[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 192 (Tuesday, November 2, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7587-S7588]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                            Energy Policies

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, in watching from the sidelines and since 
we are not directly involved and because the Democrats decided to go it 
alone, our Democratic colleagues appear to be playing a game of whack-
a-mole to keep their reckless tax-and-spending spree from falling 
apart.
  After months and months of intra-party negotiating--again, talking 
among themselves, not to us--they hit the gas pedal last week when they 
knew that President Biden was going to the U.N. Climate Summit in 
Glasgow, Scotland, and they wanted to give him something that he could 
actually deliver on.
  So, last Friday, they finally settled on a framework, but the cracks 
quickly began to show. We don't even have a pricetag on this proposal, 
but some have estimated its cost at $1.75 trillion--an absolutely 
staggering amount of money. The truth is no one knows because the bill 
hasn't even been finalized yet, much less scored by congressional 
scorekeepers.
  Unsurprisingly, yesterday, one of our colleagues, the Senator from 
West Virginia, expressed some of his skepticism about the proposal; and 
I imagine more are in the wings, wringing their hands in private. After 
all, this bill spends trillions of dollars on radical priorities that 
are out of step with where most Americans are: expanded healthcare 
subsidies; handouts for labor unions; government-funded childcare; and 
an all-out attack on American-made, affordable energy.
  On Friday, the President touted the $555 billion that this agreement 
would put forward to support clean energy efforts, but these, upon 
further inspection, are mainly subsidies--taxpayer subsidies--for 
corporations and the well-off.
  I am reminded of France's yellow jacket protests a few years ago. In 
2018, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in 
Paris to protest a hike in gas taxes. At the time, President Macron 
said the increase was critical to pushing the French people to buy 
cleaner vehicles, but for most hard-working families, pricey electric 
vehicles simply were not and are not an option. The yellow jackets felt 
disenfranchised by the urban elite, saying leaders were talking about 
the end of the world while they were worried about the end of the 
month.
  It sounds pretty familiar. Here in the United States, families are 
being pounded by inflation. Prices are going up on everything from 
groceries to home appliances. Gas prices alone have gone up 60 percent 
from just 1 year ago, and families are doing their best to prepare for 
an expensive winter. Energy bills are expected to soar by as much as 54 
percent.
  Despite the serious financial strain that families are feeling, our 
Democratic colleagues are pushing policies that will drive up those 
costs even more.
  But here is the real kicker: Often under these proposed policies, the 
wealthiest of Americans will stand to benefit the most on the backs of 
hard-working American families.
  One of the most clear-cut examples is the aggressive push toward 
subsidizing electric vehicles, which are among the most expensive cars 
on the market. Now, with 280 million cars on the road, only 2 percent 
of which are electric vehicles, this will not benefit most hard-working 
American families. It will benefit those who can afford these expensive 
vehicles, and the cherry on top is the up to $12,500 taxpayer subsidy 
that will help those wealthy Americans buy these expensive vehicles 
that are out of reach for most hard-working families.
  It doesn't matter if the vehicle is completely or substantially made 
in China, for example, or if the buyer makes hundreds of thousands of 
dollars a year--they are still eligible for the tax credit. The most 
generous benefit is reserved for vehicles built in--you guessed it--
union shops. We know the labor unions are among some of the biggest 
supporters of our friends on the other side of the aisle, and they are 
set to receive their reward. Buyers could receive up to a $12,500 tax 
credit for purchasing an electric vehicle from a union shop.
  I have nothing against union shops. I support people who choose to be 
part of a labor union, but this idea that taxpayers should have to 
underwrite a benefit that goes exclusively to one part of the electric 
car business, to me, is offensive, and it is just unjustified.
  I haven't seen any evidence either that union-made electric vehicles 
are somehow more green than their nonunion-made competitors', but those 
companies are certain to gain financial benefits because of these 
generous taxpayer-funded handouts. Wealthy Americans and Big Labor win; 
hard-working American families not so much.
  Then there is a long list of government handouts to make homes more 
energy efficient. Similar to those electric vehicles, the high cost of 
retrofitting a home makes it infeasible for most families--certainly, 
the middle-class families. Outfitting a home with solar panels will 
cost you well over $10,000; and, of course, the bigger the house, the 
more the cost.
  The Biden administration is, once again, happy to let taxpayers 
subsidize these expenditures. The Democrats' proposals include billions 
of dollars in rebates and grants to help cover the cost of retrofitting 
homes, even for the well-to-do, who will be the ones who will primarily 
be able to afford, even with these subsidies, this sort of retrofit.
  At the end of the day, the family with the means to spend thousands 
of dollars on these products will spend less on their monthly 
electricity bill, which I assume is the point, but everybody else will 
pay more in taxes without having the benefit of a lower electricity 
bill. If our colleagues on the other side of the aisle get their way, 
monthly electricity prices are likely to increase for everyone else.
  As I mentioned, gas prices are up significantly from last year. If 
you filled up your pickup truck a year ago, today you will find out 
that you will spend about $33 more for each tank of gas that you pump. 
And energy prices for homes this winter are expected to go up as much 
as 54 percent.
  These are incredible numbers. This is what happens when you throw so 
much money at limited goods and services--prices go up; inflation goes 
up. It is a silent tax on people who must pay for these goods and 
services and have nowhere else to turn.
  With this as a backdrop, our Democratic colleagues have proposed to 
raise taxes on energy companies and drive those prices even higher. 
Now, only in a fantasy world can you impose greater costs through tax 
increases on a business and not have them transferred directly to the 
consumers who buy these goods and services. They are going to be passed 
along to the people who pay for these goods and services.
  This bill will include a new methane tax, which would require oil and 
gas producers to pay hefty fees if they emit more methane than the 
government allows.
  Natural gas accounts for 40 percent of our electricity--double the 
amount as renewable sources. Hitting those companies with a methane fee 
and other proposed tax hikes isn't going to change the fact that we 
need natural gas to keep the lights on.
  By the way, we need natural gas in order to produce the electricity 
that you use to charge your electric vehicle.
  As we hope to move to cleaner forms of energy--obviously, coal being 
the one that most of us believe emits the most emissions--moving to 
natural gas just makes sense, and as a matter of fact, the United 
States has reduced our emissions, not by banning access to any 
particular energy source but by producing more natural gas.
  If we need an example of what a natural gas shortage in America would 
look like, just take a look at Europe. The supply shortage has caused 
electricity prices in Europe to skyrocket, plus the fact that they have 
banned the use of coal and even nuclear power, which is emissions-free. 
But after the Fukushima nuclear meltdown and the

[[Page S7588]]

tsunami that followed, Europe basically decided to hang up on any 
additional nuclear production. So natural gas prices, which are going 
to sustain the greatest demand, will go up about 600 percent. Since the 
start of the year, they have. The situation is so dire that utility 
companies have switched from natural gas and now begin to burn coal and 
fuel oil because they simply don't have access to enough natural gas.
  This is the problem with the push to quickly move away from fossil 
fuels before we are ready to transition into other types of energy 
sources and when you punish the producers of that affordable energy.
  Renewables, as laudable as they are--and in Texas, we are an ``all of 
the above'' State. We produce more electricity from wind turbines than 
any other State in the Nation. But renewables don't come close to 
generating enough energy to power our world.
  If the United States and our allies scale back production to pursue 
arbitrary emission benchmarks, that leaves the world turning to 
countries like Russia and organizations like OPEC, led by Saudi Arabia, 
to provide that energy. So it is no wonder that Russia is a no-show at 
the U.N. climate summit. They are actually the ones that will stand to 
benefit the most if other countries eliminate fossil fuels from their 
fuel mix because other countries around the world will have no choice 
but to buy more and more Russian energy.
  In his remarks yesterday, President Biden said we should view the 
current price volatility as a call to action rather than a reason to 
back off our clean energy goals. Well, I disagree. Families are being 
pummeled by high prices across the board. We don't need to increase 
that burden by driving up costs or potentially adding an energy crisis 
to the mix.
  As I said, Texas has always been a proud supporter of the ``all of 
the above'' energy strategy. We are often recognized for the might of 
our oil and gas sector. But a lot of folks don't know, as I said, that 
Texas is a leader in wind energy. Well, we produce about one-quarter of 
all the wind energy in the United States. If we were a country, we 
would be the fifth-largest wind energy producer in the world. We don't 
plan on stopping there. We are also making serious strides in energy 
innovation through cutting-edge carbon capture and storage projects.
  Texas is proof positive that we can strike a balance between 
conservation, productivity, and economic power, and you can embrace 
low-emission energy sources without hammering the middle class. But 
those are not the types of proposals we see from the tax-and-spending 
spree bill now pending before the House of Representatives. This bill 
would simply drive up costs for hard-working American families, hurt 
our energy independence, and benefit our adversaries.
  This may impress President Biden's peers in Glasgow, but it is sure 
to fall flat with the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.