|House Meets At:||First Vote Predicted:||Last Vote Predicted:|
9:00 a.m.: Legislative Business
|11:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.||12:00 - 1:00 p.m.|
**Members are advised that today, the House is only expecting one vote series.
Complete Consideration of H.R. 4480 Strategic Energy Production Act of 2012 (Rep. Gardner – Energy and Commerce/Natural Resources) (Two hours of debate) H.R. 4480 compiles the text of 7 bills – two reported by the Energy and Commerce Committee and five reported by the Natural Resources Committee. This measure seeks to increase domestic oil and gas production and reduce regulation of the energy industry in order to reduce energy prices and boost economic growth. It however, does more to seek to promote domestic drilling and rolls back critical clean air protections as a way of lowering environmental compliance costs for refineries. Specifically, the bill delays the implementation of certain EPA air quality and fuels regulations and creates an interagency committee to review the impact of EPA rules and regulations on energy prices and the broader economy. It also changes the management of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to require additional oil and gas leasing on federal public lands and waters commensurate with a release of the Reserve’s oil.
The bill requires the Interior Department to develop a strategic plan for the nation's energy needs over 30 years and set domestic production goals to meet demand; increases the amount of federal land available for energy production and streamlines the process for approving drilling permits; and sets new standards for judicial review of civil actions filed against energy lease sales or drilling permits. Continued Republican efforts to expedite drilling fails to recognize that our public lands and waters are significantly producing. The Energy Information Administration reports that oil production from federal lands and waters was higher during the first three years of the Obama Administration than the last three years of President George W. Bush. In addition, oil imports are the lowest since 1997.
Despite Republican’s claims, the bill is not a comprehensive jobs plan and will do nothing to put Americans back to work or grow our economy. Members are urged to VOTE NO.
As of last night, the House debated through Rigell (VA) Amendment #17. The following amendments remain to be debated:
Holt (NJ) Amendment #18 Would end free drilling in the Gulf of Mexico by requiring oil companies to pay royalties on previously royalty-free leases in order to receive new leases on public lands
Wittman (VA)/Rigell (VA) Amendment Would expedite the process for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to approve temporary infrastructure, such as towers or buoys, to test and develop offshore wind power in the Outer Continental Shelf
Westmoreland (GA)/Braley (IA) Amendment Would lessen the regulatory burden on deli -style display cases by making Service-Over-the-Counter (SOTC) refrigerator units into a separate product classification
Bass (CA) Amendment #21 Would require the Transportation Fuels Regulatory Committee to conduct an analysis of how to shield American consumers and the United States economy from gasoline price fluctuations and supply disruptions in the oil market by reducing the dependence of the United States on oil
Bass (CA) Amendment #22 Would require the Transportation Fuels Regulatory Committee to assess the impact of human exposure to pollutants in the air, water, and land
Capps (CA) Amendment Would remove the requirements in Title II of the bill to conduct an analysis, issue a report, and delay rules if the Secretary of Energy determines that the analyses are "infeasible to conduct, require data that does not exist, or would generate results subject to such large estimates of uncertainty that the results would be neither reliable nor useful."
Hanabusa (HI) Amendment Would require the Secretary of Interior in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture to include in their Quadrennial Federal Onshore Energy Production Strategy, the best estimate, based upon commercial and scientific data, of the expected increase in domestic production of geothermal, solar, wind, or other renewable energy sources on lands designated as Hawaiian Home Lands
Speier (CA) Amendment Would strike language in the underlying legislation that would require drilling permits to be deemed approved a 60 day deadline, which could expose public lands to undue risk
DeLauro (CT)/Markey (MA)/Frank (MA) Amendment Would require $128 million received from the sale of new leases issued pursuant to this legislation to be made available to fully fund the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to limit speculation in energy markets
Jackson-Lee (TX) Amendment Would establish an Office of Energy Employment and Training, as well as, an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion that would be responsible for all matters relating to diversity in management, employment, and business activities
Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 4348 – Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012, Part II (Rep. Hoyer)
Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 4348 – Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012, Part II (Rep. Black)
|The Daily Quote|
“The tax reform plan that House Republicans have advanced would sharply cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and could leave middle-class households facing much larger tax bills, according to a new analysis set to be released Wednesday. The report, prepared by Senate Democrats and reviewed by nonpartisan tax experts, marks the first attempt to quantify the trade-offs inherent in the GOP tax package… Those changes would benefit virtually every taxpayer, but they also would reduce federal tax collections by about $4.5 trillion over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center… So although households earning $100,000 to $200,000 a year would save about $7,000 from the lower tax rates in the GOP plan, those savings would be swamped by eliminating major deductions, according to the report by the Democratically controlled congressional Joint Economic Committee. The net result: Married couples in that income range would pay an additional $2,700 annually to the Internal Revenue Service, on top of the tax increases that are scheduled to hit every American household when the George W. Bush-era cuts expire at the end of the year. Households earning more than $1 million a year, meanwhile, could see a net tax cut of about $300,000 annually.”- Washington Post, 6/20/12