Child Tax Credit Equality for Puerto Rico Act of 2011

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill, H.R. 4480, the so-called Domestic Energy and Jobs Act, what is really a death and destruction act, an act that will directly lead to the death of American citizens from various health-related causes-- including cancer--and destruction. It is the destruction of not only our environment, but of our quality of life, including our quality of life in my home State of Colorado that is such an important part of driving our economy forward and creating jobs.

Here we are where several controversial, highly partisan bills have been packaged together. There are seven bills. While there is an attempt to dress this up as a jobs package, it's really a wish list for the oil industry that has no chance of becoming law. It's a huge giveaway to the oil industry at the expense of the health of American families, the health of our environment, and our enjoyment and recreational opportunities and economic opportunities on public lands.

Instead of allowing improvements to this drastic death and destruction bill, the House majority has blocked many amendments offered by Republicans and Democrats alike. Under this restrictive rule, commonsense amendments were blocked, including an amendment I offered that would have directed a study on the impacts of oil shale development on agricultural and municipal water usage. My colleague from California, Representative Napolitano, offered a similar amendment in committee.

Those of us in the West, where farmers, ranchers, and community leaders consistently keep us abreast of water issues--and water is our most precious resource--know that we need some commonsense and objective data with regard to how energy production impacts resources, particularly our most precious resource: water.

What lies at the heart of this death and destruction bill today is simply a false premise. It's the false premise that somehow the United States is failing to make good on its natural energy resources.

The fact is, as a result of President Obama's all-of-the-above energy strategy, our Nation's dependence on foreign oil has fallen drastically, and crude oil production in the United States is at an 8- year high. President Obama has increased production of crude oil substantially over the Bush administration lows. The President's policies are demonstrating that we can have an approach to energy in the United States that boosts oil and gas

production and invests in the next generation of cleaner, job-creating, renewable energy technologies, such as wind, solar, and geothermal.

In contrast to the President's all-of-the-above approach, which will lead to reductions in gas prices and a sustainable energy future for our country, this death and destruction bill before us today is an oil- above-all approach. This death and destruction bill hands public lands that we all value over to the oil and gas industry and undermines the laws and rules that have made our air and water cleaner and safer over the past 40 years.

One of the scariest provisions in this package would gut important health-based standards provided for in the Clean Air Act established on a bipartisan basis in 1970. The Clean Air Act-based standards are especially important for protecting children, the elderly, and others who are susceptible to harmful air pollution.

Many nonpartisan public health and medical organizations have recognized that this bill would override clean air standards that have protected American people and families from harmful pollution in the past 40 years. That is why on this bill, which the majority purports deals with energy, we've heard from pediatricians, we've heard from doctors, we've heard from health care providers that this would lead to death, as well as the destruction of jobs, as well as the destruction of our environment and recreational opportunities.

Another controversial partisan provision in this bill would open up vast quantities of public lands to drilling. The bill sets an arbitrary requirement on the Department of the Interior to offer oil companies at least 25 percent of onshore areas that industry nominates each year. Let me say that again. The Department of the Interior wants to open up more lands to industry, even though oil and gas companies hold more than 25 million acres of public lands on shore where they're not producing oil and gas. In addition, these companies are sitting on 6,700 drilling permits that have been approved that they are not using. They need to explore lands where they already hold energy leases.

This is not a sensible energy policy. It's called an old-fashioned land grab and an old-fashioned water grab. They're coming after our land in the West, and they're coming after our water in the West. We're not going to take it sitting down.

Another extreme provision is that this bill would overturn the Federal Land Policy and Management Act to elevate energy production above other public land uses. My constituents in Colorado are tremendously concerned that somehow oil production would trump job- creating activities, including hunting, fishing, recreation, grazing, conservation, mainstays of jobs and the economy in my district that would be overridden in the name of oil, which would destroy jobs and destroy the health of Colorado families and families across the United States.

Another provision in this bill turns the review of applications to drill into nothing more than a rubber stamp. The bill says that if the Secretary of the Interior doesn't make a decision within 60 days, it's automatically approved. It will be automatically approved with no process.

At the same time, many of the proponents of this bill are attempting to gut the budget of many of the agencies that need to review these applications, effectively ensuring that no application can properly be dealt with and evaluated within 60 days, and therefore they would all be automatically approved regardless of the impact on people's health or economic opportunities and jobs.

Now there are so many troubling provisions in this bill. Another one--and this one would likely violate our Constitution, which we began this session of Congress by reciting very publicly in this body--it would limit a citizen's right to participate in the discussion of leasing and drilling by making all dissenters pay a $5,000 fee.

Now imagine you are a Coloradan, an Arizonan, a Pennsylvanian, a Texan who's concerned about drilling near your home or near your school or near your ranch. Now under this death and destruction bill, opening your mouth would cost you $5,000. Free speech would no longer be free, if this bill passes.

Madam Speaker, public lands are just that, public. We all own a share of them. We all benefit from them. They're not the private playground of oil and gas companies. They're owned by all Americans. And all Americans should have a say in how they're used, not just Americans who cough up $5,000.

Well, this bill would grant the oil and gas industry's wish list by opening up public lands and rolling back public health safeguards, hurting health and killing American families. But one thing this bill will not do is lower the price of gasoline. Economists agree: this bill has no impact on the price of gasoline.

There are actually now more drilling rigs in operation in the United States, thanks to President Obama's leadership today, than the rest of the world combined. In addition, the number of drilling rigs has doubled, doubled since 2009. President Obama's leadership has doubled the number of drilling rigs since 2009.

Now research going back more than three decades shows that there is very little correlation between the volume of domestic oil and the price of gasoline at the pump.

Go ahead and tell the American people that we want oil and gas companies to drill anywhere they like with no regard for public health. Is that the message that we want to send? This bill, this death and destruction bill, would not only lead to the deaths of Americans but would destroy jobs, destroy economic opportunities, and destroy recreational opportunities. It's nothing short of a Federal land grab and a Federal water grab.

Representing my constituents in Colorado, I encourage my colleagues to say, ``Heck, no,'' on both the bill as well as the rule.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

If we defeat the previous question, I'll offer an amendment to this rule that will allow the House to consider the Stop the Rate Hike Act of 2012, legislation that would keep the student loan interest rate low and reduce the deficit. If Congress fails to act, more than 7 million students across this country will see their student loan interest rate double come July 1, just around the corner. It's outrageous that at this time of slow and painful economic recovery the majority continues to refuse to work on this issue in a bipartisan way.

To discuss this proposal, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).

I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Madam Speaker, this is a rare time when we are talking about energy, when we are hearing from the Academy of Pediatrics, the Heart Association, the American Lung Association, the Public Health Association, the National Association of City and County Health Officials, and a number of other signatories on this letter which says, very simply, that we should make sure that the EPA can determine whether our air is safe to breathe and not do it based on how much it costs to reduce air pollution.

June 18, 2012.

Dear Representative: The undersigned public health and

medical organizations

write to express our strong opposition to H.R. 4480, which

includes dangerous provisions that would block and delay

important public health safeguards under the Clean Air Act.

Gutting the Clean Air Act will not address rising gas prices,

but it will needlessly weaken the Clean Air Act's life-saving

protections and delay much-needed air pollution safeguards.

Title II of H.R. 4480 indefinitely delays three overdue air

quality safeguards, including standards for tailpipes

emissions and gasoline sulfur content (Tier 3), air emissions

standards for petroleum refineries and ground level ozone

standards. Most egregiously, H.R. 4480 also repeals the

health premise of the Clean Air Act.

In 1970, an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress

agreed that to adequately protect public health, the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must set air quality

standards to protect health with an adequate margin of

safety. These standards are based on the best available

health science. This system has worked for more than 40 years

to let people know if the air is safe to breathe, and

motivate action to improve air quality when it is not safe.

EPA must retain this authority to establish health-based

ambient air quality standards.

The Clean Air Act fully considers cost and feasibility in

determining how to meet air quality standards. States and EPA

consider these factors during the implementation process as

strategies are implemented to meet air quality standards.

Just as a doctor does not diagnose a patient based on the

cost of treatment, EPA should not determine whether the air

is safe to breathe based on how much it costs to reduce air

pollution.

The Clean Air Act is one of the nation's premier public

health laws. Since its establishment in 1970, the aggregate

emissions of criteria air pollutants decreased 71%, while

Gross Domestic Product increased 210%. Given the enormous

contribution of the Clean Air Act to public health, we urge

you to reject all efforts to weaken and delay it. Please vote

NO on H.R. 4480.

Sincerely,

American Academy of Pediatrics.

American Heart Association.

American Lung Association.

American Public Health Association.

American Thoracic Society.

Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America.

Health Care Without Harm.

National Association of City and County Health Officials.

National Environmental Health Association.

Trust for America's Health.

Madam Speaker, I'm proud to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Madam Speaker, it's my honor to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 20 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

And here we are. While we're debating this death and destruction, oil above all bill, the clock is ticking on student loan payments that will cost middle class families millions and millions of dollars.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).

I would like to inquire of the other side if he has any remaining speakers.

Very good. Then I'm prepared to close, and I will yield myself the balance of the time.

Now, this rule only provides for consideration of certain amendments. Why are the Republicans so concerned with letting the House work their will on such an important bill?

Now, a number of these measures have been brought forward by Representatives from Colorado. I want to be clear that these are policies that are not universally supported in Colorado and that many of us believe that the policies contained in this set of bills would destroy jobs as well as the quality of life and health of not only Colorado and the West, but the entire country.

In Colorado, we've created a balanced approach to energy policy that's worked. In some areas we lease, some areas we use for other purposes, some areas we protect. Many Colorado small business owners agree, our parks and public lands are critical not only to the economy and job growth, hiking, fishing, hunting, the outdoor industry, but also to our quality of life and our health.

This job-destroying Federal landgrab, Federal water grab bill would put tens of thousands of Coloradoans out of work and destroy the quality of life for our entire State. This bill puts the wish list of the oil and gas industry above all the other users of public lands, above the interest of hunters, above the interest of fishermen, above the interest of hikers, above the interest of tourism, above the interest of skiers, above the interest of conservationists. This bill is out of touch with the citizens of Colorado and will destroy jobs in Colorado and throughout the country.

Look, companies are able to drill. They've been drilling the last 40 years. President Obama's leadership has led to twice the number of drilling wells. Our energy production is at an 8-year peak from oil and gas, and we continue to increase our energy production on public lands, and there's a responsible way to do it.

But we need a balanced approach that doesn't throw out the safeguards and protections that protect the health of children and the health of families, to protect our jobs in the outdoor industry, that protect our jobs in the recreation industry and protect our quality of life across the Western United States, and laws that protect our water and laws that protect our air.

This bill, this series of omnibus death and destruction bills, simply fails that test. The American people deserve more than the death and destruction, oil above all omnibus package that's being offered here today. While millions of Americans are waiting in the unemployment lines, we need a bill that creates jobs rather than destroys jobs.

An increased concentration of toxic chemicals can harm the health of American citizens and Coloradans. Now there is great promise and opportunity in technology that will allow companies to drill with less of an impact on

human health and the environment. That's why we have a regulatory framework. It is to ensure that there is incentive to make sure that American families are safe.

This package of job-destroying bills that has been brought before us today would harm our sensitive lands and constitute a Federal land grab and Federal water grab, all without lowering the price at the pump and destroying tens of thousands of jobs in the process.

This death-and-destruction bill is simply not what this country needs to move forward. I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule and to oppose the bill. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and to defeat the previous question.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 691 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis). Pending that, I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

I also ask that all Members may have 5 legislative days during which they may revise and extend their remarks.

This resolution provides for a structured rule for the consideration of H.R. 4480, the Strategic Energy Production Act of 2012, and it makes in order 27 individual amendments that are specified under the rule, two-thirds of which are Democrat amendments.

The rule provides for 2 hours of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of both the Committee on Energy and Commerce as well as the Committee on Natural Resources. So this structured rule is very fair, and it will provide for a balanced and open debate on the merits of the bill.

Madam Speaker, I'm actually pleased to stand before the House today in support of this rule as well as the underlying legislation, H.R. 4480. The lead sponsor of this legislation, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Gardner), is to be commended for his hard work and leadership in putting this piece of legislation together. I also commend the chairmen of both the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Natural Resources Committee for their support and hard work, as well, on this particular act and on other important pieces of legislation aimed at making our Nation more energy independent.

Madam Speaker, this bill is yet another reminder that this administration is not doing enough to develop our own domestic energy resources, which are plentiful in many parts of our public lands. In my home State of Utah, for example, there are vast amounts of oil and oil shale reserves that remain untapped, largely due to special interest group politics that keeps these lands locked up, even as we go abroad and increase our dependence on foreign sources as well as increasing our trade deficit.

Energy is an absolute prerequisite to our economic engine and creates jobs. If this administration ever hopes to get unemployment down during its tenure, then helping to develop more domestic energy is the key.

This bill, H.R. 4480, stands for a very commonsense proposition. The proposition is that, whenever the President of the United States authorizes a release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the Secretary of Energy will be required to develop a plan to increase the percentage of Federal land oil production by a commensurate percentage to that released from the reserve. The reserve is a reserve. It is reserved for emergencies. Unfortunately, this administration is using our reserve to accommodate common daily life.

It is important and the purpose of this legislation is:

Number one, to develop our resources;

Number two, to make sure that we can streamline the process so that we do not delay the development of our resources;

Number three, to keep the reserve for real emergencies;

Number four, organize a plan to make sure that will be in effect; and

Number five, recognize clearly that energy is needed for job creation. Without that energy, we will not create the jobs that are necessary for this country to move forward.

This bill would actually limit the total amount of Federal lands to be leased, which is only 10 percent of the total of all public lands. Ten percent is very reasonable. The bill also excludes national parks, obviously, and congressionally designated wilderness areas from consideration of this bill.

It's a good bill. It's a commonsense bill. When passed, it will be a key part of our effective and comprehensive national energy strategy.

I urge adoption of the rule, which is a fair rule, and the underlying bill, which is a commonsense bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Berg), the gentleman whose home State has provided a program of death and destruction which has led to a 3 percent or less unemployment rate, through jobs in energy production.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Boustany, a State that truly understands what it means to have an all-of-the-above policy for energy production, and what energy means to job creation.

I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to a Member who is really a great and wonderful Member of this body, the gentlelady from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).

Madam Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Chairman Hall, who has probably heard many of these arguments before.

Ironically, I do agree with the gentleman from Massachusetts in one element of what he said, that this administration, President Obama, is drilling on permits that were granted by Bush and Clinton. The unfortunate side is that this administration is not permitting any new drilling permits for the future growth of this country.

With that, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) who has been working diligently for many years on this particular issue and has a clear understanding of it.

I yield the gentlewoman 1 minute.

I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Griffin).

I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to another member of the Resources Committee here who understands this issue very well, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman).

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

I reserve the balance of my time.

No; I think I'm it.

I yield myself the balance of my time.

In the 111th Congress, when the other side was in charge, H.R. 2454 was brought forth from the floor. It was called the American Clean Energy and Security Act. There were 224 amendments submitted, and one was made in order. In our bill today, 27 amendments are made in order, two-thirds of which are Democrat amendments. This is a very fair rule, and it will provide for an open and clear debate on the particular issue.

Let's face it, Madam Speaker. The United States has a lot of untapped areas on public lands that are involved not only in oil and oil shale but in natural gas and coal. We are an energy-rich country. We are an energy-producing country. It's about time we recognized that fact and developed the energy that we have for the betterment of our people and for job creation.

We need an all-of-the-above strategy that is not just a rhetorical exercise in an election year but an all-of-the-above strategy that, actually, really creates something without hidden delays disguised as procedural practices and processes.

This bill will create jobs. This bill will keep American dollars at home. This bill will provide economic growth instead of sending our money abroad. This is a good bill, and it is an incredibly fair rule. I urge its adoption.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Speaker, this act removes the obstacles that are blocking our efforts to achieve greater American energy production and job creation by providing more certainty and clarity to the public lands leasing and permitting process.

In particular, my part of this legislation will ensure that Federal oil and natural gas lease sales occur on a consistent basis and provide the necessary lease certainty so production is made easier.

Currently, there are roughly 1,631 outstanding projects on Federal lands, including lands in Colorado, which have been delayed over 3 years. Federal regulatory delays to these projects prevent the creation of over 60,000 jobs.

We have endured several years of over 8 percent unemployment. Over 12 percent of our veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan are still out of work. The fact that we are not fully benefiting from the employment and financial potential of our energy resources is simply wrong.

The President often boasts about his energy record, but this administration regularly delays and blocks leases. In fact, BLM only approved 11 oil and gas leases in Colorado in 2011 where, in 2006, there were 363 approvals.

We in Colorado understand the importance of harnessing our own resources and the value it provides our economy. The oil and gas industry in Colorado directly employs 50,000 people and supports over 190,000 jobs in our State. This industry is responsible for roughly 6 percent of total employment in Colorado. We have an opportunity with this legislation to create jobs by developing our own resources right here at home.

Opponents of domestic energy exploration claim that the industry already has thousands of acres but are not producing the wells. These critics point to recent Department of the Interior reports that this report represents the

reasons for nonproducing wells. More often than not, the factors that cause our production are delays instituted by the Interior Department itself by requiring redundant reviews of projects, one example being the newest Master Leasing Plans instituted by the Secretary.

Delays also occur because exploration companies do not have full information as to the capacity of production on the land until after the lease sale is finalized. Therefore, some leases prove to be noncommercial and go unused. Although industry has already paid the government thousands of dollars in fees for the opportunity to explore, many times they receive no economic benefit, and the risk is entirely on them.

Let me also be clear, because this fact is largely missed by the opponents of this legislation. Only lands that are already approved by BLM for exploration can be nominated by industry. This bill is not a green light for immediate production on all Federal acres. Rather, it grants access to a very small percentage of the total of Federal lands.

As a Coloradoan, I respect the need to preserve our wilderness areas, but I also understand the need to responsibly capitalize on our vast resources in order to get people back to work.

As a Marine Corps combat veteran who has served multiple tours in the Middle East, I fully understand the need to reduce our reliance on foreign oil, and this legislation will help do that.

For these reasons, I ask my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on certainty, ``yes'' on jobs, and ``yes'' on the final passage of the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much.

This bill represents the latest Republican attempt to give away our public lands to the wealthiest oil companies in the world. This bill is the culmination of the Republican oil-above-all agenda. Instead of approving this legislative love letter to Big Oil, the majority should be sending a thank-you note to President Obama for his actions to increase domestic energy production and decrease our dependence on foreign oil.

The truth is that oil production from Federal lands on shore today is higher than it was under President Bush. And across the United States, oil production from all public and private lands is unbelievably now at an 18-year high. Obama is drilling, baby; he's drilling.

The Obama administration's all-of-the-above strategy has also been successful in creating jobs. Since 2008, 14,000 new jobs have been created in oil and gas extraction. Thank you, President Obama. And 50,000 new jobs have also been created in wind and solar, but Republicans don't want a real all-of-the-above energy strategy.

At the Rules Committee, I offered an amendment, along with Mr. Welch, that would have established a national renewable energy standard. That amendment would have created wind and solar all across our country as a standard. That amendment was germane to this bill and had no budgetary impact, but the Republican majority refused to even allow us to debate an amendment so that Members could have a chance to vote on an actual all-of-the-above package that wasn't just oil and gas.

And President Obama is about as good a President as you can have on that issue; but wind and solar and biomass and geothermal and all of these technologies of the future, they refused to even allow the Democrats to have a vote on that on the House floor this afternoon. They are not all of the above; they are oil above all. They don't want wind and solar because the oil industry doesn't want it, and the coal industry doesn't want it because it's real competition from the future.

The renewable electricity standard that I would have offered would have created 300,000 new jobs and saved consumers billions of dollars on their electricity bills.

In 2007, 32 Republicans joined 188 Democrats in overwhelming support of a similar renewable electricity standard. In 2009, the House again passed that policy on a bipartisan basis. It died in the Senate both times. Today, it dies here on the House floor because the Republicans don't want 32 Republicans to even have the right to vote for wind and solar and biomass and geothermal. They're afraid Republicans might vote for it, so there's a gag here, a gag order to the House floor saying no debate on the renewables because oil and coal don't want it debated. There will not be a vote on this.

The majority has voted more than 100 times in this Congress to help the oil industry, but they have not voted once in favor of clean energy in the year and a half that they have controlled the United States Congress.

Moreover, because they will not extend the production tax credit for wind, 40,000 jobs are going to be lost in the wind industry in the first 6 months of 2013. This is the Big Oil dream act. This is the dream act of the Republicans. This is something that should be opposed.

I thank the gentleman from Utah for yielding the time.

I am so pleased, Madam Speaker, that we are pushing forward on some bills that are going to actually create the environment for jobs growth to take place. Of course we know that that is needed by the American people. We hear about it every single day.

We are at the longest streak that we have had since the Great Depression, the longest streak with unemployment being above 8 percent. If you look at underemployment, it's at 14.8 percent. Clearly, the American people are speaking out that they want action and they want to get back to work. The Domestic Energy and Jobs Act will do that, helping to create the environment for jobs growth to take place and helping to create the environment where we take actions to fuel this economy.

Our unemployment and underemployment numbers should be a wake-up call to the President, should be a wake-up call to the Senate. They can't continue to sit on their hands and play the blame game while 13 million Americans remain out of work.

As I said, this legislation will help create the jobs that are needed in our Nation's energy sector. What we want to see is more American- made energy, more American exploration. We want to see American innovation and end our dependence on foreign oil. Those are worthy goals, and these are steps in the right direction.

We also hear a lot about the price at the pump. I have many friends who are the mom in the minivan and are getting children back and forth, to and from activities. And at $3.50 a gallon as the new normal, if you will, gas having doubled, the price of gasoline as a transportation fuel having doubled since this President was sworn in, this is something that women talk to us about regularly. There are deep concerns about this.

The greatest potential for economic growth in this country can be found in this Nation's precious natural resources, in our energy resources. While the President is clearly preoccupied with telling Americans what we won't do on energy, what he will not take steps to do, the economy and jobs and what he isn't going to do there, House Republicans are laying out a pathway for what we can do.

By working hard, we can empower those innovators to harness our domestic energy capabilities using so many

of those new technologies that are out there, new innovations that have been brought forward by so many of the petroleum engineers and the innovators in this country.

I have to say this: with every new discovery of American energy and every new technology advancement, we are able to put more into the marketplace for our Nation's manufacturers, engineers, our leasing specialists, our rig operators, and much more.

I recently had the opportunity to be back in south Mississippi, where I grew up. I had the opportunity to talk with some of the men and women who are involved and working and innovating in the oil and gas industry every single day. What I heard from them was the degree of advancement and the number of opportunities that exist if the Federal Government will get out of the way and return our focus to creating the environment for energy exploration and jobs growth to take place in this great Nation.