Lower Energy Costs Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment I introduced in concurrence with Representative Lesko to defend America's ability to purchase and use natural gas stoves, a common household appliance found in over one-third of American households.
Federal bureaucrats at the Department of Energy are threatening access to natural gas stoves for millions of Americans through the rulemaking process. This amendment would stop the DOE from denying Americans the freedom to cook on the range of their choosing.
According to the Department of Energy's own analysis, in 2020, 38 percent of Americans used natural gas to cook in their homes. The Energy Information Administration says cooking with gas is three times cheaper than cooking with electricity.
Americans should have access to the cooking appliances that they deem fit. They do not want or need the Federal Government to dictate what is in their kitchens. The Department of Energy's own research estimates that 50 percent of gas stoves on the market today don't meet the proposed standards, which means these households would have to remove them.
This is a direct attack on natural gas consumption in this country and an example of the Biden administration's desire to control every decision we make. Americans should have the freedom to choose their appliances, and Federal Government intrusion is unwarranted and unwanted.
Furthermore, this rule is essentially a tax on consumers, who are already being squeezed by inflation. My Democratic colleagues may argue that these rules were crafted with the purpose of saving consumers money. The DOE estimates the regulation would reduce energy use by 3.4 percent, resulting in a whopping $21.89 saved over a gas range's lifetime. This would save consumers $1.45 per year of the 15-year lifespan of a gas range.
This minuscule savings indicates this regulation isn't actually about consumers' pocketbooks. It is about Federal control at the behest of the radical green policy groups.
People should be free to choose their cooking appliances based on what they need rather than on what the government requires. If a consumer wants a gas stove that cooks faster, then they should be free to choose it, and if a consumer wants a gas stove that cooks slowly but more efficiently, then they should be free to choose that.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, no one should have their choices limited by Federal bureaucrats. In fact, these bureaucrats should not have the ability to implement rules like this at all without congressional approval.
This amendment shows the clear difference in vision between House Republicans and the Biden administration.
Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support consumers and their freedom to choose what they prefer in their kitchens by supporting this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALMER. Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 1, the Lower Energy Costs Act. I am proud of the work that we are doing here to reduce the burden of high energy costs facing Americans and to strengthen our national security. I am also pleased that my bill to repeal the EPA's $27 billion slush fund is included in H.R. 1. It is an important step to right the numerous wrongs in the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act.
I have said many times that the war in Ukraine didn't create the energy crisis; it exposed it. If we learn nothing else from the energy crisis in Europe, it is that we should never make our Nation or our allies dependent on an adversarial nation to meet our energy needs. Sadly, the Biden administration's attacks on American hydrocarbon energy make us more dependent on China, who is an adversary, making this not only an economic security issue but a national security issue, as well. Thankfully, the Lower Energy Costs Act puts us on a path to energy security, improves our economy, and strengthens our national security.
Additionally, Americans have been facing record levels of inflation due to the policies of the Biden administration. Energy costs are one of the biggest drivers of inflation. Everything we use or consume has an energy cost. On day one, President Biden set the course for higher energy costs and higher inflation. When he came into office, inflation was 1.87 percent. Today, it is over 6.5 percent because of reckless spending, increases in massive regulatory costs, and higher energy costs.
The misnamed Inflation Reduction Act contributed to these problems by establishing the so-called Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which is nothing more than a $27 billion slush fund for green advocacy groups.
The reality is energy prices have risen so much during Joe Biden's Presidency that nearly 20 million households are now behind on their household utility bills. If my colleagues really wanted to help the American people, they would do everything they could to help reduce energy costs.
This might be interesting to my colleagues. Polling indicates that a majority of voters support the Lower Energy Costs Act, including 56 percent of self-identified liberals and 69 percent of moderates.
For these reasons, I encourage all of my colleagues to support unleashing our domestic energy production to reduce the cost of living for all Americans, strengthens our national security, and makes energy independent again. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, Federal bureaucrats at the Department of Energy are threatening access to gas stoves for millions of Americans through the rulemaking process.
In fact, the DOE admits that up to 50 percent of all gas stoves currently on the market or in use in American households will not meet the proposed standards.
This amendment would stop the DOE from imposing this regulation. According to the DOE's own analysis, in 2020, 38 percent of Americans used natural gas to cook in their homes.
The Energy Information Administration says cooking with gas is three times cheaper than cooking with electricity.
The American people see this for what it is; a direct attack on all natural gas use in the country and another example of the Biden administration's desire to control every decision we make. Moreover, this rule is essentially a tax on consumers who are already being squeezed by inflation.
My Democratic colleagues would argue that these rules were crafted for the purpose of saving consumers money.
The DOE estimates the regulation would reduce energy use by 3.4 percent, resulting in a savings of only $21.89 over a gas range's life span. That is $1.45 per year over an average life span of 15 years for a gas range.
These miniscule savings indicate this regulation is really not about the consumers' pocketbooks; it is about Federal control at the behest of radical green energy groups who want the complete elimination of the use of natural gas.
I will point out were this to happen, there would be far less food to cook because natural gas is essential to fertilizer for food crops. Its elimination would cut food production in half worldwide.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the fact that my Democratic colleague admitted that half the stoves do not meet the standard.
When he says that half already meet it, you know, by my math, the other half doesn't.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment shows the clear difference in the vision between House Republicans and the Biden administration and my Democratic colleagues' views on these things.
Their claim that this regulation will save American households money is another painful example of how bad they are on math.
House Republicans believe in American energy abundance, and the administration believes in energy restrictions.
We believe in consumer choice, and the administration believes in heavy-handed government mandates.
We believe that consumers back home should make their own decisions, while the administration believes Federal bureaucrats should decide what Americans can and can't do on a daily basis, including what they can use to cook their families' meals.
I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Armstrong).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source