Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment that prohibits funding in this bill from being used to reduce the number of oil and gas leases issued by the Secretary of the Interior.
Americans saw the impact on the global oil supply when Russia decided to illegally invade Ukraine. Of course, we know that Russia is a world exporter of oil. Gas prices rose over 40 percent. It is a world commodity.
Now, with the uncertainty in the Middle East and another war beginning, we are facing more potential energy shortages. This is what happens when we allow ourselves to be dependent on foreign oil.
The fact of the matter is, like it or not, the world consumes 100 million barrels of oil a day. That is not going to go away anytime soon. We put ourselves and our great Nation's security at the mercy of foreign countries' stability, something that we have little to no control over.
This is not only precarious and foolhardy, but it is also dangerous. Despite the obvious dangers and national security pitfalls, the Biden administration continues to cut oil and gas leases in America and forces us to be more reliant on foreign oil.
Since taking office, the Biden administration has gravely undercut America's ability to become energy independent by canceling gas and oil leases continually from even his first day in office until now.
In September, the Biden administration announced they were canceling the remaining seven oil and gas leases in Alaska. For comparison, the Trump administration proposed a plan that included 47 new potential lease sales.
Energy independence is crucial to our Nation's security. Democrats will have you believe we can survive just fine without oil and gas, but that is simply not reality. In fact, I didn't come to work today on my unicorn, and I wasn't talking to my mermaids in my swimming pool, and the leprechaun next door didn't pay for it all. It is just not a reality that we live in right now.
I think many Republicans, including me, are for an all-of-the-above approach--wind where it is practical, solar, and oil and gas, but if we are going to have a serious discussion about zero emissions or reducing emissions in this country, we need to talk about nuclear energy, as well.
I urge my colleagues to help their constituents by voting for lower energy costs and increased national security by voting in favor of this amendment and in favor of American energy production.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chair, you talk about being an environmentalist, which I honestly think all 435 Members of Congress are, and not throwing partisan bombs, which haven't been thrown right now, but you hear about them in these Halls, unfortunately. Think about what the United States has done in the last 20-plus years. We have reduced our carbon emissions by, now, nearly 25 percent, more than any other Nation in history.
What has China done? They have increased their carbon footprint by 300 percent in that same time.
Why don't we see some of our leftist activists, mostly young people, protesting outside the Chinese Embassy or the consulates.
The United States, as great a country as we are, we are not a planet, and, as an environmentalist, we should be wanting the United States to fulfill the needs of the world.
Again, fact: 100 million barrels a day. How is the wind and solar industry going to be developed? Well, largely based on the energy that oil and gas produce.
In the United States, we have an independent judiciary. We are a rule-of-law nation. We have strong environmental laws. We have an expertise in oil and gas that has been perfected over more than a century.
The fact of the matter is we have to produce oil and gas, and I would rather have the United States do it, rather than Venezuela or a China or a Saudi Arabia, for that matter. I trust our abilities more.
As an environmentalist and someone who wants to protect this Nation and the planet for future generations, my 17- and 14-year-old sons, and, hopefully, their children someday, this is the best path forward.
It is the realistic path forward, and nobody says, because we drill and produce oil and gas in this country, that clean energy can't be developed synchronously. Of course it can, and it has been, but the free markets have to come into play as well to benefit this country and humankind.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chairman, I think this is a really good amendment. It is common sense, and I believe that every Member of Congress that votes for it will feel better about themselves.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment that prohibits the use of Federal funds for community-scale ambient air monitoring.
In simple terms, ambient air monitoring is the long-term assessment of pollutant levels by measuring the surrounding outdoor air. Now, on the surface, that doesn't sound like that much of a big deal at face value. However, the EPA already monitors this.
The EPA has extensive systems and sensors in place that monitor air quality and emissions, regulated primarily by the Clean Air Act. Now, that is at the Federal level.
Let's think about this, too. Having served at the State and local level, they can also monitor their air quality, and, in fact, they do. When I was on city council in Frisco, Texas, we had a battery recycling plant in the middle of the city. The city had kind of grown around it.
We took local action. We didn't ask the Federal Government to do squat. We paid $45 million to buy that plant. We closed it down. That is at the local level. I trust folks at the local and State level far more than I will ever trust the Federal Government. The Federal Government has a role in roads, military, and other things, but these kinds of things, I really do trust the local entities.
What is this program doing, if not to be redundant, because this is already happening at the Federal level with the EPA? Simply put, it is another attempt by some on the left to push a Green New Deal and push their narrative that pollution is somehow racist. I have been in these Halls for 3 years, and I learned crazy things. People claimed that COVID was racist, that the weather is racist. Now, maybe pollution is, too.
They are pushing funding for this program so they can send untrained individuals who they choose with unknown equipment to cities they choose to further a narrative that pollution is somehow skewed towards someone's pigmentation.
As I said, I support science. However, there are insufficient guidelines surrounding third-party individuals or groups that would be conducting the air monitoring, the equipment they will use, or even the data matrix that they will utilize, so we would have these untrained individuals doing this monitoring.
It is kind of seeming to me like putting your thumb on the scale and having a predetermined outcome before the testing even takes place.
Democrats want to allow for these untrained individuals to operate this equipment. The Biden administration continues to push nonsense and their radical agenda and fund them with taxpayer dollars, and this isn't acceptable.
At a time when our country is trillions of dollars in debt, I refuse to stand idly by while this administration continues to waste money in this fashion, and there is no justification for allowing Federal dollars for a program like this.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment and to stop the mismanagement of even more taxpayer dollars.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Chair, to my good friend from Maine, I was raised in New England, and Maine is a lovely State.
Again, Mr. Chair, this is already going on. The EPA already does air quality monitoring, and this is an additional program that is simply unnecessary.
I do trust the great people of the great State of Maine. If they want to monitor their air quality at the State level, they are certainly welcome to do so, as well as at the local level, as we did in Texas, and as we took a proactive approach to an issue that was very important to the citizens in the city that I now represent in Congress that I used to represent on the city council.
I, again, have yet a second amendment that, if Members vote for it, they will feel really good about themselves, as my good friend, Matt Gaetz, just told me.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source