Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I share the gentleman's strong passion for making sure that America has the very best deterrent on the face of the Earth in view of what we are facing not only in the Middle East, but obviously, as you stated, in Ukraine and with what is happening on the high seas around the globe. We are so proud of our nuclear Navy.

I rise in reluctant opposition to this amendment because of my dear friendship with Congressman Garamendi, and I respect his efforts to try to have a responsible nuclear deterrent and weapons program.

I understand that. This amendment itself would prohibit funding, as has been stated, for the plutonium pit production at the Savannah River processing facility.

We all know that plutonium modernization is a key aspect to meeting our nuclear weapons stockpile requirements and maintaining the Nation's nuclear deterrent.

On both sides of the aisle of our subcommittee, we have had complete support, really, in ensuring that our country maintains a safe, secure, and credible nuclear deterrent while also addressing the threat of nuclear nonproliferation and terrorism.

However, on our side of the aisle, at least, we continue to be troubled by the unsustainable spending in the Department of Energy's weapons program.

I have to say that the concerns about the budget deficit and so forth attend to every agency, including this one.

There have been cost overruns at a level that are historic, and I think we have to have rigor in terms of managing whatever funds are allocated to that important task.

I wholeheartedly agree with Chair Fleischmann that the National Nuclear Security Administration needs to improve its program management--I hope they are hearing us--given that more than half of its projects are over cost or behind schedule. That is not really a good record for something so important.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding. We, as a committee and as a Congress, have to face the realities of future defense caps and begin making important decisions to prioritize within those programs. Only through strategic prioritization can the program achieve success in meeting the needs of stockpile requirements and maintaining our Nation's critical nuclear deterrent.

Nonetheless, prohibiting all funds to one strategic investment of plutonium modernization at the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility is not the right approach at this time.

Mr. Chair, I thank all of my colleagues. In working together, we will find the right path for America. I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, and I thank Congressman Garamendi for making sure we spend our dollars wisely.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I invite the gentlewoman to come into any pulmonary ward in this country and see the cancers that attend to people who have suffered from carbon ingestion in their careers.

This amendment prohibits funds to implement the Industrial Decarbonization Roadmap published by the Department of Energy in September 2022.

The purpose of the roadmap is to develop a strategic approach to decarbonizing the Nation's industrial sector--I come from industrial America--while simultaneously creating good-paying jobs for American workers, spurring economic growth, developing U.S. leadership in these new technologies, and creating a cleaner, more equitable, and healthier workplace for all Americans.

The industrial sector represents 30 percent of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in the United States. To address the climate crisis, we must address these emissions. We have a lot more people living in this country now. When I was born, there were 146 million. Today, we have about 335. It is going to go up to 400 million people. We have to think about our way of life and how we meet the demands of a new era.

In addressing these emissions, we will also dramatically improve air quality and reduce millions of early deaths in our country and around the world.

The roadmap focused on proven steps for energy technology innovation: advancing early-stage research and development, investing in multiple process strategies, and scaling through demonstrations and integrating solutions, including on the factory floor and places where equipment is repaired.

America has always been about the future. A successful industrial decarbonization strategy is critical to supporting the existing 11.4 million workers in American manufacturing and growing a future workforce in the clean industry transition.

There is a lot of training that has to be done there. How is it that our firefighters across this country, just in the last few years, have discovered the cancers that attend to working in that extremely dangerous and important patriotic service to the people of our country? Their equipment is important, and what happens to their lungs and their bodies is really important.

Again, I invite you to come with me into the hospitals of this country and meet the families of workers who have died and the people suffering because of carbon ingestion.

While it is clear we need an all-of-the-above energy strategy that taps domestic oil and gas and invests in clean energy, we must continue to promote energy innovation, a cleaner workplace in all sectors of the economy, and in the American home as well.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, mining is a really difficult industry. I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, as a daughter of automotive and truck America and an aficionado of NASCAR and having spent a lot of my time on drag strips across the country, including my own reasons, I really rise in strong opposition to this amendment because it is not about the future. It is about the past.

This amendment prohibits funds for the Department of Energy's SuperTruck 3 program within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. It is hard to make an engine. It is hard to conceive it. It is hard to build it. It takes a lot of creativity to understand propulsion. The parts of the country that I represent specialize in that.

The Department of Energy initially launched the SuperTruck initiative in 2009 to improve heavy-duty truck freight efficiency by 50 percent. That is a gulp.

The second iteration, SuperTruck 2, sought to double fuel efficiency for 18-wheeler trucks.

SuperTruck 3 is currently working to improve medium-and heavy-duty truck efficiencies and reduce emissions of freight transportation, that is underway.

This program consists of a public-private partnership with General Motors, Ford Motor Company, Daimler Truck North America, Volvo Group North America, and PACCAR.

Now, I want America to succeed. I want the free world to succeed. This program is building on a proven track record. Within 7 years, four truck makers exceeded the SuperTruck 1 goals and the five SuperTruck 2 projects are on track to more than double their fuel efficiency.

I invite the gentlewoman to come with me through some of these companies and some of these research sites to see what it takes to make America more fuel efficient.

These efforts help create good-paying jobs here at home and boost American supply chains, not in China, not in Japan, not anywhere else in the world, but right here.

Oil prices are on the rise again. Our transportation sector is currently largely dependent on petroleum and thus subject to oil price volatility and what will become diminished supplies in the decades ahead. I don't want America to be stuck on the whims of dictators throughout the world. It is common sense we should be developing energy alternatives and promoting energy proficiency and advancement in our transportation sector.

While it is clear that we need an all-of-the-above energy strategy that taps domestic oil and gas, we must also invest in alternative energy options to diversify our energy portfolio, including hydrogen, hydrogen fuel cells. Where the market is moving, the companies are moving. We need to help to propel that advancement sooner rather than later.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Fleischmann), the chair of the Energy and Water Subcommittee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. I rise in opposition to the gentlewoman's amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, first, I oppose the amendment because the Department of Energy is charged with implementing congressionally directed energy efficiency standards. They are implementing the laws we passed.

The Department of Energy drafts energy efficiency regulations with the full participation of the manufacturers and the public at large, and they do issue their guidelines and regulations for review.

The end result is people save money. They save money on water heaters. They save money on what it costs to wash clothes at home and on refrigerators.

When these standards are set forth, they also promote innovation. You get a lot of new inventions across the country, and we can see the results of that every day. The benefits are real.

As a result of the Department of Energy's efficiency actions in the past, cost savings for American families and businesses are projected to reach nearly $2 trillion by 2030. It not only makes sense for the consumer. Frankly, it makes sense for the country because it means that the systems to supply the energy are also more efficient. It drives us to be better at what we do.

It is estimated per household the energy efficiencies achieved already have amounted to over $6,000 of savings for every American every month when you pay every one of those bills: your gas bills, your electric bills, everything else you have to pay for in your house.

The Department of Energy estimates that this specific rule would slash household utility costs by over $11 billion annually to save consumers $198 billion on their energy bills over 30 years when we look at the whole. With the population growing, we have to do a better job of trying to save resources in order to make sure that everyone has the ability to access them.

Stopping the Department of Energy from finalizing, implementing, or enforcing energy efficiency standards basically is bicycling backward and will only create uncertainty for manufacturers and consumers.

For consumers, costs go up when we don't pay attention. With respect to the proposed energy efficiency standards for consumer water heaters, I urge my colleagues with concerns to participate fully in the rulemaking process, as I have done with respect to my concerns about the proposed energy efficiency standards for distribution transformers. That is appropriate. It is a response people can take to the proposed rule and companies can take.

Congress has vested the Department of Energy with the authority to promulgate these rules. Let us fully participate in the process. Let's make America better. Let's modernize America.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I have long been a champion of ensuring that the United States maintains a safe, secure, and credible nuclear deterrent while addressing the threat of nuclear proliferation and terrorism.

I wholeheartedly agree with Chair Fleischmann that the National Nuclear Security Administration needs to improve its program and project management given that more than half of its projects are over cost or behind schedule.

We must also face the realities of future defense caps and begin making important decisions to prioritize within this program.

As one step in the prioritization process, the National Nuclear Security Administration proposed pausing, not phasing out, construction of this facility to focus resources on high-priority items necessary for nuclear weapon modernization efforts.

Only through strategic prioritization can the program achieve success in meeting the needs of stockpile requirements and maintaining the nation's nuclear deterrent.

We should not prohibit the NNSA from pausing certain activities, especially since those issues will be resolved through conferencing funding levels.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, this amendment the gentlewoman has offered raises serious constitutional issues and may amount to an unconstitutional bill of attainder.

This is not the way to handle policy disputes, with Michael Conner, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for civil works.

This amendment prioritizes, I am sad to say, legislative theater over the American people, and it has no chance of becoming law.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Fleischmann), the chair of the Energy and Water Subcommittee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, this amendment would prohibit funds for the Corps of Engineers to implement or enforce guidance from the 1996 memo called Approval of Perpetual Beach Storm Damage Reduction Easement As a Standard Estate. That is engineering language. While this may sound like a lot of jargon, it is actually an attempt to have one area of Florida treated differently than other areas.

Beach renourishment is an important function of the Corps of Engineers and includes the adding of sediment onto or directly adjacent to an eroding beach, something that our country on many coasts now is experiencing. The Corps of Engineers generally requires that real estate easements are granted when performing work, which makes sense, because the taxpayers are footing the bill for the improvement.

Further, it seems particularly of interest to taxpayers that, if our taxpayer dollars are improving private property, then there should be an easement provided.

In this case, that wasn't required in the past, but the Corps of Engineers realized it wasn't following standard procedures and decided to implement that going forward.

This really comes down to one basic question: Do we want to treat one area of the country differently than all the rest of the areas are supposed to be treated? I believe we should strive for consistency in implementing the laws and regulations of this country, especially when it comes to projects funded with taxpayer dollars.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. This amendment prohibits funds provided by this act from closing campgrounds or parks operated by the Army Corps of Engineers and located at or around Lake Sidney Lanier, Georgia.

I can certainly understand the strong interest in preventing the Corps from closing campgrounds and parks in a particular area. Frankly, I wish my area had one, but we don't have Corps facilities like that. The gentleman has been blessed.

The Corps of Engineers is one of the Nation's leading Federal providers of outdoor recreation. Its recreation sites receive 262 million visits each year and include more than 400 lake and river projects in 43 States. Unfortunately, the Corps of Engineers' recreation funding has been declining in recent years.

I support the notion that we do not want the Corps to begin closing recreation sites due to lack of funding. However, this is an issue that affects hundreds of sites across dozens of States. I do not believe we here today should begin the practice of using funding prohibitions to carve out special designations, but instead should develop a comprehensive solution, fair to all regions across our Nation, to address the challenge of funding the Corps' recreation sites.

I would welcome the opportunity to work with the gentleman on that and obviously the chair of the full committee.

For this reason, I oppose the amendment at this time, but look forward to working with my colleagues to develop a solution to the larger problem. Maybe we can even give a little attention to the Great Lakes. Wouldn't that be great?

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, as I understand it, this amendment prohibits the use of funds for the Department of Energy's Office of Scientific Workforce Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

This bill already includes harmful riders that show Republicans are not interested in bills that can gain bipartisan support and become law.

During our full committee markup--I remember it well--Republicans added a provision that prohibits funds for any diversity, equity, and inclusion office, program, or training. The underlying bill already includes section 606 that prohibits funds related to advancing racial equity and support for underserved communities and related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the Federal workforce.

In addition, section 605 of the underlying bill prohibits any activities related to ``critical race theory'' that, as we heard during the markups when I asked the question, none of my Republican colleagues could even define. I don't see a definition in your presentation here today.

How many times do the individuals on the other side of the aisle need to emphasize that they do not like the words ``diversity, equity, and inclusion?''

I know when we were educated, we were always taught about ``e pluribus unum,'' out of many, one. That is what makes our Nation great, that we aren't just one widget, that, in fact, our common experience is our shared heritages, wherever they might be from. It makes us a more interesting place, and it also connects us to the broader world beyond our shores.

I really do not understand why these provisions are necessary on an energy and water bill, and I hope that my colleagues would stop targeting those who may be different from themselves--or they might think they are--and embrace acceptance or at least tolerance of others.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, this amendment would prohibit funds for the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases.

In my part of the country, we recognize what greenhouse gases are. We have to contain methane at many landfills that have let that stuff belch out into the atmosphere. The satellites that take photos of the Earth from a distance can show us that when we weren't conscious of greenhouse gases, we were breaking through the ozone layer, and we have been able to heal that over time with concerted effort. Those who care to know about greenhouse gases have plenty of evidence around us.

We know that the work of this particular group is crucial to making sure the government accounts for the potential impacts of government actions on the climate.

Now, I just left a group of farmers back in Ohio, and I can tell you that their fields are being washed out because of added rainfall at a level they have never seen before.

We have the saltwater creeping up the Mississippi River right now. I was just talking to one of the Members on the other side of the aisle yesterday concerned about Baton Rouge and what is happening with the ocean and saltwater coming north. This has never happened before. This is very unusual.

Whether it is gases in the air--I think of Canada this past summer. In my part of the country, we never had the kind of fog, I call it, that came from those forest fires down into our region and even made it here to Washington, D.C., and down to the panhandle. This is all new.

As I have said, it is undeniable that we are witnessing growing weather events stemming from climate change occurring in real time, even to the point where we can see it with our own eyes.

As of the end of August, there have been more than 23 disasters in 2023 alone costing at least $1 billion each. With the costs of trying to pick up after these terrible events, whether we are talking about Hawaii or other places in our country that have been hit hard, our homeland security and disaster assistance accounts have tripled because of what is going on.

We know that the events this year have exceeded the previous records set in 2020, and we still have a few more months to go before this year is done. We don't have the luxury to pretend that climate change isn't impacting us--whatever name you call it--or that our actions aren't somehow related to it.

Tell the American citizens who lost businesses or homes and loved ones from hurricanes, wildfires, and other recent natural disasters, and those who continue to face unrelenting flooding in the Midwest, that there are no costs from climate change because there sure are.

It is already past time for aggressive action to address climate change and its impacts.

The truth is that it is having catastrophic social and economic impacts here in the United States and across the globe, and these are real and unrelenting. Pretending that it doesn't exist simply won't make it go away.

Madam Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this harmful amendment and would enjoy talking to the gentleman at any time about my part of the country and what we endure. From what I see in your part of the country, you have issues there, as well.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, all I wish to say on this is there is an old expression: Don't try to fool Mother Nature. I would say and advise, don't ignore Mother Nature.

I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this harmful amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, here is another amendment that prohibits something else. The gentleman's amendment would prohibit funding for the American Climate Corps.

I have been a long-time supporter of the idea of engaging young Americans in helping to build our country forward as the original Civilian Conservation Corps did many, many years ago.

People who became a part of that saw a part of America that they had never seen before. They made friends. They learned new skills. It gave people a pride in our Nation that was incalculable.

The whole intent of the American Climate Corps is to engage young Americans in helping our Nation build forward, whether they would be weatherizing homes, planting trees, installing solar infrastructure, mitigating coastal erosion, permitting fires and flooding--the gentleman talked about some of the needs of our national forests-- constructing and maintaining public trails, and so much more.

From the western Great Plains to the coast and Great Lakes, we are witnessing the wreckage brought about by changing climate with a ferocity that knows no bounds.

Our success in tackling this challenge will require bold and innovative strategies and connecting to the younger generation.

Last month when the President announced the American Climate Corps, he talked about training young people in high-demand skills for jobs in the clean energy economy, as well.

This program will give a new generation of Americans the skills that our grandparents had, which are necessary to access good-paying jobs that are aligned with high-quality employment opportunities after they complete their paid training and service. It is really a program for America and for the next generation, and I would welcome that.

It used to be that most persons had someone in their family who joined the U.S. military. Today, less than 1 percent of America's families are connected to the U.S. military.

We have to find other means to engage our younger people in patriotic service, and this is one of those. I believe we must continue to invest in America's next generation, our future workforce, and this is such a positive way to do it.

I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, this amendment raises serious constitutional issues and may amount to an unconstitutional bill of attainder. This is not the way to handle policy disputes with the Secretary of Energy for our country.

This amendment prioritizes legislative theater over the American people and doesn't have a chance of becoming law.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I would say in reaction to what I just heard on the floor here, there must be two Jennifer Granholms because the one I know is simply exceptional.

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Fleischmann), the chair of the Energy and Water Subcommittee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, his amendment would prohibit any funds to enforce COVID-19 mask mandates.

I must say, America used to focus on big issues. I remember as a child we tried to figure out how to eradicate polio coast-to-coast, and you know what, we did it.

America was inspired by a great a President, John Kennedy, to land a man on the moon, and we did. America did it. We worked together to defeat Soviet communism, and guess what, we did it. We have remnants of that tyrannical regime still seated, and history will show whether we meet the challenge or not. But most of America wants to defeat Vladimir Putin's unconscionable invasion, unprovoked to the adjoining nation of Ukraine.

This amendment is one more controversial poison pill policy rider dealing with face masks. You know what, I didn't really come to Congress to worry about the face masks. I find the majority's odd interest in this peculiar.

Preventing diseases reduces healthcare costs, such as hospitalizations, pharmaceuticals, and benefits employers by resulting in less employee absenteeism. I find it very odd--here we are moving into Halloween and people are spending millions of dollars on masks to go all around the country and parade around in neighborhoods in masks.

Yet, when we talk about facial masks to fight the COVID-19 virus, which is a wicked one, it has been politicized to a level that it is almost a theater of the absurd.

From January 3, 2020, to September 27, 2023, there were how many deaths in our country from COVID?

Madam Chair, there were 1,127,152 deaths from COVID-19 in our country alone. That is 1,127,152 deaths. Some of the people who died we knew and loved, and some were people serving in this room.

Madam Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this harmful amendment and to focus on great quests, not ridiculousness.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, the Department of Energy is charged with implementing congressionally directed energy efficiency standards. So the Department is fulfilling the obligations in law. Now, if individuals want to comment on that there is a way to do that, to fully participate in the rulemaking process, and I urge our colleagues to do that.

Again, the gentleman's interests seem to be rather narrow, and to create false fears--whether it is masks or whether it is trying to get better equipment--more energy efficient equipment in the country to help everyone, businesses that use ice making machines, and homeowners who have ice making in their home.

This specific rule would save Americans over $44 million in annual operating costs. That is pretty good. We make American industry more efficient and we make it cheaper. They save money.

We are trying to act in the interest of the American people. There is a quote in this Chamber, ``Let us develop the resources of our land, call forth its powers, build up its institutions, promote all its great interests and see whether we also in our day and generation may not perform something worthy to be remembered.'' That is what we should aspire to.

In saving the American people money in helping them to promote their companies to save money to make America better, I think that we are on the right path. I think the gentleman's amendment is misdirected, and I oppose it.

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

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, the Department of Energy is charged with implementing congressionally directed energy efficiency standards, and I think it is safe to assume that virtually all Americans, let alone all the people in this room, have benefited from these types of efficiency standards over the course of their lifetimes.

Today, the typical new room air-conditioner uses 39 percent less energy than its 1990 counterpart. In that 33-year time span, the Department of Energy raised the efficiency standard for room air- conditioners three times, and real results happened.

The Department of Energy estimates that these new standards will save American families and consumers approximately--are you ready?--$1.5 billion per year on their electricity bills.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, this amendment raises serious constitutional issues and may amount to an unconstitutional bill of attainder.

This is not the way to handle policy disputes with Mr. Rodrigues, the Assistant Secretary for Electricity at the Department of Energy's Office of Electricity. He has very impressive credentials, with over two decades of work in industry in California and Arizona, parts of our country that understand the new pressures on producing power. Look at the forest fires that have occurred out there and the stresses on the environment that cause millions of people not to have electricity. He has actually lived in places in our country that have experienced it first.

He has impressive degrees in law and obviously in business, so I don't think they are being fair to this gentleman, and this is certainly not the way to handle this.

This amendment prioritizes legislative theater over the American people. It has no chance of becoming law.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time, as well.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, first of all, the gentleman's amendment raises serious constitutional issues, and like others this afternoon, may amount to an unconstitutional bill of attainder. This is really not the way to handle policy disputes with Andrew Light, Assistant Secretary of Energy for International Affairs.

First of all, I think I have to say: Energy security for our country understands the global environment in which we exist and function, and that is both the commercial marketplace as well as on the defense ledger.

This is a very, very important job. This gentleman has very broad experience prior to coming to his current position, even in the area of atmospheric sciences, trying to understand some of the science as well as the security issues involved in America remaining energy independent in perpetuity here at home.

The amendment prioritizes legislative theater again over the American people. It doesn't have any chance of becoming law, and I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this harmful amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Fleischmann), Chair of the Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Will the gentleman yield?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. When the gentleman began his remarks, he referred to the Interior bill. This is the Energy bill. I wonder if the gentleman could clarify that.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. I think the Record will have to be corrected.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Amendment No. 59 Offered by Mr. Rosendale

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, as of the end of August, there have been more than 23 disasters in our country, just this year, costing at least a billion dollars each--each. That exceeds the previous record set in 2020, and we have not even finished this year yet.

This morning, as I drove to work, I was listening to the Representative from Hawaii talk about the recovery in Maui and ongoing efforts there and the struggle and the positive attitude of the people to try to rebuild. Don't try to tell American citizens who have lost businesses or homes and loved ones from hurricanes, wildfires, other natural disasters and who continue to face unrelenting flooding in the middle part of the country that there are no costs from climate change.

Talk to any insurance company, property insurance company. Disaster costs have risen substantially across this country, and they are growing. In fact, they have tripled. The Federal Disaster Assistance Office, just the Federal side, it is billions and billions and billions more dollars.

It is already past time for aggressive action to address climate change and its impacts, and pretending that it doesn't exist won't make it go away.

We must maintain American leadership for our clean energy future and not cede all the economic opportunity, which Congresswoman Castor just talked about when she was here on the floor, to China and other countries who surely want to be right at our ankles and try to dump product into this country.

We have to stand on our own two feet and be as great a Nation as we really are and seize the horizon.

Mr. Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this harmful amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source