Introducing H.R.1: the Lower Energy Costs Act

Joe Biden is attempting to thread the needle by opening 3 pads of the Willow Oil Field. In order to placate the Democrats' environmentalist base after Willow, Biden shut down or limited drilling in Alaska or in the Arctic Ocean. Meanwhile, House Republicans don't have to thread the needle. They just introduced H.R.1, aka the Lower Energy Costs Act.

The bill seeks to "cut red tape and increase [domestic] energy production." According to House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, H.R. 1 seeks to "to cut red tape and increase energy production here at home so we can lower energy costs and stop our dependence on hostile foreign countries for our energy and minerals." The political goal is to highlight the failure of Biden's (and the Democrats') energy policy. Under the Democrats'-Biden watch, gas at the pump reached $5.00 a gallon nationwide for the first time in our nation's history.

This is just a political ploy to get Biden past the 2024 election. The House GOP bill is a serious bill aimed at NEPA permitting reform, increasing oil production, pipelining and refining. In short, it's aimed at restoring U.S. energy policy to energy dominance, not just lower prices and energy independence.

The package specifically takes actions aimed at bolstering fossil fuel production, including making it easier to import and export natural gas, requiring more offshore oil and gas lease sales to be held, bar the president from halting fracking and taking power away from states to reject pipelines and gas export facilities that could impact their waterways. It also mandates that four onshore oil lease sales are held in each of at least nine eligible states each year.
H.R.1 is pretty aggressive. Check this out:
The legislation seeks to repeal climate provisions in the Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act, specifically programs that: incentivize the oil and gas industry to cut methane emissions through rewards and penalties, fund climate-friendly projects through the Environmental Protection Agency and raise fees that companies have to pay for drilling on public lands and waters.

For mining, the legislation contains a provision that would require an assessment that includes economic impacts to be conducted before barring mining on certain federal lands.

Steve Scalise explains to Larry Kudlow what's in the Lower Energy Costs Act in this interview:

Democrats insist that 'transitioning' away from fossil fuel vehicles is aspirational. It's nothing of the sort. It's delusional to think that we'll be fossil fuel-free anytime soon. We'll be lucky to stop using fossil fuels within 50-75 years.
The bill also contains provisions aimed at speeding up the approval process for infrastructure projects — known as permitting reform. Specifically the legislation would set time and page limits for environmental reviews and require lawsuits against approved projects to be filed within 120 days.
It's time to stop moving at a snail's pace. It's time to start approving permits faster.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio
Read more