Targeting Resources to Communities in Need Act of 2022

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1119 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), pending which 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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1119, providing for consideration of three measures.

The first is H.R. 6531, the Targeting Resources to Communities in Need Act, under a closed rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairwoman Maloney and provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, and provides one motion to recommit.

The second is H.R. 7309, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, under a structured rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Scott, provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Labor, makes in order 39 amendments, provides en bloc authority, and provides one motion to recommit.

The third is S. 2938, to designate the United States Courthouse and Federal Building located at 111 North Adams Street in Tallahassee, Florida, as the ``Joseph Woodrow Hatchett United States Courthouse and Federal Building'' under a closed rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided among and controlled by the chairs and ranking minority members of the Committees on Oversight and Reform and Transportation and Infrastructure and provides one motion to commit.

Finally, the rule deems passage of H. Res. 1118.

Mr. Speaker, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, known around here as WIOA, is our Nation's flagship workforce development law. WIOA is the culmination of decades of policymaking by Congress to create a federally supported, State-managed system of programming for job training, adult education, and career services, as well as programs to connect employers with jobseekers, and help with placement, recruitment, and retention.

WIOA helps achieve our country's key goals of reducing poverty and driving economic growth by helping working Americans get the skills, knowledge, and experience they need to successfully participate in today's job market. With a new skill, certification, or degree, workers can apply for better-paying jobs, earning more for themselves and their families.

WIOA and its predecessors have been a successful formula for workforce development for over 60 years, and today's bill will ensure that WIOA can continue serving workers and their families in our changing and dynamic economy.

Today's bill is an overdue reauthorization for WIOA. While the bill makes a variety of important technical adjustments to keep the law relevant as our economy changes and evolves, the bill also upholds the core programs and services that have a demonstrated record of success.

The bill's main achievement is raising WIOA's funding levels to meet the needs of our workforce. Since the 1980s, the number of working Americans has doubled, but the funding for our workforce development programs has fallen by over 60 percent even as jobs and our economy have been invented and changed at a dizzying pace. Most of the drop in funding happened within the last 20 years as that pace accelerated.

The story of WIOA is the same as that of many of our Nation's key programs to help working families. Twenty years of harmful budget cuts and misguided austerity led by Republican Presidents and Republican majorities in Congress have resulted in WIOA lacking the proper funding to meet the needs of the American workforce and to allow members of that workforce to reach their full potential.

The funding authorized by this bill will allow WIOA programs to train over 1 million workers a year, creating real, tangible benefits for workers and employers. Put simply, with this boosted funding, workers will be able to get better jobs, and businesses will be able to hire better employees. That is a rare win-win policy achievement that we should all be able to get behind.

Today's WIOA reauthorization bill also has an added focus on youth employment opportunities, adult education, and support for formerly incarcerated individuals.

The WIOA reauthorization bill will reauthorize programs to help disadvantaged and disconnected youth and provide them with summer programming, employment and educational opportunities, as well as youth-specific training programs.

The bill will provide community colleges with funding and technical assistance to offer employment and training programs for in-demand industries--a successful model that we have seen utilized in my community--and the bill will create a Department of Labor program to specifically help individuals released from prison transition back to the workforce.

Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I want to highlight three of my amendments to WIOA. As chair of the Congressional Youth Mentoring Caucus, one of my priorities is to make sure that youth are able to access job training and meaningful employment opportunities. We know that mentors can have a positive impact on youth in their career exploration and early employment opportunities.

My amendments will ensure that WIOA's programming better targets youth who are most in need of services and is specifically geared to ensure positive outcomes for young people. The amendments will make summer and year-round employment opportunities accessible to more young people.

Finally, the amendments will make sure that employers, programs, and staff that mentor youth will have the tools required to provide the support and skill development needed to help young people succeed in their chosen careers.

All in all, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act will address both recent and long-term challenges in the labor market. Right now, our economy has a shortage of approximately 4 million skilled workers, and that shortage is expected to continue to grow. Reauthorizing WIOA is a key to this problem, so I encourage all my colleagues to help American workers and pass this bill.

Mr. Speaker, sadly, this rule also includes three suspension bills that failed on the floor after our Republican colleagues obstructed the business of the House of Representatives.

Included in today's rule is the Targeting Resources to Communities in Need Act and two naming bills which were all blocked by House Republicans with no other purpose than to obstruct the work of Congress on behalf of the American people.

Passing bills on suspension is one way in which Congress tries to streamline its work in order to devote more time to the most pressing issues of the day. Suspension bills are bipartisan bills narrowly tailored to the problems they address. To get on the suspension calendar and to be considered with an expedited process, a bill must have demonstrated strong bipartisan support.

By the time a suspension bill gets called up on the House floor, majorities of both Republicans and Democrats have to be willing to back the bill. However, some of our colleagues across the aisle have compromised the suspension system solely to waste the time of the American people and for political theater.

One of the bills we must reconsider now is the Targeting Resources to Communities in Need Act which would use proven strategies to improve the direction of Federal funds to areas of persistent poverty. This bill will greatly improve the effectiveness of many of our safety net, housing, hunger, and job training programs.

The bill is bipartisan, bicameral, and would benefit low-income Americans in both rural and urban communities. Yet, House Republicans tanked the bill.

The other two bills would rename a courthouse after Judge Joseph Hatchett and a post office after Representative Lynn Woolsey.

Joseph Hatchett was a pioneering Black lawyer and judge from the State of Florida. Born into the Jim Crow south, Judge Hatchett set many important firsts as a Black judge, ultimately becoming the first Black man to serve on the Florida Supreme Court.

Judge Hatchett was a committed public servant for the State of Florida, a fact recognized by both of Florida's Republican Senators and all 27 of the State's Representatives who cosponsored the resolution to name a Florida courthouse after Judge Hatchett.

And yet, House Republicans tanked this bill, too, including 10 Florida Republicans who had previously supported the measure.

What purpose does this stunt serve? What constituent base wants you to do this? It is nonsense and a waste of everyone's time.

If a Member doesn't like a bill, that is fine. That is how this place works. But we need to work together, in good faith, for the American people. It is a bad-faith move to torpedo bipartisan suspension bills at the last minute. It is bad for Congress, and it is bad for the country.

This Congress has seen a worrying increase in this kind of parliamentary nonsense from a small but vocal sect of the Republican Party. And while it is a small group of Members who initiate this nonsense, the whole party has been happy to go along with it.

With these three suspension bills, the minority leader continues his long and troubling streak of being unable or unwilling to control the behavior of the members of his party.

It is not a good path for our country. We have been trending down this road for a while, and January 6 was the painful result of this type of behavior.

We should not be here to fight each other. We should be here to help the American people. Some of our colleagues seem to have lost sight of that mission, and the whole country is paying the price.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I will redirect the focus to the underlying bill that we are considering with this rule, and that is the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.

The purpose of that bill is to unleash the full power of our investments in infrastructure, clean energy, and the care economy. It is essential that we have a skilled workforce to power those industries forward.

Now, we have seen what can happen when we make those kinds of investments. We have seen them in my district as we have invested in training our young people through our technical institutes, through our community colleges, with our employers, and with our apprenticeship programs. We are seeing the fruits of that labor, as it were, as we see people prepared to get the good jobs that we are bringing to our region.

The continued investment in the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act is really critical for my part of the country and critical for every district across this country.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the Statement of Administration Policy in which the administration urges the House to pass the WIOA Act of 2022.

Statement of Administration Policy

H.R. 7309--Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2022--Rep.

Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, D-VA, and 55 cosponsors

To unleash the full power of investments in infrastructure,

clean energy, and the care economy, it is essential that we

have the skilled workforce to power those industries forward.

It is equally important that the benefits of new job creation

are shared by all Americans, and in particular those who have

traditionally been left behind in the labor market. The

Administration strongly supports House passage of H.R. 7309,

the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2022, and

looks forward to working with the Senate on this critical

bill.

The public workforce system should adapt to dynamic and

rising demand for worker skills training and related

services. The U.S. currently invests just one-fifth of the

average amount spent on workforce and labor market programs

by advanced economies. Workforce development is critical to

strengthening our economy and increasing our competitiveness.

Our investments must match employers' needs and workers'

goals of finding and keeping good quality jobs.

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2022

authorizes three critical Administration priority programs as

new national programs--the Sectoral Employment through Career

Training for Occupational Readiness, Strengthening Community

Colleges, and Reentry Employment Opportunities programs.

These programs will ensure greater access to quality training

opportunities and supportive services, particularly in

infrastructure and supply chain sectors that will create

pathways for people in underserved communities to middle-

class jobs. H.R. 7309 also increases employment programming

for underserved youth, establishing a new funding stream for

summer and year-round employment activities to deliver young

people the work experience they need to connect with future

employment and education pathways.

The Administration urges the House to pass the Workforce

Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2022.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

We all know that Americans are feeling pain at the gas pump, but Big Oil companies are raking in billions upon billions of dollars. They had record-breaking quarters about which they bragged to their shareholders during 2021, with the top 25 companies making more than $205 billion in profits last year.

As the war in Ukraine rages on, this is a time when we can all make choices, choices that reflect our moral fiber. Instead of choosing to do the right thing, oil and gas companies are choosing to take advantage of American consumers.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a May 7, 2022, USA Today article titled ``Oil giants reap record profits as war rages in Ukraine, energy prices soar: Here's how much they made.''

[From USA Today, May 7, 2022]

Oil Giants Reap Record Profits as War Rages in Ukraine, Energy Prices

Soar: Here's How Much They Made

(By Wyatte Grantham-Philips)

As households around the globe struggle with rising energy

bills, some of the world's leading oil giants reported record

profits for the first three months of this year.

Profits for Exxon Mobil, Shell and more also rose by

billions despite significant costs of exiting operations and/

or investments in Russia amid war in Ukraine.

After Russia invaded Ukraine in February, the price of oil

climbed in 2022's first quarter--as countries that rely

heavily on Russia for energy scrambled for alternative fuel

sources amid uncertainty.

The benchmark for global oil prices, Brent crude, averaged

at $102.23 a barrel during the first quarter--67 percent

higher than during the same period last year, according to

the Associated Press. In the United States, for example,

drivers have consequently found increasingly expensive gas

prices at the pump.

Home heating bills and electricity prices also inflated

worldwide--as natural gas prices climbed from $3.50 per

million British thermal units to about $5.60.

High oil and gas prices have boosted the profits of major

energy companies, further contributing to global inflation

and the cost-of-living crisis.

The net profit margin of S&P 500 companies, which include

energy giants such as Chevron and Exxon Mobil, in the first

quarter has been running at 12.3 percent based on estimates

and earnings reported so far, according to FactSet. That's

down from a peak of 13.1 percent in the second quarter of

last year, but above the pre-COVID-19 level of about 11

percent.

``Profit margins should be coming down,'' Lindsay Owens,

executive director of Groundwork Collaborative, a progressive

economic policy research group, previously told USA TODAY.

Instead, she noted, ``they're actually growing.''

Here's a breakdown of the profits and earnings some of the

world's oil giants made in the first three months of 2022:

Shell earnings rise to $9.1 billion

In the first quarter, Shell's adjusted earnings rose to

$9.1 billion from $3.2 billion in the same period last year.

Net income rose to $7.3 billion from $5.8 billion in last

year's first quarter. Shell said that it would also take a

$3.9 billion charge to cover the cost of exiting investments

in Russia, which the London-based energy giant pledged to do

after the invasion of Ukraine.

BP records $6.2 billion profit

BP posted its highest quarterly profit in over a decade--

with the British energy company announcing on Tuesday that

its underlying replacement cost profit rose to $6.2 billion

in the first three months of this year, more than doubling

the $2.6 billion from the same period last year.

BP PLC also said its net loss in the first quarter totaled

$23 billion, after accounting for a write-off of its nearly

20 percent stake in Russian oil producer Rosneft in response

to the Ukraine war.

Both BP and Shell's recent profit reports have contributed

to calls in Britain for the government to impose a tax on

energy companies' windfall earnings, in hopes of helping

consumers struggling with rising energy prices. Prime

Minister Boris Johnson has rejected the idea, saying the tax

would reduce investment in Britain during efforts to

diversify the country's energy industry.

The British government's ``refusal to tax the super-profits

of energy companies is completely unforgivable when people

are too terrified to heat their homes,'' Ed Davey, leader of

the Liberal Democrats, told the Associated Press.

Exxon doubles profits from last year to $5.48 billion

At the end of April, Exxon Mobil reported $5.48 billion in

profits during the first quarter of 2022--also more than

doubling its profits compared with the same period last year.

Revenue for the Irving, Texas-based company was $90.5

billion, far exceeding the revenue of $59.15 billion during

the same quarter in 2021.

But, after abandoning Russian operations due to the war,

Exxon also took a significant hit, writing down $3.4 billion.

Chevron reports $6.26 billion profit

Also at the end of April, Chevron reported a quarterly

profit of $6.26 billion, over four times its earnings of $1.4

billion in the first quarter of last year. Revenue for the

San Ramon, California-based energy producer surged 41

percent, to $54.37 billion.

Sinopec totals $3.45 billion net profit

According to Reuters, China Petroleum & Chemical Corp, or

Sinopec, reported 22.61 billion yuan ($3.45 billion) net

profit under Chinese accounting standards for the first

quarter of 2022, compared to 17.93 billion yuan ($2.69

billion) last year.

Sinopec also saw a 25 percent surge in net income.

Phillips 66's adjusted earnings of $595 million

For the first quarter of the year, Phillips 66 reported

first-quarter earnings of $582 million, with adjusted

earnings of $595 million.

In 2021, Phillips 66 reported a first-quarter loss of $654

million, with an adjusted loss of $509 million.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, today's rule should be an easy one for this Congress to pass, particularly if there were two parties here interested in solving problems rather than just pointing blame.

It is clear that we need to reauthorize the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. WIOA is an investment in ourselves. It is an investment in the American worker and the American economy. WIOA creates and propels economic opportunity, particularly for our youth. Passing the reauthorization bill will help millions of Americans get better jobs to support themselves and their families. It will make it easier for workers to get the skills and training needed to compete in the modern job market, and it will maintain our country's competitiveness in the global economy.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for the rule today and to support the underlying legislation.

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

I thank the Republican whip for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at 12 p.m. for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m.

On Tuesday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. and will recess shortly thereafter. At approximately 11 a.m., the House will meet in joint session with His Excellency Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the Prime Minister of the Hellenic Republic, Greece. Votes are expected in the House on Tuesday thereafter.

On Wednesday, the House will meet at 12 p.m. for legislative business.

On Thursday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business.

The House will consider Chairman Scott's H.R. 7309, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2022, which is an important part of the Make It In America agenda. Now more than ever, businesses need skilled workers, and it is essential that we reauthorize WIOA to expand access to skills training for high-demand, high-wage jobs.

Mr. Speaker, the House will also consider H.R. 7688, the Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act, introduced by Representatives Kim Schrier and Katie Porter. This critical legislation seeks to give the Federal Trade Commission greater authority to rein in excessive gas prices. This bill would protect consumers against irresponsible actors in oil and gas who would artificially inflate prices for extra profit, and it will help Americans struggling with higher energy costs.

Mr. Speaker, the House will also consider two bills under suspension of the rules in recognition of National Police Week.

Mr. Speaker, 23,229 of our fellow citizens have lost their lives, over the course of the existence of our country, in law enforcement, in doing their duties and protecting us and protecting our property.

The first of those bills is H.R. 6943, the Public Safety Officer Support Act, bipartisan legislation that would expand eligibility for the Public Safety Officers' Benefit program to include stress and trauma-related injuries and death by suicide for law enforcement officers and their families.

Tragically, Mr. Speaker, that happens too often as a result of the trauma and stress which our police officers around the country confront.

The second bill is H.R. 2992, the TBI and PTSD Law Enforcement Training Act, again bipartisan legislation, Mr. Speaker, that would require the Department of Justice to develop crisis intervention training tools for law enforcement agencies so they can better equip officers to respond to individuals with traumatic brain injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder, some of the most dangerous confrontations that our officers have.

The House will also consider, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6531, the Targeting Resources to Communities in Need Act of 2022, sponsored by Jim Clyburn and Hal Rogers, the ranking member on the Appropriations Committee. Unfortunately, that failed on suspension, so it is coming back under a rule.

We will also consider S. 2938, legislation to designate the United States Courthouse and Federal Building located at 111 North Adams Street in Tallahassee, Florida, as the Joseph Woodrow Hatchett United States Courthouse and Federal Building, which was sponsored by Senator Marco Rubio, Republican Member of the United States Senate.

The House will consider other bills under suspension of the rules. The complete list of suspensions will be announced by the close of business today.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, we obviously will be ready at any time that the Senate can pass assistance to the extraordinary, brave, and courageous Ukrainians, who are confronting the Russian criminal invasion of their country unprovoked, unwarranted, and unjustified.

We will have that legislation as soon as it comes back here considered, hopefully, on this floor so that we can get some $40 billion in military and humanitarian assistance that is needed in Ukraine so critically.

It is a sad thing that we passed this bill Tuesday night, and it has been sitting in the Senate with essentially now one Senator, one Republican Senator, Mr. Paul of Kentucky, holding it up. I am hopeful that the Senate can move it over to us quickly.

We passed it in an overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion when it was here, so that is also a possibility, Mr. Speaker, to be on the floor next week.

Will the gentleman yield just on that point?

On just that point, the gentleman mentioned this the last time we had a colloquy and pointed out that the drilling and processing of petroleum products are the cleanest in the world. You made that point last week, and you have just made it now.

Does the gentleman know why that is the case?

Correct.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, we have had this discussion before. I am going to take a little bit of time to--because if you just listen to the Republican whip, you would think that America is bereft of production of oil, or of LNG, or of petroleum-based products.

I want to go through what America is doing, what the increase has been, and what can be done.

First of all, the United States is the largest producer of oil in the world--18.61 million barrels per day. Saudi Arabia is about half of that, at 10.8. Russia is slightly less than Saudi Arabia; Canada about half of what Russia is doing; China about half, a little less than half, of what Russia is doing. So, we are the largest producer of petroleum products.

We import some, and that is largely based on the type of petroleum products that we use. On crude oil we produced 11.6 million barrels in February 2022. The all-time high was 12.9, almost 13 million barrels.

When Trump took office, we produced 8.8 billion barrels in January 2017. In 2008, we produced 5 million barrels. We more than doubled that in a decade from that 5 million.

Oil production is up more than 700,000 billion barrels from January to December 2021. It is up. It is very substantially up. Oil production is projected to grow more than 1 million barrels this year alone.

The U.S. rig count--this is important because these are the rigs that are in operation. The U.S. rig count is at a current level of 705, up seven from a week ago, and 257 from 1 year ago--a 57 percent increase.

So the presentation that somehow we are handcuffed in producing petroleum products is simply not true. In terms of natural gas, the United States is also the largest producer of natural gas in the world, at 3 trillion--3.109 billion cubic feet. Russia is second, Iran is third, and China is fourth, and Qatar is fifth.

In December of 2011, Mr. Speaker, the U.S. was producing 82.1 billion cubic feet of natural gas. That was in 2011. In December 2021, we are now producing 118 billion cubic feet, a 45 percent increase in 10 years. Again, to hear the

whip talking about it, it would be as if we have been somewhat constrained and are not doing our job.

Now, I happen to have an export company in my district, Calvert Cliffs, a nuclear facility. Right south of Calvert Cliffs is an export facility for LNG, in Cove Point, Maryland. In October 2021, 66 percent of the deliveries went to Asia, 34 percent went to Europe.

In February and March of this year, it is now 80 percent to Europe and 20 percent to Asia.

Why is that? So that we can meet the cutoff that has either happened because Russia did it or it has happened because the Europeans have stopped buying, in some respects, Russian product.

In any event, at the end of 2021, the U.S. had a peak export capacity of 11.6 billion cubic feet per day. By the end of 2022, that figure is expected to increase by 20 percent. This is not a country that is locking down the production of oil.

In addition, let me point out that there are--I want to get the right figure--oil and gas companies already have 26 million acres of public lands to drill on and over 11 million acres of Federal waters that are currently at their disposal. They have 37 million acres in total. Nothing is stopping these companies from drilling there, if they choose to do so.

The industry, Mr. Speaker, holds 9,000 unused approved permits right now. There are 9,000 approved permits to drill, which they are not using.

Last fall, the Biden administration put 80 million acres of the Gulf of Mexico for auction; unfortunately, the court overturned that. There has not been a pursuit of that, as the whip will point out, since that time. The point is that the response to that offer got a 2 percent response for 1.7 million acres out of the 80 million acres that were offered.

Now, the reason I took some time to go through these figures--nobody ought to be confused by the fact that what we are experiencing is a cause of the President's proper view that we need to move to alternative fuels, a proper view that we need to, as the whip has pointed out, have safe production, safe processing, energy efficient, but also environmentally sensitive production of our oil products. All of which we are doing.

I want to make it very clear that my personal view is we need to make sure that Europe has product, period, for national security reasons and, as the whip points out, for environmental reasons. There ought to be no confusion that oil production in this country is doing very well.

Now, why do some companies say they are not producing a lot? Because they are making a lot of money, a lot of profits, and buying back stock. That enhances the value of that stock. It enhances the value of the company. It enhances the value of the CEO. I don't criticize them for that.

Very frankly, we are at war. A dictator has invaded, without justification, a friendly country, Ukraine. They have fought back with extraordinary valor. What we really ought to do is talk together about how we can make sure that we bring gas prices down.

Now, whether the FTC decides--as the gentleman has pointed out, Mr. Speaker--whether or not there is gouging, if they don't decide that then, as Secretary Granholm observed, they are not sure, so be it. If they are gouging--if they are incorrectly charging consumers a higher price just because they can, then we ought to know about that.

That is what this bill is about, and that is going to be discussed next week. There ought to be no confusion, we are producing a lot of oil. We are producing a lot of LNG. We are trying to provide for our own needs and the needs of those who are confronting tyranny in Europe and are confronting shortages in Europe, which is driving up prices.

For the gentleman to say that these are Biden prices is simply not the case. Biden didn't have anything to do with these prices. We were producing more petroleum products. What happened is the cartels, which have done so--and I am old enough to remember what happened in the early 1970s--the cartels are controlling supply.

As a result, the shortness of supply and the increase in demand--why? Because we dealt with the pandemic. We got shots in arms. Once we got shots in arms and we are not wearing masks on the floor anymore, we are in better shape health-wise.

So what are people doing? They are going out and driving. Demand is up and supply is being kept down by the cartels, not by Joe Biden.

This evidence of the companies not producing more product--I get it. They are getting very high prices.

So why should they produce more product? If you produce more product and if you want to sell more product to make more money--but they are making a lot of money right now and they are buying stock back. The dividends are being paid at a healthy rate. So here we are.

Mr. Speaker, I would tell the gentleman that we are going to deal with both the supply side, which is important, but I also want to make sure that we aren't gouging consumers in the process.

It is unfortunate that at a time of war that we spend all our time blaming our own President.

It is unfortunate that when the Europeans put themselves over the objections of numerous administrations in a place where they had dependence on Russia, Russia has no leverage over us. We don't need Russia for energy. As a matter of fact, we voted overwhelmingly to stop buying any petroleum products from Russia which I supported strongly. On this side of the aisle and on the other side of the aisle we supported that strongly.

The fact of the matter is the gentleman refuses to recognize 80 million acres--now, it was overturned by the courts later--80 million acres. He says all these people want to produce it and they want to look to new places, and they want to find oil someplace. There was a 2 percent of response.

Mr. Speaker, 1.7 million acres out of 80 million acres were bid on. That doesn't sound to me like a stampede to find it.

But let me tell you what he doesn't tell the American people, Mr. Speaker, when he is making that presentation. And you would think the Biden administration has clamped things down. The Biden administration approved more drilling permits in 2021 than the Trump administration approved in the first 3 years they were in office. Let me say that again: The Biden administration approved more permits in the first year of their term than the Trump administration did in the first 3 years of their term.

So when he says: Oh, the Biden administration is shutting it down and that is why we are having the problem; we are having the problem because Russia--the second, third producer of petroleum products in the world--is an irresponsible dictatorship run by one man, essentially, who wants to use petroleum products as leverage. And he had leverage on the Europeans, and he had leverage certainly on the Ukrainians. They used energy as a bludgeon.

In addition to that, the oil companies were making huge profits as these prices kept going up. So they didn't go out and do a lot of drilling. They didn't bid on a lot of new opportunities that maybe they could have produced oil on. They didn't bother.

Why?

Because they were making so much money. Now, that is a business judgment. But the effect of not doing it meant that as demand went up and less of a supply, not just from their actions but from the actions of the Saudis, others, and the cartel, again, three times as many permits were authorized in the first year of the Biden administration than 3 years in the Trump administration.

So don't tell me about Donald Trump and the free market. The free market is one reason why this is happening. I am for the free market because sound business judgments work: we are making a lot of money, with that money we are going to buy back stocks; it will make the remaining stocks more valuable; we are going to pay good dividends; our stock value is going to go up, and everybody is happy--except the consumer, of course, because supply on the world markets--and it is a world market price, it is not Biden's price, it is the world market price--have gone up because demand is up and supply is down.

So I don't know how the gentleman rationalizes his comments about Biden constricting petroleum production when the permits issued are three times--or said a different way--in 1 year three times the number of permits that Mr. Trump issued in the first 3 years of his term. I wish we would get off this and really focus on the enemy. I know there is a lot of politics here, but we are at war. We need to produce energy.

As I told my friend, Cove Point is now sending 80 percent, reversing Asia supply to European supply because they need it because we are at war. And we are up in almost every category of production of petroleum products. So we can go on and on and on about this. Rig counts that are producing oil are up 57 percent--57 percent from a year ago--a 57 percent increase in operating rigs. It doesn't sound to me like Biden is shutting people down.

Biden does want a clean environment. Biden does want us to look at alternative energy. That is what he was talking about in the campaign that he wanted to look to that. But President Biden has made it very clear he understands in the short term--short term could be 25 years or 5 years--in the short term, particularly during the course of this war, we need to have all the petroleum products, and we need to have them for ourselves and for our allies.

Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring to the majority leader the schedule for next week.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the House majority leader.

Mr. Speaker, as we look at some of the bills that will be brought up next week, in the price gouging bill, there are a number of concerns with the way it is not really defined in terms of what price gouging would even be. But as we know, the current state of our energy crisis is really because we, through the Biden administration, have shut down energy production in America.

In fact, just the other day, earlier this week, in the midst of dramatically high gas prices, President Biden announced that he is canceling massive oil and gas lease sales. In the Gulf of Mexico, where there are rich reserves of American energy that could be produced, and Alaska, where there are rich reserves of American energy that could be produced, President Biden said no yet again. And this isn't the first time.

In fact, since he became President, on day one, Joe Biden started attacking American energy. He killed not only the Keystone but the ability to produce and make any new pipelines in America to move energy around our country so that we don't have to import it from countries like Russia. President Biden made us dependent on Russian oil. In fact, he was begging Putin to send us more oil while he is canceling the ability for us to produce our own energy.

You have seen other steps that the President has taken all throughout his Presidency to make it almost impossible to produce American energy, to move American energy, to export American energy. LNG permits are sitting on the desk waiting to be signed for over a year, not a single new LNG export permit to help not just America lower our energy prices but to help our friends around the world, especially in Europe, not need to get energy from bad actors like Putin.

As Putin is, hopefully, going to be pushed to the side in terms of energy that we get, the President continues to turn not to American energy but to turn to other dictators, to go to Iran, to go to Venezuela, while shutting down American energy.

So, we have a bill, and I brought this up to the majority leader a number of times, H.R. 6858, with over 130 cosponsors, a bill that would actually open up American energy so that we can lower gas prices. We can actually do something about it, not try to point the finger and blame this person.

The President tried blaming Putin. Nobody in the country bought it because they knew gas prices were going up dramatically well before Putin invaded Ukraine. In fact, President Biden, by shutting down American energy, allowed Putin to make $700 million a day selling his oil to America and Europe, $700 million a day leading up to the war to help fund the war against Ukraine because President Biden said no to American energy over and over again. This bill would actually fix that.

Now, when you look at the price gouging bill, first of all, Secretary Granholm, the Secretary of Energy, was asked in a committee hearing recently, just about 2 weeks ago, if there was price gouging. She said: I am not sure anyone is saying there is wholesale gouging.

Now, if you read the bill, what we have seen of it so far, it doesn't allow the FTC to take action against the President of the United States, who actually is responsible for the gouging prices, high prices, whatever you want to define ``gouging'' as.

Again, the bill itself is very vague. If you just don't like a high price, you can go blame somebody else, or we could actually do something about it. We could actually bring a bill, like H.R. 6858, that would actually allow us to open up American energy that is here-- great technology, lowest carbon emissions in the world, by the way, as we are now forced to rely on energy from other countries that actually emit more carbon to produce their oil.

I would yield. Especially if the gentleman would tell me we are bringing this up on the floor, I would be happy to yield right now.

Because America has the best standards in the world.

America knows how to do it better.

By the way, it is American innovation that has opened up the ability to produce more energy cleaner than anyone else in the world, and the President of the United States is the one saying no to America. He is not saying no to all energy. He is saying no to the cleanest American energy. But then he is begging foreign countries, which actually produce energy without American standards, begging them to give us our oil at a much higher price than just doing it here in the best place to do it in the world.

It perplexes me why the President of the United States says no to American energy while begging dictators to give us our energy at a higher cost, but that is where we are.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, to say that Joe Biden is not the reason that supply is limited just doesn't match with the facts. Again, just 2 days ago, Joe Biden, not Putin, not the big oil companies, Joe Biden canceled oil and lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico.

Joe Biden canceled lease sales in Alaska.

Joe Biden, as a candidate--this isn't just some new development for Joe Biden--Joe Biden as a candidate for President of the United States said: ``No more drilling, including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill. Period.''

That was Joe Biden as a candidate, and he didn't stop there.

When he became President, on day one he started an attack on American energy. It is crystal clear why.

Now, I am glad the gentleman is bragging about high production levels, but let's not think for a minute that Joe Biden is the reason we have production today. If you understand the oil and gas industry--I was just on a rig in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico 2 weeks ago, one of the largest-producing rigs in the Gulf. Do you know that rig got its first lease in 2002? It took about 10 years to get the first oil. They put private money--all private money; over $10 billion of private money--into developing those leases. There were many leases and permits along the way to finally get to the point where they could bring oil out of the ground, making money to pay back the $10-plus billion, to ultimately get to a point where they could produce over 130,000 barrels today.

If Joe Biden wants to try to dare take credit for those 130,000 barrels today, he needs to go check the record at how long it took to get that oil from lease, permits, out of the ground, to ultimately getting it into world markets, not American markets. Oil companies don't set the price of oil, it is world markets. That oil ultimately depletes, which is why the oil companies are always looking for new opportunities.

The gentleman talks--as the White House has talked--about thousands of permits that are out there. It sounds really good. Understandably, I think people recognize it is a misleading number because many of these permits are for wells that were tried where there is no oil. There is not oil everywhere.

You buy leases to go explore. It is called ``exploration'' for a reason. If it was known reserves--if you go drill right under a gas tank you find oil. If you want to find oil out amongst the natural resources that leases are issued for, you do test wells, you do seismic engineering. By the way, that takes years to go through the process of permitting.

Since Joe Biden has been President they have not issued new leases for seismic. So you might have a 3-mile by 3-mile lease in the Gulf of Mexico that you paid millions of dollars to the Federal Government for years ago, and you are continuing to try to explore those 3 miles by 3 miles that the Federal Government was happy to take the money for, but you can't even get a permit from the Federal Government today to explore that lease--to exercise other permits.

You have to get permits for the pipelines. Not a single new pipeline permit has been issued. Even if you get it out of the ground, the Biden administration doesn't want you to have the ability to move it through to refineries and world markets.

What you see is a recognition by the rest of the world that America has

taken itself off the shelf in terms of the ability to produce energy. Again, Joe Biden is the one who canceled all these sales. Joe Biden is the one who, as a candidate, said there will be no drilling. Cartels love this policy because they know now they control the supply.

America is producing oil today based on permits and actions that were taken years ago. What we are seeing today is an inability to continue developing these leases, which means ultimately they will dry up, as all of those leases do. That is why you are always exploring for the next round of finds.

Those next rounds of finds are not being explored for in America, they are being explored for in other countries, but it is countries that are cartels, countries that are monopolies, so they can control the price.

It is interesting that the gentleman brought up the last time we saw these kinds of prices was in the 1970s under a similar Democrat President who had the same kind of attitude toward American energy. It made our country dependent on foreign energy and it created lines at the pump where people had to wait days to get gasoline.

When you saw President Trump opening up American energy and allowing a free market to produce energy--we don't put those constraints in place when we are operating under a free market, so the cartels have no leverage, Putin has no leverage. The only reason he has leverage is if you have a President like Joe Biden who says we are not going to produce in America.

He said it. He took the actions to follow up on it, including just a few days ago. Amidst high gas prices, he actually took more American energy off the market, giving the cartels more monopoly power to raise prices. I wish we would address that. We have a bill to address that and reverse those bad policies. Unfortunately, I haven't heard the gentleman commit to bringing those to the floor yet.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

So I wish my friend would address that. We have a bill to address that and reverse those bad policies. Unfortunately, I haven't heard the gentleman bring it to the floor yet.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

We will continue this discussion. I would like to see us bring up the bill that would actually address it. We will see this debate go on next week and beyond.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania for yielding the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, today's rule provides for consideration of three bills: H.R. 7309, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act; H.R. 6531, the Targeting Resources to Communities in Need Act; and S. 2938, to name a post office after Joseph Woodrow Hatchett. The latter two bills failed on suspension last week and so now must be considered under a rule.

We were also expecting to consider H.R. 7688, the Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act. But after hours of debate in the Rules Committee on this bill, the Democrats had to pull it for lack of support within their own party. Perhaps they realized that, in fact, there is no evidence of price gouging. In fact, this point was made by the Secretary of Energy, Secretary Granholm, in a recent Energy and Commerce Committee hearing where she said: ``I'm not sure anyone is saying there is wholesale gouging.''

You know what? We could focus instead on increasing domestic production rather than blaming an industry, an industry that has also been suffering supply and demand difficulties that are significantly influenced by global factors and government regulation.

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act reauthorizes programs from the 2014 bill of the same name but makes no needed reforms to workforce development programs. Instead, it increases government control, adds onerous requirements to program administration, and decreases flexibility and the ability to actually achieve results. What are the results that we want? Pulling people out of poverty and enhancing the labor market.

First, the bill authorizes $78 million over 6 years. It does this without making workforce development programs more efficient, without making them tailored to the actual job market, and this funding will further exacerbate what is now becoming increasingly evident as an inflationary crisis.

The bill expands the size of State and local workforce boards, making room for organized labor. It also introduces Federal definitions of job quality, a determination that actually should be made by employers. How is a Federal agency in Washington, D.C. best equipped to determine the job quality for someone in Krum, Texas, a town of around 4,000 people back in my district in North Texas?

This bill also requires burdensome equity reports. If our goal is to pull people out of poverty and get them into the workforce, then every eligible person should have the opportunity to access these programs, not just a certain few who meet certain criteria.

Finally, this bill maintains the current Job Corps system without adapting to the changing needs of eligible youth and continues the inflexibility of the current apprenticeship system. I have long been concerned that many young people do not always recognize their best path to prosperity. For example, many students are conditioned to believe that they can only get a good job by attending a 4-year university. Meanwhile, a licensed plumber or an electrician or a welder can often make more than someone with a university degree. Apprenticeships have been a good way for someone to learn these special trades. However, the program's structure is left over from the time of the Depression in the 1930s and needs to be updated to meet today's vastly different work environments.

Another concern I have is the amount of student loan debt burdening our labor force. Flexible training or certificate programs could lead to less debt by giving jobseekers alternatives to the traditional 4- year university path.

Additionally, we should be looking at ways to encourage the private sector, private employers, to provide student loan repayment programs for their employees, perhaps through a tax credit or other incentive. The Federal Government has a student loan repayment program, and it is a significant incentive for many young people to join public service.

The Republican substitute amendment would have added flexibility into many programs and reformed our workforce development systems to ensure that employee skill development is aligned with employer needs. A huge factor in successful programming is knowing the programs are actually meeting the actual needs.

The Republican substitute amendment would have ensured that States and localities could use funding to survey employers to understand the most in-demand skills.

Mr. Speaker, in the post-COVID world, employers and employees have adapted to different styles of training and workforce environments. The Republican substitute amendment encourages workforce boards to provide services virtually to meet the changing needs of today's workforce. We should be inserting additional flexibility into these programs rather than simply maintaining the status quo, a status quo that was developed many, many decades ago.

Unfortunately, the Republican amendment was defeated during the Education and Labor Committee markup and likely will be defeated when it is considered on the House floor.

Continued partisanship is not the path forward when it comes to equipping the workforce for the modern labor market.

Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, Republicans will amend the rule to consider H.R. 6858, the American Energy Independence from Russia Act, introduced by Ranking Members McMorris Rodgers and Westerman.

In the past 2 months, Democrats have denied consideration of this essential bill five times, choosing instead to continue their assault on domestic energy production through drilling and export restrictions and massive tax increases on producers.

Republicans remain committed to America's energy independence by approving the Keystone XL pipeline, by removing restrictions on the United States liquefied natural gas exports, by restarting oil and natural gas leasing, and protecting energy and mineral development.

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

Mr. Speaker, here to explain the amendment is one of the most lucid speakers that we have on this subject.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), one of the most thoughtful leaders in the House Republican Conference.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), my colleague on the Energy and Commerce Committee and a valuable member of the Republican Conference.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gimenez).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank my colleagues who have come to the floor and spoken in favor of defeating the previous question in order to consider H.R. 6858, the American Energy Independence from Russia Act.

We have seen the damage that one-party rule has done in this town over the last 18 months and, unfortunately, the victims of that damage are the American people. So here, today, in this body, there is a chance to vote against the previous question and bring up this important amendment to begin to get some relief for the American people.

In addition, back in 2014, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, which is also the subject of this rule, was enacted on a bipartisan basis. But once again, one-party Democratic rule could not be satisfied with that, and our colleagues have blocked Republican efforts to try to improve the 2022 version of this bill and find any sort of compromise.

Our workforce development programs need to be modernized and modernized accurately in order to match the changing labor market. But this bill lacks the necessary reforms and, instead, adds burdensome requirements and centralized governance to these many programs. This is not the way to prepare employers and potential employees to thrive in a post-pandemic world.

Again, we have an opportunity to defeat the previous question and consider rationalizing our energy markets. I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question, a ``no'' vote on the rule, a ``no'' vote on the underlying measures, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for the recognition and the yielding of time today.

Mr. Speaker, I spent, like you, much time in Louisiana visiting small businesses and visiting with people who are just trying to make ends meet. It was National Small Business Week a few weeks ago. Visiting businesses, I heard over and over and over again the pervasive impact, the incredible impact, of high gasoline and high energy prices.

Stephanie Towns in Chicago said: I have got kids. I have got to get them to school every day. The gas prices are just so high, I can't make it.

Mr. Speaker, we have had people talk about the inability to visit and take care of grandchildren, the inability to fuel their cars to go to work, the inability to even buy groceries because of the profound cost that we have seen related to energy and related to gasoline.

But this shouldn't have been a surprise to anybody. During the campaign, President Biden said: ``We are going to phase out fossil fuels.'' ``I guarantee you we are going to end fossil fuel.''

The Secretary of the Interior, the Cabinet official responsible for producing American energy, said, ``I am wholeheartedly against fracking and drilling on public lands.''

Incredible, incredible statements.

I will say it again. None of this stuff should be a surprise to anybody. This is a post we put up on January 27 of last year, and we said, ``As a result of President Biden's energy policies, this is exactly what is going to happen.'' Let me say it again, January 27 of last year, 6 days after some of these policies. We are going to have higher electricity bills, higher prices at the gas pump, lost revenue for hurricane protection and flood control and coastal restoration because there is revenue sharing. That is where these dollars go--I have no idea what the President is going to tell these communities whenever we end up having another hurricane on the Gulf Coast--higher delivery costs that would be passed on to consumers; more dependence on foreign energy sources like Iran, Russia, China, and other countries that don't share American values; and a net increase in global emissions.

I remind you, Mr. Speaker, under President Trump, we saw emissions go down an average of 2.5 percent per year. Under President Biden, we have seen them go up 6.3 percent.

Why is this happening? We have seen this administration try to blame price gouging, try to say that we are going to fix it through the Strategic Petroleum Reserve releases. We have heard him even say that we are going to come in, and this is a result of what is happening with Ukraine and Russia.

But let me go back to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. As a result of their announcement to release all of this oil, guess what has happened? China has bought some of it and others. We have actually moved it from one storage cavern to another, and they are paying to store it in the other place. It doesn't make any sense.

Meanwhile, prices have only gone up. I have a feeling Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster are going to be the next responsible entities for higher energy prices.

Don't take my word for it. Look, the Blackstone CEO said we are going to end up with a real shortage of energy. What happens when you have a shortage of supply? Prices go up. If we have a shortage, it is just going to cost more, and it is probably going to cost a lot more; exactly what we have seen. The Blackstone CEO says if you try to raise money to drill holes, it is almost impossible to get that money. They have prevented access.

Here are the real reasons this administration came out and, on the first day, issued an executive order saying that they were going to ban new oil and gas production in the United States. Under this administration, under the Biden administration, we have nearly tripled dependence on Russian oil. They, through this House of Representatives, passed a bill with up to a $10,000 a mile a year pipeline fee. They have increased royalty rates through this House of Representatives by up to 50 percent, and the administration unilaterally announced the same thing.

Mr. Speaker, what happens when you impose higher costs? Do you think the money just invents itself? No. They pass it on to consumers, and boy, have they nailed it. They have nailed it.

Let me quote a former Treasury official for the Biden administration: Lower gasoline prices ``undercuts the administration's climate change goals--where really to care about fossil-fuel consumption, we don't want lower prices for fossil-fuel buyers, we prefer higher prices.'' They nailed it. They nailed it.

The problem is the impact to the average American. We can't afford this. It is undermining our ability--like I said, grandchildren, groceries, energy bills, we can't even afford to live our lives.

Mr. Speaker, as noted by Mr. Burgess, there is a solution: the American Energy Independence from Russia Act. If we defeat the previous question, we are going to be able to bring up this legislation that unlocks American energy, allows us to produce energy.

I don't know what these people have against Americans. Why are we carrying out policies that benefit Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia? Do you know who I care about? I care about domestic energy producers. I care about American workers. Why can't we meet our own energy demands just as this bill does?

Congressman Westerman and Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers have legislation that unlocks American energy, allows liquefied natural gas terminals to be permanent, reduces the regulatory burden. It ensures that the Keystone pipeline can be built, not the policies that Democrats are advocating for where, in the United States Senate, Senate Democrats said they want to urge Saudi Arabia to use their swing capacity to increase world oil supplies or the current runup of world oil prices is effectively a tax on American families' energy discretionary budget, except that the money goes to the OPEC cartel rather than the U.S. Treasury.

Actually, on this one, Mr. Speaker, I fully agree. I urge that we defeat the previous question; we unlock America's energy resources; and we lower energy prices for all Americans.