Lower Energy Costs Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, this amendment prohibits the unelected and unaccountable Delaware River Basin Commission, the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River from improving hydraulic fracturing regulations more stringent, more stringent than those passed by the duly-elected State representatives and Senate in which the regulation is to be implemented or enforced.

According to the Energy Information Administration, last year, residential natural gas prices were the highest on record. That is awesome. I am sure consumers love that.

The best way to combat these record-high prices is with more competition; simply, more supply and demand. It is to produce more natural gas in America in places like my home State of Pennsylvania, the second-largest natural gas producer in the Nation.

Unfortunately, again, unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats at the Delaware River Basin Commission have instituted a hydraulic fracturing ban for a portion of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, stripping away property rights and mineral rights from Pennsylvanians in contravention of the will of their very own legislature.

The result is a prohibition on the development of critical shale plays in eastern Pennsylvania that can bring desperately needed natural gas to market and the unconstitutional taking of mineral rights of all Pennsylvanians.

Using this playbook, radical environmentalists and unelected bureaucrats will next prevent hydraulic fracturing in the Susquehanna River Basin and the Potomac River Basin, as well.

The threat of this expansion undermines investor confidence and exploration and development projects throughout the Commonwealth and further restricts domestic natural gas production.

To be clear, this amendment simply clarifies that these three commissions cannot impose restrictions more stringent than those passed by the State in which the regulation is being implemented or enforced.

It makes no changes to the ability of States to regulate hydraulic fracturing as they see fit, as their legislatures see fit, as their citizens see fit. This means it would have zero impact on existing fracturing bans in the State of New York.

Instead, this amendment simply makes clear that Pennsylvanians can use their property and mineral rights as they see fit, subject to the Pennsylvania laws passed by their elected representatives, the way it is supposed to be done.

Enough is enough already. It is time to stop this underhanded attack on property rights, representative government, and State sovereignty and restore American energy security.

Opposition to this amendment is support for a hydraulic fracturing ban and for higher natural gas prices for your constituents and your citizens.

I urge my colleagues to do the right thing and rein in these unelected bureaucrats waging war on Americans in their very homes and support this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Armstrong).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, if you don't want to vote for this, I get it. You can tell your constituents at home that you stand for people that are unelected. Most folks at home have never even heard of the Delaware River Basin Commission. They don't even know about interstate compacts.

Here is what they know: They want to live their lives, and they want to vote for elected officials to make decisions that are important to them. If it is so dangerous, how come it is banned here but not there? In the rest of Pennsylvania, we do it.

Mr. Chairman, this is just taking the people's rights away, their voices away from their elected officials, and it is literally the definition of tyranny.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote for my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment repeals section 115 of the Clean Air Act. This vital amendment protects the autonomy of the States over their own energy sectors by ensuring that unelected, unaccountable EPA bureaucrats cannot seize control over these vital industries under the guise of emissions reductions.

The Constitution clearly reserves this power to the States, and it is long overdue that we bring Federal policies back in line with the very Constitution that we swore an oath to.

Section 115 gives EPA the authority to impose emission reductions on the States if the administrator finds, based on the word of some international organization--just based on their good word--that American air pollution endangers the public health and welfare of another country. Imagine if we could do that to China? The administrator determines that that country will lower their emissions a commensurate amount.

Put a different way, section 115 allows the EPA to rely on the credibility of the same international elites who misled us about COVID to force our constituents to change every aspect of their lives because some European nation thought it would be great to do the same thing. Now, we would have to do the same thing.

This is no longer a hypothetical.

Since President Biden reentered the Paris climate agreement, it can be argued that these conditions have been met and EPA can immediately impose devastating requirements as it was argued when the Obama administration first entered the agreement. Subjecting such an important sector of our economy to the whims of foreign bureaucrats is downright reckless and hands U.S. sovereignty over to a foreign ideologue--not even foreign governments, just foreign bureaucrats.

Removing the broadly written language in section 115 is the only way to prevent the delegation of nearly unlimited power over State energy sectors to the EPA bureaucrats and removes the ability of international organizations to meddle in our energy sector.

It is vital that we prevent this Federal power grab before it imposes devastating economic consequences by empowering the States to meet the needs and interests of their own citizens.

Language to prevent the use of section 115 of the Clean Air Act has passed the House three times under Republican majorities: Twice in the 115th Congress and once in the 114th.

To those who view this amendment as premature because the administration has not yet acted under section 115, the impact was never questioned in the past. How many times do we have to wake up and say, well, I didn't think they would do it? I didn't think they would actually defund the police. I didn't think they would have the IRS show up at the guy's house when he was testifying in Congress.

Heaven forbid, I didn't believe they would actually try and ban my gas stove. I thought they were just kidding around. They didn't really mean it. They do mean it.

We know the administration is going to do so because the radical environmental groups that control their agenda have come out and said it.

Here are a couple examples. The League of Conservation Voters: ``While there has been limited use of section 115, numerous scholars have advocated for its use as a pathway to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, particularly since the Paris Agreement.''

How about Foreign Policy for America: This amendment would undermine EPA's authority for ``its potential future applications to greenhouse gases.'' Yeah, we want to undermine their authority and make the authority of the States preeminent. The authority of citizens should be preeminent.

Preemptively removing this authority from the administration before they can act is vital to U.S. sovereignty and our economic well-being.

Mr. Chairman, I urge support for this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Armstrong), since I know he wants to speak favorably about me.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source