Coastal and Marine Economies Protection Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to this bill and the other two natural resources bills that we will be considering this week.

Let me start by saying that it is unfortunate that we are in this position today. One of the predominant reasons for this disappointment is that I, like many of my colleagues, both support energy development, while looking after our natural and ecological resources.

I love my district dearly. I was born and raised there. I have lived there all of my life and will continue to live there the rest of my life. I value the beautiful coastline that we have in my district.

But blanket bans instituted by these bills across the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf, and Arctic are misguided and are, quite plainly, the wrong approach.

In January of last year, I raised concerns with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management about how this plan would affect Georgia and my constituents. In April of this year, after the Georgia General Assembly passed a resolution opposing energy exploration in Federal waters off of Georgia, I sent a letter to Secretary Bernhardt requesting he exclude Georgia from consideration under this plan.

Mr. Chair, I have taken public service seriously for my entire life. When I was elected to serve the people of the First District of Georgia, I knew that I would be representing the will of my constituents up here. That is why I have been firm in my stance that Georgia be removed from consideration due to concerns from the State legislature.

But while my request to remove Georgia from consideration under this plan stands, I firmly believe it would be unwise and counterproductive to move forward with this blanket ban on U.S. Federal waters.

Knowing these bills would be coming to the floor, I knew I needed to do something to support the request I heard in the district that waters off of Georgia be removed. That is why I, in order to abide by my commitment to my constituents in our community, submitted three amendments to the Rules Committee.

Unfortunately, my amendments, which would empower States to decide what is best for them, remove Georgia from consideration, and address undersea national security, were not accepted by my colleagues across the aisle.

Let me be clear. This wasn't a rejection of including the amendments in the bill. This was a rejection of the ability to even debate them.

My colleagues across the aisle who had championed the will of the States to decide what is best for them when it comes to this topic, would not let my amendments move forward. For those who were so opposed to energy development offshore, I didn't even have the opportunity to have an amendment removing Georgia from consideration debated on the floor of this House.

Mr. Chair, it is really unfortunate that we are voting on these bills which would sacrifice tens of thousands of jobs and millions in economic benefits for political grandstanding.

To step back on domestic energy development is to promote foreign energy consumption. I can still remember when the United States was held hostage to Middle Eastern resources, and we can't allow that to happen again.

While I believe Georgia should be removed from consideration, these bills are not the solution. I oppose these three bills, and I hope my colleagues will actually work with us on real solutions rather than promoting messaging bills.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source