Further Continuing Appropriations Amendments, 2011

Floor Speech

Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the chairman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, if this wasn't such a serious subject that we're discussing here, the Federal budget and how we're going to fund it for the next 2 weeks, it would almost be funny.

Almost every Member of the Democratic Party that has stood up and talked about this CR has said something like this--even the sponsor of this motion said something along these lines: Democrats know we have to reduce spending. Democrats want to reduce spending. Yet the very first time they have a chance to vote to reduce spending, reductions that the administration agrees with in its 2012 budget and eliminating earmarks, the Democrats vote ``no''? It's strange but true.

In fact, instead of cutting spending, they propose to increase revenue. Or increase taxes.

In this fragile economy with energy prices rising, we should be encouraging more energy and gas development and production in the United States. We need more supply, not less supply. This would reduce the supply.

Oil prices are rising again; and with the wave of unrest in the Middle East and North Africa, there are fears that we could soon see a return to $4 or $5 gas in the United States this summer.

The moratorium put in place following the Deepwater Horizon accident was lifted last fall by the administration; but the administration has issued just one deepwater permit in the gulf, and that was issued just yesterday. The Federal judge called this de facto deepwater drilling moratorium unreasonable, unacceptable, and unjustifiable.

The public will have no patience for more delays, more excuses, and higher taxes if gas prices continue to rise, especially when we have untapped resources here in the United States not being utilized. We need to be encouraging more production in this country, not discouraging production in this country.

Oil and gas from Federal lands, both onshore and offshore, provide an important energy source and domestic jobs and billions of dollars of revenue to the United States. This is a job-killing proposal. This is an issue that needs to be addressed carefully and in great detail. A rush to impose new taxes and fees through a motion to recommit is hasty and unwise. We ought to let the committees of jurisdiction address this issue. I strongly, in the strongest terms, encourage my colleagues to vote against this ill-conceived motion to recommit.

Source