mr. defazio: would you give me a second? the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? mr. pastor: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. pastor: i yield to mr. defazio. mr. defazio: i thank the gentleman for yielding. it's not so obvious with this administration. they're desperate for the t.p.p., they're desperate for the transamerica free trade agreement and we're very worried that they would think that disapproving this application from ireland represent, representing norway, who intends to operate a rent-a-airline, rent-a-crew from singapore would somehow derail their talks. so i don't think it's obvious. this is sending a message to the white house, we're not going to let this happen. with that i thank the gentleman and i yield back. mr. pastor: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from arizona yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from oregon. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair

mr. defazio. mr. defazio: what we are talking about here is obscenely profitable oil companies getting a give away while we are running massive deficits. everyone says they want to run government like a business and lower deficits. the g.a.o. estimated if this is allowed to run its course without any of these leases being renegotiated, it will be a $50 billion windfall to the oil industry. not million, $50 billion. now, that would be a nice piece of change both for revenue sharing for the state and for the federal treasury. we could apply it all to deficit reduction or other needs. maybe even fund continuation of national transportation system, who knows. bottom line is, as the gentleman pointed out, it may or may not have been intentional on the part of people that the then management service to give away these assets to the oil companies, but for three years before they slept with them, or whatever happened, they did include it in the leases and then the court -- what the court found was that the law

mr. defazio: i thank the chair. we just had a debate over the potential impact of export of l.n.g. on domestic prices. there's no arguing that the low domestic prices for natural gas have been a boom for our country. some manufacturers are actually moving operations back from overseas. others here are being advantaged in the markets. much to our concern to our competitors in europe and elsewhere. so we can say that's good. we're not going to settle that issue in my amendment. i'm going to bring up another issue. the reason, you know, natural gas companies want to export is to realize higher prices, and some of these terminals will require new pipelines to connect to domestic natural gas supplies, particularly some of the new supplies. and here's the problem. in 2005 congress passed the bush-cheney energy plan, which gave the federal energy regulatory commission, a group of nameless, faceless, obscure bureaucrats the authority to grant eminent domain to pipeline companies. that means companies have eminent domain aut

mr. defazio. mr. and the 1 billion figure that you used. >> it is an estimate from a few years ago 800 million for oregon and washington and annual losses and so i rounded up. >> i mean in the event of a 9.0 or greater it would exceed a billion dollars. >> i didn't give the member for 99. i gave a billion a year on the long-term average candidate for the magnitude nine the estimate is 50 to 100 billion. >> okay. so does anybody on the panel think the federal government given the potential for 50 to 100 billion-dollar calamity which could be partially mitigated we are investing enough money in either research or development and deployment of technology to provide early warning, does anybody think that we are spending enough? okay. no one, good. i would be very surprised if you did. the issue seems to me we spent $10 million since 1999. we are looking at a 100 billion-dollar problem that spends 10 million. we talk about countries like i think you said romania, mexico, they have deployed early warning sys

mr. defazio: the gentleman is the last speaker? mr. hastings: i have no further requests for time. mr. defazio: i will close. fairly brief. nothing has refuted the points i made earlier. in fact, the gentleman from south carolina made the point about high diesel prices. well, if he would hashingen back to a time when diesel was actually cheaper than gasoline, now we are exporting in the advice vicinity of one million barrels a day. the price of diesel is up because we are paying the world price. if we exported 2 million, the price wouldn't go down and you would have the problem with speculators, 60 cents a gallon, that would be diesel. and gasoline goes directly to speculators on wall street, those friday frequency traders that are so vital to our economy. and we do have a few statistics just to keep it straight, gasoline production was at a record high in may, but unfortunately gas prices were pretty darn high. nd this is from the energy information administration. and they quote the american petroleum institute, now this is a group that wants to begin to export crude oil. so if we pro

mr. defazio: i believe i have the right to close. i reserve until the other side has concluded. e chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. wittman: thank you, madam chairwoman. as the chairman expressed, he is exactly correct. virginia is interested in being able to develop lease 220, and it's a bipartisan interest. it's both of our senators from virginia. it's our governor from virginia. it's our general assembly from virginia. there is broad bipartisan support in moving forward with offshore energy production. virginia has the potential to be a leader in oil and gas development on the east coast. i along with many in virginia was disappointed when the department of interior announced that virginia would not be included in the 2012 to 2017 outer continental shelf oil and gas leasing program. it was in the plan originally when the final plan came out, lease 220 was taken out. for no good apparent reason. we want the ability to be able to add it back because all the work has been done to have it there. we want to make sure the flexibility is there for the administrati

mr. chairman. >> representative defazio. >> thank you mr. chairman. first, professor vidale, i didn't understand the 1 billion figure you used in relation to the northwest. >> oh, the billion a year? >> yeah. >> the fema estimate a few years ago, 800 million for oregon and washington annual losses. maybe i rounded up to a billion. >> i don't know what you mean annual. in the event of a 9.0 or greater, i assume the losses far exceed $1 billion. >> i didn't give the number for a magnitude nine. i gave a billion a year on long term average of losses. for a magnitude nine, the estimate is $50 billion to $100 billion. >> $50 billion to $100 billion? >> right. >> does anybody think given the potential for $50 billion to $100 billion calamity, that could be partially mitigated, we are investing enough money in research or development to provide early warning? anybody think we're spending enough? anybody? okay. no one. good. i would be surprised if you did. so, you know, the issue seems to me, i think it was dr. leaf who talked about it, we spent $10 million

mr. defazio: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from oregon seek recognition? ms. bonamici: i ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a co-sponsor from h.r. 809. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir. pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on june 20, 2014, at 10:42 a.m. that the senate passed senate 1603. that the senate agreed to requests by the house to return papers to the house, h.r. 4412. with best wished i am, signed, sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the clerk be authorized to engross the bill h.r. 4412 in the form i have placed at the desk. the speaker p

mr. defazio of oregon. the chair: the gentleman from oregon and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair will be recognized. mr. defazio: there is a section in the bill of merit which would require four studies, whether the technology and personnel needed to moderate the -- the role it plays in providing liquidity and i would recommend people read flashvoice and whether the authority is sufficient to high efficiency. we should have the answers. but i have one additional request, which would be to examine about high frequency trading increases market volatility. they found there were 27,000 contracts traded during a 14 hive second period but they came to no conclusion regarding how or what role they may have played in flashcrash and with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. lucas: mr. chairman, i would claim the time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lucas: i would recognize myself for the time i might consume. althou

mr. defazio points up one aspect that have. here in the richest country in the world, by far, undenially, doesn't act as if we have a future. what invests, one builds infrastructure, one sponsors research. when we believe we have a future. instead we talk about cut, cut, cut here. it is a fundamental problem. the chairman says let's look for some money. i'll show him plenty of money. we've got it. we could invest in education. we could invest in research, we could invest in infrastructure and we should because we have a future, i believe. the other general comment i wanted to make has to do with the field of geology and earthquakes. for generations, humans believed that we experienced the happenings on earth, and probably the most development of recent years is the understanding that humans have the ability to actually change the earth. to poison entire oceans, to change the very climate of our globe, and, in fact, to induce earthquakes. most of us would have thought that the energy involved in investing water into the ground i

also, and i see that we have the ranking member, representative peter defazio of oregon and you are now recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank for calling this important hearing. as the testimony today points out, the impact of the good friday earthquake 50 years ago was not limited to alaska. though it was particularly devastating in alaska. the tsunami that was generated killed four oregonians in part because there was no early warning system to alert people that a tsunami was bearing down on the oregon coast. the tsunami early warning system 50 years ago could have saved lives and giving people some warning, even a few minutes can save lives. we can build an earthquake tsunami early warning system with the potential to save lives. oregon doesn't just face a threat from tsunamis generated elsewhere, we have our own fault, it turns out with some of the research that came subsequent to this quake. a rather big one it turns out. the same type that generated the great alaska quake. the 2011 japan earthquake and the indonesia earthquake and according to geologic history we're overdue for a major quake in the no