[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repealed.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enactment of this Act) is rescinded.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repealed.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repealed.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enactment of this Act) is rescinded.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.
____________________