U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) took to the Senate floor today to oppose the nomination of David Bernhardt, a former energy lobbyist and the president’s pick for the No. 2 spot at the U.S. Department of Interior.
“There are host of reasons, from his history of censoring scientists to his denial of climate change, but I am going to limit my remarks to his allegiance to the oil industry – specifically his disregard for the importance of the moratorium on any drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico,” Nelson said.
Nelson cited comments Bernhardt made during his confirmation hearing in support of the president’s actions to “increase offshore production” and “ examine new leasing opportunities within the [outer continental shelf].” Nelson called those comments “very troubling.”
“During his confirmation process, [Bernhardt] gave some very troubling answers to questions about the moratorium,” Nelson said. “When it comes to the eastern Gulf, there is no good way to increase offshore production while balancing environmental concerns. … And, secondly, as I have explained time and time again, it makes no sense to drill in an area that is critically important to the United States military.”
“The top brass in the Pentagon are asking that we extend this moratorium,” Nelson continued, citing two recent letters from Pentagon officials expressing support for Nelson’s plan to extend the current moratorium beyond 2022. “We should not put someone in charge at the Department of the Interior if he has an open objection to what is obviously needed for the national security.”
Nelson, a long-time opponent of drilling near Florida’s coast, filed legislation earlier this year to extend the current moratorium for another five years, from 2022 to 2027.
Copies of the two letters from Pentagon officials are available here and here.
Following is rush transcript of Nelson’s remarks.
U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson
Remarks on the Senate floor
July 20, 2017
Sen. Nelson: Madam President, I want to discuss this nomination. I’m here to add my voice to my colleague whose oppose the nomination of David Bernhart to be deputy secretary of Interior.
There are host of reasons from his history of censoring scientists, to his denial of climate change, but I am going to limit my remarks to his allegiance to the oil industry, specifically his disregard for the importance of the moratorium on any drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico.
During his confirming process — during his confirmation process he gave some very troubling answers to questions about the moratorium from, question from the ranking member, Senator Cantwell. She asked: “Do you support the current moratorium in relation to offshore drilling in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico?
He responded: “I am aware that, in response to the President’s recent Executive Order on the Outer Continental Shelf, Secretary Zinke issued a Secretarial Order 3350 directing the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to review and develop a new five-year plan.”
He continues, I support the President’s and Secretary’s actions to examine new leasing opportunities within the OCS in order to advance the administration’s energy agenda.” End of quote.
Then Senator Cantwell asking, “Do you support extending this moratorium?”
He responded, quote, “I support the president’s and secretary’s actions aimed at increasing offshore production while balancing conservation objectives.” End of quote.
Madam President, first of all, when it comes to the eastern Gulf, there is no good way to increase offshore production while balancing environmental concerns. The Gulf — the eastern Gulf is still recovering from the horrific 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion which fouled the Gulf all the way east into most of the panhandle of Florida.
And secondly, as I have explained time and time again, it makes no sense to drill in an area that is critically important to the United States Military, and likewise, is the largest testing and training area for the U.S. military in the world where we are testing our most sophisticated weapon systems and where we are sending our fighter pilots that need the open space to train, and that’s why they have the training at Tyndall Air Force Base of the F-22 and that’s why they have the training for pilots on the F-35 at Eglin Air Force Base.
And so that’s also why the chief of staff of the Air Force wrote in a letter just recently, quote, “The moratorium is essential for developing and sustaining the Air Force’s future combat capabilities.” End of quote.
Now, we have two letters, and I will make them a part of the record with the permission of the chair. These letters, one from the office of the Secretary of Defense, and two, from General Golfein, the chief of staff of the Air Force, two letters that say that they are needing to put a major investment of telemetry into the eastern Gulf range for all of the sophisticated weapons systems, and they don’t want this investment of infrastructure, and then the moratorium ends in the year 2022, they want it extended for another five years to 2027.
That’s a reasonable request by the Department of Defense and the Department of the Air Force, for all the reasons.
Now, for example, you can test, starting way down in the south off of Key West, and you can shoot a cruise missile and it could all the way, 300 miles, because of the size of this test range, and then it could have a land impact on Eglin Air Force Base. That is part of our testing regime.
So you say, well, why couldn’t the cruise missile weave around oil rig activities? Well, look at the new miniature cruise missiles that are out there, not one, but a swarm that takes up a big footprint that we are testing. These are the kinds — and this is just one example of a weapons system that you need lots of open space and his is a national asset. We don’t want to give it up.
And that’s why the top brass in the Pentagon are asking that we extend this moratorium so they can make those expensive investments in the telemetry.
So we should not put someone in charge at the Department of the Interior if he has an open objection to what is obviously needed for the national security and if he has such a demonstrated history of siding just with special interest, which would be a bad decision when it comes to the national security of this country.
And so for all of these reasons, I am going to oppose the nomination, buts that just one reason — but that’s just one reason — one item on an ever-growing list of concerns that this senator with the Department of Interior these days.
On June 29 Secretary Zinke announced that they were seeking a new-five-year plan for offshore oil and gas leasing. And unless anyone forgets, the current five-year plan was just finalized six months ago and it’s supposed to run through 2022.
So why is the department now going to spend more taxpayer money going through the whole process all over again? And the only reason that this senator can see is that the oil industry wants more acreage. They are going after the eastern Gulf of Mexico despite the fact that the Department of Defense is asking for exactly the opposite.
By the way, you ought to take in the very productive sections of the Gulf of Mexico off of Louisiana. There are acres and acres under lease, but you ought to see of all those acres under lease how much of those are actually drilled and or in production. It’s a small percentage of the acreage under lease that is actually drilled.
So why don’t we take advantage of the existing leases, particularly in the central Gulf, which is where the oil is, because that’s where all — that’s where all of the sediments over millions of years came down the Mississippi river, settled in what is today in the Gulf the earth’s crust compacted it and made it into oil and that’s where the oil is.
Now, remember also out in the eastern Gulf, the area off limits, the Eastern Test and Training Range. The Gulf Eastern Test and Training Range. The Air Force wants to extend that moratorium from 2022, 5 years, out to 2027 protect it for all of these reasons that we have been discussing here. And it’s all that open space we ought not give it up.
I’ll give you another example of the short memories over at the Department of Interior. After the 2010 BP oil spill it became clear the relationship between the regulators and the oil industry, it was a problem. So the mineral management service was divided into two separate agencies in the Department of Interior. The bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which regulates lease sales, and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, which is supposed to ensure safety standards are followed. And then less than a decade later people seem to have forgotten all of that, and they want to put the two back together again. That’s another example of what’s going on.
Not only that, but the administration is trying to roll back the safety rules, like the well-controlled rule that was finalized in November of last year, this long overdue rule seeks to prevent what went so tragically wrong on the Deep Water Horizon rig. It attempts to prevent it from ever happening again.
And every day it seems like the administration is coming up with a new way to put the Gulf at risk, and Florida’s coastline and tourism-driven economy at risk. And now putting at risk the national security of the country by messing up the largest testing and training range for the United States military in the world.
It’s utilized by all branches of service. As a matter of fact, when they closed down the Atlantic fleet of the navy from doing all of its training off of Puerto Rico at the island of Vieques, all that training came to the gulf. The squadrons, Navy squadrons come down for two weeks at a time to Key West Naval Air Station, the airport actually being on Boca Chica Key, and when they lift off on the runway, those F-18’s within two minutes they’re in restricted airspace so they don’t have to spend a lot of time and fuel to get to their training area.
I’ve heard from business owners, I’ve heard from residents across the entire state of Florida. They don’t want drilling in the eastern Gulf. They saw what can happen when the inevitable spill happens. We lose an entire season of tourism, and all that revenue goes away along with that loss.
Why do they know that? Well, the BP spill was off of Louisiana, but the winds then started carrying the oil slicks to the east. It got as far east as Pensacola beach, and the white sugary sands of Pensacola were covered in black oil. That was the photograph that went around the world. The winds continued to push it, and tar mats got over and on the beach at Destin. We were desperately trying to keep the oil out of going into Choctawhatchee Bay at Destin like it had already gone into Pensacola Bay at Pensacola. And then the winds kept pushing it to the east, and the tar balls ended up all over the tourism beaches of Panama City. And then the winds did us a favor. They reversed, and they started taking it back to the west.
So oil on some of the beaches, but what happened? For an entire year tourist season, the tourists didn’t come to the Gulf beaches not only in northwest Florida, but all down the peninsula, all the way down to Marco Island. And they lost an entire tourist season.
That’s why people are so upset about any messing around. And this senator brings to us, as I have spoken of what has happened, as I have stood up for the last four decades to fight to prevent those kind of spills from happening again off of the state of Florida, but now we have right here an issue in front of us something that could threaten the Department of Defense’s mission for being ready to protect this nation. And in that case my recommendation to the Senate is not to vote for this nomination for Deputy Secretary of the Interior because of his history in the past, but also how he responded to Senator Cantwell in the committee.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
Nominee
Senator Nelson will vote "no" on Health and Human Services nominee
Sen. Bill Nelson announced today that he will be voting against the nomination of Rep. Tom Price to head the Dept. of Health and Human Services.
“Seniors can’t take a chance on Congressman Price as their HHS secretary by virtue of what he’s already said and what his record is in the Congress,” Nelson said on the Senate floor this afternoon. “His plan would give seniors a fixed dollar amount – that’s the voucher – to buy insurance. That, most every economist would tell you, would mean higher monthly premiums. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, turning Medicare into a voucher program would cause seniors to pay 11% more out of their pocket. Is that what you want to do to our senior citizens? I don’t think so …
“The congressman also supports – get this – raising the Medicare eligibility age to 67 forcing seniors to wait for benefits they earned during their working years …
“Our country deserves an HHS secretary who will uphold those promises, not inflict deep cuts that alter the financial security Medicare provides Americans in their later years. And so for these reasons and others, sometime in this next 11 and a half hours when we vote, I’m going to vote no on this nominee. There’s too much at stake for our seniors to give this nominee the control over these programs.”
Here’s a link to watch the above excerpts of Nelson’s remarks: https://youtu.be/urgyVhug90w
Sen. Bill Nelson statement re: Supreme Court nominee
U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) issued the following statement today regarding Judge Neil Gorsuch’s nomination to the Supreme Court:
“Of course, I’m going to talk to him and listen to the Judiciary Committee hearing. But I have real concerns about what I believe are two of the most fundamental rights in our democracy: the right to vote and the right to know who you are voting for. And I specifically want to know how the judge feels about the suppression of voting rights and about the amount of undisclosed, unlimited money in campaigns.”
Florida leaders, elected officials call on Sens. Nelson and Rubio to reject Neil Gorsuch, Trump’s Supreme Court nominee
During a press call today, Florida leaders and elected officials called on Sens. Nelson and Rubio to reject Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court. Neil Gorsuch has made clear that he’ll put the interests of the wealthy and powerful above the rights of ordinary Americans. This nomination poses a unique threat to the rights of women, immigrants, LGBTQ people, and working families.
Shevrin Jones, State Representative:
“Americans count on the Supreme Court to protect the rights of all people, not just the rich and powerful. Judge Gorsuch, though, has repeatedly ruled in favor of big corporations, hurting working people and everyday Americans. If Gorsuch is confirmed to the bench, we’d see him sacrifice the rights of working people, stack the deck against consumers and in favor of corporations, and restrict access to health care for women and millions of poor Americans. Judge Gorsuch was hand-picked by powerful institutions for his loyalty to a judicial ideology that sacrifices the interests of ordinary Americans.”
Daisy Baez, State Representative:
“When I was serving in the Army, I took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. When I became a U.S. citizen, I took an oath to defend the Constitution. And when I was sworn in as a state representative, I took an oath to defend the Constitution. So here I am, defending the Constitution! Americans need a Supreme Court that will protect our Constitutional rights and promote justice for all, including American immigrants. Unfortunately, Judge Gorsuch will be anything but a fair-minded judge who protects all Americans. He’s tried to make it harder for Americans to hold big corporations accountable, and he would be a rubber stamp—not the check the judiciary is supposed to be—for Trump and his administration.”
Tony Lima, Executive Director of SAVE:
“Freedom, opportunity, and equality for all are essential principles of the American Dream. Americans have often turned to the Supreme Court to uphold those values and reject policies based in bigotry and discrimination. But Judge Gorsuch would turn his back on LGBTQ rights. His ruling in Hobby Lobby, which allowed corporations to refuse to offer birth control as part of healthcare coverage, raises serious red flags. And Gorsuch has criticized those who turn to the courts to protect LGBTQ rights! We insist that our Senators stand up for Floridians and fundamental American and constitutional principles and say no to Gorsuch.”
Damien Filer, Why Courts Matter Coalition spokesperson:
“In the system of checks and balances designed by our country’s founders, the Supreme Court plays a crucial role in defending the promises of the Constitution. But that only works if we have Supreme Court justices who are willing to do so. When we don’t, we can see disastrous results, like the Supreme Court’s conservatives voting to gut the Voting Rights Act, and opening the door to politicians making it harder for people to vote. Americans have made it clear that they are willing to stand up to our new president when he betrays our constitutional values. The Senate has a responsibility to ensure this nominee won’t be a rubber stamp for President Trump, especially when Trump’s actions threaten fundamental principles like religious or reproductive freedom, the rights of workers and the rights of all Americans to breathe clean air. We urge Floridians to get informed, get engaged and get active and let Senators Nelson and Rubio know this nominee is simply out of touch with mainstream American values.
Florida leaders, elected officials to respond to President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee
At tabindex=”0″ data-term=”goog_751862367″>8 PM today, President Trump will be announcing his Supreme Court nominee. If he picks as extreme of a nominee as we are expecting, Florida leaders and elected officials will call on Sen. Nelson and Sen. Rubio to stand up for the Constitution and reject the nominee. Speakers will make clear that the Senate cannot confirm a nominee who will simply be a rubber stamp for President Trump’s anti-constitutional efforts that betray American values.
WHO: Daisy Baez, State Representative
Tony Lima, Executive Director of SAVE
Damien Filer, Why Courts Matter Coalition spokesperson
WHAT: Tele-Press Conference Responding to Trump’s Supreme Court Pick
WHEN: Wednesday @ tabindex=”0″ data-term=”goog_751862369″>10am
RSVP: To RSVP and receive dial-in information, please email Damien@progressflorida.
HHS nominee dodges questions on closing Medicare donut hole
U.S. Rep. Tom Price, the president’s nominee to head the Department of Health and Human Services, refused to say during a confirmation hearing today whether he supports certain key provisions of the Affordable Care Act that are saving Florida’s seniors, on average, nearly $1,000 per year on the cost of their prescription drugs.
“I’m humble enough to believe that there are better ideas out there,” Price said in response to a question by U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL), who earlier this month filed legislation that would have prevented the Senate from repealing the provisions aimed at closing the gap in Medicare’s prescription drug coverage, commonly known as the “donut hole.”
“Congressman,” Nelson responded, “as their senator and as the protector of senior citizens in Florida, I can’t get away with an answer like that. I’ve got to tell them that I am going to support your right to get drugs under Medicare Part D just like you’re getting it now and not take it away from you.”
Below is a rush transcript and here’s a link to watch video of the exchange: https://youtu.be/L2aWyI1XZ10.
U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson
Senate Finance Committee Hearing
Jan. 24, 2017
Nelson: I mentioned earlier, and I did so yesterday, that senior citizens – we have 4 million in Florida on Medicare – but there are almost 2 million people in Florida that now get their health care through the ACA and on Medicare Part D, the drugs, what we have tried to do, is close the amount of money that seniors have to pull out of their own pocket, otherwise known as the “donut hole.” You want to comment, Congressman, about whether or not seniors should have retained that federal ability to purchase their drugs?
Price: Well, in view of the fact that two of those senior citizens in your state are my mother-in-law and my father-in-law, I need to tread very carefully here. It’s – the concern that I have about, one of the concerns I have about drugs for being available for seniors is the accessibility of the drugs that they need and desire. And so we need to make sure that formularies aren’t limited, that we aren’t decreasing the access and availability of medications that seniors have available to them for the care that they receive.
Nelson: And so, the part of the ACA that closed that donut hole for senior citizens, you would support that part?
Price: As I say, I think it’s imperative that we provide the greatest amount of opportunity for individual seniors to be able to gain access to the drugs that they need. So often times in these discussions we think whatever we’re doing right now is the only solution that’s possible and I just – again I’m humble enough to believe that there are better ideas out there and if we find a better idea that actually provides greater coverage at a lower cost, more efficiently and more responsive to patients, then we ought to say – we ought to be able to admit that we would embrace that if it were to come along.
Nelson: Congressman, as their senator and as their protector of senior citizens in Florida, I can’t get away with an answer like that. I’ve got to tell them that I am going to support your right to get drugs under Medicare Part D just like you’re getting it now and not take it away from you.
Price: And, I understand that. And I would respectfully suggest that if we used as a society the line, we’re going to maintain the kind of quality coverage that we have right now unless we’re able to improve it and then we just might be able to do that for you.
Nelson: And if I gave them that answer I’d get run out of the room with a group of senior citizens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
