Mike Conaway: “The gentleman is incorrect in the sense that this does not, over the next year or 2 or 3, however long sequestration is…”

“The gentleman is incorrect in the sense that this does not, over the next year or 2 or 3, however long sequestration is going to be in place, measurably affect climate change one way or the other. The small amounts of fuel that are allowed to be purchased in excess of competitive costs are 2 million gallons at 28 bucks a gallon. The Department of Defense buys 107 billion gallons of fuel, so any number up to some multimillion dollar number, million gallon amount could be hidden under this amount. We also don't have a good accounting process to understand exactly what those costs are when they enter into these contracts, and asking the Department of Agriculture to subsidize this process doesn't make any sense either. In order to hide from the program, the issue is the Department of Defense buys the fuel, they send a bill to the Commodities Credit Corporation to actually pay for it. So it is not even on the Department of Defense's books and records to get the proper accounting to make sure. This is straightforward stuff. You can't, on the one hand, argue that we need to provide all that needs to be provided for our men and women to fight and spend an extra $51 billion, plus $510 million that we don't know where that went on a product that can be brought for $3.35 a gallon. I would argue there is nowhere in the world today where we need drop- in jet fuel that can be provided somewhere else. That argument is specious and it makes no sense whatsoever.…”