While the Defense Authorization Act doesn't have much public policy in relation to energy in it, it is a beneficiary of good, sound national energy policy. DOD is the single largest department purchaser of energy of any of the Federal agencies that this Congress oversees. It would benefit dramatically by decreases in costs of energy, as would every consumer, every American home would as well. And conversely, its budgets are dramatically negatively impacted with rampant run-up in costs. We fly jets, we drive tanks and Humvees and other vehicles, and we have to buy that fuel to get that done. These increased costs as a result of an unsound national policy on energy are a detriment to the Department of Defense. A sound national policy on energy should promote additional supplies of domestically produced sources, both fossil fuel sources as well as unconventional sources. It's not an either/or, it ought to be both. And this Democratically led House has consistently, over the last 16 months, had a very negative bias against fossil fuel sources.
Mike Conaway: “While the Defense Authorization Act doesn't have much public policy in relation to energy in it, it is a beneficiary of…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the impact of energy policy on the Defense Authorization Act.
Share
More from Mike Conaway
I thank my colleague from Texas for yielding and for those very kind words. I thank Chairman Engel and Mr. McCaul, the ranking member, for bringing this resolution forward. I rise today in strong support of the passage of my resolution…
The Farmers to Families Food Box Program (FFFBP) was the victim of a rushed process that included no engagement with current distributors and nonprofits and resulted in cherry-picked contractors who were not qualified.
Let's have those kind of conversations as opposed to defending a loophole that allows some families in America to be treated differently.
Broadband access is not about convenience. It is about being able to participate in modern life and the economy.





