Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act--
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, I rise today to discuss the Biden administration's regulatory blizzard that is restricting energy development and making energy more expensive and less reliable for homes and businesses not only across my State but across the country.
According to data from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, electricity demand is expected to increase almost 5 percent over the next 5 years. At the same time, FERC Commissioners and grid operators are warning of more blackouts and brownouts because powerplants are retiring before new generation capacity can be brought online.
Simply put, energy prices are high because demand is outpacing supply, and Americans are being forced to pay higher prices at the pump and higher utility bills. Because the cost of energy is built into every good and service across the economy, higher energy prices are fueling persistent inflation.
Instead of bringing more supply online to reduce prices, the Biden administration is imposing a regulatory blizzard that seeks to curtail energy production. It starts with the EPA, which is imposing new, costly, unworkable mandates specifically designed to reduce traditional energy production.
Just 2 weeks ago, the EPA finalized four new regulations targeting the power sector, including an overly stringent, new mercury and air toxic standards, or MATS, rule, despite the EPA's own regulatory analysis stating that the existing rule is adequately protecting public health; also, the Clean Power Plan 2.0, requiring existing coal-fired and new gas-fired plants to reduce CO
On top of all these burdensome regulations on the power sector, the EPA is placing onerous new methane regulations on oil and gas producers, and the EPA is implementing a new tax on natural gas.
Collectively, these EPA rules will require the power sector to spend billions of dollars to comply with these regulations or, worse, force the premature retirement of reliable coal-fired baseload plants.
Ultimately, these costs are passed along to electric ratepayers-- families and businesses across the country.
To push back against this regulatory blizzard, I will be introducing a Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval to overturn the MATS rule. Also, I am joining Senator Capito in her efforts to overturn the Clean Power Plan 2.0 rule.
All these things are driving inflation. Essentially, the Biden administration is putting handcuffs on our energy producers, and they are forcing up the price of energy. They are doing it not only with the regulatory burden that creates costs for the plants to continue to operate, but they are also putting baseload energy out of business. That puts us at risk of blackouts and brownouts across the country, and it undermines the stability of the grid. It also forces energy prices higher for every single consumer--every business and every individual. Who does that impact the most? Low-income people. So it goes right at low-income individuals.
If you live in a place like, I don't know, California, maybe Texas, it can get pretty warm, and you want those air-conditioners running. You don't want a brownout right at peak time when you need that power.
On top of the EPA's regulatory onslaught, this blizzard is continuing at the Interior Department, which manages 245 million acres of public land and 700 million acres of subsurface minerals.
Our vast taxpayer-owned energy reserves are a national strategic asset, ensuring that our Nation remains energy dominant. Why, then, is the Biden administration doing everything it can to seemingly lock away access to our taxpayer-owned energy reserves? It makes no sense.
Last month, the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management, or BLM, issued its public lands rule. This rule allows environmental groups to utilize a new conservation lease that will directly conflict with longstanding multiple-use stewardship of Federal lands, including energy development.
So the law says that on these Federal lands, they have to be for multiple use. That is energy development. That is agriculture. That is tourism. That is all of these different uses. But with these new environmental or conservation leases, that will restrict the use of that land to one use. One use is not multiple use. That absolutely violates the law.
Along with Senator Barrasso, I will be introducing a CRA resolution of disapproval to block this rule as well.
The BLM has also finalized a new onshore oil and gas rule and a new venting and flaring rule. These are designed as well to and will drive up the cost of energy production on Federal lands. It affects small businesses. It affects consumers. It affects every single business that uses energy, which is just about all of them. It affects every consumer because we all use energy.
In North Dakota, the BLM is proposing a new--just my State alone--a draft resource management plan that would close off leasing to 45 percent of Federal oil and gas acreage. Texas produces the most oil, and then it is either North Dakota or New Mexico that produces the second most. We produce I think about 1.2 million barrels a day of oil, and we have a lot of Federal land. But this resource management plan that the BLM is putting forward would close off leasing to 45 percent of the Federal oil and gas acreage--45 percent. Half of it.
As far as coal, we provide electricity I think to as many as 12 different States with coal-fired electricity. Ninety-five percent of Federal coal acreage would be closed off under this new rule.
Furthermore, given the scattered nature of Federal minerals across North Dakota, this plan is particularly problematic because it also blocks access to State- and privately-owned energy reserves.
Think about this: The Bureau of Land Management owns the surface acres, but they don't own the minerals. So a private individual may own those minerals underneath, but because the BLM owns the surface acres, that individual can't develop his minerals for oil, gas, or coal because they are blocked by the BLM--patently unfair, absolutely unfair, and I just don't think it is going to pass legal muster.
The BLM's mismanagement of our vast energy reserves reaches to other States as well, including the blocking of new oil and gas production, for example, in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.
The goal of the Biden administration's regulatory blizzard is clear. It is a ``keep it in the ground''--part of the Green New Deal--agenda no matter what the economic or geopolitical costs are.
There is a better approach, and it means taking the handcuffs off our energy producers and unleashing the full potential of our Nation's most valuable strategic asset: our abundant energy resources--oil, gas, coal, all types of energy.
Instead of this regulatory blizzard, the Biden administration needs to work with us to increase the supply of energy to bring down prices for hard-working American families.
So, at the end of the day, it is this simple: The Biden administration is handcuffing our energy producers with one onerous regulation after the next. We just put a few of them up here on these charts. It is just one after the next.
Simple terms: What does it do? It restricts and reduces the supply of domestic energy here at home. That means our cost of energy goes up. That fuels inflation. So every single consumer and every single business now pays more for energy. And who does it hit the hardest? The low-income individual. It goes right at the low-income individual.
So that is the first thing to think about. Second, we compete in a global economy, so if you use energy, that is one of the important costs for your business. If you have low-cost, dependable energy, we can compete more effectively, create higher paying jobs, more jobs, and grow our economy, but all of that is handcuffed as well by the Biden energy plan.
Then let's talk about national security. Energy security is national security. Look at what is going on in the world right now. How is Russia fueling its war machine? With sales of oil and gas. So when we don't produce here at home, that means more people have to buy from places like Russia, from OPEC, from Venezuela--including our allies in Western Europe. It makes them dependent on Russian energy instead of getting natural gas from the United States. That is a national security issue not only for us but for our allies.
It is the same thing with Iran. How does Iran fuel its war machine? With oil. How does it fund Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis? With revenues from oil and gas. When we produce oil and gas, that mitigates, reduces, hurts their ability to continue, particularly if we combine it with the right kinds of sanctions, which we should have, on Iran. It not only mitigates their ability to fuel terror, but it strengthens America, and it strengthens our allies.
The final point I want to make in this regard is, let's talk about good environmental stewardship, good conservation. Who has the best environmental standards in the world? Is it Iran? Is it Russia? Is it Venezuela? Of course not. So how could it possibly make any kind of common sense to produce less energy in America, where we have the best environmental standards, and instead forfeit it to our adversaries, like Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, where they are not only our adversaries--not only our adversaries--but they have the worst environmental standards? That is an energy policy that makes absolutely no sense.
Instead of regulation after regulation after regulation and tax after tax, take the handcuffs off our energy producers. It is good for consumers, it is good for our economy, it is good for national security, and it is good for the environment to let us produce energy here in America. It is just common sense.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source