Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Submitted By the Environmental Protection Agency Relating to ``Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles''

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Speaker, the Inflation Reduction Act, the bipartisan infrastructure law, and the CHIPS Act constitute the most important climate legislation ever enacted. EPA modeling indicates implementation of the IRA alone can achieve a reduction of the transportation sector's carbon pollution by roughly 11 to 25 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. EPA's final rule is expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from light-duty vehicles by about 11 percent every year.

Once fully phased in, the standards will save the average American driver an estimated $6,000 in reduced fuel and maintenance over the life of a vehicle.

I am going to say that again because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to think this is bad for consumers when, in fact, it is good. Once fully phased in, the standards will save the average American driver an estimated $6,000 over the life of a vehicle.

The beauty of this approach is that it allows automakers to do what they do best, which is innovate. EPA's rule does not mandate or ban any specific technology. Instead, it sets emission standards that apply across an entire auto fleet rather than specific vehicles. What this means is that auto companies could still produce cars with higher emissions provided that they balance out the emissions with sales from lower emission vehicles.

EPA did its homework. They worked closely with stakeholders in developing this rule, and that is why manufacturers can use a variety of approaches, from EVs to gas-powered vehicles with particulate filters, to comply. I am confident American automakers can rise to this challenge.

As States and auto companies plan, consumers are increasingly excited about lower emission and zero-emission vehicles. In my home State of Colorado, an Environmental Defense Fund analysis examined the net purchase cost of electric vehicles and found many offered thousands of dollars in lifetime savings. For example, it found cost savings as high as $21,500 when comparing the cost of Ford's F-150 Lightning EV with the gas-powered Ford F-150.

Consumers are taking advantage. In 2023, U.S. EV sales reached 1.6 million, which is a 60 percent increase from 2022. This shows consumer demand for EVs is here and will only grow.

As the evidence shows, EPA's rule saves consumers money and reduces carbon emissions. It is not an either/or. However, to compete globally, we must continue to make progress.

One of the few countries that rivals the U.S. in EV adoption is China. Eight of the top best-selling EVs in the world are made by Chinese companies. This administration has taken strong action to ensure U.S. automakers can compete in this critical sector.

Now, I will address a claim the EPA emissions limit will mandate electric vehicles. We hear this all the time. This is simply not the case.

EPA is relying on flexible performance-based standards. This means, as I said, instead of requiring any specific approach, automakers have the option to allow for a mix of technologies to meet the limits.

This has not stopped my colleagues on the other side of the aisle from pursuing CRAs that would raise emissions and hike costs for consumers. I find that so ironic because what we want to do is help consumers here.

Unfortunately, this isn't new. The majority has spent this entire Congress attacking progress in protecting human health and the environment, while the Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee has moved numerous bills attacking energy efficiency, including the so- called Refrigerator Freedom Act.

At the end of the day, the biggest threat to energy security is our country's dependence on foreign oil and natural gas. However, with this resolution and by ignoring the threats posed to the grid by the climate crisis, frankly, the majority is fiddling while Rome burns.

The Biden-Harris EPA has led. I am grateful for their leadership. If we care about our energy security, we should all support EPA's rule to reduce our demand for a finite resource.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source