[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 50 (Thursday, March 21, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2492-S2495]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Electric Vehicles

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak about 
the President's most recent attacks upon the freedoms of the American 
people. This week, the Biden administration, the Environmental 
Protection Agency, announced that it is going to put stringent new 
limits on gas-powered cars.
  In effect, this delusional new regulation is attempting to kill the 
sale of gas-powered cars in America and, in doing so, try to force 
every American to buy an electric car.
  President Biden seems to want to regulate every room in the house of 
the American people. He started in the kitchen with our stoves, 
continued throughout the house, and now he is headed to the garage. 
This is a coercive crusade, and it is a crusade against consumer 
choice. It is a crusade against convenience and also against 
affordability.
  Last year, less than 1 in 10 of the vehicles sold in this country 
were electric vehicles. Under this new rule, Biden is demanding that 
the EVs make up two-thirds of all new car sales by the year 2032. 
Apparently, the administration thinks it is smarter than everyone else. 
They want to pick what you can drive and punish people who choose to 
drive something different. Why? Well, it is all in the name of the smug 
superiority of the coastal elites who think they ought to be running 
the country.
  Now, this is the crux of the new Biden car ban. Driven by this blind 
faith in the climate religion regardless of the cost to our country in 
terms of energy being affordable, available, or reliable. The costs are 
real, and they

[[Page S2493]]

are expensive. The benefits are theoretical, unproven, exaggerated, and 
certainly burdensome. President Biden is pushing ahead anyway.
  To Democrats, what kind of cars Americans drive isn't a practical 
question; it is one based on theology. Their war against gas-powered 
cars amounts to what I believe is foolishness at best and leftwing 
lunacy at worst. Americans reject and continue to reject this 
unwelcomed intrusion into our lives. They reject it for good reason. 
They know that this Biden car ban will drive their lives into the 
ditch.
  Certainly, that is the case for the people of my home State in 
Wyoming. It is bad for the families in my home State. It is bad for the 
workers in my home State. It is bad for American national security. 
Farmers and ranchers count on their vehicles. It can be a matter of 
life and death. People know not to run out of fuel, not to run out of 
gas. They know what it is like in the winters. They know to always be 
fully prepared and fully loaded with gas before they head out on the 
roads in Wyoming.
  They want their vehicles to be reliable and affordable. We have, in 
Wyoming, cold winters, vast distances. Electric cars are not meant to 
benefit and survive in either. President Biden's push to force Wyoming 
drivers to buy expensive vehicles they don't want, don't need, and most 
families can't afford is ridiculous and an abuse of power.
  Electric cars are a reasonable choice for some people. They aren't a 
reasonable choice for everyone, and that is why these new 
administrative rules are so unreasonable. Electric cars should never be 
Americans' only option. And no one should be forced to buy a vehicle at 
a time they can least afford it.
  Because of what we have seen with Bidenomics, that time when people 
can least afford things is turning out to be right now. People are 
suffering from the costliest regulatory agenda in history and also for 
increasingly higher interest rates for auto loans. Trying to force 
families to buy expensive new vehicles they don't want and can't afford 
is completely out of touch.
  It has also become clear that Joe Biden's car ban is going to lead to 
a steep loss of jobs in the auto industry, particularly union jobs. We 
heard loud and clear from the unions about it. As the CEO of Ford Motor 
Company, Jim Farley, said last year, electric vehicles will require 40 
percent less labor to make than the typical traditional gas-powered 
vehicle. According to one estimate, the transition to EV production 
will kill about 117,000 auto jobs in the United States. Another 
estimate puts that number much, much higher.
  It is already hitting home for some automakers and autoworkers. The 
owner of Chrysler laid off 1,200 employees at his Jeep plant in 
Illinois. Ford cut 3,000 white-collar jobs last year. The reason for 
the layoffs, both companies say, is the EV transition. By pushing ahead 
with this Green New Deal fantasy, Joe Biden is pushing hundreds of 
thousands of union workers off the assembly line and into the 
unemployment line.
  Plus, the Biden car ban puts activist demands ahead of America's 
national security. I mean, that is what is happening. President Biden 
is rejecting what is needed by American workers to try to appeal to a 
group of voters influenced by a TikTok climate influencer who visited 
the White House, met with John Podesta, and is now trying to drive the 
administration's energy policy.
  When we take a look at the electric batteries that are used to power 
these vehicles, where are they coming from? Well, 80 percent of the 
world's electric batteries right now are coming from communist China. 
Communist China controls 60 percent of the critical minerals that are 
used to make these batteries. When Joe Biden and the Democrats try to 
force-feed electric vehicles to Americans, it is a recipe for more 
dependence on the dictators and the despots, including the Chinese 
Communist Party.
  We need to change course. We want to stop Biden's mandate madness. We 
are working to put American drivers, not Washington bureaucrats, back 
in the driver's seat for when people make decisions in this country. 
Americans should be able to make their own decisions about what type of 
vehicle works best for them and be able to buy it.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. CARPER. I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized for 10 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CARPER. My colleague John Barrasso has just spoken. He and I used 
to lead the Environment and Public Works Committee. We worked together 
over the years on a lot of issues. He is good at finding the middle in 
a bunch of those and I think I am, too, and so is our Presiding 
Officer.
  I want to follow up on the issue of electric vehicles. The reason why 
there is a strong interest in this country and around the world in 
electric vehicles is because they don't put greenhouse gases into the 
atmosphere. The reason why we are concerned about greenhouse gases 
coming out of fossil fuel vehicles--it is something like 30 percent of 
the greenhouse gases in this country being produced by our mobile 
fleet, our cars, our trucks, our vans--almost all of them are gas- and 
diesel-driven.
  We are seeing a real tick up in the last 3 or 4 years in electric 
vehicles. There is a lot of interest right now in a combination--
hybrids--where you run for a while--vehicles run for a while on battery 
and for a while some of these on other sources of fuel. I think we need 
both of those.
  The reason, again, why it is important for us to do something real 
with respect to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, about 30 percent of 
our greenhouse gas emissions come from the cars, trucks, and vans we 
drive--about 30 percent. About another 25 percent comes from the 
powerplants--coal-fired plants, natural gas-fired plants. That creates 
the electricity we use in our businesses and our homes. Maybe another 
20 percent of our greenhouse gases in this country come from 
manufacturing plants--steel mills, asphalt plants, that kind of thing.
  Should we be concerned about this? Yes. Last year was the hottest 
year on record on our planet--hottest year. It was the hottest year in 
the United States, and the expectation is that it is going to continue 
to worsen as time goes by.
  For those of us who live in the coastal communities, there is a great 
concern in Delaware and all up and down the east coast, gulf coast, and 
Pacific coast about sea level rise. We see threats to people's homes, 
their businesses, their jobs. So there is a real incentive to do 
something about that as well.
  One of the things Senator Barrasso and I and John Neely Kennedy, the 
Senator from Louisiana, have worked on before is one of the major 
sources of carbon emissions, which, as I mentioned, is our mobile 
fleet. But another one comes from, believe it or not, refrigerants that 
are in the air-conditioners, the freezers--the coolants that we have 
used--something called HFCs, hydrofluorocarbons. There is a need to 
actually phase those down.
  We have new substances that can be used as a refrigerant to address 
the concerns that we have with HFCs, hydrofluorocarbons.
  The two colleagues I just mentioned, we all worked together toward 
legislation--a treaty called Kigali--the last couple of years to adopt 
a stepdown plan over 15 years so we reduce about 85 percent of our use 
of those HFCs.
  Why am I interested in HFCs? In terms of the threat they pose to us 
with respect to climate change, they are 1,000 times more potent than 
carbon dioxide. Think about that. HFCs are 1,000 times more potent. 
That is why we are concerned about doing something, and we are.
  Methane. We have way too much methane in our air. And I worked a 
couple of years ago with my colleague Joe Manchin from West Virginia 
and others from EPA to come up with a methane emissions reduction 
program, which is now being implemented.
  Why do we care about methane emissions? They are about 85, 90 times 
more potent than carbon dioxide when it comes to climate change.
  There used to be, oh gosh, a criminal. I am trying to think of what 
his name was. He was up in New York State back during the Depression. 
He used to rob banks. He used to rob banks. The Presiding Officer may 
remember this story. He used to rob banks--a lot of them. He finally 
got caught and was

[[Page S2494]]

arrested, put on trial. He came before the judge and the judge said to 
him: Why do you rob banks? He said: Your honor, that is where the money 
is.
  The reason why we go after hydrofluorocarbons, the reason we go after 
methane and auto emissions is that is where the emissions are. They 
pose a great threat to our planet.
  The young people sitting down here to the right of our Presiding 
Officer today, they look young, and they are probably all about 15, 16, 
17 years old. They are pages. They are from all over the planet. I want 
to make sure, at the end of the day, they have a planet to grow up on. 
I want to make sure they will have families of their own and their 
children and grandchildren will have a planet to grow up on and grow 
old on. I also want to make sure they have jobs to support themselves 
and their families.
  One of the untold stories about the work that we are doing to reduce 
these greenhouse gas emissions is we can create jobs while doing that. 
We can create a lot of jobs in terms of building vehicles, cars, 
trucks, and vans. We put people to work, believe it or not, using 
hydrogen. This is something that is especially a bright future in our 
country.
  People are going to hear a lot in the days to come--weeks to come--
something called hydrogen hubs. We could actually use hydrogen to fuel 
airplanes. We could use hydrogen to fuel buses. We put out a lot of 
emissions. We could use hydrogen to fuel large trucks--all of that. We 
could use hydrogen to create electricity in powerplants.
  The question is, Are we doing that? We are. We are doing it in a way 
that creates jobs--a whole lot of jobs. The idea that if we want to 
reduce emissions, harmful emissions, we will cripple the economy--that 
is not really true. We can have both. It is like having your cake and 
eating it too; in this case, having the benefit of reducing greenhouse 
gas emissions and creating a whole lot of jobs and putting people to 
work.
  One more word on hydrogen hubs. The Presiding Officer and I and 
others have worked on this for a while. The administration has put out 
some guidance from the Treasury Department on the use of hydrogen to 
help reduce emissions. As it turns out, I studied economics in school. 
I got here later on. I spent a lot of time in the Navy, and I know a 
thing or two about nuclear power. You hear a lot about nuclear 
power. There is a process called electrolysis where we can use 
electricity created by nuclear power, which puts out no emissions--no 
harmful emissions. And there is electricity created by hydro. In Maine, 
where the Presiding Officer is from, they have a fair amount of 
electricity that is produced by hydroelectric power. I learned just 
several years ago that there is a process called electrolysis that uses 
electricity that comes from nuclear powerplants and electricity that 
comes from hydroelectric plants and puts out no emissions. And we can 
use that electricity in conjunction with water, H2O, in a 
way that separates the ``H''--the hydrogen--from the oxygen, and we can 
harness that hydrogen and use it in a lot of ways that would enable us, 
as I have just spoken, to reduce harmful, harmful emissions. And we 
have got to be smart enough to do that.

  Janet Yellen, the Secretary of the Treasury, was before our committee 
today, before the Finance Committee. I found it a good exchange, with 
respect to the Treasury Department. They are in the process of writing 
guidance. Sort of like when we pass a law, the Federal Agency writes a 
rule or regulation to say what the law is all about now. The folks over 
at the Treasury Department are trying to write the guidance, if you 
will. They help guide us as we move to adopt hydrogen more completely. 
And through the process of electrolysis, we can create it.
  So it is acknowledged that we sort of have our differences. Those of 
us in the Senate, Democrats and Republicans, are anxious to make sure 
we don't leave the opportunity to create hydrogen through electrolysis, 
using nuclear energy and using the hydropower. And we had a very good 
exchange, and she did express an openness and a willingness to hear us 
out and maybe try to find the middle in ways that create jobs, in ways 
that help preserve this planet so that someday these young pages, when 
they are old pages and they have children of their own, they will have 
a planet that they can be proud of and they can live on.
  One of my favorite international leaders is the President of France, 
a guy named Macron. A couple weeks ago, our President gave the State of 
the Union Address. I thought he gave a really good one. But about 2, 3, 
maybe 4 years ago, we had another leader who spoke to a joint session 
of the House and Senate in the House Chamber, and it was the President 
of France, a fellow named Macron, who was actually a leader--I think a 
global leader--on climate change and how to deal with that.
  And one of the reasons he is interested in this is, the last time I 
saw and I noticed when they had the Tour de France--I don't know if any 
of our young people ride bicycles, but the Tour de France is a great 
bicycle race. About a year or 2 years ago, when they had the Tour de 
France, they had to call it off in different parts. They couldn't 
complete the race because the pavement that they were riding their 
bikes on was melting. It was melting.
  This stuff is real. We are not making it up. And the question is: 
What are we going to do about it? What are we going to do about it in 
ways that put people to work, keep people working? We can do that.
  I drive an EV. For many, many years, I drove a 2001 Chrysler Town and 
Country minivan for, like, 20 years, and I had 600,000 miles on it. And 
my wife says I am cheap, and I wouldn't buy a new car. Finally, I did, 
and I bought an electric vehicle, and I have had it for a couple of 
years now. And not only do I feel good about it--just recharge this in 
our garage. We have a place to charge it. And there are other places, 
these Wawa convenience stores all up and down the east coast. Wawas 
have charging stations all over the Atlantic coast. Sometimes we use 
those.
  But the thing that is especially attractive about the vehicle that we 
drive--that I drive--is frankly the maintenance costs are de minimis. 
It is amazing. We have had it 2 years and spent almost nothing on 
maintenance costs.
  The other thing is they are fun. And I remember when I was a kid, the 
age of these guys, how much fun it was to get my learner's permit and 
later on a driver's license and to be able to drive and be on my own. 
And I feel the same sense of joy in driving today because of what we 
have with the EV.
  So with that having been said, I will close with comments about John 
Barrasso. I think the world of John; he knows that. And I always look 
for ways to work with him. He is a strong advocate for nuclear energy, 
and my hope is that, although there are some things we are going to 
disagree on, we can agree on something called the ADVANCE Act.
  The ADVANCE Act, which has come out of the Environment and Public 
Works Committee, is sort of the next generation of nuclear powerplants, 
and nuclear power can be used for a lot of good use, good purposes. We 
always have to do it in a way that is safe. You always want to make 
sure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has the resources that they 
need to do their jobs, to keep us safe so we can have safe nuclear 
power.
  I am a Navy guy. I spent a lot of years in the Navy in Alaska, before 
serving in the U.S. Senate, and I used to fly P-3 aircraft missions. We 
used to fly in and out of the Brunswick Naval Air Station, up in Maine, 
when the Presiding Officer was Governor of Maine.
  But one of the things that Senator Barrasso and I agree on is the 
need for more nuclear, and we have an opportunity to move forward on 
small nuclear reactors. And they are safe and provide the electricity 
that we need in a lot of different ways. And my hope is that we cannot 
just talk about it to the folks that agree to disagree, but always look 
for ways to agree to help save our planet and help create a lot of jobs 
for those who live here.
  With that, I yield back. I see our colleague from Texas, Senator 
Cornyn, has come to the floor, who is the ranking member of the Trade 
Subcommittee of the Finance Committee, which I am privileged to chair.
  I am going to pause for a moment and see if he is ready to take the 
floor before I yield.
  I yield the floor.

[[Page S2495]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.