[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 113 (Tuesday, July 9, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H4497-H4503]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STOP UNAFFORDABLE DISHWASHER STANDARDS ACT
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1341, I call up
the bill (H.R. 7700) to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from
prescribing or enforcing energy conservation standards for dishwashers
that are not cost-effective or technologically feasible, and for other
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Meuser). Pursuant to House Resolution
1341, the bill is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 7700
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 ``Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher
Standards Act''.
SEC. 2. PRESCRIBING AND ENFORCING ENERGY CONSERVATION
STANDARDS FOR DISHWASHERS.
(a) Technologically Feasible and Economically Justified.--
Notwithstanding subsections (m), (n), and (o) of section 325
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295),
the Secretary of Energy may not--
(1) prescribe a new or an amended energy conservation
standard for a covered product that is a dishwasher under
such section unless the Secretary of Energy determines that
the prescription and imposition of such energy conservation
standard is technologically feasible and economically
justified; or
(2) enforce an energy conservation standard prescribed
under such section for a covered product that is a dishwasher
if the Secretary of Energy determines that enforcement of or
compliance with such energy conservation standard is not
technologically feasible or economically justified.
(b) Prohibition on Increased Costs to Consumers.--
Notwithstanding subsections (m), (n), and (o) of section 325
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295),
the Secretary of Energy may not--
(1) prescribe a new or an amended energy conservation
standard for a covered product that is a dishwasher under
such section unless the Secretary of Energy determines that
the prescription and imposition of such energy conservation
standard is not likely to result in additional net costs to
the consumer, including any increase in net costs associated
with the purchase, installation, maintenance, disposal, and
replacement of the covered product; or
(2) enforce an energy conservation standard prescribed
under such section for a covered product that is a dishwasher
if the Secretary of Energy determines that enforcement of or
compliance with such energy conservation standard is likely
to result in additional net costs to the consumer, including
any increase in net costs associated with the purchase,
installation, maintenance, disposal, and replacement of the
covered product.
(c) Significant Energy Savings Requirement.--
Notwithstanding subsections (m), (n), and (o) of section 325
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295),
the Secretary of Energy may not--
(1) prescribe a new or an amended energy conservation
standard for a covered product that is a dishwasher under
such section if the Secretary of Energy determines that the
prescription and imposition of such energy conservation
standard will not result in significant conservation of
energy; or
(2) enforce an energy conservation standard prescribed
under such section for a covered product that is a dishwasher
if the Secretary of Energy determines that enforcement of or
compliance with such energy conservation standard will not
result in significant conservation of energy.
(d) Covered Product; Energy Conservation Standard.--In this
section, the terms ``covered product'' and ``energy
conservation standard'' have the meanings given such terms in
section 321 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42
U.S.C. 6291).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill 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 South Carolina (Mr. Duncan) and the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Duncan).
General Leave
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this
legislation and insert extraneous material on H.R. 7700.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7700, Stop
Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act, and I thank Congressman
Langworthy for leading these efforts.
The Biden administration has lost sight of the original intent behind
the Department of Energy conservation standards. Instead, they are
contradicting the statutes and doing so at the expense of Americans'
quality of life, their pocketbooks, and their energy bills.
Instead of harnessing the abundant resources we are blessed with in
this country, the Biden administration wants to lower your standard of
living by telling you what appliances you can have in your home, and
they want you to pay more for it.
An analysis from the Department of Energy found that their dishwasher
efficiency mandates would increase the upfront cost by up to 28
percent. It is estimated that these proposed standards may take
consumers over 16 years to pay back the increased cost on a dishwasher
that won't even last 12 years.
The Biden administration has abused the Department of Energy's
appliance standard program to go beyond the authority granted to them
by Congress by proposing these overreaching standards.
Americans will suffer the consequences of the Biden administration's
rush-to-green agenda.
The DOE's net zero rush-to-green energy agenda is reaching into your
home to impose cost increasing regulations on appliances in every
corner of your home.
We have debated gas stoves and other appliances here, and now here we
are today debating on dishwashers.
The Biden administration has proposed over 15 regulations that affect
appliances, like I mentioned, not only gas stoves but hot water
heaters, refrigerators, freezers, and now dishwashers.
[[Page H4498]]
They argue these regulations will save money and reduce emissions,
but that is just simply not the case. One study found these regulations
could increase the cost for the average American family by over $9,000.
These increased efficiency standards mean Americans need to run their
appliances twice as long to get the same effect, and we all know it.
You run the dishwasher, you open it up, the dishes aren't clean, and
you have got to run it again. It happens to every American family
multiple times. You are not saving money. You are not saving water and
electricity running your highly efficient appliances when you have to
run them two or three times just to get the dishes clean or to get them
dry.
This bill would prevent this abuse from the DOE, and it will prevent
the Department from enforcing standards on dishwashers unless they are
technologically feasible and economically justified, they are not
likely to result in additional costs to the customer, and they won't
enforce the standards unless they will result in a significant
conservation of energy. American families know that is just simply not
happening in their homes.
I urge all my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 7700, Stop the
Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act, to protect affordability and
preserve the quality of life that Americans expect and deserve.
I thank Representative Langworthy for leading this legislation, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, today's debate demonstrates why House Republicans simply
cannot govern. This bill, H.R. 7700, the Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher
Standards Act, doesn't need to be brought up today because House
Republicans already passed it 2 months ago as part of another larger
bill.
In other words, today's debate is a waste of our time. It is clearly
being brought up because Republicans simply don't have any other bills
to bring to the floor. They are fresh out of ideas that can meet the
approval of the extreme elements in their party.
Now, at a time, Mr. Speaker, when the American people want us to work
together to build on the progress we have made to grow our economy for
the future and lower everyday costs for American families, the House
Republican majority wants to have another debate about protecting
dishwashers even though this legislation will increase home energy
bills on the average American family.
This bill would gut popular energy efficiency standards for
dishwashers. Energy efficiency standards are popular for three key
reasons. First, they save Americans money on their energy bills.
Second, they boost innovation by modernizing appliances for the future.
Third, they reduce greenhouse gas pollution in our ongoing efforts to
combat the climate crisis.
{time} 1415
The Biden administration's past and planned energy efficiency actions
will save Americans $1 trillion and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
more than 2.5 billion metric tons over the next 30 years. I will repeat
that: They will save Americans $1 trillion and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by more than 2.5 billion metric tons over the next 30 years.
That is why there is so much support for these efficiency standards.
This is something we should all support.
This used to be a bipartisan issue, but not anymore. Extreme
Republicans have decided that they would rather do the bidding of
corporate polluters as they continue to move forward with their
polluters-over-people agenda.
H.R. 7700 attacks a popular and effective Department of Energy
program that saves Americans money by setting efficiency standards on
household appliances. It adds burdensome and duplicative language to
the Department of Energy's process without defining any of its vague
metrics.
This bill completely ignores the mechanisms and practices that
already exist at the Department of Energy. Worst of all, it gravely
threatens the Department of Energy's ability to implement and enforce
the already-finalized dishwasher standards. In pushing this
legislation, Republicans ignore the fact that the Department of Energy
already must ensure that the standards are economically justifiable,
technically feasible, and result in energy savings. Before the
standards are put in place by the Department of Energy, it has to meet
those standards.
In fact, the process works so well that the dishwasher standard
targeted by this bill was actually the result of a consensus agreement
between industry, efficiency advocates, and consumer advocates.
Industry supports the standards. I don't know who supports the repeal,
essentially, of these standards.
If my colleagues look at the details of the dishwasher efficiency
standard, they will understand why there is so much support for it. The
standard hasn't been updated in over a decade, and the new rules are
expected to save Americans over $3 billion on utility bills over 30
years. That is real savings, and the standards are attainable.
Dishwashers that meet the new standards are already on the market.
People can buy them now. It doesn't even go into effect until 2027, but
consumers can already buy these now because people want them.
It is clear that the appliance manufacturing industry doesn't feel
burdened by the new standards. They support them.
Therefore, one has to question, again, why Republicans continue to
fight against these commonsense standards. I have no idea other than
their corporate and polluter friends.
The bill, along with the next bill we are debating, would not just
impact the Department of Energy's ability to implement the recently
finalized standards, but it would also effectively overturn them. I
want to stress that. These absurd bills include a provision that
prohibits DOE from enforcing new or existing standards if they increase
costs by even a penny, completely disregarding the massive consumer
savings on future monthly home energy bills.
My point is, over a period of time, consumers will save a lot of
money. My colleagues are saying if it just costs an extra penny at any
point, then it shouldn't be allowed. This simply defies logic.
Again, the bill is designed to protect the interests of Republicans'
oil and gas friends. The bill would create market uncertainty and
threaten real savings for Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I oppose the bill because it will increase home energy
costs for American families and undermine our ongoing efforts to combat
the worsening climate crisis. I urge all of my colleagues to oppose
this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the legislation would prevent
the Department from enforcing standards on dishwashers unless they are
technologically feasible and economically justified, unless they are
not likely to result in additional costs to a consumer, and unless they
will result in significant conservation of energy.
Americans know that this new standard and even older standards are
not working. They are having to wash their dishes multiple times.
We have seen over and over agencies overreaching the constitutional
mandate they were given. Thank goodness the Supreme Court last week
overturned the Chevron deference, and now Congress can use other tools
like pieces of legislation to direct agencies on what they should do
and the limits they can do it under.
Sure, there is other legislation we ought to take up, but we have had
to use Congressional Review Act legislation. We have had to use
legislation like this to push back against these agencies and their
overreach.
Thankfully, Mr. Langworthy knows a lot about this. He filed the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Langworthy).
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the
Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act, which will put the brakes
on the Biden administration's relentless assault on efficient,
affordable, and reliable appliances for everyday Americans through
overbearing regulations.
When Congress enacted the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975,
the goal was straightforward: encourage a more efficient use of energy
that is both practical and cost-efficient. Yet, the Biden
administration has
[[Page H4499]]
abused and twisted this law beyond recognition to serve the radical,
woke environmentalist agenda of the far left.
They are not just out of touch. They are making life more expensive
for hardworking Americans. In fact, the Biden administration's own
analysis of the proposed rule for the new efficiency standards admits
that it would take more than 12 years for an American family to see $17
in savings--$17 over 12 years, and that is if their dishwasher lasts
that long, which is really doubtful. This is a textbook example of Big
Government overreach.
Here is the bottom line: Our country is in the midst of a historic
affordability crisis. Millions of Americans cannot afford to buy their
first home or even save for a rainy day. What does this Biden
administration do? They pile on more regulations, more requirements,
and higher standards onto the most basic household appliances.
To my friends across the aisle who disparage this legislation here
today as trivial and unimportant, I encourage them to go explain right
now to the average American family, already crushed by this Biden
economy, that their daily struggles with skyrocketing costs don't
matter. Go explain to seniors in my district living on fixed incomes
why they should shell out thousands more to replace their basic home
appliances to satisfy some radical environmentalist pipe dream. Go tell
them that they should take a back seat to the Green New Deal agenda. Go
tell them that the Biden administration knows better about what is best
for them.
Why should Americans who are putting their groceries on credit cards
be forced to deal with more out-of-touch, expensive regulations? The
hardworking families, seniors, and constituents in my district might
not matter to the Biden administration, but they matter to me.
That is why I introduced this legislation. By stripping away consumer
choice and imposing draconian new regulations and standards that make
absolutely no sense from an affordability and efficiency standpoint,
this administration is making life harder for the American people, pure
and simple.
Mr. Speaker, enough is enough. We cannot tackle this affordability
crisis facing our country today if we don't stop the Biden
administration's regulatory agenda dead in its tracks. I urge my
colleagues to support my bill, H.R. 7700.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Tonko), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the
Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials.
Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7637 and H.R.
7700, both of which are being considered this afternoon.
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that Republicans went home for
Independence Day, reflected upon all that great holiday means, and, as
their first order of business back in D.C., brought up these redundant,
anticonsumer bills.
Let it not be said that House Republicans don't care about people's
rights. These bills support the rights of Chinese manufacturers to dump
cheap, inferior products into the U.S. market. These bills support the
right for utilities to bill Americans more just for keeping their
refrigerators plugged in or running their dishwashers.
Strong efficiency standards reduce energy use and are proven to save
Americans hundreds of dollars each and every year. These bills support
the right of landlords to stick their renters with low-performing
appliances.
Strong efficiency standards raise the bar for everyone. DOE's
efficiency standards are required by law to be cost-effective, and they
result in major savings for every American household. They also reduce
energy demand, which makes our electric grid more reliable.
The refrigerator and dishwasher standards, which would be undone by
the bills before us today, reflect the consensus of energy efficiency
advocates, consumer advocates, and American home appliance
manufacturers. That is right: Our own domestic manufacturers recognize
the benefits of these standards and truly support DOE's rules.
We have wasted enough time. We have wasted enough energy already.
Let's not stand in the way of the Department of Energy and American
manufacturers that want to support the development of the next
generation of innovative, cost-effective, and energy efficient
appliances.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage Members to do the proconsumer and patriotic
thing by rejecting these bills today.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Allen), a valuable member of the Energy and Commerce
Committee.
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7700, the Stop
Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act or the SUDS Act.
Time and again, we have seen the Biden administration's radical rush-
to-green agenda negatively impact the lives of hardworking Americans,
including their freedom to choose what household appliances meet their
needs--first, gas stoves, and now, dishwashers and refrigerators. It is
hard to believe that under this administration, the most regulated
space in America is the kitchen and laundry room.
Under the guise of energy efficiency, this administration is issuing
new standards that will significantly drive up costs, reduce
reliability, and jeopardize the availability of numerous home
appliances.
House Republicans will continue to lead on legislative solutions that
protect American families from out-of-touch, top-down rules. The
American people want choice.
When I talk to my constituents in Georgia's 12th District, they want
relief from record inflation and rising prices. Yet, the Biden
administration is moving forward with issuing standards that could
increase the upfront cost of dishwashers by 28 percent and the upfront
cost of refrigerators by 25 percent, according to the DOE's own
analysis.
President Biden's war on American energy is crushing families'
budgets nationwide, which is why I am proud to support the SUDS Act, as
well as legislation being debated later today that will protect
affordability, quality, and choice for residential dishwashers,
refrigerators, and freezers.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on these bills.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Castor), the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce's
Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R.
7700. It is a bill that will saddle American families with higher
costs.
This is not a serious bill, but it is rather emblematic of the least
protective Congress in modern times. Rather than focus on improving the
lives of our neighbors back home and lowering costs, Republicans, as my
colleague from New York said, went home for the Fourth of July recess
and talked to their neighbors about what the Congress could do to
improve their lives, and the first bill that they bring up on the floor
is one to gut energy efficient dishwashers.
Let's talk about energy efficiency because it is popular. Where does
it come from? Years ago, the Congress acted in a bipartisan way and
directed the Department of Energy to every few years update efficiency
standards for the appliances that power our lives: our air-
conditioners, dishwashers, refrigerators. American manufacturers have
responded.
Americans know this. Our appliances have gotten better and better
over time. They save us money. They save us water. That is really
important right now, that we can put a little bit more money back into
our pockets. It is a win-win-win for us.
I have already heard some misleading statements on the floor today,
and I think we need to clear those up.
When the Department of Energy creates new efficiency standards,
whether it is for dishwashers or other appliances, it does so in
collaboration with industry, with the support of industry and appliance
manufacturers. The final standards for dishwashers were adopted in
April, and they reflect the recommendations from the Association of
Home Appliance Manufacturers. That is a trade association of 30 leading
appliance makers.
{time} 1430
Second, they have said that this is a mandate and that all Americans
have to go buy these dishwashers.
[[Page H4500]]
Mr. Speaker, Americans are smart. They know that is not true. If you
want an inefficient dishwasher or if you want to return to the days of
hand-washing your dishes, then that is your right to do so. However, it
is important that we prod appliance makers to be more innovative and to
be more efficient. The guiding star--in fact, it is called Energy
Star--is to save consumers money, to cut pollution, and to help put a
little more money back in their pockets.
In creating new energy efficiency standards, DOE does so with
consumer savings as its guiding force. According to the agency
calculations, consumers will save $3.2 billion on utility bills over 30
years from the dishwasher standards alone.
For my neighbors back home in Florida who are paying exorbitant
electric bills right now because they don't use the power of the
sunshine, they are mostly on gas, boy, this is a godsend for them to be
able to put some money back into their pockets.
Since we have so much time to debate dishwashers today, I will spend
a little time on a public service announcement.
Mr. Speaker, if you go to energy.gov/save, there are additional
savings for you and your family. There are rebates on appliances and
new heat pumps. There are tax credits for various appliances and
upgrading your home. Many of these were adopted by Democrats in a
Democratic-led Congress in the Inflation Reduction Act. That is our
historic clean energy and climate resilience law. It has been difficult
to get through the noise of this chaotic Congress to make sure that
families understand the cost savings that are available to them, but
that is at energy.gov/save. There are enormous rebates and tax credits
to help you with the cost of living.
The Consumer Federation of America, a consumer advocacy group, said
about the new dishwasher efficiency standard: The Department of
Energy's new efficiency standards for dishwashers are a significant
victory for both consumers and the environment. The standards require
simple changes that will positively impact most households.
If the appliance makers, consumer advocacy groups, and environmental
organizations all support the Department of Energy's energy efficiency
standards, I know many of you are wondering, then why do House
Republicans oppose them?
Another common theme in this chaotic Congress has been the
Republicans' allegiance to polluters and utility companies.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. I was about to answer the question on
everyone's mind: Why would anyone oppose putting money back into the
pockets of hardworking American families?
It is because the GOP is so aligned with oil and gas companies that
they want you to use as much energy as possible. The utility companies
want you to use as much energy as possible, Mr. Speaker, because that
benefits their bottom line and not yours.
Rather than do the dirty work for polluters and electric utilities, I
would say: Let's stand up for the families we represent and put money
back into their pockets. Whether it is a dishwasher, a refrigerator, an
AC, or whatever it is, they need a little bit of relief. We are here to
serve them and not the special interest groups.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I don't have any further speakers, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Casten).
Mr. CASTEN. Mr. Speaker, we often talk about kitchen table issues,
and what better time to elevate those issues than this week, which you
all have declared in honor of refrigerator freedom.
Specifically, as I was walking around July Fourth, I heard a lot of
issues from my constituents about refrigerators.
Some of them asked: Who put the meat in the crisper drawer?
That was a big fight.
Why aren't you using the egg holder for your eggs?
If you use the last of the mustard, don't just put it back in the
fridge; go to the store and get some more mustard.
That is a fight.
There is the always controversial: Should we or should we not replace
a perfectly good refrigerator just because it doesn't match our
cabinets?
These are the real issues that are bothering Americans around their
kitchen table when they talk about refrigerators. If those sound silly,
I will only point out that those issues are vastly more important, more
substantive, and are legitimate points of debate. You can argue both
sides of any of those issues more than anything in this bill because
this bill doesn't address those issues. All it does is gut efficiency
standards that if left in place will save American consumers more than
$3 billion on their utility bills over the next three decades.
I am going to say this very slowly so everybody across the aisle can
understand: If you save energy, then you don't have to pay for energy.
I think you all know this, Mr. Speaker, because some of you have
probably at some point said to your kids: Shut the window. I have got
the AC on. I don't want to waste energy. I don't want to waste money
when I cool my house.
That is the same thing here in these standards.
Also, I think, as anybody who has ever sat around a kitchen table
knows, Americans kind of like to save money on their energy bills. Here
we find ourselves with efficiency standards in place that lower
Americans' utility bills, and Republicans are proposing legislation to
block Americans from access to cheaper energy in the name of
refrigerator freedom. God bless refrigerators.
I oppose this bill because it is bad for consumers, it is bad for the
environment, and, quite honestly, it is bad for this institution
because it is a waste of our time.
Furthermore, at the appropriate time, Mr. Speaker, I will offer a
motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If House rules
permitted, I would have offered this motion with an important amendment
to this bill, and my amendment would require that the act not take
effect until the Secretary of Energy submits to Congress a
certification that this act, including amendments made by this act,
will not result in higher energy costs for American consumers.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my
amendment into the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion
to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. CASTEN. Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting
for this motion to recommit.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the Biden administration's own Department of Energy in
their analysis finds that efficiency mandates could increase the
upfront costs by 28 percent and it could take consumers 12 years to pay
back the increased cost on a product like a dishwasher that may only
last 7 to 12 years.
Mr. Speaker, it is going to take you 12 years to pay for something
that may wear out in 7 years based on DOE's own analysis. That makes no
sense.
The gentlewoman mentioned earlier that Republicans were not wanting
to help American consumers, that they want to take money out of their
pocket. This is actually the opposite of that. We are wanting to help
save the American public money over time by stopping these reckless
rush-to-green regulations like we are voting on today dealing with both
refrigerators and dishwashers and then gas stoves but only because they
have a green agenda that really wants to do away with fossil fuels.
Let's just call it what it is. That is their agenda, to end the use of
fossils fuels in the United States of America at a time when we, as a
growing nation, growing population, and growing metropolitan centers,
need more energy. The demand for energy is only going up. It is not
going down. The continued war against American-
[[Page H4501]]
produced fossil fuels is costing Americans' ability to improve their
quality of life and their standard of living.
We need to continue debating the need for efficient, reliable,
affordable, and dispatchable energy resources, something that is 24/7/
365 always on, always ready, always available, not weather-dependent,
and not sunlight-dependent, intermittent energy sources. We need to
continue debating that. Instead, we are having to push back against an
administration that, under broad legislation passed by the United
States Congress, has given them the ability to write rules and make
regulations without the necessary congressional oversight in many
cases. That is why, I believe, the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron
deference to say that these agencies don't just have carte blanche to
do whatever political agenda pushes them in the mindset to do.
I think Congress needs to focus on really defining what those rules
are in the legislation we pass here, and I think that is what the
Supreme Court is ultimately going to force us to do. They it made very
clear with no ambivalence and no ambiguity.
We have a Nation that is hurting because of the Biden economic
factors that are causing inflation. It started with energy on day one
by stopping the Keystone pipeline, ending lease sales on the Outer
Continental Shelf, destroying the American energy base.
The Democrats will say: Well, energy production is up.
It is, but it is up because of past administration policies that
expanded oil and gas leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf and on
Federal land. These things don't pop up out of the ground overnight. It
takes decades sometimes to get an energy product to producing. The
permitting process alone takes years. Then you have to find the
resource and produce the resource and get it online where Americans can
benefit from it.
Guess who else can benefit from it, Mr. Speaker. The world can. With
the abundance of natural gas we have in this country, we could be a
tremendous exporter. We export a lot, but we could do a lot more
because of the abundance of natural gas we have here to help the
quality of life and standard of living of people all over the globe.
Yet this administration says we are going to put this pause, which was
basically a ban, on LNG exports.
That hurts our allies in Europe who are facing Vladimir Putin's
cutting on and off the spigot of natural gas. It hurts folks around the
world who are in energy poverty, and America could help raise them out
of that poverty.
Americans know they are hurting because it started with energy. We
talk a lot about that. Americans also see a border that is wide open
and 16-plus million people who have crossed our southern border who are
raping and killing American citizens. The crime rates are going up in
cities. They are straining our social services at the State level and
in our own communities causing our property taxes to go up and our
State income taxes to go up to pay for folks who aren't even legally in
the United States of America. That is because of Joe Biden's open-
border policies.
Sure, we ought to debate a lot of things in this Congress instead of
debating regulations on efficiency standards on dishwashers, gas
stoves, refrigerators, freezers, and all these things, but the Biden
administration has definitely overreached in these areas. It is because
they have a green agenda that they are pushing.
Republicans want to help Americans maintain their standard of living,
improve their standard of living, and improve their quality of life. We
can do that by lowering taxes. We can do that by improving the economy
which the Biden economic policies have not done. We saw tremendous
spending in the IRA and other things. More government spending equates
to higher inflation. That is not me saying it. That is economists all
over the globe who understand that simple concept.
We want to improve the quality of life of people and not make their
appliances that they rely on every day be less efficient, cost more,
and in the case of dishwashers, having to pay for something that wore
out 3 or 4 years ago and they are still paying on it. If you factor in
the cost savings, it is pennies a day. In fact, it is probably pennies
a year. It gets into less than a $20 savings over the life of the
appliance. That is not saving the American people money.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 7700, the Stop Unaffordable
Dishwasher Standards Act. Let's protect affordability, and let's
preserve the quality of life for Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New Jersey has 14 minutes
remaining.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Porter).
Ms. PORTER. I think it is important before we legislate on something
to know something about it. I know a lot about dishwashers because I am
a single mom, and I load, unload, load, unload, rinse, and buy
detergent.
So I wonder if the gentleman who is supporting this legislation about
dishwashers and proposing to be an expert in what the American people
want in their dishwashers would be willing to engage in a little
colloquy with me about dishwashers.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina.
Are you willing to engage in this?
Representative Duncan, I would like to know if you know what the
average utility cost is per month to run a dishwasher?
No. He doesn't know. It is $2 to $4 a month.
In other words, about one-third of a frappuccino: $2 to $4 a month.
{time} 1445
Mr. Duncan, do you know about how much a dishwasher costs,
Representative Duncan, like a mid-range dishwasher?
Nope, he doesn't know. About $800, $900. If you want to get fancier,
like a thousand.
Representative Duncan, do you know the best ways and the most
important things you can do to make your dishwasher get the dishes
clean?
Nope. The gentleman is not a dishwasher expert. Loading it correctly.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Member will be reminded to direct their
remarks to the Chair.
Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, do you know what the most important
technique is to load a dishwasher correctly? It is loading it
correctly.
Mr. Speaker, I have heard a lot about the Biden so-called border
crisis. What I haven't heard about is anything about dishwashers. As
somebody who saved and scrimped and was so proud to get a new
dishwasher and can tell you a lot about them, what they cost, what
kinds of features they have, how to load it properly, which I wish
every person, every man and child in America, would listen to their
wife--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from California.
Ms. PORTER. I wish everyone would listen to their spouse about how to
load the dishwasher correctly. Those are the most important things that
make your dishes get clean.
This bill is ridiculous. It is Congress at its worst, a bunch of
people who haven't unloaded a dishwasher ever telling the American
people with legislation what kind of dishwashers they should or should
not be able to buy.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from South Carolina has 14
minutes remaining.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, to address the gentlewoman, I wasn't going to engage in
a colloquy on the floor during a debate on this issue, but I do load
and unload the dishwasher.
I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that, many times, I have opened the
dishwasher, loaded properly, with the right amount of dishwashing
liquid or pod put in, that all the dishes aren't clean. They were
rinsed off before they were put in, to the gentlewoman.
I would run it again. Americans know this. This isn't just me and my
household. Americans know they have to run the dishwasher ofttimes more
than once.
[[Page H4502]]
How is that a cost savings? How is it a cost savings when you have to
run it more than once?
Americans know you open that dishwasher after its cycle, and
apparently the heating component of the efficiency standards didn't dry
the dishes, so they get them out before they put them in the cabinet
because you don't want to put wet dishes up. You get a towel down, and
you dry every one of them off. Cup, knife, fork, plate, pan, you dry it
off before you put it up.
Mr. Speaker, you might as well have just washed it in the sink versus
using an inefficient dishwasher that is becoming more and more
inefficient based on these standards. I am not going to stand here and
be lectured by someone who seemed very pious about dishwashers or
washing laundry or loading a refrigerator properly to stay away from
the hotspots because we are going to go to refrigerators next.
I am sure some of these same comments are going to be brought up.
Guess what, I don't have to because the American people know. The
American people know what they deal with every day, and they know they
are going to pay more for an appliance that is less efficient, and they
may still be paying for it when the thing is worn out. That is unfair
to the American people. We should be about improving the standard of
living and quality of life of Americans.
I will address one other thing that the gentlewoman said: the so-
called border crisis. Every American knows we have a border crisis. We
have had over 16 million people in our country not with a visa, not
with a permission slip, to come here illegally. They reside in our
communities because guess what? Every State is a border State now, even
California and even South Carolina, where I come from because these
migrants have been bussed or flown at taxpayer expense into our
communities.
I won't stand here and hear it be called a so-called border crisis
because Americans know it is a border crisis when 16 million people
illegally enter. We are not talking about 6, but 16 million or more.
Those are just the ones we know about.
What about the ones that the Border Patrol see cross the border, who
go into the bushes, and they go after them? They can't find them, and
they are not counted in the got-away numbers because they have been
told that those migrants may have gone back across the border, so they
are not counting those numbers.
What about the ones who cross the border in areas that aren't
patrolled currently, those people who come through who have no
encounter with law enforcement at all, who are never counted. They may
have nefarious goals in mind because all of these illegal aliens that
have crossed our border aren't just from Mexico or Guatemala, Honduras,
El Salvador, Latin-American countries. A lot of them are coming from
China and Russia and the Middle East. America knows we have no idea who
is in our country.
Let me say that again: Americans, we have no idea who is in our
country.
When I got into this conversation about energy prices and the border
and economics and inflation, high interest rates, cost of goods costing
more now than they did 4 years ago, ofttimes 28, 30, 35 percent more,
Americans know. They don't want to pay more for an appliance that is
inefficient. That is the gist of this debate.
Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers. I yield
myself such time as I may consume to close.
Mr. Speaker, I go back to the dishwashers and clarify some of the
facts here. Republicans are throwing around a lot of numbers that I
believe are not true. Yesterday, at the Rules Committee, we heard from
Republicans that the new dishwasher standards will take 12 years for
consumers to break even, and Members cited Department of Energy as a
source for this number.
However, the 12-year payback period is in reference to a DOE
evaluation of a proposed standard from May of last year. Department of
Energy didn't actually adopt that rule. The actual payback period for
the rule that was finalized is 3.9 years, and the estimated average
lifetime of the dishwasher is way longer.
DOE estimates that the price increase for dishwashers going from the
lowest efficiency to the new minimum efficiency standard required will
be $26, and these $26 will be paid back in less than 4 years.
Additionally, the price of most dishwashers is not expected to
increase at all. Many models already meet the standards or only require
small adjustments.
Mr. Speaker, Republicans are using old data to trivialize the savings
from the standards and exaggerate the costs. As we have said over and
over, the Department of Energy considers the technology, the costs, and
the savings in this process. This bill is about gutting agencies and
deregulating everything and trying to sell it to the American people as
a consumer protection, which it is not.
I clear up a few other misconceptions which seemed to be circulating
on the Republican side. At yesterday's Rules meeting, my Republican
colleagues expressed outrage that the Department of Energy employees
are setting appliance efficiency standards, implying that this isn't
their job and that this is just another example of the Biden
administration overreach, but the truth is this is their job.
These efficiency standards are congressionally mandated. The Energy
Policy and Conservation Act requires that the Department of Energy
evaluate and finalize appliance energy conservation standards and the
appliance energy conservation program at the Department of Energy was
created in 1987. Who was President in 1987? Ronald Reagan. This program
was created under a Republican President with a Republican-controlled
Senate and a Democratic House.
Republicans are not upset about the specifics of the conservation
standards, believe me. The majority is upset about the existence of
standards at all. If one looks at Project 2025, their policy proposals
for a second Trump administration, the excessive gutting of critical
Federal programs that help all Americans will be seen all over the
place.
Let me give an example. Not many Americans have heard of Project
2025, which is this shadowy effort led by former Trump administration
officials and those who would staff a second Trump administration to
implement far-right policies. It calls for radical ideas, such as
banning abortion nationwide, cutting taxes for the rich, and ending the
independence of the Department of Justice.
Front and center in Project 2025's plans for the Department of Energy
is an idea ``to eliminate energy efficiency standards for appliances.''
The war Republicans have declared on energy efficiency is not organic.
It is a small part of a larger effort to attack American institutions
and dismantle the parts of the government that keep us safe and save
consumers money.
I want everyone to understand that what we are talking about here
with energy efficiency standards is just part of a larger effort to
basically eliminate all consumer protections.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to please not fall for the
Republican framing of these issues. Energy efficiency used to be
bipartisan, and it helps all Americans. It helps all Americans. Nobody
is opposed to it other than this ideological crusade on the part of the
Republicans.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that our Members vote against the bill, this bill
and the next one that follows on refrigerators, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. Speaker, enacted in 1975, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
provides specific criteria for the DOE to follow in order to propose a
new appliance efficiency standard. I went over those standards earlier.
The Biden administration has consistently ignored these requirements by
proposing and finalizing standards that violate the statute.
Mr. Speaker, I owe the gentleman from New Jersey an apology because I
misspoke earlier when I said the payback period was 12 years.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a link to the Federal Register,
Wednesday, April 24, 2024. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-
04-24/pdf/2024-08211.pdf.
[[Page H4503]]
This is a table in the Federal Register, and it says it is a 16-year
payback for dishwashers. I said 12. I apologize for misspeaking because
it is really 16 years. This is not just words. These are in the Federal
Register.
Americans know that these standards will lessen the efficiency of
appliances, will cost them more in upfront costs, and ultimately cost
them more in inconvenience, in multiple run cycles, in cost over the
lifetime when you have a 16-year payback.
Mr. Speaker, this is the right piece of legislation to push back
against the administrative overreach, and I urge my colleagues to
support H.R. 7700, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1341, the previous question is ordered
on the bill.
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. CASTEN. Mr. 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. Casten of Illinois moves to recommit the bill H.R. 7700
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Casten is as follows:
Mr. Casten moves to recommit the bill H.R. 7700 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. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall not take effect until the date on which the
Secretary of Energy submits to Congress a certification that
the implementation of this Act will not result in increasing
energy costs for 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. CASTEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question are postponed.
____________________