Sarah Abruzzese, E&E reporter

House Democrats reaffirmed President Obama’s call to end oil industry subsidies yesterday during a hearing that party leaders called as part of their effort to present an alternative to the GOP’s economic agenda.

“There are no more critical challenges facing this Congress than these two: creating jobs and reducing the deficit,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), calling for “smart investments in clean energy industries that will create new jobs for America’s workers.”

“We are urging Republicans and Democrats to come together to eliminate the billions we are currently sending to oil company coffers, invest federal dollars where they’ll do the most good in jobs that cannot be outsourced and [put] jobs in the hands of American workers,” she said.

The undertone of the hearing was of a party looking for a message that will appeal to voters as the Democrats strive to retake the House.

While the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee hearing centered on job creation, it also delved into how the country should secure its energy future with an eye toward security, innovation and financial health — even as the party has no say in the chamber’s agenda.

Ryan Alexander of the group Taxpayers for Common Sense laid out the amount of money that the oil industry gains through tax breaks. She added that, all told, the oil companies receive billions of dollars but noted that the true cost of the subsidies is hidden because many of them are a century old and reliant upon oil companies’ voluntary reports.

“Our policy toward oil companies right now is essentially corporate welfare,” Alexander said.

House Oversight and Government Reform ranking member Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) focused on a recent Government Accountability Office report that examined the lack of payments by oil and gas companies extracting from federal lands.

“The American taxpayer should get a fair share of what oil companies drill on federal lands, that is just common sense,” Cummings said, adding that the GAO report says that including direct subsidies, the country essentially gives as much as $50 billion to oil companies.

“A much better approach would be to invest these funds and create new jobs here in the United States not only to reduce unemployment but to help out on our dependence with regard to oil,” Cummings said.

The two-hour meeting was packed with Democratic leaders. At one point a staffer even had to fetch an additional chair as more than a dozen lawmakers filled the dais, including Reps. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and Ed Markey of Massachusetts.

Amidst the backdrop of political unrest in the Middle East, a drop in oil production and a spike in oil prices, Drew Sloan, an Army veteran and Truman National Security Fellow who works for the energy efficiency company OPower, spoke about the national security interests at play as well as the leadership role that the military has taken in advancing technology.

“The strength of our security relies on the strength of our economy,” Sloan said, adding that its reliance on oil stifles the United States’ ability to respond appropriately to global crises when oil is involved. Additionally, Sloan noted that much of the Republican rhetoric like “drill baby, drill” is too simplistic. Such statements, he said, fail to look at oil globally, because no matter how much domestic production there is — even without environmental regulations — it would still not be enough to steer a global market.

Calling the hearing “critically important,” DeLauro said afterward that the country is ready to move forward to new technologies that will place the country at the “cutting edge of [energy] development and not have to be dependent on countries in a great deal of turmoil and with a great deal of unrest.”

But domestic politics were never far from the discussion.

At one point, Rep. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) said, “Everything that you told us today simply reinforces everything that is so painfully obvious to those of us who are sitting here.”

“My question is, is there any industry that seems to be so powerful as to literally stymie what would be totally rational for the public good efforts on the part of the federal government?” she wondered. “How do we bring that power? How do we enact these kinds of laws that make sense to us? How do we change the royalty relief law and get rid of that and the huge subsidies? What do we need to do besides regaining the majority?”

Comments (0) · Leave a Comment

There are currently no comments.