. >> thank you, mr. hamm. make you the last one. >> i mentioned unintended consequences, you know, and the government's quest to raise more money, and equalize things. i just want to caution that this tax could be one that vaporizes, you know, if idcs are taken away, that we stop the renaissance and still don't raise a lot of money. there's $4 billion, you know, drilling ceases or slows down considerably. you know, we've examined our company and, you know, absolutely a third less drilling would take place, you know, without the idcs. >> well, thank you all. >> thank you, senator conrad? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this hearing. thanks for the excellence of this panel. i remember very fondly serving with senator nickles. we've led the budget committee together for a number of years. one thing i learned about senator nickles is his word is absolutely gold, even when it's hard to keep his word, he did, which i always admired. congressman sharp, always good to serve with you, you're a thought

mr. hamm. we'll call you doctor for now. mr. hamm. >> thank you. thanks, mr. baucus, it's an honor and privilege for me to be here today. i'll be speaking on my own behalf and not as representative of continental resources or not here on behalf of the romney campaign for which i serve as an energy adviser. it's been 20 years since i was here speaking before this committee, senator david born at that time was cochairing the committee, i believe, and i spoke to him about a couple of things that were mostly unknown and unconventional at the time and the other was the aspect of drilling into the trucks themselves and the shales that would produce a vast amount of natural gas and talking about a temporary trigger, tax trigger to advance that theory. well, that wasn't given. we didn't get a tax trigger and over the last 20 years, we've seen those technologies develop and thank god we've come a long way since then. continental is the top ten producer where 75% of all of last year's production we focus on since it started in montana and that's where we started with co

that's what mr. hamm discussed with us in his written testimony, so i think we are all on the same page here. what we're not apparently on the same page about is essentially what the price system is doing for the energy sector. you're an accountant, or were, mr. coburn, and you know that when you evaluate a project for a client like mr. hamm, if you ever had such an outstanding person as your client, i would simply say if you ignore the price of energy, if you ignore the dynamism of our economy and the energy independence that's going to result from the new structure of oil prices in the world economy, you're fired. you're no longer mr. hamm's accountant, if he's done project analysis ignoring energy prices, and that's what we need to absorb. our market-based economy is working. it's working toward energy independence, and it's working toward a more effective allocation of energy resources toward the domestic sector, which you've emphasized in your question, senator coburn. >> just -- if the chairman woul

and what i hear you saying, mr. hamm, is that as you move towards these reform steps, first of all, don't throw out intangible drilling because that would have unintended consequences. is that what you're trying to tell us here? >> that's correct. again, i'm not a tax accountant, but, you know, we've done our study. we have provisions right now that encourage us to invest, and we need to invest heavily. for instance, right now we estimate there's 900 billion barrels of oil in place, in this whole petroleum system. >> 900 billion. >> 900 billion. right now we think we can get 2% to 3% of that, 2.5% maybe, or something like that. if we could move that needle up to 5%, everybody here can do the math. i mean, we're talking doubling, you know, our reserves in america so it's that significant, so, you know, we've got a job to do and a very significant one, and we need the ability to do it. this gives -- this encourages us to do it. >> just the last statement, if i could, mr. chairman. i've just been up with secretary salazar o

jurgensen, i don't know or mr. hamm, but if you two are half as good as i'm hearing from my colleagues, this is a great panel. we're delighted that you're here today. in what the senator was saying earlier, i think it's optimistic to be about the future of our country. one of the reasons is, with saudi arabia, we having for sometime, saudi arabia of coal. we are now apparently the saudi arabia of natural gas. i understand that we have become that porter of oil. while we're not the top producer of oil in the world, i think we might be number three or so but we apparently have more drills going today. more wells producing today than i think maybe the rest of the world combined which is pretty amazing. i share subcommittee deals with nuclear safety, and we have four brand-new nuclear power plants being built in this country for the first time in 25 years. and i'm encouraged with the technology and the safety of the technology that it provides. cafe, we implemented -- adopted cafe legislation, fuel efficiency for vehicles i

jorgenson, i don't know either you or mr. hamm well, but if you two are half as good as i'm hearing from my colleagues, this is a great panel, and we're delete that had you're here today. i want to follow up a little bit on what senator coburn was saying earlier. i think there's reason to be optimistic about the future of our country, a number of reasons, but one of those is, and he alluded -- we have been for some time the saudi arabia of coal. we are now apparently the saurd sawed of natural gas. i understand that we have become a net exporter of oil, and while we're not the top producer of oil in the world, i think we might be number three or so, but we apparently have more drills going today. wells producing today than i think maybe the rest of the world combined which is pretty amazing. i chair a subcommittee that deals with nuclear safety, and we have four brand new nuclear power plants being built in this country for the first time in 25 years, and i'm encouraged with the technology and the safety of the technology that it

but this country has, as mr. hamm would be the first to tell you, a very competitive industry on the supply side of fossil fuels. we are a very competitive industry in the supply of renewable energy sources, both solar and wind. and, therefore, you should think, as you just suggested, in terms of relying on these very, very well structured markets. but they're not going to do the job by themselves. that's where we come to the hidden costs of energy combustion that i've harped on over and over in this hearing. and so we shouldn't say that free markets are the answer. but nobody here has said that. i haven't heard a single voice of support around the panel or around the senators here that are present. so, i think we need to -- the lead markets let them work. we've got to recognize the fact that let the government has a role. i've tried to spell that out. >> and also, as dr. jorgenson's terms, externalalities, the costs associated with fossil fuels. >> certainly, i think the market place will work. and it has worked and

mr. hamm? we'll call you doctor for now. mr. hamm? >> thanks, chairman baucus, ranking member hatch and members of the committee. it's an honor and a privilege for me to be here today. i'll be speaking on my own behalf, i'm not here on behalf of the romney campaign for which i serve as an energy adviser. it's been plenty of years before i was here speaking pfr this committee. senator david warren at that time was co-chairing of the committee, i believe, and spoke to him about a couple things that was mostly unknown, totally unconventional at the time. one of them was horizontal drilling and the other was the aspect of drilling into the source rocks themselves, or shales, that might produce a vast amount of natural gas and talking about a temporary trigger, tax trigger, to advance that theory. well, that wasn't given. we did get a tax trigger, but over the last 20 years, we've seen those technologies developed and thank god we've come a long way since then. continental is a top tens liquids producer. we're 75% oil with last year's prod

to senator nickles and mr. hamm, does this conflict with the key objectives of tax reform to lower the rates and broaden the base, when lower tax rates also provide more cash for additional exploring and drilling, and also in the context of tax reform, do you agree that intangible drilling costs and percentage depletion provision should also be reviewed? >> under grassley, you haven't changed a bit. [laughter] >> we've been having this debate for about 30 years. [laughter] >> you compared it to rnd. r&d is a credit. r&d credit is dollar for dollar for your cost for the other is an out-of-pocket costs for wages. i mentioned earlier, before you arrived, i think for texts in this become you should allow every business to be able to expand its wages. i am in favor of putting everything on the table. it is exciting to think what you are it getting ready to do in tax reform, and you should put everything on the table. if you don't allow industries to have expense through out-of-pocket expense, you're going to have some ne

i've been listening carefully and i want to compliment you, mr. hamm, for having the guts to do what you've done. debris with you on the intangible drilling and production it's been a tremendous benefit for the oil industry at least independent oil industry in this country which i don't think we would be as far along as we are, and the real question we have is, should we have any of these tax expenditures or deductions in lieu of the fact we might reduce corporate tax rates low enough so that that would take care of it. but in your industry, it's a special industry. there's no question about it and there's a lot of risk involved. lot of money involved. it got broke easier in your business than almost any business i know and i just want to compliment you for what you've been able to accomplish and the guts that you've had to get things done. we'd like to you weigh in and help us to understand what we really do need to do with regard to tax reform. professor, i've enjoyed your remarks very much today. >> thank you. >> and of course, phil, it's great to s

second of all, obviously the entrepreneurial risk that people are willing to take like mr. hamm and others had powerful whether it's oil and the natural gas supply and the new nuclear plant that is about to be built in this country in solar and a whole bunch of resources. we require that across the board. nobody in this group, i'm sure, would deny the importance of that. third, the reason for this change is because many of these technologies that came in the marketplace for production or demand reduction were actually the result of decades of research, some of it by the private sector and much of it supported in some level by the public sector. some of it in public sector like the national laboratories. it is very hard to unsort that mix of which is which, but nobody should misunderstand that both are important in government expenditure and help advance these technologies that now we've sucked into the marketplace and the fourth finding, there of course, have been policies at the state and federal level that have helped incentivize in this community itself has been very active i

mr. harold hamm. chairman of continental resources, a position he served in since its inception in 1967. thank you all for coming very much and you all know our practice, i assume you do. certainly you do, don. speak for about five, six minutes, everyone utilizing and all of your statements will be inserted in the record. go ahead, don. glad to have you here. let her rip. i tell all witnesses, pull no punches and tell it like it is. life's short, you can't take it with you. go for it. >> mr. chairman, thank you. it's a pleasure for me to be on the panel and join my colleagues on the panel, especially harold hamm, who has built one heck of a company in oklahoma, continental resources, and doing so much in north dakota and montana but also in oklahoma and they've added hundreds and hundreds of jobs and a lot of valuable resources to this country, so it's a pleasure to join him as well. mr. chairman, you mentioned talking about tax reform and doing it right. i remember being in this body and particularly

mr. president. >> reporter: one of its most visible milestones came in 1991 when the u.s. women's soccer team won the world cup. mia hammroved that women athletes could win. like her teammates, hamm credits much of her success to that landmark legislation. >> i wouldn't have had a career without title nine. i think first and foremost i wouldn't have been able to play soccer or any sport that i liked in high school. >> reporter: yet despite the gains by athletes like hamm and the generation of girls who can't imagine a time when they couldn't play on the same field as the boys, hamm believes title nine's work is far from over. >> i would love to be in a state where we don't need it, but right now i think it is relevant. i think we still need to consider and create those opportunities for young girls. >> with sports as a microcosm of society, when we take care of both genders, the world is in a good place. when it leaves somebody out, that's not good. we still don't have as many opportunities. >> reporter: much more to do? >> a lot more to do. it will be never ending because you always want to cree pay the more opportunit