Cloture Motion

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam President, today, I join my colleagues to talk about highlighting some of the things that we see in the dubious environment and energy provisions included in the Democrats' reckless tax-and-spending proposal and what that will mean to the American public.

This week, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, a nonpartisan governmental group, forecasted that the cost of Americans' natural gas bills will go up 30 percent this winter. We are getting ready to get into the cold winter season. That means American households will spend an average of $746 on gas heating in the months from October through March--30 percent more than last year.

Now, maybe to some people, $746 doesn't sound like much, but if you are on a fixed income and you have to pay that every month, that means having to make difficult decisions.

Also, with natural gas, which is the primary heating fuel for 48 percent of American homes, which is nearly half the country, this has huge implications for our families.

As I said, just think of retirees in West Virginia, who are on fixed incomes. That 30-percent increase is huge and unmanageable. People already struggle to pay their energy bills in normal times, but with this increase, difficult decisions will have to be made in many households.

Think of a family of four just trying to get through--trying to get through the school year--and they have just enough to buy the necessities for their children, and now their heating bill is 30- percent higher. That is a big hit to that family.

Americans who rely on propane will face an even greater price increase, and that is a lot of Americans. The EIA said it is expecting a 54-percent increase this winter.

So with Americans facing eye-popping increases in home heating, Congress should be considering legislation that lowers those costs by producing more energy here at home; but, instead, the House Energy and Commerce Committee reported legislation to impose a methane tax, which would really be called a natural gas tax.

This regressive provision would make already high heating costs even worse this winter and beyond, and low- and middle-income families would suffer because we know those costs always get passed on. The natural gas tax would put jobs in the energy sector in my home State at risk. This week, we saw reports that this tax may drop out of the reconciliation package. Good news for me, and it would be good news for States like ours.

But even without a natural gas tax or the devastating Clean Electricity Payment Program, which also is rumored to be on the chopping block, the remaining provisions in the Democrats' legislation wastes taxpayers' dollars and includes broad, new regulatory policies that would change this country.

For example, there is the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. It is a $27.5 billion slush fund for Democratic States and progressive organizations to finance whatever so-called green projects they may want.

Apparently, our colleagues are concerned that the over $200 billion we have in renewable energy tax credits is not enough to encourage the private sector to finance projects. Therefore, billions of tax dollars are required to provide even more public financing for their wish list.

Two other provisions tucked into the House bill that have not received much attention could have major policy implications.

First, the House bill includes a $50 million fund to create a new greenhouse gas emissions regulation at the EPA, like President Obama's Clean Power Plan.

My question would be, if the EPA is funded, why they would need another $50 million to create a program.

But this provision directs the EPA to develop overly burdensome regulations. At the request of 26 States, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed President Obama's Clean Power Plan because the EPA lacked the statutory authority.

Yet this $50 million provision, tucked into the $3.5 trillion behemoth bill, isn't only about giving more money to the EPA; it is designed to give the administration the ability to say that future climate rules were specifically authorized by the Congress. These rules could regulate energy production, manufacturing, agriculture--really, any sector in the U.S. economy--and place countless jobs at risk.

Another separate $50 million provision directs the Federal Highway Administration to come up with a greenhouse gas emissions performance measure.

What is that?

States would then be required to set emissions reduction targets based on that performance measure. The Federal Highway Administration is also directed to impose consequences on States that fail to meet these targets.

How much of a reduction in emissions do States have to achieve to hit their targets? What actions will States have to take or not take in order to meet their targets? More importantly, what consequences will the Federal Highway Administration impose on our States that fail to meet their targets? Will they lose their Federal highway dollars? Will States have more restrictions on building new roads? Will there be new requirements to direct highway funding to other activities that reduce emissions?

All of those questions are left unanswered.

This $50 million open-ended provision, reported by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, could jeopardize the ability of States to build new roads and bridges.

These are just a few of the erratic environmental provisions in this reckless tax-and-spending spree. Their provisions have not had the careful consideration that they need to have, and they have not had the vetting that, I think, programs such as these would need.

The package is much broader than that. It is really a lot of wasteful spending. It is regulatory overreach that will make energy and goods more expensive. We have talked on and on about the rising costs of goods and, particularly, gasoline. It is a progressive wish list rolled into a $3.5 trillion bill that inserts the government into nearly every phase of American life from cradle to grave. The reconciliation bill should not pass.

I will continue to come to the floor, along with my colleagues, to shine a light on the harmful provisions and help inform the American people about what really is in this package.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source