Joe Barton

Mr. BARTON of Texas

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Would you like a response to some of that?

Mr. BARTON of Texas. I want to make a couple of responses. First, we will talk about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Under the current law, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve cannot be used to manipulate or impact prices. It is specifically in the law. It would take an act of Congress to change that. Under current law, the President has to find a, has to issue a finding, a national emergency on supply that affects the economy of the United States. I think as has been pointed out by Mr. Westmoreland, that would certainly be a hearing that would be worthy in the Oversight subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, perhaps in the Natural Resources Committee that Chairman Rahall chairs. But under current law, we would not be allowed to release oil purely to help alleviate the pricing situation. On the issue of this big oil field, I wasn't listening closely, but is the gentleman referring to the big oil find off the coast of Brazil?

Mr. BARTON of Texas

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Reclaiming my time, if the gentleman from Michigan can get our distinguished Speaker to put an ANWR bill on the floor and let everybody have a free vote, I think I can guarantee you that we are willing to restrict that oil and gas to be used in the Continental United States or at least Canada and the United States and Mexico, at least in the North American Continent. If you can get us to get a vote on the drilling, I would bet we can get a restriction that meets your requirement.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. It's going to be energy focused. You're about to control the time; so you will be able to set that agenda. But we're willing to talk about anything.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. A very complicated chart.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. We will be happy to take that deal. And now, Mr. Speaker, I want to yield to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Hall).

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the distinguished doctor from Georgia, Dr. Tom Price.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).

Mr. BARTON of Texas. They've been in place, and this is a guess, but about 18 months, 2 years. Don't hold me to that specifically.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. I didn't know that we had a specific agenda, but certainly----

Mr. BARTON of Texas

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to remember and honor a true Texas hero. Teague Fire Chief Robert Leland Knight was killed in the line of duty on July 5th. He was only 42-years-old. Chief Knight was a member of the Teague Volunteer Fire Department for almost 20 years. He became chief in 1999. But his involvement in the community didn't stop there. He was also a volunteer paramedic, a member of the Boggy Masonic Lodge No. 739, and active in the First United Methodist Church. He was also a proud graduate of Texas A&M University. I am honored to call myself an Aggie, not just because it is a great institution, but because it produces great men like Chief Knight. Friends and family will tell you his love of his community and his alma mater were only trumped by one thing--his love of family. Chief Knight was a brother, a husband and a father. He is survived by his wife Terri Jo and his children--son, Trent and daughters, Layla and Laura. My prayers are with Chief Knight's family and the town of Teague as they struggle to overcome this great loss. I hope they are comforted by the good memories and the examples of service to others he left with them. Thousands of volunteer first responders put their lives on the line everyday. They run into burning buildings, respond to medical emergencies, and confront criminals--not because it's their job, but because they want to make their community a better, safer place. Chief Knight made Teague and the State of Texas a better, safer place. Even though he is now gone, I am hopeful the way he lived will inspire a new generation of community volunteers because that would be the best way to honor this heroic man.

Mr. BARTON of Texas

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6346. I know it is very similar to a bill that my friend introduced a year ago, and I think we even had a vote on the House floor a year ago on the bill, but there are some changes. Let me give the process argument against it, and then I will give the policy argument against it. The process argument against it is a bill that is introduced on one day, is voted out of the House Floor the next day. That certainly shows a speedy government, but it doesn't show due process under the normal rules of the House of Representatives. It would be good to have a legislative hearing on the bill and to have either a subcommittee and/or, and preferably or, a full committee markup. We have a number of bills right now that have been introduced on oil speculation in the futures markets. My friend, Mr. Stupak of Michigan, has introduced a bill, I have introduced a bill. He and I and the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Dingell, are on a bill together on that issue. We had an excellent oversight hearing yesterday that Chairman Stupak chaired. We have got a commitment from Chairman Dingell that we are going to have a legislative hearing and go through regular order on the oil speculation bill. So we will have an oil speculation bill on the floor hopefully within the month that will have gone through the process, that will be bipartisan. This bill doesn't meet that test. It was introduced in its current form yesterday and we are voting on it on the floor today. Now, as to the substance of the bill. Let me read into the record some information on prices. These are national average gasoline prices in the United States of America. In 2006, the average retail price was $2.56 a gallon. This is the national retail price for self-serve unleaded gasoline. The average retail margin was 14 cents, and the average credit card fee was a little over 6 cents. Last year in 2007, the average retail price had gone up to $2.79. The average retail margin was still 14 cents, and the average credit card fee had gone up to 7 cents. So far, for data that we have this year for calendar year 2008, the average retail price has jumped to $3.37. Now we know as a side note that as of today the average national retail price is a little over $4, I believe $4.07. The average retail margin has gone down to 12 cents, so we have lost 2 cents in retail margin, and the average credit card fee has gone up 8.4 cents. So based on, such as there is, the definition of price gouging in this bill, which if you go over to page 3 of the bill, they don't directly have a definition of price gouging, but in the factors considered on page 3 of the bill it does speak about a price that grossly exceeds--we don't know what grossly means--grossly exceeds the average price at which the applicable gasoline or other petroleum distillate offered for sale during the 30 days prior to a proclamation, which is a presidential emergency proclamation, or grossly exceeds the price at which the same or similar gasoline or petroleum distillate was readily obtainable in the same period. So to the extent we have a definition of price gouging in this bill, it is based on an average price 30 days prior or an average price in the same period. Based on that kind of implicit definition, we don't have price gouging, as far as I can tell, going on in the United States of America today. We do have high prices. There is no question that an average national price of $4.08 a gallon for self-service unleaded is a price that we should not be having to pay right now. But the reason we have that price is not because of price gouging at retail. If the average national price is a little over $4, and that is the average, in some parts of the country I am told out in California it is up over $4.20. In my State in Texas, I did not see but I was told that in Dallas near Love Field they were having a gas price war and you could get a gallon for $3.62, which is a price that is certainly preferable to $4 or $4.50. But according to the statistics that I have, we don't have price gouging going on in the United States of America. The second point. I am not aware of any pending State action on price gouging. And almost every State in the Union has State law that gives the State Attorney General the ability to go after price gougers within the boundaries of that State. Now, my friend from Michigan may have information about some price gouging efforts that are going on at the State level, but I don't have that information. That would indicate that we don't--again, we have high gasoline prices and high diesel prices and high fuel oil prices and high aviation fuel prices, but it is not because of retail or wholesale price gouging. The second issue with the bill, it requires the declaration of a Presidential energy emergency. I am going to read that title or that paragraph: The President may issue an energy emergency proclamation for any area within the jurisdiction of the United States during which the prohibition in paragraph 1 shall apply. The proclamation shall state the geographic area, the gasoline or other petroleum distillate covered, and the time period that such proclamation shall be in effect. The bill doesn't give any definition as to why the President should declare an energy emergency, but it does say that, in order for the bill to go into effect, the President has to declare that emergency. It has the term in the bill unconscionable pricing, but again does not define it. It just says unconscionably excessive, or the seller is taking unfair advantage. It doesn't define that. So here we have a bill that has not been through any kind of a process, no hearings. My good friend from Michigan did introduce a similar bill last year, and so it is obviously something that perhaps at the Federal level--and I say perhaps. I am not saying it should be, but I will admit that it could be addressed. We passed a price gouging bill in the last Congress in this body. It went to the other body, it went to the Senate, and was not passed over there. So I can't say categorically that I am opposed to any price gouging legislation. But I do think, on process grounds, it ought to go through the committee system. And I think on policy grounds, this bill is undefined, it doesn't state the reasons the President should declare a national emergency, it doesn't define what unconscionably excessive is. It appears to base when you would bring a finding based on an average price that was it in a region 30 days before the current period or a price in the region in the current period that is grossly excessive. And, again, it doesn't define grossly excessive. So Mr. Speaker, I know there is a lot of pressure on the Congress doing something. I would state we would be better served to look at the underlying fundamentals, and the underlying fundamental is pretty straightforward: Oil is a fungible commodity. It can be produced anywhere in the world; and once it is produced, it can be shipped and refined anywhere in the world. We are currently consuming worldwide about 85 million barrels of petroleum products, and we have the capacity to produce about 86 million barrels. So we have about a 1 million barrel per day surplus production capacity. That is less than 1 percent. Any time you get the oil markets less than 3 percent capacity in terms of surplus over the demand, you are going to have what is called a very tight market, and the prices are going to tend to spike because there is enough uncertainty in the market that people will bid up, not necessarily in the United States, but in China and India and the developing countries where demand is high and increasing, they will bid these high prices to get that marginal barrel of oil. What we need to do in this Congress on this floor is bring to the floor bills that address the fundamental supply situation. The United States of America is a treasure house of energy resources. We have 2 trillion barrels of shale oil reserves. We have a 300-year supply of coal that we can convert to liquids. We have hundreds of billions of barrels potentially of oil reserves that are off-limits in the Outer Continental Shelf and in the State of Alaska and on the Federal lands and the lower 48 that we have put off-limits from drilling. Only 6 percent of the Federal lands in the United States have been made available for leasing under current law. We need to unlock our treasure house. We need to at least start the process of letting there be an opportunity to increase American made energy for America's families. And if we do that, we won't need to depend on false remedies like price gouging legislation. We can bring to the floor bills that increase our supply. And as our supply increases, the price we have to pay will go down, will change domestically and in the world the fundamental supply/demand equation. That is why we have high prices. We are not meeting the demand for energy in the United States from American-made energy, but we could do a lot better. So I have great respect for my friend from Michigan. I understand it is difficult to focus on the long term in the mid-term strategy. But bringing bills like this to the floor, they may be politically satisfying, but they do not do anything to address the underlying problems. So I would hope that we would vote against this legislation, and then work together on substantive issues that will address the supply and demand inequality. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Well, Mr. Speaker, let me just simply say in closing that with regards to the last speaker's comment about the futures market, I tend to agree there may be something that we need to look at. That's why I'm on a bill with Mr. Stupak and Mr. Dingell to look at the futures market. But on page 3 of this bill, there is a line that specifically excludes the futures market from the jurisdiction of the bill that's before us. We have a Federal price gouging bill on the floor right now that deals with retail and wholesale price gouging when there is absolutely no evidence of States' attorneys general conducting prosecutions of price gouging anywhere in this country. And as I pointed out in my opening statement, the average retail price for gasoline is up while retail margins are down, refineries margins are down. Retail prices are up because the wholesale price of crude oil is up over $130 a barrel. We're not doing anything in this bill to address that fundamental supply problem. We are a treasure house of energy resources here in the United States. We could produce more American energy for America's families and factories. You know, a price gouging bill when you don't have any real evidence of price gouging and where the States that think there's price gouging going on in their States have legislation to deal with that seems to me to be superfluous and symbolic. So I would ask for a ``no'' vote on this legislation, and let's work together on issues that would fundamentally address the supply and balance and bring prices down. With that, I yield back.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time because I only have one more speaker who is not on the floor.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire as to the time remaining on each side.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. I continue to reserve.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Reclaiming my time, it seems to me that given the circumlocutory answer that I got from my friend from Massachusetts, that he did tend to price somewhat above the market, and he seems to at the time take glee in it.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. The statute of limitations under the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has expired. Mr. Speaker, if it is still my time, I want to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. BARTON of Texas. I continue to yield myself such time as I may consume. I am happy to yield to my friend to give us an explanation of his pricing scheme selling ice cream cones at Fenway Park.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. BARTON of Texas

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, so I reserve the balance of my time and am prepared to close.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, can I inquire as to the time remaining on the four sides.

Mr. BARTON of Texas. I reserve the balance of my time.