news

The success of our small businesses and the economic security of working families relies on abundant sources of affordable energy. As we all know, the high cost of oil and gas over the past 18 months has caused significant financial distress to many families, particularly those in rural areas like mine, who often must travel significant distances to access simple services.

That’s why I’m supportive of efforts to make our nation more energy independent and take advantage of the wealth of natural resources available to power our economy long into the future.

Unfortunately, many of the sources of energy that we rely on are vulnerable to foreign manipulation. Just two weeks ago, we saw Russia and Saudi Arabia collude to continue production cuts through the end of the year. As a result, oil prices spiked.

And despite the record amount of oil being produced in the U.S. right now, gas prices remain elevated for most consumers. This is because the price of oil is set on a global market, and no matter how much is produced here at home, it will still be vulnerable to manipulation by dictators and despots abroad.

But what is clear is that while we transition to more sustainable and cost-effective renewable energy, we still need oil and gas in the meantime.

One potential source of oil and gas is found off our shores. Unfortunately, the process of extracting it comes with significant tradeoffs, particularly for coastal communities.

We know that as offshore oil and gas infrastructure ages, it can corrode and release harmful chemicals into the water. Idled and unplugged wells can leak oil that is toxic to fish, shellfish, and other marine life, harming local fishermen. In the event of large spills, oil can reach the shore, polluting beaches and threatening coastal tourism.

One study found that the deepwater horizon oil spill cost the tourism and fishing industries in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida between $15 and $30 billion. This is why I opposed offshore drilling off the coast of Washington, and my first amendment as a Member of Congress, was to prohibit drilling off the shore of Oregon and Washington that would adversely affect fisheries.

We’re here today to discuss new action by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, or BOEM, (pronounced bowem) to better understand these tradeoffs to both protect coastal communities and shield taxpayers from incurring additional costs when oil companies that drill offshore go bust.

New proposed financial assurance regulations would require oil and gas companies conducting business offshore to cover the costs of decommissioning up front in the event their company goes bankrupt.

While decommissioning wells is already required by law, companies often seek to shirk their duties to do. As a result, the taxpayer is often left with the expense. According to the GAO, the Department of Interior held less than $3 billion in bonds to cover $38.2 billion in decommissioning costs in 2015.

While I sympathize with the concerns of my colleagues that this could negatively impact independent oil producers, it is essential that our regulations address the real costs of offshore drilling and ensure those costs are borne by the companies that profit from the practice – not the taxpayer and coastal economies. I hope this regulation will adequately protect coastal communities from any downstream consequences of offshore drilling.

With that, I thank all the witnesses for joining us, and look forward to a productive conversation.