Oil state Democrats in the US House seem caught in a dilemma. On one hand, their party leaders advocate energy solutions that do not include oil and gas. On the other, many of their constituents work in that very industry or related businesses.
But three such members say it’s easy to resolve that question. Their constituents’ interests come first. What’s more, they told me, the House’s Democratic leadership understands.
“People sometimes ask me why I’m so supportive [of oil and gas]. We have to represent our districts. In mine, we do everything. We still have producing wells. There are several service companies, refineries, and petrochemical plants,” explained Gene Green (Tex.).
Soon after Democrats regained control of the House in the 2006 elections, Green and others in the party from producing states began to meet informally. “We’re not a large group, so we typically coordinate quickly on the floor and in our committees. But we can come to a decision without taking much time because there aren’t that many of us,” he said.
Weren’t in the room
One problem with H.R. 2615, the so-called “Use it or lose it” bill, was that House Democrats who understand the oil and gas industry weren’t in the room when it was being discussed, according to Charlie Melancon (La.). If they had been, they would have mentioned factors ranging from rig availability to the time it takes to examine and evaluate a lease before starting to drill, he said.
The situation has improved recently, Melancon continued. “We’ve been meeting more with the leadership. They’ve been asking for more meetings, in fact. Will we move something? I don’t know,” he said.
“The leadership is always seeking new ideas,” said Dan Boren (Okla.). While my vote is not always in line with what it decides, it has been very [open] to listening to new ideas. Frankly, when the Republicans were in control, they governed with more of an iron fist. The Democrats have been more open on these issues.”
‘A complex question’
Melancon said, “It’s a complex question, a worldwide problem with domestic elements. I understand where the leadership is coming from, but we need to get past punitive actions and provide more incentives for increased domestic production, for conservation, and for alternatives,” he said.
Oil state Democrats in the House are particularly active in committees, where they also work with leaders. Boren said Jim Costa (Calif.), who heads the Natural Resources Committee’s Energy and Minerals Resources Subcommittee, and Rick Boucher (Va.), who chairs the Energy and Commerce Committee’s Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee, are particularly knowledgeable.
“The leadership always has met with us and sought our advice. We’re obviously in the minority so we’ve tried to shape policy around the edges by sharing our concerns. I’ve been in discussions with our entire leadership team on multiple issues. Even though I’ve voted against several bills, there’s always been an open line of communication,” he said.