[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 153 (Thursday, September 18, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H4428-H4433]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               NATIONAL COAL COUNCIL REESTABLISHMENT ACT

  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 707, I call up 
the bill (H.R. 3015) to reestablish the National Coal Council in the 
Department of Energy to provide advice and recommendations to the 
Secretary of Energy on matters related to coal and the coal industry, 
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. Pursuant to House Resolution 707, any 
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce, printed in the bill, would be adopted. There being 
none, the bill is considered read.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3015

       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 ``National Coal Council 
     Reestablishment Act''.

     SEC. 2. NATIONAL COAL COUNCIL.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall reestablish 
     in the Department of Energy the National Coal Council, in 
     accordance with the charter for the National Coal Council 
     that was in effect on November 19, 2021.
       (b) Applicability of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), chapter 10 of 
     title 5, United States Code, (commonly referred to as the 
     ``Federal Advisory Committee Act'') and section 552b(c) of 
     title 5, United States Code, shall apply to the National Coal 
     Council.
       (2) Termination.--Section 1013 of title 5, United States 
     Code, shall not apply to the National Coal Council.

  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 Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) and the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.


                             General Leave

  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members

[[Page H4429]]

may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on H.R. 3015.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the National Coal Council 
Reestablishment Act, introduced by my colleague from Ohio's Sixth 
District (Mr. Rulli).
  This legislation would codify the National Coal Council, an important 
advisory committee that had aided our Federal Government for 37 years 
with expertise and technical reports on all matters affecting the coal 
industry and its workers.
  The reestablishment of the National Coal Council couldn't come at a 
better time. It is no secret that our energy demands are rising. If the 
demand isn't met with sufficient supply, we risk ceding leadership in 
the next-generation economy to China, while raising costs on American 
households along the way.
  We are seeing the demand for reliable electricity affect nearly every 
industry. At the end of the day, electricity policy is technology 
policy, and electricity policy is manufacturing policy.
  There is one source of reliable electricity that has been powering 
American industry for many years. Coal-powered generation is a key 
baseload resource that even today can protect against upward price 
pressures and provide the right type of energy to fuel American 
innovation and the next-generation industries.
  Unfortunately, the previous administration sought to deliberately 
undermine the financial viability of coal while subsidizing preferred 
sources like wind, solar, and batteries.
  Instead of regulating one industry and subsidizing another to make it 
competitive, we need to get back to making things affordable in the 
first place.
  The National Coal Council plays a critical role in developing a 
cohesive national energy strategy that will unleash American energy 
dominance to lower costs for hardworking households.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3015, and 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 opposition to H.R. 3015. This bill would 
require the Department of Energy to reestablish the National Coal 
Council, something that President Trump already did 3 months ago.
  It goes further than that. House Republicans don't just want to 
reestablish the National Coal Council. They want it to play by 
different rules than the 27 other advisory councils that the Department 
of Energy maintains by making it permanent.
  Of course, they offer no justification as to why this council and 
only this council is special. There isn't one.
  I also want to point out that among DOE's other 27 advisory councils, 
not a single one is focused on clean energy. There is no solar council, 
no wind council, no battery council, and not even a geothermal energy 
council. All of those could be very useful.
  Instead of using their floor time to prompt the Department to develop 
a council for some of our cheaper, cleaner energy, Republicans are 
focused on giving coal special treatment. Frankly, it is ridiculous. I 
think it is a waste of time.
  Mr. Speaker, the country is in turmoil. We are facing a national 
healthcare crisis. Republicans are actively taking healthcare away from 
millions of Americans. Meanwhile, millions more are about to watch 
their healthcare premiums skyrocket and their local hospitals close, 
not to mention the astronomical cost of living that is rising more and 
more each day, thanks to Trump's tariffs.
  Rather than addressing one of these real crises, Republicans have us 
wasting time on a bill that would order the DOE to do something it has 
already done.
  Republicans could be using the floor time to ensure millions of 
Americans don't get priced out of their healthcare plans. They are not 
doing that.
  Republicans could use floor time to rein in Trump's tariffs, which 
are projected to cost hardworking families thousands of dollars each 
year. They are not going to do that.
  Republicans could use floor time to pass an energy policy that would 
bring electricity bills down. Clearly, they are not doing that.
  The reason is simple. Republicans care more about signaling their 
love of coal than they care about fighting for hardworking families 
struggling to make ends meet. They don't care about the hardworking 
families who are trying to make ends meet. They are just signaling that 
they love coal.
  That is particularly shameful when we consider coal consumption has 
declined by nearly two-thirds since its peak in 2007. Instead of 
celebrating the newer sources of cleaner and cheaper energy, 
Republicans are frantically trying to turn back the clock and ignore 
Americans' pleas for real and meaningful help in the process.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this bill and to this massive waste 
of time. It is completely meaningless. I hope they will do something 
else.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely concerned about families making ends 
meet through cheaper electricity. There are also hardworking families 
in my Commonwealth of Kentucky who work in the coal industry and have 
been really hurt by the policies that came out of the prior 
administration.

  This has been reinstated by the Trump Presidency. This ensures a 
future President can't again undo what we experienced in the last 4 
years. That is the difference in where we are. That is why it is 
important that we are doing it.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Rulli), the sponsor of this legislation. He is a new member of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and I am proud to have him on the 
committee.
  Mr. RULLI. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chair Latta for his leadership, and I 
rise in support of H.R. 3015, the National Coal Council Reestablishment 
Act.
  Mr. Speaker, for decades, the National Coal Council was a powerful 
voice for coal and a timeless champion for American workers and 
American communities. Coal fueled the factories, powered our homes, and 
helped build the greatest economy this world has ever known. It is 
ridiculous to neglect this.
  I feel today is a Paul Revere moment, where we are calling to 
everyone to realize that the meltdown is coming. What I mean by that is 
the grid is going to melt down. Simply, all one has to do is go back in 
time three Christmases ago, when the American grid pretty much was 
hours away from melting down.
  Mr. Speaker, look at California and Texas. Look at the meltdowns that 
have happened there. The grid is not stable.

                              {time}  1330

  The grid needs to be redone, and every coal plant that I toured in 
Ohio said three Christmases ago, the call was: We need more generated 
power, and we need it right now, and there was no more to give.
  All we have to do is look at is the opposition party wants to 
celebrate the European Union, and what does the European Union do?
  They look for power from countries like Russia, like China, and like 
India to use their coal-powered, generated plants to support their 
grid. However, in America, we cannot wait to put coal factories out of 
business. Just like in my district, with the Sammis factory, Joe Biden 
couldn't wait to celebrate putting 800 jobs in the garbage and putting 
our grid at jeopardy.
  Paul Revere would be turning in his grave if he saw the jeopardy that 
these people are putting our country through by putting the grid up 
against the wall.
  We have to take into consideration what could come in the future. I 
do want to take a moment, and I want to thank President Trump and his 
executive order that he knows that this bipartisan committee for coal 
was established over the last 30 years, and it was a bipartisan 
approach to make sure that national security, which is our grid, 
because if our grid melts down, there is no security.
  Particular to my district, I have seven or eight investors who, right 
now, want to invest in new coal. They

[[Page H4430]]

want to make sure that the artificial intelligence companies and the 
data mining companies come to Ohio. However, if there is no energy, 
then nobody is coming to Ohio.
  Today, more than ever, let's worry about national security, let's 
worry that we can keep these lights on, and let's worry that this grid 
is protected for our grandchildren who are not even born yet, so when 
they say that this is a meaningless bill, it couldn't be further from 
the truth.
  This is the bill for national security. This is the bill that 
President Trump signed into executive order. Today is the day that we 
codify this into law.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues today to have a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, once again, I yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), who is our 
ranking member of the Energy Subcommittee.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for 
yielding the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3015.
  This bears repeating again: Here we are, 9 months into the new 
administration and a new Congress, and Republicans have not brought one 
bill to the floor of the House that will help tackle the cost-of-living 
squeeze and the affordability crisis.
  Folks back home really need help. They are paying more on their 
groceries despite all the promises, more on their electricity, and now 
are facing huge increases to the cost of healthcare. It is really not 
fair.
  Now, let's get back to household electricity. Prices are up 10 
percent this year. One in three households is cutting back on basic 
necessities just to pay their rising electric bill. People are very 
concerned, and they should be, because over 100 gas and electric 
utilities are proposing higher rates this year.
  Mr. Speaker, you know very well that we are grappling in Florida 
where the largest utility has requested what looks like the largest 
rate increase in the history of the country. I hear my good friend, the 
chairman of the committee, talk about this. They care a lot about 
consumer costs, but their rhetoric does not match their record.
  Example number one is the big, ugly bill. I will offer for the Record 
an analysis by Energy Innovation of the big, ugly bill where they say, 
``The bill will reduce additions of new cost-effective electricity 
capacity, raising power prices for consumers, and decreasing U.S. GDP . 
. .'' which will hamper development of domestic electricity generation 
capacity, and by 2035, we forecast a 340 gigawatt decrease in 
generation capacity due to the bill. As a result, this bill will make 
it more expensive to meet growing demand in the next 5 critical years 
in the global artificial intelligence race damaging U.S. 
competitiveness.
  Mr. Speaker, the links for this analysis and two other analyses are 
as follows:
  Https://energyinnovation.org/wp-
content/uploads/One-Big-Beautiful-
Bill-Senate-Reconciliation-
Analysis_July-2025.pdf
  Https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/grid-
strategies_cost-of-federal-mandates-to-retain-fossil-
burning-power-plants.pdf
  Https://energyinnovation.org/wp-
content/uploads/Coal-Cost-Update.pdf
  Mr. Speaker, we cannot win the AI race of the 21st century with 
energy policies from the 20th century. Not only is it bad policy, but 
it is soul crushingly expensive to do so.
  Hardworking American families are just looking up here to Washington 
and saying: Can you all please focus on solutions and not cater to the 
polluters and the folks who have all too much power here in the Halls 
of Congress? It is not fair.
  This bill is an example of not only is it a waste of time, because 
here is the secret: This bill is asking for a coal council. I think the 
ranking member already went to it. The President has already 
established a coal council, so we don't really even need that.
  The real impact is going to be on the bottom line, and let's look at 
one example of why this is going to cost everybody more. In May, just 
days before the J.H. Campbell coal-fired power plant was set to close, 
the Trump administration issued a last-minute order to force the plant 
to stay open.
  We won't even talk about how the Trump administration has pulled 
permits of fully permitted and almost fully constructed offshore wind 
projects. We will put that aside. However, to keep the Campbell plant 
open, the administration cited a so-called grid reliability emergency, 
but they produced no actual evidence of any kind of emergency. Since 
their order, the Department hasn't appointed to a single instance where 
the plant was needed to keep the lights on.

  Remember, Mr. Speaker, nobody was asking for this. The company that 
owns and runs the plant wanted to close it and shift to a mix of energy 
sources. The plant is losing money, and the administration is now 
forcing the company to spend nearly $1 million a day to keep it open.
  Who will pay the cost of that?
  It will be these families across the Midwest, and the Trump 
administration looks to force the old, uneconomical fossil fuel plants 
to continue operating past their plan retirement dates nationwide. We 
estimate that this looks like the cost to the consumer could reach $3 
billion a year by 2028.
  People can't afford that, and they don't deserve that. Don't forget, 
Mr. Speaker, the big, ugly bill. If you add what they are doing by 
enforcing uneconomical plants to stay online so consumers pay the cost, 
with the big, ugly bill, you are taking away clean energy incentives, 
cheaper and cheaper energy, and you are asking consumers to pay the 
cost of what utilities are. Everyone is grappling with these arbitrary 
Trump tariffs.
  This is not fair, and Republicans say we need to keep coal plants 
online so that the so-called dispatchable resources to meet growing 
electricity demands will help with the artificial intelligence race 
with China. However, they are clearly confused about the difference 
between reliable and dispatchable power. Reliability is not just about 
being dispatchable. It is about delivering performance under stress.
  Here is the truth: Coal-fired power plants are not reliable. They are 
inflexible. They are outdated. It is outdated technology that actually 
threatens grid reliability and resilience.
  Most of our coal fleet was built in the 1970s and eighties, and years 
of use has led to a rise in unplanned outages. PJM has capacity 
accreditation of coal plants at just 83 percent. The Colstrip Coal Mine 
in Montana is accredited at only 54 percent. That means it is 
effectively unavailable nearly one-half of the time that it is needed.
  As noted by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, 
large voltage-sensitive loads like data centers require flexible, 
responsible grid solutions, not slow-ramping generators that can take 
up to 12 or more hours to come online. Coal plants are inherently 
inflexible, and that worsens grid congestion. By forcing coal plants to 
stay online, we are occupying our limited transmission capacity with 
inflexible generation. That prevents cheaper and cleaner resources from 
being delivered.
  This is a real concern. Independent market monitors in the Midwest 
have found that congestion-related market distortions have cost 
customers over $1 billion a year.
  That is not fair. This is the United States of America. We are about 
innovation. We are about modern technology. We are not about looking 
backwards. If Republicans were serious about meeting energy demand and 
keeping customer bills low, empowering artificial intelligence, then 
they would look to real solutions, energy efficiency, virtual power 
plants, grid-enhancing technologies, batteries, and more.
  However, Mr. Speaker, if you keep looking backwards, then we simply 
will not be able to meet the moment and meet the growing demand that is 
forecast.
  American businesses should not be left holding the bag with higher 
bills because the majority refuses to march forward in the 21st century 
on what we need to do on power production and tapping the great 
innovators across this country.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this very costly 
bill. This entire package is another cost raiser for families back home 
that they don't deserve. Please vote ``no.''
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that over the next decade, we are 
going to

[[Page H4431]]

need 152 gigawatts of power. A gigawatt of power is about what is 
needed to power the city of Seattle, so 152 Seattles over the next 
decade is what is estimated.
  We are also slated to close 112 gigawatts of power, so we need 152 
gigawatts of power in the next decade. It takes years to get any 
project approved. Hopefully we can speed that up through permitting 
reform that hopefully we all can work on. However, when you need that 
much power and you have existing power, then why take it offline?

                              {time}  1340

  My understanding--I have had a couple of people bring this coal plant 
up that was just mentioned--is that the grid needed it for the summer 
because they were afraid they were not going to have enough power to 
get through the summer. It wasn't just that the Federal Government 
forced them to keep it open. The Federal Government allowed them to 
keep it open.
  The first thing we can do to help our fight against China--that is 
what it is all about. We know either we have the scaling data centers 
here, or China is going to dominate. That is the only choice.
  Europe can't do it. We know what happens if you overregulate and 
don't produce the energy. That is a good example right there from 
Europe.
  We know we need the power or we are going to lose the great battle of 
our time of who is going to control AI and supercomputing, eventually 
quantum computing.
  The very first thing we can do to really bridge that power gap is not 
take power offline. I think it is reasonable to do. I think it is the 
right thing to do, and I think that it is absolutely what we should do.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. 
Hageman).
  Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3015, the 
National Coal Council Reestablishment Act.
  I have often said that coal is the energy of the future, and under 
the leadership of President Trump and this Congress, coal is rightfully 
back in favor in Washington, D.C.
  Coal produced 16 percent of the electricity in this country last 
year, and it is one of the most reliable and affordable forms of energy 
that we have. It is imperative that we increase domestic production in 
order to meet our ever-increasing demand.
  My home State of Wyoming is responsible for about 40 percent of the 
Nation's coal, producing 191 million tons of coal and shipping 171 
million tons to 26 different States in 2024.
  It is estimated that Wyoming has more than 165 billion tons of 
economically recoverable coal with over 1.4 trillion tons of total coal 
reserves.
  Power demand is expected to increase by nearly 21 percent by 2030, 
and the AI sector will need 50 gigawatts of new electric capacity by 
2028. Producing coal is the only way to meet this demand.
  Federal policy must be designed to meet these new challenges, which 
is why reestablishing the National Coal Council within the Department 
of Energy is more important than ever.
  Unfortunately, this longstanding Federal advisory committee was 
shuttered by the Biden administration in response to lawsuits filed by 
the very environmentalist NGOs spearheading the full-scale campaign 
against coal.
  My colleague on the other side decries the cost of energy and states 
that it is because of coal and policies from the Republicans that are 
causing that increase. The increase in the cost of energy is solely the 
responsibility of the Democrats and their failed policies. They are the 
ones that have caused the increase in the electric rates by requiring 
the electric companies to include unreliable and unaffordable energy 
resources in their mix.
  While they claim coal is an energy of the past, clearly that is not 
the case. Coal-fired power plants are the most reliable and cost-
effective form of available energy that we have.
  I will just give one example near Colorado Springs. The coal-fired 
power plant is approximately 300 acres in size. Across the highway is a 
solar field that is approximately 1,500 acres. The coal-fired power 
plant is 80 percent efficient. The solar field is approximately 20 
percent efficient. The coal-fired power plant produces more than double 
the energy and the electricity that the solar field produces.
  Luckily, the Trump administration restored the council in June of 
this year, and I applaud the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Rulli) for 
offering this bill to reaffirm President Trump's actions.
  We need more coal, not less. But coal policy can be complex. Coal 
production falls within the jurisdiction of numerous oversight 
agencies, and it is governed by a series of mining and energy laws, 
regulatory agencies, and permitting requirements.
  The National Coal Council will provide much-needed expertise, advice, 
and guidance related to effective coal policies.
  An example of the council's importance can be found in the report 
that it issued in 2018 titled: ``Advancing U.S. Coal Exports.''
  Although environmental NGOs have worked to reduce domestic coal 
production and use, our allies in Asia have an increasing demand for 
coal, confirming that export markets present a significant opportunity 
for States like Wyoming.
  I again thank Mr. Rulli for his sponsorship and Chairman Guthrie for 
his committee leadership promoting strong energy policies.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this bill and to 
support the coal industry.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), who is the ranking member of 
our Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me 
time.
  I rise today to speak in opposition to H.R. 3015. Coal is the 
dirtiest form of energy and also one of the most expensive.
  Coal-fired power plants spew toxic pollutants into the air, including 
sulfur dioxide, mercury, lead, soot, and arsenic. These pollutants are 
disastrous for human health, causing neurological damage, lung cancer, 
and even premature death.
  No one wants to breathe this stuff. That is why we closed all of the 
coal plants in California. You might remember acid rain. That was 
caused by coal plants. Acid rain didn't magically go away. We put in 
place regulations that limited basic toxic pollutants from coal, and 
that is what stopped acid rain.

  The Trump administration even acknowledges this. Secretary Kennedy 
has spent his career railing against the coal energy and its pollution.
  The Trump administration's ``Make America Healthy Again'' report 
celebrates the progress we have made in reducing toxic air pollution, 
progress we made in part by regulating coal mines.
  However, now President Trump and Republicans are rolling back 
regulations on coal plants, preventing old coal plants from retiring 
and reestablishing the National Coal Council. They even gave a tax 
break to coal mining.
  It is not just dangerous. It is expensive. Coal power is now 28 
percent more expensive than it was just 4 years ago. In fact, it is 
often cheaper to build an entirely new solar power plant than it is 
just to keep a coal plant running. That is why nearly 800 coal power 
plants have been retired in the last 25 years. They are just too 
expensive, and we have cheaper, cleaner options.
  I really thought that President Trump and Republicans campaigned on 
lowering costs. Well, more coal power means higher electric bills. I 
don't know about you, but I think Americans are already paying too much 
for electricity.
  Once again, Republicans are selling out their own constituents to 
boost the profits of big, polluting corporations.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. McGarvey).
  Mr. McGARVEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce. This is my first time to publicly congratulate him 
on the House floor on assuming the chairmanship of the Energy and 
Commerce Committee.

[[Page H4432]]

  What I can tell you about Mr. Guthrie, having known him for a long 
time, is he has always acted and led with civility, kindness, and 
respect, going all the way back to the time in the State Senate in 
Kentucky.
  I have never served a day of my life in the majority. It might go 
without saying I was sort of hoping that Mr. Pallone would be the 
chairman this year. But if the chairman of the Energy and Commerce 
Committee can't sit on this side of the House, I am certainly glad it 
is a gentleman from Kentucky.

                              {time}  1350

  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill not just because it is 
a waste of our time. It is also a wasted opportunity to, for once, do 
something for coal miners instead of coal companies.
  As Ranking Member Pallone said, the President has already 
reestablished the National Coal Council. It is a waste of our time to 
focus on something that already exists just days before the government 
runs out of funding and mere weeks before people receive notice of 
their health insurance premiums going up by thousands of dollars next 
year, unless the House Republicans extend healthcare tax credits for 
working families.
  Most importantly, it is a wasted opportunity to spend 1 hour of 
precious floor time in service of Republicans' obsession with removing 
coal from the ground while doing nothing for the men and women who work 
the mines.
  The House has not spent 1 minute debating an increase in black lung 
benefits. Current levels are totally inadequate to cover the cost of 
living for miners with black lung or their survivors after their death.
  The House has not spent 1 minute on improving the long-term solvency 
of the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.
  The House has not spent 1 minute on the Trump administration's 
efforts to delay the life- and limb-saving proximity and silica dust 
rules. These are delays which the United Mine Workers of America 
president has called ``a death sentence for more miners.''
  The House has not spent 1 single minute on stopping Trump's cuts to 
the Coal Workers' Health Surveillance Program, the National Institute 
of Occupational Safety and Health's black lung research programs, or 
black lung screenings. These are cuts that are taking place at a moment 
when this disease is killing coal miners at the highest rates this 
century.
  The Republicans have made clear that they are for coal, but I am for 
the men and women who mine the coal: the coal miners. We must do better 
for them.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I have heard my colleagues on the other side talk about 
how long it takes to bring energy plants or energy sources online. I 
have heard about the suggestion that the Democrats are trying to close 
fossil fuel plants.
  President Trump is a President who, in the 8 months now since he has 
been President, has proceeded to try to cut off almost any source of 
clean energy. Just a few weeks ago, he announced that he was going to 
stop the offshore wind projects that were over 90 percent constructed 
in Rhode Island. He has done the same throughout the eastern seaboard.
  I think it was the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) who said 
that it takes a long time to build these energy facilities, and either 
the gentleman or one of the other Republicans today said that 
Republicans favor all of the above, which means that the majority 
favors fossil fuels, would like to see clean energy, and would like to 
see nuclear energy, presumably.
  Mr. Speaker, that is not what we are getting. That is not what we are 
getting from the Trump administration. That is not what we are getting 
with these bills. Everything favors fossil fuels. Every effort is being 
made by this President to cut off clean energy, not only windmills but 
also solar, et cetera.
  The bottom line is that everything is being done to prioritize dirty 
fuels, in particular, whether it is coal, oil, or whatever it is, at 
the expense of clean energy.
  Clean energy is cheaper. Even if my colleagues didn't believe that, 
we need more energy, regardless of the source. Why would Republicans 
want to just cut off offshore windmills in Rhode Island that are over 
90 percent complete? It makes no sense unless they are trying to favor 
the oil and gas and the fossil fuel interests.
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans say that they want to save the coal 
industry. Secretary Wright recently implied that he doesn't want a 
single fossil fuel plant to close.
  This is ridiculous for several reasons, the most important being that 
keeping these plants open is more expensive than building new sources 
of clean energy. The proof is really in the pudding here. The Trump 
Department of Energy recently forced two fossil fuel plants that were 
days away from retiring to remain open and is directly forcing 
homeowners hundreds of miles away from these plants to pay to keep the 
plants online.
  The Consumers coal plant in Michigan was slated to close and save 
Michigan residents $600 million on their power bills, but Donald Trump 
pulled the rug out from everyone and, instead, is increasing families' 
power bills.
  The administration pulled the same trick with the Eddystone oil and 
gas plant in Pennsylvania, where two units that were nearly 60 years 
old were set to expire. Pennsylvania's grid operator determined that 
taking the plants out of service would not impact grid reliability, but 
President Trump didn't care. The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission 
chairman noted that ``the price tag for consumers could grow quickly.''
  Consumers aren't getting a say in this process. President Trump 
dictates that a coal plant stays online, and homeowners have to pay for 
it.
  A recent study by Grid Strategies found that, if the administration 
refused to let a single fossil fuel plant close, Americans would be on 
the hook for $6 billion per year and increased costs by the end of the 
Trump administration.
  Republicans' obsession with coal is going to cost Americans billions 
of dollars and pollute our air and water for nothing except some 
additional cash for Republicans' friends in the coal industry. It is 
really a rotten deal for the average American.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to say in opposition to this bill that 
Republicans claim that the National Coal Council is so important that 
it demands floor time in the House of Representatives, even though the 
President has already reestablished it. We could be passing legislation 
to lower energy costs or avoid a spike in health insurance premiums 
instead.

  If Republicans believed that the National Coal Council is such a 
priority, then surely the Trump administration does, as well. Yet, the 
Trump administration has let the National Coal Council languish for 3 
months. They reestablished it back in June. It hasn't met. No one has 
been appointed to lead the council. Remember, those positions don't 
require a Senate confirmation or even consultation with the Office of 
Presidential Personnel.
  There are no meetings scheduled. It should at least have some members 
if Republicans think that it is important. Unfortunately, none of those 
things has happened.
  If you look on the website for the National Coal Council, it says 
that all of this is coming soon: members, meetings, or whatever. That 
is like the neighborhood coffee shop not quite ready to open to 
visitors. They put up a ``coming soon'' sign.
  The reality is that all of this is a charade. Republicans can try to 
sell to donors that they are rescuing the coal industry, but in fact, 
they are doing nothing, not even with the National Coal Council.
  It is not like it was that great under the previous Trump 
administration, either. The National Coal Council operated in the 
previous Trump administration as some kind of bizarre organization that 
was intertwined with a trade association that went by the same name, 
funded by private contributions from companies that made up the real 
government coal council.
  It got so bad that a Federal judge found that the shadowy trade 
association was the alter ego of the real coal council, with no clear 
lines of separation between the Federal entity and its mirror image.

[[Page H4433]]

  Official Coal Council events were funded by the trade association. At 
a meeting of the government's Coal Council, a speaker called upon 
members to become dues-paying members of the trade association.
  You can't make this stuff up. You really can't. This idea that the 
National Coal Council will be important and that anyone really cares 
about it is just a joke. The Trump administration obviously doesn't 
think the National Coal Council is important. The last time it existed, 
it didn't even seem to do anything.
  I don't understand the point of advancing a bill to reconstitute it 
without adding guardrails to prohibit the mixing of industry priorities 
with legitimate research. This is what the court pointed out to us.
  I only mention these things because I am trying to emphasize that 
this bill is a complete waste of time and a disservice to our 
constituents that we are even here talking about it.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the bill, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Congressman Rulli, for sponsoring 
this legislation. It is important. We don't want this to be 
unestablished. I know it is getting reestablished.
  The reason President Trump is having to reestablish it and it is 
coming soon is because it got unestablished. That is what we are trying 
to prevent in the future.
  Mr. Speaker, I wish the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. McGarvey), my 
friend and colleague, were still here because I would thank the 
gentleman for the kind words. He is a good friend with kind words.
  I will say that I wish that he were in here just a couple of years 
ago when he said we haven't spent 1 minute or any time helping the coal 
miners. There are more retired union coal miners in Kentucky and the 
surrounding areas than there are current coal miners. Their entire 
pension system and their healthcare system were based on a time when 
there were always new people coming in and fewer people going out.

                              {time}  1400

  It is upside down now. If my friend had been here, he would have seen 
in the Longworth Cafeteria or the Rayburn Cafeteria, day in and day 
out, people with their coal hats on, their miner hats on, their shirts, 
and a lot of them from Kentucky saying, what am I going to do? This is 
something I had depended on.
  I will tell you, we all worked on it. I will have to say that his 
constituent, our colleague on the other side of the bill and the leader 
at the time, Leader McConnell, took that as his issue. I will tell you, 
if you ask any coal miner, retired coal miner in Kentucky with a 
pension, a union benefit, retired union benefit, they will tell you who 
spent time on that issue, who was the leader on that issue.
  Leader McConnell used to go around Kentucky when he was campaigning 
and say things like, Kentucky punches above its weight, and we 
absolutely did on that. He threw the right punch on that.
  Our retired union coal miners have the benefits they have today 
because in an omnibus or spending bill--I can't remember, probably both 
together--he put in a provision that preserved their benefits.
  When you say we hadn't spent a minute on it, maybe he is talking 
about right now, but I can tell you we have here in this Congress, the 
leader absolutely did, and I commend him for that.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge support of 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 707, 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.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. 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 will be postponed.

                          ____________________