On the recordFebruary 15, 2012
I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I just want to reiterate once again--and this is understanding that people in our great country have different views--I certainly understand what happened in southern California some 40 years ago. Listen, that picture is indelibly in everybody's mind. But nobody can argue there have not been advances in oil exploration in this country, and certainly in the OCS. But as a recognition of that, in this bill we didn't say just go anywhere you want to go in southern California. We said go to the existing platforms where you're drilling and existing infrastructure where there has been drilling. Now, that seems to me to be a perfectly acceptable way to utilize the resources that we have--by the way, in Federal waters, not in State waters, in Federal waters--so that we can make ourselves less dependent on foreign energy. The last thing I would say is the State of California is pursuing precisely the same thing that's embodied in this underlying bill, only in State waters. So I urge my colleagues to oppose my good friend's amendment from southern California. With that, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps). The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
