North American-Made Energy Security Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I am glad I'm able to rise and speak about legislation that involves one of our closest allies, Canada, and because this is a relationship with Canada, and because it is an international issue, I'm assured that in the process, we will have significant oversight that includes the Environmental Protection Agency, the Secretaries of Defense, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security, and the Attorney General who will have to comment on this application before the conclusion and the final decision. That is good news.

I also think it's important, as we discuss what the potential of this relationship is and the opportunity for oil coming from a friendly neighbor, to be reminded that many of us have said over and over again that we must cease to rely upon foreign oil.

In fact, in a Senate hearing when Egypt was beginning to, in essence, explode, Members said, watch Egypt, and we must lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Obviously Egypt is not one of our major sources of energy, but they were beginning to see the ripple effect in the Mideast of what has been called the Arab Spring. For many of us, we realize that it is a long, long winter as our friends in the Mideast seek peace. So this is an important statement about our commitment to creating jobs, but also it is an important statement on relieving or ceasing the dependence of the United States on foreign oil.

Let me just take one State's economy and realize what would happen with this particular effort. There would be a $2.3 billion investment in the Texas economy, creating more than 50,000 jobs in the Houston area, providing $48 million in State and local taxes, increase the gross State product by $1.9 billion.

But I don't choose to be selfish in my amendment, and my amendment is a sense of Congress that says that it is the sense of Congress that the United States must decrease its dependence on oil from countries that are hostile to the interests of the United States and that Canada has been a strong trading partner, and increasing access to their energy resources will help create jobs in the United States. If I were to add to that, I would say continue the strong relationship between the United States and Canada.

In addition, I think it is important to note that the President of the United States has indicated that we should decrease our reliance on foreign oil.

In this instance, I believe that we are making an effort toward that. Do I believe that we should, in essence, cross our environmental Ts? Absolutely. So I would ask my colleagues to support my amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman very much for his agreement.

Let me give a famous quote: ``Can we all get along?'' I mentioned the different agencies that will have oversight. I have listened to a number of concerns about safety, security, and health. I frankly believe we can do it all. We can increase jobs here up to 300,000 and we can pay attention to the issues of environmental safety and security.

I think it will be important for TransCanada to be able to address the question of spills, important for there to be discussions about protecting against toxic chemicals, important to disarm farmers--when I say disarm them, about fears about the pipeline in their area.

I've worked on pipelines. I know there is a lot of work that goes into construction, a lot of overall State laws that regulate the building. And so putting forward more safety procedures and standards, being concerned about the public health, and making sure that we address the concerns of all Americans is an important step.

But I think we have a bottom line here: the importance of lessening our dependence on foreign oil, and as well to be able to ensure that jobs are created here in America. That's what we are sent to Congress to do: to create these jobs, to stand alongside our neighbors and make sure they have a safe environment while they work, and produce an economy that is known only to America, the greatest economy in the world.

I ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

* [Begin Insert]

I thank the Chair for this opportunity to explain my amendment #6 to H.R. 1938 ``North American Made Energy Security Act,'' expressing the sense of Congress that it is imperative that we decrease our dependency on oil from nations hostile to our national interest. Canada has long been a strong trading partner, and increased access to their energy resources will create jobs in the United States.

I represent the 18th Congressional District in Houston, TX, our Nation's energy capital. I understand the vital role that the oil and gas industry plays in our economy and will continue to play in the future. Our nation needs a concrete and viable strategy for gaining independence from foreign oil and gas sources. These strategies need balance on the one hand this pipeline will create jobs and on the other we must weigh the costs associated. Upon careful and deliberate considerations of our energy needs, our need for jobs, and our need to protect our national security will result in finding a comprehensive energy strategy that works.

Houston is the fourth most populous city in the United States, and is home to nearly 3,500 energy companies and related firms. There is no denying the importance the energy industry has in creating jobs in Houston and across our Nation. I understand the need to put the hard-working people of the Gulf region back to work, and I believe it can be done in compromise with The Department of Interior. We have all heard the famous phrase ``can't we all just get along.'' I believe that we can get along.

I have consistently brought attention to our dependence on oil coming from nations in the Middle East who are in turmoil and have shifting views of the United States. I offer this amendment to call attention to the national security implications of our continued dependency on foreign oil imports. I also, offer this amendment to draw attention to the need to create jobs here in the United States.

The United States imports 49% of all the oil we use. In 2010, 16% of oil imports came from OPEC countries in Africa and South America, with another 9% coming from OPEC nations in the Persian Gulf. Relying on oil imports from hostile regions greatly weakens our energy security.

A variety of events have caused increases in the price of oil over the last decade. In 2003, strikes shut down oil production in Venezuela, increasing oil prices of other OPEC nations. A 2004 terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia caused a sudden increase in oil prices, as did militant attacks in Nigeria in 2003, 2007 and 2008.

With the current political unrest brought by the Arab Spring, our oil supply is constantly threatened by hostile nations, and circumstances beyond our control. Oil is an integral part of the U.S. economy. 40% of the nation's total energy requirements are met by oil, including 94% of the energy used in transportation, and 41% of the energy used by the industrial sector.

Increases in the price of oil affect average American consumers as well as industry. Last week, the average price of gas in Houston ranged from $3.57 to $3.85, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration's weekly retail gasoline index.

Increasing the amount of oil imported from Canada is beneficial to both our energy security and economy. Canada provides a far more stable source of oil than many of the OPEC countries, and importing Canadian oil often yields investment in U.S. infrastructure.

Additionally, Canada has been a longtime ally of the United States, and an important trading partner. In fact, the U.S. and Canada represent the world's largest two-way trading

[Page: H5529]

relationship, and for every U.S. dollar spent on Canadian products, including oil, 90 cents is returned to the U.S. economy.

In addition to providing a stable and reliable energy source, the Keystone pipeline XL, which we are considering in H.R. 1938, will generate $20 billion of private sector investment in the U.S. economy, as well as $585 million in new taxes for states and communities along the pipeline route.

The American oil and gas industry are inextricably linked to our economy, and we must take steps to ensure that the U.S. remains competitive in the energy sector. According to an independent review of the

Keystone XL Pipeline Project and its potential economic impact, during the construction period the pipeline will stimulate $20 billion in new spending for the U.S. economy, spur the creation of 118,000 jobs and generate more than $585 million in state and local taxes for the states along the pipeline route. When Keystone XL is operational, the states along the pipeline route are expected to receive an additional $5.2 billion in property taxes during the operating life of the pipeline, according to the analysis.

However, there are some aspects of the legislation that require further review. I am particularly concerned about the implications of Congress legislating to force a decision of executive authority, as well as the environmental risks that may be associated with the pipeline.

As a Representative of Houston, the nation's energy capital, I certainly understand the importance of the energy industry with regard to our economy. The energy sector creates jobs, and increased energy production is good for the economy, but I do have reservations about the precedent set by this legislation. Ordinarily, we do not require a permit for constructing oil pipelines. However, any pipeline that connects the United States and another country is subject to executive permission, conveyed through a Presidential permit. Historically, any pipeline crossing international borders has required executive permission by way of a Presidential permit. Executive Order 13337 designates the Secretary of State as able to receive applications for Presidential permits. TransCanada submitted its permit applications to the Department of State in September of 2008. Environmental impact review has been underway since January of 2009, and has included public comment periods with extensions for additional input from impacted communities. The State Department is afforded primary jurisdiction over the proposal for the pipeline and expects to make a decision by the end of the year. Forcing the State Department and President Obama to render a decision before completing a thorough review is in no one's interest. Currently several agencies have worked together to determine the feasibility of this pipeline.

The Final Environmental Impact Statement is expected to be released by the EPA in August, at which time, the Secretaries of Defense, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, and Homeland Security, along with the Attorney General, and EPA Administrator will be asked for their views.

It is imperative that we achieve energy independence; we cannot continue to rely on foreign sources of oil from regions of the world which are unstable, and in some cases, opposed to our interests. Accordingly, there is no issue more integral to our economic and national security than energy independence.

We must encourage the development of innovative new technologies that create jobs; we must focus on reducing carbon emissions, protecting consumers, and increasing production of clean and renewable energy sources to truly modernize our infrastructure.

Yet, oil and gas companies provide jobs and serve a valuable need, and must be instrumental in devising a pragmatic strategy for achieving energy independence. We need new solutions, but they must strike a balance that will support continued growth in the oil and gas industry.

However, we must also carefully examine any project that impacts the environment to prevent lasting harmful effects to the nation and the planet. Before a decision is rendered on the current Keystone pipeline XL project, it is essential the proposal be thoroughly reviewed, and all environmental impact be evaluated.

We can work together to find a solution to our energy concerns upon which we can all agree. We can take the time to educate farmers who have valid concerns. We can brief environmental groups and seek their input from the planning stages to the implementation of the Process. We must not forget that the Canadian people also have an interest in protecting their environment. Certain parts of Canada are known for their pristine landscapes and nature conservatories. We must be prepared to advance and listen to the environmental concerns raised in the United States and Canada. We must protect both our citizens and the citizens of Canada.

The pipeline considered in this legislation transports tar sands oil, a high polluting fuel that produces high rates of carbon emissions. We must
consider the potential for leaks and explosions that will release harmful toxins into the environment.

I am confident that both parties can find ways to work with the energy industry, the Administration, and other stakeholders to forge a compromise that will protect the environment without an adverse impact on the industry or consumers.

Rome was not built in a day; however, it was built on the backs of hard workers. At a time when our citizens seeking employment, many are struggling to live from one check to the next, it is imperative to review opportunities presented to us that will create a significant amount of jobs. We must utilize the technology and the resources we have at hand to advance our understanding of how to effectively process and use energy. We must acknowledge that we need energy. Our need for energy requires a comprehensive energy plan that will create jobs and decrease our dependence on countries that are hostile to our interests and indeed to our national security.

The oil resources currently available in Alberta, Canada are second to those available in Saudi Arabia. No one can argue that against the preference of getting oil from a stable country rather than from countries that are constantly in turmoil.

Canada has been our longest and strongest trading partner. Our countries share a common boarder and a common language. The sky will not fall if we build a pipeline. There is no doubt that we have all learned from the damage that can result by accidents caused by poor oversight.

I have thought about both the pros and the cons. I have carefully studied this issue. I believe that we must use the technology of today to advance the technology of the future. A lot has been made today of the recent pipeline explosion--has anyone asked why it occurred? How to prevent it from happening again?

Today, we are faced with looking at ways to decrease our dependence on oil from nations that are hostile to our interests. I support firmly advancing, if not this pipeline, then access to the oil resources in Canada. We must look at the thousands of jobs that can be created. There is .3 billion in revenue that can be generated. In the greater Houston area which has suffered so much job loss this will add thousands of jobs.

The arguments made have been balanced ones; however, when placed in context, when balanced against the need for working parents to have jobs that will feed their children during a time of economic crisis, then we must consider all options. I have long been and will continue to be a champion of the environment. Groups who have championed the environment are the very watchdogs we need to ensure its safety. At this time, our relationship with Canada merits careful and deliberative consideration.

We must consider all of the aspects of this legislation, and I offer this amendment to express the Sense of Congress that, despite how we will individually vote on H.R. 1938, we are committed to reducing our dependency on foreign oil from hostile regions, or those that oppose the interests of the United States.

I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and make very clear to the American people that we are dedicated to finding stable energy sources, reducing fuel costs, and creating jobs.

* [End Insert]

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source