[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 190 (Wednesday, December 12, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2550-E2551]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT OF 2007

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. STEVE BUYER

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, December 6, 2007

  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a step in the wrong direction. 
Our current focus should be on rebalancing our energy portfolio and 
responsibly accessing and managing our domestic energy resources to 
decrease our dependence on foreign countries. This legislation does not 
improve our energy security in any way. The included Renewable Fuel 
Standard mandates biofuel production levels which increase our Nation's 
dependence on the same supply source for both our energy and our food. 
Basing laws on unavailable technologies and taxing the industry that 
actually provides energy to the country now, does nothing to decrease 
our dependence on foreign countries' oil and gas.
  I offered an amendment to strike the manufactured language in Sect. 
413 of the bill. The bill in its current form would have detrimental 
effects on the industry, which is a significant contributor to the 
Indiana economy, and it would undoubtedly result in higher manufactured 
home prices for consumers.
  The Department of Housing and Urban Development has an ongoing 
stakeholder process to improve energy efficiency of manufactured 
housing. The HUD process strives for cost-effective efficiency 
standards that add real value for consumers and keep the overall 
product affordable. Section 413 would inject the Department of Energy 
into the process. Consumers and manufacturers fear that DOE's ``price-
is-no-object'' track record on efficiency standards will mean that 
manufactured housing will be priced out of the lower and moderate 
income markets, harming consumers and costing jobs in the industry. 
Meanwhile, it will not help energy efficiency since the alternative, 
stick-built homes, have no national energy standards. Improving the 
energy efficiency of homes is important, and it is necessary that these 
efforts take into account cost criteria as well. The manufactured 
housing industry is already working to meet efficiency standards 
previously legislated in the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 
2000. This energy bill's manufactured housing language would only add 
confusion by creating a duplicative program while simultaneously 
increasing the price of housing.
  At a time when the United States' housing market is unsettled, 
Congress should be making use of every opportunity to assist the 
average American in their dream of homeownership. This energy bill 
would make an affordable housing option unaffordable for many 
Americans.

[[Page E2551]]

  The Renewable Portfolio Standard in this bill also concerns me 
acutely. Without regard for the effect it will have on consumers' 
electricity costs, this standard would require States' investor owned 
utilities to meet 15 percent of their power generation with renewable 
energy. Coal is conspicuously absent from the list of acceptable fuels. 
Indiana has a 250 year supply of alternative energy in the form of 
coal. Coal is Indiana's most prevalent energy resource, and I cannot 
support a bill that does not take that into account. I cannot support a 
bill that increases our reliance on foreign countries for energy, 
limits States' access to their own resources, and drives up the costs 
of electricity for hard working Hoosiers when they are already 
shouldering higher gas prices, and home heating costs. Furthermore, the 
bill does not include nuclear energy as an acceptable source. This is 
most confusing because the bill claims to be about addressing 
greenhouse gas emissions, and nuclear energy emits no Carbon Dioxide. 
Responsible Federal policy does not walk all over States' rights, 
disregarding their unique economies and natural resources.
  Democrats declare this bill an answer to rising energy costs, but it 
will only increase energy prices for Americans, and Hoosiers.
  This is bad energy policy for our country. It is bad for consumers' 
pocketbooks, bad for Indiana and bad for my constituents. I urge my 
colleagues to vote no on Senate Amendments to H.R. 6.

                          ____________________