[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 208 (Wednesday, December 10, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H5522-H5528]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATE PLANNING FOR RELIABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY ACT

  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 936, I call 
up the bill (H.R. 3628) to amend the Public Utility Regulatory Policies 
Act of 1978 to add a standard related to State consideration of 
reliable generation, 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 (Ms. Foxx). Pursuant to House Resolution 936, 
the bill is considered read.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3628

       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 ``State Planning for 
     Reliability and Affordability Act''.

     SEC. 2. STATE CONSIDERATION OF RELIABLE GENERATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 111(d) of the Public Utility 
     Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(22) Ensuring electric reliability with reliable 
     generation facilities.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each State regulated electric utility 
     that employs integrated resource planning shall establish, as 
     part of such integrated resource planning, measures, 
     sufficient to ensure the reliable availability of electric 
     energy over a 10-year period, to maintain--
       ``(i) the operation of reliable generation facilities; or
       ``(ii) the procurement of electric energy from reliable 
     generation facilities.
       ``(B) Reliable generation facility defined.--In this 
     paragraph, the term `reliable generation facility' means an 
     electric generation facility that ensures the reliable 
     availability of electric energy by--
       ``(i) having operational characteristics to enable the 
     generation of electric energy on a continuous basis for a 
     period of not fewer than 30 days;
       ``(ii) having--

       ``(I) adequate fuel, or a continuously available energy 
     source, on-site to enable the generation of electric energy 
     on a continuous basis for a period of not fewer than 30 days; 
     or
       ``(II) contractual obligations that ensure adequate fuel 
     supply to achieve the generation of electric energy on a 
     continuous basis for a period of not fewer than 30 days;

       ``(iii) having operational characteristics to enable the 
     generation of electric energy during emergency and severe 
     weather conditions; and
       ``(iv) providing essential services related to the reliable 
     availability of electric energy, including frequency support 
     and voltage support.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Obligations to consider and determine.--Section 112 of 
     the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 
     2622) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(9)(A) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 
     of this paragraph, each State regulatory authority (with 
     respect to each State regulated electric utility for which 
     the State has ratemaking authority) shall commence 
     consideration under section 111, or set a hearing date for 
     consideration, with respect to the standard established by 
     paragraph (22) of section 111(d).
       ``(B) Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of 
     this paragraph, each State regulatory authority (with respect 
     to each State regulated electric utility for which the State 
     has ratemaking authority) shall complete the consideration 
     and make the determination under section 111 with respect to 
     the standard established by paragraph (22) of section 
     111(d).'';
       (B) in subsection (c)--
       (i) by striking ``subsection (b)(2)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (b)''; and

[[Page H5523]]

       (ii) by inserting ``In the case of the standard established 
     by paragraph (22) of section 111(d), the reference contained 
     in this subsection to the date of enactment of this Act shall 
     be deemed to be a reference to the date of enactment of that 
     paragraph (22).'' after ``paragraph (21).''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Other Prior State Actions.--Subsections (b) and (c) 
     shall not apply to the standard established by paragraph (22) 
     of section 111(d) in the case of any State regulated electric 
     utility in a State if, before the date of enactment of this 
     subsection--
       ``(1) the State has implemented for the State regulated 
     electric utility the standard (or a comparable standard);
       ``(2) the State regulatory authority for the State has 
     conducted a proceeding to consider implementation of the 
     standard (or a comparable standard) for the State regulated 
     electric utility; or
       ``(3) the State legislature has voted on the implementation 
     of the standard (or a comparable standard) for the State 
     regulated electric utility during the 3-year period ending on 
     that date of enactment.''.
       (2) Prior and pending proceedings.--Section 124 of the 
     Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 
     2634) is amended by inserting ``In the case of the standard 
     established by paragraph (22) of section 111(d), the 
     reference contained in this section to the date of enactment 
     of this Act shall be deemed to be a reference to the date of 
     enactment of that paragraph (22).'' after ``paragraph 
     (21).''.

  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.
  After 1 hour of debate, it shall be in order to consider the 
amendment printed in part D of House Report 119-399, if offered by the 
Member designated in the report, which shall be in order without 
intervention of any point of order, shall be considered read, shall be 
separately debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not 
be subject to a demand for division of the question.
  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 (Mr. Guthrie).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material in the Record on H.R. 3628.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3628, the State Planning For 
Reliability and Affordability Act, sponsored by my colleague 
Congressman Evans from Colorado.
  H.R. 3628 directs State public utility commissions to consider 
implementing measures that would ensure utilities retain sufficient, 
reliable generation through their integrated resource plans to maintain 
the stability and affordability of their electric grids.
  Over 35 States utilize resource plans to ensure their utilities are 
appropriately planning their investments in the electric grid.
  The U.S. grid, commonly referred to as the greatest machine on Earth, 
is a complex system compromised of myriad components and infrastructure 
to deliver electricity that powers our economy and enables modern life 
for households.
  To ensure the timely delivery of electricity at all times of the day, 
utilities have historically undergone extensive planning processes to 
methodically deploy ratepayer dollars to build requisite 
infrastructure.
  Unfortunately, in recent years, we have seen States move away from an 
integrated resource planning process centered on reliability and 
affordability toward one intended to achieve climate and environmental 
justice goals.

                              {time}  1800

  The central focus of utility planning must be on the end-use 
ratepayers, keeping the lights on for households at an affordable 
price. Unfortunately, the States that have taken the most aggressive 
stance on climate goals are the same States with the highest 
electricity rates in the country.
  H.R. 3628 is fuel neutral and focused on attributes that are 
essential to reliability and affordability, such as frequency and 
voltage support. This legislation ensures that baseload and 
dispatchable resources, such as natural gas, hydropower, coal, and 
nuclear, are sufficiently considered as part of any 10-year plan.
  There is a road for a diverse energy mix that includes renewables and 
storage, but we know that not all electrons are the same.
  This is the exact message that the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
has heard in hearings with grid operators, utilities, engineers, and 
those charged with protecting the reliability of our grid. In fact, 
just last month, the head of the NERC called the current reliability 
crisis a five-alarm fire.
  The State Planning for Reliability and Affordability Act prioritizes 
the resources we need most. It will encourage States to take more 
responsibility over their systems.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. It is a 
wholesale attack on clean energy under the guise of reliability. 
Americans can see through the nonsense here to the truth, and that is 
that Republicans are waging a culture war against wind and solar. 
American families are footing the bill with higher monthly utility 
bills.
  For a moment, I want to try to take Republicans at their word, that 
this bill is all about electric reliability, ensuring that the lights 
won't go out. In that case, I have excellent news for my Republican 
colleagues. The law this bill amends, the Public Utility Regulatory 
Policies Act, or PURPA, already does that. The law requires States to 
have an integrated resource plan that considers reliability. That is 
all we need to do, and Congress already did it 33 years ago.
  Of course, the only difference between that law and the language in 
this bill is the bogus definition about what counts as ``reliable 
generation facility.'' It should come as no surprise that the only 
things that count are coal, natural gas, and nuclear. That is it, not 
wind, not solar, not either of those even when paired with battery 
storage. It is completely ridiculous and the latest example of 
Republicans' relentless attack on cheaper and cleaner energy sources.
  Ever since President Trump took office earlier this year, Republicans 
have been obsessed with crusading against wind and solar whenever they 
can. They passed the big, ugly bill, which slashed tax incentives for 
clean energy and made electricity more expensive for everyone. They 
have tried to kill every wind or solar project on Federal lands and in 
Federal waters, driving up people's energy bills even further. Now, 
they are trying to put another thumb on the scale in favor of dirty 
fossil energy by pushing a bill with a fake definition of ``reliable 
generation.''
  Unfortunately, the American people are paying the price. This past 
summer, when much of the United States was in a so-called heat dome 
fueled by climate change, the grid's electricity regulators said that 
solar helped save the day, preventing dangerous outages in that record 
heat.
  The reality is that no single source of electricity is perfect, but 
that is why storage and a diversity of generation resources are so 
important. Republicans don't care about how we can actually help the 
grid. Instead, they only care about extending fossil fuels at the 
expense of clean, cheap energy.
  This is just another instance when Republicans are doing the bidding 
of their corporate polluter friends over the needs of the American 
people. If they cared about the American people, they would be bringing 
bills to the floor that would actually address the affordability 
crisis. Instead, Republicans are debating this bill that they know will 
increase prices for Americans.
  By forcing States to consider preferencing dirty and expensive fossil 
energy, Republicans are increasing everyone's utility bills even more 
than they already have. It is just more of the same from a Republican 
Congress that is dead set on increasing costs for American families.

[[Page H5524]]

  I don't understand it, Madam Speaker. President Trump promised to cut 
Americans' power bills in half. Instead, he and Republicans are causing 
them to soar with their backward policies and their war on cheaper, 
cleaner energy. Since Trump took office, electricity prices are up 13 
percent, and natural gas prices are up 8 percent. They simply don't 
care. They would rather continue to push bills like this that will make 
the affordability crisis even worse.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and 
I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Latta), my good friend and colleague on the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy.
  Mr. LATTA. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, the chairman of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, for getting this bill here to the 
floor.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3628, the State Planning for 
Reliability and Affordability Act, sponsored by my colleague from 
Colorado's Eighth District. This legislation ensures that States take 
responsibility for their policy decisions that impact households' 
access to affordable and reliable supplies of electricity.
  It is clear that we are in the midst of a reliability and 
affordability crisis caused by the Biden administration and decisions 
by States to attack baseload power supplies. Let me be clear: There is 
nothing more expensive than a blackout, and that was the path created 
by the Biden administration.

  In 2008, House Republicans developed an all-of-the-above energy 
strategy. This meant that the Federal Government didn't pick winners 
and losers. The data is clear. States with the most aggressive forms of 
clean energy standards are the same States with the higher electricity 
bills.
  Across the country, rate case filings by utilities detail the reasons 
for rising costs: new infrastructure to meet State climate goals, 
stranded assets of prematurely retired power plants, and the need for 
additional backup generation to keep the lights on when the weather 
doesn't cooperate.
  Just look at States like New York, whose own grid operator has begun 
sounding the alarm over how their State laws are driving up baseload 
generation resources that could threaten the integrity of their system.
  Comparatively, States that have responsibly maintained reliability of 
their system have enjoyed affordable electricity rates and an influx of 
investment into energy-intensive industries, such as domestic 
manufacturing, that drive economic growth.
  The central focus on resource planning must be affordability and 
reliability.
  While climate and environmental justice goals of States seem 
laudable, the greatest harm that could come to our communities is a 
grid without enough electricity. In every facet, our modern life is 
uniquely dependent on a reliable and affordable electric grid.
  Madam Speaker, H.R. 3628 brings common sense back to integrated 
resource planning, and I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Castor), who is the ranking member of the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce's Subcommittee on Energy.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone 
for yielding the time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3628. I think we all know 
that our neighbors are really struggling with higher electric bills. 
They are really grappling with how to pay these higher costs.
  Household electricity prices across America are up by 13 percent this 
year--17 percent in North Carolina and 15 percent in the State of 
Georgia. Folks really are at their wits' end because it is all coming 
down at once.
  In Florida, the three largest investor-owned utilities have requested 
$34 billion in price hikes this year. Last month, the DeSantis-
appointed utility commission approved a $7 billion rate hike for 
Florida Power & Light customers. FPL customers will be paying much more 
over the next few years.
  In Tampa, I was with some neighbors who were burning their electric 
bills, throwing them into a garbage can, lighting them on fire because 
they are struggling to keep the lights on. If you are a TECO customer, 
you are going to be paying about $939 more annually than you were 5 
years ago.

                              {time}  1810

  Madam Speaker, folks back home are really wondering: Can Congress get 
its act together to help lower the cost of living and work on 
solutions? I hate to report that, no, Republicans in Congress and the 
Trump administration have shown no interest in doing that or in 
tackling lower electric bills. In fact, they are making it worse.
  Electric bills are going up for a number of reasons. Let's talk about 
it.
  There is the big, ugly bill that Republicans passed in July. That is 
projected to raise electricity rates by 61 percent. Why? They took away 
a lot of the tax credits to speed cheaper energy onto the grid. They 
ripped away rebates to help consumers save money on their electric 
bills. They canceled a lot of jobs that were helping people pay the 
bills.
  Then when we add on the arbitrary tariffs of the Trump 
administration, that has a significant cost. Projections are that the 
average household is going to pay about $1,600 more per year. Some 
estimates are up to about $2,000 a year. That is, yes, on our coffee 
and groceries and consumer goods. It is also impacting electric bills. 
We do import poles and wires and energy, and that is raising electric 
bills, too.
  The Trump administration has also canceled billions of dollars' worth 
of cheaper, cleaner energy projects and solar projects in every State. 
No one has been immune to this. That has also fed into skyrocketing 
electric bills. All of this adds up.
  We are looking at a healthcare cliff in just another couple of weeks. 
Congress has only one more week to act to reinstitute the ACA tax 
credits. That is 4.5 million Floridians who will face higher healthcare 
bills, in addition to what they are doing to higher electric bills and 
our groceries. I would say to American families that they deserve so 
much better than they are getting here.
  This bill, H.R. 3628, amends the Public Utility Regulatory Policies 
Act to four States to favor more expensive, dirty energy over cleaner, 
cheaper energy. It is a ridiculous requirement that they want to add, 
and it directly conflicts with the provisions in the law right now that 
require States to maintain a diverse portfolio of electricity and 
engage in prudent resource planning.
  Who loves this? Oil and gas companies love it. Investor-owned 
utilities love it. They will profit at the expense of hardworking 
Americans. Energy generated by wind, solar, and stored in batteries is 
often cheaper. It should make up a substantial portion of our 
electricity portfolio.
  Madam Speaker, we need to lower electric bills by speeding cleaner 
and cheaper energy to the grid, especially to meet rising demand, and 
to do it while we protect clean air and clean water. America cannot 
afford to turn its back on half of all of the new electricity that is 
poised to come onto the grid over the next 5 years.
  We need a modern transmission system and a modern electric grid. We 
need to speed up clean energy and not throw a wrench in it and make 
people pay more back home. They are already paying too much.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Evans), a very important member of the Energy and 
Commerce Committee.
  Mr. EVANS of Colorado. Madam Speaker, I am proud to stand here today 
in strong support of my bill, the State Planning for Reliability and 
Affordability Act, to help drive down the cost of energy for Coloradans 
and Americans.
  This is a straightforward piece of legislation that will help 
counteract shortsighted energy policies that States like Colorado have 
implemented for far too long to the detriment of my constituents and 
their wallets.
  This commonsense bill would require State public utility commissions 
like the Colorado PUC to consider implementing policy that focuses on 
long-term energy reliability which, of course, helps affordability.
  My constituents are facing an energy crisis in no small part due to 
the skyrocketing costs of utilities in Colorado,

[[Page H5525]]

and that has happened during the last 4 years under Democrat control 
both at the Federal and the State level.
  Coloradans are paying 24 percent more in electricity now than they 
were just 4 years ago, and it is easy to see why. The Colorado Public 
Utilities Commission and statewide Democrats have been enacting one bad 
policy after another, from shutting down power plants that provide 
reliable baseload power to mandating so-called beneficial 
electrification which seeks to ban natural gas for residential heating 
by 2050. The results have been catastrophic. A nonpartisan report from 
earlier this year found the following:
  ``Driven by State policy mandates to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, 
electricity prices are projected to grow at more than three times the 
rate of inflation and nearly 13 times the growth rate from 2010 to 
2020.''
  That report goes on to project that by 2030, the average Colorado 
household will spend $390 to $504 more annually due to rates outpacing 
inflation and historic trends, all Colorado households combined will 
spend between $970 million and $1.25 billion more in electricity costs. 
The average electricity rate will grow by 56 percent, from 12 cents a 
kilowatt-hour to 18.4 cents a kilowatt-hour.
  That is not partisan conjecture. Those are the cold, hard facts that 
my constituents have to face.
  Americans are tired of partisan energy policies like the ones we saw 
in the previous administration, which is why my legislation takes a 
fair and balanced approach that supports a wide range of reliable 
energy generation from more traditional sources like natural gas to 
greener sources like nuclear and hydropower.
  It shouldn't be a left versus right issue. If an energy source is 
reliable and drives down costs, it should be on the table.
  I would remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that 
financial stress induced by higher utility costs also increases 
negative health outcomes.
  We need balance, not heavy-handed leftist mandates that harm the 
economy, increase costs, and increase poverty, which, again, increases 
negative health outcomes.
  Madam Speaker, we know that energy demand is going up, not down. 
Nationally, demand is expected to surge by over 50 percent in the next 
15 years. In States like Colorado, where we are leading in the AI race 
and the resurgence of manufacturing, it is even higher.
  My local utility has projected energy demand will triple in the next 
10 years. The three biggest cities in my district have cited power 
shortages as the biggest inhibitors to growth.
  While my bill focuses on affordability, it is also about national 
security. If America is to onshore manufacturing capabilities and 
compete with China militarily and otherwise, we need reliable energy. 
As a former National Guardsman who has been deployed to a combat zone, 
that is of critical importance to me, as well.
  Madam Speaker, in closing, this commonsense bill is simple. It helps 
bolster American innovation, keeps the lights on rain or shine, and 
helps reduce utility bills for the middle class. As a Representative of 
a district that is at the forefront of American energy dominance, I am 
proud to stand on the floor today and urge my colleagues to join me in 
voting for reliable energy and lower bills for all Americans.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Neguse), our assistant Democratic leader.
  Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Pallone for yielding me the 
time.
  Madam Speaker, only in Washington, D.C., can politicians who vote to 
give tax breaks to the biggest oil companies and fossil fuel companies 
on planet Earth come down to the floor of the House and argue that 
their legislative efforts are going to lower electricity prices.
  Only in Washington, D.C., can politicians stand by as energy projects 
in their own districts are decimated by their inaction and then claim 
that they are championing efforts to improve the reliability of the 
grid.
  My colleague from Colorado made a lot of references to local utility 
efforts in our home State. What he failed to mention in his quest to 
improve reliability of the grid is that several projects in his own 
district were eliminated by the Trump administration just 5 weeks ago. 
My colleague from Colorado, like virtually every single Member of the 
Republican Conference, did nothing to stop it, nothing.
  By the way, we are not talking about small projects. This is the 
headline. ``Colorado company may close after Trump administration cuts 
funding for nearly 3 dozen energy projects in the State.''

                              {time}  1820

  I will quote this article, Madam Speaker: ``In all, DOE eliminated 
$7.6 billion in projects in 16 States, all of which are led by 
Democrats.''
  Here is the kicker: ``But some of the projects are in Republican 
congressional districts, including a $27 million grant in Colorado's 
Eighth Congressional District, which Representative Gabe Evans, a 
Republican, represents.''
  Gabe Evans is the author of this legislation we are debating today.
  I will quote another article. This is the local utility, Madam 
Speaker, in Fort Lupton, which I believe is the sponsor of this 
legislation's hometown. I will just quote: ``The Fort Lupton Microgrid 
project was submitted with the goal of increasing the reliability of 
the city's municipal water treatment plant.''
  This is another project, $6.1 million, Madam Speaker, that was 
unceremoniously cut 1 month ago by President Trump.
  If we want to get serious about the reliability of the grid and if we 
want to address the ballooning electricity costs that are a direct 
byproduct of the bill that Republicans passed earlier this summer, then 
a good way to start would be to tell the Department of Energy to stop 
eliminating energy projects in Brighton, in Fort Lupton, in Fort 
Collins, and in Longmont, the communities I represent and the 
communities that my colleague from Colorado represents.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his 
indulgence.
  By the way, Madam Speaker, just so that we are clear, this bill does 
absolutely nothing as a practical matter. I welcome Chairman Guthrie's 
response on this front. It does nothing to impose new standards, it 
does nothing to compel State public utility commissions to adopt new 
standards, and it does nothing to require these commissions to 
implement new standards.
  It simply says that commissions must consider them.
  This is basically a press release. That is what this bill is. We 
could have spared everyone the time and just got on with it so that we 
can actually get to the substance of addressing the inflation cost 
crisis that Republicans have unleashed on Coloradans and on Americans 
writ large, but, no, we are here to debate this very carefully 
constructed press release that ultimately will accomplish nothing if it 
is ever signed into law.
  Madam Speaker, I am voting ``no,'' and I urge my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I am 
prepared to close.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Schrier), who is a member of our committee.
  Ms. SCHRIER. Madam Speaker, I rise today as families across the 
entire country are struggling with rising costs at the grocery store, 
on their healthcare, their health insurance, and this year especially, 
on their utility bills. In fact, in Washington State, average 
electricity rates are up nearly 17 percent since Trump took office less 
than 1 year ago.
  With energy demand skyrocketing in the region, prices have continued 
to climb.
  Let me be clear. This is a direct result of the harmful and reckless 
policies of this President and Republicans in Congress. They have 
canceled billions of dollars in investments for our State, including 
the hydrogen hub that would expand research and development of hydrogen 
fuel, bolster American energy dominance, and bring nearly 10,000 jobs 
to the region.

[[Page H5526]]

  They have created chaos at critical agencies that keep the lights on 
like Bonneville Power Administration. Moreover, with their big, ugly 
bill they have gutted clean energy investments meant to lower utility 
bills and strengthen our energy infrastructure in the Pacific Northwest 
and keep the lights on.
  With Republicans in charge here in Washington, D.C., jobs and 
innovation are down, clean energy projects are canceled, and energy 
prices are up. My constituents deserve better. They want real solutions 
that will lower costs and better their lives.
  At a time when families are struggling to pay for the essentials, the 
single most valuable thing we can do in the energy sector is roll out 
more low-cost, clean energy, not hinder it.
  We have a real shot at meaningful reforms that will cut red tape and 
accelerate the build-out of abundant, affordable energy. We can build 
more power lines for a more connected and nimble grid, and we can 
secure our supply chain of critical grid infrastructure, as well.
  This bill that we are voting on today does none of that, and that is 
why I am asking my colleagues to oppose this bill and start a good-
faith, bipartisan discussion to bring real solutions to the American 
people, not just empty promises.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Mullin), who is also a member of our committee.
  Mr. MULLIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the so-
called State Planning for Reliability and Affordability Act. This 
measure will encourage State regulators to push our grid toward more 
expensive and polluting sources of energy at the very moment families 
are struggling with rising energy bills.
  Across this country, households and small businesses are seeing 
electricity costs rise by hundreds of dollars. Demand for power is 
rising quickly, and this year, utilities have already proposed major 
rate hikes to the tune of $34 billion. Instead of helping lower bills 
with forward-looking technology, this legislation takes us backward, 
effectively promoting energy sources that take longer to build and 
deploy and cost more to operate.
  These are costs that will be passed on directly to everyday 
Americans.
  This comes 1 year after President Trump promised to cut energy prices 
in half. Instead, on his watch, prices are rising. According to 
multiple press reports, he privately urged oil executives to spend $1 
billion in support of his campaign last year in exchange for promoting 
their interests as President.
  Perhaps it is no surprise we are seeing policies that benefit the 
most expensive energy sources instead of the cheapest options available 
to consumers.
  Utility-scale solar and wind are the lowest-cost sources of new power 
today. Together with battery storage, they can be built quickly, 
strengthen reliability, and keep bills down. This bill undermines State 
planning processes that would promote reliable and cheap sources of 
energy, which also happen to be the cleanest. It limits choice and will 
slow energy innovation, keeping prices higher than they need to be.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and work 
together on real solutions that lower energy bills for the American 
people.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, may I ask the chairman if he is prepared 
to close.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers on the bill, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky has the right to 
close.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise to object to the Trump administration and 
congressional Republicans' disastrous energy policies and their impacts 
on everyday Americans.
  We have a duty to ensure that our power grid can keep the lights on. 
That demands an all-of-the-above approach to energy. Given the 
unprecedented demand to add capacity to our grid as AI data centers 
continue to expand, we need to use every tool that we can to keep 
energy prices down. That means adding clean energy to the grid. It is 
the quickest source of energy to add to the grid given the current 
multiyear gas turbine shortage.
  Grid reliability regulators have been basically clear: Renewable 
energy and batteries were critical in allowing the grid to endure 
multiple heat waves this summer.
  That is why Texas has added more solar and wind energy to their power 
grid, more than any other State in the country, in the wake of their 
horrific blackouts during Winter Storm Uri 4 years ago. That is because 
solar energy helps keep the lights on.
  Unfortunately, Republicans seem uninterested in acknowledging that 
basic reality, that solar and wind, partnered with batteries, can be an 
essential part of a reliable power grid. Instead, they have done 
everything they can to increase the costs of these technologies and 
make it harder to add clean energy to the grid. They are using their 
power to subsidize dirty, expensive fossil fuel, all at the cost of 
American families who are struggling to afford their electricity bills.

                              {time}  1830

  Now, if you don't believe me, just ask Secretary Chris Wright. At an 
Energy and Commerce Committee hearing in June, he was blunt. The 
Secretary said: ``I have never been for all of the above, and if I said 
it at one point in time, I misspoke.'' There you have it, Madam 
Speaker.
  The Trump administration is staunchly against all of the above. The 
Secretary is saying it, and that makes sense. Their actions at least 
match their rhetoric. They are doing everything they can to put their 
thumb on the scale for dirty energy, including through this bill, H.R. 
3628. They are canceling every single clean energy project they 
possibly can, no matter how helpful it might be to keeping electricity 
bills down or the lights on.
  Madam Speaker, the bills on the floor today will only worsen the 
Republican affordability crisis. Every time Americans open their power 
bill or see their lights flicker, Republicans are responsible. I think 
the American people will hold them accountable.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, first, I thank Congressman Evans for sponsoring the 
State Planning for Reliability and Affordability Act. Let's go back to 
what this bill does.
  H.R. 3628 directs State public utility commissions to consider 
implementing measures that would ensure utilities retain sufficient 
reliable generation through their integrated resource plan to maintain 
the stability and affordability of their electric grids.
  We have had a lot of discussion. We have been debating for the last 
few months. The Affordable Care Act passed 15 years ago. Insurance 
rates have doubled since that passed, and now, we are debating whether 
to deal with the rising costs of health insurance or continue to 
subsidize the rising costs. We want to deal with the underlying costs 
of health insurance.
  We are talking about the affordability of green energy or clean 
energy. I am for all of the above, but if you remember what the 
Secretary said, he said he is for the best of the above. There are 
areas where the Sun shines and the Sun shines bright, and it shines 
bright on my old Kentucky home. There are areas for that. There are 
areas where solar makes sense, where wind makes sense, and where fossil 
fuels make sense.
  When he says best of the above, he doesn't mean we don't do all of 
it. We do what fits in the right place at the cheapest price for our 
citizens. When you talk about investing in your own utilities, if clean 
energy--they keep saying they are going to go for more expensive energy 
as opposed to the cleaner energy. That is what they say. I will say, I 
think our energy companies want to go to the most affordable energy. 
That is what they want to produce.
  What this does, if you look at the map, and a lot of people have 
looked at maps of energy prices, what are the highest cost electric 
prices in the country? I know my friend from Colorado

[[Page H5527]]

pointed out to my other friend from Colorado that Colorado is up in the 
grid with California, New Jersey, and New York. They have higher energy 
prices, and it is because their general assemblies and their State 
governments have put additional climate issues in place, not to make 
energy more affordable, but it makes it more expensive. What we are 
saying here is that State planning commissions have to ensure in their 
plans that they look at affordability, reliability, and sustainability 
within their grids.
  That is what this piece of legislation does. I encourage my 
colleagues to vote for it, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate on the bill has expired.


         Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Moore of West Virginia

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 
1 printed in part D of House Report 119-399.
  Mr. MOORE of West Virginia. Madam Speaker, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Add at the end the following section:

     SEC. 3. GAO REPORT ON EFFECTIVENESS OF INTEGRATED RESOURCE 
                   PLANNING IN ENSURING SUFFICIENT RELIABLE 
                   GENERATION FACILITIES.

       (a) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall submit to Congress a report on the effectiveness 
     of integrated resource planning employed by State regulated 
     electric utilities prior to the implementation of section 
     111(d)(22) of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 
     1978 (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)(22)), as added by section 2 of this 
     Act, in ensuring sufficient reliable generation facilities to 
     maintain the reliability, stability, and affordability of 
     electric service for electric consumers.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Electric consumer; integrated resource planning; state 
     regulated electric utility.--The terms ``electric consumer'', 
     ``integrated resource planning'', and ``State regulated 
     electric utility'' have the meanings given such terms, 
     respectively, in section 3 of the Public Utility Regulatory 
     Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602).
       (2) Reliable generation facility.--The term ``reliable 
     generation facility'' has the meaning given such term in 
     section 111(d)(22) of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies 
     Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)(22)), as added by section 2 of 
     this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 936, the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Moore) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. MOORE of West Virginia. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Under President Joe Biden, energy prices skyrocketed. The Trump 
administration is working around the clock to unleash American energy 
and drive down prices. Americans are starting to see the results at the 
pump and in their energy bills, but this only underscores the need for 
more cheap, abundant, and reliable baseload energy to power America's 
new golden age.
  Currently, States require utilities to develop integrated resource 
plans to assess reliable electrical generation and provide affordable 
electricity to consumers. These integrated resource plans provide a 
framework for producing reliable electricity for American businesses, 
hardworking Americans, and families.
  Unfortunately, Democrat-led States have used these integrated 
resource plans to push woke climate and environmental justice goals, 
prioritizing leftwing ideology over making life affordable for American 
families. Worst of all, these blue States have required utilities to 
shutter baseload power plants while promoting wind and solar.
  These reckless policies place our grid at risk and send energy prices 
skyrocketing.
  Demand for energy will increase by nearly 151 gigawatts over the next 
decade. However, another 115 gigawatts of reliable generation have 
announced anticipated retirements over that same period. The Department 
of Energy projected that of the planned 209 gigawatts of the new 
generation by 2030, only 22 gigawatts would come from reliable baseload 
generation.
  The North American Electric Reliability Corporation called our 
electrical reliability crisis a ``five-alarm fire.'' It is clear that 
blue States' destructive policies prioritize the green new scam over 
reliable power, making our grid more unreliable and life unaffordable 
for Americans.
  We must act now to ensure baseload power reaches American consumers 
and staves off this looming crisis.
  My amendment to the State Planning for Reliability and Affordability 
Act requires the comptroller general of the Government Accountability 
Office to review existing integrated resource plan processes to assess 
whether they sufficiently consider reliable generation in their 
portfolios.
  My amendment requires transparency and ensures reliable baseload 
power remains the backbone of our grid.
  I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment to deliver 
reliable, affordable energy to American households and unleash 
America's golden age by ensuring coal, oil, and natural gas remain an 
integral piece of our energy mix.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I urge opposition to the amendment because 
it doubles down on a bogus and misleading definition of ``reliable 
generation,'' a definition that would only include coal, natural gas, 
and nuclear power plants.
  While I would typically have no problem with a GAO report, I do have 
a problem with Republicans pretending that fossil fuel generation is 
perfect and that there is no room for clean, cheap energy in a 
diversified grid.
  In the last few years, Republicans have moved away from saying that 
clean energy is too expensive and are now claiming it is unreliable. 
Madam Speaker, the only reason they have done that is because they have 
firmly and permanently lost the argument. Clean energy is cheap energy. 
Everyone knows it, even Republicans now.
  In their desperation to keep Americans' energy bills high to keep the 
profits flowing for oil and gas, Republicans have started peddling the 
falsehood that clean energy isn't reliable. I want to be clear: There 
is no such thing as a perfectly reliable power plant. They all can run 
into problems. Renewables depend on wind and the Sun. Coal and gas 
often have issues in extreme heat or cold. That is why it is important 
that we pursue an all-of-the-above approach.
  Unfortunately, President Trump and his Secretary of Energy don't 
believe in all of the above. Instead, Republicans are out here working 
overtime to shill for coal and gas. It is just very sad.
  Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1840

  Mr. MOORE of West Virginia. Madam Speaker, baseload energy in this 
country is absolutely quantified and defined by natural gas, nuclear, 
and coal. That is baseload energy in this country.
  The reason green energy was ever affordable or cheaper is because 
everybody in America is subsidizing it right now with their tax 
dollars. That is the only reason that it ever became competitive. It is 
because we are subsidizing a broken system.
  Green energy is consistent in its inability to produce baseload 
energy, reliability, or consistency. It is not consistent in its 
ability to transmit even down the power lines that are currently in 
place, which many times they have to construct new ones.
  This is a report--by the way, this is just a report--which I think is 
so critical to assessing our plans here to have cheap, abundant, 
reliable energy for the United States and the American people.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the previous question 
is ordered on the bill and on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from West Virginia (Mr. Moore).
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. Moore).
  The amendment was agreed to.

[[Page H5528]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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. 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 will be postponed.

                          ____________________