So you say--so, for instance, you have it in the Gulf of Mexico, right? But you don't have planning criteria that can meet the actual criteria.

So let me just go through this really quick. There are three issues here.

OK, so let's go back and make this simple for me.

The airlines hate the American people, that is all I am saying.

Why do you have these in there, the planning standards, if there is no real requirement for someone to perform to them?

So they can say, 'here is our plan,' and then, when it comes down to it, they don't really have anything, but that is OK, because they had it--they had a plan for....

Carrying the people offshore, that is taxicab service, OK? Not a big deal.

But just in the marketplace why don't they care, the insurers?

Right, but I am--we are not talking fire, we are talking oil.

The problem here, which I think we are all trying to get at, is you are here to protect American companies and American interests.

So you issue waivers and give them the opportunity to have alternative planning criteria in Alaska?

I am pretty sure he just requested it. So there you go. Congress just requested it.

It seems to me, from your report, that the increase in spending is all being driven by mandatory spending?

I think there are really only 2 ways to pay for spending. You either tax it now as revenue, or you tax it in the future as debt.

the President was calling for a government shutdown. And, in fact, he has been bending over backwards to avoid a government shutdown.

What he called for was for the Senate to reform its closure rule on fiscal bills that has completely gridlocked Congress' ability to control spending.

I am looking forward to this hearing.

We are currently studying and working with the Department on the impacts of the Executive orders that have to do with regulations.