[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 4 (Wednesday, January 7, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H127-H132]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1820
SAVING HOMEOWNERS FROM OVERREGULATION WITH EXCEPTIONAL RINSING ACT
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, Pursuant to House Resolution 977, I call up
the bill (H.R. 4593) to amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to
revise the definition of showerhead, 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 977, the bill
is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4593
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 ``Saving Homeowners from
Overregulation With Exceptional Rinsing Act'' or the ``SHOWER
Act''.
SEC. 2. REVISED DEFINITION OF SHOWERHEAD.
(a) In General.--Section 321(31)(D) of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291(31)(D)) is amended to
read as follows:
``(D) The term `showerhead' has the meaning given such term
in ASME A112.18.1-2024, except such term does not include
safety shower showerheads.''.
(b) Revisions to Regulations.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Energy shall promulgate such revisions to regulations as may
be necessary to conform such regulations to the definition of
showerhead in section 321(31)(D) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended by subsection (a) of this
section.
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
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the
legislation and to include extraneous material on H.R. 4593.
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, under the previous administration, American consumers
were subjected to Washington's constant micromanagement of appliances
and equipment in their homes and businesses.
In fact, the Biden-Harris administration finalized more than 30 new
or amended energy efficiency standards, totaling over $60 billion in
costs and regulating nearly every appliance in Americans' homes. Part
of this effort focused on complicating the definition of a showerhead
by prohibiting multi-nozzle shower systems if the whole system
collectively delivers more than 2.5 gallons of water per minute,
instead of following the straightforward statutory definition of a
showerhead.
The new, highly bureaucratic definition was an amazing 13,000 words
in length and a novel interpretation. This resulted in shower systems
with more than one nozzle having a lower flow rate compared to
individual showerheads.
Additionally, this definition is misleading to consumers looking to
buy multi-nozzled shower systems for the purpose of increasing water
flow.
President Trump has taken executive action to restore the regulatory
definitions and standards to the law's original intent by allowing a
maximum water use of 2.5 gallons per minute for each faucet in a shower
system. H.R. 4593 would codify President Trump's definition by allowing
the 2.5 maximum flow rate to apply to each nozzle in the shower system.
This legislation will ensure manufacturers, like Delta Faucet in my
district in Morgantown, Kentucky, are not subjected to the swing of the
political pendulum with ever-changing interpretations of the law.
Further, this legislation is simple and pro-consumer choice. It is
unfortunate that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are
seeking more regulation for its own sake and limiting the choices of
American consumers. If an individual wants low water pressure, they
have a variety of options. They can purchase a single-nozzle
showerhead, or they can simply turn down the faucet. It is that simple,
but those choices must be left to individual Americans and not to
Washington.
H.R. 4593 would bring regulatory certainty to manufacturers,
performance effectiveness to a household appliance we all use, and
choice to American consumers.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support it, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The American people are struggling to make ends meet. They are
feeling the pinch of the affordability crisis and bearing the brunt of
rising costs at the hands of Republicans. Yet my colleagues continue to
turn a blind eye to the cost-of-living crisis. In fact, President Trump
has called the affordability crisis a con job and a Democratic scam.
That is how out of touch they are, Mr. Speaker. Healthcare costs are
skyrocketing, and electricity bills are through the roof. Meanwhile,
President Trump just illegally invaded Venezuela, and Secretary Kennedy
is putting children's lives at risk by restricting access to vaccines.
There is a lot this Congress could be doing this week, but the first
bill Republicans bring to the floor in 2026 is about showerheads. It is
almost impossible to believe. To make matters worse, this bill will
actually drive up monthly utility bills for American families.
Electricity prices are up 13 percent across the country. Eighty
million Americans are struggling to pay their utility bills, and
Republicans want to make that financial pain even worse. Meanwhile,
grocery prices are surging, and, of course, monthly healthcare premiums
are skyrocketing across the Nation, thanks to the healthcare crisis
Republicans created by failing to extend the Affordable Care Act's
enhanced premium tax credits. As a result of their inaction, more than
20 million Americans are now facing skyrocketing monthly healthcare
premiums. In many cases, and I will say in my home State of New Jersey,
Mr. Speaker, they are double or triple the cost that they paid last
year.
We just heard a debate on the discharge petition a few minutes ago,
and as a result of that discharge petition, and no thanks to most of
the Republicans and the leadership, we are going to have an opportunity
to vote on the premium tax credits. The bottom line is that that has
nothing to do with the Republican leadership. This was a Democratic
initiative that a few Republicans finally joined with us so that we
have an opportunity to vote on it.
There isn't a single thing that the Republicans can point to about
dealing with the affordability crisis that they have created. President
Trump and his Republican accomplices are completely out of touch with
the alarming reality millions of Americans are facing. Republicans have
no plans to address affordability, and I think today proves it.
They are beginning this new Congress with a bill that changes the
definition of ``showerhead'' in order to open the door for the Trump
administration to increase already rising monthly utility bills and to
waste our scarce water resources. This bill would actually increase
costs for consumers.
In Trump's first term, he redefined ``showerheads'' to allow them to
use significantly more energy and water. Showerheads with multiple
nozzles could vastly exceed the current limits. For example, a
showerhead with eight nozzles could use up to 20 gallons of water per
minute under Trump's 2020 definition.
Think about this, Mr. Speaker: You are raising the costs. You are
increasing utility bills not only for electricity but also for water.
You are wasting energy, and you are wasting water.
The bottom line is that manufacturers didn't want this. They largely
rejected this move by President Trump
[[Page H128]]
and didn't produce showerheads that exceeded the limit that existed.
That was because they knew that consumers value money-saving and water
conservation showerheads that are good for both their wallets and the
environment.
Energy and water conservation standards, Mr. Speaker, save consumers
money. The only reason that we have these energy-efficient standards
both for showerheads and for so many other things is that Congress, on
a bipartisan basis, decided to establish a program where if the
Department of Energy or other Departments, mostly the Department of
Energy, could show that, in fact, you could save money for consumers
and eliminate a lot of waste in terms of water and energy, then they
would put forth these standards. These are bipartisan standards.
In 2024 alone, energy and water conservation standards slashed $576
off Americans' utility bills while cutting our energy and water
consumption.
I am just trying to point out, Mr. Speaker, that Republican
priorities are completely out of touch with the concerns of everyday
Americans. They are out of touch with the manufacturers and out of
touch with the average American.
The only Republican priority is pleasing President Trump with
whatever he wants. They give in to his every wish, even if it means
driving up utility bills for American families.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1830
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
When the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) had his poster, he
didn't actually have the poster that President Trump was referring to
when he was talking about affordability.
It was a poster that showed the different States and the rising price
of energy. It showed certain States and certain areas--he colored them
blue and red States on his poster--and the difference in what people
are paying for electric rates.
You can tie it directly to State and local governments that are
making decisions to shut down generation of energy. When you
overregulate--why are people paying more for appliances, dishwashers
and stoves? It is because of the regulations.
Why are they paying more for showerheads? As we said, if people can
have the choice, they can also turn down their water. As I said, it is
just that simple.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Weber), my good friend, the vice chair of the Energy Subcommittee.
Mr. WEBER of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the
SHOWER Act, led by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Fry).
Over the last several years, Americans have seen firsthand what
happens when a radical regulatory agenda takes over Washington. The
previous administration, it is sad to say, inserted itself into nearly
every aspect of American life, raising costs and imposing rules that
made no sense for American families.
One of the clearest examples is what they did, believe it or not, to
our showers. They twisted the law to claim--you can't make this stuff
up--that the 2.5-gallon-per-minute standard applied to the entire
shower system instead of just each individual showerhead. You can't
make this stuff up. Quite frankly, I think they were all wet. The
result was weaker water pressure and daily frustration for homeowners,
all in the name of government control.
For a year now, this Congress has worked to reverse the damage left
behind by previous administrations, Mr. Speaker. The SHOWER Act is
simply another step in that effort. It locks in the law's original
intent and ensures that future leftist administrations cannot weaponize
regulations against everyday Americans again.
This bill is one of many we must pass, Mr. Speaker, to reverse the
harm already done and restore America to the one we once knew. Mr.
Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the SHOWER Act.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Castor), the ranking member of our Energy Subcommittee.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New
Jersey for yielding the time.
I rise in opposition to H.R. 4593 with a great concern that House
Republicans simply do not care to work on any solutions to lower the
cost of living for our hardworking neighbors back home.
In 2025, House Republicans failed to bring one bill to the floor to
lower the cost of living or to tackle the high rate of inflation, but
here is some good news actually: By tomorrow, thanks to House Democrats
and a handful of Republicans who stood up to their Speaker, the House
will vote to lower the cost of healthcare coverage for millions of
Americans. That is a little bit of good news.
If Americans were hoping that Republicans in Congress would start
2026 off with some relief for their pocketbooks, I am sorry to report
that, no, Republicans are not bringing bills to lower the cost of
living.
I congratulate my Republican colleagues, their first bill of 2026, to
set the tone, is to address showerheads. This is critical. You heard
that right. It is ridiculous, isn't it? It is so out of touch.
The President promised he was going to cut Americans' power bills in
half, but since he took office last year, electric bills are up by 13
percent across the country, and they are much higher in some places.
There are 80 million Americans who are struggling just to pay their
electric bills. In Florida, the Republican-controlled utilities
commission just approved the highest rate increases in the history of
the country--they are calling them that--a $6 billion rate increase.
Across the country, folks are facing about $86 billion in electric
rate increases, so hold on to your wallet. Rather than help,
Republicans have only made things worse. They have gone along with
arbitrary tariffs that have raised the cost of living and taken a
hatchet to cleaner, cheaper energy. They have gone along with illegally
halting energy projects. They ended tax cuts and rebates that helped
people afford their electric bills in order to pay for tax breaks for
billionaires.
They are out of touch.
Folks in the Northeast are worried about their rising electric bills
because the President in December arbitrarily terminated five offshore
wind projects that were under construction. That energy onto the grid
would have helped keep the pressure on lower electric bills.
The President canceled final approval for what would have been the
Nation's largest solar farm, a 6.2 gigawatt project in the Nevada
desert. He illegally ended low-cost solar installation for working-
class families that would have helped them and their family budgets.
The President now has canceled major upgrades to the power grid out
of the bipartisan infrastructure law, such as the Grain Belt Express
transmission line.
Republican policies now--we are adding it up--have cost Americans
about 266 gigawatts of planned electricity generation projects in 2025
at a time when there is a surge of new demand for electricity across
the country. They are out of touch.
Speaking of being out of touch, of course, the President doesn't
believe there is an affordability crisis. He has called it a hoax. The
real issues for the President are shower pressure, redecorating the
White House, and so much more.
Yes, it was last April that the President thought it was so important
he issued an executive order to end the Obama-Biden war on water
pressure and make America's showers great again. He is out of touch.
However, he urged Congress to codify that order, so that is what we are
doing here tonight on the first bill of 2026 by this Republican
majority. Are they serious?
What has been the President's focus during all this time he has
called the affordability crisis a hoax? Well, he paved over the Rose
Garden. He has torn down the East Wing of the White House to make way
for a grand ballroom funded by people who have business in front of the
Federal Government.
I haven't been over to the White House, but all of the pictures show
24 karat gold ornamentation all through the White House. He has
installed marble floors. I have seen him tweet that
[[Page H129]]
out. He has also added his name to the Kennedy Center.
For those of you who haven't come to Washington, D.C., he has put
banners of his picture up on Federal buildings. He is proposing to put
his likeness on gold coins.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Moore of Utah). The time of the
gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I think you get my drift here. It
was so galling as people are trying to pay their electric bills and
their grocery bills that the President here is bragging about how he
has redone the Lincoln bathroom, yes, with gold showerheads.
We don't need to redefine what constitutes a showerhead. We don't
need to weaken energy and water conservation measures that help people
save money. We don't need to make life more expensive for hardworking
neighbors back home. We don't need to boost foreign manufacturers who
want to import inferior products to the U.S., but that is what they are
doing.
No, in 2026 we are going to need real solutions. I beseech my
colleagues to work with us to tackle the high cost of living. You can
look back on 2025 now; Federal spending is up. They added $2 trillion
to the national debt and they have lost manufacturing jobs when you add
it all up. Now their answer on the first bill of the Congress in 2026
is showerheads. They are out of touch.
{time} 1840
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, when we talk about affordability, we did
pass and sign into law no tax on Social Security. It is a deduction for
people who generally have incomes that are almost all Social Security.
They won't pay any tax on that. We passed the no tax on tips. People
working on tips income won't be paying tax on their tips.
I come from the world of manufacturing where people work hard all
week hoping for overtime over the weekend so they can earn more money
for their families. Now there is no tax on overtime to make things
affordable for people and give them more money in their pocket to pay
for things, but we also need to make them cheaper.
We worked hard on energy. We have passed bills out of committee and
across the floor on permitting energy. We have energy in this country,
but we have to be able to generate the electrons, and we have to be
able to move the energy to where it needs to be. The problem is
permitting. I am a believer in all of the above, and we need to develop
an all-of-the-above energy strategy.
We have 112-gigawatts of power--a gigawatt is the city of Seattle.
There are 112-gigawatts of power scheduled to go offline in the next
decade because of environmental regulations, which we can do safely and
securely and save our environment and produce the energy that people
need.
Again, if you bring the poster that the President used, you can see
States that have the highest energy prices, and it goes to their energy
regulation that their State and local governments have done to
themselves.
Mr. Speaker, I was in California putting gas in a rental car, and I
looked over to the guy next to me and said: Do you have any idea how
much people pay for gas in the rest of the country?
I paid $2.80 in Kentucky and paid over $4 in California. It is State
and local governments that make these decisions, and they are bringing
that to Washington, D.C. We want to make it cheaper and for our people
to have more affordability.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Fry), the sponsor of this legislation and my good friend.
Mr. FRY. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to set the scene in
contrast to some of the revisionist history that Democrats seem to be
talking about today.
The definition of a showerhead was outlined very clearly in a 1975
act that Congress passed, not some bureaucrat and not some
administration. Congress actually got together and said we are going to
have some efficiency standards on showerheads and a number of other
things. We are going to pass this bill, in 1975, and for over 30 years
that was the national standard.
Even the American Association for Mechanical Engineers, this is their
definition that is in this bill. Along comes the Obama administration,
and rather than take the very simple, easy-to-understand,
congressionally mandated standard of what a showerhead is, the Obama
administration, in some closet somewhere, decided we are going to
reinvent the definition of a showerhead.
Now, why is this important? Because this is exactly why people have a
problem with Washington, D.C. They make rules that are not
congressionally driven, that the people elect their representatives to
be their voice in Washington. No, it is some unelected, unaccountable
bureaucrat that decides to create a problem and then solve the problem
that they created.
This is a microcosm to a much larger problem. That is overregulation.
I think the ranking member said Trump changed the definition. No, he
changed it back. He changed it back to what Congress intended to begin
with.
Now, we have the Biden administration that comes in and pulls it back
again. We have this ping-pong effect of regulations that are creating
uncertainty for manufacturers and creating uncertainty for consumers.
You can take showerheads, but the Biden administration also did this on
home appliances, gas stoves, any number of things. The degree of
regulation that Democrats and their bureaucratic allies are willing to
do even, as something as small as a showerhead, that should send alarm
bells. Why are we not empowering people to make choices about what they
want in their own homes?
If they want a nozzle that dribbles on their head, then go get one of
those. If you want something that slices an orange, then go get one of
those. That should be your choice as a consumer. But we find ourselves
in this endless game of whack-a-mole in Washington, D.C., because
bureaucrats create problems and then solve them like they have done
something meritorious for the country. It is total BS.
This bill is quite simple: It restores the definition of a showerhead
to what Congress originally intended in 1975. It was a law for 32 years
before the problem was created by the Obama administration. Then they
solved the problem.
The President is absolutely right not just on showerheads but on home
appliances. The Democrats want to talk about energy costs. For a
second, by the way, I think it is really rich coming from them because
I think eight of the top ten States with the highest energy costs are
blue States that are run by Democrat State legislators and Democrat
governors. They want to talk about the rising cost of energy. It
disproportionately affects blue States. Why? Because they have terrible
policies.
This bill is quite simple: It restores the definition that Congress
originally intended. If an administration, any future administration,
wants to change policy, rather than that coming from the bureaucrats,
it should come before Congress. Congress set the efficiency standards
in 1975, and if Congress wants to address those, that is Congress'
prerogative, not some unelected, unaccountable bureaucrat in
Washington, D.C.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Menendez), a member of our committee.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague, Ranking
Member Pallone, for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, House Republicans ended 2025 by failing to extend
Affordable Care Act tax credits causing healthcare costs to skyrocket
for millions of Americans.
Since President Trump took office, electricity prices have gone up by
13 percent nationwide and 20 percent in New Jersey, leaving over 80
million Americans struggling to pay their utility bills. Instead of
addressing the affordability crisis that they have ignored, that
President Trump has called a hoax, the Republicans' priority on day one
is showerheads.
It is obscene that with all the work we need to do to uplift American
families, to give them a fair shot at the American Dream, the
Republican majority would choose instead to focus on showerheads. Why?
Because it is important to one person and one person only, Donald
Trump.
[[Page H130]]
Not once, at any of the townhalls I have had, has anyone said that
their showerhead pressure is their top concern. Housing, yes.
Healthcare, yes. Childcare, yes. Not once did they say showerheads was
their primary concern.
If my colleagues were serious about governing, we would be voting on
protecting healthcare, lowering costs, and addressing the real issues
that working families are facing. We would not be here today talking
about showerheads.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my Republican colleagues to get serious and focus
on the priorities our constituents sent us here to address. For all
these reasons and so many more, I strongly oppose this bill.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Rulli), my good friend and member of the Energy and Commerce
Committee.
Mr. RULLI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Congressman Fry's
SHOWER Act.
I am not going to pull a Nancy Pelosi, Mr. Speaker. I am not going to
rip up the speech that I had written, but I am not going to give that
speech.
I have to talk about the opposition party, and I have to talk about
their complete lack of interaction with the blue-collar Joe Bag of
Donuts, which is Youngstown and Akron and Canton and Cleveland and
Pittsburgh. These are working people that they have forgotten.
They bring up electricity, sir, but they do not allow us to address
power plants. They shut down coal plants. They put regulations on gas-
powered generated plants, but then they say there is an electricity
problem.
Let's talk about prices. In my district right now, eggs are $1.29. We
have chicken breast at 99 cents. In Trumbull County, we have gas at
$1.99. I have 45,000 jobs that I cannot fill.
We are on the ground. We are listening to the people. You guys are
promoting the Ford Lightning, which nobody who is a working person even
gives a crap about. They want to have Silverados and they want to have
their Mopar and they want to have gas-powered engines inside of those
cars, but yet they say they have it. All they work on is the narrative,
Mr. Speaker. That is what they do.
I will tell you how I came to Congressman Fry's bill and how I got
interested in it. We were replacing a showerhead at my mom's house, and
I said to my plumber, Marty: What is going on with these showerheads?
He said: You tell me. The people in Washington messed this up. Nobody
can have a darn good shower in the last 10 years.
Why does that matter? What did they say? They say we are worried
about showerheads. We are worried about the working man. We are worried
about the standard of living that they have taken away from them. They
have taxed them to death. They play this game with healthcare. They
created ObamaCare. They never had a solution. It was never a permanent
fix.
{time} 1850
Mr. Speaker, the Democrats kicked it down the road, and then they
said to just extend it without even dealing with it. What my Democrat
colleagues are doing to the American people is wrong.
When a person goes on vacation, they go to a motel and take a shower.
It is the worst shower they have ever had. It is cold. It is dripping
out there. The working man cannot even enjoy his daily life. That is
what they have missed.
We want to talk about how grand their philosophy is. When we look at
the mayor of New York City, he wants to have government-owned grocery
stores. People will be able to choose about 400 or 500 items instead of
the 30,000 or 40,000 items they could choose today, all in
consideration of the blue-collar Joe Bag of Doughnuts, the forgotten
worker.
This is why Donald Trump was elected. We care about the forgotten
worker. We are going to fix healthcare. We are going to fix
affordability. Gas prices are already coming down. Grocery prices are
coming down. Wait until that tax cut hits in 2026.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support of H.R. 4593 and so should you.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Frankel).
Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Speaker, my, my, my. I rise today,
amazed that with the healthcare crisis unfolding, the Republican
priority before us is plumbing.
At a time when families are already being squeezed by the rising cost
of living, from groceries to rent to utilities, President Trump is
focused on renaming the Kennedy Center, building a ballroom, running a
foreign country, and the water pressure in his showers.
Republicans in Congress, instead of focusing on lowering healthcare
costs, are debating the definition of showerheads. Really? Millions of
Americans are losing their healthcare coverage after Republicans
allowed the Affordable Care Act tax credits to expire.
The nightmare of families having to choose between taking their child
to the doctor or paying their rent is now a reality, hitting my home
State of Florida especially hard. In Florida, more than 4 million
people rely on the ACA and face premiums that are doubling or tripling.
A self-employed mom recovering from cancer in Lake Worth Beach is
dropping her coverage as her premium tripled overnight. A 62-year-old
waiter in West Palm Beach is going without insurance because it now
costs more than his rent.
Here is a fact. When people lose health insurance, the consequences
are real, and they are devastating. Medical debt piles up. Families
drain their savings. They face bankruptcy.
Untreated illnesses force workers out of their jobs. When people lose
their coverage, it affects all of us. Hospitals are strained.
Businesses are hurt. Costs rise for everyone.
Here is a solution. I urge my colleagues to support the 3-year
extension of the ACA tax credits and stop millions of hardworking
families from losing their coverage. Fix the pressure where it matters
the most. Lower healthcare costs.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Riley).
Mr. RILEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, my kids are little. The other day
they asked why daddy has to go back to D.C. I said that it is for work.
They seemed sad about that. My wife chimed in, and she said that it is
really important work. It is work that is going to help make people's
lives better.
Now here we are, back at work. The first thing on the agenda in 2026
is not to lower the soaring utility bills. It is not to lower the
insurance premiums. It is not to make housing more affordable. It is
showerheads. We are out here talking about showerheads.
Not a single person in upstate New York has ever told me they want
Congress focused on showerheads. The owner of the tattoo shop in Ithaca
told me she will go uninsured this year because she can't afford the
premiums.
There is a grandma in Endicott who is cutting back on the groceries
because NYSEG is jacking up the rates and sending all her money to
Spain.
There is a couple in their twenties. They are both young nurses. They
can't save up for a home because Wall Street is gobbling up all the
inventory.
Here we are, talking about showerheads. We wonder why people look at
this place and see it as a self-serving, out of touch, dysfunctional
mess. We don't need new ballrooms. We don't need new showerheads. We
don't need a new name for the Kennedy Center. We need lower costs,
better jobs, and a square deal.
At the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill
back to committee. If the House rules had allowed it, I would have
offered a motion with an amendment to lower costs for hardworking
families in upstate New York.
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 New York? There was no objection.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico
(Ms. Stansbury).
Ms. STANSBURY. Mr. Speaker, there are days, increasingly so, when I
cannot believe my eyes and my ears in this
[[Page H131]]
Chamber. It is about 7 p.m. East Coast time. It has been a long day. I
just came from the Oversight Committee where we just subpoenaed
additional witnesses in the Epstein investigation including potential
co-conspirators in the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein.
We spent several hours today getting a classified briefing on what
happened in the unauthorized invasion of Venezuela by this
administration and the capture of a foreign leader, as our President
and his administration are threatening to invade other foreign
countries and have failed the most basic constitutional duty of seeking
the consent of Congress and advising Members of Congress.
Today, we forced a vote on this floor, forcing all of my colleagues
to ensure that we vote to save the Affordable Care Act so millions of
Americans could have healthcare.
Mr. Speaker, we have to understand how absolutely inane and bizarre
it is to come to the floor at 7 p.m. for the first real bill of this
Congress this year and it is on showerheads.
When I heard that we were going to vote on showerheads, I literally
had to google and look up what this was all about. I was actually
genuinely shocked that the President, of course, had signed an
executive order in April, demanding that we change the efficiency
standards for showerheads.
As I often do, I went down a rabbit hole. In fact, I pulled up
pictures of the kinds of showerheads we are talking about. It was
fascinating to me, Mr. Speaker, to hear the impassioned pleas for
regular working people to take high-pressure showers in motels because
that is not why Donald Trump signed an executive order on this issue.
No, Donald Trump likes his big, fancy showers with multiple heads. We
are talking about showers for rich people. These aren't even everyday
showers.
Mr. Speaker, my question is: Why on God's green Earth on the first
full day that this Congress is back in 2026 are the Republicans using
their floor time in the midst of armed conflict and daily corruption by
this administration to run a bill on rich people's showers for Donald
Trump? It is just absolutely amazing.
Mr. Speaker, I have a little less than a minute left in my time. I
would ask my colleague across the aisle one simple question: Did Mr.
Donald Trump ask him to run a showerhead bill today on the House floor?
If my colleague across the aisle cannot answer a simple question about
why we are running legislation on the United States House floor on
showerheads, I think we rest our case.
{time} 1900
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume
to answer the question of the gentlewoman.
Mr. Speaker, no, he did not ask to do this bill on the floor today. I
know the President is very interested in this issue, but not on this
floor today.
Mr. Speaker, what I have tried to ask and nobody has answered is: The
enhanced tax credits, the COVID-era tax credits, were set to expire in
the Inflation Reduction Act, which was a bill under the reconciliation
process. It was solely the Democratic Party who put that in place, and
the question I have always asked is: Why did they set them to expire?
They may say it was the reconciliation process. There were issues in
that bill that they made permanent, but they chose to have the enhanced
tax credits expire.
What happens when the enhanced tax credits expire? They are enhanced,
so we go back to the basic law. The basic law we are operating under is
the Affordable Care Act.
Why is the Affordable Care Act not saving people money?
I remember when this first came out. I was speaking to a Rotary Club,
and a person said to me at the end that I was talking so negatively on
the Affordable Care Act.
I said to him: You know, I really hope that people will keep the
doctor they want to keep, have the choices they can have in healthcare,
and their premiums will go down. If that happens, I will eat my words.
I hope I can eat my words because there is no joy in having a bill pass
and see people lose their doctors of choice, lose choice in health
plans because it is consolidating, lose choices in healthcare because
it is consolidating, and see their premiums skyrocketing.
Talking about how much the premiums are skyrocketing, do you know
why? What is the underlying law? The underlying law is the Affordable
Care Act.
Mr. Speaker, I wish I could answer the question. I wish I would get
an answer to the question of why did they set them to expire and why is
the Affordable Care Act not working.
Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I have to respond to the chairman of our committee who,
of course, I respect a great deal.
The Republicans have never supported the Affordable Care Act. When we
passed it--and I was one of the drafters how many years ago now--I
think there were none--certainly almost no Republican votes.
They were not there when we tried to expand tax credits because we
knew that in order for people to be able to afford their health
insurance, we would have to reauthorize the tax credits from time to
time or expand them for certain incomes. They were never there.
Frankly, I don't want to go into this in any great deal or depth
today, but the bottom line is that I and most Democrats believe that
healthcare is a basic right and that we, as a Congress, have a
responsibility to make it so that most people, if not all Americans,
can have health insurance because, otherwise, they can't see a doctor.
They end up in the emergency room. They get sicker, and our society
suffers for it, either financially, healthwise, or whatever.
I don't really want to get into this debate about who, when, and
where because the bottom line is that the Republican Party has never
supported any of this. Many of them don't even believe, I think, that
somehow we should be helping Americans pay for their health insurance.
In any case, they have never supported the Affordable Care Act,
ObamaCare. They have never supported the enhanced premium tax credits,
and so talking about when you did it or didn't do it, to me, is
irrelevant.
The bottom line is that the majority had the opportunity to extend it
during the reconciliation bill. My colleagues did not. Republicans had
the opportunity right through the end of this year to extend it before
it expired, and all these double and triple costs per month for health
insurance started on January 1. My Republican colleagues didn't do it
and are not doing it now.
We had the debate just a half hour or 1 hour ago about the bill that
is finally coming to the floor, not because of the Republicans but
because every Democrat in this House signed a discharge petition and we
got a handful of Republicans to sign the discharge petition,
overturning the right of the Speaker to determine what bills come to
the floor. So it will come to the floor tomorrow, but when I was here
for the debate on the rule, there was only one Republican who got up
and said that they were supportive of extending the tax credits.
I am going to see tomorrow how many Republicans come to the floor and
say that they are going to extend the tax credits or vote to extend the
tax credits. There will be very, very few, unfortunately, because this
is not what Republicans support.
In any case, I will talk a little bit about the affordability crisis
in general. Across the country, the American people are trying to find
ways to afford the rising prices of groceries, electricity, and their
water bills. We hear from our constituents--I do every day--that
affordability is their top concern. As democratically elected Members
of Congress, I think it is our job to address these concerns--not only
health insurance, but electricity costs, water costs, and so many
things that deal with affordability.
I see my Republican colleagues only seem to be interested in fighting
the Trump administration's latest culture war on showerheads.
Mr. Speaker, I have tried not to laugh about this because I think the
issue has a level of seriousness, but it is incredible that not only
are they
[[Page H132]]
bringing up this bill as their first bill of the new year, but the fact
is that the bill does nothing to help the American people.
If the majority was doing something with showerhead bills to bring
down costs, I would say ``fine,'' but that is not the case. This is
only being done because President Trump has been complaining about
efficiency standards for everything since his first term. I think he is
completely out of touch with the realities that everyday Americans
face.
The truth is simple that efficiency standards lower costs for
Americans. I have said it before, but it is worth repeating: In 2024
alone, energy and water conservation standards slashed $576 off of
American utility bills while cutting our energy and water consumption.
Why is that a bad thing? It is a good thing.
It is totally, in my opinion, kind of dishonest for Republicans to
claim that the cost of compliance with environmental regulations and
efficiency standards drive up prices. They do not. It is not
conservation that is driving up prices for Americans. It is Republican
policies, and I would particularly point to Trump's tariffs that are
driving up costs for the average American.
The Republican Party let the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax
credit expire without any safety net, so millions of Americans are
going to lose their health insurance. Some have already decided not to
sign up because they can't afford it. They are going to lose their
health insurance. We will have more tomorrow and the next day and the
next day. Until we pass this enhanced tax credit bill, more and more
Americans will have no health insurance and the negative consequences
from that.
Let's also talk about the big, ugly bill--Republicans call it the
big, beautiful bill--that is projected to increase electricity prices
for American families by 61 percent. Nearly 1 in 20 American households
are in severe utility debt. This winter, families are forced to make
the impossible choice of heating their homes or putting food on the
table.
We have to address this issue, but somehow that is not enough for my
Republican colleagues. They now are trying to pass partisan legislation
to increase utility bills, too. That is what this bill does.
Again, all I can say is that the Republican Party's priorities are
senseless, cruel, and misguided.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, my point when I talked about the Affordable Care Act is
that once it was in place, I wish it had worked. I wish what was
believed to be in place worked because I think people with sincere
hearts were the ones who voted for it and put it in place. If we did
have choice and we had more people provided--we didn't have
consolidation, and we had cheaper health insurance. That is what we
wanted.
I will tell you that the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Ways
and Means Committee are going to be focusing on the cost of health
insurance. We talked yesterday and put out that health insurance
executives from the major health insurance companies, or CEOs, are
going to come before our committee. We are going to spend this year to
hopefully find ways that we can work together because the premiums
reflect the cost of healthcare.
We want to understand the premiums, how they devise the premiums,
where the premium is going, who is getting the money, and what about
the consolidations. We are going to have a series of hearings, and the
first one is going to be CEOs of major insurance companies to come
before our committees to do the proper oversight to see why it is going
from $14,000 to $22,000 and why are people being affected that way.
{time} 1910
That is the answer the American people deserve. That is the work we
must do, and I hope we can do it together.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the support of the underlying bill, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 977, the previous question is ordered on
the bill.
Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further consideration of H.R.
4593 is postponed.
____________________