it's cheap it's readily available and it's made in the united states washington has hailed shale gas as the next best thing and energy development over the past five years the u.s. has invested billions of dollars into the phils bringing cheap energy to consumers chilled posits like deep underground and unlike natural gas shale is widely available in the u.s. which means the country doesn't have to depend on overseas import for the shale revolution stemmed from high gas prices the main question right now is how will the shale gas industry survive now the gas prices are one hundred two hundred fifty dollars a barrel which is four times less than they were five years ago when shell development began for. another potential class of shale of course is stopping countries dependent on russia which supplies most of europe with natural gas rights now it's more holds then facts and we have really to think realistically about this source of energy we don't want to think of it terms of cause in russia like america had thought some are already suggesting that if shale deposits are bound to europ

has high hopes the shale gas that's mean tensions are in question. the race to run the international monetary fund is not so much about who as to where the candidate comes from europe or tradition decides who gets the post but he was already pushing its preferred choice making it hard for others to get a look in the for leading emerging economies say it's time someone else erica. reports on how the are brics countries are brazil russia india china and south africa don't take no for an answer. it's a change they don't believe in with the former director dominic stross current out of the financial picture there in addition is looking for a suitable replacement and while the current financial situation in europe may suggest a new approach is needed to solve the problems by looks of it the i.m.f. will go in the other direction the weight of tradition and also the fact that there has been a longstanding deal between the united states and europe the u.s. will have the world bank and europe has the fun i'm sure the europeans would convince all leading think

for the shale revolution stemmed from high gas prices the main question right now is how will the shale gas industry survive another gas prices are one hundred two hundred fifty dollars a barrel which is four times less than they were five years ago when shell development began. another potential class of shale of course is stopping countries depending on russia which supplies most of europe with natural gas rights now it's more whole then facts and we have really to think realistically about this source of energy we don't want to think in the terms of cause in russia and america have thought some are already suggesting that if shell deposits are bound to europe russia will lose the benefit of selling resources to other countries but the inhabitants of gus braun taler don't seem to be losing any sleep over the likelihood of these new record was prospects and number of countries like france have already put in place a ban on shale gas extraction on that territories. we're watching the situation and we think that locally is very viable but it will remain a local gas supply it's impossible

in addition, these are sandstone and shale. they have been uplifted and faulted and put into the position they are in today. on the cliff face, you can see the bedding of the shale. there are vertical cracks that filled the water and plans is growing. -- and plants are growing. the cumulative effect of the fresh cut with the debris sitting on the ledge, luckily we have a chance there to protect us from rocks going on the street. >> this is one type of rock salt and we will look at a few others. what will we see? >> i think it would be appropriate. we have been talking about rock salt. there is instability that occurs at telegraph hill. this was more in the earth flow and debris flow kind of movement. this moves downhill as a result of the rations from the earthquake. that is where we are headed next. >> here we are on the next stop of our landslide for parent though this is the lagoon ouna a area. this is different from where we all were just add on telegraph hill. this is a whole different concept. tell us what we have to. we

they don't consider shale gas or shale oil, they look at conventional reserves. then they don't look -- they really don't look at probable and probable, there's 10 to 20 times is a that much available in terms of probable. then when you get to estimate, there's enough oil out there to really, i think, meet the needs of this country for as long as we need to. i'm not saying forever because i think at some point, there will be a new energy source come along. it may be generations until we get that, may with hydrogen fueled cars, i don't know what it is, we'll have that science in the future. but we have plenty to meet our needs right now. in terms of natural gas, from the reserves in texas and pennsylvania and the outer continental shelf and frankly throughout the west, we have at least 200 years of natural gas. that's just what we know about. and the unknown is, but it's pretty consistent, is technology gets better and better and better. it's only with the advent about 60 years ago the development of horsontal drilling that we've been able to access -- horsontal d

in shale oil what we've consumed to this point. another comment that was made earlier is that we subsidize and consumers end up paying for things they don't know they're paying. just talked to a constituent last week, he said that he was given that tax credit for 40% of a solar facility he put on his own home. that was from the federal government. from the state government another 10%, so about 50% of the cost of the program was completely reimbursed by the government. but the big deal is they're paying him 22 cents per kilowatt hour he is able to sell back into the system. now that 22 cents needs to be compared to the seven cents that electricity normally costs, so the consumer is tagged with three times the cost of electricity provided by solar power that is bought from individual producers. the consumer will pay more for the power. it is not an easy process to understand but consumers will ultimately pay all the higher energy costs. we hear much today in washington about the subsidies for big oil. beaware that there are no subsi

going to make it difficult in the western shale. over and over and over we make it difficult to impossible to produce good, reliable american energy right here at home. and most recently, we have done that by virtually shutting down the only productive part of the united states in terms of energy, the western gulf of mexico. that's what we need to change, mr. president. we need to change that in a big way. now, in closing, mr. president, let me say i'm a proponent of all of the above. it's not either/or. it's not just oil and gas. but it's also not just new, undeveloped, advancing forms of technology and energy. we need all of the above in a big way. and so let's come together around that commonsense wisdom of the american people who favor all of the above and let's start doing all of the above aggressively. but that surely has to include much more domestic production of energy. open access to all of these vast resources we have. we can do it, we can do it safely, we need to do it to provide some relief to american families. thank y

and we've learned in the last couple of years that america has more shale gas from previously unrecoverable reserves, thanks to new technology, horizontal trill drilling and the like. we've got enough natural gas to last us 100 years here in the united states. but compare that -- really, that gift we've been given of domestic energy at home with what the administration said just in 2010. the treasury department issues an interpretation or explanation of the administration's policies when it talks about energy production, and this is what the treasury department said in 2009 or 2010. the treasury department -- this is secretary geithner, appointed by the president, confirmed by the senate. but the treasury department said, to the extent the tax credit -- the tax credits we're talking about here -- encourage overproduction of oil and gas, it is detrimental to long-term energy security. so the treasury department, president obama's treasury department, are making the extraordinary claim that i have not heard any senator make here because it is so implausible, that these tax provisions encourag

. >> everyone is talking about the is so much shale in the worltoday. doesn't that mean that oil prices should be a lot lower if there is so much shale? >> in the last 50 years, oil -- energy discoveries have doubled only while the consumption for people who have just entered the consumer life, okay, for technology users of people who were not using an electricity or had a car or vehicle to move around increased by 80 times per capita. and discoveries have only doubles. if you look at micronumbers, the world car fleet is today around 750 million cars. it's going to two billion cars in the next 15 years. yet many of them are going to be electric and hybrid. but most of them not. so there still needs the gasoline. >> one of the ways you have been so successful, of course, is you're a low cost producer. talk to us about this. you're producing oil at $18 a barrel? >> yes. the difference between us is really being in the shallow waters of brazil. so shallow waters implies low cost production, which is spectacular. we have -- if oil is today at $120, $18 is a

it is predominantly sandstone and shale. it was the shape of a dome. it was dome shaped. because san francisco was growing, because they needed the dike, that allowed miners to come in and open quarries. and they blasted. they had no concern about environmental issues, no concern about how they would leave the quality of the rock. as a result, they opened up fractures in the rocke. even today, we are paying for their mining negligence. we read it just last year where 455 vallejo, there was a rockslide that affected properties on broadway and montgomery. at rock slide occurred because of blasting that occurred back in the turn-of-the-century that left the rock week. 100 years later, the weak rock cannot stand there anymore and it fell. this slide is a long sansome street, where the city chose to protect sansome street and the cars, and they built this catchment wall. the sole purpose of this wall is to catch rocked that falls from private property. >> and every year or two, we get a call saying that rocks have fallen down the road and spilled over. this is the famous slide

shale, sea shells. if you harvest oysters and things, apparently, there is a depletion that you get for that. it is not specific to the oil industry. if you want to reform the tax code generically and have a debate about taxes and businesses and manufacturing in the united states, that is one thing. i think it is wrong to pick out any industry where there is the oil industry or the automobile industry and say we should not give them the tax credits or tax advantages that we give other companies that do business in america. host: we have about 10 minutes left. tampa, audrey, democrat. caller: i heard you defend yourself quite vigorously as you were offended by a previous caller, saying that republicans do not care. guest: he called republicans leeches and he said i was lying. i think you would be offended if i called you that. caller: [unintelligible] guest: i am not lying, ma'am. caller: i saw you apologize to the bp bid two years ago. you apologized to them. guest: i have led investigations against bri

that there is very abundant and inexpensive natural gas we have been getting from a resource called shale gas. even before safety concerns reemerged after fukushima, we had this problem that the cost of nuclear power seemed too high to a lot of utilities here. that means that now the road is ever that much more difficult for anybody who wants to push nuclear power in this country. i suspect that after 5, 7 or 10 years perhaps the technology will have evolved at that point. perhaps public attitudes will be different. perhaps the need for a low carbon energy source may have been increased but for now i would say it's holding the line. >> nonetheless in other parts of the world is fukushima accident is now keeping china, vietnam and other emerging economies from moving ahead with their nuclear projects. how can developing countries manage the risks? >> well, that's a really interesting question. it's a central one. as nuclear power grows the likely area of the biggest growth will be in the emerging economies. one of the ways we need to think about nuclear power is institutions in management.

i hope their state and this federal government doesn't throw up roadblocks to production of shale gas because it is safe, this fear is a hoax, we have been doing fracking in the oil industry for years. it's amazing how all of a sudden a process that's almost normal for production, get the second round of production out of almost any oil well that was drilled in texas is using some form of h2o tracking to get that second round of -- fracking to get the second round of oil out of the well. people rework and rework these wells with all types of processes like that. that's fracturing, is what that means. are there solutions that can bring the place of oil and gas down? yes, i think there are. here's one that my good friend doc hastings has proposed. reversing president obama's offshore moratorium, establishes a national domestic oil and natural gas offshore production goal to ensure a continued development of america's offshore energy resources. that's h.r. 1231. hopefully we'll have that bill on the floor of the house this week or next week. this is important. this is showing real leader

of france is moving to ban a gas extraction technique known as fracking meanwhile this industry the shale gas industry is booming in the united states but not without consequence a new duke university study has confirmed what concerned americans have been claiming for a while but which was dismissed as anecdotal by the gas industry that fracking pollutes groundwater but before we got to all of that let me give you a little background on friday if you don't know what it is already now some journalism students from new york university they did a song which is going to do a much better job than i could give you a little background take a listen. it's . going to go to the to the. city it's. like they're going to. see. one of the i don't. know how to talk about this is kate indeed she is senior attorney for the natural resource. council thanks so much for being with us so i want to start with france and what's going on there they're moving to ban fracking which which hasn't really gotten off the ground there yet because they say that it can't be shown to be done safely and that there are. info

as you mentioned dow has been able to say this is a closed case a new study shows fracking which is shale gas exploration to lead to dangerous levels of methane in drinking water that's something that the industry has denied and not really had to be held accountable for who do you blame for this is this corporate greed is this government regulators failing is this you know just a larger sign of the problems with the global dependence on energy you know it isn't it's all of those it's really. you know the the root of it is corporation being allowed but profit and environmental and human being concerns and safety that's the root of it and then the fact that the government is the indian government and the u.s. government are allowing this to happen and that the courts are allowed.

the country of france is moving to ban i gas extraction technique known as fracking meanwhile the shale gas industry is booming in the united states but not without consequence a new duke university study confirms what concerned americans have been claiming but which was dismissive and a global by the gas industry that fracking pollutes groundwater now before we get to all that let me give you a little background on what exactly fracking is if you don't know what it is as in journalism students from new york university have done much better job with a song that i could do in a thirty second intro so take a listen this. is a. tribute. to the. police. there were. two of six zero. zero zero. zero zero zero one of the twin. cities. so there's a little background to talk more about this i spoke with case in big senior attorney at natural resources defense council i asked her what this means for the u.s. that france is moving to ban fracking if there is this increase in public awareness in the united states around the risks associated with hydraulic fracturing here's what she said. i think wh

shale gas is an important opportunity. be developed in an environmentally secure and sensitive way. we believe that there's the capacity technologically to extract that gas in a way that is entirely safe and what we want to do is to be able to share our expertise and technology with poland in a fully transparent and accountable way because we think that consumers, environmentalists, everybody should look at the data and say this is something that can actually work. with respect to nuclear power, similarly, we have to do it in a way that is safe and secure. obviously all of us are mindful of what happened in japan. and we have a great track record and enormous expertise in the united states of developing nuclear power in a way that is safe and secure. and we are happy to consult with the polish government and have our companies consult with the polish government in terms of how to approach that. that does not eliminate the need for us in both countries and all around the world to continue to develop other clean energy sourc

now, hydraulic fracturing in these tight formations, the shale formations, you can't develop a cubic foot of natural gas without using hydraulic fracturing. it's a way of inserting liquids in to force the gas out so that we can develop it. and so it's there. so what the president is saying we need to use natural gas but we don't want to use hydraulic fracturing. and there's an effort right now by many members in here to try to take that over as a federal function, the regulation of hydraulic fracturing. right now there's never been a rob with it. it's rated -- it's regulated differently in different states. for example, in my state of oklahoma in the anadarko basin, you're talking about depths of some 35,000 feet. you go just north into kansas, it's between 3,000 and 4,000 feet. so it's different in different states. it needs different regulation. it's not broke and we don't need to fix it. now, what has the president done? he has put secretary chu in charge of -- of determining what we're going to do with hydraulic fracturing. well, that's secretary chu. he's the same guy that said

so the liquid fied natural gas, coupled with the shale gas has opened up to the world, the entire world. other nations short on hydrocarbon energy. hydrocarbon will remain an affordable type of energy. so i'm a real fan of it in general. i do think we need to be mindful of the environmental risk associated with developmental of hydrolic fracturing and i don't think we have all the answers yet in regards to that. i think we do with respect to liquified natural gas. but it could happen that liquified natural gas can become a security issue if it is not properly guarded, maintained, and secured. >> what steps would you take in forming it? >> well, it won't happen if we leave the debate to the people inside the beltway in washington, d.c. it just won't. the idea of creating an independent regulatory commission, taking away from the executive branch or judicial branch current authorities, that's not an easy conversation for people who hold those current authorities to have. also not an easy conversation for k street or lobbyist groups to have because it goes against what they stand for. so y

reed: it anticipates strong growth in the natural gas development because of the development of shale gas resources. it notes that growth in natural gas would not be permissible but for the combination of horizontal drilling and fracturing technologies which have made shale gas economical to produce. it finds that it has led to an annual average growth rate of 89% from 2006 to 2010. the second study i'd like to mention is the american gas association's potential gas committee 2010 biennial report. at this point, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. >> i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 3 which the house will vote on later today. after voting last month to end medicare as we know it for seniors, today the majority is attacking the women's reproductive freedom. for the last three months we have watch as the majority party has consistently attacked the right of women to receive comprehensive health care and tod

we keep hearing about the marcellus shale. in my district i have vertical gas wells that farmers and property owners have. it can work, but regulations have to be in place to be done safely. i would support any initiative that would allow at the stable -- at the statesville to create regulations -- at the state level to create regulations to make it safe. >> energy costs are high in this country and i disagree with the ryan budget once again. there are huge taxpayer giveaways to big oil at a time of record profits for them and highest gas prices in our tanks. i also agree with my opponent on the issue of getting our independence -- our dependence on foreign oil under control. this goes back to the 1970's. how many of us thought that was the last time we would be beholden to the middle east for oil? we did not learn those lessons then. i hope we have learned them out. i know i certainly have. but to continue taxpayer giveaways to big oil, which are included in the reihan budget, i think that is wrong. the people in my district

onshore splorgs and offshore, clean coal technology, oil shale and things that will decrease not screws the price of gasoline but decrease our reliance on foreign oil and make this country and the world safer. let's get to work all of the above energy plan on behalf of the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. are there any more one-minute requests? for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> address the house for one hour. without objection. the gentleman will suspend. under the speaker's announced policy january 5, 2011, the gentleman from georgia, mr. broun is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. broun: mr. speaker, unfortunately what has become a time-honored tradition, the president and my democratic colleagues that are here in congress, find it more convenient and politically expedient to make targets of energy companies. these are companies who invest their own capital and resources to increase our country's energy supply in the security of our nation. t

, colorado and wyoming, they have an estimated 1.6 trillion barrels of recoverable oil through oil shale and tar sands. we're all aware of the president's efforts to forestall domestic energy development offshore, but less media attention has been given to his successful efforts to move the energy industry off our federal lands in the intermountain west. the department of interior oversees more than 42% of the state of utah, including much of the land where domestic energy production is pursued. one of the early moves of the secretary of interior, ken sal gla my colleague and -- ken salazar, my colleague and dear friend, was his controversial withdraw of energy leases that had already been auctioned off and paid for by energy developers after years of jumping through environmental hoops. years. some estimate about seven years, maybe longer. jumping through environmental hoops. and then just by a stroke of a pen, they withdraw 77 leases that had been paid for. mr. president, this is a terrible signal to our domestic energy producers and companies are now leaving our federal lands in drove

will shale gas be able to replace nuclear and inefficient old coal generated power and if so, how? >> in the last chapter of why we hate the oil companies, i lay out a 50-year plan for the nation to reinvent the energy system in the 21st century. and it calls for the use of all forms of energy as part of that recreation. it calls for cleaning up hydrocarbons in ways that waste management technology can take care of. it calls for continued expansion of nuclear with new nuclear technology, not the 50, 60-year-old technology we see in today's nuclear plants, including aging nuclear construction of -- in those plants. and it's time for a new generation of nuclear technology. but in addition, massive research and development of natural sources of energy win solar and tides. i was once asked on a talk show will we ever have free energy? i thought it was a brilliant question. when we're surrounded by sunlight all day long, wind most nights and tidal movement that never stops because of the draw of the moon, that all creates a form of passive energy. why don't we turn it active? why don't

and this does not include oil shale or methane hydrates. c.r.s. concluded that total fossil fuels within the united states and barrels of oil equivalent are 972.6 billion. so considering the united states leads the world in total energy resources, we need to evaluate any energy policy on whether it makes strides to use those resources in a responsible way or whether it keeps those resources on the sidelines. the congressional research service has debunked the myth that we are energy poor, that we have somehow consumed our resources. in fact, our nation is number one, and we are rich with resources: oil, natural gas, coal, and other resources, and lots of it. yet the president, for whatever reason, keeps using a dramatically different talking point, and it creates the wrong impression. just recently, on may 6, 2011, he said -- and i'm quoting -- "the challenge is we've got about 2% to 3% of the world's oil reserves, and we use 25% of the world's oil." unquote. the impression i think he's trying to create is that we have virtually no reserves, and y

in fact, there were those who report that the production of shale gas in the united states could result in us having enough natural gas to operate in this country for at least 100 to 150 years at present or projected usages. and yet, we seem to have roadblocks thrown up in front of that production at every step. due to a deep water accident, a terrible deep water accident in the gulf of mexico, the president put down a moratorium on drilling in the gulf. both deep water and shallow water, even though the shallow water had no massive oil leaks in the shallow water. so the gulf of mexico, one of the largest potential oil and gas fields in the world, was shut down for american production. not for chinese production, not for brazilian production, but not for -- and not for anybody who else had the ability to make a deal with cuba to get a lease offshore to drill, but american production. they promised after they got all the cleanup done, they'd examine what happened and they would open up the and lift the moratorium. for the first time, at least in the state of texas, until the moratorium o

we continue to invest in natural gas production from the rocky mountain west and ourxisting shale gas regions. we have significant oil production in alaska. we have made significant investments in our refineries in the u.s., including major capital projects at our key midwestern refineries. we also inve actively in renewable energy. during 2009, we invested nearly a billion dollars in alternative energy. these investments include the operation of wind farms in 10 states, development of the first commercial scale biofuels facility in florida, and work on advanced biofuels molecule with dupont. we have our solar business, which has been in operation over 35 years. bp supports a comprehensive energy policy that includes all forms of energy, inclung oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, biofuels, wind, and solar, and encourages conservation. even with major improvements in energy efficiency, and the rapid growth of biofuels 20 years from now, the united states will still depend on oil, natural gas, and coal to meet more than three-quarters of its energy needs. on the supply side, we support pr

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.

we continue to invest in natural gas production from the rocky mountain west and our existing shale gas regions. we have significant oil production in alaska. we have made significant investments in our refineries in the u.s., including major capital projects at our key midwestern refineries. we also invest actively in renewable energy. during 2009, we invested nearly a billion dollars in alternative energy. these investments include the operation of wind farms in 10 states, development of the first commercial scale biofuels facility in florida, and work on advanced biofuels molecule with dupont. we have our solar business, which has been in operation over 35 years. bp supports a comprehensive energy policy that includes all forms of energy, including oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, biofuels, wind, and solar, and encourages conservation. even with major improvements in energy efficiency, and the rapid growth of biofuels 20 years from now, the united states will still depend on oil, natural gas, and coal to meet more than three-quarters of its energy needs. on the supply side, we suppor

and will shale gas be able to replace nuclear and inefficient old coal-generated power, and if so, how? >> in the last chapter of "why we hate the oil companies, i lay out a plan for the 21st century. it calls for use of all forms of energy as part of that recreation. it calls for cleaning up hydrocarbons in ways that waste management can take care of. it calls for new expansion of nuclear with new nuclear technology, not the 50 or 60- year old technology we see in today's plants, including aging construction in those plants. and it is time for a new generation of nuclear technology. but in addition, massive research and development of natural sources of energy, wind, solar and tides. i was once asked on a talk show will we have have free energy? i thought it was a brilliant question. when we are surrounded by sunlight all day long, wind most nights,, and tidal movement that never stops because of the draw of the moon, that all creates a form of passive energy. why don't we turn it active? why don't we turn it into electrons? we don't have the technology yet that can do that efficientl

this is from the "new york times" from texas, your state and they're looking at oil in shale.ou're talking about how there are other sources of energy out there. this piece by cliffer courthouse says, illinois next joins us, democratic caller. are gas prices impacting your summer plans? caller: not so much. the real problem is the cost of everything else because of high gas prices the way everything's gone up. really food a lot for people. that was one of the things that's usually pretty sacred and kept low, thank god, in this great country. but it seems like they've gone up really drastically over the gas and oil. and it's sad like one of the callers have said. it seems like we use our human resources, which is a terrible thing. we go over there and we fight and it's good to help those people but we lose a good men and a lot of guys come back after all these tours and stuff they're doing, it's unprecedented, five and six tours in a row. and god bless them for doing it. i just worked with a guy and i thanked him for going over there but it doesn't seem like our government trea

. $1.20 -- 1.2 trillion in oil shale, we could be self- sufficient in this country.cannot keep sending our dollars overseas. we have creditors at 4.4 trillion. one of these days, the country is going to say we are not going to buy any more american debt. we do not have to rely on someone from around the world. host: there was a second vote on raising the debt limit under democratic control. it comes around this time clean, will you vote to know? guest: absolutely. a majority of democrats will probably vote no on something like that. one of the greatest things i get to do is go to schools and to talk to kids. 50 to 100 kids are standing out there. they will have the same opportunity that my generation has had. it is not what you did for us but to us. host: here is a question for you. do republican leaders bring a cola increase, especially for seniors? guest: we have not gotten an increase. i think the first thing you need to do is look at the inflation out there. some of these reports could be checking on if prices are going up in a second area. when they are looking

we keep hearing about the marcellus shale in new york state. in my district, i have a vertical gas wells where i have farmers and property owners. it can work of the regulations have to be in place to make sure it is done safely. i would support any initiatives that would allow for the doc to make it safe and i think we can do that. >> energy costs are too high in this country and i disagree with the philosophy of the paul ryan budget. it continues the huge tax giveaways to big oil at a time of record profits for them and the highest gas prices for us. i agreed on the issue of getting our independence from foreign oil under control. this goes back to 1970 or so. people of this is the last time we would be holden to another country. we did not learn the lessons that i hope we have learned of them now. i'm supportive of looking for domestic forces but to continue tax giveaways to big companies is the wrong way a rigid set of priorities. people agree with me on >> >> in addition to the drilling, we should look at reducing the subsidies on oil. we

we keep hearing about the her se ulous shale here in southern new york state. in my district, i have vertical gas wells, that i have farmers and property owners that have, it can work but the regulations need to be in place to make sure it's done safely. i would support any initiative to create the regulations to make it safe. i believe we can do that and that would go a long way to helping reduce the gas prices. >> energy costs are too high in this country and i disagree with the philosophy of the ryan budget once again which my opponent supports, which continues the huge taxpayer giveaways to big oil in a time of record profits for them and high gas prices for us. this goes back to the 1970's, how many of us thought that was the last time we'd be beholden countries and their politics in thddle et for our oil? we didn't learn our lessons then, i hope we learned them now. i am supportive of looking for domestic sources but to continue taxpayer giveaways to big oil which are recorded in the ryan budget, i think are wrong. if you talk to anybody in this district,