Youre always welcome up here. Thank you. Gentleman from florida seek recognition. Yes, thank you. Gentlemans recognized. Mr. Chairman first. Thank you. And our presenters i perceive and believe that mr. Pallone and mr. Shuster are two good friends of mine here in congress. And im deeply appreciative of them all the time. Im hopeful of mr. Cramer getting to know you better. On this subject, i would echo the sentiments of my good friend. It does appear just listening to you, and this is the second time ive had that opportunity that you certainly do know your subject. And i, for one am appreciative of members who make their presentations in a manner that is not abrasive but makes it in a persuasive manner in the perspective that you hope. I also would like to borrow from our good friend from oklahoma, mr. Cole a notion of something that i believe he and i would be able to work on right away. And ive done some initial work on it. Understanding that the price of oil or today, and im not a Petroleum Expert or i dont have any stock. I used to tell people only stock i had was in over the counter. And that was groceries. So im not in the market, and i dont understand truly the spot market and how oil is transmitted. But general way i do. But it would seem to me while prices are low now whatever our, meaning the american oil reserve is, it should either be if it is not already maximized it certainly should be maximize maximized. And if the potential exists and legislation is required to increase the maximum amount of our oil reserve it would seem to be that this would be the perfect time to do it because we probably have about a 6month, 1year window before that price is going to go back up. And then regrettably, not in my lifetime, i wont get to see the full thrust of alternative energy. All of us that are advocating know that its going to be a 20 25, 30year process before you will really see a lot of solar and thermal and wind and other things like that. Theyre in progress. But we are not getting there fast enough for me. Let me also put on the table an area that i have a measure of expertise, i dont agree with the notion of requiring the litigation to be held in the Circuit Court or here in d. C. Article 3 courts will set up for a reason. And among them was to ensure that litigants would be able to access to the court. And so far as efficiency is concerned. If its in an area that requires expedition. The courts are fully in a position to do that whether its at the District Court level or at the Circuit Court level. When appropriate. Theres no assurance because its in the d. C. Circuit court that is going to be done rapidly either. It dead pans on a given day on a given issue as to whether or not it would even be deserving of going to the Supreme Court as it were. I do have a question, and that is again, following on my friend from oklahoma when he pointed out i had written on my little notes that i wanted to ask how much of the pipeline has already been built. Then i heard the discussion on that. I do have an american question on that. And that is do any of you know whether the steel that has been utilized in the building of the pipeline is American Steel . Gentleman yield . Yes. It certainly is. A lot of that steel built in arkansas. But its American Steel american products. Right. Then that all goes well for your position. Now, let me get to a stickier subject. I, too, have friends in canada. I served with a senator. I served with an organization for security and cooperation in europe. I served with the former defense minister and foreign minister of canada. But were making this sound like this is a canadian thing. And when the argument is made about it wont cost an american taxpayer anything to build this while i agree, that suggests to me knowing my canadian friends that there are private investors that are in transcanada. And its kind of ironic that theyre never talked about. The who they are, theyre not all canadian. Some of them are american. And im not grudgeful of folk who had great genetic accidents and abilities as a result thereof. But the fact of the matter is that some people that are involved in transcanada, they are givers to canadian parliamentarians under their structure and givers to some of us, as well. Does the gentleman yield . Yes. Just by way of information, and i probably should double check, but im almost certain transcanada is an american company. Its based in the United States. Mmhmm. And investors, and well, as my friend knows, theres considerable crossborder investment between canada and the United States. Sure. And i stay away from pointing out. Ive read the articles as to who owns, you know. And im not uptight about that. I do have abiding concerns, for example, the National Security argument, i could flip it. If we were in other areas for example, putin just shut down one he was getting ready to run across kazakhstan. And no one has satisfied me yet as if this is so good for america, then why isnt canada running it through their own territory . Which would be their option if by chance it does not ever lift here fully operative, then theyre going to wind up doing it in canada. But i dont want to belabor the point. There are several other areas. I, too, am concerned, as ms. Slaughter has pointed out. There will be spills. There will be concerns. Im not sure what the nebraska litigation is contemplating. I hesitate because so many people on the negative side of the endangered species arguments. I dont know whether there are any that are contemplated here or need to be. And so, ill be listening. I do want to end with a moment of humor. We spend our time with the Keystone Pipeline and theres a fear of brewery in belgium that is run in a beer pipeline 2 miles outside, but he wanted to keep the Family Business manufacturing it where it is. And id hell of a lot rather be at the end of their pipeline than at the end of this one. Thats all. I yield. Gentleman yields back his time in an effort to keep this Committee Hearing going. I know weve been here a long time, id defer and ask the gentleman from colorado if he seeks recognition. Where is the financing for the pipeline project coming from . Quite honestly, i dont know it where it comes from, i suspect the shareholders and the administration. The executives of transcanada which i believe is a canadian company, not an american company. I recently read a report, and i havent seen this disputed that shows that the majority of the tar sands about 90 of it require a price of 95 a barrel and the other 10 require a price of about 75 per barrel. Given that the price of oil is essentially lower than that, is there any evidence that this would even move forward as a construction project even if the president or congress were to approve it . Well, i guess first of all, thats not germane to this bill, obviously, because its not our decision to make whether they build it or dont build it. Our decision is to whether its in the nations interest. Should they build it . Or if its not in the nations interest, they shouldnt build it. And the reality is, investors will make that decision. But theres nothing that procludes this from Going Forward based on the financing of the development of the crude oil. Look i hope we wouldnt be wasting Time Congress time with the project that isnt feasible or isnt likely to occur. So hopefully there can be some evidence presented on the floor about whether this is a viable project and whether anybody is serious about moving forward with this. They havent withdrawn the application as far as i know. The market will determine that just like the low oil prices isnt good for oklahoma, not good for the steel industry. U. S. Steel in pittsburgh announced theyre eliminating 400, 500 jobs in ohio and in texas because the markets not there for the pipe that goes to the ground. So the market, and as he said, no ones withdrawn and i havent heard anything at this point. Again, from the evidence ive seen here, nobody actually wants to pay for a bill this pipeline that were talking about here. I dont know then we could all win. I dont know why were talking about it. Maybe its again a little deja vu. It had be talked about, 110 a barrel. Perhaps a relevant discussion at that point. No taxpayer money going into this. Private people are going to decide whether theyre going to spend it or not spend it. Thats the question. Any private people that actually want to build this pipeline . So, again, for this to be a topic of serious debate, it would be nice to have evidence that somebody wants to build a pipeline as opposed to talking about a phantom pipeline. Ive never heard a stronger argument for the cart coming before the horse. You know, the chicken or the egg, youre not always sure, this is the cart before the horse. Dr. Burgess . Thank you mr. Chairman. And youre correct. Weve observed a lot of things on this, but i do feel its important to reiterate part of this pipeline from cushing, oklahoma, to houston texas, is built. People have put up with the pipeline being built in the backyards and now its waiting for the rest of the connection. And my personal feeling is they waited long enough. Ill be happy to be talking about this a lot tomorrow and yield back my time. Mr. Stivers . Thank you, mr. Chairman. And appreciate all the members for being here. I think this is a National Security and its an Energy Security issue for america. And to the point the gentleman from colorado made you know we dont know what the price of oils going to be tomorrow but what we do know is theres a pending application. And this is its a Good Opportunity for us to start to create a National Energy policy which we desperately need in this country. And we need secure trading partners with whom we agree on international issues. We buy a lot of oil from venezuela and other countries we dont agree with on many things. Internationally, i dont know why we wouldnt want to buy our oil from a country weve agreed with since the french and indian war. So i feel very comfortable with this. I would want to thank you for all being here. I think there were great exchanges of ideas but i think this is a great idea that needs to move forward and i appreciate the gentleman from north dakota for all his efforts on it. Thank you very much, mr. Stivers, welcome to the committee, mr. Collins . Mr. Chairman, i appreciate being recognized and being here on the committee and being a part of this. Because one of the things that was discussed and one of my colleagues from across over there, this is a process. This is a Committee Process but also an issue and congress process. How much more process does this need . How many more times do we need the practice on the field . Jobs, secondary jobs money invested. I mean, it is sort of interesting that i believe there was no interest in this pipeline that would definitely not be an interest in the permit. I think the idea it was going to get built, or not, is really definitely not a concern because were still here. The people keep coming back for this. The issue, again, it is amazing to me when we continue this conversation habit movinge ing about moving it by train. The least safest way were arguing for, i had a professor at georgia tech who our only argument was when were talking about this well, theres other ways in the environment were scared of whats next. I said youre arguing, actually, to move it by nonenvironmentally friendly way. Thats the part that really struggle with here. But i just wanted to say at this moment just to say, the one thing that shows process here is Regulatory Burden in this country. And i know were going as republicans, were talking a lot about that. The regulatory process, im not one that says there should be no regulatory function of government, state, local or federal. But there has to be reasonable Regulatory Burden. This is an example of just a massive bungling. And i just want to say also from my class, it comes with our class, it is good to see him here. His expertise has been acknowledged from the other side. Its refreshing, especially on this issue to here and also the concerns on both sides. There are valid concerns. There are also valid concerns that both democrats and republicans agree, this is a good idea, its time to put this on the floor. I yield back. Thank you very much. As a young boy i remember studying about Philmont Scout ranch. I rattle on about the outer doors and a lot of things, but also learned about the people that were behind that. And the gentlemans name was phillips who gave the scout ranch the boy scouts of america. And he had a saying that went like this, take all the time you need, then make a quick decision. Take all the time you need. Well, i think we need to make i think weve taken all the time we need, now lets make a quick decision. I think thats what were trying to do today. I want to thank all three of you for being before the committee today. I hope your time was well worth it. Mr. Chairman, i know youre busy. You enjoy this way too much. We understood that. Thank you very much. This now closes the hearing portion of hr30 save america workers act of 2015 and hr3, the keystone xl pipeline act. Chairman will be in receipt of a motion from the gentlewoman from North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, i move the committee grant, hr3, the keystone xl pipeline act a closed rule. The rule provides one hour debate equally divided among and controlled by the chair and Ranking Member of the Minority Committee on transportation and infrastructure and the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. The rule provides that the bill shall be considered as read. Waives against all provisions in the bill. Provides one motion to recommit. Section two of the rule provides for consideration of hr30 to save American Workers act of 2015. Under a closed rule the rule provides one hour debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on ways and means. The rule waives all points of order versus consideration of the bill. The rule provides that the bill shall be considered as read. The rule waives all points of order against provisions in the bill. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit. The motion from the gentlewoman of North Carolina is there a discussion or amendment to that . Gentleman from colorado. Mr. Chairman the amendment to the rule, the necessary amendments. This amendment would increase the number of fulltime employees exempted from the calculation of the Affordable Care acts employer penalty. And increase the exemption from 30 to 49 employees to provide for a more rounded and probusiness way of accomplishing, i think, some of the goals of the deficit busting version that we otherwise would face. Further discussion. The vote will now be on the amendment from the gentleman from colorado. Those in favor, saying aye. Aye. Those opposing say no. No. Nos have it. The vote will now be on the motion from the gentlewoman from North Carolina. Those in favor, aye. Aye. Those opposed no. No. The ayes have it. Gentlewoman asked for roll call vote. Clerk . Ms. Fox. Aye. Mr. Cole . Aye. Aye. Mr. Woodall aye. Mr. Burgess aye. Mr. Stivers . Aye. Mr. Collins. Aye. Ms. Slaughter . No. Mr. Mcgovern . No. Mr. Hastings . No. Mr. Chairman . Aye. Mr. Chairman, aye. That would make it eio. Clerk will report the total. Seven yays four nays. And the gentleman from louis lewisville, texas, will begin on this for the republicans. And democrats. Mr. Pollis for the democrats. I want to thank not only the staff, the new staff and welcome them but also all the people including our great sten nothingstenographers who have taken time out of their day. This finishes the work for today and thank everybody for being here. This closes the hearing. At the white house today, president obama called the terrorist attack in paris this morning a, quote, cowardly evil act. The president spoke in the oval office. All of us recognize that france is one of our oldest allies, our strongest allies. They have been with us at every moment when weve from 9 11 on in dealing with some of the terrorist organizations around the world that threaten us. For us to see the kind of cowardly evil attacks that took place today i think, reinforces, once again, why its so important for us to stand in solidarity to them just as they stand in solidarity with us. The fact that this was an attack on journalists attack on our free press. Also underscores the degree to which these terrorists fear freedom of speech and freedom of the press. But the one thing that im very confident about is that the values that we share with the french people a belief a universal belief in freedom of expression is something that cant be silenced because of the senseless violence of the few. More from president obama later today here on cspan 3. Hes traveling to michigan to speak at a Ford Assembly plant about the u. S. Economy and job creation. Thats live at 3 45 p. M. Eastern, again, here on cspan 3. Until that starts, a conversation from this mornings washington journal. Governor gary herbert, the governor of utah, also the vice chair of National Governors association, good morning. Good morning to you. Youre in washington, you met with the president yesterday, what was on the agenda . I think mainly to say its a new year new beginning. A new opportunity for us to Work Together and certainly the governors and the states want to be a partner in shaping policy for the on the national stage. And frankly, the governors in the states are good resources for not only the president but for congress as we deal with some of these challenging issues for the american public. You and governor hickenlooper who is the chair of the Governors Association met with the president. What was on top whats top of the agenda list . Well transportation and reaut