On the recordJune 22, 2011
I think the point is that environmental groups, marine jobs groups and groups that depend on tourism in my district don't have shareholders. They aren't the beneficiaries of this. The purpose of this amendment is to find out who really benefits. If you represent a district like mine, there is a great risk in this--a risk in jobs, a risk in commerce, a risk that is irreparable, a risk that is one that should be taken very seriously. If one is taking that very seriously, one has to look at who, indeed, is benefiting by this. It's clear, given some of the other alternatives that are there right now, that the people at the pump are not benefiting by this. The people in my district who are depending on jobs that could be risked as a result of failures from this drilling have a great deal to risk. It is not a red herring. In fact, if you're going to apply any kind of fish analogies, another important industry in my area, the fishing industry, is one that is assuming this risk as well. Now, all of these risks are there. Who is benefiting by this risk? The purpose of this amendment is to tell the public who, indeed, benefits by it. It is the executives who are getting these large bonuses, because this is about profits, and the profits go to those executives. They aren't there to help reduce costs for the people at the pump, and they certainly aren't there to help the people in my district who are bearing all the risk of this type of drilling. I yield back the balance of my time.





