Tom Reed

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Chairman, at this time I am glad to yield such time as he may consume to my great colleague from New York (Mr. Gibson).

Mr. REED. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. REED. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to join with my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Grimm), to offer an amendment honoring the brave members of the intelligence community for their role in the mission that killed Osama bin Laden on May 1, 2011. As we all know, Osama bin Laden was killed on May 1 by members of the SEAL team 6. The heroics of this SEAL team have been well documented in the press over the past weeks, but the work of other professionals in the intelligence community is less well known and has received less attention. Bringing Osama bin Laden to justice was the result of over 10 years of hard work and dedication. This historic operation was truly a team effort and an achievement shared by members of every intelligence agency and our entire Armed Forces. The diligent, painstaking work of our intelligence services made possible the recent successful action carried out by our military against Osama bin Laden. For this reason, Mr. Grimm and I feel the intelligence community is also deserving of recognition as a whole. They worked long hours in distant parts of the world, far from their families, far from their friends, to keep our country safe. When the members of the American intelligence community do their job, no one really knows about it. They are silent warriors who keep us safe. They are deserving of our deepest gratitude. Mr. Chairman, this amendment does exactly that. It commends our intelligence community for a job well done in bringing Osama bin Laden to justice. Thanks to the diligence of these intelligence professionals, the world is a safer place without Osama bin Laden. Mr. Chairman, even though Osama bin Laden has been brought to justice, the war on terror is not over. This amendment commends the men and women of the intelligence community for committing themselves to defeating, disrupting, and dismantling al Qaeda and all terrorist organizations that will do harm to our great Nation. This amendment also reaffirms our commitment to using the capabilities and skills of the intelligence community to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat terrorism once and for all from the face of this earth. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 754.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. I thank my colleague from Texas for the opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule for H.R. 754, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. Mr. Speaker, the intelligence community works long hours in distant parts of the world to keep our country safe. But the thing about the United States intelligence community is that when they do their job right, no one knows about it. When they are successful in that diligence that they perform every day of the week, 24 hours a day, every day of the year, we often do not hear about that success. I stand here today, Mr. Speaker, to commend the diligent, painstaking work of the United States intelligence officials for all that they do. And in particular, I stand today to recognize the hard work of our intelligence community which resulted in capturing and killing the man who masterminded the multiple attacks which killed thousands of Americans, bringing him to justice this past week. Thanks to the intelligence professionals who work for our country, the world is a safer place without Osama bin Laden. I have an amendment with my colleague from New York (Mr. Grimm) that will be discussed on this floor tomorrow, and hopefully supported and voted upon in a bipartisan fashion, to recognize the efforts of those intelligence officials. Mr. Speaker, I rise also today to commend the work that is being done here in this Chamber, that is being led by this side of the aisle in having an open dialogue, in having an open process. We have nine amendments that are going to be considered under this rule and in this Chamber tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, that is a direct change from the history that has been demonstrated here for years prior to us coming here. It is time that we on this side of the aisle recognize that we are going to listen to the American people. We are going to have an honest conversation with the American people about the issues that we face on a day-to-day basis. And as such, I stand today and urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this rule and ``yes'' on H.R. 754.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Landry).

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. REED. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At this time, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to my good friend from California (Mr. Denham).

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, can I respectfully ask how much time remains on each side?

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. REED. House Resolution 257 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 1231. The rule makes in order eight amendments, all of which comply with the rules of the House. Of the eight, seven are Democratic amendments. Mr. Speaker, today we are debating H.R. 1231, the Reversing President Obama's Offshore Moratorium Act. This legislation, which will have profound impacts on our domestic energy supply, our national security, and our economy, is ripe for consideration by this body. It is no secret that Americans are feeling the pain at the pump. In my congressional district in western New York, my constituents, my family, my wife and I are routinely forced to pay in excess of $4 per gallon for gasoline for automobiles. We need to develop policies that will lessen our dependence on foreign fossil fuels, create stability in the financial markets, and provide relief to our constituents. In addition, this piece of legislation will create American jobs. We must get our financial and energy priorities in order. We can no longer be held victim to instability in the Middle East and across the world. The United States must develop our own energy solutions which will reduce our dependence on foreign fossil fuels. Most importantly, this will create American jobs. H.R. 1231 is one more example of our conference's commitment to developing domestic natural oil and gas resources. It adopts a philosophy that we need to drill smart, drill where the resources are, and produce our own energy. Drilling for oil and natural gas can be done safely and responsibly. There have been millions of wells drilled in the United States. There is a strong record of sound environmental practices. Total petroleum industry spillage has decreased consistently over the last 40 years. H.R. 1231 does two things. First, the legislation requires that in developing a 5-year offshore leasing plan for drilling the Outer Continental Shelf, that each 5-year plan must include leases for sale in the areas containing the greatest known oil and natural gas reserves. For the 2012-2017 plan being written by the Obama administration, this would mean targeted lease sales only in those areas estimated to contain 2.5 billion barrels of oil or 7.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. At least 50 percent of those areas must be made available for leasing in the 2012-2017 plan. Second, this legislation requires the implementation of production goals during the 5-year plan being written by the Obama administration. For this period, the goal would be 3 million barrels of oil per day and 10 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day from American domestic sources of energy. This increase in oil production equates to a tripling of current American offshore production and will reduce significantly foreign imports by nearly one-third. Most importantly, this will create American jobs and protect our national security interests. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 257 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record an editorial from the Wall Street Journal by former Democratic Member Harold Ford. [From the Wall Street Journal, May 11, 2011] Washington vs. Energy Security (By Harold Ford, Jr.) Even former President Clinton calls the Obama administration's deep water drilling policy `ridiculous.' When President Obama introduced his energy plan in March, he pointed out that the U.S. keeps going ``from shock to trance on the issue of energy security, rushing to propose action when gas prices rise, then hitting the snooze button when they fall again.'' It's true that since the Nixon administration U.S. leaders have all made the same commitment to cutting our reliance on foreign oil, finding reliable sources of clean energy, and keeping energy prices low. Yet Americans keep hearing only short-term solutions and narrowly focused rules and regulations. The U.S. still imports more than half its oil, gasoline prices are at historic highs, and consumers are paying the price. One bipartisan policy tradition is to deny Americans the use of our own resources. President George H.W. Bush took aggressive steps to keep off-limits vast supplies of oil and gas along the coasts of California and Florida. Since then, the build-up of restrictions, limitations and bans on drilling (onshore and off) have cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars while increasing our dependence on foreign sources of energy. In the year since the Deepwater Horizon spill, the Obama administration has put in place what is effectively a permanent moratorium on deep water drilling. It stretched out the approval process for some Gulf-region drilling permits to more than nine months, lengths that former President Bill Clinton has called ``ridiculous.'' Then there's tax policy. Why, when gas prices are climbing, would any elected official call for new taxes on energy? And characterizing legitimate tax credits as ``subsidies'' or ``loopholes'' only distracts from substantive treatment of these issues. Lawmakers misrepresent the facts when they call the manufacturing deduction known as Section 199--passed by Congress in 2004 to spur domestic job growth--a ``subsidy'' for oil and gas firms. The truth is that all U.S. manufacturers, from software producers to filmmakers and coffee roasters, are eligible for this deduction. We won't achieve energy security by restricting our own companies from drilling or singling them out for punitive taxes. We're talking about an industry that provides millions of jobs and, for the foreseeable future, the power for our economic growth. So our focus right now has to be to find ways to encourage domestic energy supplies, even while we encourage new sources of energy. President Obama is right that this isn't a long- term solution. But we can't lose sight of what the country needs today. Here are a few steps to take: First, let's conduct a comprehensive review of existing policies, rules and restrictions and root out any that needlessly hamper energy production at home. Do the existing environmental rules, for example, accurately reflect the industry's technological advancements in the ability to safely recover oil and gas supplies? Second, let's develop the skills we need to find new and better ways to recover domestic supplies of energy--and to develop next-generation fuels to secure the future. That means encouraging more students to study math, science and other disciplines this industry needs. And third, let's stop demonizing Big Oil to score political points. It does nothing to encourage the new talent, new ideas, and new entrepreneurs who are most likely to make breakthroughs in new sources of energy. The kickoff of the presidential campaign season and the spike in fuel prices offer an opportunity to constructively debate a comprehensive national energy strategy. Effective policies will ensure sufficient domestic production and the healthy operation of U.S. companies abroad, which together will provide the secure, affordable energy supply that Americans need. At this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to my good friend from Texas (Mr. Flores).

Mr. REED. I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, on this rule and on this bill, I think this side of the aisle is demonstrating to all of America that we are listening. Right now, with gas prices going through the roof, right now, with people suffering high unemployment across the Nation, we have before us a rule and a bill that will undoubtedly create jobs, 1.2 million jobs, according to economist Dr. Joseph Mason. We have a bill and a plan that is going to bring us closer to less dependency on foreign energy supplies. It will reduce foreign oil imports by nearly one-third. Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the aisle are going to deal with the American people in an honest fashion. We are not going to scare the American people. We are going to have an open and honest conversation with the American people. We will lead. And what we are doing here is answering a call that the American people have reached out to us to do, and that is to commit to our domestic supplies of energy so that we have energy supplies that will allow manufacturers in the private sector to create the new opportunities for generations of Americans that are yet to come. This is not a bill that is about protecting Big Oil. This is not about tax subsidies. I take great disagreement with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle when they say we are fighting for tax subsidies for Big Oil. What they are talking about is intangible drilling costs. They are talking about basic tax policy where there are income and expenses that are being calculated and deducted off income taxes. It goes back to my life in the private sector when I read income and expense sheets. All we are talking about are expenses, not tax subsidies. If we want to engage in rhetoric, that's fine. But we are focused on the substance of the issue, and that substance is getting Americans back to work, 1.2 million jobs under this proposal. We will generate $800 million in revenue over 10 years, and we are going to lead. I urge my colleagues to support this rule and support the underlying legislation by voting in favor of both.

Mr. REED. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Southerland). (Mr. SOUTHERLAND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Herrera Beutler).

Mr. REED. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services may have until 5 p.m. on Tuesday to file its report to accompany H.R. 1540.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, I had the privilege of visiting the Republic of Korea through their Congressional Member Exchange Program. In just 3 busy days, I was able to meet and converse with top officials in the Korean Government, my counterparts in the Korean National Assembly, business leaders, Korean War veterans and members of the Armed Forces. My father was a veteran of the Korean War, so it was particularly touching and meaningful for me that I was able to visit the Korean War Memorial and Exhibition, lay a wreath and to meet with officials at the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs. My visit to the War Memorial served as a sobering reminder of the cost of freedom that was paid 60 years ago through the service and sacrifice of all Korean War veterans. I had similar chills the next day, when our delegation visited the Demilitarized Zone and the Joint Security Area. It is difficult, if not impossible, to describe the flood of emotions I felt looking out across the DMZ and realizing what life is like in North Korea, a country with one of the world's most oppressive governments and, because of that, one of the world's poorest populations. While these two occasions were strikingly memorable, they provided an important framework for when I had the opportunities to meet with Korean business leaders about trade, investment, and tourism. Prior to my election as a Member of Congress, it was my great privilege to serve as mayor of Corning, New York, and of course Corning is part of the 29th congressional district that I am honored to represent. Corning is home of Corning Incorporated, a Fortune 500 company with interests and facilities across the globe--including in South Korea. While in Korea, I was taken on a tour of Samsung Corning Precision Materials and was given a very informative briefing about the company's activities which are critical to my district. I also had an opportunity to do one of my favorite things--talk about the great wines produced in the Finger Lakes region of New York. Korean consumers are quite discriminating wine drinkers and, as you might expect, have developed a taste for fine wine from the United States, especially from New York wineries. Currently, however, American wine exports to Korea are subject to a tariff that puts them out of the reach of many potential buyers. There is a glimmer of hope on the horizon, though, once the Congress ratifies and implements the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA). The KORUS FTA reduces Korea's tariff on U.S. wine imports to zero. That will be good for New York vineyards. There are more than 60 family-owned wineries in the area around my hometown, and many of them will benefit immediately from this new tariff-free situation. In addition to the meetings with business leaders, I also had important discussions with Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Sung- Hwan Kim, Deputy Minister for Trade Seok-Young Choi, and National Security Advisor Yung-Woo Chun, as well as with Kyung-Pil Nam, chairman of the Unification, Foreign Affairs, and Trade Committee of the Korean National Assembly. Additionally I met with U.S. Ambassador Kathleen Stephens and President of the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea Amy Jackson. All of these government leaders were strong advocates of the U.S.- Korea Free Trade Agreement. They did not have to do much to convince me, as I share their advocacy and appreciate their leadership and efforts to consolidate our alliance partnership overall. Today, Korea has the world's eleventh-largest economy, known for its high-technology industries. It is the seventh-largest trading partner of the United States, the fifth largest market for agricultural goods, and the third largest destination for U.S. foreign direct investment in the Asia-Pacific region. Bilateral trade between the Republic of Korea and the United States averages about $80 billion each year. The KORUS FTA represents the largest and most commercially significant free trade agreement ever signed by the United States in over a decade and since the ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement. This free trade agreement will ultimately eliminate tariff and non- tariff barriers, create better jobs, enrich consumer choice, boost industry and enhance overall welfare for both nations. It will immediately eliminate tariffs on almost two-thirds of U.S. agricultural exports worth over $1.9 billion. Overall, the KORUS FTA is expected to boost the more than $80 billion in annual two-way trade between South Korea and the U.S. by $10 billion to $20 billion about 5 years after ratification. The reasons for swift approval by the Congress of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement are numerous and compelling. In closing, I wish to extend my sincere gratitude to the Government and people of Korea for their tremendous hospitality during my visit 2 weeks ago. In particular, I wish to thank and recognize Korean Ambassador Duk-Soo Han for all his help and support that paved the way for a successful and productive trip. He is a great advocate for his country and I appreciate our mutual friendship. Mr. Speaker, I came away from my visit emboldened and excited by the opportunities that lay ahead with respect to benefits of the KORUS FTA. On this note, I respectfully urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important agreement. I hope to see it brought up for consideration very soon, so that it can be ratified and implemented at the earliest opportunity.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I rise today to bring attention to the plentiful natural gas reserves that we have in the United States. Many of my colleagues may not be aware of two studies which recently highlighted the abundance of this clean-burning domestic fuel source which holds so much promise. The first study I would like to draw attention to is the Energy Information Administration's Energy Outlook 2011, which analyzes energy production, consumption, technology, market supply and demand, and the direction those trends may take in the future. The outlook anticipates strong growth in the natural gas development and consumption because of development of shale gas resources. The outlook notes that growth in natural gas would not be permissible but for the combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies which have made shale gas economical to produce. The outlook finds that hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have led to an average annual growth rate of 48 percent in the time period from of 2006 to 2010. The second study I would like to mention is the American Gas Association's Potential Gas Committee 2010 biennial report. This report highlights the potential supply of natural gas in the United States. To be specific, the report finds that the Untied States possesses an untapped natural gas resource potential of 1,898 trillion cubic feet. This is the highest resource evaluation in the Potential Gas Committee's 46 year history. My Congressional District in New York State overlays a formation known as the Marcellus Shale. This shale play is one of the leading contributors to the rapid growth in estimates of recoverable natural gas in the United States. By developing and utilizing these massive natural gas reserves, we can begin to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and thus over time, reduce the cost of gasoline. As we all know, American producers and consumers are paying a heavy price as the cost of gasoline continues to rise. Everything costs more to produce, more to transport, and more to purchase. Reducing our dependence on foreign oil is both a national security issue and an economic issue. I urge my colleagues to consider these reports and support policies that will lead to the development of these valuable resources.