House Conservatives Push Back on President’s Energy-Production Claims

National Journal
Clare Foran
Add to Briefcase
Clare Foran
Jan. 29, 2014, 1:21 a.m.

House con­ser­vat­ives cri­ti­cized Obama on Tues­day for what they said was an at­tempt to un­justly claim cred­it for the surge in do­mest­ic fossil fuels pro­duc­tion in the pres­id­ent’s State of the Uni­on ad­dress.

“While the pres­id­ent fre­quently at­tempts to take cred­it for the cur­rent in­crease in do­mest­ic en­ergy pro­duc­tion, this is hap­pen­ing in spite of his policies, not be­cause of them,” House Nat­ur­al Re­sources Com­mit­tee Chair­man Rep. Doc Hast­ings of Wash­ing­ton said in a state­ment. “Des­pite Pres­id­ent Obama’s re­peated claims of mak­ing job cre­ation and eco­nom­ic growth a pri­or­ity, the real­ity is that he has act­ively chosen to ig­nore the eco­nom­ic po­ten­tial and job op­por­tun­it­ies that come with ex­pand­ing Amer­ic­an en­ergy pro­duc­tion and re­spons­ibly man­aging our na­tion’s nat­ur­al re­sources.”

Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Rob Bish­op of Utah, sim­il­arly con­ten­ded that while the ad­min­is­tra­tion paints it­self as a cham­pi­on of the nat­ur­al-gas and oil boom, most pro­duc­tion is ac­tu­ally tak­ing place on private, not pub­lic, lands. Bish­op also cri­ti­cized the pres­id­ent’s com­ment dur­ing the speech that he would use ex­ec­ut­ive au­thor­ity to set aside more land for con­ser­va­tion.

“The pres­id­ent did get something right in that en­ergy pro­duc­tion is up, but it has little or noth­ing to do with him or his ad­min­is­tra­tion. The pro­duc­tion oc­cur­ring can be at­trib­uted to in­genu­ity and ded­ic­a­tion on be­half of hard­work­ing Amer­ic­ans and policies set in­to place be­fore this ad­min­is­tra­tion,” Bish­op said in a state­ment. “En­ergy pro­duc­tion is in fact soar­ing on land that the pres­id­ent doesn’t con­trol, but if you want to see where he really stands on en­ergy pro­duc­tion, look at his policies for pub­lic land use. To­night, in­stead of un­leash­ing the vast en­ergy po­ten­tial found throughout the 660 mil­lion acres of fed­er­al land, he in­stead said he in­tends … to lock up fed­er­al lands by ex­ec­ut­ive fi­at.”

Re­ac­tion to the speech fol­lowed party lines with Demo­crat­ic Rep. Peter De­Fazio of Ore­gon, the rank­ing mem­ber of the House Nat­ur­al Re­sources Com­mit­tee laud­ing the pres­id­ent for his pledge to act on con­ser­va­tion.

“Last week, over 100 Demo­crats joined to­geth­er to ask the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion to use its au­thor­ity to pro­tect and con­serve na­tion­al treas­ures,” De­Fazio said in a state­ment. “I was very pleased to hear the pres­id­ent say he is will­ing to make crit­ic­al con­ser­va­tion de­cisions that this deeply par­tis­an Con­gress will not.”

What We're Following See More »
MCCONNELL’S BACK AGAINST THE WALL
Heller, Paul Won’t Vote on Motion to Proceed
5 hours ago
THE LATEST
LESS THAN HOUSE BILL
CBO Says 22 Million More Would Be UNinsured
7 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The Senate bill "would increase the number of people without health insurance by 22 million by 2026, a figure that is only slightly lower than the 23 million more uninsured that the House version would create. Next year, 15 million more people would be uninsured compared with current law...The legislation would decrease federal deficits by a total of $321 billion over a decade."

Source:
ARKANSAS BIRTH CERTIFICATE LAW OVERTURNED
SCOTUS Delivers a Victory for Gay Couples
7 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of same-sex couples who complained that an Arkansas birth certificate law discriminated against them, reversing a state court’s ruling that married lesbian couples must get a court order to have both spouses listed on their children’s birth certificates."

Source:
63-DAY TRIGGER
Revised Senate Bill Would Add Penalty for Going Uninsured
9 hours ago
THE LATEST
SENT LETTER TODAY
58 House Republicans Ask Ginsburg to Recuse on Travel Ban
9 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The letter reads in part, "There is no doubt that your impartiality can be reasonably questioned; indeed, it would be unreasonable not to question your impartiality. Failure to recuse yourself from any such case would violate the law and undermine the credibility of the Supreme Court of the United States.” Ginsburg said last year, "He is a faker. He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login