House Republicans bring up their own inconvenient truth in beach bill debate

April 18, 2008
House Democrats expected to debate a bill to increase beach safeguards on April 10. House Republicans had other plans. They wanted to discuss the impacts of record high crude oil prices on consumers.

House Democrats expected to debate a bill to increase beach safeguards on April 10. House Republicans had other plans. They wanted to discuss the impacts of record high crude oil prices on consumers.

"In devoting valuable floor time to debating a bill on beaches today, Democrats did their best to ignore the millions of American families struggling with $3.40 gasoline, and the hundreds of truckers lined up outside the Capitol protesting the staggering price of diesel. But today Republicans in the House refused to play along, instead asking Democrats to finally unveil their 'secret plan' for reining in energy prices," Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said after a dozen GOP members spoke about high energy prices during debate on a bill to increase beach monitoring and other safeguards under the federal Water Pollution Control Act.

"A full 15 months have passed since Democrats came into power with ambitious promises to provide affordable energy to all. But in that time, the price of oil has more than doubled, natural gas has risen by 20 percent, and the 'Pelosi Premium' has added an extra dollar to the price Americans pay for a gallon of gas. If this is what Democrats had in mind when they promised to take our country in 'a new direction,' I don't know that it's a direction our economy can survive much longer," Blunt continued.

Republicans essentially asked how extensive the benefits of cleaner beaches and coastal waters would be if families could no longer afford to drive there. They applauded H.R. 2537's goals but criticized Democrats for not addressing high energy prices, which they said was a much more pressing issue.

'Other, more critical issues'

The maneuver began quietly as Ralph Hall (R-Tex.) expressed his support for the bill, which he said would receive overwhelming bipartisan support. "But it seems to me that the House has other, more critical issues to consider, such as the rising cost of energy which affects the success or failures of the traveling public to even reach the beaches of the world," he continued.

"Oil and gas prices are at an all-time high with national averages topping $3.25 a gallon. A year ago we feared a time when crude oil could reach $100 a barrel, and now oil has reached $110 a barrel for the first time in history. Unfortunately, energy analysts are saying that prices at the pump are not likely to decrease any time soon, and could rise as high as $3.75, maybe $4 a gallon this year," Hall said.

He said that while the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) contained worthwhile provisions, none of them would provide immediate relief from higher oil prices by increasing domestic production. Congress also needs to streamline permitting processes for nuclear power plants and oil refineries, he maintained.

Fred Upton (R-Mich.) was next. He noted that on April 16, 2006, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Mich.) said that "the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress" had passed two energy bills costing taxpayers $12 billion in tax breaks for major oil companies, then added that Democrats had a plan and would take the country in a new direction by giving the Federal Trade Commission the authority to investigate oil product price gouging allegations, increase production of alternative fuels and rescind subsidies, tax breaks and royalty relief for oil companies.

"We have not had any relief from gas prices. Gas prices are a dollar a gallon more today than they were when the new majority took over. We have paid too much attention to windmills, bicycles and solar panels. We need to pay attention to domestic drilling. We need to pay attention to promoting alternative fuels," Upton said.

'What have we done?'

He said that he has heard from his constituents about the House's devoting time to issues such as professional athletes using steroids and "a whole number of things that don't impact the economy or, in fact, their pocketbook" while they worry about rising gasoline prices. "What have we done on this? That is their question. What are we doing about supply and demand?" he said.
Upton said that the House has passed measures that would have increased domestic oil and gas costs if they had been signed into law, which effectively would have increased prices for consumers. He also referred to EISA's Section 526, which potentially could limit US purchases of crude oil refined from Canadian oil sands.

John E. Peterson (R-Pa.) announced that he planned to submit the latest version of his bill to expand natural gas production on the Outer Continental Shelf as an amendment to the beach protection bill. He said that his proposal would provide $20 billion to clean up the Chesapeake Bay and the beaches there, $20 billion to clean up the Great Lakes, $12 billion for San Francisco Bay clean-up, $32 billion for energy efficiency and renewables, and $32 billion for carbon capture and storage.

"This Congress is the cause of high energy prices. There's no action here to fix the ills of the past. We're locking up our energy supply. It's not even to be debated. It's not even a priority," he maintained.

"As the [House] member who represents the entire Atlantic Coast in Virginia and much of the Chesapeake Bay, I recognize that our beaches are a treasure and must remain clean and safe. But we must lift the federal moratorium on deep sea drilling of natural gas in the Outer Continental Shelf," said Thelma D. Drake (R-Va.).

Let coastal states decide

As the United States has acted to make power generation cleaner, electricity suppliers have responded by relying increasingly on gas, she pointed out. "The US is the only developed nation that does not capture natural gas from the OCS. Canada has done it for years. We all know what Cuba's getting ready to do. American families and American businesses pay this extra cost, and it is driving American businesses overseas," she said, adding that coastal states should be able to decide if gas should be produced off their coastlines and should share in the royalties.

Mary Fallin (R-Okla.) said that a day earlier, the Small Business Committee, on which she serves, held a hearing which found that high fuel prices are having a heavy impact on small businesses. "They operate on razor thin margins and they are faced with dilemmas. Do they cut costs? Do they cut their business? Do they raise their prices, or do they just go out of business? Some of them are even having to cut the salaries of their employees," she said.

"I don't know if anybody had an opportunity to walk outside the United States Capitol today, but you heard trucks with their horns blaring outside the Capitol, and they were doing so because they were objecting to the leadership in this Congress and the lack of action on energy prices and gas prices. That noise resonates across this land," said Tom Price (R-Ga.).

Lee Terry (R-Neb.) also said that he has heard from his constituents about high prices not just for gasoline, but also for groceries and other goods. "When I see a bill like this, my first thought isn't about whether we need to keep beaches clean but whether it's just another environmental took to make sure that we can't get to drilling in places where we need to get," he said.

"I'm a big supporter of solar energy and wind energy. They're great renewable [sources], but we get less than 1% of our energy from them. So if we want to talk about renewable sources of energy, we're going to have to look seriously at nuclear power. We're going to have to look at using the oil that we have in this country if we don't want to buy oil from foreign countries. These are the types of things that we're going to have to do in this Congress," said Assistant Minority Whip Devin Nunes (R-Calif.).

'Quit pandering'

Don Young (R-Alaska), the Natural Resources Committee's ranking minority member, said that the United States still has significant untapped energy resources off the California, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina coasts and in the Rocky Mountains. "Think about this for a moment. Think about the American public and the need for economy-based, fossil fuel driven because it moves an object. We must address this. I'm asking my colleagues to understand that. Quit pandering. Quit pandering to the interest groups that really are trying to socially structure our nation through fear," he said.

"It's interesting that we came here to talk about a beach bill, and we're finally getting a chance to talk about some energy [issues] because most American families are not going to have the money to drive to the beach this year," said Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland (R-Ga.). He acknowledged that there have been suggestions to repeal financial incentives for major oil companies, but added that such an action simply would lead to higher product prices. "We need to concentrate on being less dependent on foreign oil. We need to look at our own future, our own lands, our own prospects," he said.

Finally, Rules Committee member Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) said that it was more than ironic that offshore oil and gas drilling proponents were using the beach bill debate to promote their cause. "The knee-jerk reaction to take every opportunity, even a bill called the Beach Protection Act, to open up our beautiful coastline to additional oil drilling, especially in hurricane-prone waters like Florida's gulf coast is ridiculous, not just ironic," she maintained.

"The irony behind this debate is that Americans really appreciate healthy beaches, but what they are really mad about is high [gasoline] prices," responded John M. Shimkus (R-Ohio). "I have three kids, 15, 13 and 8. My wife is driving them all over the world to attend every event that kids do today, and the soccer moms of the world are outraged over the price of gas that they are paying. And what has this Democrat majority been doing to continue to affect the price of gas? We just heard it . . . from my colleague who just said no more exploration for oil."

Democrats finally tabled the bill and promised to bring it back the following week, possibly under a suspension of rules which would limit debate and restrict the introduction of proposed amendments. But the Republicans had made their point. Repeatedly.

Contact Nick Snow at [email protected]