[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 125 (Thursday, September 16, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H6777-H6791]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RURAL ENERGY SAVINGS PROGRAM ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1620 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 4785.
{time} 1223
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 4785) to amend the miscellaneous rural development provisions of
the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to authorize the
Secretary of Agriculture to make loans to certain entities that will
use the funds to make loans to consumers to implement energy efficiency
measures involving structural improvements and investments in cost-
effective, commercial off-the-shelf technologies to reduce home energy
use, with Mr. Salazar in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
General debate shall not exceed 1 hour equally divided and controlled
by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Agriculture and the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden), the gentleman from
Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Butterfield), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) each will
control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden).
Mr. HOLDEN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the bill we are considering today, H.R. 4785, the Rural
Energy Savings Program Act, will greatly benefit our rural residents.
The agriculture provisions in this bill build on existing U.S.
Department of Agriculture programs and will reduce energy consumption
and, as a result, reduce energy costs in rural America.
Rural electric cooperatives estimate that the Rural Energy Savings
Program Act has the potential to create between 20,000 and 40,000 jobs
per year and will make loans available to between 1.1 and 1.6 million
rural households, depending on the average consumer size. It is clear
that this is a win-win proposition for our rural constituents and our
rural economy.
This Act furthers the Agriculture Committee's commitment to expand
renewable and alternative sources of power and discover new
technologies to improve the efficiency and sustainability of existing
power generation across rural America.
H.R. 4785 authorizes USDA's rural utility service to make interest-
free loans to eligible entities. These entities will use these funds to
make low-interest loans to rural consumers allowing them to implement
energy-efficient measures on their property. Using the existing Rural
Utilities Service structure, with the rural electric cooperatives as
the delivery system, rural consumers can more quickly obtain the
benefits of energy-efficient investments and ultimately decrease their
energy bills.
Rural customers are facing increasing energy costs and rural electric
cooperatives, which serve 42 million member owners across the country,
are facing growing demand for electric power, yet are constrained from
building new generation capacity.
The upfront costs to make energy-efficient upgrades are often beyond
the reach of most consumers. This is true even if the costs can be
recovered over time or a tax credit or a rebate would reduce the
initial price. Additionally, consumers often lack the necessary
knowledge about what technologies would be the most effective.
H.R. 4785 is an opportunity to meet these challenges and enact policy
that we know will reduce energy costs and consumption and improve the
quality of life in our rural communities.
I would like to thank Congressman Clyburn and Congressman Perriello
for their hard work and dedication to improving energy efficiency and
their support for the agriculture provisions within this Act.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the agriculture provisions contained
in this Act and encourage its passage.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I must rise today in opposition to H.R. 4785, the Rural
Energy Savings Program Act. As a result of the Democratic leadership's
failed policies, we are now considering a bill that creates two new
government funded programs to address high energy bills and energy
demand. We are considering creating a program that duplicates thousands
of other efficiency measures that Congress has passed and funded in the
billions of dollars over the last several years.
H.R. 4785, as reported by the Agriculture Committee, would require
the government, through USDA, to front nearly a billion dollars to
rural electric cooperatives so that they can, in return, make what
might potentially be risky loans to their customers for energy-
efficiency projects in their homes. The investments made in this
program would only benefit an estimated 1.5 million of the 43 million
customers served by rural electric cooperatives. Energy efficiency is
an important step in an overall energy plan. But creating a new
government funded program is not the solution.
This issue can be addressed in the farm bill by making adjustments to
current programs. The 2008 farm bill included a provision that would
have allowed rural electric cooperatives to
[[Page H6778]]
expand clean energy production and provide affordable electricity for
more of its customers.
{time} 1230
However, the provision was stripped by the current Democratic
leadership. As a result, rural electric cooperatives cannot access RUS
lending for new base load generation. In other words, base load
generation from sources such as nuclear, natural gas, and clean coal
technologies are difficult, if not impossible, to finance through the
program now.
Even more alarming is that this is not the bill that was reported by
the Committee on Agriculture. Instead, the Democratic leadership
created a bill that is five times larger and includes a program that
was already stripped, already stripped, the Home Star program, on the
House floor by bipartisan support. It will give the Department of
Energy another program and billions more in taxpayer dollars to
administer.
Why would Congress add to a failed stimulus policy? The American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act alone created the $5.25 billion
Weatherization Assistance Program for home energy efficiency updates,
which has been, some say, a colossal failure from an implementation
perspective, and very well may have wasted huge amounts of taxpayers'
dollars at the hands of the Department of Energy.
The Democratic leadership is pushing energy policy that will create
increased and burdensome energy costs for Americans. As a result, we
are creating new government programs that increase spending to address
the consequences of those policies. I urge my colleagues oppose the
bill.
I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am a proud cosponsor of H.R. 4785, a bill authored by
the distinguished majority whip, Mr. James Clyburn of South Carolina.
The Rural Energy Savings Program Act will not only quickly create
construction and manufacturing jobs, but it will also help Americans
make their homes more energy efficient.
The Agriculture Committee reported this bill favorably in July. I
want to commend the chairman of the committee, Mr. Peterson, and Mr.
Clyburn for subsequently working with my committee, the Energy and
Commerce Committee, to actually improve the legislation. The bill
includes the Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program that was reported
by the Energy and Commerce Committee on April 15, 2010, as part of H.R.
5019, the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act of 2010.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 5019 was approved by the committee with a
bipartisan vote of 30-17. It was supported by a broad array of
stakeholders, including energy efficiency advocates, manufacturers,
business and industry trade associations, and small businesses. Under
this bill, homeowners anywhere in the country will be able to work with
their rural cooperative, utility, or other governor-designated lender
to borrow money for proven energy efficiency investments in their
homes. They would repay the loans over time, generally from a portion
of the money they save on their energy bill, and at an interest rate of
not more than 3 percent. The lenders would repay their States, and the
States would repay the Federal Government after not more than 20 years.
The Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program is a natural companion
to the Rural Energy Savings Program Act. As you may know, the Rural
Energy Savings Act authorizes zero-interest loans to rural electric
cooperatives for purposes of offering consumer loans for energy
efficiency home retrofits. The Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program
will authorize zero-interest loans to those portions of the country not
served--I repeat that--not served by rural electric cooperatives.
I originally cosponsored this bill because it provided enormous
assistance to consumers served by rural electric cooperatives across
the country. My district in North Carolina is served by 10 rural
electric co-ops in addition to the 20 municipal power utilities and two
investor-owned utilities.
Across the country, cooperatives only serve about 12 percent of the
Nation's population. So the provisions included in the substitute
amendment will ensure that a homeowner will have the same access to a
low interest energy efficiency loan whether or not they are served by a
co-op, an investor-owned utility, or a municipality.
Under the Home Star loan program, States could borrow Federal funds
to allow entities like electric utilities or other entities provide
loans to consumers for residential energy efficiency measures. The
Department of Energy, in consultation with the Secretary of
Agriculture, would identify the eligible energy efficiency measures.
The programs in this bill, Mr. Chairman, vary significantly from the
Weatherization Assistance Program. Weatherization is a grant program
used by low-income households to reduce their energy bills by making
their homes more energy efficient. The programs in this bill are loans,
and thus do not increase the deficit. They are available to anyone,
regardless of income.
Some of my Republican colleagues have questioned this bill's
necessity due to the significant investment made in the Weatherization
program in the Recovery Act. Well, while I concede that Weatherization
got off to a slow start, today over 30,000 homes each month are being
weatherized across the country. In September, the Department of Energy
announced that it had weatherized over 200,000 homes across the
country. In June, 960 homes were weatherized in my State of North
Carolina. Each of the low-income families living in those 960 homes
will save an average of $437 annually on their energy bill. But that's
not why we are here today. We are here to offer all Americans a chance
to lower their utility bills and put their neighbors back to work.
The recession has had a significant impact on the home construction
and services industry, which has experienced unemployment rates of 27
percent. Additionally, manufacturing plants that produce construction-
related products have operated at 50 percent of capacity. Home energy
retrofit work can provide, and it will provide, significant employment
opportunities for construction workers while boosting domestic
manufacturing. More than 92 percent of the energy-efficient products
and materials for which the Home Star program will stimulate sales are
manufactured here in the United States of America.
Home energy efficiency retrofits can also cut the Nation's energy
use, saving consumers money and cutting pollution. American homes
account for about 33 percent of the Nation's total electricity demand,
and approximately 22 percent of all energy use in the United States.
This legislation, Mr. Chairman, presents an opportunity for all of us
to work together to save energy and create jobs. I urge all of our
colleagues to seize this opportunity.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, at this time I have no further requests for
time, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the distinguished majority whip.
(Mr. CLYBURN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. CLYBURN. I thank my friend, Chairman Holden, for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy
Savings Program Act. Mr. Chairman, the Rural Energy Savings Program, or
Rural Star, as it is popularly called, is an important piece of the
Make It in America agenda. It is a program that will create jobs and
help save families money on their energy bills.
Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once called our 50 States
``laboratories of democracy.'' And that is certainly the case with this
homegrown, American-owned idea. The rural electric co-ops in South
Carolina brought this idea to my attention late last year. And I worked
with them and my colleague Congressman John Spratt to craft legislation
that takes the South Carolina model nationwide. I am very proud that
South Carolina is providing significant leadership for our economic
recovery with this innovative approach to job creation and energy
savings.
The concept is very simple: low-cost home improvement loans for
energy-efficient upgrades, sealing, insulation,
[[Page H6779]]
HVAC systems, heat pumps, and other structural improvements. Those low-
cost loans are paid back on customers' electricity bills, with the
energy savings covering the cost of the loan.
{time} 1240
When the term of the loan expires, most people will be saving
hundreds of dollars annually on their monthly utility bills.
This bipartisan, bicameral legislation is first and foremost a jobs
bill, and it is based on commonsense ideas that can be done in a
fiscally responsible manner that will protect taxpayers and the
Treasury. Let me emphasize that this is a voluntary loan program, not a
grant or rebate; and the loans are paid back to the Federal Treasury.
We call this the Rural Energy Savings Program because it will save
consumers energy and money. More importantly, it will put people back
to work, particularly in the building and construction trades and
manufacturing industries, sectors that have been hard hit by the
economic downturn.
While providing energy upgrades and significant employment
opportunities for building and construction workers, this legislation
will boost domestic manufacturing. Retailers of energy-efficient
building materials and appliances will also benefit from increased
sales. Virtually all of the energy-efficient products and materials
used for energy efficiency improvements are made in America.
Rural Star has the support of a broad coalition of stakeholders,
including the National Association of Manufacturers, the National
Association of Home Builders, the Retail Industry Leaders Association
and the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association.
Rural Star will create high-skill, high-wage manufacturing and
construction jobs and deliver meaningful energy savings for consumers
that will put money directly into their wallets.
I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill. Let's create jobs
that are made in America so that our fellow citizens can ``Make It in
America.''
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina, the chairman of the Budget Committee, Mr. Spratt.
(Mr. SPRATT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, this bill will authorize the Rural
Utilities Service to make loans to rural electric co-ops so that the
co-ops, in turn, can make loans to families and small businesses for
energy conservation and efficiency measures that meet Federal
standards.
This process will begin with an energy audit aimed at identifying
energy-saving measures. Based on this audit, the co-ops will propose
improvements like insulation or high-efficiency heat pumps. Consumers
will pay the co-ops for the installation through a charge on their
utility bills spread over a period of 5 to 10 years. The energy savings
will cover much, if not all, of the loan repayment. And after the loan
is repaid, the participating consumer will continue to save, as will
the economy, because of the more efficient use of energy.
There are more than 200,000 rural electric cooperative customers in
my district, many of them near or below the poverty level. Many of
these hardworking people would gladly invest in their homes to make
them more efficient, but they cannot borrow or afford the funds
necessary to install a new heat pump or place insulation in their walls
and ceilings.
This is where the ingenuity of the co-ops comes in. Through a program
that could be implemented nationwide, they would provide a simple but
effective solution to help their customers at relatively low cost. At
the same time they would create new jobs by making low-cost loans
available to install high-impact energy efficiency improvements. The
loans will be repaid over time on the consumer's utility bill, and
ideally there will be a net reduction of utility payments even when
accounting for the loan repayments. This is a win-win solution to a
major problem.
I urge support for this bill. It is well crafted and it will not have
an impact on the bottom line of the budget because we are talking about
loans made by the Federal Government to the electric co-ops, which will
be, I am sure, duly repaid.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Perriello).
Mr. PERRIELLO. Thank you for yielding.
This is a great day, and this is a great program. This is the kind of
commonsense approach people are looking for right now to help cut costs
for families that are struggling and help put construction crews back
to work that are desperately under demand in this economy.
Here we have a chance to help support American construction, using
American-manufactured products to reduce the electric bills of rural
America, including seniors on fixed incomes, including middle class
families and working class families. It is the kind of common sense
that has always made this country stronger and more vibrant. Here we
are at a time when construction is down that we can be stepping up to
renovate the building stock that we have, and we know in our rural
communities our building stock is less efficient than in much of the
rest of America.
So here we have a chance to make our rural communities more
competitive and more livable, the utilities as partners, because the
only limiting factor here is up-front capital. We know that the market
can drive the rest.
So helping the utilities to provide that up-front investment, to
unleash construction crews going to work to renovate homes, using
American manufactured products like insulation, double-paned glass,
window film--including the best window film in the world that we can
make in southern Virginia in my district--that reduces electric bills.
If you are a senior on a fixed income and you have seen your electric
rates go up and up, there is nothing you can take out of that budget.
You don't have some party budget that you are going to give up. It's a
fixed income. If we can help reduce that electric bill, that's more
money for food and for transportation and for other needs that our
seniors and our working families face. We can unleash what we do best,
making things, building things, growing things in America and saving
money for the average American who is so stretched right now.
We should not delay. We should pass this today on a bipartisan basis.
We should make sure the Senate follows suit because this is the kind of
common sense that can support those construction jobs we need, those
manufacturing jobs we need, and that economic relief that our working
and middle class families desperately need.
I urge all of my colleagues to be part of this commonsense solution
and get us building and making things in America again today.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I have the greatest confidence, faith and belief in the
integrity and the intention of my colleagues as they work on this bill;
but, Mr. Chairman, this is adding 5 billion more dollars on top of
hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars
that we have spent over the course of the last year and a half-plus
that we don't have.
I would simply urge my colleagues, turn this bill back, let's not add
$5 billion more on to what we have already spent. Let's fulfill our
constitutional responsibilities and pass our 12 appropriation bills in
regular session. Let's fulfill our responsibility to our constituents
and the economy they have to work in by addressing the tax issues from
2001 and 2003, and let's just go home.
There is a political storm brewing out there. This is going to be a
different body in January. Let's do what we are obligated to do under
the Constitution and for our constituents and go home.
With that, I yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, we know that rural cooperatives will need
[[Page H6780]]
to double generating capacity. Several reports, including one done by
USDA, state it will take a 10-year capital requirement of $65.5
billion, $49.9 billion which would be for new generation, and this does
not even take into consideration the $10 billion needed for
transmission and the $3 billion to retrofit. So that would be a
tremendous expense to consumers across rural America. Energy efficiency
investment is the way we need to proceed, so I encourage adoption of
the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the bill
before us today. I am going to ask my colleagues to vote ``no.''
We had a similar bill on the floor back in May; and in that bill we
offered a motion to recommit, which passed, which struck the Home Star
loan program.
{time} 1250
This bill, the bill that we struck the loan program from back in May,
was a $324 million authorization. This bill has come back to us at a $5
billion authorization. That is a little bit of a puzzlement. If it
didn't make sense in May to start a new program for $300 million, it
doesn't make sense in September to start the same program except for $5
billion. So, if for no other reason, we should vote against this bill.
The second point I want to make is that the programs in the bill are
worthwhile. I know that seems to be a little bit inconsistent with what
I just said, but it is not that these are bad programs. The question is
can we afford them when we have a deficit that is going to be between
$1.2 trillion and $1.4 trillion this year?
In another energy efficiency bill that has become law last year, we
authorized, and I think we appropriated, $4.7 billion for the
Department of Energy to do the same sort of programs that this bill
would authorize. Today, the Department of Energy has spent about 10
percent of that, a little less than $500 million. So they have over $4
billion that has been appropriated that hasn't been spent. Now, I'm not
casting stones on the Department of Energy. It probably makes sense to
take your time setting up the program and making sure you get the
processes and the requirements to participate in the right form. But if
we have an existing program that has been appropriated and has over $4
billion surplus in it, I don't see the need for another program.
One may say, well, this is for rural America or for specific
homeowners. But, to my knowledge, and I have got the Agriculture
Committee here, there would be no exclusions because of the location
under the program that the Department of Energy is currently
implementing.
I would point out that 2 years ago the Federal debt was a little
under $6 trillion. We have added almost $3 trillion to it in the last 2
years. I can't see that there is much net improvement that has happened
to our economy with the expenditure of that much money, the addition of
that much money to the debt.
It is not a case, Mr. Chairman, of coming to the floor and saying,
This is a good program, support it. With these kinds of deficits, I
think we need to think as a body, Is this a program that is absolutely
essential and is it worth adding more to the public debt to pass this
program? And with all due respect, while this is a good program, it is
not a program that I think we should add to our children's and our
grandchildren's debt. So I would urge a ``no'' vote at the appropriate
time.
Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the bill before us and urge my
colleagues to vote ``no.''
There is a growing tide of voices in this country calling for less
government, less spending, and less debt. These concerns stretch across
party and region. Our national debt presents a crisis we have
mistakenly ignored for far too long. But after nearly two trillion
dollars have been spent on a failed economic stimulus package and
programs to prop-up our financial system, we need to examine every
dollar authorized with the utmost scrutiny.
If we apply just the slightest amount of examination to this bill, it
becomes difficult to defend the premise on which the Rural Energy
Savings Program Act rests. Take the so-called stimulus bill for
instance. In early 2009, Congress authorized the Department of Energy
to spend an additional $4.7 billion on its home weatherization program.
Improved home energy efficiency is a great way to ensure savings for
the homeowner and helps lessen our overall consumption of electricity.
Programs that speed efficiency measures along should be a no-brainer.
But twelve months after $4.7 billion was handed to the Department of
Energy for these purposes, we found out we had little to show for it.
In that time, DOE had spent only 10 percent of its new funds to upgrade
around 30,000 homes around the country. This was supposed to be another
``shovel-ready'' stimulus project that would create thousands of jobs
and improve energy efficiency in hundreds of thousands of homes. In
that pursuit, the program was a complete failure.
The bill before us today basically seeks the same goals using the
same byzantine structures and bureaucracies that failed us before. If
we can't trust DOE to handle increased funding for an already-existing
program, how can we trust DOE and the Department of Agriculture to
handle billions of dollars for an entirely new program? The simple
answer is we can't.
On top of the issue of government shortcomings is the question of
cost. H.R. 4785 authorizes $5 billion in taxpayer money without any
means of finding a way of paying for it. Again, we're ignoring
the Majority's own pay-as-you-go rules. These rules, as the voters were
led to believe, were created to help stop the bleeding of funds into
the pool of national debt. But over the past few years, we all realize
it is a grand illusion. Our country is at its greatest level of debt
since the end of World War II--62 percent of GDP. We cannot keep adding
a billion dollars here and a billion dollars there thinking the cost of
these programs have no effect. Somewhere we must put a stop to the
bleeding. And if we look at government's past performance in improving
home energy efficiency and weigh the costs with the benefits, we cannot
logically justify tallying $5 billion in additional red ink.
I can only conclude from the reading of this bill that my opposition
was not necessary from the outset. Had this bill properly made its way
through the Energy and Commerce and Agriculture Committees, we would
have had a better chance at learning more of the program's advantages
and disadvantages and, through committee markup, had the opportunity to
make improvements that would have eliminated the debt problem and
further developed the accountability measures that are absent from this
legislation. As we've seen so many times in this Congress and the one
before, regular order has been ignored and incomplete legislation
results.
Mr. Chair, it does not always have to be this way. I support making
homes more energy efficient and government efforts that properly pursue
that goal. H.R. 4785 will not accomplish that task and simply creates
more problems than it solves.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch), a member of the Energy and Commerce
Committee.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I want to, first of all, thank the gentleman
from Texas because he did help make this bill and the Home Star bill a
better bill.
There is a question here about why we provide this money in a time of
a deficit, and there is an answer to that. America faces, right now,
two great challenges. One is high unemployment--we have got to put
people back to work--and the other is an energy policy that is not as
clean as it needs to be. It is not as sustainable as it must be, and it
is not as affordable as it is essential that it be.
This legislation addresses both of those challenges by investing in
energy efficiency, and this is with people making their own decisions
about how best to do that in their own rural homes. We invest in our
economy. Over 90 percent of the materials are manufactured in the
United States of America. By slowing our wasteful use of energy, we can
save homeowners hundreds of millions of dollars. That is money in their
pocket that they can spend on other things good for the economy. And
by, of course, reducing the amount of costly oil we import from hostile
nations, we can create clean energy jobs here at home.
So this is a practical approach to address persistent high
unemployment, tight family budgets, and climate change. This is a win-
win-win for families, for our economy, and for our energy future.
I applaud Mr. Clyburn and the other sponsors, Mr. Spratt, and I urge
the passage of this legislation.
[[Page H6781]]
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time
to close.
I'll make it short and sweet. This is the same bill that was rejected
under suspension back in May, with the exception that the authorization
on the Home Star program has been increased by 13-fold. I suggested a
``no'' vote then. I continue to suggest a ``no'' vote and would ask for
a ``no'' vote at the appropriate time.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for his
comments.
We continue to say that this legislation is a good bill and it is
certainly deficit neutral. It has been judged that way by the
Congressional Budget Office. It is a loan program. It is not a grant
program. It will not add to the deficit. It will not add to the debt in
any respect.
I would like to encourage my colleagues to distinguish this program
from the Department of Energy program that is a weatherization program.
The weatherization programs, as we all know as Members, are intended to
help low-income families, and it is a grant program. This is a loan
program whereby Federal dollars are given to an investor-owned utility
or to a municipality or to a rural cooperative, and the money is used
then, in turn, to make low-interest loans to families who qualify. It
is not income based. There are qualifications for the loans, but the
family income is not a qualification to qualify for the loan.
We must enable the American people to weatherize their homes. Forty
percent, in some instances, of their utility bill can be attributed to
the loss of heat and air within the homes. And so this program is
intended to help install replacement windows and insulation and other
things that will make homes more energy efficient.
It will pay for itself. It's a good bill. I ask my colleagues to
support it.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 4785, the Rural
Energy Savings Program Act.
I am a cosponsor of this bill, which has been modified to include
provisions of H.R. 5019, the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act, of which I
am also a cosponsor.
The Rural Energy Savings Program Act creates two energy efficiency
loan programs. The Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program,
administered by the Energy Department, will provide interest-free loans
to states or territories, which will then re-loan the money to
consumers for energy efficiency home renovations. The Rural Star Energy
Program, run by the Agriculture Department, will make loans to rural
electric co-ops, enabling these organizations to provide loans to
qualified consumers to make their homes and businesses become more
energy efficient.
Constituents in my district have some of the highest energy costs in
the country, especially residents of Hawaii's rural communities. The
Rural Star Energy Program would give Kauai Island Utility Cooperative,
a rural electric co-op in my district, the opportunity to help
families, farms, and businesses on Kauai save money on their energy
bills while reducing energy waste and carbon pollution.
In addition, the Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program and the
Rural Star Energy Program will help create jobs by increasing demand
for energy efficiency products (many of which are made in the United
States) and energy equipment retrofits.
I strongly support H.R. 4785 and urge my colleagues to support this
measure.
Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4785, the
Rural Energy Savings Program (RESPA).
As a part-time farmer and a representative of a rural district, I
know how crippling the cost of energy can be to farms, families and our
rural citizens. As our nation moves towards finding cleaner and more
efficient ways of generating energy, many people in small communities
are finding that the costs of energy efficiency improvements are simply
too high. The farmers I talk to know that the savings from these
improvements are real, but the up-front costs are too often out of
reach. That is what it so important about this bill: through the use of
interest-free loans distributed by the Department of Agriculture, it
will allow farmers and rural citizens to implement critical energy-
efficient technology that will bring their energy costs down.
This bill authorizes USDA's Rural Utilities Service to make interest-
free loans to individual or state-based groups of co-ops. These loans
will then be used by the co-op to fund energy-efficient improvements
for farms or residences. These projects are projected to have a 10 year
or less payback period, meaning the customer will realize savings in a
relatively quick time frame. The loan will be repaid on the customer's
utility bill over a 10 year window.
While this is a great bill for rural America, it is also an important
bill for the rest of the country. The energy upgrades mean jobs in
America for Americans, in construction, installation, and
manufacturing. These are good jobs that cannot be outsourced, the kind
of jobs we need to put North Carolinians back to work. At the same
time, Americans know that many providers of our imported energy sources
like oil are unstable and a potential threat to our national security.
This bill moves us forward with a policy that reduces our dependence on
these risky sources of energy.
As a Representative who is committed to budget discipline, I am
pleased that this bill advances these priorities at absolutely no cost
to taxpayers. The co-ops will assume all risks for consumer repayments
of their efficiency investments. This means that the Federal Government
bears no risk in these transactions and must be repaid by the co-op.
This bill moves us a step closer to energy independence without
increasing our Federal deficit, and I applaud the bill's sponsor for
that.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of this
bill. It is good for our farmers, our rural citizens and for our
country.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 4785, the Rural
Energy Savings Program Act, which also authorizes the Home Star Energy
Efficiency Loan Program. Residential housing accounts for one-third of
the Nation's total electricity demand and about 22 percent of all
energy use in the United States. Moreover, it is estimated that
existing technologies and practices could reduce energy use--and
therefore home energy costs for American families--by up to 40 percent
per home. This legislation will allow electric utilities and co-ops to
make low-interest loans of a few thousand dollars to consumers who wish
to make energy efficient upgrades to their homes. The loans can then be
repaid on the consumers' electric bill, with most of the loan costs
covered by their savings in electricity.
The Rural Energy Savings and Home Star Energy Efficiency programs
will help homeowners with the upfront costs of installing energy
efficiency retrofits while boosting markets for U.S. manufacturers of
energy efficiency products and creating new jobs for our construction
workers and contractors. It is estimated that the two programs will
create nearly 200,000 jobs in the construction, manufacturing, and
retail sectors that have been devastated by the recent recession. At
the same time, these programs will help curb our Nation's carbon
emissions and reduce our unsustainable dependence on fossil fuels. This
legislation is good for our economy, good for American worker and
consumers, good for the environment, and good for our Nation's energy
security.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the Rural
Energy Savings Program Act and the Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan
Program contained in today's substitute amendment. Together, these
complementary initiatives will create good paying American jobs, save
consumers money and enhance our nation's energy security.
The Rural Star program will enable rural electric cooperatives to
borrow money from the USDA Rural Utilities Service to fund voluntary
and cost-effective energy efficiency upgrades for the citizens they
serve. The resulting low-interest loans would bear an interest rate of
no greater than three percent and would be repaid on the participating
consumers' utility bill over a ten year period of time.
The Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program is designed for those
citizens not served by rural electric cooperatives. Under this
companion measure, which tracks the National Home Energy Savings
Revolving Fund legislation I introduced earlier this Congress, states
would be able to borrow federal funds they could then make available to
electric utilities and other entities capable of administering a loan
program for cost-effective residential energy efficiency retrofits. As
an added ``Made in America'' benefit, it is estimated that 92 percent
of the products and materials that would be used in the Home Star
program are manufactured in the United States.
Mr. Chair, this is common-sense, forward-looking legislation that
will meaningfully advance America's clean energy future. I urge ``yes''
vote.
Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona. Mr. Chair, the House considers today
H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy Savings Program. I am a cosponsor of the
original, bipartisan legislation that would address a critical need in
rural America--energy efficiency improvements that will reduce our
energy consumption and lower consumers' utility bills.
This original bill creates new loans under the Department of
Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service. The voluntary loans to electric
cooperatives will facilitate their providing low-interest loans to
consumers, to be repaid
[[Page H6782]]
through utility bills. Loans will allow cooperative customers to make
only energy efficiency improvements that are proven to be worth the
investment. After the small loans for improvements are repaid,
consumers will have a lasting reduction in their bills as their energy
consumption declines. The federal government will be repaid, wisely
leveraging these taxpayer dollars for long-term benefits. This program
is a win-win-win for consumers, the cooperatives that serve them, and
taxpayers, and I strongly support this model.
Unfortunately, the bill we are considering today also includes the
Home Star Energy Retrofit Act--a measure the House considered in May of
this year and that I opposed. This bill--also known as ``Cash for
Caulkers''--would authorize more than $6 billion in new federal
spending for rebates to home improvements. I heard from constituents
before last spring's vote that this bill will simply not work for
Greater Arizona. The rebates require homeowners to have means to make
the improvements in the first place, and in this economic downturn that
is simply not an option for many families.
In addition, the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act could cost the
taxpayers more than $6 billion over the life of the program. I just
spent six weeks back in Greater Arizona meeting with small businesses,
working families, and local leaders. The concern I heard expressed most
frequently was concern that our deficit is growing too quickly and that
our national debt is mortgaging our children's future. We must stop
spending and start to address our long-term fiscal imbalance, and
moving forward with this bill is not going to get the job done.
I support our rural electric cooperatives, but I cannot support a
bill that will add so significantly to our deficit or that will not
help families struggling in these tough times.
Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chair, I rise reluctantly to oppose
H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy Savings Program Act.
I am listed as a cosponsor of H.R. 4785, however, the legislation I
added my name to in March is vastly different than the legislation we
consider today. The Rural Energy Savings Program Act that I
cosponsored, authorized a relatively modest $750 million over ten-year
loan program to assist 1.6 million homeowners in rural America to
install energy efficiency measures in their homes. By providing these
loans, we would be able to reduce consumer's energy cost and increase
the demand for energy efficient products, thus creating jobs for
countless Americans.
Mr. Chair, during these tough economic times, we are all looking for
ways to stretch our dollars. One way many consumers seek to reduce
their monthly expenditures is by reducing their power bill. However,
the average cost of an energy efficient upgrade is $1,500. Quite
simply, in rural America, where income is 14 percent below the national
average, many homeowners do not have the up-front funding necessary to
install these upgrades, even though the energy savings provided by
these upgrades pay for themselves over a relatively short period of
time.
Additionally, I supported the original version of H.R. 4785 because
it accomplished the laudable, above-described goal, without creating
another inefficient government bureaucracy. Instead, the program would
have used our nation's existing and well-functioning rural electric co-
ops to distribute these loans to consumers.
I have a long history of supporting the rural electric co-ops, not
just in this body, or during my time in the South Carolina State House,
but also by paying my monthly power bill to my own rural electric co-op
in Berkeley County, South Carolina.
As such it pains me to oppose this legislation. However, the
original, modest goal of H.R. 4785 has been lost amid the inclusion of
the $4.25 billion Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program. This
portion of the bill would provide funding to states and other
unspecified entities to create lending programs for homeowners to make
home energy improvements.
Mr. Chair, I support energy efficiency for urban consumers, just as I
do for rural consumers. However, unlike the privately owned rural
electric co-ops, who have provided many years of faithful service, the
Department of Energy has not proven they are capable of effectively
managing such a large program.
The so-called ``Stimulus'' legislation provided $4.7 billion to the
Department of Energy in order to weatherize the homes of low-income
individuals. However, the Department's own Inspector General has found
that one year after the Stimulus was passed into law only $368 million
or 7.83 percent had been used and only 30,297 units had been
weatherized.
Considering this abject failure, I simply cannot vote to provide
another $4.25 billion of our taxpayer's dollars to the Department of
Energy. I am not alone in my opposition to the Home Star Energy
Efficiency Loan Program. In fact, the House voted earlier this year to
remove this objectionable program from H.R. 5019 the Home Star Energy
Retrofit Act by a broad bipartisan vote of 346 to 68. It is very
objectionable this program has been brought back for a vote as a
portion of H.R. 4785. As such, I am forced to rise in opposition to
H.R. 4785 although I remain supportive of the original purpose of the
legislation and I look forward to working with my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle in order to lower the electricity costs of all
Americans.
Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois. Mr. Chair, I rise today to comment on H.R.
4785, the Rural Energy Savings Program. As marked up by the House
Committee on Agriculture, this legislation would truly help rural
America. Unfortunately, the bill considered on the House floor today,
is an expensive, and unfortunate alternative that could result in $4.25
billion in extra spending that has nothing to do with rural America.
The Rural Energy Savings Program would allow electric cooperatives to
borrow money for the purposes of funding local energy efficiency
programs. Eligible co-ops would provide money for energy efficiency
upgrades to farms and rural consumers in the form of low-interest
loans. In many cases, the costs to consumers would be covered by the
resulting savings in their respective energy bills.
I support H.R. 4785, as originally passed by the House Agriculture
Committee. This voluntary program would help electric cooperatives
provide potential energy solutions to their members. I voted against
the rule for H.R. 4785, which had it failed would have paved the way
for members to vote on a clean bill. However, the bill before us today
adds a $4.25 billion authorization for a ``Home Star'' energy program
that the House has already defeated once and therefore I voted no on
the overall package.
I strongly support section two of H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy Savings
Program, and urge the House and Senate to work together to craft a bill
that mirrors the work completed in the House Agriculture Committee.
This Rural Energy Savings program is a sensible approach that could
improve energy efficiency in rural America.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chair, although I support incentives to
promote energy efficiency as well as the work of contractors across the
country who make our homes and businesses more energy efficient, I must
rise in opposition to H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy Savings Program Act.
During the 6 week August recess, I heard over and over from my
constituents in Northwest Georgia that the Federal Government needs to
get its fiscal house in order. That is hard to accomplish when--for the
first time in the modern era--Congress failed to even adopt a budget
blueprint for the fiscal year. Why is it that hardworking families have
to make difficult decisions on their personal budgets while Washington
can't? The American people deserve better.
Mr. Chair, unfortunately, the Democratic Majority just doesn't get
it. I find it hard to believe that the message they are receiving from
their constituents is much different than what I am hearing. Yet, they
don't seem to be listening.
At a time where we have amassed a $1.3 trillion deficit for Fiscal
Year 2010 alone and we are faced with over $13 trillion in debt, we
need to demonstrate fiscal restraint. Instead, H.R. 4785 seeks to spend
an additional $5 billion when the American people are begging us to
reduce spending.
Mr. Chair, I believe that we must take the needed steps to get
federal spending under control. The Democratic Majority has clearly
demonstrated that it is out of touch with the American people by
passing the $862 billion ``Stimulus'' and the $1 trillion ObamaCare
bill. H.R. 4785 embodies that same attitude that we must spend our way
back to prosperity, when we have seen it fail time after time.
Therefore, despite my support for energy efficiency programs and the
people who would benefit from this legislation, I urge all of my
colleagues to listen to the American people and curb federal spending.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on Agriculture printed in the bill, it shall be in order
to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the
5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in
part A of House Report 111-594. The amendment in the nature of a
substitute shall be considered as read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
H.R. 4785
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. HOME STAR ENERGY EFFICIENCY LOAN PROGRAM.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
[[Page H6783]]
(1) Eligible participant.--The term ``eligible
participant'' means a homeowner who receives financial
assistance from a qualified financing entity to carry out
qualifying energy savings measures pursuant to this section,
and who is not also a qualified consumer under section 2.
(2) Qualified financing entity.--The term ``qualified
financing entity'' means a State, political subdivision of a
State, tribal government, electric utility, natural gas
utility, nonprofit or community-based organization, energy
service company, retailer, or any other entity that--
(A) meets the eligibility requirements of this section; and
(B) is designated by the Governor of a State in accordance
with subsection (f)(1),
except that an entity that is an eligible entity under
section 2 shall not be a qualified financing entity.
(3) Qualified loan program mechanism.--The term ``qualified
loan program mechanism'' means a mechanism for the
establishment and operation of a loan program that is--
(A) administered by a qualified financing entity; and
(B) funded in significant part--
(i) by funds provided by or overseen by a State; or
(ii) through the energy loan program of the Federal
National Mortgage Association.
(4) Qualifying energy savings measure.--The term
``qualifying energy savings measure'' means a measure listed
under subsection (c)(1) or (2) or stipulated in a whole-house
analysis under subsection (c)(3).
(b) Establishment.--The Secretary of Energy shall establish
a Home Star Energy Efficiency Loan Program under which the
Secretary of Energy shall offer loans at zero percent
interest to States to support financial assistance provided
by qualified financing entities for the installation of
qualifying energy savings measures.
(c) Energy Efficiency Measures and Standards.--The
Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Secretary of
Agriculture, shall publish--
(1) not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, a master list of residential energy efficiency
measures determined to be cost-effective, readily available
from commercial sources, to be permanently installed in a
residence, and capable of supporting measurement and
verification of the energy savings that results from their
adoption;
(2) additions to such a list, approved by the Secretary of
Energy, of other residential energy efficiency measures that
are--
(A) recommended by the Secretary of Agriculture;
(B) calculated to achieve sufficient energy savings that
they will achieve a simple payback within 10 years or less;
and
(C) permanently installed in a residence;
(3) specifications for whole-house energy performance
analyses simulating energy use before and after a retrofit
utilizing measures from the master list published pursuant to
paragraphs (1) and (2) and such other permanent structural
measures as can be demonstrated, when installed and operated
as intended, to improve residential energy efficiency in a
manner that can be determined with confidence to be cost-
effective and to recover their own cost in energy cost
savings within the term of a proposed loan; and
(4) a protocol for measurement and verification of the
energy savings that have resulted from any and all energy
efficiency measures taken with respect to a residence and
financed in whole or in part pursuant to this title.
(d) Eligibility of Qualified Financing Entities.--To be
eligible to participate in the Home Star Loan Program, a
qualified financing entity shall--
(1) offer a financing product under which eligible
participants may pay over time for the cost to the eligible
participant (after all applicable Federal, State, local, and
other rebates or incentives are applied) of installations
described in subsection (b);
(2) require all financed installations to be performed by
contractors in a manner that meets building code requirements
and other appropriate minimum standards;
(3) establish standard underwriting criteria to determine
the eligibility of Home Star Loan Program applicants, which
criteria shall be consistent with--
(A) with respect to unsecured consumer loan programs,
standard underwriting criteria used under the energy loan
program of the Federal National Mortgage Association; or
(B) with respect to secured loans or other forms of
financial assistance, commercially recognized best practices
applicable to the form of financial assistance being provided
(as determined by the designated entity administering the
Home Star Loan Program in the State); and
(4) undertake particular efforts to make such loans
available in public use microdata areas that have a poverty
rate of 12 percent or more in a proportion of total loans
made at least equal to the proportion the number of residents
in such areas bears to the total population of the area
served by that qualified financing entity.
(e) Allocation.--In allocating 75 percent of the loan funds
made available to States for each fiscal year under this
section, the Secretary of Energy shall use the formula used
to allocate funds to States to carry out State energy
conservation plans established under part D of title III of
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6321 et
seq.), with appropriate modifications to reflect the funds to
be provided in States for loans under section 2. In
allocating the remaining 25 percent of the loan funds made
available to States for each fiscal year under this section,
the Secretary of Energy may vary the result of the formula to
recognize and reward those States that make the best progress
in providing loans to low-income areas pursuant to subsection
(d)(4).
(f) Qualified Financing Entities.--Before making funds
available to a State under this section, the Secretary of
Energy shall require the Governor of the State to provide to
the Secretary of Energy a letter of agreement that the
State--
(1) will use the funds provided pursuant to this section
solely as provided in this section;
(2) has 1 or more qualified financing entities that meet
the requirements of this section;
(3) has established, or has required its designated
qualified financing entities to establish, a qualified loan
program mechanism that--
(A) will use a quality assurance program or another
appropriate methodology to ensure energy savings;
(B) incorporates an effective repayment mechanism, which
may include--
(i) on-utility-bill repayment;
(ii) tax assessment or other form of property assessment
financing;
(iii) municipal service charges;
(iv) energy or energy efficiency services contracts;
(v) energy efficiency power purchase agreements;
(vi) unsecured loans applying the underwriting requirements
of the energy loan program of the Federal National Mortgage
Association; or
(vii) alternative contractual repayment mechanisms that
have been demonstrated to have appropriate risk mitigation
features;
(4) will provide, in a timely manner, all information
regarding the administration of the Home Star Loan Program as
the Secretary of Energy may require to permit the Secretary
of Energy to meet program evaluation requirements; and
(5) will commit to the full repayment of the loaned funds
to the Secretary of Energy by a date not later than 20 years
from the date of the loan closing.
(g) Use of Funds.--Funds made available to States for
carrying out the Home Star Loan Program may be used to
support financing mechanisms offered by qualified financing
entities to eligible participants, including--
(1) interest rate reductions to interest rates as low as
zero percent;
(2) loan loss reserves or other forms of credit
enhancement;
(3) revolving loan funds from which qualified financing
entities may offer direct loans; or
(4) other debt instruments necessary--
(A) to use available funds to obtain appropriate leverage
through private investment; and
(B) to support widespread deployment of energy efficiency
programs.
(h) Use of Repaid Funds.--In the case of a revolving loan
fund described in subsection (g)(3), a qualified financing
entity may use funds repaid by eligible participants under
the Home Star Loan Program to provide financial assistance
for additional eligible participants for installations
described in subsection (b) in a manner that is consistent
with this section.
(i) Administrative Costs.--A State may permit a qualified
financing entity to charge interest of 3 percent to cover the
costs of loan administration and personnel and program
management, or for establishing a loan loss reserve.
(j) Reporting Requirements.--The Secretary of Energy shall
report to the Congress on the implementation of this title,
including the energy savings and cost savings estimated to be
achieved, not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of this Act, and again by not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this section.
(k) Assessment by Government Accountability Office.--The
Comptroller General shall, by not later than 18 months after
the date of enactment of this Act, prepare and submit to the
Congress an analysis and report determining--
(1) the actual taxpayer funds made available for the
program created in this section;
(2) the actual amounts of such funds made available to
eligible participants or qualified consumers in the program
created in this section;
(3) the extent of measured and verified residential energy
savings achieved and expected to be achieved on an ongoing
basis as a function of this program;
(4) the extent to which funds were made available to
support commercial or industrial energy efficiency measures
under this program;
(5) the extent to which funds made available were expended
for training, administration, program support by contractors,
or trade association activities under this program; and
(6) the consistency and rigor of the standards for energy
efficiency and for measurement and verification adopted and
implemented by this program.
(l) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated
for purposes of this section $850,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2010 through 2014, which shall remain available until
expended.
SEC. 2. RURAL ENERGY SAVINGS PROGRAM.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means--
(A) any public or cooperative electric utility that is
eligible to borrow from the Rural Utilities Service
electrification program authorized under the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et seq.) that
serves a rural area;
(B) any current borrower of the Rural Utilities Service
electrification program authorized under that Act; or
(C) any entity primarily owned or controlled by an entity
described in subparagraph (A) or (B).
(2) Energy efficiency measure.--The term ``energy
efficiency measure'', with respect to property served by an
eligible entity, means a
[[Page H6784]]
fixed structural improvement and investment in a cost-
effective, commercial off-the-shelf technology to reduce
residential energy use that is either--
(A) included in the master list published under section
1(c)(1) and (2); or
(B) stipulated in a whole-house simulation conducted
pursuant to section 1(c)(3).
(3) Farm efficiency measure.--The term ``farm efficiency
measure'' means an energy saving application that is a fixed
improvement installed in or attached to a building or
structure on a farm at a total loan value for that farm of
$50,000 or less, that is not otherwise an energy efficiency
measure, and that would achieve energy savings sufficient to
repay the cost of the measure in 10 years or fewer.
(4) Qualified consumer.--The term ``qualified consumer''
means a consumer served by an eligible entity that has the
ability to repay a loan made under subsection (d), as
determined by an eligible entity, and who has not accepted
any loan as an eligible participant pursuant to section 1.
(5) Qualified entity.--The term ``qualified entity'' means
any organization that the Secretary of Agriculture determines
has significant experience in providing eligible entities
with--
(A) advice on energy, environmental, energy efficiency, and
information research and technology;
(B) training, education, and consulting;
(C) guidance in energy and operational issues and rural
community and economic development; and
(D) other relevant assistance, as determined by the
Secretary of Agriculture.
(6) Rural area.--The term ``rural area'' means any area
other than--
(A) a city or town that has a population of greater than
50,000 inhabitants; and
(B) any urbanized area contiguous and adjacent to a city or
town described in subparagraph (A).
(b) Establishment.--The Secretary of Agriculture, acting
through the Rural Utility Service, shall establish the Rural
Star Energy Savings Program for the purpose of making loans
to eligible entities that agree to accept the loan funds
authorized pursuant to this section to make loans to
qualified consumers for the purpose of implementing
residential energy efficiency measures or farm efficiency
measures approved by the Secretary of Agriculture.
(c) Loans to Eligible Entities.--
(1) Loans authorized.--Subject to paragraph (2), the
Secretary of Agriculture shall make loans to an eligible
entity that agrees that the loan funds will be used to make
loans to qualified consumers as described in subsection (d)
for the purpose of implementing one or more energy efficiency
measures, or a farm efficiency measure in response to an
application by an eligible entity.
(2) List, plan, and measurement and verification
required.--
(A) In general.--As a condition to receiving a loan under
paragraph (1), an eligible entity shall--
(i) establish a list of energy efficiency measures or farm
efficiency measures expected to decrease energy use or costs
of a qualified consumer from the master list published under
section 1(c)(1) and (2);
(ii) establish a procedure to identify to the Secretary of
Agriculture any specific farm efficiency measures for which
the eligible entity seeks authority to make a loan;
(iii) prepare an implementation plan for use of the loan
funds to ensure that a loan to a qualified consumer is for
energy efficiency investments that will achieve savings
sufficient to service the loan during the term of the loan;
and
(iv) provide for appropriate measurement and verification
as prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture to ensure the
actual use and effectiveness of the energy efficiency loans
made by the eligible entity.
(B) Revision of list of energy efficiency measures.--An
eligible entity may update the list required under
subparagraph (A)(i) to account for efficiency technologies
added to the master list published under section 1(c)(1)
pursuant to section 1(c)(2), or farm efficiency measures
approved by the Secretary of Agriculture.
(C) Existing energy efficiency programs.--An eligible
entity that, on or before the date of the enactment of this
Act, has already established an energy efficiency program for
qualified consumers may submit an existing list of energy
efficiency measures or farm efficiency measures,
implementation plans, or measurement and verification systems
to satisfy the requirements of subparagraph (A) to the
Secretary of Agriculture and may use such list until and
unless such list is inconsistent with the measures published
pursuant to section 1(c)(1) and (2).
(3) Loan terms for loans to eligible entities.--
(A) No interest.--A loan made to an eligible entity under
paragraph (1) shall bear no interest.
(B) Repayment.--With respect to a loan under paragraph
(1)--
(i) the term shall not exceed 20 years from the date the
loan is closed; and
(ii) except as provided in subparagraph (D), the repayment
of each advance shall be amortized for a period not to exceed
10 years.
(C) Amount of advances.--Any advance of loan funds to an
eligible entity in any single year shall not exceed 30
percent of the approved loan amount.
(D) Special advance for start-up activities.--
(i) In general.--In order to assist an eligible entity in
defraying initial start-up costs, the Secretary of
Agriculture shall allow an eligible entity to request a
special advance.
(ii) Amount of special advance.--No eligible entity may
receive a special advance under this subparagraph for an
amount that is greater than 4 percent of the loan amount
received by the eligible entity under paragraph (1).
(iii) Repayment.--The repayment of the special advance
shall be required within 10 years after the special advance
is made and, at the election of the eligible entity, may be
deferred to the end of the 10-year period.
(E) Limitation on advances.--All advances shall be made
under a loan described in paragraph (1) within the first 10
years of the term of the loan.
(d) Loans to Qualified Consumers.--
(1) Terms of loans.--Loans made by an eligible entity to
qualified consumers using loan funds provided by the
Secretary of Agriculture under subsection (c)--
(A) may bear interest, not to exceed three percent, to be
used by the eligible entity for purposes such as establishing
a loan loss reserve and to offset personnel and program costs
of the eligible entity to provide the loans;
(B) shall finance only energy efficiency measures or farm
efficiency measures for the purpose of decreasing energy
usage or costs of a qualified consumer by an amount such that
a loan term of not more than 10 years will achieve a simple
payback of the amount invested;
(C) shall not be used to fund purchases of, or
modifications to, personal property unless the personal
property--
(i) is or becomes attached to real property as a fixture;
or
(ii) is a manufactured home;
(D) shall be repaid through charges added to the electric
bill for the property for, or at which energy efficiency
measures are or will be implemented, except that this
requirement shall not be construed to prohibit--
(i) the voluntary prepayment of a loan by the owner of the
property; or
(ii) the use of any additional repayment mechanisms that
are--
(I) demonstrated to have appropriate risk mitigation
features, as determined by the eligible entity; or
(II) required if the qualified consumer is no longer a
customer of the eligible entity; and
(E) shall require an energy audit to determine the impact
of proposed energy efficiency measures on the energy costs
and consumption of the qualified consumer.
(2) Contractors.--In addition to any other qualified
general contractor, eligible entities may serve as general
contractors.
(3) Use of other energy efficiency incentives.--Energy
efficiency incentives made available under any other Act,
including rebates, grants, or any other payments, may be used
to reduce the amount of a loan made under this subsection to
qualified consumers in order to meet the requirement of
paragraph (1)(B).
(e) Measurement, Verification, Training, and Technical
Assistance.--
(1) Duties of the secretary.--The Secretary of
Agriculture--
(A) shall establish an implementation and measurement and
verification advisory committee consisting of representatives
of eligible entities and qualified entities;
(B) may enter into cooperative agreements with qualified
entities to provide technical assistance and training to the
employees of eligible entities to carry out this section; and
(C) shall establish a process to compile and maintain a
directory of energy efficiency auditors that are used by
eligible entities to carry out this section.
(2) Exception.--
(A) The Secretary of Agriculture shall not utilize the
authority provided under this subsection or subsection (j)
to--
(i) develop, adopt, or implement a public labeling system
that rates and compares the energy performance among
qualified consumers; or
(ii) require the public disclosure of an energy performance
evaluation or rating developed for any qualified consumer.
(B) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude--
(i) the computation, collection, or use, by the Secretary
of Agriculture, eligible entity, or qualified entity for the
purposes of aggregating information on the rating and
comparison of the energy performance among qualified
consumers with and without energy efficiency features or on
energy performance evaluation or rating;
(ii) the use and publication of aggregate data (without
identifying individual qualified consumers) based on
information referred to in clause (i) to determine or
demonstrate the performance of this program; or
(iii) the provision of information referred to in clause
(i) with respect to a qualified consumer:
(I) to the State, eligible consumer, eligible entity, or
qualified entity, as necessary to enable carrying out this
title; or
(II) for purposes of prosecuting fraud and abuse.
(f) Fast Start Demonstration Projects.--The Secretary of
Agriculture shall, not later than 90 days after the enactment
of this section, enter into agreements with eligible entities
(or groups of eligible entities) that have established an
energy efficiency program described in subsection (c)(2)(C)
to establish an energy efficiency loan demonstration projects
consistent with the purposes of this section that--
(1) implement approaches to energy audits and investments
in energy efficiency measures or farm efficiency measures
that yield measurable and predictable savings;
(2) use measurement and verification processes to determine
the effectiveness of energy efficiency loans made by eligible
entities;
(3) include training for employees of eligible entities,
including any contractors of such entities, to implement or
oversee the activities described in paragraphs (1) and (2);
(4) provide for the participation of a majority of eligible
entities in a State;
(5) reduce the need for generating capacity;
(6) provide efficiency loans to--
(A) not fewer than 20,000 consumers, in the case of a
single eligible entity; or
[[Page H6785]]
(B) not fewer than 80,000 consumers, in the case of a group
of eligible entities; and
(7) serve areas where 15 percent or more of consumers
reside--
(A) in manufactured homes; or
(B) in housing units that are more than 50 years old.
(g) Additional Authority.--The authority provided in this
section is in addition to any authority of the Secretary of
Agriculture to offer loans under any other law.
(h) Effective Period.--Except as otherwise provided in this
section, the loans and other expenditures required to be made
under this section are authorized to be made during each of
fiscal years 2010 through 2014.
(i) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this section, the Secretary of Agriculture shall
promulgate such regulations as are necessary to implement
this section.
(2) Procedure.--The promulgation of the regulations and
administration of this section shall be made without regard
to--
(A) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly
known as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act''); and
(B) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture
effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804), relating to
notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in
rulemaking.
(3) Congressional review of agency rulemaking.--In carrying
out this section, the Secretary of Agriculture shall use the
authority provided under section 808 of title 5, United
States Code.
(4) Interim regulations.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (1)
and (2), to the extent regulations are necessary to carry out
any provision of this section, the Secretary of Agriculture
shall implement such regulations through the promulgation of
an interim rule.
(j) Audit of Program.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall
conduct an audit of the program authorized by this section to
ensure that the funds provided to eligible entities under
this section are used in accordance with the purpose of this
section.
(k) Reporting Requirements.--The Secretary of Agriculture
shall report to the Congress on the implementation of this
Act, including the energy savings and costs savings estimated
to be achieved, not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, and again not later than 2 years after
the date of enactment of this Act.
(l) Assesment by Government Accountability Office.--The
Comptroller General shall, by not later than 18 months after
the date of enactment of this Act, prepare and submit to the
Congress an analysis and report determining--
(1) the actual taxpayer funds made available for the
program created in this section;
(2) the actual amounts of such funds made available to
eligible entities for qualified consumers in the program
created in this section;
(3) the extent of measured and verified energy savings
achieved and expected to be achieved on an ongoing basis as a
function of the program created in this section;
(4) the extent to which funds made available were expended
for training, administration, and program support by eligible
entities and qualified entities under the program created in
this section; and
(5) the consistency and rigor of the standards for energy
efficiency and for measurement and verification adopted and
implemented by program created in this section.
(m) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated
for purposes of this section $150,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2010 through 2014, which shall remain available until
expended.
The CHAIR. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a
substitute is in order except those printed in part B of the report.
Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report,
by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall
be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally divided and
controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to
amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Holden
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in
part B of House Report 111-594.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 1, line 17, strike ``and''.
Page 1, after line 17, insert the following new
subparagraph:
(B) is not an entity that has an ongoing capital repayment
obligation to the Department of the Treasury pursuant to the
Troubled Asset Relief Program (Public Law 110-343, 122 Stat.
3765); and
Page 2, line 1, redesignate subparagraph (B) as
subparagraph (C).
Page 6, after line 18, insert the following new paragraph
(and redesignate the subsequent paragraphs accordingly):
(2) will use the funds provided under this section to
supplement and not supplant any prior or planned Federal and
State funding provided to carry out energy efficiency
programs, on the condition that, to the extent the Secretary
finds that a State has supplanted other such programs with
funding under this section, the Secretary may with hold an
equivalent amount of funding from allocations for the State
under this section;
Page 10, strike lines 5 through 7.
Page 10, line 8, strike ``(5)'' and insert ``(4)''.
Page 10, line 12, strike ``(6)'' and insert ``(5)''.
Page 10, line 17, after ``this section'' insert ``,
provided that enactment of this Act would not increase direct
spending,''.
Page 18, strike lines 3 through 8 and insert the following:
(C) shall not be used to fund--
(i) the purchase of a manufactured home; or
(ii) the purchase of any other personal property unless the
personal property is or becomes attached to real property as
a fixture;
(D) shall not be used to fund modifications to personal
property unless the personal property--
(i) is or becomes attached to real property as a fixture;
or
(ii) is a manufactured home;
Page 18, line 9, strike ``(D)'' and insert ``(E)''.
Page 18, line 24, strike ``(E)'' and insert ``(F)''.
Page 20, line 8, strike ``(j)'' and insert ``(i)''.
Page 25, line 19, after ``this section'' insert ``,
provided that enactment of this Act would not increase direct
spending,''.
At the end, add the following:
SEC. 3. PROHIBITION.
Neither the Secretary of Energy nor the Secretary of
Agriculture shall provide any funds authorized by this Act to
any contractor that employs an employee to work in a
consumer's home if that employee has been convicted of, or
plead guilty to, a crime of child molestation, rape, or any
other form of sexual assault.
SEC. 4. FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
(a) A loan shall not be provided to a Federal employee
under this Act if any of the following apply to the employee:
(1) The employee has a seriously delinquent tax debt (as
determined under subsection (b)).
(2) The employee received a payment under the Low-Income
Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8621 et seq.)
but was ineligible to receive the payment under the criteria
described in section 2605(b)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
8624(b)(2)).
(3) The employee has been officially disciplined for
violations of subpart G of the Standards of Ethical Conduct
for Employees of the Executive Branch for viewing,
downloading, or exchanging pornography, including child
pornography, on a Federal Government computer or while
performing official Federal Government duties.
(b) For purposes of subsection (a)(1), a ``seriously
delinquent tax debt'' means an outstanding debt under the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for which a notice of lien has
been filed in public records pursuant to section 6323 of such
Code, except that such term does not include--
(1) a debt that is being paid in a timely manner pursuant
to an agreement under section 6159 or section 7122 of such
Code; or
(2) a debt with respect to which a collection due process
hearing under section 6330 of such Code is requested,
pending, or completed and no payment is required.
SEC. 5. WRONGFUL USE OR DIVERSION OF PROGRAM FUNDS.
The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Agriculture
shall take such steps as are necessary and appropriate,
including requirements for the immediate repayment of Federal
assistance, to ensure that none of the funds authorized in
this Act are used--
(1) in violation of law;
(2) in a manner that creates a significant threat to human
health or safety;
(3) in a manner that undercuts the integrity and
accountability of the program under this Act; or
(4) for purposes other than those serving the objectives of
this Act.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1620, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden) and a Member opposed each will control 10
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
{time} 1300
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, the manager's amendment contains the
following provisions: It prohibits entities with ongoing TARP
obligations from participating in the program. It mandates that funds
provided by the legislation must be used to supplement and not to
supplant other energy efficiency funding. It says that no report has to
be filed by the comptroller general regarding the extent to which funds
provided by the legislation are used to support commercial or
industrial energy measures. It prohibits any additions to direct
spending with respect to the legislation. It forbids funds from being
used to purchase personal property, including manufactured homes; but
allows funds to be used for modifications to manufactured homes.
The manager's amendment prohibits the Secretary of Agriculture from
promulgating regulations regarding a
[[Page H6786]]
home labeling program. It also prohibits the wrongful use or diversion
of program funds, as well as prohibits providing funds to any
contractor who employs any person who has been convicted of, or pled
guilty to, any form of sexual assault. Finally, it prohibits Federal
employees from receiving loan funds if they have seriously delinquent
tax debt, have received a payment in violation of LIHEAA, or have been
officially disciplined for viewing, downloading, or exchanging
pornography on a Federal Government computer or while performing
official Federal Government duties.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition,
although I do not oppose the amendment.
The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oklahoma is
recognized for 10 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. LUCAS. While I claim the time in opposition, I would state for
the Record that I support my good friend from Pennsylvania's amendment.
I support his efforts to import more integrity into this. What I am
afraid of is a duplicative program. More importantly, I support his
attempt to make sure that that the program does not affect direct
spending. As my good friend has mentioned, his amendment prohibits any
direct or mandatory spending. What it does not do, however, is prevent
appropriators from adding to our national debt by spending
discretionary dollars on the program.
While I support my friend's efforts to be truly fiscally responsible,
this act should sunset if it is not deficit neutral. Again, I support
Mr. Holden's amendment and urge others to do the same. I would prefer
language that more directly prevents direct spending, but this is what
we have.
Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the ranking member
of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Representative Barton.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I too rise in support of the Holden amendment.
It is not as good as our motion to recommit from back in May, it is not
as good as the Barton amendment that was offered to the Rules
Committee, but it is strangely similar. So if flattery is the most
sincere form of compliment, then I am complimented that you have taken
a page out of our playbook. It is going to make our coming motion to
recommit much more difficult to develop, but I can assure you that
agile minds are working as we speak on that motion to recommit. But for
purposes of this debate, both Mr. Lucas and myself do support your
amendment and urge its adoption.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentlemen from
North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Texas for their support of the manager's
amendment, and encourage its passage.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania will be
postponed.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Cuellar
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in
part B of House Report 111-594.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
(n) The Secretary of Agriculture shall provide assistance
and technical advice to the qualified entities providing
loans under this bill in conducting outreach for the purposes
of increasing participation of economically distressed rural
communities with unemployment rates above the national
average, or rural areas that lack basic living necessities,
such as water and sewer systems, electricity, and safe,
sanitary housing, in the program established under this
section.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1620, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Cuellar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to encourage my colleagues to support my
amendment to the Rural Energy Savings Program. This amendment will
direct the Secretary of Agriculture to provide assistance and advice to
the entities providing loans under this act to increase participation
in the areas of high unemployment. This important amendment will go a
long way towards making sure those areas that have been hit the hardest
are about to take advantage of this legislation.
As you know, unemployment is still a real problem for many Americans
throughout the country. In my congressional district, as an example, I
have two counties that are significantly above the national average for
unemployment, which is about 9.4. Hidalgo County is suffering at 11.1
percent, and Starr County is at 17.3 percent.
This amendment will make sure that these communities are not left out
of this good piece of legislation. Under my amendment, USDA will
provide its expertise to the entities providing loans for the purposes
of outreach. This amendment will increase economic activity in the
areas that need it the most while providing valuable energy cost
savings.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Butterfield, Mr. Clyburn, Mr.
Holden, and the other folks who have been working very hard, and also
the ranking members. I thank you, and stand in strong support of this
piece of legislation along with my amendment. I ask Members to vote
``yes'' on my amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. I claim the time in opposition, Mr. Chairman, although I
do not oppose the amendment.
The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oklahoma is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. LUCAS. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This amendment would simply direct the Secretary of Agriculture to
provide assistance and technical advice to electric cooperatives who
have been approved as qualified entities in an effort to improve the
outreach to the rural communities it serves with unemployment rates
above the national average, as the author noted. As I understand the
amendment, it does not require special treatment; rather it focuses on
promotion of the program to those communities that are hit hard by the
failing economy.
I think the gentleman's intentions are laudable, and given the
legislative framework that the majority leadership has us working in, I
do not oppose this amendment. I do, however, think there are better
ways to bring cheap and efficient energy to these communities.
The prohibition on lending in the last farm bill to increase base
load generation from clean coal, natural gas, and nuclear technologies
is the biggest hidden tax on rural Americans that I can possibly think
of, administered by the present majority leadership.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CUELLAR. I want to thank the ranking member for his support and
again thank Mr. Butterfield, Mr. Holden, Mr. Clyburn, and all of the
folks who have worked so hard. I ask Members to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Cuellar).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mrs. McCarthy of New York
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in
part B of House Report 111-594.
Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
SEC. __. PRIORITY FOR ACTIVE DUTY MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES
AND VETERANS.
In providing loans to eligible participants under section 1
or qualified consumers under section 2, the lender shall give
priority to members of the Armed Forces serving on active
duty and to veterans (as defined in section 101 of title 38,
United States Code).
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1620, the gentlewoman from
New
[[Page H6787]]
York (Mrs. McCarthy) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. I want to thank Chairmen Peterson and
Waxman and Ranking Members Lucas and Barton for bringing forward this
important legislation. I also thank my colleague from Pennsylvania, Tim
Holden.
Mr. Chairman, energy costs in this country continue to rise. For many
families these costs are becoming an unbearable burden. I support this
bill and believe that it will be a great help to many American
families. H.R. 4785 creates the tools necessary to give homeowners
control over their energy costs. The loans provided for in this bill
will allow homeowners to invest in energy efficiency measures that will
provide long-term savings to many, many families. It will help bring
down energy costs for homeowners, reduce our dependence on foreign oil,
and help us transition towards a clean-energy economy.
Although all Americans are facing the reality of rising energy costs,
for our active duty troops and our veterans, the challenges of
skyrocketing energy costs can be even more problematic. The members of
our active duty military must often balance their household and service
requirements. Does this still get your point across? I believe it does.
Our veterans, both our new veterans just starting out and our older
veterans living on a fixed income, also have unique challenges when it
comes to their energy costs.
{time} 1310
I believe it is important that we give priority in this bill to those
men and women who have sacrificed and who continue to sacrifice for our
country. This is what my amendment does. Let us make sure that, with
all the challenges in life, our active duty members and veterans are
able to worry a little less about their electricity bills.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. LUCAS. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
In agriculture, we've learned the hard way, Mr. Chairman, that carve-
outs and programs generally reduce the effectiveness of the programs.
It's a simple economic principle. By focusing on the beneficiary
instead of the results, the marginal utility is lowered.
Now, having said that, I can think of no more deserving group than
the brave men and women of our Armed Services to be prioritized in any
Federal program. Yes, I support and encourage my colleagues to support
this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Butterfield
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in
part B of House Report 111-594.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I have a parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for a parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. What is the protocol when the author of an
amendment is not on the floor and the amendment is called?
The CHAIR. The Chair is trying to ascertain whether the proponent
will offer the amendment.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Is there a prescribed waiting period? Are we in
a holding pattern around an airport or, within a minute, no-show, no-
go?
The CHAIR. The Chair will respect Members' opportunities to offer
amendments, and the Chair will wait momentarily until finding out
whether the amendment will be offered.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to
continue with the bill. If the author is not here, he has lost his
opportunity to offer it. So I would ask unanimous consent to move
forward in consideration of pending business of the House and to skip
over the amendment.
The CHAIR. This is the last amendment.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I stand to offer this amendment as a
designee.
The CHAIR. The gentleman will be recognized for that purpose.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, requesting the right to object, I
seek recognition to object if it is under the rules. We don't know. I
have great faith in Mr. Butterfield, but I am not sure he has been
authorized by Mr. Inslee. If Mr. Inslee is not here, I would object,
with all due respect to Mr. Butterfield's substituting for him, without
knowing whether Mr. Inslee wants him to.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I am told that the gentleman from
Washington is en route to the floor. I simply stood to offer the
amendment to make it in order. The gentleman who offered the amendment
should be here momentarily.
The CHAIR. The Chair then will wait until the gentleman arrives.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Will the Chair give that consideration to
Members of the minority if we happen to be tardy and dawdling? We
certainly are cognizant of the graciousness, but the House of
Representatives is a busy place, and I always thought if you weren't
here, you lost your spot in the lineup.
The CHAIR. Under House Resolution 1620, unanimous consent is not
required for a designee to offer an amendment. The Chair is prepared to
recognize the gentleman from North Carolina. The Chair has actually
been very nonbiased to both sides, and intends to be fair to both
sides.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I am not disparaging of the Chair's nonbiasness.
I hope we will have that similar consideration.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized to offer
the amendment.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I would like to proceed as the
designee.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 4, after line 12, insert the following:
In determining which residential energy efficiency measures
to include in the list published under paragraph (1) or (2),
the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Secretary
of Agriculture, shall consider advanced performance
initiatives, such as the Passive House Standard as certified
by the Passive House Institute US.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1620, the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Let me apologize to the Chair, to the ranking member
and to my colleagues for all of the confusion, but we are ready to
proceed on this matter.
Mr. Chairman, I have reviewed this amendment. It appears to be in
keeping with the spirit of the underlying legislation. I would urge my
colleagues to support it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I would ask the author's designee, Mr.
Butterfield, if he would engage in a colloquy on this amendment.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. To the extent that I can, Mr. Barton.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Would you define what a ``passive house'' is?
I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. I do not have that material in front of me, Mr.
Barton.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Okay. So we're getting a pig-in-the-poke here;
is that right?
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. You certainly appreciate the disadvantage at which I
find myself.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I am not
totally opposed to this amendment. I don't know too much more about it
than Mr. Butterfield, but I do know that this ``passive house''
concept, while it saves energy once it is in place, is more expensive
to construct. It is my understanding that the concept that the
amendment supports is substantially more expensive than
[[Page H6788]]
standard construction. That may be appropriate when people have high
incomes and when the cost of construction is really of little interest;
but for most of my constituents, Mr. Chairman, the initial cost is of
significance.
Again, I don't think there is a tremendous downside to this
amendment, but I think it should be pointed out that if the Department
of Energy, which it is not under the amendment required to mandate
this, did direct that it had to meet this test, you would raise
construction costs substantially, and I think that is something that
should be of concern.
I am going to oppose the amendment but not vigorously. I do think
that the author of the amendment usually should be on the floor when
the amendment is offered, and I would hope that we would take notice
that the author was not. We should give kudos to Mr. Butterfield for
substituting in his place.
I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. I thank the gentleman for his kind comments.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).
The amendment was agreed to.
{time} 1320
Announcement by the Chair
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now
resume on the amendment printed in part B of House Report 111-594 on
which further proceedings were postponed.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Holden
The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Holden) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 402,
noes 0, not voting 36, as follows:
[Roll No. 529]
AYES--402
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Emerson
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pierluisi
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sablan
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--36
Ackerman
Bilbray
Blunt
Boehner
Castor (FL)
Christensen
Delahunt
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Fallin
Fleming
Garrett (NJ)
Harman
Heller
Hodes
Johnson (GA)
Kennedy
Meek (FL)
Mollohan
Moore (WI)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Putnam
Radanovich
Richardson
Rogers (MI)
Shea-Porter
Tanner
Tierney
Young (FL)
{time} 1349
Mr. SMITH of Texas changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chair, today I was unavoidably delayed and unable
to return to the floor in time for rollcall vote 529.
Had I been present for rollcall No. 529, I would have voted ``aye''
(the Manager's Amendment to H.R. 4785).
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Serrano) having assumed the chair, Mr. Salazar, Chair of the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4785) to amend
the miscellaneous rural development provisions of the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002 to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture
to make loans to certain entities that will use the funds to make loans
to consumers to implement energy efficiency measures involving
structural improvements and investments in cost-effective, commercial
off-the-shelf technologies to reduce home energy use, and, pursuant to
House Resolution 1620, reported the bill back to the House with an
amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
The question is on the amendment in the nature of a substitute, as
amended.
[[Page H6789]]
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. SHADEGG. I am, in its current form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Shadegg moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4785 to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce with instructions to report
the same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
Page 1, line 5, insert ``with a gross annual household
income of less than $250,000'' after ``homeowner''.
Page 1, line 9, insert ``A homeowner may not qualify as an
eligible participant if the homeowner has been more than 6
months delinquent in child support payments.'' after ``under
section 2.''.
Page 1, lines 13 and 14, strike ``or community-based''.
Page 3, line 10, insert ``primary'' after ``installed in
a''.
Page 3, line 12, insert ``, but which shall not include the
installation or replacement of pool heaters or the
installation of Energy Star televisions'' after ``their
adoption''.
Page 3, line 21, insert ``primary'' after ``installed in
a''.
Page 5, line 16, insert ``, consistent with paragraph
(3),'' after ``particular efforts''.
Page 8, line 22, through page 9, line 3, strike subsection
(h) (and redesignate the subsequent subsections accordingly).
Page 9, line 14, insert ``The Secretary of Energy shall
also include a detailed accounting of any waste, fraud, or
abuse occurring in the administration of this Act in such
reports.'' after ``of this section.''.
Page 10, line 11, strike ``and''.
Page 10, line 15, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
Page 10, after line 15, insert the following new paragraph:
(7) the extent to which any waste, fraud, or abuse occurred
under this program.
At the end of the bill, add the following new sections:
SEC. 3. PROHIBITION.
(a) Funds authorized by this Act shall only be made
available for the purpose of carrying out qualifying energy
savings measures on a primary residence.
(b) Neither the Secretary of Energy nor the Secretary of
Agriculture shall provide any funds authorized by this Act to
any contractor that has been convicted of or pleaded guilty
to any fraudulent offense.
SEC. 4. SUNSET.
The provisions of this Act shall be suspended and shall not
apply if this Act will have a negative net effect on the
national budget deficit of the United States.
Mr. SHADEGG (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent to dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Arizona?
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
The Clerk will continue to read.
The Clerk continued to read.
Mr. CLYBURN (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent to dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, the underlying legislation creates a $5
billion government loan program to assist people in purchasing energy
efficiency devices. Anytime we spend that amount of money, we ought to
be very careful about the spending of that money, especially since we
face a $1.3 trillion deficit. Earlier this year, the GAO conducted an
investigation which found rampant fraud and abuse in the highly touted
Energy Star Program.
Sadly, many companies have become very creative in ripping off the
Department of Energy and the Energy Star Program. The motion to
recommit makes a number of sensible changes and restrictions to protect
the taxpayers in the implementation of this legislation.
First, it urges that the GAO and the Secretary of Energy report any
waste, fraud or abuse found in the program. This is simply good
governance.
Second, this program, which provides government subsidized loans,
makes sure that these home improvement loans are eligible only to
people who deserve the largesse, the assistance, of the government.
First, it says, for example, loans can be only used for primary
residences. Energy Star loans subsidized by the government under this
legislation could not be used for vacation homes or beach houses. The
taxpayer should not be providing energy-efficient appliances at luxury
homes.
Second, the motion to recommit strikes community-based organizations
from potential lenders. This goes back to the problem of ACORN and the
strong belief that they should not be in the position of using or
having access to these funds.
Third, the MTR ensures that these retrofit loans are only available
to households where the gross income is less than $250,000. It should
go without saying that if the other side is proposing to increase taxes
on earners in this category, we should not be opening up subsidized
government loans to people who make money at that level.
Third, the motion to recommit provides that homeowners who are
delinquent in their child support payments, so-called deadbeat dads,
are not eligible for these subsidized loans. It's pretty simple and
straightforward that when the government decides to help people in
these circumstances purchase energy-efficient equipment that they can't
otherwise afford, that we should not be doing that either for deadbeat
dads or for the wealthiest of Americans.
It also provides that loans and loan subsidies under this legislation
cannot be used for such luxuries such as swimming pool heaters or to
purchase LCD TVs or fancy TVs. While these technologies may save
energy, the dollars in this loan program, $5 billion, which I would
argue we don't have right now, should not be used to fund luxury items.
People should not be using a subsidy from the government or a
subsidized loan to buy a flat-screen TV or swimming pool heater.
Last, the MTR provides to fill in the standards in the legislation,
ensuring that sketchy contractors cannot implement this program. For
example, the construction cannot be done by contractors convicted of
fraud.
Finally, and most importantly, the legislation provides that the
programs must be deficit neutral. If either program, if either program
is found to have a negative effect on the national debt, then that
program is suspended.
My colleagues on the other side will find this one of the things that
they call a gutting amendment, but it really isn't. It is simply put in
place to say that if you don't want to pay for the bill, which we would
have argued for it and which we offered amendments in Rules for, then
we should not allow it to increase the Nation's deficit.
As I mentioned, we face a $1.3 trillion deficit. This simply says
that before we provide subsidized government loans to people to buy
energy-efficient equipment, that should not be done in a deficit
situation where we are expanding the deficit and passing the cost of
the program on to our children and our grandchildren.
These are simple, straightforward, good-government provisions. They
make the legislation better. They enable it to do what the authors of
the legislation intended it to do without adding to the financial
burden on the American taxpayer.
I urge my colleagues to support the motion to recommit.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition but do not
oppose the amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from South
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
{time} 1400
Mr. CLYBURN. I wish to thank my colleague and occasional sparring
partner for making what I consider to be reasonable improvements to
this bill.
Mr. Speaker, in keeping with the bipartisan, in fact, unanimous vote
in favor of this legislation, I will accept the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. SHADEGG. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
[[Page H6790]]
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the instructions of the
House in the motion to recommit, I report the bill, H.R. 4785, back to
the House with an amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Butterfield:
Page 1, line 5, insert ``with a gross annual household
income of less than $250,000'' after ``homeowner''.
Page 1, line 9, insert ``A homeowner may not qualify as an
eligible participant if the homeowner has been more than 6
months delinquent in child support payments.'' after ``under
section 2.''.
Page 1, lines 13 and 14, strike ``or community-based''.
Page 3, line 10, insert ``primary'' after ``installed in
a''.
Page 3, line 12, insert ``, but which shall not include the
installation or replacement of pool heaters or the
installation of Energy Star televisions'' after ``their
adoption''.
Page 3, line 21, insert ``primary'' after ``installed in
a''.
Page 5, line 16, insert ``, consistent with paragraph
(3),'' after ``particular efforts''.
Page 8, line 22, through page 9, line 3, strike subsection
(h) (and redesignate the subsequent subsections accordingly).
Page 9, line 14, insert ``The Secretary of Energy shall
also include a detailed accounting of any waste, fraud, or
abuse occurring in the administration of this Act in such
reports.'' after ``of this section.''.
Page 10, line 11, strike ``and''.
Page 10, line 15, strike the period and insert ``; and''.
Page 10, after line 15, insert the following new paragraph:
(7) the extent to which any waste, fraud, or abuse occurred
under this program.
At the end of the bill, add the following new sections:
SEC. 3. PROHIBITION.
(a) Funds authorized by this Act shall only be made
available for the purpose of carrying out qualifying energy
savings measures on a primary residence.
(b) Neither the Secretary of Energy nor the Secretary of
Agriculture shall provide any funds authorized by this Act to
any contractor that has been convicted of or pleaded guilty
to any fraudulent offense.
SEC. 4. SUNSET.
The provisions of this Act shall be suspended and shall not
apply if this Act will have a negative net effect on the
national budget deficit of the United States.
Mr. CLYBURN (during the reading). I ask unanimous consent to dispense
with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on passage of the bill will be followed by 5-minute votes
on the motion to suspend on House Resolution 1613.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 240,
noes 172, not voting 20, as follows:
[Roll No. 530]
AYES--240
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boccieri
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Djou
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Engel
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Gordon (TN)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McMahon
McNerney
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nye
Oberstar
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Taylor
Teague
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOES--172
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Duncan
Emerson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hunter
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Radanovich
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schauer
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stearns
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--20
Ackerman
Baldwin
Blunt
Delahunt
Ellison
Ellsworth
Eshoo
Fallin
Fleming
Hodes
Kennedy
Meek (FL)
Mollohan
Obey
Putnam
Ruppersberger
Shea-Porter
Tanner
Tierney
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There is 1 minute
remaining in this vote.
{time} 1420
Messrs. PAUL and McCAUL changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. ANDREWS, JOHNSON of Georgia, and LANGEVIN changed their vote
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to authorize the
Secretary of Agriculture to make loans to certain entities that agree
that the funds will
[[Page H6791]]
be used to make loans to consumers to implement energy efficiency
measures involving structural improvements and investments in cost-
effective, commercial off-the-shelf technologies to reduce energy use,
and for other purposes.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Ms. BALDWIN. Madam Speaker, I regret that I missed a vote on final
passage of H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy Savings Program Act.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' in support of the
bill.
Stated against:
Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 30, I
inadvertently voted ``aye'' but I meant to vote ``no.''
____________________