In an effort to pass some kind of energy bill before the 4th of July recess and having failed with their price gouging bill, the Democrats brought H.R. 6251 - the Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act sponsored by Rep. Rahall from West Virginia -- to the floor last week. The bill is also know as the "Use it or Lose it" bill.  

Not only does it do nothing to increase oil production, this bill prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from issuing new leases for exploration for, or production of, oil or natural gas, unless the applicant certifies that he is “diligently developing” the leased lands or surrenders the leases.   This bill would restrict the development of American energy, while sending a signal to the energy markets that petroleum had better come up quick or not at all, a move that could trigger higher energy prices and discourage investment in energy exploration.

19 Democrats joined 176 Republicans in defeating this "duplicate" piece of legislation. I say duplicate because Federal energy lease holders already must produce oil or natural gas within five to 10 years to live up to the terms of the lease and the law. 

Interestingly enough, back in 1992, Speaker Pelosi – as well as Majority Leader Hoyer and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall (D-WV), author of the bill – voted for the very duplicate provisions of the current lease structure.  According to Title 30, Subsection 188(a) and (b) of the United States Code, “any lease … may be forfeited and canceled … whenever the lessee fails to comply with any provisions of this chapter, of the lease, or of the general regulations…  Any lease … shall be subject to cancellation by the Secretary of the Interior after 30 days notice upon failure of the lessee to comply with any of the provisions of the lease.”  

So here we are in recess having left Washington, D.C. again without acting on any meaningful legislation to increase the supply of American-made energy to help lower gasoline prices. Now we know why Congress' approval rating is at 18%.

I was pleased to see today that the Supreme Court upheld our nation’s greatest document, the Constitution, by restoring Second Amendment rights long denied to D.C residents by their extraordinarily restrictive firearm ban.

The Second Amendment guarantees the individual a right to bear arms, and for too long it has been attacked by Washington politicians. Our Founding Fathers wrote this Amendment to protect the rights of our citizens, and their voices were heard today by the Supreme Court as their freedom to own a firearm was protected.

I was also pleased  that yesterday the House Financial Services Committee adopted language I offered  to protect the Second Amendment rights of public housing tenants during a mark-up on H.R. 6216, the Public Housing Asset Management Improvement Act.  Recently, several public housing authorities were forcing law-abiding citizens to give up their Second Amendment rights in order to reside in taxpayer subsidized public housing.  

Today, the House passed H.R. 6275, the Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act, sponsored by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY). This atrocious bill would impose $61.6 billion in permanent tax increases on businesses and individuals over eleven years in order to temporarily prevent for just one year a huge, unintended tax increase.  This bill would place a one-year “patch” on the exemption level for the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), without which more than 25 million taxpayers would be subject to a large tax increase beginning in tax-year 2008. 

Congressman Charles Rangel (the bill’s architect) and I had a nice little debate about it on CNBC’s Squawk Box this morning.



What makes this bill worse is that it would single out oil and gas companies from a broad domestic manufacturing tax deduction available to nearly all manufacturing in the United States. This is an irresponsible measure. Not only would it create disincentives for domestic energy production and investment, but it would make foreign energy investment and reliance more attractive. At a time when gas prices are soaring , increasing taxes on energy companies will make it even less likely that energy prices can come down.

We should completely repeal this antiquated tax policy without tax increases and give American taxpayers the full relief they deserve. This bill is a permanent tax increase to give a one-year tax cut. That’s a really a bad deal for the American people.

For more info on this legislation, check out my article published today by National Review Online: Be Pro-Choice: The AMT really has a hold on the middle class.

The Democrats promised a roll out of their energy agenda. Last week, they announced a call to nationalize the oil industry and it didn't take long for them propose legislation pointing us in that direction. Yesterday, they offered their first piece of legislation which they claim to be aimed at lowering gas prices. Unfortunately, their policy would have the opposite effect.

The Federal Gas Gouging Prevention Act (H.R. 6346) was taken up yesterday by the Democrats "to address our energy supply needs." The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and several other free market organizations dedicated to growing our economy and creating jobs are ardent opponents of this legislation. Luckily, the bill was defeated.

This bill's approach was flat-out wrong on several fronts, but most jarringly threw the concept of supply and demand right out the window. Americans for Tax Reform provides a nice, clear example of how the supply and demand model works:

"When a product, like gasoline, becomes scarce, that information is incorporated into the price. This amount is then raised by the producer as a warning to the consumer to curtail consumption. As a result, the consumer will respond to this scarcity by reducing their demand to meet the expected supply.

“However, when prices are fixed, as H.R. 6346 proposes, the demand will exceed the available supply, a fuel shortage will occur, gas will be rationed, and an inevitable black market will develop in response."

Although this bill was supposed to drive gas costs down, it would most likely create shortages and higher gas prices for U.S. consumers and companies. It would also create disincentives to invest in energy production and distribution.

Other problems with the bill?

Terms within the bill such as “unconscionably excessive,” “gross disparity,” and “grossly exceeds,” are without definition, subject to widely varying interpretations, and provide no guidance to suppliers.  The inevitable outcome of this ambiguity is litigation.

The FTC—despite numerous investigations—has never found any evidence of collusive price fixing or “gouging” behavior amongst oil and gas companies – which, of course, points out the obvious, that the FTC has existing authority to go after collusive price fixing under current antitrust law.  Furthermore, federal legislation is unnecessary as any price gouging is localized and aggressively prosecuted by state governments.  

The Democrats only prescription for rising gas prices so far is bad medicine.

There is actually a lot going on this week – nothing to cut the costs of rising gas prices; but a lot of other pretty important legislation is being considered.  First, however, I want to get you caught up on an historic bill that passed late last week. We finally passed a supplemental funding bill to support our troops and it contained long-overdue reforms of the Montgomery G.I. Bill, providing expanded educational benefits to veterans and their families.

A key component of the reforms is that now for the first time ever, veterans will be able to transfer their G.I. Bill benefits to family members, a key provision not included in earlier versions of this legislation. That’s why I was a co-sponsor of a bill that allowed these benefits to be transferred to the veteran’s spouses and their children and I was pleased it was included in this funding bill. This long-overdue reform finally recognizes the sacrifices made not only by our brave soldiers, but also the sacrifices made by their loving families.

In terms of what’s happening on the floor this week:  Democrats are rehashing their blame-game price gouging legislation and bringing a tax hike bill in the guise of an Alternative Minimum Tax relief bill.  I'll be sure to keep you in the loop as it happens.

You have to give credit where credit is due, and the FBI and the Department of Justice deserve to be recognized for their effort to crack down on mortgage fraud schemes. From March 1 to June 18, 2008, more than 400 defendants were charged for roles in mortgage fraud schemes as part of operation "Malicious Mortgage." The FBI estimates that approximately $1 billion in losses were inflicted by the mortgage fraud schemes employed in these cases.

Most recently, two senior managers of failed Bear Stearns Hedge Funds were indicted yesterday in separate mortgage-related security fraud cases.

Since July 2002, the DOJ has made almost 1,300 corporate fraud convictions, including the convictions of more than 200 chief executive offices and corporate presidents, more than 12 corporate vice presidents, and more than 50 chief financial officers.

These efforts are crucial for the benefit of American homeowners and taxpayers and the housing market. All the agencies involved deserve a great deal of respect for their efforts.

On Wednesday, I appeared on the O'Reilly Factor to discuss the Countrywide Mortgage Scandal involving “VIPs” Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND). Take a look.

Believe it or not, the Democrats seem to be putting together an energy plan. Yesterday, Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), a longtime influential member of the Democrats’ Appropriations team and Natural Resources Committee, as well as one of the Democrats’ leading environmental strategists, said that the federal government should just take over our oil refineries.

Fox News reports that U.S. Rep Maurice Hinchey, speaking off-camera to a gaggle of reporters yesterday, said:

“Should the people of the United States own refineries?  Maybe so.  Frankly, I think that’s a good idea.  Then we could control the amount of refined product much more capably that gets out on the market…” “So if there’s any seriousness about what some of our Republican colleagues are saying here in the House and elsewhere about improving the number of refineries, then maybe they’d be willing to have these refineries owned publicly, owned by the people of the United States, so that the people of the United States can determine how much of the product is refined and put out on the market.”

How does that sound to you?

Congressman John Peterson says it best, "I think they were afraid they might lose the vote."

In my last post, I said that Rep. John Peterson (R-PA) would offer his amendment to allow deepwater energy exploration at a full Appropriations Committee markup on Wednesday.  This amendment failed on a party line vote in subcommittee.

Well, instead of taking action on it and risking another vote on Peterson’s amendment, Democrats postponed considering the Interior Appropriations measure altogether. If enacted, the amendment would allow increased exploration in deep ocean energy zones far off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts and the eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Another day, another bold display of leadership from the Democrats on energy.

Here is a clip from Rep. Peterson on Fox News talking about what happened Wednesday on his amendment.

This past Saturday and Monday, I held three press events at local gas stations in Ramsey, St. Cloud, and Woodbury to present a commonsense energy plan, the "No More Excuses Act," that Congress can enact to help lower energy costs. Readers of this blog will know that part of this means exploring domestically and tapping into our offshore reserves.

Rasmussen released a new poll finding that 67% of Americans support offshore drilling and 64% expect it to lower prices at the pump. John McCain has come around to tapping into our offshore reserves and we'll all get to see what he has to say this afternoon when he unveils his more extensive energy plan.

Offshore exploration of oil and natural gas will be very helpful in the short term to resolve our energy crisis, and I also understand that alternative energy solutions are the future. But living in the here and now, we need to take all steps within reason to help drive oil costs down. Some suggest a Windfall Profits Tax, but like many of my colleagues, I believe that will only drive up costs to the consumer. That's the last thing we need.

I think it's great McCain is talking about these realistic energy solutions, and I hope Congress will finally act on some of these important measures.

Tomorrow, we may really see if Americans have turned up the heat enough on the Democrat leadership in Congress for them to take action. Rep. John Peterson (R-Pa.) will offer his amendment to allow deepwater energy exploration at an Appropriations Committee markup.  This amendment failed on a party line vote in subcommittee.

Stay Tuned...

At events taking place across the country this Saturday, Americans are taking time to reflect on the services and sacrifices of the heroic and brave souls that have allowed our nation to fly our flag high and proud for so many years. 

Later today I'll be attending a flag-retirement ceremony at Veteran's Lake in Ramsey where hundreds of flags will be respectfully burned after years of service.

The American Legion writes on their website that Congress approved most provisions of the Flag Code in 1942, first formulated as a set of civilian flag etiquette rules at a national conference in 1923. The Flag Code outlines that "when a flag has served its useful purpose, it should be destroyed, preferably by burning. For individual citizens, this should be done discreetly so the act of destruction is not perceived as a protest or desecration."

Many veterans groups such as the American Legion and the VFW hold flag-disposal ceremonies on Flag Day.

Our nation must endeavor to remember forever the sacrifices of the past and present - as our flag and the freedom, safety, and prosperity it represents have not been easily purchased.

From time to time on this blog, in addition to big national issues that impact everyone, I'll be posting about topics that are more specific to my Minnesota district. I hope readers outside MN still read, but understand if you don't become engaged on the topic. This is one of those posts.

To give you some background, Minnesota's DeSoto Bridge in St. Cloud was abruptly closed on March 20 this year because inspectors found bending in some of the gusset plates that hold the bridge together. This has been a pretty hot subject in MN since the I-35W Mississippi River bridge in Minneapolis collapsed during rush hour back in  August of 2007 from a similar problem.

I commend the Minnesota Department of Transportation which took quick action on this and decided that the best course of action would be to demolish the DeSoto Bridge and construct a new one.  I also commend Minnesota’s Governor Tim Pawlenty who decided to forego federal earmarks for this project because the regulatory red tape and Washington mandates would only delay implementation of the project.

There is good news now that Xcel Energy has started work on installing a new 16-inch gas line beneath the Mississippi River in preparation of the new construction. The gas line that currently runs underneath the DeSoto Bridge must be relocated and in service before the bridge can be demolished.  This is an important step in the process for Minnesotans living around and affected by the bridge's construction.

For more info, check out the St. Cloud Times article: Xcel Energy plans for project

Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court is completely unacceptable.  Alien combatants should not be allowed to have access to American courts forcing our nation’s hardworking taxpayers to pay their legal costs. These terrorists have openly condemned America and the values we stand for, they should not have the privilege to use our rights. This ruling threatens Americans’ freedom and sets a very bad precedent for future rulings with violent terrorists. 

I believe that Justice Scalia hits the nail on the head when he said, "The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion plays upon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed. That consequence would be tolerable if necessary to preserve a time-honored legal principle vital to our constitutional Republic."

Having fallen short yesterday, the Democrats have brought H.R. 5749, the so-called "Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2008" back to the floor for a vote. Under their parliamentary maneuver yesterday, the Democrats needed a two-thirds majority to pass the bill yesterday -- it fell 3 votes short. The Democrats are pretty much assured to succeed the second time around using a floor procedure that requires only a simple majority for passage. However, the shortfall yesterday doesn't look good against the looming veto threat from the White House.

This bill is another example of how Democrats take a decent idea that could help desperate Americans who need it the most, and in the process of hijacking it for political gain they ruin it.

Clearly, some states are feeling the unemployment crunch more than others, but this legislation makes no distinction for that. Even states with low unemployment rates would receive the 13-week extension. The White House and Republicans are willing to accept a targeted exception, but the bill as it is now is simply irresponsible.

Furthermore, this bill allows someone with as little as two weeks of work to qualify for up to 52 weeks of unemployment benefits -- a dramatic cut from the 20 weeks currently required by law. H.R. 5749 would increase entitlement spending by $12.8 billion over five years and increase the deficit by $12.2 billion.  However, the bill contains no spending cuts to offset this new spending.

A crucial energy vote took place today in the Appropriations Committee to address America's energy concerns. Rep John Peterson, (R-PA) attempted to amend a provision in the Fiscal Year 2009 Interior spending bill that has prevented American consumers from accessing America’s abundant deep-sea energy reserves for nearly 30 years.

It should be noted that the federal Minerals Management Service estimates that there are 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas locked up along our nation’s outer continental shelf. The Peterson amendment would modify sections 104 and 105 of the Interior spending bill, specifically targeting abundant energy reserves residing beyond 50 miles from shore. 

But given the chance today to at least get the ball rolling on addressing our nation's energy concerns, Democrats stonewalled Peterson's amendment and it failed by a party line vote of 6-9.

Every Democrat member of the committee voted against it:

Norman Dicks (Wash.), James Moran (Va.), Maurice Hinchey (N.Y.), John Olver (Mass.), Tom Udall (N.M.), Ben Chandler (Ky.), Ed Pastor (Ariz.), Dave Obey (Wisc. – ex officio), and Alan Mollohan (W.Va.).

There's no silver bullet to lowering the cost of gasoline and no one solution will affect change overnight.  That's why it's even more important to pass and pursue methods like the ones the Democrats just voted down. It'd be one thing if the Democrats had an alternative plan of their own, but to just flat out reject a measure that could eventually help lower the cost of energy is just flat out insulting.

The Democrats have had more than enough time to unveil their "commonsense plan" to reign in energy prices. Having failed, Republicans have taken the lead.

House Republicans have proposed a plan to lower energy costs with a series of supply-oriented bills and we’re filing discharge petitions to circumvent the roadblocks erected by Democratic leadership and bring this bipartisan legislation to the House floor.

Each of the seven bills is specifically crafted to lower the price of gas and other energy sources by increasing American-made energy, decreasing our dependence on foreign oil and creating jobs here at home in the process.

This morning, Republicans formally introduced a petition that would force immediate consideration of the No More Excuses Energy Act (H.R. 3089) – legislation that will reduce the price of gas by expanding U.S. refining capacity, unlocking America’s homegrown energy reserves, and encouraging the use of clean alternative energy.

In order for this bill to bypass committee where it’s bottled up by Democrat chairmen and move to the floor for debate, two-thirds of the House must sign the petition.

At least we'll now get to see who is serious about our energy concerns, and who is paying mere lip service.

Stay tuned...