Unlocking Our Domestic Lng Potential Act of 2025

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1949. It is a harmful bill that demonstrates how Republicans in Congress continue to ignore the rising cost of living and inflation that is crushing American families and that they are willing to sell out American energy to our adversaries like the Chinese Community Party.

I know it wasn't even 2 weeks ago that President Trump said: I don't want to talk about affordability.

Well, we are going to talk about it, and we are going to stand up for people's pocketbooks at home.

This bill is just another example of how Republicans have not brought one single bill to the House floor that would lower energy costs for hardworking families.

Electricity bills are skyrocketing. It is getting harder and harder for people to pay their utility bills. Now Republicans and the Trump administration are making it worse. They have passed the big, ugly bill to rip away savings and rebates for cleaner, cheaper energy a few months ago and energy efficiency that keeps bills lower, all to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy and the well-connected.

Now they want to ramp up gas exports that will make life even more expensive. It wasn't even 1 year ago that the Department of Energy released its study that made it clear, continuing to approve gas exports would raise costs on U.S. households and businesses.

Don't just take it from me, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Industrial Energy Consumers of America dated November 17, 2025. Industrial Energy Consumers of America, Washington, DC, November 17, 2025. Re H.R. 1949 the ``Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2025'' is Inconsistent with President Trump's Pledge to Put America First Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Leaders Johnson and Jeffries: The Industrial Energy Consumers of America do not oppose LNG exports. We do oppose H.R. 1949, the ``Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2025'' because the bill prioritizes LNG exports over U.S. consumers by removing long standing Natural Gas Act consumer protections embedded in Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). H.R. 1949 is inconsistent with President Trump's ``America First'' agenda. LNG exports are forecasted to increase 136 percent in the next five years (see Figure 1) and natural gas producers say they will struggle to meet LNG growth demand.

Prices are already increasing. The November 13, 2025 Wall Street Journal story ``Natural Gas Prices Hit Highest Level Since Invasion of Ukraine'' reported that natural gas prices reached their highest levels since December 2022, with December futures settling Thursday at $4.646 per million British thermal units, up 67 percent from a year ago. For every one dollar increase in the Henry Hub natural gas price, consumers pay on average $34 billion more for natural gas and $20 billion more for electricity, or $54 billion annually. One hundred percent of our member companies are from the manufacturing sector and are price sensitive.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has already approved a significant volume equal to 48 Bcf/d for shipment to non-free trade agreement (NFTA) countries, which equals 49 percent of 2024 net supply. Why then is it in the public interest for Congress to remove consumer protections? This is not a national security issue. What is approved is far more than enough to supply our allies.

When Congress passed the NGA several years ago, it initiated an ``America First'' energy regulation. Congress, in their wisdom, understood that natural gas is essential to the economy and that U.S. consumers do not have an alternative, which makes them vulnerable. Section 3 of the NGA requires that exports to NFTA must not be inconsistent with the public interest. About 80 percent of U.S. LNG is shipped to NFTA countries. The public interest includes impacts to prices of natural gas and reliability. Section 3 gives DOE wide latitude to protect U.S. consumers now and in the future as larger amounts are exported.

H.R. 1949 removes Section 3 and the protection that it affords. The bill removes DOE's authority and responsibility to consider the public interest when considering approval of new LNG exports volumes to NFTA countries.

LNG exports do have the ability to impact domestic prices. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data proves that LNG export volumes are highest during our winter peak heating season months of November through March, which accelerates a reduction in U.S. inventory, increasing the prices of U.S. natural gas and electricity and reducing reliability. The severity of the problem increases as export capacity increases (see Figure 2).

Unlike manufacturing companies, LNG customers are countries who are insensitive to price and will pay any price to keep the lights on in their country. No matter how high U.S. prices will go, they will buy away U.S. natural gas even when our winter inventories fall and prices rise. The LNG 20-year contracts shift supply and price risk from LNG buying countries to U.S. consumers and the economy.

For all of the above reasons, we urge you to oppose H.R. 1949 and preserve consumer protections. Sincerely, Paul N. Cicio, President & CEO.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. They say this bill is inconsistent with the President's pledge to put America first, and it prioritizes gas exports over U.S. consumers by removing longstanding consumer protections. They urge everyone to oppose this bill and preserve those consumer protections.

Mr. Speaker, when you export more gas, that raises domestic gas prices, electricity prices, and the cost of manufactured goods. A vote for this bill is a vote to raise utility bills. That is particularly problematic to the neighbors back home I represent in the State of Florida. The State of Florida, the Sunshine State, you would think would be powered by the sun, Mr. Speaker, but we are 75 percent reliant on gas to generate electricity.

Now, Mr. Speaker, you are saying: Okay, Floridians, you are already being crushed by utility bills, and now Republicans are going to make it worse.

It is raising costs on all of us in more insidious ways too because we do have a climate crisis across the world. Mr. Speaker, when you are paying more to address climate-fueled disasters caused by hurricanes, such as repairing your home, emergency response, and property insurance, then that is an additional cost.

Given that large methane and carbon dioxide emissions are emitted during fracking, pipeline transport, liquefaction, overseas shipping, and combustion, costs go up, and so do pollution and health risks, especially along the Gulf Coast.

Now, let's talk about point number two. Mr. Speaker, if higher costs in electric bills are not going to convince you to vote against this bill, then I hope that America's national security will. Republicans and the gas industry and their lobbyists want carte blanche to export gas to anyone, even our foreign adversaries.

Now, under current law, the U.S. Department of Energy is responsible for authorizing exports of domestically produced gas to foreign countries. In doing so, DOE makes a determination whether or not that export is consistent with the public interest. Republicans and the industry want to eliminate that important review, that even if the gas goes to the Chinese Communist Party and other foreign adversaries that is okay, there is no need to look and no need to review that. That is wrong and dangerous.

Aren't Republicans in Congress concerned that shipping American energy overseas to China to power their AI data centers and their manufacturing is a risk, an economic risk, and a military risk?

I also serve on the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. On that committee, we have heard over and over about the dangers of Chinese industrial dominance. They want to just kind of sweep up all natural resources across the globe for their economic and military advantage.

Why would Republicans in Congress be party to that?

Through this bill, House Republicans want to make it easier for China to import U.S. energy to power their industrial and military sectors.

Republicans have also enacted policies that wave a white flag to China on cleaner and cheaper energy, on electric vehicles, and on the next generation of energy manufacturing and technology, all evidenced by what they have done in gutting clean energy tax credits in manufacturing, in jobs, and in cost savings in their big, ugly bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Plus, it is hypocritical for Republicans to condemn Chinese forced labor, subsidies, and intellectual property theft on the one hand and then allow massive amounts of U.S. resources to flow to Chinese factories on the other hand.

These are not hypothetical concerns. In June, the President posted that hopefully China will be purchasing plenty of oil from the U.S.

Then, after meeting with President Xi in October, the President said that a very large-scale transaction may take place concerning the purchase of oil and gas from the great State of Alaska.

This is all too much. If these projects come online, then U.S. LNG would represent up to one-quarter of all of China's contracted LNG under the contracts that have already been entered into.

I urge my colleagues now to do the patriotic thing. Really, go ahead, and put America first for a change.

It is vitally important that energy export decisions benefit the American people, not our foreign adversaries. Exporting more LNG without guardrails does nothing to lower energy bills for hardworking families. In fact, it will make it worse, and people deserve better.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source