Providing for Consideration of H.R. Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of Providing for Consideration of H.R. Separation of Powers Restoration Act of Providing for Consideration of H.R. Gas Stove Protection and Freedom Act; and Providing for Consideration of H.R. Save Our Gas Stoves Act, and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Kentucky for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, he is completely correct. The only constitutional infirmity is the extent to which we are allowing bureaucrats to make up the law and make up policies without being checked by the branch represented by the people in this body and in the Senate to check them under our Constitution. That is the constitutional infirmity.

To my friend from Texas, who was regaling us on the absurdity, apparently, of our desire to protect the American people from the regulatory state clamping down on their ability to choose how they want to live and have the energy of their choice: Which is it?

The gentleman from Texas sat down in the well and was trying to say, no, we are not trying to ban this, and we are not going to do anything about that, when, by the way, the administration literally said: Ban stoves. It was a literal quote, and I think when they say something, you should actually believe them.

Then the gentleman from Texas went on to say: They want to protect all manner of pollution. We want to stop the scourge of global warming.

Well, which is it? Are we banning stoves in pursuit of unicorn energy theory, or are we actually going to allow the American people to be free?

The reality is, my friend from Texas gave up the joke. Everybody gets it. Everybody knows it. We know exactly where our Democratic colleagues are. They do want to ban the internal combustion engine. They have effectively said so. They do want to get rid of the burning of fossil fuels. They do want to make energy more expensive for the American people. They literally say so. That is the truth.

The fact is, it is not just energy. We have the REINS Act trying to restrict the power of the executive branch so we can stop things like a half-trillion-dollar student loan bailout, which Nancy Pelosi said: The President ``does not have that power. That has to be an act of Congress.''

They want to force schools to allow biological men to compete in women's sports under Title IX. We have an amendment to address that.

The executive branch wants to force 10.4 million healthcare workers to take a COVID jab or lose their job, use taxpayer dollars to provide abortions at the VA, unilaterally turn potentially millions of Americans into felons overnight for owning a piece of plastic attached to a constitutionally protected gun, use the EPA to regulate gas and coal-fired power plants out of existence, and use the Department of Energy to tell Americans what type of gas stove they can and can't buy.

We get the joke. The REINS Act is necessary, and I support it. However, I have to use my last 30 seconds to say this: It is ironic that we are voting on the REINS Act just 1 week after Republicans gave up our debt ceiling leverage to actually get it signed into law. That is precisely how the swamp works, Mr. Speaker.

The REINS Act was in our good bill, the Limit, Save, Grow Act, in April. We walked away from it last week to cut a deal, and we shouldn't have. Instead, we are engaging in theater where we are going to send it to the Senate for it to die. We should be serious about forcing votes to get it done in this body.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source