[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CONSUMER CHOICE ON THE BACKBURNER:
EXAMINING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S
REGULATORY ASSAULT ON
AMERICANS' GAS STOVES
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC GROWTH, ENERGY POLICY, AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 24, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-37
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: govinfo.gov,
oversight.house.gov or
docs.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
52-571 WASHINGTON : 2023
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman
Jim Jordan, Ohio Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Ranking
Mike Turner, Ohio Minority Member
Paul Gosar, Arizona Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Columbia
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Gary Palmer, Alabama Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Clay Higgins, Louisiana Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Pete Sessions, Texas Ro Khanna, California
Andy Biggs, Arizona Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
Nancy Mace, South Carolina Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Jake LaTurner, Kansas Katie Porter, California
Pat Fallon, Texas Cori Bush, Missouri
Byron Donalds, Florida Jimmy Gomez, California
Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota Shontel Brown, Ohio
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
William Timmons, South Carolina Robert Garcia, California
Tim Burchett, Tennessee Maxwell Frost, Florida
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia Becca Balint, Vermont
Lisa McClain, Michigan Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Lauren Boebert, Colorado Greg Casar, Texas
Russell Fry, South Carolina Jasmine Crockett, Texas
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Dan Goldman, New York
Chuck Edwards, North Carolina Jared Moskowitz, Florida
Nick Langworthy, New York
Eric Burlison, Missouri
Mark Marin, Staff Director
Jessica Donlon, Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel
David Ehmen, Counsel
Kim Waskowsky, Professional Staff Member
Mallory Cogar, Deputy Director of Operations and Chief Clerk
Contact Number: 202-225-5074
Julie Tagen, Minority Staff Director
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
Subcommittee On Economic Growth, Energy Policy, And Regulatory Affairs
Pat Fallon, Texas, Chairman
Byron Donalds, Florida Cori Bush, Missouri, Ranking
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania Minority Member
Lisa McClain, Michigan Shontel Brown, Ohio
Lauren Boebert, Colorado Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
Russell Fry, South Carolina Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Columbia
Chuck Edwards, North Carolina Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Nick Langworthy, New York Ro Khanna, California
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on May 24, 2023..................................... 1
Witnesses
----------
Mr. Matthew Agen, Assistant General Counsel, American Gas
Association
Oral Statement................................................... 4
Mr. Kenny Stein, Vice President of Policy, Institute for Energy
Research
Oral Statement................................................... 6
Mr. Ben Lieberman, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise
Institute
Oral Statement................................................... 8
Mr. Andrew deLaski, Executive Director, Appliance Standards
Awareness Project
Oral Statement................................................... 9
Alejandro Moreno, (Invited), Acting Assistant Secretary, Office
of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of
Energy
Dr. Carolyn Snyder, (Invited), Dep. Asst. Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,
U.S. Department of Energy
Opening statements and the prepared statements for the witnesses
are available in the U.S. House of Representatives Repository
at: docs.house.gov.
Index of Documents
----------
* Letter, from Rep. Fallon and Rep. Comer to DOE, May 24, 2023;
submitted by Rep. Fallon.
* Statement for the Record, Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers (AHAM); submitted by Rep. Fallon.
* Statement for the Record, American Public Gas Association;
submitted by Rep. Langworthy.
* Letter, from Consumer Federation of America and the National
Consumer Law Center; submitted by Rep. Bush.
* Questions for the Record: to Mr. Matthew J. Agen; submitted
by Rep. Langworthy.
* Questions for the Record: to Mr. Lieberman; submitted by
Subcommittee Chairman Fallon.
* Questions for the Record: to Mr. Stein; submitted by
Subcommittee Chairman Fallon.
* Questions for the Record: to Mr. Matthew J. Agen; submitted
by Subcommittee Chairman Fallon.
The documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov.
CONSUMER CHOICE ON THE BACKBURNER:
EXAMINING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S
REGULATORY ASSAULT ON
AMERICANS' GAS STOVES
----------
Wednesday, May 24, 2023
House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Accountability
Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy
Policy, and Regulatory Affairs
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Pat Fallon
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Fallon, Donalds, Edwards, Bush,
Krishnamoorthi, Khanna, and Brown.
Also present: Representatives Palmer, Issa, and Moskowitz.
Mr. Fallon. This hearing on the Subcommittee on Economic
Growth, Energy Policy, and Regulatory Affairs will come to
order.
I want to welcome everyone. Without objection, the Chair
may declare a recess at any time.
I ask unanimous consent for Representative Palmer of
Alabama, Representative Issa from California, Representative
Moskowitz from Florida to waive on to this Committee for the
purposes of asking questions during this hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening
statement.
Today we are going to examine the Department of Energy's
proposed rule on conventional cooktop stoves and more
specifically its de facto ban on gas stoves. This proposed rule
is just one in a series of recent actions that embody the Biden
Administration's whole of government approach to overregulate
American's day-to-day lives.
Like many of you, I was shocked when I first heard the
report that the Federal Government was even considering such a
proposal. I thought surely this cannot be true. It is some
clickbait. But, no, after looking into the details, it is,
unfortunately, true. It is a de facto ban. The Biden
Administration is looking to regulate gas stoves out of
existence. We know that the Department has the authority to
regulate energy efficiency standards for appliances and has
done so far--you know, they have done that for decades without
really a major issue.
But since Joe Biden took office, he made it clear from day
one that he was on a mission to abolish fossil fuels. Under his
watch energy prices have skyrocketed, while agencies push
through rules to suppress energy production and hurt American
energy independence. His Administration is even going after
Americans' household appliances. What is more American than a
gas stove? And not just gas stoves. It is also targeting
dishwashers, refrigerators, water heaters, furnaces, and even
air-conditioners.
So, while Americans suffer under the weight of inflation
that has not let up--it was not transitory--the Biden
Administration is trying to make Americans' lives even more
expensive. The Biden Administration does not seem to understand
it is supposed to be government of, by, and for the people, not
bureaucrats, and not the beltway. Or maybe it is just that that
is why it is taking such an effort to hide this agenda from the
American people.
For example, today we have another Biden Administration
agency refusing to testify about a rulemaking--a rule and
rulemaking authority that is affecting so many Americans. The
Department of Energy ought to be here at this hearing to answer
questions about rulemaking on its gas stoves. But, again, it is
not. The Department of Energy refused to come, claiming that
the rulemaking process is ongoing. That is exactly when
Congress should be asking questions, not when it is finished.
What the Department of Energy--you know, what are they
hiding? Why is it--why are they afraid to come and answer
questions about one of its own priorities before the elected
representatives of the people? Well, they cannot keep hiding.
That is why Chairman Comer and I have sent an invitation for
Under Secretary Dr. Geri Richmond to testify about not just
this rulemaking, but the entire Department of Energy's
rulemaking agenda for home appliances. And I ask unanimous
consent to enter this letter into the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Fallon. The American people deserve to understand the
Biden Administration's efforts to regulate their stoves, their
furnaces, their appliances, and, quite frankly, their lives.
That said, I thank the witnesses for appearing today and
for your willingness to testify about this important issue.
And with that, I yield to Ranking Member Bush for her
opening statement.
Ms. Bush. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
St. Louis and I are here today to discuss climate, the
environment, and the very air we breathe, not just gas stoves.
I wish my Republican colleagues were as concerned about
Black and Brown communities on the frontlines of our climate
crisis as they are about an appliance. This proposed rule is
not a ban on gas stoves. This proposed rule is not a ban on gas
stoves. We are regulating indoor air pollution. The climate
crisis is happening all around us, and Republican inaction is
costing us lives. As lawmakers, we have a moral obligation to
prioritize the health and well-being of every person across our
country.
I represent a community where the threat of climate
pollution comes from both inside and outside our homes. In St.
Louis City, Black children are twice as likely to test positive
for lead in their blood than White children. St. Louis ranks
among the highest across our country for rates of asthma, with
rates significantly higher for Black residents than White
residents.
I can only imagine the number of my constituents who are
unknowingly being poisoned by their gas stove in the state that
it is without this proposed rule being in effect, especially
young children, our elders, and people with disabilities who
are disproportionately at risk for contracting respiratory
illnesses.
Let us not forget that many of these gas stoves are not
owned by the residents of those homes, but often absentee or
corporate landlords. That is a thing. We have a number of
housing regulations in place to ensure that renters are kept
safe. This also applies when we speak about keeping renters
safe to the indoor air pollution, how that should be a top
concern. This proposed rule is not a ban on gas stoves.
Research proves that improving the energy efficiency of gas
stoves and switching to electric stoves completely will save
lives, will save money, and will save our environment. The
Department of Energy estimates that the updated standards to
improve gas stove energy efficiency will save consumers at
least $100 million, provide climate benefits of $67 million,
and health benefits of $65 million each year.
Congress has an obligation to make smart and forward-
thinking investments with taxpayer dollars to ensure our future
generations are not plagued by illnesses that lawmakers can
prevent today.
It is important to recognize that gas stoves perpetuate an
unsustainable reliance on fossil fuels and can cause
significant health issues. We know the Department of Energy's
proposed rule and new efficiency standards will reduce both the
negative climate and negative health impacts.
The Department of Energy policy would keep our communities
safe, so it is no surprise the Republicans are against it.
Republicans are consistently against regulations that maintain
workplace safety standards, enact gun control to keep our
children safe in schools, and allow access to reproductive
care.
These standards are not a ban on gas stoves, but a way to
move the Nation forward and reduce health and climate risks to
people in our planet while giving consumers more information
and more options. Gas stoves have long been linked to serious
health hazards, especially in children who grow up in homes
with gas stoves.
According to the Scientific American, scientists have long
known that gas stoves emit pollutants that irritate human
airways and can cause or exacerbate respiratory problems.
We have the tools and the technology to address these
issues definitively within the timeline DOE set forth. Three
years to allow manufacturers to produce more energy efficient
stoves is being generous. The real work comes in communicating
with folks at home and urging them to consider the necessary
changes, making these changes to keep their household and their
family safe and working with the administration to ensure every
single family has access to safe, effective, and affordable
appliances.
This proposed rule is not a ban on gas stoves. As Ranking
Member of this Subcommittee, I know that the work starts today.
I implore my colleagues to join Democrats in the serious work
of helping keep our communities safe and informed rather than
partaking in the unserious work of sensationalizing safety
standards by DOE and misconstruing the science and
misconstruing the facts.
Thank you. And I yield back.
Mr. Fallon. I am pleased today to welcome our panel of
witnesses.
First, I would like to welcome Matt Agen who currently
serves as Chief Regulatory Counsel for Energy at the American
Gas Association. He brings with him over 18 years of experience
in both private and public sector working on numerous facets of
the energy industry.
Our second witness today is Kenny Stein, Vice President of
Policy at the Institute for Energy Research who specializes in
domestic and international energy policy, environmental
regulation and policy, Federal and land management policy,
federalism, and legislative analysis.
Our next witness is Ben Lieberman, a Senior Fellow at the
Competitive Enterprise Institute, who also served as Senior
Counsel on the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
Our last witness today is Andrew deLaski, an Executive
Director at the Appliance Standards Awareness Project.
I welcome all of you here today and look forward to hearing
your testimony on this important topic.
Pursuant to Committee Rule 9(g), the witnesses will please
stand and raise their right hands.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are
about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but truth, so help you God?
Let the record show that the witnesses have all answered in
the affirmative.
Please feel free to take your seats.
We appreciate you being here today and look forward to your
testimony. Let me remind you that we have read your written
statements, and they will appear in full in the hearing record.
Please limit your oral testimony to five minutes.
As a reminder, just press the little button to talk so we
can all hear you. And the first four minutes you are going to
get a little green button, and then the last minute it will be
yellow, and then red is kind of wrap-up.
I recognize Matt Agen to please begin your opening
statement.
STATEMENT OF MATTHEW AGEN
CHIEF REGULATORY COUNSEL, ENERGY
AMERICAN GAS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Agen. Thank you, Chairman Fallon and Ranking Member
Bush and the Members of the Committee.
My name is Matthew Agen. I'm the Chief Regulatory Counsel
for Energy at the American Gas Association. The American Gas
Association represents over 200 local distribution companies
that serve customers throughout the United States.
The natural gas distribution system in the United States
serves approximately 187 million Americans, and that includes
5.5 million businesses. I appreciate the opportunity to speak
today on DOE's proposed cooktop rule.
AGA's members have long supported energy efficiency and
conservation efforts. AGA member gas utilities spend
approximately $4.3 million a day on energy efficiency programs.
These efforts have resulted in a 50 percent decline in
residential natural gas use per customer since 1970.
AGA's members are also serious about climate change and
fighting to reduce emissions. Methane emissions from the
distribution system have declined 70 percent since 1990, and
that includes adding approximately 750,000 miles of pipe to the
systems.
AGA has also issued a climate change commitment aimed at
reducing greenhouse gas emissions through innovation and
modernizing the infrastructure, and that includes adding
renewable natural gas and hydrogen to the gas systems.
Despite attempts to limit customer access to appliances and
gas service, natural gas remains popular with customers and
businesses. More than one new residential customer signs up for
natural gas every minute, and approximately 80 businesses sign
up for new natural gas service every day.
Households that use natural gas for heating, cooking, and
clothes drying save an average of $1,068 a year as compared to
homes that use electricity for those applications. Moreover,
the natural gas system is 92 percent efficient from production
to customer.
Turning to DOE's proposed rule, AGA respects and supports
DOE's role in setting energy efficiency standards. The natural
gas industry is ready, willing, and able to support cost-
effective, consumer friendly efficiency measures that are
economically justified and technologically feasible.
Unfortunately, DOE's proposal is an attempt to remove a
large portion of natural gas cooking products from the market
that would result in nominal energy savings and limited cost
savings.
DOE's own testing resulted in a 96 percent failure rate.
When DOE later accounted for additional models that were not
included in testing, it estimated that the cooking products
rule would wipe out 50 percent of the current gas cooktops from
the market. Eliminating anywhere between 50 and 96 percent of
the available gas stoves from the market is simply not
justifiable.
Furthermore, the proposed rule would eliminate features
that make gas stoves popular, such as high input burners that
allow for quicker cooking and cast-iron grates that allow for a
level cooking surface and the ability to slide a pot safely
across the cooktop.
Regarding the purported benefits of the proposal, DOE's own
analysis projects that this extraordinary regulatory action
would result in a customer cost savings of a scant $1.51 cents
per year.
Regarding the test procedures that underpin DOE's rule, AGA
has explained to DOE that the test procedures were flawed
because they were bias against gas products. AGA is also
concerned that the proposed rule will lead designers and
manufacturers to leave the market instead of spending millions
of dollars to comply with the proposed rule.
The Proposed Cooking Products Rule is not DOE's only effort
to limit access to gas appliances. DOE currently has
rulemakings pending that would remove a large number of gas
furnaces from the market, as well as other gas products, which
will increase cost to customers. DOE is also attempting to
eliminate natural gas from new and renovated Federal buildings.
DOE is not acting alone. DOE is acting in conjunction with
various other agencies in an effort to eliminate or restrict
direct use of natural gas.
Based on the aforementioned factors, as well as others, AGA
requests that DOE rescind the Proposed Cooking Products Rule,
and AGA encourages DOE to work with stakeholders to develop a
new approach.
I look forward to answering your questions today on this
important topic.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you.
And I now recognize Kenny Stein for his opening statement.
Mr. Stein.
STATEMENT OF KENNY STEIN
VICE PRESIDENT FOR POLICY
INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY RESEARCH
Mr. Stein. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to
testify at this hearing.
The Department of Energy's proposed rulemaking on
conservation standards for gas stoves is not a sincere attempt
to improve efficiency. This rulemaking is yet another piece of
this Administration's whole-of-government approach to targeting
energy sources that it disproves of for ideological reasons. It
is an attempt to stop consumers from using a product, natural
gas, that is an affordable, abundant, and convenient.
This proposed rule is deficient in its justification and is
outright illegal, obviously violating the plain language of the
statute. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the statutory
authority relied upon for this rulemaking, is a consumer
protection statute. The law does mandate energy efficiency
standards, but it also protects consumers from overreach from
the Department of Energy.
In the case of the proposed conservation standards for
conventional cooking products, i.e., gas stoves, DOE is
overreaching in multiple ways and violating the plain text of
EPCA.
While there are other deficiencies in the proposed rule, I
will focus my comments on two specific legal failures. This
rule violates the features provision of EPCA, and it violates
the significant savings of energy requirement of EPCA. By the
features provision of EPCA, I'm referring to 42, U.S.C.,
629404. EPCA is designed to protect consumers economically, but
it also protects consumers from DOE removing useful products
from the market. The Secretary of Energy under that section is
forbidden by statute from promulgating regulations which result
in the unavailability of products or product features.
In the technical support document for this proposed rule,
there are 21 gas stoves in DOE's test sample that met DOE's
screening criteria of including important features such as
continuous cast iron grates and at least one high input rate
burner.
In the TSD, DOE also specifically acknowledges that
continuous grates and high input rate burner are features under
EPCA. Of the products in the test sample, only a single stove
met DOE's proposed standard, meaning that only four percent of
the units included in the test sample met DOE's proposed
standard.
Elsewhere in the TSD, DOE characterizes the 21-stove sample
as representative of the gas stove market. Promulgating a rule
where only four percent of the market, according to DOE, would
meet the standard, violates the features provision of EPCA.
But it gets worse. IER's research suggests that the one gas
stove that did comply with DOE's standard is actually no longer
on the market. DOE does not disclose the models in its test
sample, instead only gives the test units an anonymous number.
This failure to provide the model number deprives the public of
critical information necessary for the public to have proper
notice of the impact of regulation.
In the case of this proposed rule, the lack of model
numbers is especially troublesome because, if our research is
correct, it appears that the only model in DOE's test sample
for conventional gas stoves that meets DOE's proposed standard
is no longer on the market.
From our research we found two slightly different model
numbers that meet the description in the TSD of test unit
number 2, both from Dacor. The problem is that these related
models have been discontinued. Now, it is possible that test
unit number 2 was not one of the Dacor models that we
identified or a similar unit, but because DOE does not actually
disclose the models, the public cannot even be sure that there
are any products that meet this standard.
If our research is correct, though, DOE is proposing a
standard where zero products with important features meet DOE's
standard and are available for purchase. This is a facial
violation of EPCA.
DOE attempts to muddy these waters with its February 2023
Notice of Data Availability. In the NODA, DOE provides
information on three additional gas stoves that were screened
out of the original 21 included in the TSD. These do meet the
proposed efficiency standard; but as DOE noted, they do not
include the useful features of having high input rate burners
and continuous cast iron grates. DOE has not provided any
information on the actual testing of any additional gas stoves.
Thus, from the data DOE has provided in the TSD, the
proposed rule, and the NODA, DOE has not tested a single gas
stove that, one, meets the standard; two, has the required
features; and, three, is available for purchase. Even if only
one gas stove is available for purchase, only one of 21 gas
stoves demonstrates DOE's proposal to eliminate the vast
majority of gas stoves that have important features for
consumers. This is a clear violation of the law.
This proposed rule also violates EPCA's requirement of
significant energy savings. As part of Congress' statutory
scheme to protect consumers from DOE, EPCA required that,
quote, new or amended standards must result in significant
conservation of energy.
Even though this regulation is overly aggressive and may
make all gas stoves with continuous cast iron grates and high
input rate burners illegal, it still does not provide
significant savings of energy. For gas stoves, DOE's TSD states
that consumers will only save $21.89 cents over the 14.5 year
average life of the product, or $1.51 a year. Saving $1.51 in
energy a year is not a significant savings of energy. But it
actually gets worse when you look at the consumer savings for
electric stoves.
Consumers will only save $13.29 over the 16.8 year average
life of the electric stove, or a mere $0.79 a year. This
miniscule monetary savings is a direct result of miniscule
energy savings and, therefore, not a significant savings of
energy required under EPCA.
These two clear violations of EPCA exposed in this proposed
rule as contrary to statute, and the Department of Energy must
abandon this regulatory overreach.
Thank you. And I look forward to your questions.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you.
I now recognize Ben Lieberman for his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF BEN LIEBERMAN
SENIOR FELLOW
COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE
Mr. Lieberman. Chair Fallon, Ranking Member Bush, and
Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today on an issue that few, if any of us, thought would
get this much attention when the year began, stoves.
My name is Ben Lieberman, and I'm a Senior Fellow at the
Competitive Enterprise Institute, CEI, a nonprofit, nonpartisan
public policy organization that concentrates on regulatory
issues from a free market perspective. I work in CEI's Energy
and Environment Department where I cover a number of regulatory
programs, including Department of Energy, DOE, appliance
efficiency standards, such as the first ever proposed rule for
stoves at issue here.
Prior to joining CEI in 2018, I was a staff member on the
House Energy and Commerce Committee where I also worked on DOE
appliance regulations, although it was mainly other appliances
and overall process reforms and not stoves that were the focus
of the Committee's attention at that time.
I include in my testimony an April 17, 2023, comment to the
agency critical of its stove proposal which was signed by 30
other free market organizations. The regulatory comment focuses
on the underlying statute, the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act of 1975, or EPCA, from which DOE derives its authority to
regulate appliances.
Contrary to some descriptions, EPCA does not take an
efficiency-at-all-cost approach to appliance regulations. In
fact, the statute contains a number of provisions to protect
consumers from excessively stringent standards that may do more
harm than good and reduce freedom of choice. But,
unfortunately, these provisions have frequently been ignored by
the agency in their zeal to crank out more and more
regulations.
Things have only gotten worse now that the agency is trying
to use these regulations to advance climate objectives at the
expense of consumers. This is particularly true of appliances
that come in natural gas and electric versions such as
furnaces, water heaters, and stoves.
Natural gas has a lot of advantages for consumers,
including being over three times cheaper than electricity on a
per unit energy basis. But natural gas is also a fossil fuel
and, thus, is a target of the Biden Administration's all-
encompassing climate agenda.
The proposed rule disproportionately burdens gas stoves
relative to electric versions and threatens to take away some
of the features people like about gas stoves. Doing so violates
the law but, more importantly, it is bad policy. Consumers
should decide what kind of stoves they want in their kitchen,
not the government.
DOE's stove rule is just one of many efforts on the part of
the Biden Administration to wean Americans off natural gas
stoves and other appliances and in favor of electrifying
everything. Indeed, DOE is, but one, of two agencies currently
targeting gas stoves.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission is the other. And at
the same time the Administration supports state and local bans
on natural gas hookups in new construction and opposes natural
gas pipelines. You cannot have a natural gas stove if you do
not have natural gas.
New subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act further tilt
the balance heavily in favor of electric stoves, $840 for a new
electric stove, but zero for a new gas stove. An upstream of
the end user hostility to natural gas drilling on Federal lands
and natural gas pipelines threatens the cost advantage natural
gas currently enjoys over electricity. Make no mistake, there
is a war on natural gas, and it is extending into our homes and
into our kitchens.
In sum, I would like to emphasize that this hearing really
is not about what kind of stove is better or which kind of
energy source is better. It is about who gets to decide these
things. And on this point, I think the decision should always
rest with the homeowner and not the Federal Government.
Thank you.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you, sir.
I now recognize Andrew deLaski for his opening statement.
(Minority Witness)
STATEMENT OF ANDREW DELASKI
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
APPLIANCE STANDARDS AWARENESS PROJECT
Mr. deLaski. Chairman Fallon, Ranking Member Bush, and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify today.
My name is Andrew deLaski. I'm the Executive Director of
the Appliance Standards Awareness Project. ASAP works to
advance appliance efficiency standards that save money,
particularly for low-and moderate-income households, as well as
cut air pollution, planet warming emissions, and water waste.
ASAP is housed within the American Council for Energy Efficient
Economy, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that works to lead
and advance energy efficiency policies, programs, and
technologies.
I would like to start by making three points about
appliance efficiency standards before turning to the proposed
stove standards.
First, efficiency standards save consumers money, and they
protect consumer choice. Federal appliance standards are a
money saver for American households. As a result of standards
in effect today, the typical American household saves roughly
$500 a year on their annual utility bills. That is real money.
The program was designed to ensure that consumers see cost
savings across a wide variety of appliances and equipment.
By law, the Department of Energy must periodically review
and update standards to reduce energy costs and emissions
across appliances. The law also requires the duty to ensure
that consumers continue to have access to the product choices
that they value.
Contrary to recent misinformation, DOE is expressly
prohibited from eliminating categories of products that use a
particular fuel type and has not proposed any standard that
would do that.
Robust energy efficiency standards help reduce energy bills
for low-and moderate-income Americans. These households spend a
disproportionate share of their income on their energy bills.
They tend to benefit most from energy efficiency standards
because they are often renters, with little control over the
energy efficiency of the appliances that get put into their
homes. Equally important, standards ensure that manufacturers
include energy-saving innovations throughout their product
offerings, including their basic, low price point models, the
ones that typically are bought by low-and moderate-income
purchasers.
The second point I want to make is that efficiency
standards enhance U.S. energy security. The Federal appliance
standards program is a strategy to boost energy security that
dates back to the aftermath of the energy crisis of the 1970's.
Energy efficiency standards bolster our Nation's energy
security and independence by freeing up critical natural gas,
oil, electricity supplies, and reducing the need for imported
fuels. In addition, by reducing peak electricity and natural
gas demand, standards make our energy systems more robust and
resilient.
Third point, there is bipartisan support for strong energy
efficiency standards. Recent polling by Morning Consult
demonstrates the breadth and strength of this support. Three in
five adults support stronger standards including a super
majority of Democrats and a plurality of Republicans. Polling
over more than a decade demonstrates very durable public
support for improving energy efficiency. The public support is
cutting energy waste and saving money.
This Administration has been working toward its statutory
requirements to finalize more than 40 standards due by the end
of 2025, including many that are long overdue by law. Once
finalized, these standards are poised to save an additional
$570 billion for consumers and avert 2.4 billion metric tons of
climate emissions on a cumulative basis according to the
Administration's estimates. We estimate that the typical
household could save nearly $350 annually once upgraded
standards are implemented and compliant products are the norm.
In my last couple of minutes here, I'll focus on stoves,
and let me be clear: There is no ban on gas stoves. This
argument is a red herring. DOE does not have a statutory
authority to ban gas stoves and has not made any such proposal.
If the proposed standard is finalized, consumers would continue
to have a wide variety of gas stove models from which to
choose.
The proposed efficiency standard for gas stoves would
benefit consumers. About half the gas stoves sold today already
meet the proposed standard. Others, primarily the luxury,
commercial style models, would require modest improvements,
resulting in about a 30 percent reduction in energy use to do
the same amount of cooking. That is a good thing. That will
both save consumers money and improve public health outcomes.
These modest energy efficiency improvements, and others for
electric cooking products too, will add up to $1.7 billion in
savings for consumers over time. That is why the Consumer
Federation of America, the Natural Consumer Law Center, who are
prominent voices for low-and moderate-income consumers, support
the proposed standard. And I've recently submitted letters to
the Committee and to the Department expressing their support.
By law, DOE must adopt the maximum improved standard that
is technologically feasible and economically justified. That is
what the law requires. A final rule for stoves is now six years
overdue, and as part of a settlement, DOE must finalize new
standards by next January. If finalized, the proposed rule
would take effect in 2027, providing manufacturers with
significant time to modernize any designs as needed.
In conclusion, energy efficiency standards for household
appliances and commercial equipment have been a cost-saving
feature of American energy policy for decades. It has been
working and working well. The DOE should expeditiously finalize
strong energy efficiency standards to secure real cost energy
savings and long-term energy security for the American people.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you.
I now recognize myself for five minutes of questions.
Mr. Agen, you just heard Mr. deLaski say that if this rule
goes into effect, there is still going to be a wide variety of
gas stoves available for consumers.
Do you agree with that statement?
Mr. Agen. No. Like he even said, they are going to wipe out
50 percent of the market. Fifty percent of the market will not
comply with DOE's proposed rule. That is a substantial amount
of gas cooktops. Of the higher end cooktops, professional grade
cooking products, again, about 96 percent will be wiped out.
So, a large chunk of the desirable products with the
features that people are looking for will be wiped out, and
that will go all the way down to the mid-range to low-range
product as well.
Mr. Fallon. But, Mr. Agen, they said this is not a ban. My
colleague said it was not a ban. We have a witness that says it
was not a ban. So, is it not a ban?
Mr. Agen. Basically it is going to amount to just--there
are going to be fewer, a lot fewer choices, and it would really
effectively be a ban in the sense that----
Mr. Fallon. Ah-hah. So, a de facto ban.
Mr. Agen. You basically will--an indirect way of banning
gas.
Mr. Fallon. So, overregulating and regulating to such
degree that is, in fact, pretty much a ban, except for the four
percent that already complied?
Mr. Agen. Right.
Mr. Fallon. So, for the 96 percent, you are kind of out of
luck?
Mr. Agen. You will get the choice that you probably do not
want at the store basically.
Mr. Fallon. A choice for consumers.
Mr. Agen. Right.
Mr. Fallon. Choice, interesting. OK.
Can you explain the versatility in performance of gas
stoves compared to electric stoves? Because I love gas stoves.
In fact, I was just talking to counsel. He is looking for a
house. He would not even buy a house unless it had a gas stove,
and I tend to agree. And if I go to a place, like a VRBO, and
they have a gas stove, I get excited. It is just me, anecdotal.
But you go ahead.
Mr. Agen. No. So, gas stoves, obviously, are very versatile
and have features that people want. The important thing is,
obviously, people like having the immediate control over the
flame, being able to control the cooking temperature, being
able to react quickly, temperatures can go up and down, and
then also cooking a variety of products. If you are looking at
cooking at high heat or sear, you can do meat or vegetables in
that way, looking to boil a large amount of pasta or any kind
of rice. It basically makes it more efficient to do cooking.
And, also, these cooking products are actually not just
used for residential purposes. If you are a small business
working out of your home, it provides that level of versatility
that allows you to work in your home business and get things
done in that fashion.
Mr. Fallon. So, let us talk about, like, states that are
calling for gas stove bans. New York comes to mind. Celebrity
chefs are suing. They like their gas stoves. They are the
experts with the culinary deliciousness that we, as Americans,
like so much. They get exceptions for their businesses. Courts
are even ruling in their favor. This is just outrageous logic.
Why are celebrities getting favored treatment over everyday
Americans?
Mr. Agen. Yes. Obviously, we would want direct use for
access to natural gas in people's homes and the stoves in
people's homes. It is clear that they are making these
exceptions because it will economically affect towns and
businesses that are looking to ban natural gas. They do not
want to see those restaurants leave. And you are starting to
see that in certain areas where restaurants are starting to
push back. And that is why really the California Restaurant
Association sued Berkeley to kind of make sure that they
could--the restaurant could still get access to natural gas in
Berkeley, California.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you.
Mr. Lieberman, your organization has participated in a
Department of Energy rulemaking over the last 20 years
regarding energy and water conservation standards for home
appliances such as gas stoves. How does the efficiency standard
in the proposed rule violate the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act.
Mr. Lieberman. The law is very clear that energy efficiency
standards cannot compromise product quality, choice, and
features. And that clearly is at issue here. Gas stoves are
much disproportionately burdened under this. Gas stoves will
survive, but they will have to cut corners in order to comply.
They will have to cut back on the very highest heat burners as
we have heard. And these are features that people want. They
are on the market because people want.
Essentially, the statute says if a feature is on the market
before a standard, it has to remain on the market in at least
one model after the standard. That is not going to be the case
here.
And regarding a ban, remember, the Department of Energy and
Consumer Product Safety Commission are both targeting gas
stoves. The idea that two agencies going after stoves and we
have nothing to worry about is just not realistic. You add to
that natural gas hookup bans, which are now getting support
from the Federal Government through the Inflation Reduction
Act, $840 of taxpayer money for the purchase of an electric
stove, zero for a gas stove, a whole host of measures opposed
to natural gas more broadly, you know, limited leasing on
Federal lands. It all adds up to a whole lot fewer gas stoves
in the future if all of this is allowed to be finalized.
Mr. Fallon. And $840 for an electric stove and----
Mr. Lieberman. I do not know how it works because some do
not even cost $840.
Mr. Fallon. Right. Maybe get the stove and some money on
it----
Mr. Lieberman. Yes. We will pay you to take the stove, yes.
Mr. Fallon. All right. Well, thank you all. I thank the
witnesses. I now yield.
And I recognize Ranking Member Bush for her five minutes of
questions.
Ms. Bush. St. Louis and I are here today to present the
facts about gas stoves and the hazard they pose on our
environment and our health.
I think about my colleague says, he likes gas stoves. I
like gas stoves. We all like gas stoves. Seatbelts work too
because there are standards put in place to keep people safe.
This is a standard. This is a--we are talking about keeping
people safe, and I like people to be alive, not necessarily
what looks like a way to weaponize or to politicize an
appliance. Let us keep people safe.
So, scientific research has proven there is a direct
connection between gas stoves and let us just take childhood
asthma, finding that gas stoves are linked to one in eight
childhood asthma cases. These findings are especially
concerning considering that asthma disproportionately affects
Black and Brown communities--like whole communities of people,
humans.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, 13.4 percent of Black children have asthma, while
only 7.8 percent of White children have asthma. New mothers
heating up bottles or making pancakes could be poisoning their
children without their knowledge. We want to keep them safe.
This evidence linking gas stove emissions to negative
health outcomes, it continues to grow. Gas stoves rely on
natural gas or methane as a fuel source which affects the
climate both as a fossil fuel source and as a greenhouse gas
itself.
So, Mr. deLaski, how does using natural gas as a fuel
source contribute to the climate crisis?
Mr. deLaski. Burning natural gas in our homes and in our
power plants is a significant contributor to climate change
emissions and also a significant contributor to air quality
challenges and problems indoors and outdoors. And making our
stoves more efficient would reduce combustion and reduce the
emissions coming from our stoves.
Ms. Bush. OK. Mr. DeLaski, would improving the efficiency
of gas stoves, would that help reduce the impact on the climate
crisis?
Mr. deLaski. Absolutely. Improving the efficiency of our
gas stoves would help.
Ms. Bush. I wholeheartedly agree.
A 2022 study by Stanford Science has found that annual
methane emissions from all gas stoves in the United States in
our homes have a climate impact comparable to the annual carbon
dioxide emissions of 500,000 cars, with more than three-
quarters of methane emissions originating while the gas stoves
were not even in use.
So, Mr. deLaski, what actions can manufacturers, can
consumers and regulators take to prevent the vast amounts of
methane leakage from gas stoves?
Mr. deLaski. One of the steps that we can take is for the
Department of Energy to set the first ever efficiency standards
for gas stoves. We now, for the first time, have a way of
measuring relative efficiency and to ask manufacturers to make
the investment to make their gas stoves that they sell more
energy efficient, reducing their emissions.
Ms. Bush. One more question for you.
What pollutants do gas stoves emit that are so harmful to
human respiratory systems?
Mr. deLaski. I'm not an expert in the various emissions
that are coming out of gas stoves. I would point you to
comments filed by the American Lung Association, as well as a
number of nurses' organizations and other public health
advocates, to the Department of Energy in the gas stove docket
where they lay out some of the problems for indoor air quality
and for ambient air quality. They are the experts, and I point
you to the American Lung Association. They support the gas
stove standard and are vocally supporting it.
Ms. Bush. Well, I would just add, like, nitrogen dioxide
which is known to irritate the human respiratory system, and as
a nurse, I have seen it all too often, the effects.
Further research we know is warranted. In the meantime,
experts suggest several actions businesses and families can
take to reduce the health risks associated with gas stoves.
These include opening a window, using an exhaust hood,
installing carbon monoxide detectors, and making the transition
to electric stoves. Everyone should have the necessary
information about their household goods to determine what is
best for them, particularly their stoves.
Thank you. And I yield back.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes my good friend and colleague from
Florida, Mr. Donalds.
Mr. Donalds. Thank you, Chairman.
First and foremost, I find it to just be highly
disrespectful that the Department of Energy was asked to be
here, they are not here. They do not want to answer questions
about their own rule, which is going to impact the bottom line
in the pocketbook of every American, especially those who own
gas stoves currently. And, you know, I just find that to just
be ridiculous.
They must be taking a cue from the President who does not
even want to answer questions, does not do press conferences,
and just is nowhere to be found. I find that to just really be
laughable, to be honest.
Secondarily, this whole gas stoves thing makes no sense.
Mr. Stein, I think you were saying in your testimony that
roughly only four percent of the current product in the gas
stoves market would actually even comply with the EPA's rule.
So, if you are a homeowner or even a renter and there are
gas hookups into the kitchen, what are they supposed to do? Are
they now supposed to retrofit their kitchen for an electrical
outlet? Because it is not a normal outlet with electric stoves.
It is a specially designed outlet for the electric stove in the
kitchen.
So, I would ask the Department of Energy, if they were
actually here, what do you expect the American people to do
with respect to their kitchen? Are they going to now retrofit
their kitchen to allow for an electric hookup to go in there
when the house was not designed for that?
Mr. deLaski, what is the cost on that? Is that in your
research?
Mr. deLaski. The Department has not proposed to ban gas
stoves.
Mr. Donalds. The Department did not propose banning gas
stoves, but the Department is actually going to regulate the
fact that most gas stoves on the market would no longer be able
to be sold. They would not be allowed to be sold, only four
percent.
Do you agree with that, Mr. deLaski?
Mr. deLaski. No. I have seen this movie before where----
Mr. Donalds. Mr. deLaski, this is not a movie. This is
reality.
Mr. deLaski. The claim is that----
Mr. Donalds. Because this is--Mr. DeLaski, this is reality.
Because if you are going to tell--let me bring it to you this
way.
If you are going to tell my mom that she cannot have a gas
stove anymore and she can only buy an electric stove, but there
is a gas hookup in the kitchen and now the kitchen has to be
remodeled--and we were renters; we were not owners, which meant
the landlord had to go and redo that--do you know what that is
going to do to her livelihood? What happens if the landlord
says, Man, I have got to go through these massive retrofits;
I'm not paying for that? It falls back on the back of the
renter, which is what does happen.
Does that sound like a movie to you? No, it does not. I'm
not even asking you a question, because this is ridiculous.
This is not a movie. This is people's lives, and we have the
Department of Energy who does not even have the guts, the
courage to come in here and answer questions about their
proposed rule. They would rather hide in their building down
the street than come in here and talk to the American people,
talk to the people's representatives.
I mean, we do have to fund the Department of Energy. That
is coming up in a couple of months. If you cannot even come in
here and answer questions, why would we fund you? And that is
serious. I'm not even joking around, because this thing is
stupid.
For Black and Brown communities, the cost of actually
having to go out and buy a new appliance or to retrofit your
kitchen is far more dangerous to your bottom line and to your
pocketbook. I'm being honest. It is far more dangerous.
I noticed in the Ranking Member's comments she never once
mentioned what it would cost a Black and Brown family. She did
not talk about that. All she is talking about is the fact that
the entire Green New Deal agenda may--and I stress may--cut one
half of a degree in the world's climate by 2050. And I stress
may, because there was a representative from the Department of
Energy in the Senate a few weeks ago, and he could not even
answer the question that came from Senator Kennedy. He did not
know. He had no answer. He was like you, Mr. deLaski, just
going back through the ``This is not a movie,'' or whatever the
heck you are saying over there. This stuff is dumb.
Listen, what we should be doing is a couple of things. No.
1, making sure that there is actually cheap and readily
affordable energy for our businesses and for our people,
period, full stop.
Two, this notion of chasing down the Green New Deal fantasy
which, by the way, half the globe is ignoring. China is not
doing this. Russia is not doing this, and the Europeans are
backpedaling from this quickly because even the Europeans now
understand that they cannot live their Green New Deal dreams on
gas that they were getting from Russia. They do not get to do
that anymore, so now Europe is backpedaling.
We need to get serious in the United States. And if we want
to have an economy where everybody has got to be able to earn
money in and we want to have an energy grid that is
sustainable, what we cannot do are these crazy demands from the
Department of Energy and from the EPA.
The last thing I will say is this. If we follow the
President's dream and the other party's dream of electrifying
every car and electrifying every stove, you know what we are
going to have? We are going to have an electric grid with not
enough energy to turn the lights on. Those are the facts.
I yield back.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you, Mr. Donalds.
The Chair recognizes Ms. Brown from Ohio.
Ms. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Today my friends on the other side of the aisle are,
unfortunately, spreading unfounded fear mongering about gas
stoves.
As someone who uses a gas stove, I want to address some
myths.
First, the Biden Administration, again, is not banning gas
stoves. I repeat, the Biden Administration is not banning gas
stoves. The Department of Energy is not banning gas stoves.
And, in fact, the Department of Energy cannot ban stoves
through energy efficiency standards. Instead, consistent with
the law, the Department of Energy is proposing standards that
would improve the efficiency of gas stoves built in the future.
Mr. deLaski, to your knowledge, will new conservation
standards affect existing stoves installed in homes and
businesses across America?
Mr. deLaski. No, it will not.
Ms. Brown. Thank you.
Mr. deLaski, can you describe some of the benefits related
to the improved efficiency of gas stoves?
Mr. deLaski. The improved efficiency of gas stoves would
cut bills for consumers. For a gas stove owner, it is going to
save them about 50 bucks, and for an electric stove owner,
about $75 over the life of the stove. Those are--you know, if
you saw $50 laying on the ground, you would pick it up. And
that is what the government is doing by setting efficiency
standards for gas stoves and for electric stoves too.
Ms. Brown. Thank you.
Mr. deLaski, why is it important for the public to have
accurate information about the energy conservation health
impacts of the products they use?
Mr. deLaski. Consumers having information is what helps
them to make good decisions that are best for their families,
and one of the things that we accomplish with these standards
is allowing people to understand what is the efficiency
performance of different products in the marketplace so they
can make the choices that are best for their families, while
they still have a range--and they will continue to have a range
of choices, let us make no mistake, both electric and gas
products, once the standard is in place.
Ms. Brown. Thank you so much for that.
Listen, experts have long held concerns about the impact of
gas stoves on human health. It is unacceptable that nearly 13
percent of childhood asthma is directly connected to gas stove
emissions.
To be clear, while the Department of Energy works to
improve the efficiency of stoves, we can all take steps to
reduce the potential health risks associated with their use by
doing small things like turning on a vent or opening a window.
As mentioned, one of the essential services that our government
provides is to review consumer products and identify ways to
make them cleaner and safer. That is exactly what the
Department of Energy is doing, making sure that gas stoves are
less expensive to operate and produce fewer toxins and health
hazards.
It is my hope that my Republican colleagues will redirect
their focus to the well-being of American people rather than
politicizing kitchen appliances. Because you know what they are
banning? Abortions. You know what they are banning? Books. You
know what they will not ban? Assault weapons. But we are
sitting up here talking about a ban on gas stoves. But I should
be excited. Because if my colleagues are interested in an
appliance that is causing harm to children's lives, perhaps
they will get the courage to have a hearing about banning
assault weapons which are actually killing people every single
day.
So, yes, I agree, this is dangerous and dumb. We have much
better things to focus our time on.
And with that, I yield back.
Mr. Fallon. The Chair recognizes Mr. Moskowitz from
Florida.
Mr. Moskowitz. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I appreciate the
waiver onto the Committee.
And first let me say, from a policy perspective, I think my
colleagues across the aisle are correct. I do not think we
should ban gas stoves, and I do not think banning gas stoves is
the least impactful way to address the gas nitrogen or carbon
monoxide or formaldehyde that is coming out. It is ventilation.
Ventilation is the way to address that.
And so, I'm here to say, Mr. Chairman, that I agree with
you that we should not be banning gas stoves. And the good news
is that this proposed rule does not ban gas stoves. And I get
it. I get that every morning, you know, as you are getting your
coffee, you know, and it is warm and you are in the kitchen and
you stare into the knobs of your beautiful stainless steel
beauty, I got it. I get the bravado. You can--we can pry your
gas stove from your cold, dead hands, or give me my gas stove
or give me death. You know, I have a six-burner, double oven
range that sits on legs. I mean, I miss her right now as we are
talking about it.
And so, I think--because it is a two-party system, I think
when my colleagues across the aisle, the other party, show
leadership, the leadership of our times that is desperately
needed, Democrats like myself should commend them. And I want
to apologize on behalf of the Democratic Party that we have
decided to put kids, kids' safety in their neighborhoods, from
getting gunned down in movie theatres or grocery stores or
school churches or synagogues, we as Democrats have clearly
lost our way, that we are not focused on appliances.
And so, we are finally seeing our friends across the aisle
stand up for parents all across the country as they tuck their
kid in at night, as they dress them for school in the morning,
as they are worried that they may not come home. My friends
across the aisle are telling those parents, you can breathe a
sigh of relief, that the grand appliance party is going to make
sure your gas stove goes nowhere.
You might own a small business, and you are worried about
how you are going to pay your employees if we default. The good
news for you today, is that if you have to shutter your
business because the country defaults, your gas stove will
still be there.
And so, you know, I look forward to the legislation of our
time, the Appliance Bill of Rights, that might come in front of
this Committee and joining in this fight together as we show
Americans that Congress can still do big things, that we have
not lost our way, and that when the American people need
leadership from their elected leaders, we are going to deliver
for them and their gas stoves.
Mr. Chairman, thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Fallon. The Chair recognizes Ranking Member Bush for
close.
Ms. Bush. As we have heard over and over again, this is not
a ban on gas stoves. This is not a ban on gas stoves. This is
not a ban on gas stoves. We would love to see actual action
that saves lives, but we continue to see from our Republican
colleagues actions that loosen regulations, that make it easier
for humans to lose their lives, make it easier for humans to
become ill.
Gas stoves have an enormous impact, a negative impact on
the climate and on humans' health. We have said it over and
over again, including contributing to childhood asthma, and
that is a big deal. Respiratory illnesses are a big deal.
Energy efficiency standards benefit American consumers by
lowering the risks that are associated with gas stoves and
saving them money on their utility bills.
The Department of Energy's proposed rule on energy
efficiency for consumer cooking products is part of the normal
course of business, and it is required, actually, by law. The
proposed rule is also part of an effort to catch up on the long
overdue updates to energy efficiency, those standards that fell
to the wayside during the Trump Administration.
The proposed rule also has the support of consumer
protection organizations, such as Consumer Federation of
America and the National Consumer Law Center.
I would like to request unanimous consent to enter into the
record a letter from these two organizations submitted for this
hearing.
Yes?
Mr. Fallon. So, moved.
Ms. Bush. Thank you.
Mr. Fallon. Without objection, so moved.
Ms. Bush. I would also like to highlight an important point
raised in the letter, and I quote: Inefficient stoves raise
important equity concerns. If DOE fails to adopt strong
efficiency standards for stoves, it will leave millions of
renters who are disproportionately low-income, compared to the
population at large, confined to having less efficient stoves
installed with consequently larger energy bills.
The proposed efficiency standards are not a ban on gas
stoves, again. The Department does not want to, nor can it, ban
gas stoves. The Biden-Harris Administration has specifically
stated that it is not in favor of banning gas stoves.
Republicans are deliberately misrepresenting the facts and
misrepresenting data, all the while focusing on this made-up
war, let us call it that, on gas stoves and ignoring far more
pressing issues for Americans across the country.
We are about saving lives. That is more important than what
we are seeing about how comfortable it is to have a gas stove
in the manner that we have them now. It is OK. New technology
comes out. New information comes out. I think we should move
forward with that, and we do not have to ban gas stoves to do
it.
Consumers should have all of the relevant information, all
of the important information that they need to make an informed
decision about appliances in their own homes.
Thank you.
Mr. Fallon. I want to thank Representative Moskowitz for
coming in and giving his testimony. He was waived on the
Committee. He actually was one of the 29 Democrats that voted
with the Republicans to prevent this rule from going into
effect, so I want to thank him for his support as well on this.
So, I figured at the beginning of the hearing that my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle would say either this
is not a ban or regulating them out of existence is something
that--because it is not a ban. It is regulating out of
existence. That is what it is, so I would partially agree. And
it--or they would say, this is something--climate change
demands it, so we are going to command it. This is something
that we are going to make mandatory, but, actually, they did
both. And some of the salacious and ridiculous and hyperbolic
claims, like the Republicans are against safety, I mean, that
is absolutely absurd. You know, this is about taking away
choice. And every time you take away choice, you take away
liberty. And it seems to me the only choice that many of our
Democratic colleagues are comfortable in allowing the masses to
have is abortion. Everything else, it is best left to the
elites. And this is not a ban. Yes, it is, again, regulating
them out of existence. And what they do, they cite a wild and
hollow savings claims.
And I prefer, if we are going to give someone a choice, do
you trust the American individual or do you trust an unelected
bureaucrat? And this, again, comes down to is it the rule of
law, which is what I thought we were supposed to be a rule of
law Nation, or is it the law of the rule?
And then we were told gas stoves are hazardous or they are
disproportionately harming people of color or they are
dangerous or they are poison, they are poisoning, and gas
stoves kill. So, I guess by implication gas stoves could be
racist. Or are they just better to help us scramble some eggs
and make some crispy bacon?
This is about, at the end of the day, choice. And it is
clear that the American people simply do not want these opaque
and complicated rulemaking standards that the Biden
Administration is putting forth.
Nominee after nominee that President Biden puts forward has
faced serious opposition or straight up rejection because this
is extreme. Just take the sinking of the nominee for the Office
of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, for example. We
would have loved to have him testify on the proposed rule at
issue today since his office would be having to sign off on it.
But as you can see, there are two empty chairs that the
Department of Energy was asked to come, and they just again
thwarted the request of Congress.
Concerningly, these agencies are moving forward with
overreaching ideologically driven rules without the consent of
the American people, and then they won't even come to answer
questions from the American people's elected representatives. I
would be just as angry if they ignored it under a Republican
Administration.
The Department of Energy is even relying on a court-ordered
consent decree initiated by environmental groups as a basis for
staying out of this hearing room today. And let us get real.
Agencies avoiding accountability is a theme we have seen
through this Congress from this Democratic Administration. We
saw it last Congress with the Democratic Majority as well.
The reason for this behavior is that the Biden
Administration knows it is politically exposed and compromised.
This is an uncomfortable hearing. We hear this from our
colleagues about, don't we have better things to do than
talking about appliances and gas stoves? We are talking about
liberty and we are talking about freedom.
But this is the same party that had, I think, three
hearings with this Committee about the Washington Redskins and
Daniel Snyder. I think we have a lot more important things to
do than to harass that man. I forget what they call them, the
Commanders, I do not even know. They will forever be the
Redskins to me.
Mr. Fallon. Republican legislation protecting consumer
choice has talked many Democrats out of supporting the
Department of Energy's proposed rulemaking. And as I mentioned,
this is bipartisan support to kill this rule. Twenty-nine
Democrats joined all the Republicans.
So, meanwhile, we have Energy Secretary Granholm, herself,
has defended bans against gas stoves. Although, she has one
herself, which is at the height of leftist hypocrisy. So do
celebrities in California who are suing for exceptions to have
the gas stoves in kitchens. Can you imagine suing to keep a gas
stove in your kitchen? This is absurd. This is where 10 years
ago, I do not think any of us saw. There is plenty of topics
today, that 10 years ago we would have thought there was no
possible way that we would get there.
One of the key principles of our great country is we the
people, not we the bureaucrats. That is kind of a dictatorship
of the bureaucracy, quite frankly. Free markets determine what
we want for ourselves and our families and our communities. And
people in America are free right now to have a choice. You can
have an electric stove, if you want, or you can have a gas
stove.
I want to thank the witnesses for their participation in
contributing to this meaningful discussion today. I look
forward to scheduling a follow-up hearing with the Department
of Energy, and maybe then they will actually show up and do
their jobs and be held accountable to the American people. They
do cash a check, and that check is written by the American
taxpayer, at which time we hope that they will appear, and that
they can answer our questions.
And with that and without objection, all Members will have
five legislative days with which to submit materials and then
submit additional written questions for the witnesses, which
will be forwarded to the witnesses for their response. If there
is no further business, without objection----
Mr. Issa. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Fallon. Yes.
Mr. Issa. I apologize. I do not know if I was waived in at
the beginning, would I be allowed to submit----
Mr. Fallon. You are.
Mr. Issa. All right. Then I would like to submit mine for
the record, too. Thank you.
Mr. Fallon. You are welcome. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Fallon. If there is no further business, without
objection, the Subcommittee stands at adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:09 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]