On the recordMarch 29, 2023
Madam Chair, I rise today in opposition to the amendment. Madam Chair, the whole purpose of passing H.R. 1 is to make it easier to build and move America forward. Lease awardees, under current law, are subject to extensive delays if the lease sale is protested. These delays could take weeks, months, or even years. Meanwhile, the prices at the gas pump continue to skyrocket while we have acres of land ready to be put into production. The current situation makes very little sense. Allowing for practically unfettered protests to lease sales with no timeline is a de facto ban on development--except this way, the administration doesn't have to admit that they actually are trying to ban American energy. It just takes a wink and a nod to the radical, wealthy, activist lawyer class that exists only to ``keep it in the ground.'' Working together, Interior and their friends in the protest class just drag it out, protest after protest, while American workers and families struggle to afford their daily commute. Section 20103 of H.R. 1 resolves this problem by putting in place a commonsense timeframe that concludes 60 days after the awardee makes the payment. Striking this section, as my colleague's amendment does, is just another attempt at slowing down any sort of oil and gas development. I urge opposition to the amendment.





