Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment No. 38 to H.R. 4394, which would prohibit the use of taxpayer funds from going to the Department of Energy's implementation of its proposed Industrial Decarbonization Roadmap.
The Industrial Decarbonization Roadmap identifies and targets four different categories of so-called CO
What does this portend in the real world? We are already experiencing the consequences of this administration's decision to target residential carbon emissions by attacking those home appliances that actually work, from gas stoves to washers and dryers to water heaters, thereby causing the price of these critically important appliances to skyrocket while also reducing their availability.
We are also suffering through this administration's decision to target the transportation sector by imposing tailpipe emission requirements, fuel efficiency standards, and propping up the electric vehicle industry, thereby causing the price of our cars and trucks to skyrocket while also reducing their availability.
What is the outcome of these misguided efforts? Government imposed wretchedness, of course, but that is what this administration does best. It is no wonder that automobile repossessions are at an all-time high because of bad policies imposed by bureaucrats who are shielded from both accountability and having to suffer the consequences of their bad decisions, but real Americans suffer every day.
This roadmap is bad policy, and I urge the adoption of my amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, the administration's roadmap targets those key industries that significantly contribute to the stability of our Nation's economy and supply chain; namely, the petroleum refining, chemicals, iron and steel, cement, and food and beverage industries.
Instead of helping our American businesses, families, and communities, the roadmap requires the use of substantially less efficient, less reliable, and more costly energy resources, including so-called clean energy, hoping to ultimately replace our ability to access our very own domestic, affordable, and reliable energy resources.
One of the goals mentioned in the roadmap is to ``prepare the existing 11.4 million American manufacturing workers and future workforce for the clean industry transition.''
When I hear that this administration seeks to prepare the existing 11.4 million American manufacturing workers for the clean energy transition and then watch as they attempt to shut down our mines while exporting manufacturing jobs to countries with dirtier products and less effective environmental policies led by dictators and despots, I admit I am more than skeptical as to what preparing actually means.
This administration's roadmap is unworkable and will bankrupt our country.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, another goal highlighted in the roadmap supports a transition to no-carbon fuels.
Mr. Chairman, Americans see through these goals. The reality is that no-carbon fuels are not only no such thing--and only a charlatan would argue otherwise--but they receive four times the amount in Federal subsidies while producing less than one-fifth of the energy as compared to our legacy industries.
These fuels are not only unreliable, even with the ridiculous amount of taxpayer subsidies, but environmentally destructive and require massive amounts of land per unit of energy produced. They kill birds and other wildlife by the millions.
These unreliable projects simply cannot compete with our traditional and reliable energy resources, a fact borne out by their need for massive Federal subsidies to be viable at all. Figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration show that renewables received $15.6 billion in subsidies during fiscal year 2022 and an estimated $1.2 trillion from the so-called Inflation Reduction Act and are the largest recipient of such subsidies.
It is thus entirely foreseeable that the second largest recipient of subsidies, according to the Energy Information Administration, are lower-income families who struggle to pay their utility bills, proving that this administration is hell-bent on imposing energy poverty on every sector of our society.
Why are they struggling? They are struggling because of rising energy prices and rising utility fees as a result of this administration's forced energy poverty. We simply cannot afford to pursue this energy transition imposed on us by radical leftists.
As the sole Representative of a State whose main industries have been hijacked by the Federal Government in the name of this pie-in-the-sky transition, I voice my strong opposition to this roadmap. I ask my colleagues to join me in defunding the Department of Energy's implementation of this proposed Industrial Decarbonization Roadmap.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment No. 39 to H.R. 4394, which prohibits funding from going toward the SuperTruck 3 program.
According to the Department of Energy, this program is unlike previous SuperTruck programs; its primary focus being on electrification and meeting so-called green energy goals rather than improving fuel efficiency.
DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy initially launched the SuperTruck initiatives in 2009 with the aim of improving heavy-duty truck efficiency by 50 percent while the follow-up SuperTruck 2 in 2016 sought to double fuel efficiency for 18-wheeler, or class 8, trucks.
Since then, the program has taken a drastic turn away from these goals. DOE has repurposed this program towards the research and development of lowering greenhouse gas emissions. SuperTruck 3 was created to fund projects to electrify medium- and heavy-duty freight trucks.
Mr. Chairman, Americans are tired of their taxpayer dollars being used to fund programs that ultimately cause more harm than good. We simply cannot afford to support programs that share the same fundamental goals outlined in the Green New Deal. They will destroy our economy and force a change in behavior by reducing the availability of the goods that Americans actually want.
Mr. Chair, I urge support of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, some may argue that this program remains aimed at improving fuel efficiency rather than a repurposed agenda aimed at fulfilling radical Green New Deal priorities.
I refer those who would make this argument to a quote from Senator Merkley in support of this program. He said: ``Climate chaos is the greatest existential threat of our lifetimes, and it is going to take an all-hands-on-deck approach to slash pollution--much of which comes from the transportation sector--that is fanning the flames of the crisis. . . . we can use new technologies to chart a path forward . . . , and lead the world toward a more sustainable future. . . . as we work to thwart the most catastrophic impact of the climate crisis.''
Now, setting aside for a moment the absurdity of the statement, you can tell it was made by a politician who will never be held accountable for the consequences of such actions or actually be required to live under the rules he seeks to impose. He will always be able to afford whatever vehicle he chooses, but not so much for the rest of us.
It is not just left-leaning politicians who spout hyperbole and demand net-zero emissions by 2050. It is also our Federal agencies. Secretary Granholm said: ``Getting to net-zero carbon emission . . . means we must aggressively cut down the largest source of emissions: the transportation sector.''
Then, to highlight this, she referred to the SuperTruck program. She said: DOE's first two SuperTruck initiatives led to a massive leap in fuel efficiency. ``This new funding triples down on . . . a push toward electrifying trucks of all sizes, along with efforts to expand EV charging access and develop low-emission car engines.''
Large scale use of electric vehicles will not happen unless mandated by the Federal Government. This is borne out by the figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The fact is that this wasteful spending is absolutely not sustainable.
Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, in Wyoming, we have many instances of EV drivers getting stranded out in the cold soon after charging their vehicles. We had a California driver, just a few months ago in Riverton, who charged his vehicle enough to go 120 miles but ran out of kilovolts halfway over the mountain, about 60 miles.
On this particular occasion, it wasn't even very cold, at least not by Wyoming standards. Had he been in the same spot just a week or so earlier, he would have been stuck in minus 20-degree temperature with 60-mile-an-hour winds.
The town of Jackson just realized that paying $1 million each for a fleet of electric buses didn't make them any more operational in our harsh winter conditions, having found out the hard way that they are unreliable and simply will not work at higher elevations and in single- digit temperatures.
The point I am making is that this transition that is being forced upon us by this administration is not only wrong-handed, it is downright dangerous.
Mr. Chair, supporting this program is not supporting fuel efficiency. It is another way to prop up the forced energy transition to unreliable resources.
For that reason, I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment No. 40 to H.R. 4394 which prohibits the use of funds to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the tyrannical, unnecessary, and wrongheaded ``Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Water Heaters.''
In late July of this year, the office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy proposed a rule to enforce strict conservation standards for consumer water heaters, holding affordable and reliable home appliances hostage to the will of a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in the Federal Government.
All of this is being done in the name of the allegedly reducing global emissions and enforcing an energy transition that will do nothing to actually change global temperatures, either in the short or long term, but will absolutely cause a substantial increase in the cost of our appliances.
We are facing some serious crises in this country: an open border, over 8 million illegal aliens invading America, a broken supply chain, bone-crushing inflation, China spying on us from above, a war in the Middle East, et cetera.
What does this administration focus on? Making all of us poor in order to force us to use costly appliances that don't work.
This administration is incapable of addressing the real issues that are important to the American public. What do they do? They target the home appliances, tools, and vehicles that actually work, from gas stoves to water heaters, from air-conditioners to lawnmowers, from the internal combustion engine to reliable vehicles. This nonsense needs to stop.
Mr. Chair, I encourage the adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, in this latest proposal, the administration is intentionally attempting to force an increase in the cost of water heaters for consumers and to take those water heaters that actually work off the market.
What did I call that a few minutes ago? Oh, yeah, government-imposed wretchedness.
The cost of home appliances is skyrocketing all because of this administration's war on prosperity. With new regulations, government- imposed market uncertainty, and an intentionally disrupted supply chain, there is certainly a method to their madness.
A new word and concept has been born. This administration and radical bureaucrats running it have one goal in mind, and they call it de- development. Let that sink in.
Throughout most of modern history, our political leaders have sought to improve our standard of living, to improve prosperity, and to make our everyday goods and needs more affordable, not less so, yet that is where we are now. The Biden administration is intentionally seeking to make us all poorer, to make us more dependent on the government, to take away our ability to feed, clothe, and house our families.
It is the concept of de-development that underlies the very purpose of the Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Water Heaters. It is for that reason that we must make sure that such standards never go into effect.
More than 9 million water heaters are sold in the United States every year. What water heaters we use should be a matter of personal freedom and economic choice. Our water heater manufacturers have built the most efficient and environmentally friendly products in the world. That isn't enough, no, not when the goal is not to make our necessary appliances more affordable but when the goal is to use regulations to change human behavior.
I will say it again. When government-imposed wretchedness is not a byproduct of agency action but the purpose of the action itself, you know that you have an out-of-control government that must be starved of money. That is exactly what my amendment does. It starves these new standards of the lifeblood that they need to be weaponized against the American people.
The bottom line is this: The Biden administration doesn't care about personal freedom or economic choice, and Democrats are cheering every opportunity they get to intervene in the day-to-day lives of Americans.
Congress has the authority and responsibility to challenge the extent to which these proposed standards are both technically feasible and economically justified, and they are neither.
This administration's strategy to destroy everything that works is causing energy poverty in vulnerable communities. While powerful clean energy companies are reaping the benefits of billions and billions of dollars in Federal taxpayer subsidies, the consumers are bearing the burden of the costs.
Many Americans are already struggling to heat their homes, pay their utilities, and put food on the table, primarily because of this administration's failed energy policies. This proposed rule only worsens those problems while solving absolutely nothing.
I ask my colleagues to join me in support of freedom and economic prosperity by supporting my amendment to defund this administration's proposed rule by preventing them from finalizing, implementing, and enforcing rulemaking pertaining to energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. This is tyranny and it needs to stop.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source