Jared Huffman

Mr. HUFFMAN

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Haaland), the chair of the National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Subcommittee of the Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I know the gentleman does not mean to disrespect or trivialize the interests of an indigenous tribe that for hundreds and hundreds of years has depended on the Porcupine caribou herd, where its calving grounds and the heart of its migratory road is right in the refuge we are talking about. I know the gentleman doesn't mean to disrespect them by suggesting that their voices don't matter, but we believe that the Gwich'in people's voice does matter. Mr. Chair, you are going to hear us stand up for their interests consistently on this issue. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Levin).

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I might consume. Mr. Chair, listen to ``the people who actually live there.'' I wish we had seen that same concern yesterday when we had a chance to vote on banning offshore drilling in places where Governors, mayors, and overwhelming majorities of actual residents don't want to see their pristine coastlines and their coastal economies despoiled by oil and gas development. I am afraid that my friends sometimes have a selective sense of hearing, but the one consistent voice that always seems to be heard is that of Big Oil. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lowenthal), my friend and the chair of the Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I might consume. Mr. Chair, we have addressed this postage stamp canard that we often hear. This is the postage stamp. It is spread out throughout the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge. It is the world's biggest postage stamp, if it is a postage stamp, and it would certainly despoil the beating heart of America's largest wildlife refuge. Let me just briefly address this other canard, the idea that Congress set aside the 1002 area of the refuge for oil and gas development. If we actually read the law, it was set aside for a study by the Department of the Interior that would determine if it makes sense to open up the beating heart of America's largest wildlife refuge to oil and gas development. And here is an inconvenient fact: The Department of the Interior actually found that this is a uniquely vital natural resource that could be dramatically harmed. That is why, for over 40 years, Congress has declined to take the step that that law envisioned of opening it up to oil and gas development. That is, until the last Congress, when it was slipped in on a party-line vote against the wishes, frankly, of even many of my friends across the aisle. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Barragan).

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva), the chair of the House Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this is not about energy independence. If my friends across the aisle were concerned about energy independence, they certainly wouldn't have lifted the crude oil export ban in the previous Congress. And if they wanted to talk about putting that crude oil export ban back in place, we would have something to work together on and we could actually take a step towards energy independence. But the truth is we are awash in oil right now. We are exporting millions of barrels of oil a day while we continue to import all that big bad imported oil that sometimes my friends across the aisle are concerned about. What this is really about, is money and profits for Big Oil. They make a lot more money when they can export that oil on the world market. That is why, when we talk about developing the coastal plain of the Arctic refuge, no one should be confused by these claims that that oil would go to American consumption. It won't. It will find top dollar on the global export market because that is where Big Oil can make the most money, and that is what the agenda we have heard about is really all about. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We just heard some pretty high sanctimony about the need to listen to the people who actually live there. That might be convincing but for the fact that just yesterday, my friends voted to override the wishes of the people who actually live on the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts, the wishes of their Governors, their mayors, overwhelming majorities of their populations, who don't want to wreck their pristine coastlines and put their coastal economies at risk because of oil development. So, again, let's not pretend that this is about listening to local voices. This is about listening to one voice, and that is the voice of Big Oil. Let's take it back to Alaska. Even in the hotbed of oil development, as my friends would tell it, in the village of Kaktovik, a 2016 poll in that community indicated that that community itself is divided on the question of whether oil and gas development should proceed. So, again, let's not be selective or hypocritical about the voices we claim to care about. Certainly, the voice of Big Oil is well- represented here today in this debate. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. I am prepared to close.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, it is important to remember that we are talking about a Federal wildlife refuge, America's Arctic refuge. Mr. Chair, you would lose sight of that, perhaps, listening to the pretzel logic we just heard from my friend who at the end of the day cannot square the selective concern for local voices when it comes to drilling in a Federal refuge and yet the flouting of local voices when it comes to drilling, in the Federal interest, the Outer Continental Shelf on the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts. The disconnect is dizzying. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), who is one of the Members of Congress who has actually spent some time in the Arctic refuge.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I have a lot of respect and affection for the dean of the House. I am sorry that we are on opposite sides of this issue. I am also sorry that it seems when it comes to oil and gas development in the Arctic refuge, he is listening to only some of the voices in the Alaska community. Mr. Chair, this week, dozens of indigenous Gwich'in leaders flew all the way to Washington, D.C., as they have done many, many times over the years, long before I started working on this bill. They do that because the Arctic refuge is not simply a policy issue for them. It is not about energy supplies, geopolitics, profits, or scoring political points. It is about their entire way of life. Those of us on the floor today don't worry that our entire history and our entire culture hinge on the outcome of this vote. But for the people in the gallery today, the Gwich'in who are in the gallery behind me right now, that is exactly what is at stake. For those on the other side who would have us destroy this wild and sacred area for some petroleum profits, I would ask them this: Why now? Why do we need to do this now? Because once it is done, it is done. The coastal plain will never be the same again after the drill rigs roll in. If we wait, if we conserve, if we protect, and if we treat this special area with the care it deserves, then it will still be there, wild and undisturbed for future generations to enjoy. Or maybe my grandchildren will still be debating Congressman Young's great-great- grandchildren over this same issue on this very floor. Do you know what? That is fine. I don't mind the debate. That is what this country is all about. But recklessly throwing open one of the most special places in this country because a few oil companies want even higher profits and President Trump wants a win? That is not fine. That is not worth it. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to protect the Arctic, stand with the Gwich'in people, and vote ``yes'' on the Arctic Cultural and Coastal Plain Protection Act. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, unfortunately, this amendment is a stall tactic to delay the bill's protections for the Arctic refuge from taking effect until the Secretary of the Interior--a walking conflict of interest who became the subject of investigations into ethical violations just 4 days into his job--has conducted a ``consultation'' process and received formal action from one village, the village of Kaktovik. I wish that same concern for Native American community consultation had existed before the Republican tax bill was amended to insert this drilling mandate without any consultation with Native American Tribes, certainly not the Gwich'in people who may technically live a little further away from the drilling area, but we are talking about people who for millennia have depended on the Porcupine caribou herd that absolutely depends on this pristine beating heart of America's Arctic refuge. So again, we are cherry-picking, I am afraid, which voices matter, which voices get to be listened to, and certainly putting this Secretary of the Interior in charge of that process would be a cruel joke. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, let's do be careful about the facts. More caribou than we have ever had before? That is certainly the case for the Porcupine caribou herd, precisely because it has had the benefit of the wilderness management of the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge so critical to its migratory pattern and its calving. Throughout the rest of the Arctic, caribou are in real trouble. Herds are declining, and a very recent study has confirmed that. So let's take note of the fact that we have one place where caribou are thriving. Let's not wreck that place with oil and gas development. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Haaland), chair of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, as I said, this amendment is a delay tactic to ensure that the current administration will lock in a lease sale before protections can go into place or before they are finally run out of office. It does not require consultation with the Gwich'in people, many of whom are here today. These are the folks who consider the coastal plains sacred. They have relied on the Porcupine caribou since time immemorial for their cultural, spiritual, and physical sustenance, as well as food security. There was no demand for Tribal consultation prior to this little provision being slipped in to the tax giveaway in the previous Congress. What we are hearing today is a very selective interest in consultation that would place the entire process in the hands of a Department of the Interior whose only interest is serving the interests of big oil. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment and ``yes'' on the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment, I am sorry to say, is another delay tactic in order to buy this administration more time to jam through a lease sale. We know that former Assistant Secretary Joe Balash said earlier this year that the leased sale will happen in 2019 and that the administration is running over all opposition in order to make that happen, ignoring concerns of wildlife biologists about impacts from seismic testing and oil development itself. Now, I said ``former Assistant Secretary'' when I referred to Mr. Balash, because he left the Department of the Interior. Just days ago, he was a top official--remember--pushing for drilling in the Arctic Refuge, and he left to take a job with an oil company that stands to profit from the Trump administration's oil giveaway bonanza. You can't make this stuff up, folks. Anyone who thought Teapot Dome was the high watermark of corruption at the Department of the Interior I hope is paying attention to the incredible craven levels of corruption that we are seeing today. These are the folks who this amendment would entrust with the authority to call the shots on whether drilling should proceed. Unfortunately, this is not a serious proposal. I urge my colleagues to oppose it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, the impacts on jobs for Native Americans, for minorities, for women, this should not be used as a pretext for more oil and gas drilling, especially in a pristine place like the Arctic Refuge. These are frontline communities that often bear the brunt of pollution and environmental justice impact. And it is deeply cynical to try to suggest that their interest would be a reason to push for more drilling in a place like the Arctic Refuge. Mr. Chairman, if my colleagues want to work on jobs and the economic interest of these communities, we have got a lot to work together on, but we should do that in a way that looks to the future. Squeezing a little more fossil fuel out of a special place like the Arctic Refuge is not the future. Developing clean renewable energy resources absolutely is the future. I hope some day we can get to the point of working together to create great, well-paying jobs in those future interests instead of trying to look backward to the era of fossil fuels, which I hope we can bring to an end as quickly as possible. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, this is, unfortunately, another delay tactic intended to enable this administration to rush through oil lease sales in the Arctic refuge. And now I am afraid my friends across the aisle are really stretching. This argument that oil development is good for caribou is something we have heard before. It has been debunked every single time we hear it. But, if you really want to see the craven nature of this proposal, focus on the fact that the person who would make the decision, who would strike that balance between oil drilling and caribou protection, is none other than the Secretary of the Interior, David Bernhardt, an oil and gas lobbyist who temporarily left the payroll of the oil and gas industry for a little time in public service and has never stopped representing their interests. And we all know that, a year and a half from now, he will be right back on Big Oil's payroll. So this is not a serious argument. This is a delay tactic. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, well, again, this canard that oil and gas drilling is good for caribou is right out of the ``thank you for smoking'' playbook. It is just not true. And rather than subscribe to these alternative facts, we need look no further than the latest credible science that we have--it is from the 2018 Arctic Report Card--which found that caribou populations across the Arctic have actually declined by 56 percent over the last two decades. Yet, there is one exception to that trend, and that is the Porcupine caribou herd, which has shown strength. This is good news. It shows the importance of the National Wildlife Refuge system and the wisdom of protecting this area in the first place. There is one place in the Arctic where caribou are thriving. It is a place where we haven't done oil and gas development. Let's not wreck the coastal plain of the Arctic refuge. If we care about caribou, then, by all means, absolutely vote ``no'' on this amendment and vote ``yes'' on the underlying bill. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, for those who have flights to catch and would like to get out of here, I think I have some good news. I think we can keep this pretty short and pretty simple because this is a very simple bill. It reflects the proposition that there are some places that are simply too special, that are too unique, that are too environmentally vital, and that are too sacred to indigenous people to wreck them with oil and gas development. Surely, that is something that most Americans and even most people in this body, regardless of their party, could agree upon. In fact, we saw bipartisan votes yesterday that reflected the same proposition that the pristine coasts of the Atlantic, the Lowcountry in South Carolina, and the beautiful California coast are places too special to wreck them with new oil and gas development. If my colleagues believe in this simple proposition, then, surely, it must apply to America's largest wildlife refuge and to the beating biological heart of that refuge, the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. That is the simple thing that this bill is all about. Unfortunately, this motion to recommit is an attempt to distract us from that, to delay protections against this drilling, so that this administration can rush a lease plan forward. Frankly, by that time, it is too late. You can't go backward once you open a place like this up to drilling. Now, my friends' concern for the local voices, some of whom in Alaska want to see drilling, would be a lot more persuasive if, yesterday, we hadn't had a vote where my friends across the aisle thumbed their nose at the local voices in California, South Carolina, Florida, and other places that don't want offshore drilling. So let's be consistent about what local voices matter, and let's acknowledge the reality that the only voice they really are hearing is that of Big Oil. The truth is that this bill will not affect or impact our role in global energy markets in the slightest. The minority seems to believe that we can provide enough oil, if we just drill everywhere, to let everyone in the world break free of Russian gas or Saudi Arabian oil. The truth is that we are, right now, the largest oil producer in the world. We produce over 12 million barrels of crude oil every single day, and we are not going to be able to corner the market. I certainly don't think, in light of that fact, that we should put at risk America's coastal jobs or our biggest wildlife refuge in the Arctic under this misguided notion of so-called energy dominance. Now, I want to just close with two things. First, for those who may still have some fiscal sensibility, I think there are still a few in this House who would like to talk about fiscal issues. Last week, Taxpayers for Common Sense said in an op-ed: ``Drilling in the Arctic Refuge will be difficult and costs from mistakes high. Right now, oil and gas is plentiful and prices are low, so this isn't the time to develop marginal areas. It's not like the oil is going away. So without huge returns, this action will put taxpayers on the hook for a lot of risk with little potential reward. In the current fiscal and energy climate, if drilling proposals in the Arctic Refuge move forward, the joke's on us.'' Let the joke not be on us, colleagues. Finally, I want to close by pointing out that there are some people who have traveled thousands of miles to be with us today, all the way from Alaska, the Gwich'in people, an indigenous community that since time immemorial have depended on the Porcupine caribou herd and its migratory route and its calving grounds that are absolutely in the heart of the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge. Many of them are here today. And, ladies and gentlemen, none of us here on this floor have to worry about what our ancestors and what our family depend on for our way of life, for our culture, for what is sacred for them, depending on the outcome of this vote. For Gwich'in people, that is exactly what is at stake. So, colleagues, let's do the right thing for the environment. Let's recognize that some places are too special to wreck with oil and gas drilling. Let's do right by the Gwich'in people. Vote ``no'' on this motion to recommit and ``yes'' on the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.