Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Submitted By the Department of Energy Relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Gas-Fired Instantaneous Water Heaters''

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 20, the second Republican resolution in just 2 days that will raise energy prices on Americans. This harmful resolution guts a Department of Energy efficiency rule on gas instantaneous, or tankless, water heaters.

Energy efficiency standards, like the one Republicans are going after today, are a popular, commonsense tool to save Americans money on their energy bills. President Trump ran on a promise to cut energy costs in half his first year, but now Republicans and their billionaire friends are only making themselves richer while sending Americans' utility bills through the roof.

Unfortunately, I guess it should not come as a surprise considering that earlier this week Republicans moved forward with a budget that includes devastating cuts to Medicaid and food assistance for our kids, our seniors, and our veterans, all so Republicans can give tax breaks to their millionaire buddies.

Let me start off by dispelling a few myths about the water heater standards targeted by this resolution.

First, these standards do not ban water heaters. Regardless of what the rightwing media and fossil fuel groups say, DOE cannot ban appliances based on their fuel type.

Second, these standards do not remove consumer choice. American families can still walk into a store, pick out a gas tankless water heater, and have it installed in their homes. In fact, these standards preserve consumer choice. They ensure that all products on the market meet a certain level of energy efficiency so consumers can shop with confidence.

The standards impact less than 10 percent of the gas water heater market, and right now, 60 percent of all models on the market already meet these standards. This isn't an effort to pull products from shelves. Instead, it is an effort to raise the quality of the products on the shelves. That is what we are trying to do with the standards.

Third, and most importantly, these standards do not increase costs for consumers. They reduce total costs over the life of a water heater and save $3.31 billion for consumers over 30 years. They are also projected to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 32 million metric tons over 30 years.

To summarize, these standards allow gas tankless water heaters to stay on the market, they preserve consumer choice, they lower costs for Americans, and they reduce emissions. So it is no wonder that these efficiency standards are supported by consumer advocates and American manufacturers--I stress American manufacturers--who want to preserve the standards.

The Republican resolution before us today completely nullifies these energy efficiency standards. It steals, essentially, $3.1 billion in savings from Americans. Because it is a Congressional Review Act resolution, it goes one step further and prevents DOE from issuing substantially similar standards in the future.

Now, why are Republicans pursuing something that is bad for consumers?

It is because it is good for the gas industry. The American Gas Association and foreign manufacturers are on the side of this Republican resolution that will terminate the standards.

Why?

It is because inefficient appliances mean that gas companies sell more gas.

Now, Mr. Speaker, if you look at where the manufacturers stand on this, three out of four major water heater manufacturers are in favor of the standards and are opposed to this resolution. All three of the manufacturers that support the efficiency standards are American manufacturers, and they have factories in many Republican districts across the country.

Foreign manufacturers, however, are lobbying against these standards because they don't want to spend a comparatively small amount of money to retool their factories to produce more efficient water heaters.

I understand that companies are reluctant to spend money, but what I don't understand is why Republicans are willing to rob Americans of $3.1 billion in savings, all to help multibillion dollar foreign companies save a few million dollars.

Republicans have made their choice. They have basically sided--and I guess that is not surprising--with their oil and gas friends, and they have sided also in this case with foreign manufacturers.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PALLONE. Castor) who is the ranking member of our subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer), who I greatly respect. When he talks about prices, since President Trump was inaugurated, prices have gone through the roof. Grocery prices, egg prices, meat prices, fish prices, and poultry prices are all up even more than ever. Electricity costs are way up, along with housing prices.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman mentions American jobs. As I mentioned earlier, I think it needs to be reiterated that American manufacturers support these water heater standards. Three out of four major water heater manufacturers are against today's resolution, and all three are American companies.

The manufacturers that are in favor of this resolution and against the standards are foreign manufacturers.

If this resolution is successful, Republicans are giving foreign manufacturers an advantage over domestic manufacturers. Foreign manufacturers are against the standards because they don't want to spend a bit of money on retrofits to their factories in order to switch their production over to products that meet the standards.

Republicans have decided that it is more important to save foreign manufacturers some money than it is to save $3.1 billion for American families. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have decided to listen to the lobbying efforts of foreign companies over domestic companies, many of whom have factories in Republican districts.

Madam Speaker, it just doesn't make any sense to me. The Trump administration is all about America first, but the words are meaningless when it comes down to it. Republicans aren't here to stand up for American families and American companies. It is very much the opposite. My colleagues are here to attack regulations and help out their Big Oil and Gas friends.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand with American companies and families and to vote against this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I respect the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jack) for looking out for his district, but this plant that he is talking about in his district is the Japanese company. This is the one non-American manufacturing company.

All of the other companies that manufacture these products are American, and they are the ones that support these energy efficiencies because they have made the investments and created more jobs when they retrofitted their companies for this product.

Madam Speaker, this company is a multibillion-dollar Japanese company in Georgia. It is estimated that it would cost them about $10 million to retrofit their plant so that they could produce more efficient tanks, and they don't want to do it. They don't want to make that investment, which would create more jobs.

Madam Speaker, I understand where my friend, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jack), is coming from, but we have to look at this as the total picture.

Most of these tanks are manufactured in the United States by American companies, and they are in a lot of the red States. They are in Tennessee, for example. They are saying: This is fine. We want the more efficient standards. We want to save Americans money. We are the good actors, not the bad actors.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. McClellan), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I will call out some of the problems that I see on the Republican side in terms of their arguments that we have heard this morning.

Over the last 2 years, Republicans have claimed that they care about energy costs. On the campaign trail, they repeatedly promised to lower costs and lower inflation, but, again, none of their actions line up with their promises.

If you are paying attention to energy load growth in this country, you know that, in addition to increasing generation, we have to incorporate ways of reducing energy demand. Energy conservation standards are one of the tools that help lower costs and help reduce demand.

The previous administration's efficiency standards are estimated to save consumers $1 trillion over 30 years. That is a trillion dollars. The water heater standards alone would save $3.1 billion--that is, if Republicans don't kill the standards right here today, which is what they are doing.

Republicans don't want Americans to realize those savings. They want Americans to be stuck with older, energy-guzzling appliances that cost more money every time you turn them on. I think that is ridiculous and so should everyone else in this Chamber.

Republicans claim they are concerned about the higher upfront costs of these appliances, but 2\1/2\ years ago, when we voted on the Inflation Reduction Act, which contained $9 billion in rebates and other investments in lowering the costs of energy-efficient appliances, Republicans all voted no.

Madam Speaker, let's review. They don't want to make positive economic investments because they are concerned about the upfront costs, but then they also refuse to take action to lower those costs. If you brought that mentality to the private sector, you would be fired in a heartbeat, but that is the orthodoxy in today's Trump-Musk Republican Party.

Lowering energy costs for consumers via efficiency gains used to be a bipartisan issue. We made real progress on this in 1992 and again in 2005, but somewhere along the way, Republicans decided to become the party of higher energy costs rather than the ones fighting for the American homeowner. That is a real shame.

For that reason, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source