[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 51 (Friday, March 22, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H1358-H1365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               REPEALING OF GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION FUND

  Mr. PALMER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1085, I call up 
the bill (H.R. 1023) to repeal section 134 of the Clean Air Act, 
relating to the greenhouse gas reduction fund, and ask for its 
immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Valadao). Pursuant to House Resolution 
1085, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text 
of the Rules Committee Print 118-26 is adopted, and the bill, as 
amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 1023

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

        This Act may be cited as the ``Cutting Green Corruption 
     and Taxes Act''.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION FUND.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 134 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
     7434)(relating to the greenhouse gas reduction fund) is 
     repealed.
       (b) Rescission.--The unobligated balance of any amounts 
     made available under section 134 of the Clean Air Act (42 
     U.S.C. 7434)(as in effect on the day before the date of 
     enactment of this Act) is rescinded.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 60103 of Public Law 117-
     169 (relating to the greenhouse gas reduction fund) is 
     repealed.

     SEC. 3. REPEAL OF NATURAL GAS TAX.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 136 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
     7436)(relating to methane emissions and waste reduction 
     incentive program for petroleum and natural gas systems) is 
     repealed.
       (b) Rescission.--The unobligated balance of any amounts 
     made available under section 136 of the Clean Air Act (42 
     U.S.C. 7436)(as in effect on the day before the date of 
     enactment of this Act) is rescinded.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective 
designees.
  The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer) and the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer).


                             General Leave

  Mr. PALMER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the 
legislation and to include extraneous material on H.R. 1023.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. PALMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1023, the Cutting Green 
Corruption and Taxes Act.
  Currently, nearly 20 million American households are behind on paying 
their utility bills, and families are struggling to put food on the 
table. These issues directly stem from the expensive and misguided 
energy policies put in place by the Biden administration and 
Congressional Democrats with their Inflation Reduction Act, or as I 
call it, the income reduction act. Thankfully, H.R. 1023 is an 
important step toward addressing two of the many problems with the IRA.
  The IRA created a $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund within 
the EPA. This is nothing more than a slush fund with little to no 
oversight to fund climate activists, green groups, and Democrat 
political allies that do little to impact the climate.
  If my colleagues really wanted to help the American people, 
especially people on low or fixed incomes, they would focus on 
unleashing American energy and expanding access to natural gas. 
Affordable and reliable American energy, not a $27 billion slush fund 
for Democrat special interest groups, will bring economic opportunity 
to the American people.

                              {time}  0915

  Despite natural gas being a critical component for food production 
and

[[Page H1359]]

many other products we take for granted, the Democrats' IRA placed a 
tax on it. This tax has made energy less affordable for Americans 
already struggling under the weight of inflation. Thankfully, 
Representative August Pfluger's hard work to repeal this detrimental 
natural gas tax is included in this bill.
  I have said it before, and I will say it again: energy security is 
national security. Sadly, the Biden administration and Democrats' 
attacks on American energy make us more dependent on China, Russia, and 
foreign adversaries. Passing H.R. 1023 will be a major step toward 
undoing their misguided policies.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1023, legislation 
that repeals the Methane Emissions Reduction Program and the Greenhouse 
Gas Reduction Fund, which are two landmark programs included in the 
Inflation Reduction Act.
  Now, these two programs work to slash dangerous climate pollution and 
invest in communities across the country all while lowering the 
deficit. This bill is nothing more than another shameless giveaway to 
Republicans' corporate polluter friends at the American people's 
expense.
  What is more, this is the third time Republicans have brought bills 
to repeal these programs to the House floor. Clearly, my Republican 
colleagues are struggling to come up with new ideas and are resorting 
to the same tired old stunts that we have all come to expect.
  H.R. 1023 is more of the same. It is the latest in a long line of 
politicized attempts to reverse course on climate action and reject the 
historic progress Democrats made toward securing a cleaner, stronger 
future.
  Moreover, Mr. Speaker, make no mistake, the progress Democrats 
delivered with the Inflation Reduction Act was historic. It finally put 
us on track to meet our climate goals, and at the same time it has 
already created more than 271,000 new, good-paying clean energy jobs 
right here at home.
  These are jobs for electricians, construction workers, mechanics, and 
technicians that can't be shipped overseas. Of course, more than one-
half of these jobs and clean energy projects are in districts 
represented by my Republican colleagues who, right now, are fighting to 
take them away. It is just unconscionable, and it defies logic.
  The United States now experiences a $1 billion or more extreme 
weather event every 3 weeks, and that is unprecedented in our Nation's 
history. It underscores just how critical it is that we reduce 
greenhouse gas pollution and invest in the clean energy jobs that will 
carry our economy into the future.
  Nonetheless, Republicans flat out refuse to hold polluters 
accountable for the damage they cause. Instead, they are doubling down 
on their polluters over people agenda with this bill that repeals the 
Methane Emissions Reduction Program. This program provides incentives 
to drive down methane pollution, one of the most dangerous and potent 
greenhouse gases. Methane pollution is responsible for a whole host of 
health risks and a full one-third of the warming we are experiencing 
today.
  Now, we are likely to hear false claims from Republicans that this is 
a tax. We have already heard that from my colleague. Nonetheless, it is 
not a tax. It simply ensures that polluters and not the American people 
pay for the methane pollution that they cause. It corrects a market 
failure that currently makes it cheaper for owners and operators to 
waste methane rather than install or upgrade equipment to prevent leaks 
and flaring. These are real problems because leaked and intentionally 
wasted natural gas never makes its way to customers, but they are, 
nevertheless, stuck with the bill.
  The Methane Emissions Reduction Program fixes that and ensures that 
consumers no longer pay for wasted energy or the harm it causes. 
Additionally, of course, companies can avoid paying the waste emissions 
charge altogether by not wasting methane. Wasted methane is bad for 
business, it is bad for Americans, and it is bad for the climate. H.R. 
1023 would allow this waste to continue to go unchecked.
  The Methane Emissions Reduction Program also complements the Biden 
administration's actions to slash methane pollution from the oil and 
gas sector, and the international community is following suit. Last 
year, I was at the COP28, and countries around the world committed to 
accelerating their efforts to control this dangerous pollution. This is 
the climate conference held in Dubai.
  These commitments were possible from other countries because of the 
United States' leadership in addressing methane here at home. That is 
why Republican efforts to undermine methane protections is so 
dangerous, as well. The Republican agenda compromises America's global 
leadership and threatens our global competitiveness. So the bottom line 
is that if we move ahead and try to reduce methane and recycle it, if 
you will, then other countries will follow suit.
  Also, the Methane Emissions Reduction Program brings in funds that 
benefit the American people.
  So how are Republicans paying for the repeal of the methane program?
  They are repealing another key Inflation Reduction Act program, the 
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. They are using that to pay for the loss 
of funding for the Federal Government from the Methane Emissions 
Reduction Program.
  The other fund that they repealed, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, 
invests $27 billion to mobilize financing to address the climate 
crisis, lower Americans' energy bills, promote job creation, and 
revitalize our community. It is a direct investment in the communities 
we are here to represent, and this Republican bill takes those 
investments away.
  The Biden administration, right now, is hard at work establishing 
this Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Various nonprofits, States, and 
local governments have submitted applications for funding for grants 
for their projects. Republican efforts to repeal the fund at this stage 
of the implementation process is robbing our communities of the money 
that they need and deserve to grow our middle class, create new jobs, 
and protect our families from the most catastrophic impacts of the 
climate crisis.

  This is sort of like a green bank. In other words, a lot of towns, 
States, and nonprofits can't get money from regular financing to 
finance clean energy projects, and so we are helping them with this 
green bank or Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1023, the bill on the floor, is a failed proposal 
that will never become law and that helps absolutely no one except the 
worst corporate polluters. Big Oil and Gas don't need more help. They 
get plenty of help from tax exemptions, but the American people need 
some help. They need some help in moving toward clean energy and 
reducing all these weather catastrophes that we have and creating new 
jobs. That is what we are doing.
  Mr. Speaker, don't let that all stop because of the Republicans' 
ideological effort here today to say that we don't need these things. 
We do need them, and that is why I encourage all of my colleagues to 
join me in opposing this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1023, the Cutting Green 
Corruption and Taxes Act.
  I thank the bill's sponsor, Congressman Gary Palmer of Alabama, and 
the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee for advancing this 
bill through regular order.
  The U.S. has been blessed with tremendous natural resources which we 
have been able to harness as a result of free market principles and an 
entrepreneurial spirit that is uniquely American.
  We have harnessed the power of nuclear energy, electrified millions 
of rural Americans' homes with clean hydropower, and ushered in the 
shale revolution which continues to create millions of new jobs, bring 
manufacturing back to the U.S., and revitalize communities across our 
Nation.
  As a result, America is more energy secure today than ever before.
  This legacy is under threat. Since day one, President Biden has been 
taking steps to shut down American energy.

[[Page H1360]]

  On his first day in office, he ended the Keystone XL pipeline. He has 
actively taken steps to ban gas stoves and liquefied natural gas 
exports, tear down hydropower dams, force electric vehicle mandates on 
Americans, and impose a tax on natural gas.
  His so-called Inflation Reduction Act provided the EPA with tens of 
billions of taxpayer dollars to launder to extreme, liberal special 
interest allies who will ultimately make us more reliant on China by 
forcing Americans to rely on cheap Chinese batteries and solar panels 
manufactured with slave labor and the worst environmental standards on 
the planet.
  H.R. 1023 is an important step toward ending the President's radical 
rush-to-green agenda. It repeals the EPA's $27 billion green bank slush 
fund and its recently proposed natural gas tax.
  The EPA doesn't want Congress or the American public to know how they 
are spending hard-earned taxpayer dollars and the way that they want to 
give tens of billions of dollars to radical environmentalists in 
secret.
  This legislation will also repeal the EPA's recently proposed natural 
gas tax. This tax drives up the costs on everything from our grocery 
bills to our energy bills. It will force good-paying American jobs 
overseas and make us more dependent on foreign energy sources.
  I strongly support H.R. 1023, the Cutting Green Corruption and Taxes 
Act, which promotes American energy leadership and security, which is 
something that is vital to building on our legacy of improving lives, 
helping to lift people out of poverty, and raising the standard of 
living across the country and the world.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to join me in voting 
``yes'' on this important bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Peters), who is a member of our committee.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose H.R. 1023 which would not 
only repeal the EPA's commonsense fee on methane pollution but would 
also eliminate over $1 billion of financial and technical assistance 
for small- and medium-sized oil and gas producers to reduce their 
methane emissions.
  The bill also repeals tens of billions of dollars for local 
communities to make smart investments in the clean energy technologies 
of the future.
  It is so frustrating that during so-called energy week, House 
Republicans are not focusing on how we can lower consumers costs, 
combat the climate crisis, or protect public health.
  Instead, we are taking time to vote on whether strong regulations on 
methane emissions are even necessary or if we should invest in American 
energy at all, regardless of whether it is cleaner oil and gas or 
accessible renewable energy.
  Addressing methane emissions, particularly fugitive methane 
emissions, is one of the most important steps we can take to combat the 
climate crisis, and there is across-the-board recognition that we need 
to do more to get methane emissions under control.
  Additionally, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund will expand access to 
financing for clean energy projects across the country, helping 
American families and businesses create good-paying jobs, reduce 
pollution, and lower costs.
  Last Congress, House Democrats were proud to advance legislation that 
reduces methane emissions from the oil and natural gas industry, 
incentivizes the adoption of clean energy technologies, and delivers 
significant economic and public health benefits. We can't let the House 
Republicans drag us into the past.

  I understand that no program is perfect, so let's talk about how to 
make it better. Be that as it may, instead of coming up with ways to 
make these programs better, Republicans cannot help but think of ways 
to make them worse or eliminate them entirely.
  For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to 
recommit this bill back to the committee. If the House rules had 
permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment 
to this bill. That amendment would have ensured that this bill would 
not have gone into effect until the Secretary of Energy had determined 
that it would not increase energy prices.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record the text 
of this amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the 
motion to recommit.
  Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie).
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1023.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation cuts President Biden's $27 billion 
green new deal slush fund.
  At a hearing, I had asked an administration witness if any of this 
money could go indirectly to China. He could not definitively say no.
  This bill also repeals EPA's proposed natural gas tax which would 
increase costs for Americans, kill jobs across the country, and 
undermine our national security.
  Mr. Speaker, if you think those are just words, then I encourage my 
friends across the aisle to look at Europe and see what is going on 
there today. All of those have come true.
  I am committed to ensuring Kentuckians have access to affordable and 
reliable American-made energy and keeping taxpayer dollars out of the 
hands of the Communist Party of China.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Alabama for his leadership on 
this issue. I thank my friend from Washington, the chair, for yielding, 
and I encourage my colleagues to support this bill.

                              {time}  0930

  Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Mrs. Dingell), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
  Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 
1023, the so-called Cutting Green Corruption and Taxes Act.
  Republicans have, yet again, brought another bill to the floor 
looking to deceive and mislead the American people and attempting to 
repeal the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and the Methane Emissions 
Reduction Program.
  The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund was established by the Inflation 
Reduction Act, inspired by legislation I championed. The program 
leverages the expertise and existing models of community lenders across 
the Nation, including in my home State of Michigan. Revoking this 
program is misguided.
  To my colleagues who want to dismantle this program, I will just say 
that when we did this in Michigan at the State level a number of years 
ago, everybody screamed and yelled, but it worked, and energy costs 
went down.
  Investing in clean energy and the survival of our environment is 
something we all need to be working on together. We have a moral 
responsibility, and it is a great economic opportunity. Republicans 
continue to attack any investment like this, but we need to be 
investing in American families and manufacturers and working to address 
the climate crisis.
  I myself am tired of once-every-100-year storms happening every year. 
We saw the Canadian fires in the Great Lakes region last year. People 
couldn't breathe and had asthma for weeks. Today, it is snowing in 
Michigan. It was 70 degrees in Michigan last week. Global climate is 
real, if my colleagues just open their eyes and watch what is 
happening.
  We have to level the playing field because China is beating us. We 
are in a global marketplace. If we do not invest in this country, we 
are abandoning ourselves. I want our country to succeed.
  The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund will help clean-energy financing be 
more accessible to low-income and underserved communities that have for 
far too long carried the brunt of environmental pollution. It will help 
us attack the climate crisis head on. It will create jobs while 
lowering energy costs.
  I am not going to cede our leadership in innovation and technology to 
anyone, anybody, anywhere, and we are going to outdo China. It is our 
responsibility as legislators to protect this

[[Page H1361]]

country. We have a responsibility to compete.
  I have worked hard to ensure that the dollars from this fund support 
projects that would not be built otherwise and ensure that these 
investments are additive and do not duplicate other efforts. We have to 
make sure that these dollars are spent in the right way.
  I know Republicans want to see the EPA and the Greenhouse Gas 
Reduction Fund fail. I beg my colleagues to work with us to make sure 
that this program is implemented effectively. I ask them not to bet 
against it. Give it a chance before trying to defund it, before any 
dollars have gone out the door.
  Blocking EPA from doing its work is no way to lead, and that is why 
it is vital for my colleagues to oppose this bill.
  I am going to give a couple other factoids since I have another 
minute.
  Since 2021, in terms of private investments for electric vehicle and 
battery manufacturing, the U.S. went from lagging behind China to 
leading the world. That is where we need to be.
  Since 2021, more than $160 billion of private capital has been 
committed to boost U.S. capacity to make electric vehicles and 
batteries, and more than 200,000 jobs have been announced.
  Since 2021, 15 gigafactories have been commissioned to make batteries 
in the U.S. For just the chargers alone, 40 facilities are now being 
set up, enough to produce a million chargers per year here in the 
United States of America.
  NADA, the National Automobile Dealers Association, estimates that 
electric vehicle drivers save an average of $5,000 on fuel over 5 
years. It is no surprise that nearly 7 in 10 Americans now report being 
interested in buying or leasing an electric vehicle for their next car.
  Data from Cox Automotive shows that electric sales are increasing 
four times faster than any other segment of the market, and available 
models now number over 114. They have nearly doubled.
  If my colleagues want to keep this country competitive, we need to 
oppose this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I cede our leadership to no one.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, one serious contender for a share of this $14 billion is 
Power Forward Communities. This new entity, which has been formed to 
secure a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund award, is a coalition of several 
organizations, including Rewiring America.
  Rewiring America's leadership includes a former Obama White House 
appointee, a former employee of liberal political action committees, 
and a Democratic politician, Stacey Abrams. Rewiring America is a 
project of the Windward Fund, which is controlled by Arabella Advisors. 
Arabella Advisors funnels donations to various leftwing nonprofits.
  To give another example, the board of another applicant, the 
Coalition for Green Capital, includes former Biden administration 
officials and a former senior staffer of the Democratic National 
Committee. This includes David Hayes, a former senior official of 
President Biden's White House Climate Policy Office who was central to 
advancing President Biden's climate agenda.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Duncan), chairman of our Energy, Climate, and Grid Security 
Subcommittee.

  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Washington, our 
chairwoman of the full Energy and Commerce Committee, for yielding 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1023, the Cutting Green 
Corruption and Taxes Act. By repealing the Greenhouse Gas Reduction 
Fund, H.R. 1023 protects taxpayers from waste, fraud, and abuse.
  This bill would repeal and rescind the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas 
Reduction Fund, commonly referred to as EPA's green bank, which was 
originally enacted in the Inflation Reduction Act. This is nearly three 
times the amount of funding EPA received in their 2023 budget.
  It is completely outside the scope of the EPA's mission, and they 
don't have the capacity nor the expertise to manage a $27 billion 
climate bank. They are not a financial institution. Even worse, they 
are funding projects that benefit China. Solar panels, EVs, and wind 
turbines all have supply chains tied to the Chinese Communist Party.
  In addition to repealing the green bank, this bill would also repeal 
the natural gas tax. This tax is especially troubling for small and 
independent oil and gas producers that will not be able to afford to 
maintain their operations. This tax comes in addition to a suite of 
methane regulations that creates a structure unworkable for small and 
midsize companies.
  There are about 9,000 independent oil and gas producers in the United 
States. For the gentlewoman from Michigan who just spoke, 75 percent of 
them will go out of business in the State of Michigan if the methane 
tax stays in effect. These companies are not Big Oil. On average, they 
employ just 12 people.
  The methane regulations included in this natural gas tax would crush 
these producers, but that is the goal, isn't it, of the Biden 
administration and the left, to end U.S. oil and gas production and to 
use taxpayer money to prop up their climate special interests.
  In fact, we said yesterday President Biden got on an airplane, Air 
Force One, and flew to Saudi Arabia to beg the Saudis and OPEC to 
increase their fossil fuel production while at the same time killing 
U.S. fossil fuel production. It is not that they don't like fossil 
fuels because he went to Saudi Arabia to beg for more. He just doesn't 
like fossil fuels produced in this country.
  Mr. Speaker, we have to stop the madness and increase American energy 
independence.
  Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Casten).
  Mr. CASTEN. Mr. Speaker, first, I remind my colleagues that Donald 
Trump called the Saudis and said to please do everything they can to 
raise the oil price because gasoline is so cheap, and they did. I 
appreciate them keeping the gas price up.
  In the words of a great American, I regret that I have but 3 minutes 
to explain all the stupidity in this bill, so I am just going to focus 
on the methane emissions reduction plan for now.
  Nobody really understands methane out there in the public, so let's 
just put this in terms folks understand. Imagine that you live in a 
town that has two dairies. They take cow milk and turn it into 
downstream products.
  One of them makes milk. They make cream. They make half-and-half. 
They make 2 percent. They are a productive plant. They don't waste 
anything. They have good jobs. They grow the American economy.
  The one next door says: We are just making 2 percent. We are going to 
throw away all the cream. We are going to throw away all the half-and-
half. We are going to pour it in the river, and the town is going to 
stink to high heavens of sour milk. You can't swim in the water. In 
addition, by the way, we are not making much money because we are 
throwing away all of our product.
  Now, let's imagine that the government came in and said: We want both 
of these businesses to be competitive. We want workers in both of those 
plants to have good jobs and a good future, so we are going to provide 
you with the capital to capture that cream so you can sell it, stop 
polluting, and make more money.
  Then, let's imagine that one political party said: How dare you cry 
over spilled milk? Spill the damn milk. We want to keep pouring that 
cream in the river. We want to keep this factory open so that they can 
keep spilling cream and wasting money.
  That is what this bill does. It says to a gas pipeline company that 
is leaking methane, the thing they sell, that rather than give them the 
ability to sell more, rather than help stop polluting, we want to 
protect their right to be a bad citizen and uncompetitive, so we can 
drive more business to China because our gas is going to be too 
expensive. We are going to spill all ours.
  This bill is so stupid. If my colleagues love pollution, hate 
capitalism, hate competitive American businesses,

[[Page H1362]]

vote for this bill, but don't be stupid. Let's get back to real work.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. 
Duncan) will control the remainder of the time.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, we are showing how misguided this $27 
billion green bank is, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Joyce) 
knows about fossil fuel production and what this would mean to the 
great State of Pennsylvania that produces a lot of energy.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Joyce).
  Mr. JOYCE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, our 
chair of the Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee, for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, taxing methane emissions is a backward and impractical 
way to combat pollution. Instead of encouraging investments in new 
infrastructure in support of the energy producers, the Biden 
administration has chosen to introduce more red tape and bureaucracy 
into our energy industry by taxing methane emissions.

  Despite what President Biden, my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle, and liberals in California might believe, we cannot tax our way 
into lower emissions. It is time to remove the methane tax that has 
only caused energy prices to rise while doing very little to protect 
our environment and communities.
  The natural gas produced by our adversaries is not subjected to these 
taxes. If American producers are going to be able to innovate and 
produce the energy that we need, then it is time for Congress to act.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation 
and American energy.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Allen).
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Duncan) for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1023, the Cutting Green 
Corruption and Taxes Act, of which I am a proud cosponsor.
  The Biden administration established a Green New Deal slush fund at 
the EPA to the tune of $27 billion in taxpayer money. Let me be clear: 
My constituents in Georgia's 12th District are sick and tired of their 
hard-earned tax dollars contributing to this administration's radical 
rush-to-green agenda, especially while prices at the pump remain a top 
concern for American families.
  During energy week, House Republicans are passing legislation to stop 
President Biden's war on American energy, and I emphasize that 
Democrats want to end fossil fuel as we know it.
  H.R. 1023 would rescind the EPA's $27 billion Greenhouse Gas 
Reduction Fund and repeal the administration's disastrous proposed 
natural gas tax.
  In doing so, we can reduce the budget deficit, reduce the size and 
scope of the Federal Government, and ensure energy costs for Americans 
do not further escalate.
  Let me be clear. Every 100 days, we are borrowing $1 trillion. This 
is common sense. It should be an easy vote for every Member in this 
body, and I encourage support of H.R. 1023.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Bice). The gentleman from New Jersey 
has 14 minutes remaining. The gentleman from South Carolina has 18 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Castor), the ranking member of our Oversight and 
Investigations Subcommittee and the previous chair of the Select 
Committee on the Climate Crisis.

                              {time}  0945

  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank our ranking member of 
the Energy and Commerce Committee for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I was listening to the debate on the floor this 
morning and there is so much doom and gloom. There is too much of it.
  I believe in America. I believe that we do have the power to solve 
big problems. The good news is that the historic clean energy law 
passed by Democrats and signed by President Biden in the last Congress 
is working.
  Already since we passed that new Inflation Reduction Act, which is 
our historic clean energy and climate law, there have been enormous job 
gains across the country, with over 523 clean energy projects across 
America. It has created about 210 clean energy jobs. Most of these jobs 
are going to working-class areas in many Republican States and many 
Republican districts, lifting them up. It has motivated over $300 
billion in private capital to come and boost communities and boost 
clean energy manufacturing. I know that we are on track to meeting our 
clean energy goals so that we can avoid the very costly impacts of our 
climate crisis.
  There is a different point of view on the other side of the aisle. 
Let's be honest, there is a very clear contrast. Just look at what the 
GOP Members here focused on during their dirty energy week.
  From the Arctic Refuge to the Gulf of Mexico, where I live, 
Republicans have made clear their intent to sell out America's public 
lands and wildlife refuges to the shareholders of Big Oil.
  On Wednesday, they passed a resolution that did nothing but celebrate 
fracking on public lands. Even in our committee this week, as Mr. 
Pallone knows, we had this crazy debate where the Republicans passed 
bills that essentially reached into the pocketbooks of Americans and 
took pennies and dollars because they passed bills--and I hope they are 
not coming to the floor--to rescind energy efficiency initiatives for 
our home appliances.
  Manufacturers agree they can innovate better, and homeowners sure 
want more money back in their pockets when they buy a new air-
conditioner or refrigerator, so they are really taking us backwards.
  Yesterday they passed an absurd resolution criticizing President 
Biden for not opening up more public lands and waters to drilling.
  Today, Republicans' polluters over people agenda continues the debate 
because they want to rescind our new green climate bank, our Greenhouse 
Gas Reduction Fund, which is an historic important element of the 
Inflation Reduction Act and everything we want to do on clean energy.
  We all know that sometimes there is a barrier and an up-front cost to 
installing solar or purchasing that battery. This new fund will help 
motivate private capital to erase those barriers. It is going to help 
working-class communities, especially, to invest in solar power. That 
is great news for people who live in the Sunshine State, my neighbors, 
and it is going to open up all sorts of new, cleaner, and cheaper 
energy options.
  These clean energy projects will support families and businesses 
across America who are eager to find relief from exorbitant electric 
bills. They will slash harmful air pollution and help communities 
better withstand these extreme weather events by utilizing battery 
storage systems.
  Although all of these investments are wildly popular, Republicans 
still oppose these investments in America. These are real solutions to 
lower bills; to create jobs; and to build safer, healthier communities. 
Why? It is because community-led clean energy projects aren't on the 
balance sheet for fossil fuel donors.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to move forward. Believe in 
America like we do and buy America, build America, invest in our 
communities, and invest in our neighbors to help them lower electric 
bills.
  I urge you to protect the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, our historic 
clean energy green climate bank, and ensure that all Americans can reap 
the savings and the benefits of clean air and cleaner, cheaper energy.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Madam Speaker, we pointed out yesterday that Americans 
are paying more for transportation fuels than they were just a few 
short years ago before the Biden administration started this war on 
energy. They are paying higher utility bills because green energy 
projects are costing more and driving up utility rates.
  If anybody watched the debate that the gentlewoman from Florida 
mentioned a minute ago, which occurred in our committee this week, they 
will see that we need to build out a pipeline infrastructure to deliver 
resources,

[[Page H1363]]

produce American resources, deliver those resources, utilize those 
resources, and export. There is energy poverty in the world; not just 
in the United States, but globally. We can help with that by exporting 
more U.S.-produced, cleaner burning natural gas.
  Georgia has been leading on this issue and here is another 
Representative from Georgia to talk about it.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Carter).
  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my friend from Alabama, Mr. 
Palmer's bill.
  As my colleagues have said, this bill primarily does two things: 
First of all, it repeals and rescinds the EPA's $27 billion Greenhouse 
Gas Reduction Fund.
  Now, $27 billion is a significant amount of money, especially for an 
agency like--in this case the EPA--that has never operated a program 
like this. This money also has a requirement that it be spent in just 
the next couple of years. That is the opposite of fiscal 
responsibility. Who gives people money and says you have to spend it in 
this amount of time.
  EPA's Office of Inspector General has noted that the combination of 
such large amounts of money in a short timeline to use it may lead to 
fraud, waste, and abuse, including being used by Chinese entities.
  Consider the fact that U.S. emissions are already dropping and our 
solar, EV, and other industries are rapidly growing with plenty of 
incentives. Why would we risk or waste taxpayer dollars?

  Eliminating the EPA's green bank slush fund will reduce the budget 
deficit, protect against government corruption, and stop China from 
receiving American taxpayer dollars.
  Secondly, this bill will also repeal the EPA's proposed natural gas 
tax, which would increase energy costs for Americans and undermine U.S. 
manufacturing. This move will hinder our energy independence and 
competitiveness.
  This administration continues to punish Americans for their own 
success while failing to address the most damaging actor on the global 
stage, and that is China.
  Taking a look at the past 20 years, even if the U.S., EU, and Japan 
had cut all of their emissions by half and India had stayed stagnant, 
China alone polluted enough to cause a global increase in emissions.
  My colleagues may say that China will follow our leadership. If that 
was the case, why are their emissions increasing while ours are 
decreasing?
  Forgive me if I don't take seriously an administration that punishes 
Americans while doing nothing to compete with the country with 
emissions that are 80 percent higher than the U.S. and EU combined.
  Madam Speaker, I support this bill, and I urge my colleagues to 
support it to tackle the real energy problems.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Casten).
  Mr. CASTEN. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for granting me more 
time because there is still so much silliness left in this bill.
  I will shift now to the elimination of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction 
Fund. Let's talk about what this program does.
  This program helps to pay for projects that reduce climate pollution, 
help grow energy independence, lower energy bills, and revitalize 
communities that otherwise would not be funded.
  So what does that mean? These are projects that are good projects 
that help people out, but they struggle to get capital.
  Maybe it is an inner city school that would like to put solar panels 
on the roof to cut their energy bills, lower their pollution, but they 
are not in a town that can afford to raise the bond to do that.
  Maybe it is an Appalachian coalfield Superfund site that would like 
to build a green space and grow their community, help attract capital, 
but they are struggling to get money.
  Maybe it is a rural area that needs an EV bus program to reduce 
pollution, but you could never justify private money investing there, 
but it helps out the local folks.
  No, all of those projects--I could go on--but what do they have in 
common? They lower greenhouse gas emissions. They put more money in the 
pockets of local communities we all represent. They would help the 
neediest among us. They would create local jobs and most importantly, 
they would be cheaper than fossil energy.
  I get it. That is a real problem for my colleagues across the aisle. 
The natural gas industry wants the price of energy to be expensive 
because that is how they make money.
  As I mentioned before, during COVID, April 2020, Donald Trump called 
the Saudis and said: I am going to take troops out of your country 
unless you cut oil production because our oil industry is hurting. They 
did it. That is what you did.
  I don't remember anybody saying: Boy, we should call the Saudis and 
do the other when the price of oil went up. I understand what you are 
rooting for.
  So why do you want to defund that program? I don't know.
  Maybe you are concerned that energy is just too damn cheap. Maybe you 
think that unemployment is too low and would like to--I don't know--
help your party win the next election. Maybe you just misremember that 
speech.
  It doesn't say blessed are the powerful. It doesn't say blessed are 
the polluters. It doesn't say blessed are the least meek.
  I don't know why you are doing it. For goodness' sake, in the 
meantime, vote ``no'' if you care about making sure that pollution goes 
down, energy prices go down, and the American people win.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Madam Speaker, this $27 billion green bank will benefit 
China, so it seems like the Biden administration and the House 
Democrats support China over the American people.
  Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Pfluger). He is somebody that knows energy being that 
he is from the Permian Basin.
  Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague Mr. Duncan and Chair 
McMorris Rodgers for yielding. I appreciate the leadership of Gary 
Palmer on this particular legislation, H.R. 1023, the Cutting Green 
Corruption and Taxes Act.
  As we sit here and listen, it has been pretty amusing. The reason we 
are here is because the American public is sick and tired of the games. 
The veil has been lifted. They know the facts. Affordability and 
reliability are the most important things, and we will get to the facts 
about the actual emissions that have been cut.
  Let's just start with the fact that this natural gas tax is 
unworkable. It was included despite never being considered, never being 
talked about with stakeholders in places like the Permian Basin that I 
represent. There was never expert testimony that talked about how to 
work this in.
  Instead of looking at emissions holistically, the natural gas tax was 
based on the single premise that if reliable energy is taxed, less of 
it will be produced.
  Let's ask the American public if they are for that.
  Especially as the EPA rolls out proposed rules to implement the 
natural gas tax, it is clear that we have to take action. There are 
dozens of rules that they are rolling out.
  When we talked to the directors of the EPA when they came before 
Congress this year, they didn't even know how they were going to 
implement this. They haven't talked to stakeholders.

  Why have they not been to the Permian Basin? Not a single person from 
the EPA has come to the largest producing area to see what we are 
doing, to see that in the last 12 to 15 years that we have increased 
production by 300 or 400 percent from 1 million barrels a day to over 5 
million barrels, and we have reduced methane intensity by over 70 
percent.
  Why can't Administrator Regan or Director Nance or Mr. Goffman come 
to the Permian Basin and see what we have done? Not because the 
government has told them to do it, but because it makes economic sense 
because they are doing it from a business sense.
  That is what you are not going to hear from my colleagues on the 
left.

[[Page H1364]]

They are being driven from a radical, environmental activist position 
that doesn't represent what the country wants or needs.
  I was pleased to host Speaker Johnson in Midland, Texas, this week to 
kick off energy week. The Speaker had a chance to meet with industry 
experts, people that know this business, people that have cut the 
emissions, people who do care about providing affordable, reliable 
energy as well as reducing harmful emissions.
  They have been doing it. They have been doing it for years. It makes 
sense that Congress would come together and talk about reducing harmful 
emissions in a meaningful way.
  Not a single industry expert has come to Congress and said that they 
want methane intensity to increase. What they don't want, or need is a 
new tax. What they don't want, or need is to assault the industry that 
literally won World War II for us, that has provided our partners and 
allies what they need because they aren't blessed with the resources 
that we are.
  If this is implemented, the ill-conceived natural gas tax will 
handicap technological innovation, reduce the supply of affordable 
energy in this country and for our partners and allies, and it will 
increase not only costs, but emissions.
  In fact, this tax alone will drive up the cost of household energy 
for 180 million Americans and over 5\1/2\ million businesses that rely 
on the natural gas tax. The underpinnings of our national security 
depend on us making smart decisions, producing energy here 
domestically, and not giving Vladimir Putin, the Iranians, or other 
nefarious actors a win.
  Madam Speaker, I urge support for American energy, I urge support for 
domestic production, and I urge support for H.R. 1023.

                              {time}  1000

  Mr. DUNCAN. Madam Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I am 
prepared to close. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for 
the purpose of closing.
  My colleague from Florida referred to this week as dirty energy week, 
and I think that really kind of sums it up. It is not energy week. It 
is dirty energy week.
  I think that maybe I can best describe why this bill is so bad and 
contributes to dirty energy week by quoting parts of the Statement of 
Administration Policy that was submitted by the White House, by 
President Biden in saying that he would veto this bill which, of 
course, means that what we are doing here today is a complete waste of 
time.
  In his Statement of Administration Policy, the President says:
  ``This bill would eliminate two key provisions of the Inflation 
Reduction Act (IRA). Through the implementation of the Inflation 
Reduction Act, the administration is making unprecedented progress in 
protecting America's energy security and reducing energy costs for 
Americans--in their homes and in their communities.
  ``H.R. 1023 would do just the opposite, repealing programs that 
provide nonregulatory incentives that help address climate pollution 
and provide consumer savings. The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund will 
provide $27 billion for the deployment of clean energy technologies 
that will cut energy costs and drive economic development in 
communities across the country and in various sectors of our economy, 
including in the power and transportation sectors.
  ``The Methane Emissions Reduction Program provides $1.55 billion in 
investments to identify and help industry curb methane leaks from oil 
and natural gas production, helping to prevent energy waste and 
reducing harm to surrounding communities, including communities that 
are overburdened by pollution.
  ``The administration wants to work with Congress to lower energy 
costs, deploy clean energy technologies, and create jobs. H.R. 1023 
would take us backward and repeal important programs that help achieve 
those goals.''
  Now, again, the Republicans call this week energy week. It is, in 
fact, dirty energy week. With House Republicans at the helm, we have 
seen nothing but chaos, efforts to push failed bills again and again--
this is the third time we have voted on this bill--and attempts by the 
Republicans to rob American families of energy savings, security, and 
peace of mind.
  Republican leadership has resulted in the least productive Congress 
since the Great Depression, and, unfortunately, this bill is more of 
the same. While Democrats and the Biden administration are making great 
progress toward protecting America's energy security and lowering 
energy costs for families, Republicans continue to push their polluters 
over people agenda. Polluters over people. That is what they are all 
about.
  This bill endangers Americans' health and safety. It will do nothing 
for American families. It is a complete waste of taxpayer dollars and 
our time. I mean, we keep doing this over and over again. It is a waste 
of time. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  I was just informed by staff that I have 10 minutes left on this 
debate. I promise you, I am not going to take that, but I could because 
this issue is important to the American people.
  The border issue is number one across the country because we are 
being invaded across our southern border, and it is not secure.
  The second biggest issue the American people are interested in are 
their utility bills and the price at the pump, what it costs them to 
fill up their tank to take their kids to school, to go to work, to earn 
the money that is taxed by this government and spent recklessly by this 
government.
  We see $27 billion given to an EPA that doesn't have the mechanisms 
set up to be a bank, to do grants, to do these type of funding 
mechanisms. We pointed that out this week during energy week. We have 
talked about energy since we got here Tuesday, but I promise you, this 
isn't the end. We are going to continue to talk about American energy 
because it is time for America to become energy dominant once again, to 
be a net exporter of oil and to increase our LNG exports.
  We see this war by the Biden administration on American energy. He 
doesn't mind fossil fuels because he went and begged the Saudis to 
produce more to help lower the price because it is an election year. He 
has drained the SPR, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, to the lowest 
level since 1980. The SPR is set up to handle national emergencies--
times of war and times of other climatic events that happen to help the 
American people. However, he drew it down for political purposes to 
lower the price at the pump because it was an election year, and we 
haven't refilled it.

  All these issues that were brought out this week during energy week 
have been important to the American people. The Republicans have 
pointed out that a lot of this $27 billion is going to end up in the 
Chinese Communist Party because they will be the beneficiary, just like 
Vladimir Putin is the beneficiary of lowering American energy 
production. He hasn't stopped. He is selling energy all over the world 
to help fund his war in Ukraine.
  Money that is going into the pockets of the oligarchs in Russia is 
funding the invasion and the battle that is going on in Ukraine right 
now. We could stop that. We ran the Germans out of oil during the 
Battle of the Bulge. It helped us win World War II. It was an energy 
issue then. It is an energy now. We could take the money away from 
Vladimir Putin and his ability to keep funding the war in Ukraine.
  However, today this bill talks about the EPA and their green bank and 
that slush fund that only caters to the radical environmentalists on 
the left. We are talking about the methane tax that is going to hurt 
producers across this Nation. It is going to drive energy prices up.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support Gary Palmer's bill 
that we are debating today. It has been a heck of an energy week, and I 
am glad that the United States Congress is finally focusing on American 
energy producers to be energy dominant, energy secure once again.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill, stop this green bank, end 
the methane tax, and help make America be stronger once again. Yes, we 
passed

[[Page H1365]]

this bill or versions like it two or three times. We can pass it 10 
more times, get the United States Senate to actually wake up and do 
their dadgum job and start taking up bills that the House passes in 
order to help make America stronger, to lead once again in the realm of 
American energy because energy is the foundation of everything. The 
American people know it. I am glad the United States House of 
Representatives, at least on our side of the aisle, understands that, 
as well.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1085, the previous question is ordered 
on the bill, as amended.
  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. PETERS. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Peters of California moves to recommit the bill H.R. 
     1023 to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

  The material previously referred to by Mr. Peters is as follows:

       Mr. Peters of California moves to recommit the bill H.R. 
     1023 to the Committee on Energy and Commerce with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith, 
     with the following amendment:
       Add at the end the following:

     SEC. 4. CERTIFICATION.

       This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall not 
     take effect unless and until the Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency submits to Congress a 
     certification that the implementation of this Act, and the 
     amendments made by this Act, would result in lower costs for 
     American consumers.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the 
previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.
  The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. PETERS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question are postponed.

                          ____________________