tv U.S. House Debates and Approves Continuing Resolution CSPAN December 8, 2016 11:29pm-12:48am EST
environment appropriations subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. mccollum: thank you. mr. speaker, once again this congress has abandoned its responsibility to provide a full-year appropriation. months of hard work were thrown away. pushing important funding decisions down the road. i've heard from families and business leaders in my district, they're worried about the uncertainty that continuing resolutions create in their daily lives. it's not a good way to govern. it's not a good way forward for our country. as the ranking member of interior and environment subcommittee, i am disappointed that this bill only provides five months of funding for priorities like clean air, clean water, national parks, and our treaty obligations. we need to secure funding for hospitals and for schools in indian country and it should be for a full year. we need to manage our national forests and parks and the environmental protections agency
of monitoring toxins that threaten the health of our families. the decision that we have before us today only allows these programs to continue for five months and be in jeopardy again in april this bill does not take an -- this bill does take one important step, however, to assist with lead poisoning crisis in flint, although it's less than what's needed and coming far too late. i want to thank, however, toirman call vert and i want thank chairman rogers and ranking member lowey for their work to ensure this bill does not contain any new policy riders that would impact the interior subcommittee's jurisdiction. my biggest concern with this legislation is not interior related but instead involves the fundamental principle of our democracy. the dig by republican leadership to include language that would
limit a full public debate on senate confirmation for the nominee of secretary of defense is alarming. civilian control of our military has been a corn stone of american democracy since our country's founding. when the secretary of defense position was created in 1947, this principle was enshrined into law. with that, i think the decision moving forward in this bill is deeply concerning to all americans and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new york. mrs. lowey: mr. speaker, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. kildee a member of the committee on financial services. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for two minutes. mr. kildee: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my friend and colleague, the ranking member, for yielding
and for her work on behalf of the hometown -- my hometown of flint, she's been one of the strong advocates. no piece of legislation that i have yet seen in the four years i have been in congress that has come before this floor is perfect. and this bill is included. but, the people of flint, the people of my hometown, today, cannot drink their water. because of actions by the state government and frankly as we know, failure of the federal government through the e.p.a. to alert the citizens of flint to the crisis, to the fact that their water had been poisoned, has caused this community to face the biggest crisis that it's faced in all its years. i am a product of flint, michigan. i grew up in flint. everything i have, everything i am, i owe to that community, and it has faced some terrible struggles over the years.
loss of manufacturing jobs, 90% of those manufacturing jobs gone. . it's a community that had just begun to rebuild itself when this water crisis has caused flint to face the toughest times it's ever faced. it needs every level of government to step up, to provide relief. this bill includes necessary funding to put flint back on a path that allows its citizens to have the basic human right of clean drinking water. so i ask my colleagues, as we consider obviously all elements of all legislation, but also keep in mind, this is the last day of this session of congress in the house of representatives. this is our last chance to
provide that much-needed help to my hometown. this is why i was sent to congress. to fight for the people that i represent. to make sure they have what they need and to make sure that at this moment of their greatest need, that every level of government responds to them and that's why i'll support it -- this bill and i hope my colleagues will join me in that. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky. >> i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas who chairs the all-important homeland security subcommittee on our committee, mr. carter. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. carter: i thank the chairman for yielding, i thank the chair for recognizing me. i am a proud member of the appropriations committee. i have one of the most difficult areas as far as current events in the country, and that's homeland security. and i don't like a c.r. any more than any other appropriator likes a c.r.
but our job is to fund the government. the constitution tells us we are to fund the government. and we have hardworking people like hal rogers who reads the constitution and realizes we've got to take the best medium we can for now and fund the government. so of course -- and i am going to support this c.r. and i hope all my colleagues will. i want to tell you, all of us on the appropriations committee go through the entire process of doing the best we can for the departments we represent, to give them suggestions of leadership and direction, to fund the projects that they need, to take care of the employees that work there, and take care of the mission of every department we have. and to have to feed all that to
a c.r. is painful. but reality is reality, the government must go on. and at this point, in this time, the government will go on with this c.r. and i also wanted to get up and say, as you go through these battles, wonderful people, like my chairman, mr. rogers, and mrs. lowey, fight through the frustrations through the entire committee. and we do this. and yet these great minds, like hal rogers, know how to make things work around here, and they're willing to put in the time and the effort to get it done, no matter how it has to be done. our preference is pass all appropriations bills into law. a necessity at this time is a c.r. and i trust absolutely my chairman is doing the right thing. i yield back.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york. mrs. lowey: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee, from the committee on the judiciary and homeland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentlelady from new york and i thank her for her leadership. i want to associate myself with the words on the chairman, mr. rogers, and thank him for his years of commitment and dedication to this nation. i also want to acknowledge my good friend sam farr and thank him so very much for being so strong and committed to the right things of this body and the nation. i thank him for his service. i join with my colleagues, many have said this is the wrong way to fund the government. that appropriations legislation done by the appropriations committee was ready and done. and i join my colleague who says that we caved. we conceded to not doing our job in the 114th congress.
and for that reason i am very concerned. earlier today we had the wrda bill and i support that bill, for the many projects that are going to help the citizens of texas. i wish i could say the same thing as we go into the continuing resolution. for, yes, we have suffered in the state of texas. there's $1 billion for the army corps of engineers, $1.8 billion for the community development block grant, $1 billion for the federal highway. certainly i would say in the wrda bill is the authorization for helping the people of flint and a reform of the safe drinking act, to make sure we protect people from lead-filled water, protect our children. that is a good thing. but it is not a good thing to only put $100 million in for flint. but i support my colleague, congressman kildee, that this money is needed and the needed now. i think there's more that we can do and we should have done regular order and if we'd done regular order, a few more days,
we would have passed appropriation bills. let me also say that what really skews and takes this bill off its wheels, the c.r., is the waiver, the expedited process of trying to move forward a nominee of the incoming president, violating statutory law that has not been changed in -- has not been utilized in 66 years, since the famous general marshall was selected. why not regular order, hearings, legislation, understanding what this will do to the military civilian separation? mr. speaker, let me simply say, we've got to do our job the right way. this c.r. is not the right way. the american people need us to do our job the right way. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentleman from new york -- the gentlewoman from new york. mrs. lowey: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased to yield one minute to the distinguished
democratic leader, nancy pelosi, from the state of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding and i commend her for her excellent leadership as the ranking member, ranking democratic member on the appropriations committee. as an appropriator myself, i understand the culture, i understand the camaraderie between parties and for that reason i want to commend our distinguished chairman, mr. rogers, for his wonderful service as the chairman of the appropriations committee. i served with him for many years on the committee, i know firsthand his concern for the american people. and i thank you for your service. i know you'll continue as an appropriator, but thank you for your leadership as chairman, mr. rogers. i join in commending one of our members, who is leaving, sam
farr, for his always looking out for america's children. whether it was the health or education especially, in terms of their access to food security. thank you, mr. farr, for your leadership. mr. speaker, it's with great regret that i come to the floor to express my personal disappointment in this legislation. and that i will be voting no. my colleagues have asked me what i think about it, i am not urging them to do anything, but i am telling you why i think his is a missed opportunity. while we all recognize that it was a moral challenge for us to do something for the children of flint, the manner in which was done, was used to get votes for another bill, which i think was wrong. but not to dwell on process, not to dwell on process. let's just look at the facts. the facts are thiels. this will probably be a bill
over -- these. this will probably be a bill ver $1.5 trillion. could have been $170 million appropriated for the children of flint in this bill. some would say that's not authorized. probably $250 billion to $300 billion in this bill is not authorized. so why should the children of flint have to step over a higher barrier? and that's just exemplary of the partisan nature of the bill. we have always worked in a bipartisan way, house and senate appropriations, and especially as we come to the end of the year. but this year it was republican, republican house and senate. again, again, forget process. but what does that mean in terms of priority? it means that families first,
an initiative to help foster kids in our country, something that had bipartisan support, house and senate, was rejected from consideration. it means, again, that the miners, the families of coal miners, who needed -- supposing your business that you worked for, my colleagues, went bankrupt or declared themselves insolvent and therefore your pension and your health care benefits disappeared. how would you feel? well, that's just what happened to the miners. and what was needed is a long-term security for them -- is long-term security for them, that mr. mckinley, a republican, put forth in his legislation, that we hoped could be taken up and be part of this. but it was rejected by a republican -- our republican colleagues. and it was interesting, because one of the other things that is not in this bill, that we hoped would be, would be a correction to last year's bill for
extenders for renewable energy. i was told by the republicans that we don't want to do that for renewable energy because we are fossil fuel guys. fossil fuel guys take care of the miners and their families. the anticipation was that there could be a five-year proposal for pension and health care benefits. right now there's a four-month provision for health care. four months. not five years. not pensions and benefits. just health care. why, why is that so unimportant, when we're talking about people who are part of a mining in our country, that is fading, and they need help and we should be here to help them. so as we reject any proposals for renewables that might provide many, many jobs for
these same people, we are also rejecting their rights to their health benefits and their pensions. the list goes on. but it's really so sad that the flint issue should have been all in one bill, but it was not for reasons i can't explain. and that's why, i can't explain it, i'm not voting for it. that's why i've called upon my colleagues, recognizing the many good things in the bill, but not meeting the needs of the american people. kids, bipartisan support, house and senate, rejected. rejected. now, there is funding for the opioids in this legislation. nd i'm pleased about that. i've been told i should be happy about that because it was one of our requests. i think it was a bipartisan request of everyone, house and
senate, to have the funding for opioids. that's what i thought. that's what i thought. i'm glad it's in the bill. so in any event, for the opportunity lost, for the ignoring of some very legitimate proposals to help the american people, for the rejection of republican suggestions in terms of the miners, for these and other reasons, i will be voting against this, regretfully, because we have tried to work in a bipartisan way in the ast, but this year, instead of four poster, it's two, and that's had an impact on what the con nent of what this is -- on what the content of this is and that has had an impact on the american people. that's why i am voting for the bill. members will have to make their own decisions. but we cannot go down the path of missed opportunities and
just roll over and not speak out and say, this isn't the best that we can do for the american people. and we owe them much better than this bill. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: does the gentlelady ave additional speakers? mrs. lowey: i'm concluding. mr. rogers: i'm sorry, i didn't hear the gentlelady. mrs. lowey: yes. i am concluding, mr. chairman. mr. rogers: does the gentleman yield back? mrs. lowey: no. i'm concluding. are you -- mr. rogers: i'm prepared to close if the gentlelady is. mrs. lowey: i yield. do i have anyone else? no. i will close after the gentleman closes. oh, i can -- ok. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized.
mrs. lowey: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. lowey: mr. speaker, as we conclude debate on the c.r., i want to take a moment to acknowledge the service of chairman rogers. this may be the last bill mr. rogers will manage as full committee chairman. i've appreciated his partnership and his friendship. i support his ultimate goal as chairman to pass individual spending bills, allowing members to exercise their constitutional duty of providing fun -- of providing funding for government programs and it may be an understatement to say he has faced political head winds each year that made regular order out of reach. but i know he will remain as a senior member of the committee and we he will continue to work to pass full year bills.
and i thank you for your partnership. finally, i would be remiss if i didn't take a moment to recognize my departing colleagues on the committee. for 23 years, sam farr has worked tirelessly to support agriculture, ensure the safety of our food and medicine, protect the vitality and cleanliness of our oceans, has also been a tireless defender of our military veterans, the peace corps, and the institution of congress itself. we are also losing the ranking member of the commerce, justice, science committee, mike honda. mike's life experiences, including his early years with his family in a japanese-american internment camp helped shape his efforts addressing income inequality,
lgbtq equity, technology issues that are vital to his silicon valley district. new york and all the of america's middle class is losing one of their strongest advocates with steve israel who has been a champion of our armed forces, clean air, and water, and the u.s.-israel relationship. on the republican side, we will miss scotry gell, david jolly and especial -- scot rigell, david jolly and especially ander crenshaw. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: may i inquire the time remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 8 1/2 minutes remaining. . rogers: i yield myself the rest of the time. as i noted before, this may be the last time i speak before the
body as chairman of the house appropriations committee. let me first say how much i appreciate the friendship and the camaraderie with the gentlelady from new york, mrs. lowey, she's been a pleasure to work with. she's perceptive, she's persistent, and she is a personal friend. and we enjoy a great friendship. without a doubt, the last six years have had their ups and downs. but i've always been proud to serve the people of kentucky, the people of this nation, the appropriations committee, and this great institution that we admire. let me highlight, mr. speaker, just a few of these ups and downs that i mentioned with one f my favorite exercises, a
by-the-numbers reflection on our many shared experiences. here's my by-the-numbers recollection of my last six years at the helm of the appropriations committee. 650. the number of hearings held by appropriations subcommittees. 140. the number of appropriations bills considered on the house floor. 19. the number of appropriations bills considered on the floor in just one month, october of 2013. 12. the number of appropriations bills we should pass every year. 2,1 2, the number of -- 2,122 the number of amendments considered to appropriations bill. 592 and counting, the numb of floor hours spent debating appropriations bill. 70. the number of appropriations
bills enacted into law. hopefully that will make it 71. two trillion, the number of dollar -- of dollars saved in discretionary outlays as a direct result of our appropriations work. too many to count. the number of cigars smoked in my office. and they were not only me. number one. the number of basketball championships won by the university of kentucky. 70, the number of mighty fine members that have served on the committee over the last six years. incalculable, the number of hours our staff, the best on the hill, have put into their tireless work on behalf of all of us. this includes late nights, weekends, holidays, you name it. when we need them, they're
there. and they've done a wonderful job. in particular, mr. speaker, let me take a moment to thank will smith, sitting beside me here, will worked up-- the ranks in my personal office, serving as chief of staff before moving to the committee in 2011. first as deputy staff director and now as staff director. he's been with me for so long and through so much it's hard to calculate. in any year, he is a first round draft pick. and i'm fortunate to have had him by my side these past six years. he has done a wonderful, wonderful job. and to mrs. lowey and our senate
counterparts, chairman cochran, ranking might be mikulski, for all their -- ranking member mikulski, for all their work throughout the process and the great work they have done. today is a bittersweet day but i'm deeply honored to have served this institution at the head of the committee i love. i hope this institution and the people we serve are better off now because of our work other the last six years. and i know that under the steadfast leadership of our new chairman, a dear -- our dear friend, rodney frelinghuysen, the progress we've made will only continue to grow. in addition to will, let me thank the front office staff of he committee, will smith, jim, le oak, steven set, jennifer hing, matt, mara hernandez,
mmy hughes, kaitlyn locouer, kalisha, and then the clerks of the subcommittee, epeople that really do the hard work. tom o'brien. john martins. rob blair. donna s crmbings havez. valerie, dave, susan ross, liz dawson, maureen hollohan, fred higgins, deana behren, and all the staff that works with them on the subcommittees and the full committee. so mr. speaker, in closing, let me thank you for the help that you've given me as chairman of the committee over the years, both on the committee and off. the friendships that we have developed, the camaraderie that develops and exists on our
committee, and throughout the body. it's been a great honor to serve in this role. i look forward to continuing to work in the committee to do the nation's work. thank you all for your collaboration, your consideration, and your companionship over the last six years. with that, the house went on to pass this measure. this continuing resolution goes to the senate with government funding set to expire midnight friday. >> chicago mayor rahm emanuel and a british member of parliament will sit down to discuss the future of cities and how urban centers can engage more politically. from the brookings institution at 10:00 a.m. eastern.
and what the international community can do to combat human trafficking at 1:00 eastern at the center for strategic and international studies. >> every weekend, book tv brings you 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors. here are some of our programs this weekend. saturday at 7:45 p.m. eastern, the discovery of what the term "better off" means to americans today in the book "better off: reinventing the american dream." >> you could fly to the cayman islands theoretically, but if you care about america, you are vulnerable to this government just like every other person in the socioeconomic bracket. i think wealth fools us into thinking we can buy our way out of suffering. >> 9:00 p.m. eastern, fox news anchor megyn kelly talks about
her book "settle for more," which talks about her life as a journalist. >> adversity is a chance to grow and become stronger. if i have had no adversity in my life, and had parents who kept me in a protective bubble for 45 years, how do you think i would handle the past year? a 9:00 p.m. on "afterwards" look at white-collar crime in "why they do it: inside the mind of the white-collar criminal," interviewed by the former director of the enforcement division at securities and exchange commission. worry,do i never need to but many would remorse still stealing a couple hundred dollars from my account. that is the fundamental difference. you can do some pretty devastating things, and not have that gut feeling of doing
something harmful. >> go to book cook's donald trump will pick oklahoma attorney general, scott pruitt to lead the environmental protection agency. a number of republican lawmakers and house science space and technology member, lamar smith, talked about energy and climate policy in the upcoming trump administration. the heritage foundation hosted this event. [crowd noise] >> good morning.
good morning. are my mics now working? that's what i always get to do is be the mic test for everything beforehand. i'm john, director of electors and seminars at the heritage foundation. heritage foundation. it's my privilege to welcome you all here at the auditorium as well as those joining us on our heritage.org website. we're pleased to host this program today with the texas public policy foundation. our housekeeping duty if you're in house to make sure your mobile devices have been silenced or turned off as a courtesy to our speakers. and we're running based on a house vote schedule so some thing this is morning will be a little bit on the fly. my introduction of our first
guest will be very brief. my ome on behalf of my -- colleague, becky norton-dunlap, she was a member they have reagan administration, working in the white house with president reagan as well as attorney general miese and later with don hodell in interior. for those in virginia, she was our secretary of natural resources before coming to heritage. join me in welcoming becky norton-dun lop. [applause] >> good morning. there's lots of energy in this room, i can tell. becky: truly it's a privilege on behalf of jim dement and the board and staff of the heritage foundation to welcome you here. most especially, we want to welcome our friends from texas. the texas public policy foundation is the genesis of this conference. we're delighted to be the co-sponsor with them.
i'm not going to take much of your time before inviting the president of the texas public policy foundation to the podium, but i do want to make a couple of quick points. the idea behind good policy is good politics. if you want to do something that's good politics, you come up with good policies and you advance them. and you help people understand why good policies are good for people. and you know, the reason that's important is because we believe people are our most important, unique, and valuable assets. and the reason that we care deeply about the management of natural resources, the wise management of natural resources and the development of our energy resources is why? because it's good for people. it's good for people. and we think principles need to
guide our policies and principled policies are good for people. that's what conservatives are all about. our job at a think tank, the heritage foundation, is to help create the atmosphere so people who are in office, elected officials and appointed officials, want to do the right thing. and part of the reason that you're here today, i hope, is to learn about some of the right things that need to be done, some of the changes that need to e made as we're going forward, growing economy and improving environment go hand in hand. and what you need to have a growing economy. you need energy. you need energy, you need an atmosphere of freedom, so that you can have economic growth and all of this is good for people. so, we're delighted that heritage -- we're delighted at heritage to be on the frontlines of advancing these good, sound
policies and we're delighted to welcome the president of the texas public policy foundation, brook who is going to do her own welcome and tell us why texas public policy foundation is involved in this. welcome. [applause] brooke: thank you, my name is brooke rollins, i've had the great privilege of leading the texas public policy foundation for 15 years. which is hard to believe. the heritage foundation has been our mentor and model all these years. 15 years ago, there were three of us based in san antonio, texas. today we just hired our 66th employee based in austin, texas in a brand new headquarters building. truly, what a remarkable journey it's been as we see washington, d.c. move more and more in the direction of bigger government and higher taxes and we see the antithesis of that out in the states, especially led by texas. we are so happy to be here and so grateful that you are joining us. this is our third crossroads summit and i know probably many
of you came to the first two, first one was in houston, the second one in austin, then today we are so proud to be in washington, d.c. for those of you from texas, it won't surprise you that we're a little bit of wildcatters down there we decided to take a pretty big risk and say, let's have an energy summit three weeks after the presidential election. and we thought, you know, most people think it's going to be a sad and dark and unfortunate time for the country, especially in this particular issue but the alternative was if we did have a new day and a new president and one that believed in unleashing the potential of our energy sector, that truly everything could change. and today, i will say, here we are, the first two summits, first in houston, like i say, second in austin, we're a little sad and a lit -- were a little sad, a little depressing on what was happening on the national front on this particular issue. today, the big thing that has changed is that there is great hope. thank you for being there with
us. it is an absolute privilege and blessing to partner with the heritage foundation and continue with this great work alongside so many of you. it is a great privilege also to introduce tim chapman with heritage action who will be introducing our next panel and very special guest. thank you for being here. [applause] tim: thank you, everybody. i'm tim chapman with heritage action for america. we're the sistering ornyization to the heritage foundation. we're on the front lines on capitol hill, lobbying for the things we all believe in. we are excited to be in a place now where we're able to, as we say internally, shoot with real bullets and got get some things done over the next few years. this is -- this conference comes at a fantastic time. i'm going to move quickly because we've got votes that are going to be constraining us up here and we're just going to all have to roll with the punches a little bit. we'll have members come in and out as they cast votes on the floor and we'll work to get questions from the audience as we go forth.
but the first member i'd like to introduce is congressman lamar smith. he represents the 21st district in texas, he serves as chairman of the science, space, and technology committee, which as you all know has jurisdiction over a lot of the things we're talking about here today. the committee oversees agency budgets of $39 billion. congressman smith continues to serve on both the judiciary committee and the homeland security committee as well and he's former chairman of the judiciary committee and the ethics committee. he was ranked as the most effective member in the house in the 112th congress in a study jointly conducted by the university of virginia and vanderbilt he also was named policymaker of the year by politico for his work on patent reform legislation during that same congress. so we are very lucky to be able to hear from the congressman today. congressman, please come up and give us your thoughts. [applause] > tim, thank you for --
lamar: thank you for that introduction. let me put that study that had to do with effectiveness in perfect i. when that study came out, that's the first time i had ever heard of the study. i now think it was the most important study conducted in america 10 years ago. the other thing is we looked at the methodology, i think it's suspect. nerls, it may sound good but i'm not quite so sure about it. in in case, it was just -- it is just wonderful to be with you all here this morning. it's not often you feel you are 100% among friends and i do want to thank you, heritage, for hosting us and texas public policy foundation for frankly inviting me to be with you as well. on the texas public policy foundation, i just have to say to brooke, saying they've gone from three in san antonio to 66 in "usa today," we, meaning conservatives, republicans, an even nonconservatives and non
republicans, recognize texas public policy as being the number one think tank in the state. they do such good work. we rely on them in the front lines. they have great influence across the board. and i'm just delighted to be a guest of theirs today and appreciate all they do for so many of us, it's not just limited to texans. it obviously goes beyond our borders. the other confession to make to you all is that one hesitates to say this publicly, i haven't been feeling too well. you can preble tell by my voice, the last couple of days. i'm probably going to excuse myself when i finish. i probably should have just said i need to leave to go vote. anyway, i'm delighted that my colleagues are going to be here shortly or will be coming back after they vote and i'm sorry i'm going to miss being with mike, who happens to be my candidate for the supreme court. pete olson is a good texas colleague on the energy and commerce committee.
gary palmer you'll be hearing from as well, he's a wonderful member of the science committee. i and you all are in good company when we are with them. well, this is an exciting time for american energy. for the first time in eight years, congress can look forward to a partner in the white house who recognizes the prosperity that is possible on the path toward energy independence. but as the obama administration comes to a close, thankfully, the president and his extreme environmental allies remain committed to stopping the energy revolution. since the election, e.p.a. has finalized regulations under the renewable fuel standard and moved to finalize tough fuel efficiency standards for vehicles. more unrealistic mandates won't benefit the environment or lead to innovation in biofuels technology. many of the new requirements are not even achieveable in today's energy market. the white house also continues to delay the construction of
pipeline projects and drags out the permitting process for l.n.g. exports. make no mistake, while president obama may soon leave the oval office, the environmental extremists who fight against american energy are here to stay. they are determined to stop americans from using reliable and affordable power. they would rather see america keep our natural resources as they say, in the ground. even with the united government in 2017, it will be an uphill climb to roll back the damage den by this administration. as chairman of the science, space, and technology committee which has jurisdiction over federal agencies such as the e.p.a. and the department of energy's research and technology budget which is about $9 billion, i will continue to take every action possible to reverse this administration's attacks on american energy. it is my committee's responsibility to ensure that the federal government is efficient, effective, and accountable to the american people. we had our work cut out for us
to accomplish these goals under the obama administration. during this congress, the science committee issued a record 25 subpoenas to retrieve information the administration had withheld from the american people. to put that in perspective, it's been 21 years since a former science committee issued just one subpoena, so the 25th one i signed a couple of weeks ago made me feel very good about how act i and proactive the committee has been. it's going to be a little bit of an adjustment because there won't be near as many subpoenas in the coming congress, i don't think. one subpoena that we issued sought to recover, this is going to sound very familiar, sought to recover some of the almost 6,000 text messages sent and received by e.p.a. administrator geena mccarthy that were deleted from her official mobile device. -- mobile device. she claimed unbelievably that only one of the 6,000 deleted
messages was official even though they were all on her official device. that should give you a sense of the frustration we have felt. time and again, e.p.a. officials have dismissed americans' rights to know and have advanced expense i have regulations without releasing the data they used to justify these burdensome regulations. e.p.a. senior officials have been held in contempt of court, used secret email accounts, and ignored freedom of information act requests. under the current administration, the same discredited e.p.a. pursued the most aggressive regulatory agenda in its history. one of the worst offenders is the obama administration's so called clean power plan. this will cost millions of dollars, cause financial hardship for american families an diminish the competitiveness of american industry around the world with no significant benefit.
e.p.a. justified its approach by claiming its regulations will slow global climate change and reduce carbon emissions. heavy handed regulations and arbitrary emission targets will do lasting damage to our economy and even the oba in a -- the obama administration admits the rule will have little to no impact on global temperatures. regulations should be based on sound science, not science fiction. unfortunately, the president's power plan which he presented as the cornerstone of his paris u.n. conference climate fail this is test. the e.p.a.'s own data shows this regulation would eliminate less than 1% of global carbon emissions and would reduce sea level rise by only .01 of an inch, or the thickness of three sheets of paper. this to me is just, if you wanted to remember one statistic about the paris agreement, the
paris summit, this would be a point to remember. country completely impled -- implemented the agreement they submitted and these agreements were in effect the next 5 years, it would only prevent a temperature rise of one sixth of one degree celsius. we can protect health and promote economic growth at the same time. contrary to what the administration may suggest, these are not mutually exclusive goals. it is vital that the next administration immediately rescind the clean power plan and other rules that threaten the american economy. [applause] lamar: there we go. thank you. regulatory mandates, picking winners and losers in the energy marketplace only benefit this
administration americans are tired of scare tactics and they sent that message loud and clear. the science is clear and overwhelming, but not in the way the president says. statements by president obama and others continually attempt to link extreme weather events to climate change. these claims are of course, unfounded. the fact is, there's little evidence that climate change causes extreme weather events. the lack of evidence is clear. no increased hurricane, droughts, or floods. the ministration's claims are contradicted by the signs from the united nations' panel on climate change. the icc found there is "low confidence that drought has increased in intensity or duration." the same can be said for transient tornadoes and
hurricanes in the last 100 years, despite constant insistence to the contrary. but providing accurate on climate t change is not important in this regulation. the epa put limits on the use of innovative technologies that could help us safely develop our national resources. that is why we need organizations like the texas public policy foundation and the heritage foundation to provide the truth and oppose federal government overreach and those that ignore the facts to advance their own political agenda. 030, whichpassed hr-1 i sponsored. by the way, it also passed in th e senate. at that point, the president tried to veto it, and that slow down the legislation. the legislation requires the epa to base these regulations on
publicly available data. why would the epa want to hide this information from the american people? obviously, one of three reasons. the data does not show what they claim it might show, or the data does not exist, or they are changing the data. the american people have every right to be suspicious when the epa uses political correct science to get the results they want, and then refuses to reveal the data behind those decisions were made. .he epa has a responsibility i will have that information tomorrow. the epa has a responsibility to be open and transparent with the people it serves and whose money it spends. eness will be important in the next administration. regulationsted opposed by the american people and negotiated climate deals that would damage our economy without consulting congress.
i look forward to working with the new president, president-elect trump, to restore transparency and restate the epa into an accountable, science focused agency dedicated to a core mission of protecting our environment. do,n, thank you for all you everyone in this room. thank you to every member of the heritage foundation and the texas policy foundation, for all they have done to get the fax to the american people and help us achieve a point where we will have reliable and inexpensive energy. i want to embarrass two people before i leave. one is senator mike lee, who just joined us one minute ago. senator, irrived, told everybody that you were my pick and hope for the united states supreme court. i still hope that is a possibility. and gary palmer has arrived and he is a wonderful member of the science committee. maybe he will run here as well. the last person to embarrass was
a member of the science committee staff, emily, who is to my right. to my left is doug. and like father like daughter. emily is an initiative taking, smart member of the science committee and if you liked my remarks today, you know who to thank. [laughter] [applause] >> mr. chairman, thank you very much. we hope you feel better and we thank you for youwearing your heritage tie today. upn next, gary palmer will come give some remarks. it is a great privilege to be able to introduce gary. gary, since coming to congress, has been a tremendous asset for the heritage foundation, the conservative movement, a real friend who has been there for us in many different fights.
i had no idea o he walked onto the football team. before coming to congress, gary was the leader of a think tank in alabama. he is a heritage-type through an d through. since coming to congress, he has joined lots of different groups on the hill. he has worked for a lot of our most conservative members, but has the ability about him to not just work with the most conservative members in congress, but to pull a lot of folks in his direction. demeanor and way. people like that he has passion for what he does. i am excited to introduce to you gary palmer. please welcome him to the stage. [applause] gary: and because you are about to call votes, i will be brief.
i do want to say something about brooke rollins. i adore this woman. i just told senator lee, she is our rockstar. i have worked with her for years through the think tank movement. i try to remind our colleagues of the potential of the think tank movement and how they have shipped public policy, not only at the state level, but federal level. they are now 65 state-based think tanks. i think with this new administration there is a lot of optimism for what we can get done. chairman smith mentioned gene mccarthy's emails. we had a hearing on that and she said out of 6000, only one of them was work related. my question was, well, when did you work? [laughter] >> i have teenage daughters who have not texted that much. i want to make a couple points about where i think we've really
got some opportunities for this new administration, particularly with scott pruitt as the nominee for the epa. a lot of people -- the "new york times" headlines, they used to get after george bush. st is a think deniali word either. it is really not about the science. i mean, in terms of policy, we should pursue the science, ok? but from where we sit, it is really about the process, the constitutional process. i have told people that i think it is legitimate for congress to debate climate change and things like that, but we have got to follow the science. but for monumentally, we -- but more fundamentally, we have to follow the constitution. that is what has happened here, particularly within the last eight years. and really, preceding that to a much more limited degree.
we are losing constitutional government. -3880,oduced a bill, hr the stopping epa overreached act. that bill says congress never toe the epa the ability regulate greenhouse gases. john dingell, the longest serving member of the house at least in history, tim. i think he got elected right after i was born and retired in 2014. he was a member of the energy and commerce committee when the spring court said the epa had the authority and the decision was based on the ambiguity of the clean air act. john dingell, a liberal democrat from michigan, said in a energy commerce committee hearing that he and her members of that committee were there when the clean air act was written, and that he was never the intention of congress to give the epa that authority. he said, in fact, it never
occurred to us that we needed to inform the supreme court of that because without even they were not so stupid. that is one of my favorite liberal quotes. the point of the bill is, it is not about the issue of climate change or greenhouse gases. the issue is who makes law. ey, liberalrl law professor, note voted for obama, made this point. he says unless congress uses its authority to rein in this administration, we are in danger of losing the constitution. what we have when we talk about the issue of climate change and the epa is two discussions. one is a policy discussion. it is a science discussion. and we should pursue the science. i think chairman smith mentioned the fact that we had subpoenaed looking --om the epa,
because we want to look at the scientific data they are using to justify the policies they are trying to impose on the people and they refuse to provide those documents. they makes the science suspect. i am not saying it makes the scientists suspect. i am singing makes the data suspect. when you have a situation like that, and the epa is then making a wall, and i is what they are doing senator lee, they are bypassing congress. it becomes problematic. i think what we want to do in congress is first of all, make sure that we are evaluating all of the science, and then we have got to regain our lawmaking authority. that is why i introduced hr-3 880. there is another issue that seems unrelated, but it is totally connected. it is the agency accountability act. senator lee, i think you were on board with that in the senate. it will require that all
appropriated funds go directly to the treasury identified with the agency where they originated, subject to being appropriated by congress. why is that important? because agency are collecting fines and fees in court settlements and are dispersing money without the oversight of congress. consequently, when we tell an agency they cannot do something, like we did with the department of homeland security when the president issued his executive amnesty order, and we said, we are not going to fund that, dhs said, we will pay for it with fees. last year, i think the office management budget reported that $520llected somewhere over billion in fees. $83 billiontified in fines over the last five years and we do not know how much has been awarded through court awards. for instance, the epa got a judgment against volkswagen, and
directed that volkswagen make contributions to what? four of their favorite left-wing charities. all of that money should have gone to congress. i carry my little constitution case. you really ought to on the floor of the house. but section nine, clause seven says no money should be drawn from the treasury. if you have got agencies spending money that congress did not appropriate, i think that's outside your constitutional authority, but it goes on to irregular regular statement. accounts and receipts of all public money should be published from time to time. i know this is shocking, but federal agencies have been acting unconstitutionally. [laughter] >> i think we've got to restore
constitutional authority. that is the most important thing that will come out of this administration. it is the single most important thing we will do with regard to issues like climate change. we have got to have constitutional government restored. we cannot allow agencies to make law, circumvent congress and basically, turn us into a bunch of elected bystanders. and i'm very optimistic that we're going to be able to do that. and i'm tremendously excited about scott pruitt. i had a meeting with got in denver, actually, before i got elected. i won the run-off. to talk about how the attorneys general could work with congress to restore constitutional authority. i think scott was one of the attorneys general who thought against the epa claiming they
were in violation of the clean air act, acting outside their legislative authority. so, going forward, i think that is what we have got to look forward to from this administration. and having a guy like general pruitt as the administrative epa, i'm quite certain he will not be sending out 6000 texts. so, we will not have that issue. when we ask for documents to back up the positions the epa takes that we will get them. what i also know this. if we are able to pass this agency accountability act, and we have the power of the purse again, we can hold agencies accountable. we will be able to restore the authority of congress and make law appropriately. the i really appreciate opportunity to come and speak. i think i'm going to have to head over to the capital and vote in a few minutes. i see my colleague from texas. texas,my dad was born in
but how did i get invited? [laughter] >> thank you. >> thanks, gary. [applause] >> thank you congressman palmer. congressman olson, have you voted? you're ok. so, we can keep going. thank you. just want to make sure we are all coordinated here. now i have the distinct honor of introducing mike lee. mike lee is somebody you know well. he would make a supreme court justice, but my goodness, that would be a terrible loss in the united states senate. he has become in the united states senate a think tank unto himself. the man is an entrepreneurial conservative who is trying to think ahead to where we are right now, trying to tap into what we need to tap into as conservatives. he is putting together right now an agenda that centers on federalism or subsidiary or
localism. but what i like about what he is doing is i think he has identified the major force of what needs to drive the conservative movement over the next decade. we have an opportunity now as conservatives to bring a lot of these new voters who came into our coalition in this last election in for good, to keep them there. but i think the only way you keep them there is by actually having an agenda that empowers locality, that empowers states, that actually deescalates the game of federal politics and makes the game of local politics more important. mike lee gets that. he is the number one guy to look to in the united states senate for all of this stuff. please join me in welcoming mike lee to the podium. [applause] tim.ank you, this is such a great place to be. i love coming into heritage. i especially like it when i get
to hear members of congress talking, as we just heard gary palmer say, that executive branch agencies sometimes violate the constitution. [laughter] >> it is like, i heard some they what,e say, guess professional wrestling is fixed. [laughter] >> i want to thank heritage and the texas public policy foundation for putting this event together. this is a very necessary discussion to have. it is always good to beget heritage, but especially for an occasion like this, to discuss something so important. we have got a government that will soon be under the unified control of the republican party, in the house, senate, and white house. and i for one, can't wait. asay we are most as far away inauguration day as they are from election day. it is coming out as quickly.
i wish we could fast-forward it tabletsthe same way as and iphones have changed the way we watch television come are what we used to call television. my wife has the show she loves to watch. it is called "suits." i, for whatever reason, can't stand it. i'm not even sure i can why. partly because, as a recovering lawyer, i find it insulting to my profession. it portrays us as lawyers as being some sniveling, backbiting, bottom dwelling parasites of society. fair point, i guess. [laughter] >> whenever she watches "suits," iwatch a little ticker at the bottom because we frequently wanted on the tablet, just so it will tell me how far away from the end we are. you could not do that with regular television. you can with this.
there is still a moment i feel like i am experiencing right now. we are getting closer and closer to inauguration day and i cannot wait for this obama show to come to an end. and in some this, of the areas we have been doing this, thanks to organizations like heritage and the texas public policy foundation. we have been doing this in summary different areas of public policy. -- this in so many different areas of public policy. looking at energy policy today, it seems to be of special importance. it is exciting because america's energy renaissance is underway. it's moving forward in a way we have not seen in decades. despite the obama's administration that despite the obama this ration's best efforts. -- despite the obama administration's best efforts. oil and natural gas production has loomed over the last decade,
largely because of the shale revolution. this has taken place as a result of technological innovation. in light of this annoying commercial that used to come on television when i was five years old, i think it was right after "gilligan's island" and right before "the brady bunch." it was put on by a local environment a group. it was of a local boy walking along a beach with a lighthouse in the background. i don't remember the exact words, but he was basically saying, by the time i'm an adult, we will be out of oil and gas and we will not have any more. so, you should all be very scared. that,sometimes scared by but mostly annoyed because i wanted "brady bunch" to start. but our own technological innovation has proven those dire projections wrong. we have been able to produce energy in a more efficient and
environmentally responsible manner. it is something that we have much more of than we anticipated at the time. advancing public policies to support and strengthen this kind of revival of energy production in our country is important for all americans. but it is especially important for our fellow citizens living in rural communities and those who are struggling to get ahead in today's highly competitive and knowledge-based economy. it is especially important for america's poor and middle-class, who are hit more harshly anytime energy prices spike. and every year it becomes harder to earn a decent living and find stable work that can support a family. if you haven't completed some kind of formal education, some kind of formal higher education. interesting though, that some of
the most important exceptions to this rule involve the producing and transportingransporti of our nation's energy resources, jobs involving construction and mining. upwards of 90% of the workers do not have, and perhaps do not need in order to succeed in that industry, a college degree. with these unique challenges in mind, i would like to take a few minutes looking back at energy policy under the obama administration, and thinking about what it might look like, and what i hope it will be like under the administration of president-elect trump. if there's one word that can describe the obama administration's approach to energy, it would be centralization. for eight years, president obama and his allies in congress and his foot soldiers within the
federal bureaucracy have feverishly worked centralized energy regulatory power right here in washington. empowering bureaucrats to micromanage how energy producers operate their facilities, and how they run their businesses, how they fuel and power the united states of america. the question is not whether we protect the environment and regulate energy producers. the question really, that i think needs to be asked, is who decides? is it going to be state officials are federal officials? is it going to be elected senators and representatives who stand accountable to their constituents every two and six years? or is it going to be unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats to whom congress can regulate a vast amount of authority and disclaimers possibility when
they overreach? the fundamental problem with centralized regulatory authority is the tendency of bureaucrats to be ignorant of, and often, entirely indifferent to the interests of the people who live and work in the committees affected by the laws they make. -- work in the communities affected by the laws they make. this is not a knock on the people who work in our federal bureaucracy. other people who are well-educated and well-intentioned and highly specialized. a lot of them are very hard. but there is no doubt that a regulator in washington dc knows less about a coal mine in sevier county, utah, and cares less regulator insult lake city. -- a regulator in salt lake city. a perfect case study involves the extreme buffer zone rule,a
regulation that was recently finalized by the department of the interior. an independent economic analysis estimates this new rule alone would eliminate between $40,00 jobs000 and 70,000 nationwide. think about that. one regulation. 77,000 jobs destroyed, eliminated, gone forever. many of those jobs are in utah, causeone operator has to all three of the minds to shut down completely. these are real people affected in a very serious way by one rule that was never approved by any democratically elected body. part of the story here is that the u.s. department of the interior essentially wrote the rule to address extreme pollution in one single state, west virginia. but then it enforces that same
rule on the entire country, on producers everywhere, whether they are in west virginia or not. approachests-all with centralized regulations, to over one hour regulations, has got to stop. -- which tend to overrun by regulations, have got to stop. now, mining in west virginia is vastly different than long wall even thoughah, federal regulators tend to treat them as if they were the exact same thing. what a deeper problem is that washington bureaucrats are insulated. not just geographically. ly. you an electoral it does not affect them. they are completely detached. the interior department claims rule willbuffer
have a net positive impact on the economy. "we are doing this to you because it will help you." despite the fact it is destroying tens of thousands of jobs in coal mining because, according to interior, it will create this abundance of compliance related jobs. in other words, those jobs that were made, many of them will involve regulating the few people still regulating energy. the report says, and i kid you not, "these official work requirements include conducting biological assessments and other tasks that require employment of highly trained professionals." how comforting. now, if you live in a community where most of your neighbors are well credentialed government workers, this kind of labor market centralized planning probably sounds feasible, and might even sound fair. but if you live in a community where some of your neighbors were iork in a coal mine or oilg
or construction site, you probably know that people cannot just be moved around, going from a mining machine operator one day to a bureaucratic compliance officer the next. every state in the entire union has suffered under the obama administration's march to centralize energy regulation in washington. but the coal miners and rig operators and construction operators in utah have been hit particularly hard because of wh ere they happen to live. utah is what we call a federal land state, which is a term used to describe any of the dozen western states in which a significant portion of land, anywhere from 20% to 80% -- it is a little under 70% in my state -- is owned and managed by the federal government.
utah's share of this amounts to a whopping 2/3. as matters for two -- this matters for two reasons. federal lands maintain a lot of energy resources. it's not going to run out anytime soon. second, energy producers are subject a whole host of regulatory rules. because it is the federal government we are talking about, many of the regulations never go through the normal rulemaking process, but are put in place simply by executive edict. i will give you an example. earlier this year on june 15, the obama administration simply said it would not issue any more coal leases until it could prrof
oof a systematic review. how long would that review take? the rumor is that it will be as long as a few years, but with this kind of regulation by decree, there is no knowing for sure. it is unknown and unknowable. they will complete bother to tell us when they get around to it. imagine you are a coal miner trying to support a family. one day you hear you will be out of a job once your company's holdings expire. on top of that, you have no way of knowing when, or whether you might ever be hired for another job. for far too many of our citizens today, they do not need to imagine this. this does not require any kind of stretch of the imagination. it is how they are living. it is their own reality. it is their own living