i rise in opposition to this rule and to h.r. 1231. once again, the house will vote on republican legislation that takes let's put all our eggs in one basket approach to our national energy policy. what's their answer to high gas prices, drill for more oil offshore and help big oil. big oil gets $4 billion in subsidies for us taxpayers. this helps them rake in $35 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2011 alone. meanwhile, my taxpayers in maui has to pay over $6 per gallon to fill up their cars to go to work. do these taxpayers get a subsidy? no. people in hawaii pay the highest gas prices in the country. when i was in hawaii recently, my constituents were astonished to hear about the record profits and continuing subsidies that are provided to big oil. . at the same time the majority

is depending subsidies for oil companies which don't lower price at the pump, they also work for funding for clean energy, energy efficient programs, they also, adding insult to injury, want to disarm the futures trading commission, which is the main cop on the beat when it comes to oil speculation. republicans also want to pretend that there are no consequences to the near indiscriminate drilling authorized by these bills. less than a year after the catastrophic b.p. oil spill which was caused by lax regulation of a dangerous industry, they want us to undo the reforms that have been made. for what? the energy department's energy information administration estimates that drilling authorized by these bills may lead to a measly 1.6% increase in domestic energy production from 2012 to 2030. that is not a prescription for relieving pain at the pump. in the short-term and it's a poor strategy for long-term energy security.

instead we need to invest in fuel efficient technologies and expand our transportation options. we need to focus on harnessing clean, alternative energy sources. and that way we can leave our children a cleaner, healthier planet. wean ourselves from foreign oil. i urge my colleagues to vote against this rule and against this drill only bill. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. can i respectfully ask how much time remains on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york has 13 minutes. the gentleman from massachusetts has 12 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, my good friend. mr. denham. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. denhamon i rise --

mr. denham: i rise in support of the rule. the rule before us allows an open process and provides this opportunity to debate an issue of increasing importance to our constituents. the future of our energy policy in this country is at stake. here today which is why i'm proud to co-sponsor this bill reversing the president's offshore drilling moratorium. this past weekend i visited with a number of constituents at gas stations throughout my district. some are asking, will we get to $5 gas prices? if you come to my district we are already there. everybody likes to talk about tourism. in california we have a great deal of tourism. but everybody that i talked to said we planned this trip quite a while ago. we can't afford to do it today. we wouldn't have done it had we known gas prices would have been this high. gas prices are still going up. we are afraid that we'll see $6 gas prices.

you want to affect tourism? try hitting america's pocketbook at $6 a gallon. it's not just tourism. you go to the farms in my district. diesel gas has gone up. if you're frustrated about paying higher gas price, wait until you pay higher grocery prices because california's great ag economy, the prices are going up. some crops are going to stay in the field this year just because we can't afford to have the gas to bring them to market. parents feeling the same thing. as i'm going to swim practice over the weekend talking to parents frustrated about just being able to get their kids to school every day. you think this bill won't do something for gas prices? it's common sense, we have a greater supply here in our great nation, gas prices are going to go down. we want american jobs. we want to be self-reliant. we are talking about veterans here on this floor. i am a veteran. i served my country.

i don't want to be reliant on foreign oil any more. we talk about 2% -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional one minute. mr. denham: i thank the gentleman for yielding. a lot is always talked about about us use thizing 25% of the world's gas -- utilizing 25% of the world's gas, where we disagree is the number of 2%. world's oil. it's not a disagreement, we have 65% of the world's reserves between our oil shale, you just have to be willing to go get it. natural gas, we want to use natural gas. let's use our own natural gas. the largest oil reserves in the world. we just have to be willing to have american jobs and reduce our reliance on foreign oil. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself 10

seconds. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: this bill does absolutely nothing to lower gas prices and it does everything to increase profits with big oil companies. again i repeat the question i have been asking over and over again. why was the amendment that would help our veterans get jobs when they return from iraq and afghanistan defeated in the rules committee? i have no idea why. at this time i yield five minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. peters. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for tife minutes. mr. peters: i thank my friend from massachusetts for yielding time. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question. the bills proposed by the republican leadership today, h.r. 1229 and h.r. 1231 do nothing to lower the high gas prices burdening america's families today. that's why i'll be offering legislation that will produce real fuel savings for consumers, reduce our dependence on imported oil, and stimulate american manufacturing. the advanced vehicle technology act proposes real solutions to high gas prices by helping

america develop the next generation of high-tech, fuel efficient vehicles. i hope my colleagues will see that this is a better alternative to the bills that are being voted on today. first this bill has broad support unlike the republican measures before us. my bill passed last congress with a bipartisan majority. a majority of the members in the house today have already voted in favor of this legislation. unlike the republican bills, this legislation is supported by both business groups like the chamber of commerce anti-national association of manufacturers, as well as the league of conservation voters and the sierra club. proving that you can support the economy while also protecting the environment. second, this bill will quickly result in real cost savings to consumers. technologies have already been developed to achieve remarkable fuel savings and putting more money into r&d increases the speed in which new technologies

can be adapted an used. -- and used. unlike the republican drilling plan which will take nearly a decade to produce results, technologies being developed today can be commercialized and put into cars in the very near future. i have visited auto companies and suppliers in my district and have seen firsthand the level of technological advancement. for example, they have technologies that are ready to be commercialized that can improve efficiency by 30%. sometimes more. that means you can drive your car 30% further on the same tank of gas. that represents real savings to consumers. a large focus on -- of this bill is focusing on those technologies so they can be brought to consumers an start reducing gas bills today not 10 years from now. this bill also targets fuel savings and medium and heavy duty trucks. it's widely known there are huge efficiency gains to be paid in these vehicles.

by placing a greater focus on research and development in this area, we can achieve the greatest bang for the buck. more efficient trucks also yield could be sumer savings because it will reduce prorgs costs to food and other goods we buy at the store. the fuel savings we receive from these technological advancements in cars and trucks will have a national security benefit as well. simply put, the bill reduces the amount of oil we import from unfriendly nations. 60% of our petroleum needs today are met by imported supplies. reducing the demant for imported oil is one -- demand for imported oil is one of the best ways to meet our energy dependence goals and end the immense transfer to american dollars to undemocratic and unfriendly nations. finally, the legislation supports american manufacturing and high-paying jobs. rising gas prices are going to drive up demand for advance vehicles around the world and it is in our national interest to ensure that the research

development and manufacturing happens right here in the united states. that's why this bill was included in the make it in america agenda, a plan to rebuild american manufacturing and create well paying jobs unveiled by house democrats and democratic whip hoyer last week. the advance vehicle technology act epitomizes the goals of make it in america by ensuring that our country remains a leader in producing the cars and trucks of the future and supporting high-tech research and engineering jobs right here at home. fuel efficient vehicle research is a win-win for our economy, it creates jobs, and makes transportation more affordable for american families. there is no doubt in the years ahead that more americans will be driving hybrids, plug-in hybrids, battery electric vehicles, and cars and trucks power bide hydrogen fuel. the only question is whether these new technologies will be researched, developed, and manufactured here in the united states or overseas.

at the same time domestic automotive and commercial vehicle manufacturers and suppliers have increasingly limited resources for research and development of advanced technologies. that's why the advanced vehicle technology act will create partnerships between the department of energy and private companies and assure that american automobile industry and manufacturing base will continue to be globally competitive and that as a nation that we will not trade our dependence for foreign oil for a dependence on foreign batteries and other emerging technologies. this bill does what the american people expects from us. it bridges the partisan and ideological divide. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional one minute. mr. peters: it's legislation that has support from the business community, the environmental community, and the labor movement. we must stop voting on bills like the ones the majority is offering that pit priorities against each other and instead we need to move legislation like my bill that brings our

priorities together. this legislation will lower costs for consumers, reduce the amount of oil we improperty from countries that don't like us, and create and sustain manufacturing and r&d jobs here in the united states. i urge a no vote on the previous question so that we can support this legislation to make it in america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. southerland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for three minutes. mr. southerland: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. southerland: i'd like to thank the gentleman from new york for yielding me time today. i rise today on behalf of the american families, the farmers, and the fishermen, especially those across north florida and northwest florida who are being crushed today by these incredibly high rising fuel costs. we -- i represent and privileged to represent the

largest landmass district in florida and i'll tell you, those that make their living in farming, those that make their living in one of our eight coastal counties in the fishing industry, they are being hammered day in, day out, day in, day out by rising fuel costs, especially the cost of diesel fuel. we have the responsibility to american people today to alleviate our energy crisis in tough economic times and we can do this and must achieve this important goal while protecting the sensitive coastal regions, yes, i took my baby steps on the beaches of panama city i understand how important oiler environmental concerns are. my family's been there since florida became a state. i under jn how important our environment is. at the same time we must also preserve our military mission capabilities. we are home of an air force base and the f-22. i understand how critical they are to our communities and our environment and economies down in florida as well. doing all these things while at the same time making sure that

what we do in this house protects the american family budget and especially in regards to rising fuel costs. most family budgets today are spending over 10%, right at, over 10% of their family budget on rising fuel cost. unfortunately some of our colleagues today believe the best thing to do is -- rather than get us out of this hole is dig this hole deeper. my grandfather said, son, that would violate walking around sense. instead of getting out of a hole you just drive and dig a deeper hole. with this chart i'm looking at right here beside me i want you to see talks about the declining in crude production in the gulf of mexico. in mid 2009 the united states was producing 1.73 million barrels of oil per day in the gulf of mexico. according to the energy information administration, that number will fall to 1.18 million barrels next year. therefore i know we earlier heard about one of my colleagues talk about the sixth graders around the country. i will tell you they understand

and they will soon learn in economics that in order to reduce the price you have to have more of something. that's simple. they are going to learn that. and basic economics. you have to have more of it. what does this drastic reduction in the gulf exploration mean in florida's second congressional district? they mean if they go to the marina to try to catch their two fish this year per day out in the gulf of mexico they are going to spend almost $6 per gallon of gas to fill that boat up. $6 billion per gallon of gas. . the second chart i have here is ships leaving the gulf waters because of the moratorium. i see countries on here -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. reed: if i could yield another minute to mr. sullivan. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. sullivan: thank you. you see jobs leaving the gulf of mexico and they're going to the mediterranean sea, egypt, australia, sierra leon. as we know our favorite pick of late is brazil, is brazil. what we have to do in this body today is we have to put our lives in the lives of the american families and we have to make sure that it is time today, it is time today to do what this body should have done many, many years ago and we have to make sure that we take care of them and we tap into our natural resources that we have in this country. i stand today and rise in support of this rule as well as the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself five seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, let's be clear, this bill does nothing, nothing at all to

lower fuel costs and everything to increase the profits by big oil companies. i think it shows where the priorities of the republican party is at this moment. at this time i'd like to yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. cicilline: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 1367, the advanced vehicle technology act and ask my colleagues to vote no on the previous question. this legislation rewards american workers and american invasion. it's a true investment in -- innovation. it's a true investment in american ingenuity. by promoting the vehicle technology program, the truck partnership, the next generation of advanced vehicles will be built in america. the advanced technology act is one important part of the democratic jobs plan. a jobs plan that focuses on making it in america. because there is no way that we can maintain our position as a great economic power without making things in america. making things in america is a key part of rebuilding our

nation's economy. it's about reversing the manufacturing job loss trend, recommit ourselves to the things that created america's middle class. good-paying jobs, world-class education, top-notch research and sound infrastructure. i strongly urge my colleagues to support h.r. 1367 because when we invest in american ingenuity and innovation, when we make it in america our middle class will be strengthened and our nation will be prosperous. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts continues to reserve. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from louisiana, mr. landry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. landry: thank you, mr. speaker. hypocrisy. it's hi pack rassy. look, reuters, april 27, reported that the president urged other countries to lift crude oil output. to lift crude oil output. how come if other countries

increase their output it affects the price yet if we increase our output it does not. so if other countries promote their drill, baby, drill, it affects the price but when we in america try to drill we don't affect the price, according to my colleagues on the other side. electric cars. so let's get this straight, they want americans to charge their car up on a system, on a grid system that's already failing and broken. we've had rolling brownouts and blackouts in this country and that's what we want to plug our cars into? i'm sorry. no. they say there are the hybrid cars. i can't do it. i enjoy going fishing. i enjoy the time i get to take my little boy out and teach him what my father and my grandfather taught him and i have to do that, pulling a boat with my chevrolet pickup truck.

and i don't like to fill it up. i wish when i fill it up it will be affordable. and we can make it in america. let's make american energy. that's what this bill, our bill does. that's why i rise in support of this rule and this bill. if we want to make things in america, let's start with making our energy. when we make our energy in america we can make our products here. i thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana yields back. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. clarke. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to recognize the gentleman from louisiana had it part -- right. we import great cars from detroit. i urge you to defeat the previous question, support the bill that we've been talking about that will create great fuel efficient cars that will create jobs and also save our motorists a lot of fun because they won't have to fill up

their cars with this expensive gasoline. they'll be able to power their vehicles through other alternative sources of energy that's good for our environment, it's great for our country. it will save the motorists money, but moe importantly, it will create jobs. let's import these good-paying jobs by importing fuel-efficient vehicles from the city of detroit. that's how you make it in america. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back his time. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. reed: mr. speaker, at this time 50eu78' pleased to -- at this time i'm pleased to recognize two minutes to the gentlewoman from washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from washington is recognized for two minutes. ms. herrera beutler: i had a job creator forum. the one thing i heard was the

rising cost of gasoline. you can all imagine what rising gas prices does to a small business like this. they had to let people go in the past and starting to hire people again. one thing he requested was make this affordable. one thing we can do is by supporting this bill because we open up the opportunity to get more -- to get more domestic energy. and that's the reality. you know, i can't wait for the day when our country no longer is dependent on fossil fuels, when we don't need gasoline or we don't need to get it from countries that don't like us. i can't wait for that day. i support the alternative energies but the problem is we're not there yet. we are not there today. and the reality is every time gas goes up we lose jobs. in my neck of the woods where we have double-digit unemployment, 14%, 13%, 14% in some areas going on three

years, it's unacceptable that this congress would sit on its hands and do nothing while the price of gas gups. if we explore for energy here domestically and do it now we will bring relief today to those small business owners in our region. everybody will hire more people. so as we all go back to our sdructs next week we know we'll hear from moms an dads, we'll hear from business owners about the high cost of gas. i invite my democratic colleagues to join with us. let's look our constituents in the eye and say we supported legislation that will lower energy prices today to meet their needs. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from washington yields back. the gentleman from new york resever. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself 10 seconds. i just want to remind the gentlelady that the department of energy says that prices will -- that if we go ahead with this, plenty of prices will go down by three to five cents in the year 2030. so -- and if you're serious about alternative forms of energy then my question is why

have you defunded all the things that will fund those new clean, green jobs? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. reed: mr. speaker, we are prepared to close at this point in time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. govefwove thank you, mr. speaker. -- mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. while my republican friends cut medicare, while they cut fuel assistance for elderly people who can't afford the cost of fuel during the cold months, while they cut pell grants, while they go out of their way to protect the tax cuts of donald trump and millionaires, while putting all the burden to reduce the deficit on middle-class families, you know, while they protect the subsidies for big oil companies, it is shameful, it is shameful that with the record profits that big oil is making that taxpayers continue to subsidize them by billions

of dollars. it is unconscionable. it is unconscionable. you want to reduce the deficit, you know, my friends on the other side, they go after programs to benefit the poor. they protect programs like corporate welfare that goes after big oil companies. you know, we should be investing in alternative forms of energy. we should be investing in cleaner and greener technologies. that's what we've been trying to do, but my friends on the other side have been instructing every -- on instructing every single thing we've proposed. they don't want to be reliant on fossil fuels in the future and yet they cut the programs that will allow us to cut energy futures. this bill will do zero to impact the price of gasoline. does nothing. everything knows how big oil operates. and they do whatever they want to do. at a time when they're raising their prices, they are going to make more money this year than they did last year.

it's outrageous what they're doing to the american people, how they're gouging the american people. this bill isn't an answer to anybody. it was just a sound bite for them to go home and say we did something knowing it will never pass the senate but also knowing if it did pass the senate and the president signed it would mean nothing. so rather than focusing on helping to create jobs, to help make it in america, to help create more products in this country, we're going through these ridiculous exercises every week on different subjects. today it happens to be a bill that is a big wet kiss to big oil. to me this is the wrong thing we should be taking our time up doing. we need to talk about how we create jobs in this country, how we put people back to work. and yet we can truly reduce the cost of energy for consumers. mr. speaker, i'm urging we defeat the previous question and i will offer an amendment if we defeat the previous question to the rule to provide that immediately after the house adopts the rule it will

bring up h.r. 1367, the advanced vehicle technology act of 2011, introduced by representative peters. and i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the record along with extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. mcgovern: and just one thing, mr. speaker. again, we had an amendment in the rules committee offered by mr. boswell that would help give hiring preferences to our veterans who are risking their lives in iraq and afghanistan and it was defeated. that's an outrage. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote no and defeat the previous question so we can debate and pass the bill that american companies develop the next generation of high-tech fuel-efficient vehicles. i urge a vote vote on the rule and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts yields back his time. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. on this rule and this bill i think this side of the aisle is demonstrating to all of america that we are listening. right now with gas prices going through the roof, right now

with people suffering and high unemployment across the nation we have before us a rule and a bill that will undoubtedly create jobs. 1.2 million jobs, according to economist dr. joseph mason. we have a bill and a plan that is going to bring us closer to less dependency on foreign energy supplies. it will reduce foreign oil imports by nearly 1/3. mr. speaker, we on this side of the aisle are going to deal with the american people in an honest fashion. we are not going to scare the american people. we are going to have an open and honest conversation with the american people. we will lead, and what we are doing here is answering a call that the american people have reached out to us to do and that is to commit to our domestic supplies of energy so that we have energy supplies that will allow manufacturers and the private sector to create the new opportunity for

generations of americans to -- that are yet to come. this is not a bill that is about protecting big oil. this is not about tax subsidies. i take great disagreement with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle when they say we are fighting for tax subsidies for big oil. what they're talking about is intangible drilling costs. they're talking about basic tax policy where there are income and expenses that are being calculated and deducted off of income taxes. it goes back to my life in the private sector when i read income and expense sheets. all we're talking about is expenses, not tax subsidies. if we want to engage in rhetoric that's fine but we're focused on the substance of the issue and that substance is getting americans back to work, 1.2 million jobs under this proposal. we will generate $800 million in revenue over 10 years. and we are going to lead. and i urge my colleagues to

support this rule and support the underlying legislation by voting in favor of both. thank you, mr. speaker, and at this time i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: both sides having yielded back their time, the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker. on that i ask for a recorded vote the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from massachusetts ask for the yeas and nays? mr. mcgovern: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote on the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having

alabama, arkansas, and oklahoma that jobs are coming back to the gulf. let's fuel our plans for american energy and american oil. no more shall we beg those who hate us for their oil. america is on her way back and it starts in the gulf of mexico. let's put the gulf back to work so we can put america back to work. madam speaker, i withdraw my point of order. the speaker pro tempore: the motion is withdrawn. the gentleman yields back. without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion to recommit. those in favor will signify by saying aye. those opposed say no.

in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. connolly: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia requests 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.

resolution is adopted. without objection a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the chair lays before the house a communication.

the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, ma sir, as the steering committee has formally selected me to sit on the house committee of financial service, i formally seek to resign my seat on the house committee of agriculture and the house committee on transportation and infrastructure. i am very pleased with the opportunity to serve on the financial services committee and i look forward to being an active and effective member. again, thank you for your assistance, please contact me if i can answer any questions. signed, sincerely, steven l. fifrpbler, member of congress. -- fincher, member of congress. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the resignations are approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> madam speaker, by direction of the republican conch conference i send to the desk a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 263, resolved that the following -- >> i ask unanimous consent to suspend with the reading. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the resolution is gray -- agreed to and the motion to

reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous concept that the committee on the judiciary may have until 5:00 p.m. on wednesday, may 18, 2011, to file its reports on h.r. 1800. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on veterans affairs may have until 5:00 p.m. on friday, may 20, 2011, to file its reports to accompany the following bills, h.r. 1407, h.r. 1484, h.r. 1627, h.r. 1383, h.r. 1657 and h.r. 802. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the

gentlelady from nevada rise? ms. berkley: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that i may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of h.r. 427, a bill originally introduced by representative heller of nevada, for the purposes of adding co-sponsors and requesting reprints pursuant to clause 7 of rule 12 and in addition to that i also would like to be considered as the first co-sponsor -- first sponsor of h.r. 673, another bill originally introduced by representative heller of nevada, for the purposes of adding co-sponsors and requesting reprints pursuant to clause 7 of rule 12. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on transportation and infrastructure be discharged from further consideration of house concurrent resolution 16 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 16, concurrent resolution authorizing the use

of the capitol grounds for the greater washington soapbox derby. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the consideration of the concurrent resolution? without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska rise? excuse me. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on transportation and infrastructure be discharged from further consideration of house concurrent resolution 46 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 46, concurrent resolution authorizing the use of the capitol grounds for the national peace officers memorial service. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the consideration of the concurrent resolution? without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska rise? mr. young: madam speaker, i ask

unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill, h.r. 1231. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. pursuant to house resolution 257 and rule 18, the chair declares in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r. 1231. the chair appoints the gentlewoman from michigan, mrs. miller, to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the

committee of the whole committee of the whole for the consideration of h.r. 1231 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to amend the outer continental shelf lands act to require that each five-year offshore oil and gas leasing program offer leasing in the areas with the most prospective oil and gas resources, to establish a domestic oil and natural gas production goal and for other purposes. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. markey, will each control 30 minutes. and the chair now recognizes the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: madam speaker, i -- madam chairman, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the chair: without objection. mr. young: madam chairman, the americans suffering from $4 a gas today, $5 a gas next month must feel like they areary experiencing a sense of deja vu. it was just three short years ago in 2008 when gasoline prices reached the record high

of $4.11 a gallon. those high prices cut deep not pockets of americans that summer and forced congress to act. that fall a democrat-controlled congress and republican president took bipartisan action to lift the offshore drilling ban that had been in place for decades. this monumental step opened up all of the atlantic and pacific coast to new offshore energy production. three years later most americans will likely to be shocked to learn no energy development has happened in these new areas and they're actually once again been placed off-limits. the progress that was made in 2008 by lifting the drilling moratorium has been completely reversed by the obama administration. the president says he wants to win the future but his policies are taking us back to the past. now, american families and businesses are once again facing $4 gasoline as i said, $5 the first of june, and we're

not further expanding drilling. it's unacceptable. the house has already passed two bills to increase offshore drilling production, to create jobs. today we'll vote on a third offshore drilling bill, h.r. 1231, in order to reverse the moratorium that president obama has single handedly placed on new offshore drilling. this bill requires that administrations to move forward with offshore lease sales in areas containing the most and natural oil and natural gas. from 2012-2017 lease plans being written by the obama administration this would include areas contained 2.7 billion barrels of oil or 7.3 trillion cubic feet of gas. based on the numbers, this would open up some areas of the north and central atlantic coast, pacific coast and offshore alaska. even in the face of rising gasoline prices, the president

wants to drill nowhere new. this bill says, let's move forward with leasing and drilling on those areas where we know our america has real and significant resources. and contrast to the president's drill nowhere new plan, this is a drill smart plan. this bill requires the secretary to set specific protection goals for the next five years for the 2012 and 2017 plan, it sets the goal of three million barrels of oil per day and 10 billion cubic feet of natural gas by the year 2017. by comparison to today's level, this triples the current american offshore reduction and reduce foreign imports by nearly one third. this bill will not only significantly increase america's energy production, would also create good-paying american jobs. economist dr. joseph mason testified that this bill would create 250,000 jobs short term and 1.2 million jobs long term.

this bill will also generate hundreds of billions of new revenue to help strengthen our economy and pay down the national debt. according to the congressional budget office this bill will generate over $800 million in revenue over the next 10 years. recent polls show that the majority of american, republicans, democrats and independents, all support increased offshore drilling. they recognize that our national and economic security should not be in the hands of iran-led opec. madam chairman, the obama administration is trying to lead us into a supposed new era of time without understanding the importance of fossil fuels. it is the largest tax on every family. approximately $1,100, mr. and mrs. america, you're paying to the obama administration, in taxes because of the high cost of oil, high cost of gas to you. it's time america steps up and becomes independent from those that have been selling us oil

for the past 25 years. it's just not this president. this has been going on for a while. next year we'll send over $400 billion overseas to the countries that do not like us, that do not create one american job. not anything for america. send the money over and buy foreign oil. i watched the president say this in brazil, we want you to be our partner. we want to buy your gasoline. mr. and mrs. america, we have the fossil fuels, we have the opportunity. it's time we open the offshore for development for the good state of america and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from alaska reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. markey: i yield myself five minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. markey: ladies and gentlemen, we are at a historic

juncture in our country's history as northern africa and the middle east explode. and what we have, of course, is a real instability in the oil marketplace, and we have to do something that fundamentally responds to that challenge. in the first three quarters of this year as a result, first three months, rather, of this year, exxonmobil reported that it made $10 billion off of the american consumer in january, february and march of this year. shell reported that they had made $8 billion. b.p. reported that they had made $7 billion. so what are these companies asking for? these companies are now asking that we open up the beaches of california to drill for oil. we open up the beaches of

florida to drill for oil. we open up the beaches of new jersey and new england to drill for oil. now, i will tell you right now, in most of those places -- actually, all of those places, the only oil the people who live near those beaches want is the suntan oil that they use when they're out on those beaches. they don't want oil coming in the way it did in the gulf of mexico. and why are they concerned? they're concerned because the oil companies, exercising their power and those right now those oil companies are centered down in the gulf of mexico, those companies have exercised their brock any new safety reforms from being put in place in order to protect against another catastrophic spill. so the at the matter of these oil companies is -- temerity of these oip companies is they're

coming out today saying no safety, no lessons learned from what happened in the gulf of mexico, just devastating are the beaches of the gulf. now we want permission to drill off the california coast, the florida coast, the new england coast, the new jersey coast without any new safety. and by the way, along with the skyrocketing prices that people who travel here to washington, they've been coming down, you know, all of the highways watching the price of gasoline go up even as they're traveling, heading up to $4 and some places $5 a gallon. they're saying that the congress shouldn't take away their tax breaks. don't even touch those tax breaks. you know, the oil companies are saying, cut -- cut medicare for grandma. that's what the oil companies are saying.

exxonmobil, chevron, they're advocating for cutting medicare for grandma to take that money and give it to the oil companies as tax breaks to put on -- kind of like a cherry on top of a sundae, to put it on top of the profits they're making off of the american consumer. that's what they're trying to do. that's what this debate is all about. what we're saying as democrats is we're saying let's implement the safety recommendations to make sure that the drilling doesn't endanger the beaches off of the east coast and west coast the way they did in the gulf of mexico. the oil companies are coming in here with the republicans as their advocates saying, don't worry about it. yes, we're going to bhock any safety, any safety measures from being put on the books but that's our prerogative because we have the votes here. the republican are going to make sure they'll block any safety -- we want to keep the

tax breaks. the republicans say fine. we don't want any new safety regulations, the republicans say fine. by the way, we don't even like the idea that this competition from wind and solar, so we would like to ask you as the republican majority to cut the solar and wind budget by 70% and they did it. believe it or not, it's 2011, we're watching the middle east explode and the republicans cut wind and solar in the united states by 70%, keep the tax breaks for the biggest oil companies and off grandma to -- ask grandma to take a lower medicare benefit to pay for the oil companies. this is 2011, ladies and gentlemen. this is a message that is so dangerous for our country. so we have to oppose this bill. because, first of all, they already have 60 million acres of american land, in minnesota they already have to drill on

that they haven't drilled on yet. which has about 11 billion barrels of oil underneath it and the equivalent amounts of natural gas. so, vote no on this republican bill. it's just a giveaway to exxon mobil and shell and they're the last people in the world that right now need a hand. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: thank you, madam speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from georgia, mr. broun. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. broun: as record high gas prices are causing american families to suffer in their daily routines, like buying groceries at the grocery store, driving to work each morning, it is inexcusable that this level of administration could continue to turn its back on the problem. just last month, just lant month americans spent around --

last month americans spent around $368 on average just to fill their tanks, about the same month -- amount a family would spend on groceries for two weeks. yet the democrats' only solution to the pain at pump is to raise taxes on domestic oil producers and they've already admitted that it will not lower gas prices. i fully support h.r. 1231, a real proposal which would lift the president's ban on offshore drilling and get the ball rolling on domestic energy production. i urge my democratic colleagues to pass this bill because both our cars and our economies should be running on american resources, not on their empty promises. pass this bill to create american jobs and a strong american economy. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from georgia yields back. the gentleman from

massachusetts. >> i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. pascrell: thank you. mr. speaker, madam speaker, i rise today in strong opposition to the rule and the underlying bill. look, we have preserved millions of acres in alaska, my good friend. we want to preserve the shores of new jersey. now, if you don't understand that there is even more major problems. since last night my friends on the other side have voted down no fewer than four amendments dealing with the safety of drilling. you can be for drilling but i think it's common sense that we preserve and not take the chances that large companies take and we saw what happened in the south.

the gulf of mexico is still recovering from billions of dollars in economic and environmental damages caused by the deepwater horizon oil spill. it's almost unbelievable, when you watched it, one blamed the other and those folks still don't have relief. it's almost unbelievable. and in the wake of such a tragedy this bill is before us today. there are 60 million agers of public land -- acre of public land already under lease to drill. and i wouldn't give one more acre up until you drill those companies drill on the land that they already have. you blame everything on the president, you're going to blame the plague on the president. it doesn't -- that dog doesn't hunt anymore, forget about it. if we can't come together on issues like this, no wonder the american people are disgusted out there when they do pay their gasoline bill. you want to expand offshore

drilling to vast new areas of our oceans, including the atlantic coast, without taking any of the commonsense steps that the president's bipartisan oil spill commission recommended. an oil spill on the atlantic coast where the federal government would be required to lease under this bill would devastate the economy -- one more minute? mr. markey: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute more. mr. pascrell: thank you, madam speaker. tourism at the jersey shore supports jobs for over 500,000 people. generates over $50 billion in economic activity every year. these people depend on the responsible stewardship of our waters and coasts for their livelihoods. let's set the record straight. this legislation does nothing to address the current spike in

gas prices. what we need to do is stop wildly fluctuating oil provideses and -- prices and that's something that commodities future trading commission which are writing the regulations as we speak right now, tap america's oil reserves for a short period of time, we can afford to do that. crack down on gas gouging which is happening and the u.s. attorney general is correct in investigating this and, finally, evolve to a clean energy economy. it's not just that we need to depend less on foreign oil, we need to depend less on domestic oil. we know it's going to take time, we need to be reasonable about this. and be safe about it as well. thank you, madam speaker. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: i appreciate the gentleman's comments on why he represents but he did vote against anwr, has supported no production, terribly a very,

very important to me, and i will tell you, i can say one thing, the obama administration , i got a big kick out of someone saying we can blame the president. i remember bush was in the office for eight years, we blamed him for the earthquakes and the tsunami and i don't know what else. but what bothers me the most, that this country moves its economy with fossil fuels. our trucks, our ships, our planes and our automobiles are, our trains are all used in fossil fuels and must do so. that's what moves our commerce going. that's also what will raise the -- raise the price of everybody in every household in our nation. it is being taxed by these high costs of fossil fuels. we can stabilize that cost if we're allowed to produce off our shores and on our shores but to not to say we're going to produce anymore oil which is exactly what this administration is saying because they want to transfer into a new era of time, we want to transfigure the country into a new era of time, we don't care about more jobs, we don't

care what happens to the economy, we're going to do it because we're right. and i'm saying you're dead wrong. can we use the fossil fuel to use as a bridge to new fuels? yes, but you cannot stop using fossil fuels, we're buy withing $400 billion a year overseas from foreign countries bleeding this country every day. it's time we get on with the job and this time, madam speaker, i yield one minute to mr. mcclintock from california. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. mcclintock: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam chairman, this truly is a tale two of parties. the democrats have been very clear in their approach on this issue. heap additional taxes on producers which will be immediately passed on to consumers and continue to delay an obstruct the development of america's vast petroleum resources. higher prices at the pump, increasing dependence on foreign oil and thousands more families thrown out of work, that is the democratic plan.

the republicans have also been very clear on our approach. open america's vast petroleum resources, triple the current production by 2027, cut foreign imports by 1/3 and even more importantly this bill means hundreds of thousands of new jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars of direct revenues into the national and state treasuries, not through higher prices for consumers, but through growing prosperity for our country. that's the choice. between the two parties. plain and simple. and it's the choice i believe the american people are ready and eager to make. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. markey: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to representative capps from california who knows this subject very well. the chair: the gentlelady from california is recognized for two minutes.

mrs. capps: i thank my new jersey colleague for recognizing me. madam chair, i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 1231, the last and most egregious bill in the republicans' oil addiction agenda. it's unconscionable that we're voting today to expand offshore drilling even before stronger safeguards can be put in place. to mandate new leasing off the economically important coastlines of southern california, alaska and the entire eastern seaboard, each time these waters are open to drilling, and it's cynical to claim that more drilling will relieve high gas prices. more drilling only means more profits for the oil industry, not lower costs at the pump. we all know oil companies hardly need a boost right now. they're receiving billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies and reaping record profits. on top of that the oil industry is already drilling more than ever before. for example, offshore production has increased by

more than 1/3 in the last two years and the gulf produced 1.6 million barrels of oil per day last year, an all-time record. yet despite all that drilling, gas prices continue to soar and the reason is clear, more drilling here in the u.s. has little affect on the global oil market. nearly 3/4 of oil resources are owned by opec nations and even if we expanded offshore drilling significantly, we wouldn't see an impact on gas prices until 2030 and even then it would be a matter of just five cents a gallon and this is according to the energy information administration. if instead we further raised fuel efficiency standards we could lower driver bills at the pump. building cars that go further on a gallon of gas is the best way to protect american families. it also creates jobs, it slashes our oil imports and it reduces dangerous air

pollution. this is the kind of solution we need right now. we shouldn't be promoting reckless drilling that will fail to lower gas prices and endanger our coastlines. so vote no on h.r. 1231 and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: madam speaker, at this time i yield the gentleman, mr. lungren, from california, two minutes. the chair: the gentleman from california voiced for two minutes. mr. lungren: thank you very much, madam chair. i rise in support of the bill with under consideration. i heard one of my friends on the other side of the aisle suggest that the only thing people in california or other places that live near beaches, the only oil they're concerned about is sun tan oil. i have to take exception to that. even though i represent an inland district now, i was born a block from the beach, i was a resident of a beachside community for 4 years. i grew up with kids whose parents worked in refineries, worked on oil rigs, were

wildcatters, worked in offshore drilling in theport of long beach, worked offshore of huntington beach, i just have to say, i find it insulting to suggest that those people are not concerned about the good of the united states. we're talking about the loss of middle class jobs in america, there's nothing more middle class than those men and women who have worked for years in the oil industry. what do you think it comes from? from the sky? you got to drill for it. you got to produce it. you've got to refine it. and everything i hear on other side of the aisle is we're not going to allow you to drill, we're not going to allow you to produce, we're not going to allow you to refine because somehow it's just going to show up. we watched the president of the united states, supported by the members on the other side of the aisle, journey to brazil and laud their efforts to use

american technology to explore and drill and maximize their recovery of their resources. he lauded them for, it he thanked them for, it he applauded them for it and then he turned around and said, and we want to be your big withest customer. in other words, he promised that we would pay a foreign entity for a resource that we need. i'm absolutely convinced that my friends on the other side of the aisle will oppose any notion that we can have any offshore drilling unless we make brazil the 51st state. that's how absurd it is. and i just have to say, madam chair, as someone who grew up with family members -- mr. young: i field -- yield 30 seconds to the member. mr. lungren: who grew up working in this industry, who considered it an all-american industry, how far have we come that now we denigrate it from top to bottom?

and we hear on the other side, it swronet any impact because it takes five to 10 years to develop it. well, i heard that on this floor 32 years ago, i heard that on this floor 27 years ago, i heard that on this floor 22 years ago, i heard that on this floor five years ago, and it is correct. my friends on the other side are correct. it will make no difference so long as they make sure we don't drill now, we don't drill five years from now, we don't drill 10 years from now, we are harming ourselves, it's time to stop the harm. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: madam chairman, here we go again, considering legislation that is written as if the largest oil spill in u.s. waters did not occur. this is the third of the amnesia act that we've seen offered in the last week. i say to my friend from california, no one is saying that we oppose this bill because we shouldn't drill ever, but let's be smart.

h.r. 231 would force the interior department to open up vast areas of the american coastline to drilling, including california, and all the mid and north atlantic. it's incomprehensible that the majority would take such a reckless, radical step before we even know the full cost of the gulf spill. let's be smart. this bill, in particular, represents something worse than the prespill mentality. it represents an alternative reality. facts evidently don't matter. never mind the fact that one year ago 11 workers died in the deepwater horizon oil rig explosion. never mind that about 60 died over the last decade. never mind the fact that prior to the gulf spill, offshore drilling in u.s. waters was four times more deadly than drilling of the same operations, the same kinds of operations by the same companies elsewhere in the

world. even inhospitable north sea. never mind the gulf of mexico work force suffered 1,550 injuries, 948 fires over the last decade. never mind that congress has not eb acted a single piece of legislation to improve the safety of offshore drilling. never mind the fact that there were 79 reported losses of well control in the gulf between 1996 and 2009. never mind the fact that a single blowout caused them more than four billion barrels of oil to spew for 87 days coating 1,000 miles of the coastline, closing over 88 square miles of some of the nation's most productive fisheries. never mind the fact that the independent energy information administration has concluded

that unlimited access to u.s. offshore resources would have zero effect on gas prices over the next decade. and might have an effect of pennies after that. never mind that u.s. oil production will remain above the 2009 pre-gulf spill levels through 2035 as calculated by the department of the interior without the proposed acceleration in leasing and drilling. never mind that the united states cannot drill our way to lower pump prices when we possess about 2% of the oil reserves, about 2% of the world's oil reserves. we are not dominant in this field. oh, yes, we have some of the best companies and certainly the best profitable. but we consume 25% of the world's oil when we have about % of the world's oil reserves. prices are determined by opec

with fleblingtflektuations above that basic price determined by speculation on the commodities market. never mind the fact that 79% of all of the potential oil reserves on the entire continental shelf are already available under the current leasing. 79%, i repeat, to my friends are already available under the existing leasing program. never mind that 60 million acres are already under lease but not producing oil. that's onshore and offshore. and offshore the existing leases contain more than 11 billion, billion with a b, barrels of oil. never mind the fact that the entire atlantic contains less than 5% of the potential u.s. offshore oil reserves and less than 9% of the natural gas reserves. never mind the fact that the entire pacific contains only

about 12% of the potential u.s. offshore oil reserves and less than 5% of the potential natural gas reserves. never mind the fact that the gulf of mexico in the gulf of mexico, the oil companies already hold the drilling rights to 34 million acres but are producing oil on only six million acres. never mind the fact that the 28 nonproducing acres of the gulf have more natural gas and about as much oil as you would ever get total from drilling up and down the east and west coast. never mind, my friends, the fact that from 2005 to 2009 big oil used less than 10% of their profits to explore for oil while they use between 60% and 90% of their profits to pay dividends and buy back stock.

this is -- you know, these are behaving like financial industries, not energy industries. never mind the fact that the majority refuses to end the four billion -- it's actually more like $8 billion in tax breaks to oil companies at the very time that the top five oil companies took home over $3 billion in profits in just the last three months. never mind the fact that the top four oil companies took home $45 billion in profits during the five years from 2005 to 2009. thill still reduced their combined american work force by 10,200 employees. and you my friends here are talking about jobs when these companies make profits of nearly $500 billion, they lay off more than 10,000 workers?

what kind of reality are they living in? never mind the fact that the gulf of mexico tourism and fishing industries employ five times as many people as the oil industry. five times as many. never mind the fact that the annual value of coastal tourism and fishing in the u.s. exceeds that of oil and gas extraction by tens of billions of dollars. never mind the fact that this bill before us is one more unjustified giveaway to big oil. never mind all of those facts. ignore this bill, drill, baby, drill. no, thank you. i prefer to live in the real world where facts matter and where this bill could have devastating real world consequences. i urge my colleagues, remember this bill, vote down this bill.

i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: mr. chairman, i say there were no facts presented in that last presentation. there were opinions. there were no facts. when everybody says never mind the facts. there was no fact there. it's all opinions. what bothers me most, they talk about the money oil companies made. they made it overseas. they made it overseas selling us oil. these are international companies. international companies. and that is something that really disturbs me when you're understanding we burn oil produced overseas. yes, they did lay off 10,000 people because of the moratorium this president placed in louisiana, in the gulf. there's where the jobs were lost. the biggest economic impact of the spill, horizon spill, was the loss of employment in louisiana, alabama, in the

gulf, texas. the loss of jobs, loss of oil to this country, and that's the thing that concerns me, because there are no facts about the profits made and the people who were laid off other than the fact it was done by the obama administration. at this time i yield to the gentleman, mr. quale, one minute the chair: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for one minute. mr. quayle: we have a gas crisis going on. when i fill up my tank i cringe how expensive it is. my friends on the other side of the aisle, their so-called solutions to this are to increase taxes. that's not a solution to get our people back to work, to get our economy moving again, because right now we're having some anemic growth in our economy.

and if we start to increase taxes and have an energy increase in cost that's happening at the pump, that's going to have a negative effect on economic growth. instead of actually having solutions where we can get the people in the gulf back to work, where we can get our economy moving again, where we can get -- actually tap the energy sources that we have in the united states, we have an administration that only per sues moratoriums on gulf -- pursues moratoriums on gulf drilling, on moratoriums on supplies. 30 seconds. mr. young: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. quayle: we could have charts down on this floor to have job growth. if we passed today's legislation will generate $800 million in revenue over 10 years and combined with the energy initiatives in the house last week, this would create

over 250,000 jobs in the short term and 1.2 million jobs over the long term. so i urge my colleagues to support this bill and get our economy and our american people back to work. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: may i ask the remaining time? the chair: the gentleman from new jersey has 12 1/2 minutes. and the gentleman from alaska has 16 1/2 minutes. mr. holt: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: mr. chairman, i move the committee now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. accordingly, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 1231 direct me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chairman of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 1231 and has come to no resolution thereon.

for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i send to the house a primplingd report from the committee on rules for -- privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 264, resolution providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 754, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the united states government, the community management account and the central intelligence agency retirement and disability system and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 257 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further -- for the further consideration of h.r. 1231. will the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, kindly resume the chair. i'm sorry. would the gentleman from california, mr. campbell, please resume the chair.

the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of the bill h.r. 1231, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to amend the outer continental land shelf act to require that each five-year offshore oil and gas leasing program offer leasing in the areas with the most prospective oil and gas resources, to establish a national oil and natural gas production goal, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose a few minutes ago, the gentleman, mr. young, has 16 1/2 minutes remaining and the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt, has 12 1/2 minutes remaining. who yields time?

the gentleman from alaska is recognized. mr. young: at this time, i'll yield two minutes to the gentleman from tennessee, mr. fleshman. -- mr. fleischmann. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. fleischmann: if enacted, this bill will open up areas of the outer continental shelf that are the greatest known oil and gas reserves that contain billions of barrels of oil. with resources like these, it's a wonder that we continue to rely on other countries for most of our energy. while the administration is encouraging other countries to produce oil, americans are unable to access large areas of our own energy supply here. h.r. 1231 will hold the

administration accountable by setting pruck goals to make sure that we provide enough energy for our country while reducing the dependence on foreign oil. gas prices have increased by 12.9 cents per gallon in my hometown of chat knew ga, tennessee, in the last month -- of chattanooga, tennessee, in the last month alone. we know that increased oil and natural gas production will drive down gas prices. we should have theable to access our vast resources at home. mr. chairman, we have the means to provide relief for our growing energy deficit and passage of this bill will be a step toward providing these means for our country. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: i continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: i yield two minutes

to mr. berg of north dakota. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. berg: thank you, mr. chairman. my home state of north dakota is rich in natural resources. we've seen tremendous economic opportunity from the bachen field. through empower north dakota, we were able to adopt a long-term energy plan in our state. it encouraged new energy development and it created high-paying, high-quality jobs in the energy industry. today our unemployment rate is the lowest in the nation. we can have the same success on the national level. but to do so, we need a long-term, common sense plan that's a national energy policy that must work to increase america's energy production, lower gas prices, and ultimately break our dependence on foreign oil. american families and small businesses are hurting. gas prices are over $4 a

gallon. energy bills are hindering business growth. and national unemployment remains a very high 9%. there's enormous potential in the gulf for energy development that can help turn our country's problems around. our addiction to foreign energy is not sustainable. it threatens our national security. it's time to invest our resources that we have here in the united states. we need to lower energy costs and get americans back to work. as a member of the house energy action team and a proud north dakotan, i'm committed to working hard toward a national, long-term energy policy. let's pass this bill and get the gulf back to work and break our dependence on foreign oil. thank you and i yield the remainder of my time.

the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: i thank the chair. the majority, the sponsors of this bill, say we need it because supply is dwindling. and gasoline prices are climbing. and employment is terrible. well, i'll grant they've got a point on a couple of items here but it has nothing to do with this legislation. they bring forward a bill to help the oil supply when it is a fact, i say to my colleague, that 79% of all of the potential oil reserves, as calculated by the nonpartisan prospectors on the whole continental shelf are already under the current leasing program. 60 million acres. this is indisputable. 60 million acres offshore are

under existing lease and contain 11.5 billion barrels. so this hurry up and -- hurry up and drill legislation is certainly not necessary for that. as for employment, you know, i said it before, i'll say it again. it is a fact, during the five years previously when the four oil companies took home $485 billion in profits, their combined american work force developed -- dropped by 10,200 employees. they made money, they laid people off. so we can check that one off too. it's not about employment. how about prices? this year's leases have nothing to do with this year's price at the gas pump, or next year's. in fact, not for 20 years might

it have an effect. yes, there's a supply problem. the supply problem is that u.s. oil reserves amount to about 2% of the world's oil reserves. about 2%. my colleagues say, oh, no, those call cue lages are wrong. i'll give you a break. let's say we're off by a factor of two or a factor of three or a factor of four? we would still be one of the smallest oil supplies of the oil producing countries. so this is not about that. the prices are determined right now at the pump largely by speculation. according to the commodities future trading commission, speculators increase their energy future contracts. their positions. by 64% over the last couple of years. totaling more than a million contracts. they are trading in each day far more paper barrels, far

more paper barrels than barrels of oil are ever delivered. it's speculation, pure and simple. speculators have moved from holding 30% of the open interests in the commodity markets to 70% and you wonder why the prices at the pump are so high. even goldman sachs says that speculation is responsible for tens of dollars of the -- many tens of dollars of the $100 a barrel that is now the world price for oil. you know, going back a decade, the majority voted to exempt all energy derivatives from regulations. and then when the dodd-frank financial reform bill came along, they opposed the enactment to give the cftc the power to regulate energy

derivatives. they voted to slash the cftc's budget as part of h.r. 1. and right now, in the agriculture committee and the financial services committee, they are working to block any possibility that the cftc would put in regulations to limit or reduce speculation. so if my colleagues want to do something to deal with the high gas prices, i will give them a list of things to do. it is not this bill. we do not need to cut corners. we do not need to deem that inadequate applications for leasing are adequate. we do not need to deem that environmental impact statements that are clearly inadequate are adequate. we do not need to open up the east coast and west coast to willy nily, rapid drill

prospecting. we certainly do not. now one thing i'll hand my colleagues. they, yesterday, said, you know, we really need to get away from these environmental regulations that are stymying the oil companies, that are making it hard for them to earn their profits. these burdensome environmental regulations. i'll give them one thing. these regulation the environmental impact statement that was prepared for the drilling in the gulf of mexico this year that they want to expand on into the future, that has in it a plan for dealing with walruses, because they think that's a really good environmental impact statement that's based on the real world facts, you know, you're right. in the mccondo well, the blowout of the deepwater

horizon, we didn't lose a single walrus' life. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: i reserve the right to close. if he has other speakers, let him have them speak or he can close right now. the chair: the gentleman from alaska reserves, he does have the right to close. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: i thank the chair. i just repeat, let's live in the real world. let's deal with the facts. facts mat -- facts matter. this bill can have devastating consequences for workers, for those who deal in -- those who have to travel by car and buy gasoline. and for those who earn their living fishing and dealing with

tourism in the gulf and in new mexico and in california. let's not pass another amnesia act. let's not ignore the spill and drill, baby, drill. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey yields back. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey has yielded back all time.

the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: may i ask how much time is remaining? the chair: the gentleman has 13 1/2 minutes. mr. holt: -- mr. young: i'd like americans to understand that the issue of whether we should drill or not is long overdue. i've heard this argument for 36 years because i was here when we drilled and opened the trans-alaskan pipeline to provide 17 billion barrels of oil to america. 17 billion barrels of oil. i've heard people say that there's only 2% -- that is a figure that was arrived at in 1955. we have new estimates with new technology, we think we have about 20 pk of the world's reserves in fossil fuels and we're not producing them. i've heard the argument, this wouldn't change the price of gasoline. it's not quick enough. i've heard that 25 years ago.

we need to produce so we have a stable supply of domestic fossil fuels, so other countries and speculators don't take advantage. they have us right now in a position they can take advantage because we're not producing any oil of any consequence. in the united states right now. we're down to 600,000 barrels a day in alaska. if we drop much more, we won't vevpb that 600,000 barrels a day. yet we have, in alaska, five -- i take that back, there's been $5 billion spent to find oil, we have not had the permit to drill because of this administration. they think there's 27 billion barrels of oil in one offshore development. the other one has approximately 14 billion barrels of oil. and one -- in one offshore

development. and of course we have anwr, which that side does not support to a great degree, that has probably 39 billion barrels of oil. you add up that amount of oil, you have oil to last this country for 100 years. now yes, we ought to have other forms of energy but the obama administration is trying to force this country into a green energy future. this is a policy, i heard the former speaker -- speaker say it. of course it doesn't make any sense -- it makes sense to reduce our dependency on oil but no one takes into consideration the impact upon the economy of this nation. new jersey is building an l.n.g. plant to receive gas overseas. that's well and good, buying foreign gas, when we have trillions feet of gas in the united states of america. we are costing not only jobs but the dependency and everybody talks about the high

price of gasoline, it's caused by spiking. some little incident in the middle east, the opec countries who supposedly have 70% of our oil, raises the price of gasoline. you can't have a model of the economy in a business and have those spikes. if the price was $5 across the board, we knew it was going to be $5 across the build for the next 40 years you can build your economy on that. but we have gas $5 in june and may go up to $6 in august. may be down a little bit. we need to stabilize. and only we can do this. but this administration is trying to convert america into green technology. technology of wind, technology of -- let's say solar. wind power is 17% -- 17 cents a kilo watt compared to five cents for coal. mr. and mrs. america, you're paying for that. again, as i said in one of my

statements was this in fact is a tax on the american people. this is an obama tax because of the lack of cheaper fuel is necessary to keep our economy running. the impediments of oil and gas production is another reason. slow down of federal leasing. we talk about everything is leased and permitting onshore and offshore. only six permits have been issued in the gulf of mexico since the b.p. spill happened. six permits. lease in the gulf of mexico on a coast that's been delayed for several years. offshore permitting has oil and gas has been slowed down to a real slow crawl. america, i keep telling you, you are being taxed by an administration that does not understand the necessity for fossil fuels for our economy, the movement of product, the receiving of product and the shipping of product, the deliverans of people, the deliverans of supply is by air, ship, plane, automobile and

truck. that's what makes this country great. and here we said when the group that says oh, we're going to save the environment. i'm all for that, but you don't have an energy policy and you can't have enough fossil fuels. anyone that says we can have one without fossil fuels is not thinking about fossil fuels, not even thinking about energy. we might get wind power if we get a propeller on the capitol to drive out the hot air that is in here. we won't deal with solar policy. this administration has not promoted anything except the two most expensive, wind and solar. we need our fossil fuels. we need to make sure that the agencies under this administration, make sure we develop our energies or recannot -- if they can't do it then it's up to this congress, this congress, this bill, this legislation, the two previous bills are a step forward.

a necessary step for this nation. we need to keep going to employ americans and quit buying foreign oil. you talk about being hooked on dope, that's what we are. we are hooked on foshe oil. and yet we have people to say we can't develop our own oil. we can't develop our own resources it will hurt somebody. somebody will be harmed and we can't do it. that's not true. we can do it. in the gulf there was 41,000 wells drilled without a spill, and one spill, everybody thinks the world came to an end. was it bad? yes. do we learn from it? yes. as we did in exxon valdez. we will improve on that. to not let them drill, not let them produce that oil, not employ americans, that is dead wrong. so i urge my colleagues to pass this legislation, reject the amendments that are going to be offered. they are not the amendments they should be. at this time i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from

alaska yields back 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. the amendment printed in the bill is adopted. the bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. no further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in house report 112-74. each further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 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

house report 112-74. for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska seek recognition? mr. young: as designee of doc hastings, i have an amendment under the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report 112-74 offered by mr. young of alaska. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 257, the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from alaska as the designee of mr. hastings. mr. young: mr. chairman, i rise in support of this amendment that corrects a drafting error in the bill that was discovered by the legislative counsel after h.r. 1231 was supported -- having bipartisan support. it -- i'd urge support for the

amendment. i yield back. the chair: does the gentleman reserve his time? the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? mr. markey: i claim time in opposition although we have no objection. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. markey: we have no objection. and we urge swift passage. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts yields back. the gentleman from alaska -- mr. young: yields back. the chair: yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska, mr. hastings -- the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, for the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to.

it is now in order to consider amendment number 2 printed in house report 112-74. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. cobblely: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 112-74 offered by mr. connolly of virginia. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 257, the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: i thank the chair. mr. chairman, this simple amendment clarifies that any expanded oil production will not interfere with ongoing operations by the armed forces of the united states. i prishte congressman bobby scott and congressman jim moran, their co-sponsorship of this amendment. there are no stronger advocates for the military in my state than those two gentlemen. as you know the united states

has more than two dozen coastal and naval bases, including those located in virginia, washington, california, texas, louisiana, mississippi, florida, georgia, south carolina, maryland, new jersey, connecticut, rhode island, maine and hawaii. the deputy undersecretary of defense of readiness published a report noting that many of those potential location for oil exploration could and might conflict with d.o.d. operations in these locations. for example, d.o.d. has surface, subfur surface operating areas and airspace warning areas off every coastal state in continental united states. and you can see from this map the red dots are where they actually have bases and the spider webs is where they have operations offshore. these areas are important because the military uses in some of these areas for surface and subsurface training as well as practice of live ordnance, oil wells and live ordnance don't mix so well.

for example, the norfolk naval base in my home state of virginia uses 70% of the proposed lease sale 220 right now for training and live ordnance practice. the navy wants to ensure that oil drilling in that area does not interfere with live ordnance impact, including bombing, subsurface operations, combined ship board qualification trials and equipment testing and evaluation. norfolk is america's largest naval base and a major driver of our state's annual $10 billion government contracting economy. it would be difficult to quantify how many billions of dollars taxpayers have spent building and maintaining these military installations all around the continental united states, but relocation costs would be substantial and we don't have that money. my friend from alaska talks about putting people out of work or putting people into work. believe me, if we had a close

or relocate these bases, there would be a lot of weeping and gnashing of teeth in the unemployment line all across america. and the cost would be borne by the taxpayers, mr. speaker, because also by the service men and women who would have to relocate and the tens of thousands of contractor employees who rely on the d.o.d. perhaps it's possible to co-locate oil drill infrastructure in areas used by the navy or other components by the armed forces. in that case this amendment would not get in the way of the oil exploration. this amendment simply ensures that any additional oil drilling, which takes place in accordance with this bill, will not conflict with national security operations in the armed forces. i'm sure that energy development and national security can be mutually reinforcing and compatible. i hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would support this commonsense amendment to protect our national defense and national security. i know we can all agree that preserving those should be

paramount as we consider changes to our nation's energy policy. and with that i yield back the balance of my time to the ranking manager. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from alaska rise? mr. young: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. young: meerm, it's no surprise i oppose this amendment. both the continental land shelf act and the 2003 national defense act already fully protect the defense department's responsibility in the outer continental shelf and the state coastal areas of the o.c.s. h.r. 1231 continues these pro-texes. as chairman hastings said in a similar debate on h.r. 1230, preserving the working relationship of the department of the defense and department of the interior is important. this meets the mutual goals of

balancing national security and energy independence. but this amendment would upset the balance. may i say, mr. chairman, the department of defense never notified, never talked to us about any opposition to this legislation. h.r. 1231 fully supports the department of interior's work with the department of defense in addressing the necessary stipulation that will protect the military mission in the o.c.s. in the development of lease sales. gaining access to domestically available energy resources is also a paramount morns to our national security because -- importance to our national security because it lessens our dependence on foreign oil. it is a national security priority. additionally, development of our own energy resources benefits the department of defense. according to the brookings institute, every $10 increase in the price of a barrel of oil increases defense operation by $1.3 billion. $1.3 billion. lowering energy prices should

be apriority for the american consumer and the department of defense. this amendment is truly protect -- isn't protecting department of defense activities. it is to stop offshore energy development. that's what this is about, and i congratulate the people offering this amendment. exactly what you'd like to do. again, defense activities are not hindered by energy development. the department of defense and interior work well together to balance the needs of our nation. h.r. 1231 will allow both offshore energy leasing and military activities to go forward in a safe and responsible way and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from alaska reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: i thank the chair, and i say to my friend from alaska, i won't have anybody question my sincerity about trying to protect the national security interests of the united states of america. i come from a state with a long military tradition. i'm proud of that tradition and i'm here sincerely to protect the national security. if we want to disagree with that, that's fine, but

questioning the motivations and whether there is another agenda is a different matter. mr. chairman, i now yield the balance of my time to my distinguished colleague from virginia, mr. moran. the chair: the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran, is recognized. mr. moran: may i ask the chair how much time is remaining? the chair: you have one minute. mr. moran: i say to my good friend from alaska, remind him that 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. filling this area with drilling rigs is a bad idea. now we have been told verbally and in writing that there should be no lease sales in 72% of this lease area because it's in direct conflict with the operations of the navy. 5% will interveer with aerial

operations an should not host drilling rigs and permanent structures and another 1% would have site-specific stipulations and then you're left with 22% and much of that is dedicated to the shipping lanes for the country's two busiest commercial ports. there are other areas offshore, i'm sure, that are also important to the armed forces but we're responsible for virginia, we know the situation there. we're not going to jeopardize those jobs and i would say that national security interests ought to trump oil and gas develop. -- development. i thank my friend. the chair: the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: may i ask about the time remaining on both sides? the chair: the gentleman from alaska has three minutes. the gentleman from virginia's time has expired. mr. young: i urge my colleagues

to vote no on this amendment and if we can't get the government to work together, there's something wrong. something deadly wrong. this is about the department of defense, the department of interior and the american people. we ought to be able to work together an i'm sure we can. the idea that this is going to hurt the mission is, again a way to stop drilling. that's all it is. maybe we have that 23% open and we knew where it was maybe we'd be able to drill there, but i don't think they'd support that. i urge a no on this amendment an yield back the balance. the chair: all time has been yielded back. 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 have it. mr. connolly: on this matter, 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 virginia will be postponed.

it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in house report 112-74. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. markey: i rise in support of my amendment at the desk. the chair: does the gentleman offer the amendment in mr. markey: i offer the amendment. the chair: this the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number three printed in house report 112-74, offer id by mr. markey of massachusetts. the chair: the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: i thank the chair and yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. markey: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman in the first quarter of this year, the oil companies actually were able to

make $35 billion in profits. but in my amendment, we're able to save them -- say to them that because of a flaw in leases, in the 1990's, which require them to pay no royalties on public lands, taxpayers' lands, for oil they're drilling for right now and charging $100 a barrel, $4 a gallon at the pump, that there's something wrong when the taxpayers don't get anything back so what my amendment says is that they can't apply for any more leases on taxpayers' land unless they're willing to renegotiate the mistaken leases that were given to them that by the way will allow them to escape having to pay $53 billion in

taxes. in royalties. that's another word for taxes. royalties. when you're talking about oil, royalties is the word we use to describe taxes. and so, this blank check to the oil industry is absolutely, you know, undeserved. the republican approach to offshore oil royalty policy is to treat the big oil companies like royalty and to treat the consumers and taxpayers like peasants. we're just going to give away all these breaks to the oil industry. you know, prince william and kate middleton just left on their hundred knee moon. -- their hundred knee moon. -- their honeymoon is just beginning. but for those drilling on public lands, they have a

honeymoon going on way too long. today we give the members of the house a chance to end the honeymoon on the royalties that the oil industry has to pay. now what are the republicans going to do? they're going to oppose it. they're going to say, no, we need more tax breaks, $4 billion worth of tax breaks for the oil industry. so where are they going to find the money for those additional tax breaks they want to give to the oil industry? they looked arn and they decided that the best place to find it was in medicare. that is in the health care that we give to grandma and grandpa. and so what they have done is they've set up a drilling rig for the oil industry on top of the medicare program so they can drill in to the pockets of grandma an grandpa to find the $4 billion in tax breaks. and then on top of that, protect them against having to pay the royalties, the taxes on

where they're already drilling for free on taxpayers' land in our country. that's an unbelievable combination and they do it while cutting the renewables budget by 70%. can you believe this? it's 2011, the republicans have already passed the bill cutting the renewables budget, wind and solar, biomass, thermal by 70% and they're setting up an oil rig on top of the medicare program of grandma and grandpa to drill for even more tax breaks for the oil industry. this is an unbelievable debate we're having. they say over here, well, you know, we're the all of the above party. we want to do it all. but the truth is, they're really the oil above all party. and that's what this debate is all about. how can we get even more for the oil industry? so what my amendment will do is to give people the opportunity to reclaim that $53 billion from the oil industry and give it to grandma.

of all the people who don't need a break, a subsidy this year, it's the oil industry. you know who needs a break? you know who needs a subsidy? it's grandma. let's not cut medicare. let's not cut her health care in order to help the oil industry. vote aye for the markey amendment. the chair: does the gentleman yields back his time? mr. markey: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman -- mr. young: i rise in opposition. all due respect to grandma and grandpa -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: there's no grandmas or grandpas being medicare taken away from them or anything else, that's pure demagoguery on this floor. it's iron toik me this house has debated and voted on this amendment over the years they defeated it by bipartisan votes, it's like a bad penny, it keeps showing up and the big

oil is all bad. all i know is the american public is being taxed every year, $1,000, 1rks100 every year, let's review the fact the leases were issued by bill clinton. bruce babbitt, 1996 and 2000. the republicans do all this -- they're the ones who issued these leases. those that hold the leases have been successfully challenged to include price slesh holds in lease agreements. the department of interior has lost in federal dict court, the appellate court an the united states supreme court. an now we're going to interfere with a court decision? if this amendment passes, those holding such leases would be required to renegotiate a contract, the lease terms of d.o.i., to have new thresholds. bill clinton would turn over --

he's not in his grave, i can't say that the secretary doesn't have the authority to include price thresholds on these leases and forcing companies to renegotiate the leases would be a violation of contract law and would be challenged in court. mr. chairman, this is an amendment that just comes out of where, i don't know. it's a time to demagogue on the floor about medicare. there's nothing to do with oil leases. it has nothing to do with the so-called tax breaks that bill clinton and bruce babbitt put in place. george bush wasn't there. mr. obama wasn't there. bill clinton. did this. lo an behold, somebody is having to renegotiate something, let's start renegotiating contracts all over the countryside. maybe we ought to start doing that. some of the contracts made, i think we did this last election, their contracts were terminated. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from alaska yields back.

mr. young: i reserve, i'm sorry. the chair: the secret from alaska reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts has 30 seconds remaining and is recognized. mr. markey: can you inform me how much time the gentleman has remaining? the chair: the gentleman from alaska has 2 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. markey: i am the last speaker on our side. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from alaska has the right too close. the gentleman from alaska reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. markey: thank you. we have a big choice here. we can reclaim $53 billion from the oil and gas industry that they owe to the american taxpayer and put it into wind, solar, all electric vehicles, the revolution we immediate to transform our country's relationship with opec. we should be able to tell opec we don't need your oil anymore than we need your sand.

this is a chance here. to reclaim the $53 billion in windfall profits by escaping taxes the oil industry is engaged in and put it into a new technology innovation agenda that talks about the wind and solar that will transform our relationship with the rest of the planet. the chair: the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: i appreciate the gentleman from massachusetts' comments but wind power is subsidized energy. that's all it is. wind power is subsidized by the taxpayer. solar power is subsidized by the taxpayer. and to try to transform this country into using wind and solar by raising the cost of gasoline to the american consumers is dead wrong. that's not the way to solve this problem. i will support wind power when it's not subsidized, i will

support solar power when it's not subsidized and i will support nuclear support, which the gentleman has opposed every time, and i'll support hydropower, in fact i'll support all forms of power so we can become more independent and i go back to the concept of fossil fuels. it moves objects. wind power doesn't move objects. no. solar power doesn't move objects, no. it takes fossil fuels to run our ships, our planes, our automobiles and our trucks and our trains. that's this the commerce of this nation. that's what's hurting this nation in our recovery. we have to start producing our own fossil fuels so we can have the commerce necessary to employee people and create jobs in this country. in this country. yes we can have other forms of power but we have to have the fossil fuels to continue the recovery of this country economically. so i yield back thba