and taxpayers are hit twice with taxes on gasoline, once at the pump and once on tax day. this must end. we can help consumers at the pump by going after wall street speculators that drive up the cost of oil. we can increase mileage standards and it's reasonable that they could reach 60 miles per hour gallon by the year -- miles per gallon by 2025. and consumers can choose the lowest alternate. high gas prices are painful. they are painful to seniors living on a fixed income, and painful to small businesses. and the big oil subsidies accompanying them are paying for our nation's economy as it recovers from the bush recession. let's end these big oil give aways to some of the most profitable companies in the world and provide drivers with alternatives.

creating clean energy jobs of the future. i'd like to thank the gentleman for his leadership on this issue and for yielding. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. benishek, a valuable member of the house natural resources committee. the chair: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. benishek: mr. chairman, this morning a gallon of gasoline in my hometown of iron river, michigan, was $4.29. and unfortunately most people are plagued with the fact they know that the prices are going to go up further in the next few weeks. i believe that we in congress know there is no silver bullet that's going to lower prices at the pump. however we have a responsibility here to craft policy and pass legislation that will increase the supply of crude oil which we

will be -- which will be produced here at home. as members of congress, it's our duty to take these actions to help lessen the pain of these prices on our families. in michigan and throughout the country. mr. speaker, mr. chairman, we need to find a long-term solution to high fuel prices, and i believe that our full day markup we have on committee last month was the first step. i believe that passing this bill today will be the next step. we have many further steps to take. i yield my time. thank you. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: mr. chairman, i'd like for us to hear now from mr. sarbanes of maryland, one of the most thoughtful members of the natural resources committee. the chair: for how long? mr. holt: two minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. sarbanes: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i oppose the legislation that would really open in a wholesale fashion a very sense fifth areas to offshore drilling.

we have to take a lot of care when it comes to doing this offshore drilling. i don't think that this bill exercises that care. during the committee's consideration of the bill, i put forward an amendment that would strike that section of the bill that authorizes drilling off the coast of virginia. i did this because of my concern about the potential impact of a spill on the chesapeake bay, which, of course, is a treasure for marylanders and all those who live in the chesapeake bay watershed. that chesapeake bay is really the soul of my state of maryland. it's a national treasure. in so many ways. the virginia lees parcel, 220, and it is a lease parcel which the republicans would like to put back into play with their bill, when you look at it about 78% of that parcel, you have to immediately take off the table, because it would occur in areas where military operations would be impeded. i want to thank my colleague,

gerry connolly, from virginia, for putting forward an amendment on this bill which would shift the burden say the department of defense has to affirmatively conclude that you will not impede these kinds of military operations in order to drill. so you take that out of the equation, then you take another chunk of it out because you need to keep commercial shipping lanes opened, what you're left with is about 10% of the parcel that you could actually drill on. what you could get from that would overwhelm supply the demand of the country for one day. so you would be putting at risk this valuable, sensitive chesapeake bay and all the surrounding areas for getting one day's worth of energy production. that just doesn't make sense. i think it undermines the bill on a wholesale basis. it shows that this is not put forth in a way that is sensible. for that reason i oppose the legislation. i yield back my time.

the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, another valuable member of the natural resources committee, mr. wittman. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. wittman:thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to thank the chairman also, for his leadership and work on making sure we address the energy needs of this nation. virginia has the opportunity to develop offshore energy in an environmentally friendly and responsible manner. like any industrial or commercial activity, energy production has its risks, however those risks have been significantly mitigated and offshore energy production can be conducted in a safe and responsible manner. unfortunately, the administration has halted any further oil and gas development in the atlantic ocean. our economy continues to struggle and any further increase in energy prices will exacerbate that struggle. we are now working to regain our

footing, as unemployment hovers at 9%, with the unrest in the middle east and north africa, those issues continue to threaten this nation's energy security. failure to properly and promptly address our energy needs could negatively impact the u.s. economy and stall any recovery, and continue to affect national security. energy production offshore of the commonwealth could create thousands of jobs and generate much needed revenue to reduce the deficit. the department of interior has calculated virginia could produce 500 million barrels of oil and 2.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, natural gas being one of the most economically viable and environmentally friendly sources of fossil fuels. a recent study by i.c.f. international concluded that offshore energy production in virginia could create 1,888 new

jobs and generate 19.5 billion in federal, state, and local revenues. i can tell you in virginia as we struggle to find dollars to clean up the chesapeake bay, struggle to find dollars for transportation, that those dollars are much needed. virginia can lead the nation in improving our energy security and reducing our reliance on foreign oil, and to do that we must reinstate the planned offshore oil and natural gas lease sale. with that i urge my colleagues to support this measure. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia,. mr. connolly. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. connolly: thank you. i thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, you know, i hate to say it, but what we are hearing here on the floor of the house of representatives in

defense of this legislation is snake oil. somehow the commuters, the hard-pressed commuters and consumers of gasoline in this country are supposed to believe that if today we unleash all possibility of oil drilling, gas drilling offshore, continental united states, we are going to be producing barrels of oil. false. we are going to reduce the price of oil today equally false. in fact, there's plenty of evidence that the market that drives oil is relatively an elastic. we heard earlier today on the floor of this house, driving is down. demand is down. supply is up. but so are prices. in fact, if you look at this chart, there's an erie -- eerie, correlation between oil profits and the spike in the price of gasoline charged to our hard-pressed consumers in the united states. .

the other side wants you to believe with a smoke screen that somehow their tax subsidies being cheaged or lifted would in fact further increase the price of oil. they have low tacks, low royalties, they have record profits, how has that worked out for the average driver in america? this is produced record gasoline prices. the republican policy that will be enshrined today in this legislation have produced these profits and those costs for the average consumer in america. it is wrong and to argue otherwise is selling snake oil. i urge the defeat of this legislation on behalf of the consumers of america and i yield back to the distinguished ranking member. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from washington state, mr. inslee.

the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. inslee: we should oppose this bill not because it is too strong but because it is too weak. americans do need relief from $4 a gallon gasoline and they are not going to get it from this bill either in the short-term or the long-term. the reason they won't get relief in the short-term is we're not drilling in the right places. we need to drill speculators, not just wells. even goldman sachs recognizes that a significant portion of this huge spike in prices is due to rampant speculation in the market. but this bill doesn't do a single thing about that short-term reason for this short-term price, we need to drill speculators not just wells. but secondly, in the long-term, this bill does not give us what we need.

my friends across the aisle told us they were going to give us an all of the above energy strategy. they haven't given us an all of the above strategy. they have just given us an all of the below strategy. because the only thing they are thinking about are these archaic technologies of drilling holes in the ground. we use 25% of the world's oil. we only have 3% of the world's oil supply. even if we drill in yellowstone national park. the dinosaurs just didn't die underneath our feet. we need new supplies of energy of electricity, biofuels from targeted genetics in seattle, advanced form of algae biofuels from south fire energy and general atomics and other companies. we need new sources of energy not just below our feet but above our feet and in our minds where we get the intellectual capital to get these -- to invent these technologies. that's an all of the above

strategy. let's get real short-term relief. defeat this bill and get a real energy policy for this country. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: i'm going to reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: can you please tell me how much time is remaining in the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts has 3 1/2 minutes remain, the gentleman from the state of washington has 10 minutes remaining. mr. markey: i would ask the gentleman from washington state to please -- mr. hastings: i have a speaker coming to the floor right now. at this time i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. flake: i thank the gentleman for yielding, i won't take the full two minutes.

i've been listening to this discussion, when you see graphics with an oil rig sucking money out of social security or medicare or whatever that was, you know you've gone beyond the realm of what is logical for a debate or the real facts about what this legislation does. the bottom line is it will make it easier for us to become more energy independent. not completely energy independent. it can't go that far. but it will make us more independent than we were before. it'll create an environment where jobs can be created by the private sector. it will help over time lower the price of gasoline because it will create more supply in the end. that's what it does. it doesn't put a big oil rig on the top of medicare and suck money from our seniors. come on. this is just a measure to help the situation, to make it better. we've blocked off too many

areas to oil drilling and we not exploited our own supply enough to help breng down price and to help consumers out there everywhere. so that's all this does. i commend the gentleman for bringing it forward. i urge support for it and i yield back the mans of my time. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. holt: i thank my friend, mr. markey. this is about big oil handouts, pure and simple. there are no lessons learned, no lessonned applied with regard -- lessons applied with regard to safety or the environment. if these companies were energy companies, as they lake to say, they would invest more in producing sustainable, clean energy. alternatives. in the long run, we all know it, we've got to face the facts, we've got to break our

addiction ooil. and if the majority, the authors of this legislation, really wanted to help the motorist the consumers, they would address speculation, they would enthe speculation. they would end the tax giveaway. they would use the strategic oil reserve to short circuit speculation. the oil companies are not energy companies. they are fleecing machines. the greatest profits of any corporation in history and you heard me say a few minutes ago that the biggest of them, exxon, had an effective tax rate of about .4%. this will not help the consumer. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: can i inquire of my freppeds -- if my fend from massachusetts is prepared to close. mr. markey: i am prepared to close.

mr. hastings: hold on just one second there, i have one gentleman who wants to speak. i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from louisiana, mr. landry. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. landry: i ran down here to thank my colleagues for doing what the american people have been asking them to do and to start the process of stopping to kick the energy problem can in this country down the road. finally, we're going to take the steps necessary to put people back to work and to start america down a path of affordable domestic energy. now, they say that we're robbing grandma and grandpa. grandma and grandpa hold stock in those nrnl companies.

down in louisiana, grandma and grandpa's grandsons and grandchildren work in an industry that provides that energy. right now, they don't have a job. they're being laid off or they're being stonet brazil or africa or the middle east to drill for oil out there. while we have spent over $1 trillion of taxpayer money funding the department of energy to wean us off of foreign oil. i just rise to say thank you, mr. chairman, thank you to my colleagues who have come today in support of this amendment, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i would defer to the chairman of the committee, if he is the concluding speaker on his side, i'm prepared to

close on my side. mr. hastings: at this time, i am the concluding speaker so i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: would the chairman -- the chair: the gentleman has 2 1/2 minutes. mr. markey: i yield myself the remaining time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. markey: so here's where we are. the republicans take over. the republicans say they're ready to put together a plan for our country. it's one year after the b.p. catastrophe in the gulf of mexico, the worst environmental disaster in our nation's history. last year, the republicans blocked passage of any safety legislation that would lerp the lessons of what happened in the gulf of mexico. the b.p. spill commission has come back. they say fatalities on u.s. rigs are four times higher than those on european rigs. we should be number one in drilling and we should be number one in safety.

the plups refuse to deal with the endemic, systemic problems with safety identified in the american oil tri-. the oil tri-is now garnering the largest profits any corporations in the world have ever been able to enjoy. but the republicans refuse to bring out here legislation which will take away their tax breaks. they don't need to have tax breaks to do something they're doing anyway. it's like subsidizing a fish to swim or a bird to fly. we don't have to give them taxpayers' money. the ryan budget slashes benefits for grandma and grandpa, then takes that money and gives it away in tax breaks to millionaires and to the oil industry. do we really need to tell grandma we're cutting back on her medical benefits and taking her must be -- her money and giving it in tax breaks to the

biggest companies in america? and finally we should be talking about the stra teemic petroleum reserve. it was used by both president bushes, it was used by president clinton, it does work. the new york mercantile exchange is where oil futures are traded. it is a casino of crude oil right now. on one day two months ago, 45% of all the computer generated trades were in the oil industry. it was twice the value of all the oil in the world. that's what we need to do, to deal with those speculators and the way to do it is to deploy the strategic petroleum reserve, deploy it now, send the fear of losing fortunes into the hearts of those speculators and you'll see the price of oil drop like a rock. that's what we need to do. that's what consumers need as they head into the memorial diday weekend. that's what people are wondering what is going to

happen to our economy. 10 of the last 11 recessions in our economy are -- in our country are tied to the price of oil. 10 of the last 11 recessions. but what we saw in 1990, president bush won the war in iraq in 1990 an 1991, but because he never deployed the strategic petroleum reserve until it was too late, a mini recession and president clinton was able to defeat him. let's learn this lesson about the price of oil. ignore this agenda of the republican party. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, how much time? the chair: the gentleman has seven minutes. mr. hastings: i yield myself the balance of me time. -- of my time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: this is an interesting debate, there's been a will the of rhetoric thrown around, some that opportunity apply whatsoever to the bill before us today.

h.r. 1230 simply tells this administration that to go through with the lease sales already authorized by a previous administration, in other words, all these lease sales had gone through whatever process they had to go through, three of them were in the gulf of mexico, one on the coast of virming. we are simply saying, let's send a signal to the international markets that america is serious about becoming less dependent on foreign oil and we to that by saying, this administration should go through with these lease sales. which i might add, mr. chairman, we have heard about the loss of revenue from the other side of the aisle, these lease sales themselves would provide the general fund with $40 million other the next 10 years. so this is a very -- what we're doing, which is ironic, we're telling this administration to do something, it should be doing by law anyway.

that's what this is. i urge my colleagues to vote on this bill. we can have other discussion on the other bills in ensuing days. as far as the discussion talking about big oil, i don't know how many --ic probably count the number of colleagues on the other side of the aisle that didn't say something about big oil rather than those that did. but what is interesting, you would be led to believe that the only big oil in the world apparently are american companies. i would suggest that is entirely not true. in fact, when you talk about big oil, mr. chairman, really who you should be focusing on is opec. because crude oil is an international product, a global product, no question about that. and yet opec controls 45% of the market. it is a cartel, mr. chairman, there is no question about that. and we all know simple economics if there's a cartel

on any commodity on any commodity the way that you break the cartel is by increasing the supply. and that's what the combination of these three bills do, simply send a signal to the markets -- and i've said this over and over -- that we are serious about utilizing the resources that we have. now it's been said several of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle said the united states doesn't have any resources. well, nothing can be further from the truth because if you look at government data on what the potential resources are in the outer tenl shelf, and i am going to -- outer continental shelf, and i am going to say onshore, the potential resources for oil equivalent per barrel is in excess when you combine o.c.s. and onshore, the potential resources are in excess of two trillion barrels

of oil. that far exceeds what one of my colleagues earlier, dr. fleming from louisiana, said. it far exceeds what they have in saudi arabia. in fact, in other opec nations. now, this rhetoric of trying to blame somebody when the issue really is something as basic as having a supply and -- out there that consumers can utilize. what we are saying here is two-fold. actually throw-fold. one relates directly to american jobs. energy sector jobs are good-paying jobs, so let's encourage the energy sector in this country to expand so we can have those good-paying jobs. that's gd to get -- good to get the funk out of our economy. secondly, we become less dependent on foreign sources because energy is an important part of our growing economy. and if we have a stable source

of that in the future, our economy can grow with the assurity we will have a stable source of energy. but probably more important long term, mr. chairman, the reason why we should pass these bills, to send the signal to the market is the national security issue. we all know that -- in fact, i mentioned opec. there are some countries in opec that are outwardly hostile to the united states. one of them is south america, venezuela. why are we relying on them for the supply of our energy when we have these resources that i just pointed out to you in excess of two trillion equivalent barrels of oil? so, mr. chairman, this is the first step. this is the first step of starting the process of becoming less dependent on american -- on foreign oil and on foreign energy, i should say, and it is the first step to get our economy in recovery

by creating good american jobs. with that i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 1230, and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time for general debate has expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. no amendment to the bill is in order exthose printed in part b of house report 112-73. each such amendment may be offered only in the order, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and control by a proponent and an opponent of the amendment, shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in part b of house report 112-73. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. holt: mr. chairman, i have an i have an amendment at the desk.

the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in part a of house report 112-73 offered by mr. holt of new jersey. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: in the legislation it is deemed that the shoddy environmental analysis conducted four years ago -- in fact, years prior to the gulf blowout, to be sufficient for all future lease sales in the gulf despite their glaring de-- deficiencies. they deem, they declare this is deficient. this environmental impact statement wasn't adequate then and we know it's not adequate now. deem is language that could jeopardize worker safety and could imperil coastal communities.

my amendment would strike the language deeming the prespill environmental work to be sufficient and it would, therefore, require a new updated analysis. and the administration says they intend to and are prepared to apply a strengthened virmal analysis incorporating the lessons learned. this amnesia bill before us learns no lessons from the worst environmental oil spill in our history. just look at some of the conclusions contained in the outdated environmental analysis. the e.i.f. determined, quote, the most likely size of an offshore spill greater than or equal to 1,000 barrels would be 4,600 barrels. so that, in other words, the pre-b.p. spill analysis concluded that the most likely size of the largest spill that we would see in the gulf of mexico would be 4,600 barrels

of oil. the deepwater horizon produced four million barrels spilling into the gulf. in addition, the analysis concluded that the total value of oil that would be spilled from all spills over 40 years would be roughly 47,000 barrels of oil. that's less than what spilled from the deepwater horizon in one day. the e.i.s. concluded that in the worst-case scenario, something like several dozen miles of gulf coastline would be affected by the spill. in reality, it affected 950 miles of coastline across all the gulf states. the earlier e.i.s. review that they would say should apply for all future drilling determined that a deep-water blowout would not present a cleanup problem because the oil would rise in a water column surfacing almost directly above -- that's their words in the e.i.s. that they would deep to apply --

surfacing almost directly over the source location. in fact, we know the oil spewing spread in subsurface plumes for miles and miles and miles across the gulf. for commercial fisheries, the environmental statement said, quote, a subsurface blowout would have a negligible effect on the gulf of mexico fishery resources or commercial fishing, end quote. in reality, b.p. -- the b.p. spill closed 88,000 square miles of the gulf to fishing. these are just a few examples of how this an inadequate environmental statement. have we learned nothing from the largest spill in gulf waters? it is so thoughtless and so boiler plate that it talks about protecting wallresses in the gulf of mexico. this was a thoughtless

environmental impact statement. surely not worthy of the people who live along the coast. this environmental impact statement is surely not worthy of those who make their living either in the oil business or the fishing business or any other business. the fact is we have far more information now than we did in 2007, and after immense cost, really hard-earned knowledge we certainly should not proceed as if nothing happen. the department of the interior is working to hold these sales mandated but in a reasonable time frame. it -- any leases should reflect the lessons learned from the b.p. spill. in other words, it should reflect reality, not some dream world. they live in a dream world economically. they live in a dream world environmentally. it is clearly a world where wa

lress live in the gulf of mexico. my amendment is a reasonable way to proceed. it would require that we do new environmental work that builds on the hard-earned lessons that we learned from the largest oil spill in the gulf waters. it ensures that future leasing in the gulf fully considers the environmental impact of drilling. i urge adoption of the amendment. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, i strongly oppose this amendment. the e.i.s. work thus far for the lease sales -- and keep in mind these lease sales were already ok'd -- is complete, thorough to conduct these lease sales. it is important to note that this is only one of many environmental analysis that these leases will undergo before any drilling can start.

at each of multiple stages, the environmental reviews will be conducted. the language in this bill -- underlying bill allows the administration to move forward with the lease sales in a timely manner but does not allow drilling until several more layers of thorough environmental assessments and reviews are done. i think that's what the gentleman gets to. the underlying bill let's that happen. these additional environmental study will allow for the latest and best available information following the oil spill to be concluded in studies and applied to any drilling that takes place. in totality, the library of environmental review will end up totaling tens of thousands of pages, mr. chairman, and hundreds of hours by environmental scientists, engineers, biologists and other professionals. but this amendment isn't about environmental protection. this amendment is about

removing the timelines in this bill to conduct these for lease sales. keep in mind, these lease sales is agreed to by a prior administration. the real effect of this bill is for president obama to continue to push these lease sales past 2012 or 2017, in some cases. the real impact of this amendment is that we are right back where we started when the president canceled these lease sales. sending jobs and energy production overseas. this administration's actions to delay these lease sales and their long record of energy roadblocks is why 2011, this year, may be the first year since 1958 that no lease sales will occur in the o.c.s. it's for this reason that o.c.s. revenues in 2011 will fall by more than $9 billion compared to 2008. by validating the existing

e.i.s. work, the bill ensures that these lease sales move forward this year, generating revenues for taxpayers, ensuring that our leasing program continues in a timely manner while also allowing for additional safety measures to continue. i urge my colleagues to vote on this amendment, and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey's time has expired. the gentleman from washington -- mr. hastings: how much time do i have? the chair: the gentleman from washington has 2 1/2 minutes. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman from louisiana. the chair: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. landry: here we go again, delay, delay, delay. the poor people of my district will have to sit there unemployed and wait again. we've goten environmental study after environmental study after environmental study that will

happen after these lease sales. this does not prevent the additional environmental studies that will take place anyhow. all it will do is force those companies to take up the three more years before we can get to our business of drilling so we can get to our business of providing for the american people affordable energy. again, it's a delay tactic. how do i know that? because i can tell you that this administration pulls delay tactic after delay tactic after delay tactic. in permitting wells in the gulf of mexico. they lift the moratorium and then they don't issue permits. so what do they do now? the other side of the aisle, my colleagues on the other side,

they say, well, we got -- it looks like we have a piece of legislation in front of us that's going to finally start to open the gulf back up so let's see how many roadblocks we can put in front of it. i urge my colleagues, defeat this eam. let's get on the business of providing this country with affordable country, and let get this economy rolling and let's get back to creating jobs. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, the ealt is -- the amendment is not agreed to. mr. holt: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek

recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3, offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. comely. the chair: the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: this amendment requires the president to certify that moving forward with lease sale 220 will not impede naval or other department of defense operations off virm's coast. the department of defense stated that 78% of the lease sale of 220 is currently used by the navy for equipment testing, practicing with lived or nants, underwater training and other needs. there may be no other place for lived or nant testing and we wouldn't want live ortnants

near oil wells, would we? billions of dollars have been invested in norfolk and that test bed area. perhaps it's possible for offshore oil exploration or wind energy development to be compatible with continued naval operations. that's why we ask for a certification. but if energy development forces the navy to relocate, our national security would suffer, preparedness would suffer and billions of dollars of extra cost in federal expenditures would be incurred. virginia's economy would also suffer as we can lose more than $10 billion in annual contracting income derived from that base. this amendment ensures that energy development would not cripple naval operations by requiring the president, with the secretary of defense to certify that moving forward with lease sale 220 won't impede naval operations and harm national security and with that, mr. chairman, i reserve

the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado. >> i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume while i appreciate what the gentleman is trying to accomplish, we already protect the responsibility in the outer shelf of virginia so this amendment is totally unnecessary. because preserving the working relationship between the department of defense and the department of the interior is of great importance to the virginia congressional delegation and the natural resources committee, h.r. 1230 assures the mutual goals of national security and nrnl independence by requiring that the lease sale be conducted with stipulations on surface use. mr. lamborn: as well as additional requirements to make certain that the leases issued in this area would not impact defense operations.

i also want to point out that the bipartisan support for energy production offshore of virginia does exist. according to a study by the southeast energy alliance, offshore energy development in virginia could create nearly 2,000 jobs in virginia and produce more than half a billion barrels of oil and 2.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, that's trillion, with a t. this natural gas is important because in the last few years the diminish lick fied natural gas received human amounts of foreign natural gas. developing offshore natural gas in virginia could displace foreign natural gas and mean more for virginia. in context, half a billion barrels of oil is enough to fuel all four million cars in virginia for more than four years and 2.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas can heat

all 3.2 million virginia households for more than 11 years. developing resources off virginia's coast could generate nearly $19.5 billion in revenues to federal, state and local governments. virginians, along with their governor, both democratic stharts and a majority of the congressional delegation here in congress and the city council of virginia beach, off which much of the development would take place, do support offshore leasing and development because they understand it can bring much needed jobs and revenues to the state. thank you, mr. chairman. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from virginia. >> how much time is remaining. the chair: the gentleman has two and a half minutes remaining.

mr. connolly: if the gentleman is so certain of the protections in this legislation, then surely this extra special amendment would not find objection on the other side of the aisle. with that, i yield two minutes to my friend mr. moran of northern virginia. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. moran: i thank my good friend and colleague. mr. chairman, the u.s. atlantic fleet is based at the norfolk naval base and operates in the same waters that this legislation proposes to sell for oil and gas development. does the republican majority really want to yep ardies those thousands and thousands of jobs that are identified with that naval base? according to report -- to a report issued by the secretary of defense, there should be no lease sales in 72% of the proposed lease area that this bill directs be sold to oil and gas companies because it is in conflict with lived or nants,

air surface missile and gunry exercises, shipboard qualification trials, carrier qualify cages, development and operational follow-on testing and evaluation and an additional 5% would interfere with aerial operations and should not post -- host permanent surface stucktures such as drilling rigs. in other words more than three quarters of the area this legislation directs be sold to gas companies is in conflict with our national security interests. a good deal of the remaining 22% is within shipping lanes of the country's two busiest commercial points, rampton rhodes and baltimore. our coastal waters are a shared resource that host a number of competing and times incompatible uses. clearly direct national security issues should be weighed at least alongside the

indirect benefit of unproven oil and gas development that won't occur for many, many, many years to come. this amendment would ensure national security interests would prevail but it also underscores the point that the majority seems too anxious to dismiss the coastal fisheries and tourism industry that generate billions in income and sustain the lively -- livelihoods of millions of americans. their future is at risk when congress disregards the lessons past disasters have taught by mandating shortcuts to drilling. i urge my colleagues to accept this amendment and reject the underlying bill. the chair: the gentleman from colorado. mr. lamborn: is the other side ready to close? mr. connolly: i have one more request to speak. the chair: the gentleman has one and a half minutes

remaining. mr. connolly: i yield one minute to my -- to the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott p.c. this would ensure that military safeguards are in plates to protect nasa missions and port access in certain offshore areas. in the commonwealth of virginia, the united states navy trains extensively off the coast of virginia. additionally nasa's flight facility on virm's eastern shore requires a clear and unrestricted rocket and target launch range off virginia's coast. i have had long reservations about drilling off the coast of virginia. i believe the environmental, economic, and national security risks for drilling far outweigh any potential benefits but if drilling will occur, this amendment will ensure that common sense an responsible process will be in place to safeguard against obvious negative consequence to our military, to nasa, and to port operations.

i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: how much time is remaining? the chair: the gentleman has 30 seconds remain, the gentleman from colorado has 2 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. connolly: i just want to say i appreciate again the reassurances our colleague from colorado but many of us in virginia want to be sure this amendment is simple. it does not stop oil production or oil drilling offshore. it simply requires first a certification that the all-important naval pace at norfolk is protected and that the offshore testing bed, offshore, is not in jeopardy given the billions of dollars we've invested in national security in that area and its importance tour regional economy. we think it's a reasonable protection a reasonable measure. i you remember adoption of the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from colorado. mr. lamborn: in closing, mr.

chairman, i would point out that the governor of virginia supports this, the majority of the house members from virginia support this, without the amendment, and the democratic senators from virginia have in the past offered or agreed to legislation identical in wording to what this legislation says about offshore activity. so because the offshore activities are adequately and responsibly dealt with in the bill as it is, i would urge a no vote on the amendment and i would yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. all time has expire the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes visit. mr. connolly: on that, i would ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to legal cause 6 of rule 18, further amendment action on the amendment of the gentleman from virginia will be postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will resume on

which further proceedings were postponed in the following order, amendment number one, offered by mr. holt of new jersey, amendment number two, by mr. connolly of virginia. the chair will reduce to two minutes the time needed for any vote in the series. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on house report part b by the gentleman from new jersey mr. holt an on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number one printed in part b of house report 112-7 rk offered by mr. holt of new jersey. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]