Garret Graves

His first text back was--and I will just use the abbreviation, because I would hate to say this word--but 'BS.' He then came back and said, 'That is stupid.'

Mr. Slocum, I appreciate your answers, and I am glad that you went down to Cameron Parish.

Doesn't it seem so much strange or ironic that states like Alabama, as well as efforts in Louisiana, money is being spent to create artificial reefs whenever at the same time we are effectively removing them?

What our bill does is our bill simply tries to create a clear process, provide regulatory certainty on how we can take this energy infrastructure that may be moving toward decommissioning, the P&A work and ultimately decommissioning, and…

What has happened over the last several years is we have had platforms removed, all of this reef structure removed at a rate that has never, ever been seen before.

There are big differences between the Gulf Coast and the West Coast. The habitat for our fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico is the energy infrastructure.

Let me be clear. Big oil wants rigs to reef as the rule in every case, not because they have some newfound love of marine life or biodiversity. They want to save money.

I want to be crystal clear on this. This is our habitat. This is our reef structure.

OK, I certainly would appreciate that, if we could continue the dialogue.

Wow. Well, thank you. That is amazing.

I want to be clear, I agree with you. There is nothing we want to do that we want to increase the threat to the health and the ecological productivity of the Gulf of Mexico.

If you are not an absentee owner, you are there day to day, operations of what happens on that land.

I am just irked. It is so removed from the reality of people trying to make a living on the land.

Higher prices, more dependence upon unfriendly countries, higher emissions. All day long, it makes no sense at all.

There is going to be a global increase in oil and natural gas demand.

I just continue to be a little bit baffled by what we are seeing with energy policy right now.

I don't think I have ever heard anyone in my life say, 'Please bring back the Jimmy Carter energy policy,' ever.

Have these policies promoted or advanced America's energy security? The answer is no.

This is having the biggest impact on those who can least afford it, to where families are literally having to choose among things like groceries, health care, utility costs, filling up their car, and other what I would call false choices.

Despite the efforts and the description of what is happening, and the impetus, the justification for changes in energy policy, we have seen emissions go up under the Biden administration, whereas they went down under the Trump…

It is no secret that just a few years ago, the United States was effectively energy independent and well on our path toward energy dominance.

If you compared what has been leased under the Biden administration, for example, to the Reagan administration, you had 357 times, 357 times, the acreage for energy production leased under the Ronald Reagan administration than you have had…

For every 1 ton of emissions we have reduced, China has gone up by 5.

Decreasing supply of oil and gas production in the United States doesn't do a damn thing for demand.

We have the resource base, we have the demand surging, moving forward, and we need to provide reliable, affordable supplies of energy to the American consumer.