Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 7 (Friday, January 9, 2026)

[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 7 (Friday, January 9, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H595-H604]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVER MANDATING EFFICIENCY STANDARDS ACT

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, Pursuant to House Resolution 977, I call up
the bill (H.R. 5184) to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from enforcing
energy efficiency standards applicable to manufactured housing, 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 977, the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on
Energy and Commerce, printed in the bill, is adopted and the bill, as
amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 5184

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 ``Affordable Housing Over
Mandating Efficiency Standards Act'' or the ``Affordable
HOMES Act''.

SEC. 2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISIONS TO STANDARDS FOR
MANUFACTURED HOUSING.

(a) Recommendations.--Section 413 of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17071) is
amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) Recommendations for Revisions to Standards.--The
Secretary may transmit to the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development recommendations for revisions to the preemptive
energy conservation standards established under section
604(g) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974
(42 U.S.C. 5403(g)).'';
(2) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
``(b) Criteria for Recommendations.--Any recommendations
for revisions to a preemptive energy conservation standard
transmitted under this section shall--
``(1) be based on a determination of the cost-effectiveness
of such standard as proposed to be revised, taking into
consideration life cycle construction and operating costs;
``(2) include estimates of the impact of such standard as
proposed to be revised on the initial purchase price of
manufactured homes; and
``(3) be developed taking into consideration--
``(A) factory construction techniques and limitations
unique to manufactured homes;
``(B) climate zones established by the Secretary of Housing
and Urban Development;
``(C) alternative methods that achieve equivalent or
improved energy performance as compared to such standard as
proposed to be revised; and
``(D) estimated payback periods for any added costs arising
from such standard as proposed to be revised.''; and
(3) by striking subsection (c).
(b) No Force or Effect.--The final rule titled ``Energy
Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
Manufactured Housing'' published by the Department of Energy
in the Federal Register on May 31, 2022 (87 Fed. Reg. 32728),
shall have no force or effect.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debated 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 Ohio (Mr. Latta) and the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta).

General Leave

Mr. LATTA. 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 insert extraneous material on H.R. 5184.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, since 2020, it is estimated that America's housing
market has climbed 57 percent, sidelining first-time home buyers and
impacting communities across the country. In fact, polls show that more
than four out of five Americans agree that housing affordability is a
problem in the area in which they live, with median-priced homes
costing more than 50 percent of a typical household's income.
There are many contributing factors to the surge in prices, such as a
demand shift and material costs. Inappropriate and duplicative
regulatory structures have compounded these issues for the construction
of manufacturing housing.
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 required the
Department of Energy to set energy efficiency standards for
manufactured housing. This duplicates the Department of Housing and
Urban Development's longstanding jurisdiction, first granted in the
National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act,
over these standards.
The law also required the DOE to base these new standards on the
International Energy Conservation Code, the IECC, which is intended for
site-built homes. Builders of site-built homes build according to that
specific region, and the IECC reflects those unique characteristics. On
the other hand, manufactured homes are built without knowledge of the
final location of that home.
Manufactured homes play an essential role in meeting our Nation's
demand for affordable housing. In fact, the average income of a
manufactured home buyer is $63,000, while the average income for a
site-built home buyer is about $143,000.
We must ensure regulatory morass does not deteriorate access to these
homes. H.R. 5184, bipartisan legislation led by the gentlewoman from
Indiana, eliminates DOE's authority to issue energy efficiency
standards for manufacturing housing. Instead, HUD will maintain full
regulatory authority, and DOE may provide recommendations throughout
the rulemaking process.
This legislation will not diminish the energy efficiency of these
homes. Our colleague from the other side of the aisle, the gentleman
from Massachusetts' Fourth Congressional District, issued a Dear
Colleague and put it well by saying: This bill in no way diminishes the
importance of energy efficiency. It simply ensures HUD, under its
affordability mission, is the authoritative voice.
Consumers will continue to be protected by HUD's existing process,
and manufacturers will have a regulatory process that will facilitate
the efficient construction of affordable homes in the United States.
Homeownership remains a significant aspect of achieving the American
Dream. H.R. 5184 helps bring that dream closer to reality for millions
of Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I
reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 0920

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the affordability crisis has spread to nearly every
facet of American lives. Utility bills are skyrocketing across the
country. Trump's disastrous tariffs are being passed on to the American
consumer. Grocery prices are up, making it hard for families to put
food on the table, and Republicans delivered their latest blow

[[Page H596]]

with failing to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax
credits which will result in soaring healthcare premiums for more than
20 million Americans. In many cases, Americans are seeing monthly
premiums either two, three, or four times higher than they were last
year for their healthcare insurance.
To make matters worse, we are in the midst of a housing crisis that
is crushing American families' dreams. We are witnessing historically
high home prices, coupled with a devastating shortage of housing. The
cost of buying a home feels out of reach for too many, while rent is
simultaneously ballooning at an unsustainable rate. Manufactured homes,
however, are an important component of our affordable housing stock.
We should all be concerned about the cost of buying a new home, but
this bill does not solve this crisis. In fact, it only makes housing
affordability worse.
First, it revokes the Department of Energy's May 2022 energy
conservation standard for manufactured housing, robbing residents of $5
billion in savings. Manufactured homes are often far less efficient
than other homes, costing owners about 70 percent more per square foot
in utility bills. Many low-income residents have reported foregoing
basic necessities like food or medicine in order to keep their lights
on.
To suggest that the Department of Energy standards for manufactured
homes negatively impact affordability is entirely false. As I stressed,
it is entirely false. When talking about affordability, it is
imperative that we also consider the cost of actually living in these
homes, and energy use is a big part of that. This is even more
important at a time when electricity costs are up 13 percent
nationwide.
If my Republican colleagues really want to get at the root cause of
the current housing affordability crisis, they should look at Trump's
disastrous tariffs on essential building materials and appliances, not
energy efficiency standards that actually lower monthly energy bills.
Now, this bill also strips the Department of Energy of its
congressionally-directed authority to set efficiency standards for
manufactured homes and sends the responsibility to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, an agency with a history of
failing to protect manufactured housing residents from high energy
costs.
Prior to the passage of a bipartisan bill called the Energy
Independence and Security Act in 2007 when George Bush was President,
he signed that into law, and HUD was then responsible for setting
energy efficiency standards for manufactured homes. However, the
agency, HUD, failed to act, leaving residents without an updated energy
code since 1994. It is no wonder that 44 percent of manufactured
housing residents face a high energy burden.
Now, the Department of Energy in May 2022 set a standard that was
long overdue that said that manufactured housing residents had gone
without a modern standard for nearly 30 years before the Department of
Energy issued a final rule, and they did so. As a result, the standard
that exists now, which this bill would repeal, essentially saves about
$475 a year in savings on utility bills; but this bill repeals those
savings. It repeals the DOE standards, and that is what is unacceptable
about this bill. We should be fighting to raise the standard of living
of manufactured housing residents, not lowering it with higher costs.
That is why I strongly oppose the bill. The affordability crisis is
quite literally hitting home for millions of Americans, and H.R. 5184
would only saddle residents with even higher utility bills at a time
when they can least afford it.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, Republicans have been working to make sure we bring down
utility costs and energy costs across this country, and that means
making sure that we have that energy that has been given us.
When we look at what we have been able to do, especially in oil and
natural gas production, from the days of Jimmy Carter when we were told
that we were supposed to shut down our thermostats, make sure you put a
sweater on, walk to work, well, Republicans did something about it and
put the laws and regulations into place to make sure.
However, people who live in certain States are going to see their
prices going up. Looking at this chart, what we see is when you look at
California, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island,
their prices have gone up. We also know that we had the Governors up in
New England this year who stated that they were fearful that their
consumers were going to pay 40 percent more for power this winter.
Republicans want to do something about that in this country and make
sure we get the permitting laws done that we have been working on in
committee.
At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Carter).
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding and for hosting us today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Affordable HOMES Act.
Manufactured homes are an essential part of our effort to meet the
demand for affordable housing in America. Unfortunately, manufactured
homes are currently subject to burdensome and unnecessary Biden-Harris
regulations that are raising prices.
This commonsense bill would eliminate the Department of Energy's
duplicative authority over manufactured home energy efficiency
standards while ensuring the Department of Housing and Urban
Development maintains full regulatory authority. This creates less red
tape without sacrificing quality and efficiency.

When energy efficiency standards are streamlined, it can lower costs
and ensure that more Americans can afford homes.
Congress owes it to the next generation of Americans to make buying a
home as affordable and accessible as possible, and this bill helps to
do that.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Representative Houchin, for
introducing this bill, and I urge its immediate adoption.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), who is the ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Energy.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New
Jersey for yielding the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5184 because it will lead
to higher costs for hardworking American families, especially higher
electric bills that are spiking under Republican policies.
Despite President Trump's promise that he was going to lower electric
bills, he was going to cut them in half, electricity prices are up by
over 13 percent over last year and much higher in many places.
Americans have been hammered with about $86 billion in rate increases.
In Florida, the Republican utilities commission just passed along the
highest rate increase in the history of our State. Some are
characterizing this as the largest rate increase in the history of the
country.
The Republican big, ugly bill is also driving prices higher, along
with Trump's illegal interference with clean energy projects that were
ready to come on line and help lower prices. That is just not smart,
and neither is this bill that would gut the Department of Energy's
ability to set energy efficiency standards for manufactured homes.
These were goals given by Congress in a bipartisan way years ago to
help our neighbors save money back home.
Yes, Americans are facing a housing affordability crisis, but they
are also facing an energy affordability crisis. Republicans are using
this bill to try to prevent a false choice between tackling both of
those problems, but Republicans have done nothing to address the
economic instability of hardworking American families.
Just ask my neighbors back home in Florida. Florida has more
manufactured homes than any State in the country, about 800,000
manufactured homes, so that is 10 percent of all manufactured housing
in the United States. What the Republicans will not tell you is that
manufactured homes often have very poor insulation. They use about 50
percent more electricity than other types of construction.

[[Page H597]]

Utilities in Florida do not offer any efficiency programs designed
for manufactured homes, so there is no help there. As a result, it is
incredibly difficult for the people living in these homes to pay their
electric bills. It is only getting worse with longer, hotter summers
fueled by climate change.
At the end of the year, my hometown newspaper actually took a look at
the soaring electric bills for manufactured homes. Mr. Speaker, I
include in the Record the Tampa Bay Times article of December 30, ``For
Tampa Bay's mobile home residents, high electric bills can be a
crisis.''

For Tampa Bay's Mobile Home Residents, High Electric Bills Can Be a
Crisis

(By Emily L. Mahoney and Max Chesnes, Dec. 30, 2025)

Energy efficiency standards for mobile homes haven't been
updated in decades, allowing leaky walls to sap budgets.
Rebecca Parris rushes to the bank before it closes.
The power could be shut off soon to her 960-square-foot
mobile home in St. Petersburg, she fears, if she doesn't pay
Duke Energy her overdue bill. The deep red ``Action Required:
Bill Past Due'' banner on a Dec. 16 email from the company--
and the handful that came before it--makes her heart pound.
A neighbor chips in $95, and she speeds over to Bank OZK to
cash the check. This month's crisis is narrowly averted. But
she's already thinking about next month.
``I've worked my ass off my whole life,'' said Parris, 67,
still sitting in the driver's seat of her car from her dash
to the bank. ``But it's been really hard.''
Mobile homes have long been an affordable option for people
with fixed or lower incomes, when a big down payment and
mortgage are out of reach. But beyond the smaller purchase
price lurks a hidden danger: Because of outdated
manufacturing standards, mobile homes can have much higher
electric bills than traditional houses.
For a series of stories on energy affordability, the Tampa
Bay Times asked readers to submit information about their
electric bills. Hundreds responded, and many said they paid
higher bills this year than ever before. Yet even in this
climate, mobile home residents stood out--some with bills
ranging from $300 to $500, roughly comparable to houses twice
their size.
Retired and on a fixed income, Parris has struggled this
year to keep up.
After Hurricane Helene's storm surge flooded her home last
fall, she lost her car, her furniture, a new washer and
dryer. The salt water also damaged her air conditioner, which
she replaced about a month after the storm.
Then she watched this year as her Duke charges climbed:
$170.09 in May.
$258.06 in June, a payment she missed.
$314.85 in July, which ballooned to more than $500 counting
what she still owed.
``It's so so stressful and daunting,'' Parris said. ``I
deal with financial pressures every day like this.''
Rebecca Parris, 67, is struggling to keep up with high
power bills in her 960-square-foot mobile home in St.
Petersburg. ``It's so stressful and daunting,'' she said. ``I
deal with financial pressures every day like this.''
Lowell Ungar, director of federal policy for the American
Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, a national advocacy
group, said that while codes for traditional houses have been
constantly improving to require builders to make them more
efficient, mobile home regulations haven't budged in decades.
``In terms of their energy equipment and components,
they're not built very well,'' he said, referring to the
homes' insulation, windows and water heaters, for example.
``The federal code hasn't been changed since 1994--and it
wasn't very strong then.''
Unlike other types of housing, mobile homes are only
subject to federal energy standards, not state building
codes. In 2007, Congress recognized that these requirements
were too weak and passed a law directing the U.S. Department
of Energy to update them. That still hasn't happened.
The agency released updated rules in 2022, but delays to
their compliance date, bureaucratic back-and-forth and
pressure from the manufactured home industry has led to a
``long saga'' of delays, Ungar said.
A bill in Congress called the Affordable HOMES Act, a
Republican-sponsored measure that is advancing with the
support of some Democrats, would roll back the Department of
Energy's most recent attempt to update the standards and
block the agency from setting future ones.
Proponents contend that stricter standards will make new
homes cost more for consumers, an agrument that Ungar said is
outweighed by the larger savings on energy bills, which
result in lower monthly costs even with a slightly higher
mortgage.
``It is beyond frustrating that this has dragged on now
for, depending how you count, 30 years since the energy code
was last updated and 18 years since Congress told the
Department of Energy to fix the problem,'' Ungar said.
``Every year, there's tens of thousands of new homes that
stick their residents with these bills for the decades that
people are in those homes.''
Parris blames the poor insulation in her 1970s home for
leaching cool air in the summer. She'll set her air
conditioning to 77 degrees, but the temperature inside rises
to around 87.
Duke representatives have told her that her new air
conditioning may have been installed improperly, Parris said,
and have explained that her kilowatt usage is double what
they would expect of a home her size.
Poor insulation exacerbates costs that are already rising
because of hikes to base rates and--particularly stark this
year--steep hurricane recovery fees from 2024's disastrous
season.
Brad Coath paid more when he bought his mobile home to get
it upgraded with extra insulation. It's paid off, he said, as
he's noticed it holds its temperature well in the summer.
Still, Coath, a 66-year-old retired nurse, has seen the bills
for his St. Petersburg mobile home swell.
He's enrolled in Duke's budget billing program, which
averages out bills across each quarter to make them more
predictable. They went from around $150 to over $200 this
summer, prompting him to cut back on travel and put off
bigger expenses.
``I get so tired of the PSC just rubber-stamping everything
that comes across their desks,'' Coath said, referring to the
Florida Public Service Commission that approves utility
hikes. ``Do these people not get bills? How do I get that
job?''
Duke Energy has emphasized that the storm cost recovery
charge, which is around $32 monthly for a household using
1,000 kilowatt-hours, will fall off bills in March, which is
also when a separate seasonal discount kicks in. Tampa
Electric's hurricane fee, which is about $20 per month for
the same energy use, will last longer, until September 2026.
Both companies noted they have programs to help mobile home
residents improve their efficiency, like home energy audits
that can lead to discounts. Duke, for example, offers rebates
up to $600 for air conditioner replacements to qualifying
mobile homeowners, and smaller rebates for duct repair. They
are funded by all Duke customers through a charge on their
bills.
Edward Cifelli, 83, moved to Dade City with his wife almost
20 years ago because the rolling pastureland reminded them of
their longtime New Jersey home.
Electric bills for their double-wide usually hover around
$200, an amount they can manage even as the rent for the lot
their home sits on continues to creep upward.
But in August, their Duke bill hit $300 for the first time
Cifelli can remember. He doesn't understand why utilities
charge residents for hurricanes when those should be an
expected part of doing business in Florida.
``It doesn't seem right to me that we pay a certain amount
of money, and when it gets a little expensive for them, they
make us pay extra,'' he said. ``Old people are always
concerned about outliving their savings, and that's where we
are.''

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it says: ``Energy efficiency
standards for mobile homes haven't been updated in decades, allowing
leaky walls to sap budgets.''
They profile an older woman, a retiree on a fixed income in St.
Petersburg, who lives in a 960-square-foot manufactured home. After
Hurricane Helene, she has really been struggling. She lost her car. She
lost her furniture, her washer and dryer, and her air-conditioning.

{time} 0930

Now, her electric bills are soaring because of the costs of hurricane
recovery and these longer, hotter summers. Her electric bills this year
went from $170 in May to $258 in June to $314 in July. That is not
affordable. Energy efficiency standards are needed for future residents
so they can save money over the long term.
In this story--and I will recommend it to everyone that is concerned
about this issue--there is one expert that goes into this and says that
in terms of their energy equipment and components, manufactured homes
are not built very well. ``The Federal code hasn't been changed since
1994--and it wasn't very strong then.''
It goes on and says: ``Unlike other types of housing, mobile homes
are only subject to Federal energy standards, not State building codes.
In 2007, Congress recognized that these requirements were way too weak
and passed a law directing the U.S. Department of Energy to update
them. That still hasn't happened.'' And it needs to happen.
This expert says that people are saying we need more affordable
housing, but if you let folks off the hook for future improvements to
manufactured homes, you are simply going to weigh down the people who
live in them over time. You are not doing them any favors.
This expert says that every year there's tens of thousands of new
homes that stick their residents with these bills for decades. That is
not right. We can do better than that.

[[Page H598]]

This bill also would move the authority to set these standards from
the Department of Energy to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Well, HUD hasn't set energy standards for manufactured
homes since 1994, and it was a bipartisan Congress that moved it back
to DOE where they have the expertise to do it.
If these standards were to take effect, the DOE standard would save
residents an estimated $475 a year on their electric bill. That is not
peanuts, especially for that retiree in St. Petersburg who could use
every cent right now.
If anything, Congress should be pressing DOE to strengthen standards.
Energy efficiency standards are not the barrier to building affordable
manufactured homes. Mr. Speaker, more than 58,000 homes already have
been built to higher DOE Zero Energy Ready Homes criteria, most in
2025, because many want to do better for their residents. The
technology is there and the building materials are there.
These are the people also mostly being hurt primarily by the
Republican policies raising the cost of living, whether it is arbitrary
tariffs--and maybe the Supreme Court will give us a little relief from
these arbitrary tariffs. People are paying, according to one analysis,
up to $1,200 to $1,600 more because of arbitrary tariffs every time
they go to the grocery store or for construction materials, canceled
energy projects, and the big, ugly bill and cuts to healthcare.
While speaking of healthcare, thanks to the American people speaking
out, along with hospitals, doctors, and nurses, every House Democrat
and 17 Republicans yesterday voted to extend the ACA tax credits and
lower costs. I hope this is catching. I hope this would catch on with
our Republican colleagues because people are feeling very insecure when
it comes to their family budgets.
You add on something like this where there is no hope for the future
to help save money if you are going to live in a manufactured home,
your arbitrary tariffs, all this is weighing down on people. If
Republicans actually wanted to lower household costs, they would
restore tax credits, as well, related to residential clean energy that
they gutted as part of the big, ugly bill. They were working to help
people save on the high cost of electricity, saving them thousands of
dollars on appliances like their AC and heating systems and helping
them install solar and batteries or helping them make other home
efficiency improvements.
But the Republicans have rejected all of that. They said that is not
important. It is more important to give a pass or do a favor for Big
Oil companies or the Big Utility companies. Well, we are on the side of
the people because they deserve so much better.
Unfortunately, we know the tone the Republicans set last year. I just
hoped at the beginning of the year the Republicans would turn the page.
Mr. Speaker, 17 did yesterday on healthcare tax credits. I would hope
on energy bills they would also look to partner with us to help lower
the cost of living. That may be too much to ask for, otherwise they
wouldn't be offering bills like these that heap more costs and pain
onto our neighbors back home.
Mr. Speaker, American families deserve so much better. This bill
needs to be rejected. You need to stand on the side of the people and
their pocketbooks for a change.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Allen). He represents Georgia's 12th District.
Mr. ALLEN. I thank my friend from Ohio for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I
rise today in support of H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act.
Mr. Speaker, for many years, including when I first got started in my
career in the construction industry, buying and owning a home was
reachable and a significant achievement for American workers. In fact,
just 6 years ago it was achievable, but unfortunately, in today's
economic conditions, many young Americans are realizing that the dream
of homeownership has become just that: a dream.
This all happened in the 4 years of the Biden-Harris administration.
In fact, if you were born after 1982 in this country, you had never
seen inflation before. It created high interest rates. Simply, these
people don't know what they are talking about.
Like I said, I come from the business world. I lived through these
last 4 years, and it has been devastating to this country.
What we are trying to do here is turn the tide. For example, in the
State of Georgia, the average home is valued at over $320,000. Just 6
years ago, you could buy that home for $250,000. It is just simply out
of reach for countless young families.

Under current law, the Department of Housing and Urban Development
and the Department of Energy have the authority to set energy
efficiency standards for manufactured homes.
Authorizing two Federal agencies to accomplish the same goal only
serves to create conflicting standards and confusion, overcomplicating
the regulatory process for builders, and making it more difficult to
construct and ultimately purchase affordable homes.
We are listening to the housing industry.
Mr. Speaker, with my over 40 years of experience in the construction
industry, I can tell you firsthand just how overbearing and expensive
and burdensome Federal regulations can be. Let's listen to the American
people. Let's listen to the people that build these homes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, the Affordable HOMES Act, offered by my
friend Representative Houchin, is a commonsense bill that removes
duplicative housing regulations and will decrease housing costs in
America.
Specifically, it eliminates DOE's authority to issue energy standards
for manufactured houses while maintaining HUD's full regulatory
authority. In doing so, we will streamline the standard-setting
process, which will lower the cost of manufactured housing.
We should be able to agree in Congress that we need to take this
action to address rising costs. I strongly urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R.
5184.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5184, the
Affordable HOMES Act. This bill does not make housing more affordable.
Instead, it will lock in higher utility bills.
We know and we understand there is an affordable housing crisis, and
that is true in the district I represent in the State of Oregon and
across the country. Too many people cannot afford homes, but here is
the truth: Low-cost homes with expensive utility bills aren't
affordable.
Manufactured homes are a critical source of affordable housing, and
that is especially true for seniors, veterans, and working families.

{time} 0940

These homes might cost less upfront, but monthly utility bills can
determine whether families can afford to stay in them.
Before I came to Congress, I served in the Oregon legislature, and I
chaired the Senate Consumer Protection Committee. I had in the district
I represent, and still have in my congressional district, the largest
manufactured home park in Oregon, with more than 450 homesites. Back
then, and it is still true today, the largest complaint was about
utility costs. Once people get in their homes, they can't afford rising
utility costs.
In Oregon, demand for energy is rising. We have colder winters and
hotter summers. Sometimes, wildfire smoke can trap families indoors,
forcing air systems to run longer and harder. Oregonians may need more
energy, but they certainly don't need higher costs.
When homes are energy inefficient, families pay more. However, energy
efficient homes mean lower costs and homes that are safer, healthier,
and more resilient.
This legislation will increase costs, reduce protections, and shift
responsibilities away from manufacturers and onto families who are
already struggling with high costs for groceries, healthcare, and
housing.
I understand the concern about HUD because they have had the
responsibility since 1994. Finally, DOE enacted some standards. Giving
that responsibility to HUD is not reassuring.
Mr. Speaker, let's defeat this bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.

[[Page H599]]

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Oregon.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Speaker, let's work together. Let's defeat this
bill today. Instead, let's consider legislation that will really lower
costs, not raise them. Let's ensure that the standards are enacted
before we start passing these costs on to consumers.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote today.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Auchincloss).
Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Housing affordability is the number one issue in the United States
economy right now, and manufactured housing is part of the solution. It
is housing in the range of $100,000 to $200,000. New manufactured homes
are HUD energy code compliant, and some of them even are meeting Energy
Star certification standards.
However, we have a challenge. In 2022, under the Biden
administration, with the Department of Energy and the Department of
Housing and Urban Development sharing enforcement authority for energy
efficiency standards for manufactured housing, the Department of Energy
put forward energy efficiency standards that the Biden-era HUD said
they could not enforce.
I want to reiterate that for my Democratic colleagues. The Biden-era
HUD said they could not enforce because of what they would do to
housing affordability with manufactured housing.
It was projected that at least 25,000 fewer homes would be
constructed over the next 10 years, and one Biden-era Office of
Management and Budget official said it could add $5,000 to $10,000 of
additional costs per key for manufactured housing, all to save what
could be a teaspoon of greenhouse gas emissions, about what one Ford F-
150 would emit on one visit to a construction worksite.
This is not a workable scenario because when you have shared
enforcement between two agencies that disagree, nothing happens. What
this bill does is it puts accountability for housing affordability with
the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development still needs to
incorporate the expertise of the Department of Energy. I want to be
clear about this. This does not necessarily lower energy efficiency
standards. In fact, HUD could very well decide that they want to raise
energy efficiency standards, but they are going to make that decision
holistically. They are going to look at the costs.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. They are going to look at the total cost of
ownership, including the initial purchase price plus the cost of
utilities over long-term usage, understanding that many purchasers of
manufactured housing don't live there for the 30 years that the
Department of Energy was using to amortize the energy costs.
This bill streamlines bureaucracy, and it clarifies accountability.
It does not lower energy efficiency standards, but it does lower
prices. This is why the National Housing Conference, which is a
continuum of affordable housing stakeholders, has endorsed this
legislation. I encourage my Democratic colleagues to do so, as well.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, while I appreciate that my colleague from Massachusetts
offered an amendment to improve the bill during the subcommittee
markup, unfortunately, his amendment fell short of addressing the fatal
flaws in this underlying bill.
The amendment allows the Department of Energy to make efficiency
recommendations to the Department of Housing and Urban Development on
energy conservation standards. While this change is better than
completely writing the Department of Energy out of the process like the
original bill did, the fact of the matter is that this bill still
nullifies the Department of Energy's manufactured housing rule standard
for energy efficiency and, therefore, jeopardizes billions in savings
for American families.
Additionally, the bill, as amended, does not specify what HUD should
do with the recommendations from the Department of Energy. Even if the
Department of Energy submitted recommendations, HUD is likely to ignore
them. Let us not forget that when HUD had sole authority to issue
energy codes for manufactured housing prior to 2007, the agency failed
to act.

Again, it is important to ask: Why should we entrust HUD to act
differently now?
This bill undermines the Department of Energy's authority to set
efficiency standards and will rob much-needed and long-overdue savings
from manufactured housing residents. I still strongly oppose the bill,
as amended. Families who live in manufactured housing deserve to have
efficient and safe homes. Let's fight to raise their standard of
living, not lower it.
My colleague from Massachusetts mentioned support from the housing
group. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from five major
organizations that deal with manufactured homes: Americans for
Financial Reform, Grounded Solutions Network, National Association for
State Community Service Programs, Next Step Network, and ROC USA.

Hon. John Thune,
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Chuck Schumer,
Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Mike Johnson,
Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Hakeem Jeffries,
Minority Leader, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Leader Thune, Leader Schumer, Speaker Johnson, and
Leader Jeffries: We write to you as representatives of
organizations that advocate for and support the production of
affordable homes for lower-income families, urging you to
oppose H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. This bill would
result in high energy costs for families who live in new
manufactured homes, undermining their affordability at a time
when those families are having trouble paying their bills.
Manufactured homes have long been--and must remain--a key
source of housing for many limited-income residents. Yet some
of these homes are built with poor insulation, air sealing,
and windows, leaving residents with unaffordable monthly
energy bills. These costs are a burden for the residents, who
have a median household income of roughly $40,000.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last
updated energy requirements for manufactured homes more than
three decades ago in 1994. Unfortunately, those outdated
rules have allowed the continued construction--up to the
present day--of homes that are poorly insulated and sealed.
In response to HUD's inaction, Congress stepped up in 2007 by
directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to set energy
efficiency standards for the homes. Standards finalized by
DOE in 2022 would significantly improve affordability, with
energy bill savings that far exceed the modest added
construction costs.
While DOE and its national labs have much greater building
energy expertise, HUD already has an active compliance
program for its manufactured home standards, and cooperative
use of that infrastructure would improve compliance with the
DOE standards and ease the compliance burden for
manufacturers by creating one enforcement mechanism.
Unfortunately, the timely and effective implementation of the
cost-saving standards has faced opposition, including
litigation, from segments of the industry.
H.R. 5184 would revoke the 2022 DOE standards, and it would
go further, eliminating DOE's authority to set standards for
manufactured homes altogether. This would leave only HUD's
three-decade-old code in place, along with the unlikely
prospect that HUD and the Manufactured Housing Consensus
Committee would suddenly update energy efficiency standards
after decades of inaction. While many manufactured homes
already are built well above the DOE standard, many others
are still built to the baseline HUD Code level.
Congress can and must take steps to improve housing
affordability, including expanding production of homes in
which families can afford their energy bills and be safe and
comfortable during extreme weather. H.R. 5184 would have the
opposite effect, locking in the unaffordable and harmful
status quo for too many families who live in manufactured
homes.
For these reasons, we urge you to vote against H.R. 5184.
Sincerely,
Americans for Financial Reform.
Grounded Solutions

[[Page H600]]

Network.
National Association for State Community Services Programs.
Next Step Network.
ROC USA.

Mr. PALLONE. I don't want to read the whole thing, but this was
addressed to the House bipartisan leadership.
It says: ``We write to you as representatives of organizations that
advocate for and support the production of affordable homes for lower
income families, urging you to oppose H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES
Act. This bill would result in high energy costs for families who live
in new manufactured homes, undermining their affordability at a time
when those families are having trouble paying their bills.''
I won't get into the rest of it, but I just wanted to point out that
many more organizations that deal with manufactured homes, than what
was cited by my colleague from Massachusetts, oppose this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the
10th District of Michigan (Mr. James).
Mr. JAMES. Mr. Speaker, right now, the median cost of a new home in
Michigan is over $430,000, and more than 78 percent of households
cannot afford it. Nearly 8 in 10 Michiganders are losing their shot at
homeownership. They are locked out, priced out, and pushed away from
the American Dream.
Now, after 4 years of Bidenflation, which saw home costs double,
Michigan Democrats are pushing new building codes, expecting to add
another $15,000 to the cost of a new home. Regulatory costs already add
$93,870 per home, and for every $1,000 increase, Mr. Speaker, 3,393
households are already priced out of the market.
That is why I am very pleased that my colleagues and I on the Energy
and Commerce Committee are taking this issue seriously and advancing
real, practical solutions.
Through efforts like my Path to Affordable Homes Act and the
important legislation that Congresswoman Houchin introduced today, we
are working to cut unnecessary regulatory barriers, expand housing
affordability, and ensure families, seniors, and future generations
have a fair shot at homeownership and building generational wealth.
Mr. Speaker, this is how we restore common sense. This is how we
restore affordability. This is how we give the American people a chance
to get ahead, stay ahead, and have an ownership stake in their future.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5184.

{time} 0950

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains
on both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New Jersey has 11\1/2\
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Ohio has 18\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Indiana (Mrs. Houchin), the bill's sponsor, who represents Indiana's
Ninth District.
Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, the American Dream starts with owning a
home, but today families are being priced out by unnecessary Federal
regulations.
The Affordable HOMES Act fixes a simple but costly mistake in
Washington: two Federal agencies regulating the same homes in different
ways.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development has regulated
manufactured housing for decades. It knows the market, and it
understands how these homes are built and the families who live in
them.
However, in 2022, the Biden administration layered on a new
Department of Energy rule that raised costs on manufactured housing
without regard for any of these factors.
The rule raised costs by $5,000 to $10,000 per door, with little to
no environmental benefit. It simply made homes harder to afford. I ask
my Democratic colleagues: What difference does it make if a home is
more energy efficient if you can't afford to buy it?
For families looking to buy a manufactured home, affordability comes
down to one thing: whether the monthly payment fits their budget and
whether they can actually qualify for a loan. Even a few thousand
dollars in added up-front costs can be the difference between owning a
home or being shut out entirely.
When a policy raises costs and locks families out of homeownership
without improving outcomes, it is a failure. The Cicero Institute said
it well in a 2021 article critical of the Biden-era rule. It stated:
``The government isn't magically providing consumers `savings'; it is
merely forcing them to buy more expensive things.''
The bill restores clarity and common sense. HUD sets the standards as
Congress intended while the Department of Energy maintains and
continues to provide technical expertise.
The bill eliminates overlapping mandates that drive up prices and
slow construction, which is why it passed the Energy and Commerce
Committee with strong bipartisan support. We aren't aiming to weaken
standards. We are ensuring as standards are enacted they work for the
people they are meant to serve.
When regulations price families out of homeownership, Congress has a
duty to step in.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman from Indiana.
Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, the Affordable HOMES Act does exactly that
by cutting red tape, restoring clarity, and helping builders build and
families buy.
Despite claims made by my Democratic colleagues about the Affordable
HOMES Act, it does not raise existing rates for homeowners.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 5184.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Evans), who represents Colorado's Eighth District.
Mr. EVANS of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of
the Affordable HOMES Act. Housing affordability is top of mind for my
constituents, and this bill helps deliver.
It cuts red tape by streamlining duplicative regulations for
manufactured homes, which improves housing affordability for millions
of Americans.
This commonsense approach is the exact opposite of what Colorado
Democrats have done. Last year, Colorado adopted the Model Low Energy
and Carbon Code, which forces homebuilders into electricity-only for
residential energy, along with demand response controls.
What is demand response control? Literally, the government requiring
utilities have the power to lock you out of your thermostat, freeze
your water heater, and turn off your lights in response to energy
efficiency mandates.
Mr. Speaker, that is government overreach my constituents cannot
afford. Bills like the Affordable HOMES Act help fix the problem by
cutting red tape, lowering costs, and increasing the inventory of
affordable homes.
I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes.''
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I listened to the gentleman from Colorado, but I just want to stress
that this bill isn't about resolving conflicting standards or
regulatory confusion on the part of the Federal Government.
This is about the fact that the Department of Housing and Urban
Development failed to act for decades on energy efficiency, leaving a
1994 energy code untouched for over 30 years.
Now, when the Department of Energy is seeking to put in place a
standard, well, what happens? First of all, when it was supposed to go
into effect, President Trump this summer basically postponed it.
Now, they are trying to remove the standard entirely, but removing
the Department of Energy's authority to set efficiency standards will
only leave residents unprotected from high energy costs.
The Department of Energy is required by statute to consult with HUD
in setting efficiency standards, and

[[Page H601]]

DOE has worked extensively with HUD on this for years.
Technically, HUD can still update the energy code for manufactured
homes, but they have been severely delinquent in doing so. Just as I
mentioned, HUD has had over 30 years to set a stronger standard, and
they just choose not to.
H.R. 5184 does not magically rewrite history. Giving HUD sole
authority now does not take away the fact that the agency left
manufactured housing residents with energy bills that are 70 percent
more per square foot compared to site-built homes for decades.
DOE's energy sector experts are best positioned to set efficiency
standards for manufactured homes, and it is the only agency that has
successfully produced modernized standards. Those standards would save
$475 a year on utility bills and have a real impact on Americans'
wallets, safety, and security. Of course, though, President Trump
doesn't want that, so he set aside the standard, and now they want to
eliminate it completely. All that is going to do is raise utility bills
tremendously for people who live in manufactured homes.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Kim), who represents the 40th District.
Mrs. KIM. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand in support of H.R. 5184,
the Affordable HOMES Act.
This bill fixes a broken Federal process that has stalled sensible
updates to housing standards for years. While the issue is clear in
manufactured housing energy standards, the lesson applies across the
housing market: Overlapping regulations increase costs without
delivering better outcomes for families.
As a champion of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, I fought to deliver
real relief for hardworking families by raising the State and local tax
deduction cap to $40,000 so families can keep more of what they earn
and finally afford to buy a home.
We must also bring the Housing for the 21st Century Act to the House
floor as soon as possible to help working-class American families get
ahead.
The Affordable HOMES Act is a practical step forward that helps
families without sacrificing safety or efficiency.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Flood), who represents the First District.
Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, first I thank the gentlewoman from Indiana
(Mrs. Houchin), my friend, for her leadership on this very important
issue. It has been an absolute pleasure working with her on this bill,
which makes manufactured housing less expensive and more accessible to
Americans.
I also serve as the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee chairman with
the Financial Services Committee. Our Committee has jurisdiction over
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which is responsible
and should be solely responsible for manufactured housing codes.
Manufactured homes are more affordable than site-built and even
modular homes, in part because they are built to one single Federal
code. Regulatory streamlining isn't just a bonus for manufactured
housing; it is at the core of what makes these homes cost effective.
That is why this legislation is so important. Inviting a second
regulator into the business of manufactured housing codes really
undermines a key value proposition for manufactured housing.
Since legislation passed in 2007 mandating the Department of Energy
establish energy efficiency standards for manufactured homes, the
Department of Energy has struggled to effectively craft and implement
these standards.
They released an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 2010, and
it took them 6 years to propose draft standards in 2016. The final
standards were released 15 years after enactment in 2022, but then the
Department of Energy delayed implementation of the rule because they
were unsure of how they would even enforce the rule. We are now
approaching 19 years since enactment, and the Department of Energy is
still behind schedule.
Unfortunately, the actual content of the final rule is also
problematic. The Department of Energy has been sued for this rulemaking
for both failing to coordinate with HUD, which was mandated in the
statute, and failing to adequately consider costs.

{time} 1000

The Department of Energy even admitted in their final rule that their
analysis has not ``included any potential associated costs of testing,
compliance, or enforcement'' of the mandate.
That is downright embarrassing from an agency tasked with taking cost
into account when implementing these standards.
Suffice it to say, the Department of Energy's entry into manufactured
housing standards has not gone very well. Their standards are a decade
behind schedule, and their rulemaking would significantly increase the
costs of these homes. This bill fixes the problem. It puts HUD back in
charge of manufactured housing standards, including those related to
energy efficiency while still giving the opportunity for HUD to look
into this.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Yakym).
Mr. YAKYM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for the time this
morning.
Mr. Speaker, Indiana is proud to have manufactured housing facilities
across the State that build hundreds of thousands of homes for
Americans.
Manufactured housing is critical to giving Hoosier families
affordable housing. It gives options and supports our domestic
manufacturing economy. It makes homeownership attainable, particularly
in rural areas.
Democrats have allowed the Department of Energy and the Department of
Housing and Urban Development to regulate these homes. This has led to
unnecessary and sometimes conflicting regulations, which drive up costs
for homeowners and creates confusion for manufacturers.
The Affordable HOMES Act, led by my friend and Hoosier colleague,
Erin Houchin, eliminates this redundant regulation and allows HUD to be
the sole regulator of manufactured housing.
Homeownership is the cornerstone of the American Dream. We need to
get the government out of the way so that housing is more affordable
and more Americans can achieve that dream. This is a commonsense bill
that will lower housing costs.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to voting in favor of the bill, and I
urge my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that we need to do a lot more
to address housing affordability, but let me assure everyone that this
bill is not the solution because it doesn't do anything to bring down
costs. In fact, it only raises costs on hardworking American families,
particularly hurting low-income, rural, and senior households.
I think there is a misunderstanding on the other side of the aisle
about the Department of Energy's process in setting efficiency
standards for manufactured homes, so let me just clear a few things up.
The Department of Energy would not issue an energy conservation
standard if the benefits of the rule did not far outweigh the costs.
DOE is required by statute to consult with the Department of Housing
and Urban Development. It is also specifically required to ensure that
the standards are cost effective based on the impact on the purchase
price of the home as well as the total life cycle construction and
operating costs.
Affordability is really at the core of the statute that directs the
Department of Energy to set efficiency standards for manufactured
homes, and as such, affordability is a guiding principle in the
Department's May 2022 final rule that set the efficiency standards.
In fact, in order to accommodate price-sensitive, low-income
purchasers, DOE adopted a tiered approach in the

[[Page H602]]

final rule based on the size of the manufactured home. This standard is
projected, as I have said, to save manufactured housing residents $5
billion, even when you include the upfront costs.
In fact, in the first year of home ownership, energy savings greatly
exceed the marginal increase that might come from the initial purchase.
The bottom line is that the benefits in energy savings to the consumer
immediately offset any increase in purchase price. I think it is
important to reiterate that affordability is about more than just the
purchase price.
A lower purchase price doesn't mean anything if you are spending 70
percent more per square foot on energy bills like manufactured housing
residents currently are. Over 40 percent of manufactured housing
residents face a high energy burden, meaning that more than 6 percent
of their income is going toward energy costs.
Given the recent trends in energy costs, it is more important now
than ever that we maintain the Department of Energy's standard to
protect these residents from even higher energy bills.
I think if my Republican colleagues really wanted to address housing
affordability, they would be speaking out against Trump's tariffs.
These are tariffs that the President has put on essential building
materials. That is the problem right now. Hopefully, today, the Supreme
Court eliminates these tariffs, but right now the increased costs of
manufactured housing is primarily based on the tariffs. That is what is
driving up the costs.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5184, the
Affordable HOMES Act.
H.R. 5184 would eliminate the Department of Energy's authority to
impose redundant energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing
that are already undertaken by other Federal agencies. The cost of
living is on everyone's minds right now, which makes this bill
especially timely.
Let's be clear, overburdensome and duplicative Federal regulations
make life more unaffordable for all Americans whether it is housing,
energy costs, or everyday necessities. Meanwhile, demands for
affordable housing persist across the country, particularly in rural
communities in Wyoming where my State continues to attract new
industries and our reliable energy sector expands.

Manufactured housing is one of the many innovative solutions that can
help bridge the gap and provide hardworking families and growing
communities with access to quality housing.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Houchin and Chairman Guthrie for
their steadfast leadership on this legislation, and I urge all of my
colleagues to support the Affordable HOMES Act.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Shreve).
Mr. SHREVE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Affordable
HOMES Act. Indiana ranks fourth in the Nation in manufactured home
production and in Indiana's Sixth District, 7,000 manufactured homes
provide key housing to our citizens.
For Hoosier families, the dream of owning a home has slipped out of
reach. To right this ship, we need less Washington red tape in our own
backyards and the freedom for families to choose the type of housing
that works for each of them.
That is what this bill does. It cuts unnecessary Federal regulation.
It streamlines the rules. It lowers the cost of manufactured housing,
thereby making the American Dream a little more attainable for more
families.
I thank my colleague, Congresswoman Erin Houchin, for leading on this
legislation. She and I know Hoosiers want common sense coming out of
Washington.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side keep talking about
efficiency standards driving up costs but, in fact, it is not the case.
The costs that are driving up manufactured home prices is because of
Trump's disastrous tariffs.
President Trump has issued tariffs on essential building materials on
inputs, like lumber, gypsum, steel, and even appliances and cabinets.
These tariffs are driving up the costs of new construction,
renovations, and affordable housing development.
Tariffs are raising construction and renovation costs and disrupting
supply chains, placing upward pressure on home prices. Trump's tariff
policies are not only undercutting the supposed goal of reducing the
cost of living for Americans but they are also exacerbating the housing
crisis by slowing the production of housing and adding exorbitant costs
to the process.
The ever-changing tariff landscape, because we don't even know what
it is from one day to the next with him, is creating uncertainty for
homebuilders and putting the dream of buying a new home out of touch
for perspective home buyers. Even the National Association of Home
Builders has criticized Trump's tariffs as harming housing
affordability and driving up costs. American consumers are feeling the
pinch and paying the price for Trump's tariffs.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is time for my Republican colleagues to look
in the mirror because what is really contributing to the housing crisis
in a major way is Trump's tariffs, not energy conservation standards
that save American consumers money. Stop demonizing efficiency
standards, not only in this bill but on so many occasions, and start
addressing the root of the problem.

{time} 1010

Mr. Speaker, that is President's Trump's bad policies. I don't know
if anything has come forward yet. Hopefully, today the Supreme Court is
going to throw these tariffs out, and maybe we will have some relief.
That is the problem here.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Moore).
Mr. MOORE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of
H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. America is facing a substantial
housing shortage. Right now, we are short more than 8 million homes
nationwide. In North Carolina alone, that gap is projected to exceed
750,000 homes.
The reality is simple. The only solution is to build our way out of
the problem. Building new housing right now is slower and more
expensive than it should be, largely because of regulatory costs and
outdated Federal requirements.
Regulations now, Mr. Speaker, add over $93,000 to the cost of
building a single new home. The Affordable HOMES Act takes a step to
address this problem by eliminating the duplicative Department of
Energy regulations that drive up costs for manufactured housing.
Affordability requires more homes to be built faster at a lower cost.
I am proud to support the Affordable HOMES Act because I believe it
makes it easier for Americans to achieve the dream of homeownership.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).
Ms. STANSBURY. Mr. Speaker, I wasn't planning on speaking on this
bill this morning, but I have to say that I cannot stand when
politicians come into the Chambers of these hallowed Halls to represent
the people of this country, pretending to represent the hardworking
poor and working families of this country, and actually are doing the
bidding of corporations and industries that are asking them to do
things to cut cheap deals for them.
This is not about poor people. This is not about working people. This
is not about making manufactured homes and trailers better for people
that live in them. This is about doing the bidding of corporations that
ask them to carry this bill.
As a low-income person who actually grew up in a trailer, let me tell
you that efficiency standards and efficiency programs and support
programs that make it possible for low-income people to actually have
high-quality utilities and to be able to afford their utility bills is
what actually helps working people.
We are tired of your hypocritical and cheap bills that you are
running on the floor.

[[Page H603]]

I just want to say this, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday was a good day for
the American people. What it looks like when you work for working
people is you get shit done. Yesterday we passed for the first time
this Congress an extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies so that
hardworking Americans can actually--actually afford healthcare.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded the use of profanity on
the floor is not within the rules.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I want to stress again the nature of this bill is
totally the opposite of what the Republicans say. It should be titled
the unaffordable homes act because electricity prices are rising across
the country. Americans are going into debt to heat their homes this
winter.
President Trump has failed on his day one promise to bring down
prices for American families. Instead, his big, ugly bill is projected
to increase electricity prices by an additional 61 percent.
How are American families supposed to shoulder the financial burden
as they struggle to afford the cost of their daily necessities that
have been inflated by his senseless tariff policies?
I hear from my constituents every day that affordability is their top
concern, and we should be focused on advancing bipartisan legislation
to end this affordability crisis. Instead, my Republican colleagues are
trying to repeal the Department of Energy's energy efficiency standards
for manufactured housing through this bill.
Mr. Speaker, these standards were thoughtfully developed in
consultation with HUD to balance upfront costs and long-term
affordability. These standards are sorely needed as energy efficiency
standards for manufactured housing haven't been updated for over 30
years.
As a result, electricity bills for manufactured homes are 70 percent
higher than site-built homes. It is cruel and senseless to try to
overturn energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing as
families are facing unprecedented increases in their electricity bills.
The Department of Energy's manufactured home efficiency standards are
estimated to save homeowners $475 per year on their utility bills.
Collectively, these standards would save 17 million Americans $10
billion over 30 years.
These efficiency standards are good for our wallets, and they are
good for the economy. It is really unconscionable for Congress to
consider overturning these standards amid this affordability crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to oppose this legislation, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that Energy and Commerce has been
working on for years is to make sure that we have more power out here
for the American people. Just this week in the Energy Subcommittee, we
had another hearing on nuclear power to make sure that we are bringing
nuclear power back online in this country.
We have got to make sure we have energy out there for the American
people so they can go out there and make sure that when they turn on
that switch, it is not too expensive.
Once again, let's look at this map of the United States. It is kind
of interesting, Mr. Speaker. If I live in California or Michigan or
from Maryland up to Maine, why is it that their kilowatt hours are more
expensive than the rest of the country?
It needs to be talked about, Mr. Speaker. They need to talk to their
State Governors, and they need to talk to their legislators and
regulators. They are raising the prices for their citizens in those
States. We have to make sure we understand what is happening here.
We have to do our part this Congress, but let's look at these States.
We are making sure we are working hard in the Energy and Commerce
Committee to ensure those rates are low for Americans.
As we have heard from both sides of the aisle today, H.R. 5184 is a
commonsense reform to unlock the construction of manufactured housing
and increasing housing affordability for all Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5148, the
Affordable HOMES Act, 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, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
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 vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 263,
nays 147, not voting 21, as follows:

[Roll No. 12]

YEAS--263

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amo
Amodei (NV)
Arrington
Auchincloss
Babin
Bacon
Balderson
Barr
Barrett
Baumgartner
Bean (FL)
Begich
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Bice
Biggs (AZ)
Biggs (SC)
Bilirakis
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Bresnahan
Buchanan
Budzinski
Burchett
Burlison
Bynum
Calvert
Cammack
Carbajal
Carey
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Ciscomani
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Correa
Costa
Crane
Crank
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davidson
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Downing
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Evans (CO)
Ezell
Fallon
Fedorchak
Feenstra
Figures
Fine
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flood
Foster
Foxx
Franklin, Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Garbarino
Gill (TX)
Gillen
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (TX)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, V.
Gooden
Goodlander
Gosar
Graves
Gray
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Hamadeh (AZ)
Harder (CA)
Haridopolos
Harrigan
Harris (MD)
Harris (NC)
Harshbarger
Hern (OK)
Hill (AR)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Hudson
Huizenga
Hurd (CO)
Issa
Jack
Jackson (TX)
James
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kean
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy (UT)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley (CA)
Kim
Knott
Kustoff
LaHood
Landsman
Larson (CT)
Latta
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Letlow
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luna
Luttrell
Mace
Mackenzie
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Maloy
Mann
Mannion
Massie
Mast
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McDowell
McGuire
Meeks
Messmer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Moolenaar
Moore (AL)
Moore (NC)
Moore (UT)
Moore (WV)
Moran
Moskowitz
Mrvan
Nehls
Newhouse
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ogles
Onder
Owens
Palmer
Panetta
Pappas
Patronis
Perez
Perry
Peters
Pfluger
Pou
Quigley
Reschenthaler
Riley (NY)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rouzer
Roy
Rulli
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Scalise
Schmidt
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Sewell
Shreve
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spartz
Stanton
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Strickland
Strong
Stutzman
Suozzi
Sykes
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Titus
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Tran
Turner (OH)
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Epps
Van Orden
Vasquez
Vindman
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Westerman
Whitesides
Wied
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NAYS--147

Adams
Aguilar
Ansari
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bell
Beyer
Bishop
Bonamici
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Carson
Carter (LA)
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cisneros
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conaway
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Davis (IL)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Elfreth
Escobar
Espaillat
Fields
Fletcher
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Friedman
Frost
Garamendi
Garcia (CA)
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Goldman (NY)
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Hayes
Huffman

[[Page H604]]

Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jacobs
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy (NY)
Khanna
Krishnamoorthi
Larsen (WA)
Latimer
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Liccardo
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Matsui
McBath
McBride
McClain Delaney
McClellan
McCollum
McDonald Rivet
McGarvey
McGovern
McIver
Menendez
Meng
Min
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Morrison
Mullin
Nadler
Neal
Neguse
Norcross
Ocasio-Cortez
Olszewski
Omar
Pallone
Pelosi
Pettersen
Pingree
Pocan
Pressley
Ramirez
Randall
Raskin
Rivas
Ross
Ruiz
Sanchez
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sherman
Simon
Smith (WA)
Stansbury
Stevens
Subramanyam
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Underwood
Vargas
Velazquez
Walkinshaw
Waters
Watson Coleman
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)

NOT VOTING--21

Baird
Casar
DeLauro
Dexter
Evans (PA)
Fong
Gottheimer
Higgins (LA)
Hunt
LaLota
Langworthy
McCaul
Mfume
Moulton
Murphy
Norman
Rutherford
Steube
Swalwell
Veasey
Womack

{time} 1041

Messrs. MIN, SUBRAMANYAM, Mrs. McCLAIN DELANEY, and Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ
changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Ms. BOEBERT changed her vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to
authorize the Secretary of Energy to transmit to the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development recommendations for changes to preemptive
energy conservation standards applicable to manufactured homes.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Mr. Speaker, I was not recorded due to unforeseen
personal circumstances. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on
Roll Call No. 12.
Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent and unable to vote.
Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 12.
Ms. LEE of Nevada. Mr. Speaker, during Roll Call No. 12 on H.R. 5184,
my vote was incorrectly recorded as NAY. Had it been recorded
correctly, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 12.
Stated against:
Ms. DeLauro. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted NAY
on Roll Call No. 12.

____________________