Tim Murphy

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment and note that we all share the highest respect and admiration for all our military, from all branches. But the Air Force proposal to retire more than 200 aircraft and eliminate 9,100 positions impacts 149 U.S. installations, but only one base faces cuts so severe that it would be closed, and that is the 911th Air Reserve Station in Pittsburgh. If the 911th was inefficient, not cost-effective, or served no unique strategic purpose, I would support the Air Force's decision wholeheartedly, but I'm afraid the attempt to close the 911th was misguided, mistaken, and misinformed. That's why I submitted an amendment, along with Representatives Doyle, Critz, and Altmire, to ensure Congress has the ability to review Pentagon decisions and enforce cost and strategic accountability on force reductions. I'm grateful Mr. Young of Alaska worked to combine our amendment with his and that it was adopted in en bloc No. 6. But first I want to say a few words about why this effort was so critical, not just to the 911th Airlift Wing, but the entire country. The decision to close the 911th is the present-day tale of the $400 hammer and the $200 toilet seat. When you don't do proper due diligence, haste makes waste. As my community has witnessed with the Air Force's attempt to close the 911th, the Pentagon is using a loophole to outflank Congress and ignore the intent of the statutes. The Pennsylvania congressional delegation repeatedly sought information about the decision to close our base, but we never received accurate and detailed information about the Air Force's justifications. As the home of seven C 130 Hercules transport planes, the 1,100-plus reservists at the 911th provide critical mission support for global military logistical operations with an active tempo in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Air Force did not perform a base-by-base cost comparison of the 911th against other Reserve and Guard stations housing C 130s. Instead, it did a plane-by-plane cost comparison, comparing the oldest models with the newer ones. Unfortunately, the 911th now has the oldest models of C 130s because the Air Force recently swapped out the newer ones for active duty operations in Afghanistan. With four 10,000-foot runways and a control tower, fire, safety, and security support provided at virtually no cost to the Air Force, the 911th is indeed cost-effective, while other bases cost hundreds of millions of dollars over 10 years for similar and even less services. Since 1976, Congress has insisted on having a voice in Pentagon decisions to close or substantially reduce civilian personnel at military bases. Two statutes have been enacted to prevent base closures from occurring without congressional review. Our crucial amendment prevents the Pentagon from moving forward on a back-door BRAC in violation of congressional intent to review those decisions and ensure base closure attempts are both in the best interest of the taxpayers and our national defense. And it protects the jurisdiction of the House and Senate Committees on Armed Services by requiring force reduction proposals be submitted as part of the President's budget request. This gives Congress two opportunities to review and reverse base closures if they are not in national strategic interest, both in the annual defense authorization and appropriations bills. Our language protects Congress' ability to review force structure changes and requires the Pentagon to complete a thorough and accurate analysis before moving forward. But through the support of Chairman McKeon, Mr. Forbes of Virginia, Ranking Member Smith, as well as the leadership of the Defense Appropriation Subcommittee, who have worked with us on this issue, the underlying legislation prevents the Air Force from making any aircraft retirements or transfers in the next fiscal year. With the NDAA and defense appropriations bills, Congress will now have the opportunity to vote on legislation to save the 911th Airlift Wing for the upcoming year and stop the Air Force from making any decision on massive Guard and Reserve cuts that are misguided, mistaken, and misinformed. Even if both of these bills were enacted, this amendment is still needed, because without it, the executive branch can close any Guard or Reserve base without giving Congress a chance to review the decision. On behalf of the families of the 1,100-plus military families at the 911th, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment since the Young-Murphy amendment has already been adopted.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the gentleman from Oklahoma if he could respond to the notion: All of us want to protect the social safety nets for the truly needy, but we also want to stop abuses within the system that take money from those programs and hurt the poor, for example, people who hide their assets to fraudulently qualify, people who misuse food stamps for alcohol and tobacco. So I would like to ask the gentleman if he is going to be doing more to close the loopholes, to reduce waste and abuse, and reform the system, while really protecting those who qualify.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I have one additional question for the gentleman. In fairness here, will you be bringing forward a bill to the House from the committee that's truly going to reform farm subsidies, produce savings, and result in deficit reduction?

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman for his responses.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Israel is our friend and our ally. Israel is an island of democracy that supports freedom and religious tolerance. It is where a Christian church, a mosque, and a synagogue will peacefully exist on the same street. In neighboring countries, Christians are prohibited from building churches or are prohibited from assembling to worship, and in some cases their churches are burned down. Israel respects and preserves the rich history of many faiths and cultures. Israel promotes invention, creativity, and economic development. Neighboring countries, like Iran, are committed to developing nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them, and it avows to annihilate Israel and to commit genocide against its people. Israel is fighting terrorist groups, like Hamas and Hezbollah, and has suffered real attacks and the threats of future attacks of tens of thousands of rockets rained down upon its people. Israel needs and has every right to develop defenses such as the Iron Dome, David's Sling, and the Arrow missile to defend itself from these very real threats. Israel has been there for us during times of threat and times of peace, and we will be there for them. Israel has been a partner in medical, scientific, and technological innovations. Israel has stood with us to fight terrorist threats against our Nation and other freedom-loving nations. For these reasons and more, there are several facts which we must recognize and support: Israel has a right to defend itself. We will stand firm with them. We will not turn a deaf ear to the anti-Semitic language and to those nations who speak it. We cannot and will not be a part of the dangerous indifference of nations and people to say it is not our problem. We will not be a part of the denial among those who refuse to see the hatred and threat from Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and other nations. We will support Prime Minister Netanyahu's call for negotiated peace with the Palestinian Authority of a two-state solution. So let us approve H.R. 4133, and let us show that when we say ``never again'' that we mean it, because the cost of passivity--the cost of doing nothing--is far too expensive in lives and money.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman. Last decade, when I was a State senator of Pennsylvania, I took on HMOs and plans that made decisions by accountants and MBAs and not MDs. It was important to do that because we found that doctors could not make decisions even though they were supposedly empowered to do that. Instead, there were boards that would make decisions for them. And now here we are with deja vu all over again. We're about to have 15 Presidential appointees--even under the advice of both Chambers of Congress--none of whom are involved with medicine, making decisions with regard to who makes decisions for you in terms of what gets paid and how much gets paid to doctors and hospitals. But as it goes through, what happens if there's a decision that says it's not going to be covered? Can you call the board, itself? No. Can your doctor call the board? No. Can your hospital call the board? No. Can your Member of Congress call the board? No. But, in fact, it would take an act of Congress passed by the House and Senate and signed by the President to override them. So who is this panel, and what decisions can they make? By law, it's people who are involved with finance, economics, hospital administration, reimbursements, some physicians, health professionals, pharmacy benefit managers, employers, people involved with outcome research and medical health services and economics. What's missing from that is any requirement that it might be people who have knowledge of such things as oncology, endocrinology, pediatrics, obstetrics, geriatric medicine, family medicine and surgery, and the list goes on and on. So, in other words, what's going to happen here is not only if you like your doctor you may not be able to keep him or her, but if your doctor doesn't like what's going to be covered, there is nothing he or she can do about that. This is not the practice of medicine; this is the practice of government overtaking medicine. While Americans were begging for us to fix a broken system, what they got was half a trillion in new taxes, half a trillion in Medicare cuts, trillions in new costs, and massive mandates--1,978 new responsibilities of the Secretary of Health and 150 boards, panels, and commissions yet to be appointed. And we don't know what's going to happen. We need to return health care to where it really is going to be fixed.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, when GenOn announced it would close its coal-fired power plant in Elrama, in my district in southwestern Pennsylvania, my community didn't just lose the 50 remaining jobs; it also lost a vital component to economic growth: affordable energy. We should be cleaning up, not shutting down these power plants, but new regulations aimed squarely at coal, oil, and natural gas are making it harder for families to get by, for manufacturers to prosper, and making it more difficult for our country to become energy independent. The Elrama plant is one of 57 nationwide slated to close because of a multitude of costly and unworkable EPA rules set to take effect over the next 5 years. Already utilities are preparing to retire almost 10 percent of coal power in the country. That's 25 megawatts of energy that supports 18.8 million homes. That lost capacity, which is five times greater than what the EPA predicted it would be, is why the North American Electric Reliability Corporation is warning of blackouts and service disruptions. The EPA's new coal regulations will cost the economy $184 billion and 1.4 million jobs in mining, transportation, manufacturing, and power generation. Of course, the expense will be passed along to consumers. Families in my State could see about $400 more a year in their electric bills. And it begs the question, is the President trying to make good on his promise to bankrupt utilities that use coal? These new costs would come at a time when higher oil prices already mean families are paying $2,400 more per year for gasoline than they were just 3 years ago. And if gasoline approaches $5 a gallon, the average family will pay over $3,000 more per year. That's a couple of months worth of groceries, or college loans, or payments on a new car. Unfortunately, instead of increasing oil supplies to bring down prices, domestic oil production on Federal lands has fallen 13 percent in the last year. The President said we have only 2 percent of the world's proven reserves, conveniently overlooking the technically recoverable oil that is under lock and key in the gulf and the shale oil States. We have more oil reserves--800 billion barrels--than Saudi Arabia. By the way, that means for a family that makes less than $10,000 a year, they'll be spending 81 percent of their income on energy. For a family that makes between $10,000 and $30,000 a year, they'll be spending 24 percent of their income on energy. And for every dollar of gasoline, 76 cents is tied up in crude oil. To bring down the price of gas, we don't need higher taxes on oil companies or penalties on speculators. What we need to do is send signals to the world that the United States is serious about using North American energy. We can start with building the Keystone pipeline. Now, many of my colleagues argue that we can count on plentiful natural gas to replace the demand for coal and oil. But while deposits are being unlocked from the Marcellus shale and the Utica shales with new fracturing technologies, natural gas is also threatened with costly overregulation. Eight different Federal agencies are there to stop it. The EPA, the Departments of the Interior, Energy, Transportation, and Agriculture, the Centers for Disease Control, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Securities and Exchange Commission are all working on new regulatory burdens. One national energy organization predicts an EPA natural gas regulation for well sites specifically written to combat ``global warming'' will cut shale gas drilling by between 31 and 52 percent. That means higher energy bills to heat our homes. With our know-how and resources in coal, natural gas and nuclear, America can still become an energy-independent Nation. That's why I introduced an all-of-the-above energy plan that wouldn't raise taxes, borrow from China, or buy from OPEC. The Infrastructure Jobs and Energy Independence Act, or H.R. 1861, expands safe offshore oil and gas exploration, creates over a million new jobs annually, and launches $8 trillion in economic output. It dedicates a portion of its up to $3.7 trillion in new Federal oil and gas revenues for investments in rebuilding our aging infrastructure, power generation, and grid modernization, and helps put us on a path to energy independence. And rather than shutting down coal-fired power plants, my bill invests in the kind of cutting-edge technology being developed at the National Energy Technology Laboratory to clean up coal. So we can either continue to build the wealth of OPEC countries that use our money to fund terrorism, nuclear weapons, and unfriendly policies, or build jobs here at home with energy independence. We can let OPEC pick the winners and losers, or make the USA the winners again. I choose the USA. We have the energy resources to unleash prosperity, but first and only if the Federal Government gets out of the way. The Federal Government should be a partner in prosperity, not build bureaucracies and barriers to stop our energy independence and hurt the American family.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, while we are all aware of the debt this country has hanging over our heads, over $15.3 trillion, we have to also be aware of what it takes to grow our way out of this debt. Part of the way of growing us out of this debt is by having jobs. But there is also another burden hanging over our heads, and that is the cost of gasoline to American families, which adds to their own personal debt. Bear in mind at the last inauguration in 2009, the price of gasoline was $1.83 a gallon. Now, it's approaching $4 a gallon. Think about what that means to the average family where they're spending a couple thousand dollars more per year for gasoline and no end in sight. It's expected that prices will go up to well over $4, perhaps $5, per gallon in some States in the coming months. It is a burden that families, unfortunately, have to bear when they find themselves needing to travel to and from work or to and from other important activities and they cannot avoid this, especially in areas where public transportation is weak or not available. Now, we have put forth a plan in this House to open up some other areas for drilling for our own oil. It has been criticized by some who say it would take too long for that oil to get to market and by others who say it wouldn't have that much of a price difference on oil. I beg to differ. Four or 5 years ago when I put forth a bill, a bipartisan bill with many of my colleagues, to open up the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling, we had noted at that time the impact that would have upon our economy. It's anticipated that there's about $8 trillion worth of oil and natural gas off our coast, and that would lead, if that were invested in our infrastructure, to over 1 million new jobs per year for the next few years. The Federal revenue that would come from that over the next 20 years would be about $2.5 trillion to $3.7 trillion. Even when you're talking about our national debt, those are large numbers. If we invest that in America's infrastructure, noting that for every $1 billion we invest it's about 30,000 to 35,000 jobs, that's a lot of jobs, and it takes care of our many unemployed and underemployed in this country. Well, for those who say it will not lower gas prices, I beg to differ. Certainly, there are studies in the past that have been flawed when they look at only the impact of Alaska in terms of what that would mean. But I would like to put forth some other numbers that are important and that is, if you open up the Outer Continental Shelf also, it has a big impact. Right now, we import perhaps 60 percent or more of our oil. Some of that comes from Canada and Mexico, our North American neighbors; but much of that oil also comes from OPEC nations. Further, OPEC has stated time and time again they would like to see gasoline and oil prices go up so much that oil is at $200 a barrel. It's critical for their economies. And when OPEC leaders get together, it also includes some countries that are not very friendly to us, such as Iran and Venezuela, and other countries which we have defended with our blood and treasure over the years, which has cost us more. But look at this, in terms of international policy, of using our own oil versus OPEC. In 2011, our trade deficit with OPEC was $127 billion. In 2010, it was $96 billion. In 2009, it was $62 billion. And in 2008, the last time we had a big oil price jump, it was $177 billion. That means we're buying more oil from OPEC than they're buying of our own goods. But it goes beyond that. There is also the cost of blood. In our first Iraq war in Desert Storm, one Army group in my district, the Quartermaster Unit, was hit by a scud missile, and it killed many of those soldiers. How do you put a price on that cost of war? And clearly we are battling Iraq because they also invaded Kuwait and were attempting to control more oil fields in the market. Yes, it was about dealing with Saddam Hussein; but, yes, it was also about dealing with control of oil. Look what we're doing now with the costs--patrolling the Strait of Hormuz with our 5th and 6th Navy Fleet out there to patrol the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf to make sure Iran doesn't cut off world oil supplies and cause more problems. But look also at the lives cost in the Iraq war in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Sixty-three Pennsylvanians have been killed, including many from my own district, whose lives were lost defending our causes in Iraq. There are also, in Pennsylvania, 553 wounded. But overall, 4,484 have died up to 2011 in Operation Iraqi Freedom--Americans. Pennsylvania has certainly paid a high price on that; but also know between 224,000 and 258,000 civilians were killed in Iraq directly from warfare. Now, although other countries may have paid us back in dollars for what we spent in first Desert Storm, gulf war, we are bearing the costs of Operation Iraqi freedom. And we can never, ever return to the families the lives of their loved ones, their wives and sons and daughters and mothers. Let's remember that opening up our own oil fields in America is not just about paying the price for families and what it cost them, but also making sure we know we will never have to pay again the price of blood. That reason and that reason alone is enough to say let's be drilling for our own oil.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 91, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, families are doing holiday shopping, planning budgets. So are employers. Now we're being asked to accept a 2-month plan here, $166 per family, and a message of: Trust us and we'll come back. Congress needs to be doing more than rehashing this again. We need to be dealing with unemployment, the deficit, and not just spending more time over 2 months. We're telling families to accept $166 instead of $1,000. For that $166, that's about a week and half of groceries for a family of four. For that same family of four, we're talking about 12 months of gas bills, 11 months of diapers, 10 electric utility bills, 9 months of baby formula, 8 months of cable, 7 months of auto insurance, 6 weeks of groceries, 5 months of gasoline, four student loan payments, three car payments, two credit card bills, and one mortgage payment for your house.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. A few months ago, Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress in this very Chamber. He was welcomed by Members with a standing ovation. Several times during his speech, Congress responded with applause. When a person in the gallery attempted to disrupt his speech, the entire House stood and applauded to show support for the Prime Minister over the disruption. The Prime Minister noted that people can speak out in a democracy that supports free speech. We all know what happens when citizens challenge their governments in Syria, Iran, Libya, and other repressive countries. The Prime Minister clearly laid out his concerns for the Middle East, support for a two-state solution and a clear and unequivocal message against Iran's nuclear weapons development. And following his speech, the joint session of Congress gave the Prime Minister a closing standing ovation. Recently, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman commented on Congress' response to the Prime Minister. He said: ``I sure hope that Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, understands that the standing ovation he got in Congress this year was not for his politics. That ovation was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby.'' Now, Madam Speaker, I don't know if Mr. Friedman was in the Chamber at the time, and I do not know if he interviewed Members of Congress following the Prime Minister's speech. I certainly know he did not speak with me nor many of my colleagues before he came to this wrong conclusion. So for the record, I wanted to make it clear why I and others stood when the Prime Minister of Israel addressed the joint session of Congress. I rose for the Prime Minister because he is a leader of state. We always show respect for such leaders--but in this case, there were greater reasons for our action. I also rose because Prime Minister Netanyahu is the leader of a nation I respect, of a people I admire, and of a culture that I cherish. I stood up in support of a nation that protects religious freedom for all religions even when they are surrounded by other nations that will not permit Christian churches nor synagogues to be built and are surrounded by those whose people burn down Coptic Christian churches. For Israel's tenacity, courage, intelligence, creativity, inventiveness, and endurance over thousands of years, I stood in respect. When Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Israel must be ``wiped off the map'' and ``the uniform shout of the Iranian nation is forever `death to Israel' '' and that the Western powers ``launched the myth of the Holocaust . . . They lied; they put on a show and then they support the Jews,'' I stood up in support of Israel and stood against these hostile and hateful and false comments. While Iran continues to develop nuclear weapons and openly threatens Israel and the Middle East and Europe, while some may cower in fearful silence, we will stand against nuclear proliferation by these rogue nations. That is why we passed strong sanctions against Iran and why we support all options to protect our friends. We stood in support of Israel's continuous support of the safety and security of the people of the United States. When we were attacked by terrorists, Israel stood by us and continues to stand by us, and they take personal risks in doing so. We stood to show our gratitude to the people of Israel. Now, like any relationship, ours is not perfect nor without differing thoughts and opinions. To be sure, there are times when we honestly disagree. That is the nature of governments elected by the people. There will be debate, but we must use these as opportunities to learn from each other, to reaffirm our promises, and to grow. All of that strengthens our bonds because we put respect, true resolution and a commitment to peace above all else. Mr. Friedman would do well to understand the true issues behind our support. We are jointly committed to peace, to a two-state solution, to fighting terrorism, to supporting the tolerance of other religions, to supporting democracy, to standing up against those who would rain thousands of rockets on an innocent people. We will not be silent. We will speak out against terrorism, and we will stand together. So, for all of these things, I and others stood in respect, in support, and in an open show of our joint commitment to peace and civility. And together we will stand again.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce today's guest chaplain, Pastor Bryan Thiessen of the Journey Assembly of God Church in Bridgeville, Pennsylvania. Since the first House chaplain was elected by Congress in 1789, it has been tradition for a prayer to open the House's daily floor proceedings, and I thank the Office of the Chaplain and the Reverend Patrick Conroy for allowing Pastor Bryan Thiessen to have the opportunity to continue this tradition and lead us in prayer. Pastor Thiessen joined the Bridgeville community in April of 2011, along with his wife, CaRanda Thiessen, and has been a driving force in improving the community since the moment he stepped foot in southwestern Pennsylvania. During Pastor Thiessen's tenure, he has seen his parish grow in size, which can directly be attributed to the exceptional work he has done in leading his church. He has also been elected president of the Bridgeville Ministers Association, where he leads Bridgeville-area churches, nonprofit organizations, and community outreach events. He also serves as the Christian education director of the Southwest Metro section of the Assemblies of God. As director, Pastor Thiessen guides 35 churches in Christian education programs and ministries in the southwestern Pennsylvania region. I especially thank Pastor Thiessen and members of his parish for making the trip to Washington this morning. The House is very pleased to have all of them, and we are excited to hear the words of the Lord he has chosen to share with us today.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, this week Speaker Boehner announced a bill that will be introduced soon to Congress to deal with our jobs issue. It's not one that raises taxes. It's not one which is going to add to the deficit. It is the American Energy & Infrastructure Jobs Act, which will be introduced soon. It is an act that in part is related to a bill that I have presented in this Chamber for several years now in a bipartisan move to get America back to work. Instead of importing $129 billion worth of oil every year and sending them our wealth, it uses our oil off our coasts to create jobs. Our infrastructure in America has a $2 trillion pricetag to repair our roads, highways, and bridges. We also still have 14 million Americans out of work and another 10 million looking for work. It's time America got back to work, and we can do it with this bill. I urge all of my colleagues to make sure they're part of this bill when it comes out and get Americans back to work and rebuild America once again.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor of H.R. 1380.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a story about American jobs. This is the story about American jobs and the story of where our money is misspent, how it hurts States, the United States, and how we can change that trend. It's how some U.S. policies currently are hurting U.S. citizens, and it's a story of how we can change policies, we can clean up our environment, create jobs, have clean air, clean land and clean water. It's about growing jobs without increasing our debt, borrowing from China, or raising taxes. This is a story of the new American Dream for the next generation; the story that says if we have the will, we also have the way. It's a story that makes America back to work again. And best of all, it's a story that can come true. We can do this because we have the road to energy independence and American prosperity mapped out with this bill, H.R. 1861. Today, a number of Members from both sides of the aisle, the Bipartisan Working Group on Energy, will describe America's needs and show how this bill provides the means to rebuild our aging infrastructure and meet America's growing energy needs and will grow millions of jobs, not for 90 days, not for one election season, but for 20 years into the future. This bill moves us towards energy independence. But first, before we get into that, I want to talk about the energy needs of the world and what's happening with our own economy. We all recognize, and every Member of this House is concerned with the debt of this Nation which is now $14.5 trillion. It's 97 percent of the value of our economy. It's $45,000 for each man, woman and child, and growing at $58,000 a second. We are all concerned that more than 25 million Americans are out of work or looking for more work. We are all concerned that we've lost 5 million manufacturing jobs to other countries in the last decade. We all know the global demand for energy is going to grow by 53 percent by the year 2035. And total U.S. consumption of liquid fuels, including both fossil fuels and biofuels, is going to rise from about 18.8 million barrels per day to 21.9 million barrels per day by the year 2035. Now, we know that many people would like to have us get off oil, but we're still going to need oil, not only for transportation, but for manufacturing, for plastics and for chemical development. It is not something we can turn our back on, but it's something we need to recognize is a treasure out there that we can use, not only to stop sending our money overseas, but also to develop American jobs. Keep in mind we can turn our energy around through energy because energy equals jobs. We import 65 percent of our oil, and some of that from hostile regimes. The U.S. currently imports roughly 20 percent, or 5 million barrels a day, from members of OPEC. The United States spends about $1 billion a day on foreign oil, or $129 billion each year from OPEC nations. By converting to natural gas, 18 million diesel trucks and fleet vehicles which return to a central location overnight would cut OPEC imports in half. Choosing to enact no change in policy related to natural gas is the same as choosing to remain reliant on OPEC nations for our economic vitality. Our bill helps finance this conversion. Gas costs families about $2,200 more a year than it did in 2009. And this House, this Chamber, has talked about energy independence since the 1973 oil embargo. The demand for energy is growing and growing; and, unfortunately, OPEC exerts control over world oil prices and has asked that it someday be $200 per barrel. We think it affects our economy now at where it is. Imagine what would happen when it reaches that level. The Department of the Interior, however, estimates that we have between 86 billion and 115 billion barrels on our Outer Continental Shelf. That is enough oil and gas to replace imports from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia for the next 80 years, extensive tracts of oil, which, by the way, were last surveyed for the most part in the 1970s. And it's quite likely that also given areas that have not been reviewed or surveyed since then would have many times that amount. Offshore exploration, including the revenues that come from the leasing, from the royalties, is about $440 billion alone. When you add everything else that can come from this, with over a million jobs a year, with manufacturing, the economic impact of this exceeds $8 trillion overall for our country. And new Federal revenues are estimated to be between $2.2 trillion and $3.7 trillion over the next 20 years. Our option is to continue to buy from foreign nations which aren't friendly to us. Think of what happens with this $129 billion a year we send to OPEC nations, nations that oftentimes we send blood and treasure of our soldiers and our money to go protect. And what do they do with our money as well? They build islands, great highways, palaces. Now, we recognize that many folks around the world are our allies, but we also have to recognize we are here to take care of our citizens and make sure our citizens have an opportunity to compete for jobs in America. Ultimately, here's the problem America faces right now in our energy infrastructure. According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, America's infrastructure is crumbling. It would take $930 billion to rebuild our roads and bridges; $87 billion for aviation; $12.5 billion to rebuild our dams that are breaking and our locks; $255 billion for sewer and water infrastructure rebuilt in America, where we're leaking massive amounts of water every year in our clean water; $75 billion for energy infrastructure in this Nation; $50 billion for inland waterways; $50 billion for levees; $63 billion for rail; and $265 billion for our transit system. What we would do is open up those areas for offshore drilling. And, quite frankly, I trust our ability to do it. Yes, there have been mistakes, but they have been rare; and I certainly trust our folks to explore for offshore resources and make sure they follow environmental laws to the letter. But in this process of creating jobs and dedicating the revenue from this act, keep in mind we do not raise taxes, we do not borrow from China, and we do not buy this oil from OPEC. Instead, we create our jobs. We create our jobs now and in the long term. We rebuild America's crumbling bridges and roads. We invest in clean American energy, not just talking about cleaning up our coal-fired power plants, not just talking about it would be nice to have nuclear power, not just saying it will be great if people can conserve more energy, because 40 percent of the energy of typical homes and buildings is oftentimes wasted through incredible energy inefficiency. We pay for that energy, but we don't get it. We pay to heat our homes and light our homes and cool our homes and offices; but whenever we are wasting that energy, that's power plants we don't need to have built. There's also wasted energy in the areas that have to do with how our grid structure is so inefficient, but we can actually clean up the environment and conserve energy; and we can do all of this without raising taxes, as we said. Now, I said this is a bipartisan bill, and I'd like to turn to a number of my colleagues today to talk about how this can be done, and to hear the kind of support we have for this as we move through. With that, I would like to yield to my colleague from California, Mr. Jim Costa.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I would now like to yield to the gentlelady from West Virginia, Ms. Shelley Moore Capito.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentlelady from West Virginia. I might add, as she was speaking about the Marcellus shale--this vast natural gas deposit which is underground in the States of New York, Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and others--I know Pennsylvania has realized revenues from that in the billions of dollars and direct jobs of around 50,000. We're already talking about a couple hundred thousand jobs that can come from this and that we will have the benefits of that Marcellus shale natural gas over the next 30 years. I bring that up because, although that is being drilled now and being brought to market now, it is a tiny, tiny fraction of what we're talking about in the coastal areas that we will drill in a responsible way and use to create American jobs. With the many millions of Americans out of work who want to work and who want good-paying jobs, we know one of the greatest threats to our country right now is poverty. The government can't provide all of those. We can let the private sector grow, and we can let these jobs come through, so we begin to work on these many areas of rebuilding America. I would like to turn to one of my colleagues, one of the prime sponsors of this bill now, to talk more about the issues here, Mr. Tim Walz of Minnesota.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for his comments. As he was describing the issue about making sure that we clean up our environment, the reason is that this bill pays for those things. We know, for example, that the waterways just in the Great Lakes alone is a $30 billion problem with regard to pollution that has to be cleaned up. We know of our coal-fired power plants that 40 percent of them have inadequate or no scrubbers, and we need to clean them up. The point is that shutting them down is not going to reduce the cost of electricity, and it's not going to clean up the environment when those jobs simply go over to other countries where they do manufacturing with little or no pollution controls because that still comes back over to our Nation. Keep in mind that this bill does not raise taxes, that it doesn't borrow from other countries, that it doesn't buy oil from OPEC, and that it doesn't put us more into debt. I will yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), but I first want to yield to another gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Pat Meehan, who is one of our new colleagues here, to also comment on this bill.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania. What he is referring to also is taking care of our infrastructure, which has aged so much, and it's just a massive problem. I know it is something that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is committed to finding some solutions. I now yield to Congressman Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania, one of the great leaders of this effort. I am proud that he's a colleague from Pennsylvania, and his commitment is second to none with trying to find some solutions to rebuild America.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank my friend from Pennsylvania for his comments and in helping to lay out how we need to lay out America's infrastructure, clean up our environment and do this without raising taxes, borrowing, or buying more from OPEC. I now yield to another one of the cosponsors and another Pennsylvanian whose district is just north of mine, Mr. Jason Altmire.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his support and insight into this. Several of my colleagues have noted that this is a rare moment on the House floor. We actually have people from both sides of the aisle coming together during this Special Order hour, Mr. Speaker, and talking about an issue where we have to find agreement. Now, if this was one of those times when we were in disagreement and insults were being hurled back and forth, the galleries behind me would be filled with the press reporting on this. Probably this Special Order won't be reported on much at all because Members are actually coming together with a common plan and a common goal to say we recognize we need jobs, we need to clean up our environment, we need to have an energy source, we need to do this without debt. And as my colleague from Pennsylvania just pointed out, this bill actually returns money to the Treasury and helps reduce the debt by a percent every year. I might also add, the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, talked about this concept of using energy to pay for transportation when he said on September 15 in an address in front of the Economic Club of Washington, D.C., he said the following: I'm not opposed to responsible spending to repair and improve infrastructure. But if we want to do it in a way that truly supports long-term economic growth and job creation, let's link the next highway bill to an expansion of American-made energy production. Removing some of the unnecessary government barriers that prevent our country from utilizing its vast energy resources could create millions of new jobs. There's a natural link between the two. As we develop new sources of American energy, we're going to need modern infrastructure to bring that energy to market. Talking more about this bill and issues and how this will help us throughout the Nation, I turn to another one of my colleagues from Pennsylvania who's here, Mike Fitzpatrick.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Joe Donnelly.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank all the speakers today. Let me wrap up by saying this. In Pennsylvania, we're coal country; we're natural gas; we're the headquarters of nuclear; and we recognize we have a responsibility as a Nation to take care of our country and be good stewards of our environment. We also have to make sure we are creating jobs in America. But I want to tell you something else. While people are out there criticizing oil, I still believe we can do it better. And one of the things to keep in mind is, when we're sending $129 billion in foreign aid every year to OPEC, we're paying for their bridges and their highways; and that OPEC money has a way of finding its way to countries like Iran and using that to fund terrorists who are attacking America, hurting our soldiers and maiming them. I've seen enough of them in the hospitals that I work with in the Navy. Let me tell you, that alone, Mr. Speaker, is reason to pass a bill like this and stop harming our soldiers and our citizens in paying for terrorism. Instead, let's pass the Infrastructure Jobs and Energy Independence Act. Let's keep our money at home; let's create jobs; let's keep America safe; and let's do this right. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman from Indiana. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the House Republican Conference, I send to the desk a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.