[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 175 (Tuesday, October 5, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6904-S6906]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Infrastructure and Jobs Act
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. President, this summer, the Senate passed historic
bipartisan legislation that would make meaningful investments in our
physical infrastructure. We did the hard work. We did the hard work to
produce legislation that meets current and future needs by investing in
our roads,
[[Page S6905]]
our bridges, clean water, broadband, transit systems, rail, and our
electric grid.
Chairman Carper and I led a surface transportation reauthorization
bill and a water infrastructure bill in our EPW Committee, both of
which were unanimously reported out by our committee and really served
as the backbone of this infrastructure package. The Commerce Committee
and the Energy and Natural Resources Committee both also contributed
bipartisan bills to this major effort. A bipartisan group of our
colleagues, led by Senator Portman and Senator Sinema, negotiated with
the Biden administration to complete the package. That effort resulted
in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which earned the vote of
69 Senators nearly 2 months ago. President Biden himself expressed his
support for the legislation in a widely covered speech from the White
House.
By now, that bill should be law and Federal funding should be on the
way to State Departments of Transportation, local water boards, and our
economic development officials. All Speaker Pelosi had to do was put
the Senate legislation on the floor in August and watch its passage
with a strong bipartisan vote. However, House Democrats broke promises
to their own Members and refused to ask for a vote on the bill, and
that was in September. Our bipartisan work in the Senate advanced the
infrastructure football to the 1-yard line. We were there, but somehow
House Democrats were still unable to reach the goal line.
Last Friday, our Federal Surface Transportation Program lapsed--
lapsed--for the first time in over a decade. After months of talking
about rebuilding American infrastructure, House Democrats shut down the
Federal Highway Administration, pressing pause on some of the most
important infrastructure programs in this country. It was a short
lapse, but it was a lapse. A lapse in these programs would be
unacceptable in any circumstance, but House Democrats decided to let
the programs expire rather than vote on bipartisan legislation that sat
on their desks for more than 7 weeks during their August recess.
In delaying this vote, those leaders didn't just break their
commitment to the American people, but, again, they broke a commitment
to their own Members when they said--they were originally promised the
infrastructure bill would receive a vote by September 27. Instead, the
House and Senate had to reauthorize, quickly, our existing Surface
Transportation Program, but guess what--for a month--October 31. What
does that do? Not much. It does continue, but it does create confusion,
and that stop-and-start is difficult. I appreciate my colleagues' work
to reopen these programs, but it is not enough.
Over on the House side, they are holding core infrastructure
legislation hostage in an effort to force Members of their own party to
come on board in separate legislation that would, in my opinion, waste
$3.5 trillion on social programs unrelated to infrastructure. The $3.5
trillion package is what my colleague and our colleague, Senator
Manchin, correctly described as ``fiscal insanity.'' House Democrats
are telling the American people that if they want roads and bridges,
they have to accept trillions of dollars in unrelated spending and
unrelated tax policies.
If this reckless tax-and-spending spree were popular with the
American people, they wouldn't have to bind it to the infrastructure
legislation and block that legislation in an effort to convince the
Members of their own party to support it, but they understand there is
a real concern back home to spending $3.5 trillion. I heard this over
and over when I was just home over the weekend--over and over--from my
constituents in West Virginia.
We all know inflation is real, and it is impacting day-to-day
families--families who are trying to figure out how to pay for the cost
of gasoline, that gallon of milk, those new school clothes, books,
pencils, the cost of heating and cooling their homes. It is hurting our
American families. And yet, even with these red flags, the Biden
administration and my Democrat colleagues want to spend an additional
3.5 trillion--with a ``t''--dollars. And if that is not enough, they
want to impose the largest tax hike in decades.
These efforts will hit American families with higher prices and
greater tax burdens at a time when they can least afford it. I am not
sure there is a time we could ever afford it. So this makes zero sense.
Now, I know President Biden has promised not to raise taxes on
families making less than $400,000 a year. He has repeated this many,
many times in his public speeches. But what he is not telling you is
that the cost of everyday living is going up significantly because of
these--and will go up more because of these progressive policies, which
are a hidden tax on the American people. Your utility bills, your
grocery bills, all the costs of everyday goods and services are going
to go up.
And have you heard this just really outrageous idea that they want
your bank or credit union to tell the IRS every deposit or withdrawal
of $600 or more? And if you have $600 in your bank account, they want
your bank or credit union to report that to the IRS. Does that sound
like it is designed to target billionaires or middle-class Americans?
The taxes, fees, and penalties this partisan, reckless tax-and-
spending package includes ultimately still falls to you, regardless of
how much you make. As ranking member of the EPW Committee, I am
especially concerned about several environmental provisions in the $3.5
trillion spending plan.
Let's be clear. All of us, Republicans and Democrats, we do want a
cleaner energy future, and we are moving toward that. The proof of that
is our work together on technologies like carbon capture and
utilization. But this rushed reconciliation package doesn't allow time
for any sort of transition. Wind and solar energy still has serious
gaps. They are growing, yes, but they still have serious gaps in
reliability and stability. When the wind stops blowing and the Sun
isn't shining, our country still relies heavily on coal, natural gas,
and nuclear. But instead of recognizing this reality and investing in
technologies to accelerate carbon capture, which would lead to less
emissions, this package punishes companies that are already cutting
their emissions. It is reckless spending. It is punitive taxation, and,
ultimately, the American family will pay the price.
Take, for example, the proposed methane tax--well, methane fee, it is
called, but it is actually a natural gas tax. This regressive tax on
natural gas would increase energy costs on American families and small
businesses, disproportionately affecting middle- and low-income
households at a time when natural gas prices are going up due to
inflation and increased demand and reduced supply here and abroad due
to some factors--and, right now, the pandemic.
According to the EPA, natural gas systems in the United States
reduced their overall methane emissions by nearly 16 percent between
1990 and 2019, without these onerous regulations and taxes. It is
widely recognized that the shale gas boom led to significant greenhouse
gas emission reductions across our power sector. In fact, as our
natural gas production has risen and has gone up, the country's overall
greenhouse gas emissions have gone down significantly.
According to API, the methane fee, or tax, would cost approximately
$9.1 billion and as many as 90,000 jobs in a lot of the regions in the
country, one of which is my own in West Virginia. Don't be fooled. Like
any other part of this package, the methane fee is rushed government
overreach when the market is already reducing emissions.
More than 150 groups have written to Congress to oppose this natural
gas tax. This is not about reducing emissions or even raising revenues
for Washington; it is about targeting an industry, oil and gas, and the
related good-paying jobs, like those in West Virginia, for elimination
for wholly political purposes. The idea that our country will be able
to transition to a cleaner future and keep up with our energy demands
without natural gas is just not based in reality.
So speaking of based in reality, let's talk about the proposed Clean
Electricity Performance Program. This is a program in the $3.5 trillion
bill to eliminate coal and natural gas from our electricity mix by
requiring an 80-percent reduction in carbon emissions from utilities by
2030. This goal is very unrealistic as fossil fuels now provide
[[Page S6906]]
60 percent of our Nation's electricity today, 2021.
The United Mine Workers of America wrote that this plan would
``eliminate virtually all of West Virginia's coal generation fleet of
eight baseload power plants well before the end of this decade. . . .
All related coal mining and utility jobs would be lost, with severe
[adverse] impacts on families, communities, and the local and state tax
revenues associated with mining, electric generation, and electric
power [generation].''
This program is an explicit attempt to put energy producers out of
work. It would use taxpayer dollars to get rid of coal and natural gas
jobs in States like mine, using a convoluted system to try to mask the
hit to our electricity taxpayers. And for all the promises we heard of
lined-up green energy jobs for these workers to replace these jobs, I
am certainly not seeing many of those in my State, certainly not the
tens of thousands of jobs that would be needed to make up for the lost
jobs. And I am definitely not seeing any of those green jobs pay--the
pay on those green jobs even close to what a miner would make or
somebody in the natural gas business.
But the Clean Electricity Performance Program will impact more than
just my home State, of course. If California is any indication, the
clean electricity payment plan will lead to less reliability, rolling
blackouts all across the country, and higher energy prices. We don't
need to wait and see how a plan like this will impact a powerhouse
country like ours.
Germany is already trying this. According to Forbes Magazine, our
German friends are spending as much as $4 trillion to install as much
wind and solar capacity as possible--laudable goal--and to drastically
curtail and hopefully eliminate the need for coal, natural gas, and
nuclear. This has left Germany with the highest electricity prices in
the world--harming their households and their world-famous
manufacturing sector. When they have found themselves short of supply,
they have to import coal-fired electricity from Poland.
We, here, in this country, would have no kind of international
fallback. So while we try to mimic a path similar to Germany and shut
down American coal mines, meanwhile China is building new coal plants
that will wash out any of our supposed carbon reductions. American
energy prices will skyrocket, and the Clean Energy Payment Plan will
make a negligible impact on global emissions.
The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund is another absurd provision in this
reconciliation package. This is basically a $27.5 billion slush fund
for Democrat States to use whatever they would use for their so-called
green projects. This will increase our reliance on critical minerals
and energy supplies that we get from China and other international
competitors trying to put forward energy-free technologies and
particularly looking at the production of lithium batteries and solar
energy that is primarily produced in China.
Another egregious provision tucked away in this reconciliation
package is a $50 million expenditure to EPA to write new clean air
regs. That is right, $50 million. They would give $50 million to write
a new version of President Obama's Clean Power Plan and other
devastating climate regulations. With the money, EPA will hire extra
lawyers and bureaucrats to write additional regulations under section
111 and other provisions of the Clean Air Act in ways that they have
never done before, all, in my view, which would put my hard-working
West Virginians out of a job.
These are just a few of the environmental provisions in this reckless
tax-and-spending spree. But the package is much broader than that. It
is a wish list rolled into a $3.5 trillion bill that inserts the
government into nearly every aspect of American life. The American
people understand that passing this bill will harm our country by
fueling inflation, and it will harm our country for generations to come
as we add to our debt.
It is no wonder that the Democrats are having so much trouble passing
this. By shuttering our Federal Surface Transportation Programs last
Friday, House Democrats made it abundantly clear that despite their
rhetoric, physical infrastructure is not a priority. Instead, they have
said that roads, bridges, broadband, water infrastructure--all
infrastructure items that Americans in both parties support are only
worth funding if they are accompanied by another $3.5 trillion in
spending.
I hope that our House colleagues will change their approach. The
bipartisan infrastructure bill represents good policy, and it should be
allowed to pass on its own merit. It will benefit every State in this
country. It will provide the certainty of 5 years of funding for our
Surface Transportation Programs and avoid future lapses like we saw
last Friday. These programs cannot bounce from one short-term extension
to the next. We have done that before. It is very, very difficult to
conduct business, and they should not play second fiddle to a package
of partisan policies.
We came together in this body to pass a bipartisan infrastructure
bill that the American people can be proud of, and that bill should
become law soon.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Markey). The Senator from Wisconsin.