REFINER Act

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up

House Resolution 879 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the underlying legislation.

Yesterday, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule, H. Res. 879, providing for the House's consideration of eight separate measures.

The rule provides closed rules for consideration of S.J. Res. 80, H.J. Res. 130, H.J. Res. 131 with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources, or their respective designees, for each joint resolution. The rule provides each such joint resolution one motion to recommit.

Further, the rule provides closed rules for the consideration of H.R. 1949 and H.R. 3109 with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, or their respective designees, for each bill. The rule provides each bill with a motion to recommit.

Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 58 under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services, or their respective designees.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 5214 and H.R. 5107 under closed rules with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, or their respective designees, on each bill. The rule provides for one motion to recommit for each bill.

Finally, the rule tables H. Res. 581 upon the transmission of a message to the Senate that the House has passed H.R. 4405.

Mr. Speaker, after over 40 days of the Democrat government shutdown, the House has returned to regular order, and this majority is continuing to push forward with the America First agenda, the American people's agenda.

All of these pieces of legislation we are considering today are in alignment with the American people's demand and President Trump's executive orders that we maintain a robust posture of American energy dominance.

You know, Mr. Speaker, our Democrat colleagues have developed a strong proclivity to thumb their noses at the development of energy that comes from American soil. One must wonder why they choose to do that. They pay lipservice to environmental protections and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but it is just a fact that American oil and American natural gas are cleaner and more environmentally friendly than any from our global competitors.

Why would they cede our dominance on the global stage in favor of hostile actors who lack even the most basic environmental protections?

We are blessed as a nation to have vast repositories of natural resources that we can draw from and utilize accordingly. When we ignore the opportunities to harness these resources for our benefit, we deny ourselves the opportunity to grow more self-sufficient.

H.R. 5214 and H.R. 5107, two measures reported from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, focus on restoring law and order in our Nation's Capital City, a city that ought to be a model for the rest of the Nation to follow.

H.R. 5214 would revoke cashless bail in the District of Columbia and would require mandatory pretrial and postconviction detention for crimes of violence and other dangerous crimes.

H.R. 5107 would repeal the Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022 enacted by the District of Columbia Council. This act targeted police officers in D.C. for simply doing their duties, and it led to over 1,600 officers being removed from the city's force.

Thanks to President Trump's efforts, the streets in D.C. are safer, and we have the opportunity through these two measures to add to that progress.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, we have H. Con. Res. 58, a resolution denouncing the horrors of socialism. Most of us here in this body recognize how dangerous the plague of socialism really is. We understand its history of failure and oppression. Throughout history, this ideology has collapsed into the most brutal of dictatorships, communist regimes, and outright totalitarian rule.

Many are quick to avert their eyes and cover their ears when presented with facts about the horrors of socialism, how many individuals across the world have suffered and died because of it. This resolution will put everyone in this body on record. The American people will see who espouses this caustic ideology and those who reject it.

I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, while it is true there have been 80 closed measures, this number needs context. Twelve of the closed rules were in the rules package, which passed 2 weeks before the 119th Rules Committee even organized to begin meeting. Additionally, 25 measures were CRAs. They don't allow for an amendment. Sixteen were bills that received no amendments, meaning 41 measures were closed by definition. It is also important that four of the closed rules are duplicates from a previous failed rule. In reality, only 27 measures have been closed by discretion of the Committee.

Additionally, the Rules Committee under Republican control has simply been more productive, producing more total rules than our colleagues ever did. For example, during the most recent Democratic-controlled Congresses, the Rules Committee produced 127 total rules in the 116th Congress and 163 in the 117th Congress. Contrast this to the 200 total rules in the Republican-led 118th Congress. For the 119th, we are on pace to once again produce nearly 200 rules for the Congress.

Mr. Speaker, we are doing our job. We are not closing out debate. We are having plenty of debate. There are plenty of opportunities for our colleagues to offer amendments. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Utah (Mr. Owens).

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

Mr. Speaker, let's be clear: Republicans don't oppose the full transparency of the Epstein files. We embrace the Oversight Committee's task of doing just that. We embrace Representative Massie's legislation here today by putting it up for a vote under suspension. I will be voting for it.

We already have a House investigation that carries the full force of law, and there is no opposition to respecting the majority's wishes to get this codified into law. Let's get to it. Let's get to the vote and end these false debates, straw man arguments, and non sequiturs.

We tried to pass this bill last week, but Democrats wouldn't agree to doing so. Let's vote now. Democrats should stop, listen, and take yes for an answer.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

At the top of this page, I have written: ``Democrat hypocrisy on Epstein.'' Mr. Speaker, that is what we are hearing today.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. I am proud to have supported the full investigation into the Epstein files on that committee.

Furthermore, I am proud to have supported formalizing that investigation by taking the decisive step in directing that investigation by a special rule provided by the Rules Committee. This gave the Oversight Committee's investigation the full weight of the House of Representatives behind the committee's existing subpoena power. It is very important in this debate.

Mr. Speaker, let's get things straight here. In just a matter of hours, we will vote on the Massie bill. That won't preclude the existing House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's investigation in any way. That is a great thing because that investigation is yielding results.

We now know that one of Jeffrey Epstein's closest confidantes was apparently Larry Summers, a Cabinet member in the Clinton administration. We now know that a Democrat Member in this body, Stacey Plaskett, was colluding with Jeffrey Epstein in real time during a hearing. The subject matter was how to take down President Trump. We can't make this stuff up.

We now know that Epstein himself hated President Trump. It is in black and white. We now know that one of the chief Epstein victims stated that President Trump never acted inappropriately.

Don't forget that oversight investigations specifically subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton for their ties to Jeffrey Epstein. They haven't been quick to step into the breach and exonerate themselves, have they?

The truth will continue to come out, as it has, because of Republicans and a current Republican-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee investigation, one that already carries the full force of law. Let's see where that leads.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, we need to get facts straight here. President Trump's Department of Justice in his first term arrested and prosecuted Jeffrey Epstein. We, on our side, want justice to prevail in this case and in every case.

Speaker Johnson has always been clear that if the discharge petition reached the necessary signatures, then the House would consider the legislation, and that is what we are providing for in our rule today.

In fact, as soon as the petition hit 218 votes last Wednesday, House Republicans offered a unanimous consent request to pass the legislation then.

However, the Democratic leader would not give consent to do that last week.

Why?

It is because they are not really interested in this. They are interested in some other things.

Mr. Speaker, I have to correct the Record.

Mr. Massie did not request time from me. I am the person who controls the time on the Republican side. He did not request time from me. I would have given him time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Our colleagues want Americans to believe that this discharge petition and underlying legislation are the be-all and end-all in this investigation. However, it is House Republicans who have worked tirelessly to achieve true justice for victims.

To date, the significant information that has come out has come from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee as a result of it issuing 13 subpoenas. We have released 65,000 pages of documents from the Department of Justice; the Epstein estate, which was not mentioned in the underlying legislation; the former U.S. attorney; and others.

Let me say it again. The unanimous-consent request to pass the legislation immediately last week was blocked by the minority leader, full stop. If Democrats truly cared about finding justice immediately for victims, this legislation would have been passed last week. Instead, they want political theater to capitalize on.

House Republicans, on the other hand, remain focused on truth, accountability, and delivering real justice for Epstein's victims, not political points.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and I am prepared to close.

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

Mr. Speaker, those of us who did not sign the discharge petition are just as concerned about the victims or, as some are calling them, survivors as our colleagues who signed the discharge petition.

We share contempt for anyone who abused anyone else. I have stood on this floor many times, Mr. Speaker, to speak out for victims and survivors of people who have been abused and against anyone who breaks the law or takes advantage of an innocent person.

We will not be characterized as insensitive to that, but House Republicans

who didn't sign the discharge petition remain focused on truth, accountability, and delivering real justice for Epstein victims.

Again, I will point out that it was under President Trump's Department of Justice that Jeffrey Epstein was arrested and tried. We have not tried to avoid this situation. We want things done the right way. We want maximum justice for these victims and survivors.

Our rule today simply expedites consideration of the Massie-Khanna legislation. As I said, we would have liked to have seen it pass last week when we gave an opportunity for it, but it was blocked by the Democratic minority leader.

Mr. Speaker, I ask for support for this rule and the underlying legislation. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 879, I call up the bill (H.R. 3109) to require the Secretary of Energy to direct the National Petroleum Council to issue a report with respect to petrochemical refineries in the United States, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3109.

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

Mr. Speaker, the American economy is fueled by petrochemical refineries

providing affordable diesel and gasoline to families, critical inputs for our manufacturers, and products imperative for the maintenance of our defense systems.

The national security component of a viable refining industry cannot be overstated, and we must not forfeit these essential supply chains.

Under the previous administration, we saw the impact of an energy retreat: higher prices for families and businesses, emboldened adversaries, sluggish economies, and increasing reliance on other nations.

Unfortunately, this is still the case in States like California, where a hostile regulatory environment has forced refineries to reduce operations. In fact, the Golden State is expected to lose 17 percent of its capacity in the next year. This has led to an average gasoline price of nearly $5 per gallon, an increased fuel dependence on Asian producers, and jeopardizing the fuel supply chain of military installations in their State.

We must not let this become status quo across the country. H.R. 3109 requires the National Petroleum Council to collect and examine information regarding the role of petrochemical refineries in the United States and their contributions to affordability, security, and reliability. The report will assess opportunities to expand capacity as well as current risks to refineries.

H.R. 3109 will provide the Committee on Energy and Commerce the information we need to enact policies to deliver affordable, reliable, and clean energy to all Americans.

I thank Representative Latta, the chairman of the Energy Subcommittee, for his leadership on this issue.

I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 3109, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

When I was a young man in the 1970s--when I was a kid, I guess, in the 1970s--I remember gas lines and having to push my father's car to get gasoline. At the time, everybody said we were going to run out of crude oil. That was the thing, running out of crude oil.

I appreciate the gentleman bringing up the crude oil issue. It is actually because of the ingenuity of the American people that we have an abundance of crude oil. The issue isn't crude oil. It is the refining capacity.

Since I was a kid, we found this abundance of crude oil in the Permian Basin, North Dakota, and all the places I can name. We have more oil than they have in the Middle East, which, when I was a kid, a lot of it was coming from the Middle East.

Then, you have this chokepoint of refining capacity. We haven't built a new refinery in the United States since I was a kid, so that is the thing that we want to address. That is the issue we want to address. We do want prices to go down. We don't want it to be $5 a gallon.

I was putting gas in a rental car in California, and I looked over at the guy next to me. I paid probably $2.60 a gallon in Kentucky, and I think it was $4.80 there. I said: Do you guys have any idea what the rest of America is paying for gasoline?

We are here to address it, and we are addressing it by a bill authored by my good friend, the chairman of the Energy Subcommittee, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and a leader in this arena.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta).

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

It is frustrating that we lost 42 days because our side of the aisle wanted to open the government and wanted to have the government operating. We

wanted to sit down and work through the issues before us, not choosing to not fund the government.

I was always embarrassed to even look in the eye--I voted for all of it--to go see a TSA agent at the airport in Nashville in my home State of Tennessee where I fly out of, the FAA people going to work at the airport. I was embarrassed coming here and seeing the people sitting in front of us here, the people guarding the doors of the Capitol building, with no respect, having them come to work without respect and paying them. That was extremely frustrating to me. It is just beyond pale that that happened.

On the Epstein files, the Speaker tried to come and unanimous consent the Epstein files. Remember, last week he came down and said let's pass the Epstein files, and the other side of the aisle objected to it. I don't know why they would object to passing the files.

They held it up for several days. I know there were a few rallies that happened, and then we all voted. It was 427-1. Were they trying to get the Epstein files out, or were they trying to make sure people got in town for their rallies? That is what I would like to know.

The National Petroleum Council that we are referring to in this bill is a part of the Department of Energy. All through government, we have councils of people that are experts in their fields who come to D.C. The Department of Labor has them. People from the labor community come and have councils to give advice on bills.

We know we have ample crude. We know the ingenuity of the American people to have ample crude. What we are talking about today is where 40 refineries in California have gone to 14. If you want affordability, not only do you have to be able to get the crude out of the ground, you have to refine it to where we can use it.

As we are shrinking refining capacity in this country and increasing demand, if we don't increase supply, we are not going to have affordability. You can talk about affordability all you want, but you have got to have the supply to address it. That is what we are focused on doing today.

We want the experts to give us their information. We don't have to do what they say. We want to take their information, take the good ideas and try to implement them into where we can provide lower prices.

If you think this doesn't work, come buy gas in Kentucky. Then go to my good friends who are sitting here from California and buy gas in their State, then tell us what does efficient energy policy do for affordability. I will challenge them to do that. I will say you can buy the most expensive gas in Kentucky, and we will compare that to what is going on in California.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), my good friend and very important member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend from California, and I actually do love going to California. I haven't been in the bay area in a couple of years, and we will figure out an opportunity to come there. My family tries to go to California as much as we can. I know he is from the beautiful bay area. Actually, when I was talking about the high price of gas, it was down in southern California, which has its own beauty, as well.

I am a fan of California. Other than Kentucky, I think California is one of the prettiest States we have in the Union. From the redwoods to the Yosemite Valley, it is absolutely stunning. I absolutely would love to come back out to the bay area because it is beautiful, as well.

In this bill, we are talking about electricity prices. China is building the electric car industry, but they are also building the power generation, like a coal plant a week, I think, to provide the energy for that.

This bill we are talking about is on gasoline and diesel. Remember, everything that arrives to a store comes on a truck. Sometimes they come on a train, but the last mile is almost always or is always a truck. Diesel prices, fuel prices, matter in terms of food prices and about everything else that we consume.

This is important to do. Electric affordability is also important to do, and we are committed. We will work together to get our prices down, but we have to produce more.

That is what we are wondering. How do we efficiently, effectively, safely, and cleanly produce more gasoline and diesel? You can't do it without more refining capacity unless you decrease demand for it. That is not the avenue we have to go, either.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber), my good friend and the vice chair of the Subcommittee on Energy of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, other than the Commonwealth of Kentucky, California is one of those beautiful States in our--they are all beautiful, actually. We live in a wonderful country. There is nothing prettier than the tunnel view from Yosemite Valley.

I don't know, with your lines changing so much, but I know my good friend from California used to represent our beautiful natural resources in the National Park of Yosemite Valley. He still does.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), my good friend and a classmate elected the same year.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Fong), who is from Bakersfield, California, and was elected just recently to Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, we are all concerned about rising prices. My friend from New Jersey talked about since 2022, and he said the emphasis is on what has happened in the first few months of this year.

The decisions were made prior to the present Trump administration to take power offline. I know in my community down in Bowling Green, Kentucky, a few years ago with the polar vortex, we actually had blackouts, we had to have rolling blackouts because of taking power offline.

We all want to address it. The way we address this is not taking power offline, not building new, safer--my good friend from California talked about what they are doing in California to make refineries cleaner and safer, and that is what we want. We want refineries to refine in a safe, responsible, and sustainable way. We can work together to do that.

On the LNG we are going to talk about in just a few minutes, we do have the gas in our country. We have people who can develop, particularly in your home State, Mr. Speaker. The problem is, can we move it to where it needs to go. We know the challenge isn't the access to gas, it is actually moving it to where it needs to be.

We need to work together. I think Natural Resources today had a markup, T&I is working on a markup, and we hopefully can work together as Members across the aisle in the Energy and Commerce Committee to do our share to make sure this explosive growth of energy is not just in gas and diesel but also in electricity. We need every electron we can produce to beat China.

Talking about China, China is struggling and working as hard as they can to beat us to control the data that flows around the world through AI. It

is our job on this committee to see that that doesn't happen for this country, and that is because we have to have enough energy.

Again, this is a Department of Energy council, made up of people in the industry, to give us a report to see where we should go in making sure that America has proper refining. It is not a report that is going to produce what we do. It is the kind of report that informs us in what we do. I know on our side of the aisle--I think on both sides of the aisle--we try to take as much information as we can to make a reasonable decision to make sure we have clean, sustainable, but ample and safe fuel for this country in order to get groceries to the grocery store, either through diesel or gasoline.

Prices matter. It hurts families when their electric bills are high and when their grocery bills are high because people have to eat and they have to have a safe and clean place to live. This is what this is about. This is what our struggle is over, and this is what we are going to accomplish as a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 3109, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, Americans are working more and more for less and less.

Almost every day, I speak with young people who can't afford to start a family, can't buy a house, and can't get ahead. I hear it from seniors who are struggling to survive on fixed incomes. I see it with my own eyes. Moms and dads are putting items back on the shelves in the grocery store because they can't afford them. Parents can't go back to work because they can't afford childcare. People's health insurance premiums are doubling and tripling because this majority has failed to act.

During election season, we heard from Trump and Republicans who swore up and down they would bring down prices. They promised the American people they would reverse inflation and focus like a laser on affordability. They have broken that promise. They have betrayed the American people.

If you want more evidence of that, look at the bills on the floor today: more garbage, more culture war crap, more bills written by this Republican majority of, by, and for the billionaire class.

Republicans moved Heaven and Earth to give tax breaks to the rich and powerful. That got done in a nanosecond.

If you are a regular person staring down next year's healthcare premium hikes and deciding whether to pay a thousand bucks more or put food on the table, the answer you get back from the Republicans is: Let them eat cake.

We are barreling toward another shutdown at the end of January. We could have spent the last 2 months working on passing the nine appropriations bills Republicans still need to pass to stop another shutdown. Instead, they went on a taxpayer-funded paid vacation for 8 weeks.

Let me just say, because we are debating a rule to consider these eight bills, this rule sucks. There are eight closed rules, no amendments, no changes allowed on the floor, take it or leave it. If you are keeping count at home, that is 80 completely closed rules this Congress, the most ever in a year.

Mr. Speaker, I want to correct the gentlewoman because last night in the Rules Committee she said that five of these bills didn't receive any amendments. That is because she didn't ask for any. When you don't send an amendment deadline, everyone knows you are doing a closed rule.

My Republican colleagues have been complicit in these 80 closed rules. Nearly 9 out of 10 times, the majority party has not been allowed to bring amendments to the floor. They are getting blocked by their own leadership time and time again. How does that feel?

Again, this is a terrible rule, and I urge a ``no'' vote. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, those are a lot of words to justify the most closed Congress in history, the most authoritarian Congress in history. It would make Putin blush.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of H.R. 6074, which would extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits for 3 years, through 2028.

We are in the midst of a healthcare crisis. More than 20 million Americans who get their healthcare on the ACA exchanges are going to see their premiums skyrocket next year. That includes 250,000 people in my home State of Massachusetts, who are paying lower premiums and copays due to these tax credits, which Democrats created in 2021 and which are set to expire at the end of the year.

Let me read you some of the stories from folks in my district: I just received my letter, and my monthly costs have gone from $1,287 to $3,026 for next year. As a working family with a daughter who has an autoimmune disease, we are struggling, and I am working 50-plus hours a week just to pay the insurance.

Here is another one: With the Health Connector, I was paying $264 per month, acceptable seeing that I am healthy but not young. Without the advanced premium tax credit, my monthly premium will be just over $800 per month. I can't and I won't pay that. I will go without.

This is happening across the country, and for the sake of millions of Americans and their healthcare, I urge my Republican colleagues to support this bill and vote ``no'' on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, shortly on the floor, Republicans are about to finally bring up the Massie-Khanna bill to release the Epstein files. We had to drag this leadership here kicking and screaming.

I appreciate their sudden and stunning change of heart on this issue, but I state for the record that the Republican leadership has tried to block this day for months and months and months.

I also want to state for the record that Donald Trump could release these files on his own, today, right now, right this very second. He doesn't need to wait for Congress to pass the bill. He could release the files himself, but he won't. That is why we are here, because he refuses to act.

Meanwhile, the Republican majority has blocked transparency at every turn. They stonewalled in committee. The gentlewoman from North Carolina and every Republican on the Rules Committee voted nine times to block my amendment to release the Epstein files, nine times.

Republicans were so afraid of my amendment that Speaker Johnson shut down the Rules Committee and sent us home early in July, and then he refused to swear in a new Member of Congress for weeks because she promised to be the 218th signature to force this bill forward. Only four Republicans signed the discharge petition. Every single Democrat signed on.

In a few moments, I am going to yield time to Representative Massie, who has been the Republican leader of this effort alongside Representative Khanna on the Democratic side. Here is why I am doing that: This bill should be getting a full hour of debate on the floor, but Speaker Johnson, I guess at Donald Trump's direction, is throwing every procedural gimmick at the wall to see what sticks, and he is trying to limit debate on the floor because for some reason he is very, very afraid of talking about this. That is why I am donating a significant chunk of my time to Members who have been silenced by the Speaker for the terrible crime of demanding truth and transparency.

If I had to guess, most Republicans will probably vote in favor of releasing the files, but they are not voting ``yes'' because their conscience changed. They are voting ``yes'' because Donald Trump tells most of them how to vote, and he realized he has lost on this one.

He says that people who support this bill ``betrayed the entire Republican Party.'' Really, really? How is accountability for a pedophile, something Donald Trump campaigned on, how is that now a betrayal? This was his issue, his idea. He ran on releasing the files.

By the way, to those who say that Biden should have released these files, let me just address that right now. You are right, he should have, but he didn't make it his number one issue, and he is not the President right now. Donald Trump is. He could have released the files at any point over the last 11 months, but he has not.

Republicans have had months to sign the discharge petition. They had months to bring this bill to the floor, but this leadership has chosen obstruction. They don't want to pass this bill. They don't even want to talk about it on the House floor, and so that is why debate matters.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman doesn't oppose this? Boy, she has a funny way of showing it. I gave the gentlewoman nine opportunities in the Committee on Rules to bring this measure to the floor. I gave her nine opportunities. Every time I brought up an amendment, she voted it down. There were nine opportunities. To say that somehow this is always what they wanted, I don't know, but that doesn't pass the smell test.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from California.

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman says that we should just trust her and Republican leadership. After what I saw unfold over these last several months, I can't. There was obstruction and the use of every maneuver possible to avoid this moment we have here today.

I say for the record: It doesn't matter whether there are Republicans, Democrats, or Independents implicated in these files. We believe in accountability for everybody who abuses young women. We believe in justice. That is kind of what is uniting many of us on this side of the aisle here today.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Khanna for his leadership. I thank Representative Massie, Representative Greene, and Representative Mace for their courage and for their willingness to stand up for what is right. We don't agree on very much, but we do agree there ought to be accountability when young women are abused. That is what this is about.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie) to control the time.

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

Mr. Speaker, first, let me say how much I admire the courage of my Republican colleagues who are beside me here today.

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, this is not about us, and it is not about politics. This is about the survivors, young girls who were exploited by powerful men. These were men who used money and power to take advantage of girls, some as young as 11 years old.

The President of the United States calls it all a hoax. Can you imagine that? What an evil and disgusting thing to say. These young girls, now women, the survivors, what happened to them was horrific. They were sexually abused, many of them for years, and the President of the United States calls it all a hoax.

What kind of messed up, sick-in-the-head, immoral person says something like that? This bill is about making sure that powerful men are held accountable. It is about demanding truth and transparency for the American people.

Republican leaders in this House lost control of the story. They lost the ability to hide behind procedure, and they lost the luxury of pretending that they were ever on the right side. The American people see it. Survivors see it, and history will see it.

Listening to the Speaker of the House's press conference today, it sounds like he basically wants to kill this whole thing. He is trying to obstruct and derail the process.

Why the hell is he fighting so hard to do the opposite of what the survivors want? What an awful, awful thing to do.

Let us release the files. Let's give survivors the transparency they have long been denied. Let us take back power from the rich, billionaire elites who think that they can do whatever they want with no justice or accountability. Let's remember exactly who had to be dragged here under duress and who stood up from day one to demand the truth.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill, which is a complete and utter waste of the House of Representatives' time.

It asks the National Petroleum Council to do a study, and that is it. That is the entire bill. In my opinion, to ask the National Petroleum Council to do something it can already do on its own makes absolutely no sense.

The House was out of session for over 50 days because Speaker Johnson refused to bring Congress back to resolve the healthcare crisis created by Republicans and to reopen the government. Now, Speaker Johnson claims we will be working day and night on important problems. I certainly agree that we should be doing that. We should be working on problems that Americans care about, but millions of Americans are seeing their healthcare costs skyrocket because the President and Republicans refuse to extend critical tax credits that make healthcare more affordable for millions of Americans.

Millions more are paying thousands of dollars more a year for everyday goods because of the President's tariffs. These tariffs are attacks on the American people, and they are expected to cost families more than $2,000 each year when they take full effect.

Meanwhile, prices on everything from utilities to food to energy, even prices for Thanksgiving dinner next week, are going up.

You would think that House Republicans would be doing something, anything, anything at all to fight these high prices. Instead, we are here talking about a bill that requires a Big Oil and Gas lobby group to put together a report. That is it.

I cannot stress enough that this report is simply not needed, regardless of who does it. In fact, it is almost an insult, particularly to refinery workers on the East Coast, including my State of New Jersey, who don't need a study to tell them why refining capacity here has dropped by over one third in the last decade. It all goes back to the repeal of the crude oil export ban in 2015.

You don't have to take my word for it. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office found in a 2020 report--that was a report--that domestic refinery margins suffered in the wake of the repeal. This bill only asks for the report to assess executive actions, regulations, or policies that have impacted refineries, not a change in the law. If it were dealing with a change in the law, I think that would make sense.

It is a massive, massive oversight to not talk about the law and what happened when the crude oil export ban was lifted 10 years ago. That is what caused the problem with refineries.

The most ridiculous part of this bill is that it demands the study not be done by the Department of Energy but by the National Petroleum Council, an industry advisory body for Big Oil and Gas. I have no doubt that the National Petroleum Council will produce a biased report that will likely complain about every environmental regulation that they don't like, but that protects the American people. That is what Republicans have been doing: repealing all the environmental regulations.

If Republicans wanted an unbiased view of domestic refining challenges, they would have asked the Department of Energy to craft a report. That is not what they are looking for because Republicans just want to sanction fossil fuel propaganda. That is what they are doing with this bill.

It is a waste of everyone's time, Mr. Speaker. It is just another example of how Republicans have absolutely no ideas to help American families lower everyday costs.

We need to be working on real solutions, Democrats and Republicans, to address the affordability crisis. That is what the American people want, not this report.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, my point is that this report does not ask the people that are doing it to look into the change of law that would be necessary in order to bring refineries back.

The reason why we lost so many refineries, particularly on the East Coast and New Jersey, was because the ban on the export of crude oil was lifted 10 years ago. You don't need a refinery if you can export the crude, but this report doesn't address that at all.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), the ranking member of our Energy Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, listening to my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle, this report obviously does absolutely nothing to address the prices of power and electricity that continues to go up.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a document from the Joint Economic Committee, as well as a link to the document located at: https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/22e24fd6-4db7-44c6-93a9- 9710c6f48b85/electricity-bills-report.pdf

[From the Joint Economic Committee Minority, Nov. 2025]

State-by-State Data: Annual Electricity Bills Up $100 Per Family in

2025

Last year, President Donald Trump repeatedly promised that

energy bills across the country would be ``cut in half''

within 12 months. However, this new Joint Economic

Committee--Minority analysis finds that electricity costs are

increasing significantly, with households in nearly every

state on track to pay more for electricity this year compared

to last year.

The Committee estimated full-year 2025 electricity costs

per state based on the monthly electricity bill data released

by the federal Energy Information Administration (EIA) for

January-August of 2025. The Committee projects that annual

electricity costs will be at least 5 percent higher than last

year in 37 states plus D.C., and at least 10 percent higher

than last year in 10 states plus D.C. On average, the

Committee projects that American households will pay

approximately $100 more per household in electricity costs

this year.

Mr. Speaker, last year, as I think everyone knows, President Donald Trump repeatedly promised that energy bills across the country would be cut in half within 12 months of his taking office. This shows a State-by-State analysis of how much electricity bills have gone up instead of being cut.

Just to mention to my two colleagues, here in Kentucky, it says that they have gone up 11.8 percent; in Ohio, 9.9 percent; in New Jersey, 13.6 percent. Certainly nothing like the cut in half that President Donald Trump promised. This report projects that American households will pay approximately $100 more per household in electricity costs this year.

We are going to deal with this pricing issue when we get to the next bill about LNG, which, again, is only going to increase prices. It is clear that the Republicans have no intention of dealing with this crisis of affordability with electric or power bills, as well.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, I urge President Trump and my Republican colleagues to start taking the American affordability crisis seriously. President Trump is simply out of touch with the reality that American families are facing.

Earlier this week, he seemed to mockingly suggest that ``affordability'' is a word the Democrats made up to attack him. Well, that is rich coming from a man who has declared bankruptcy six times. The American people are hurting because of President Trump and the Republican policies, and they should not be mocked for that. Even FOX News reported last night that 76 percent of Americans view the economy negatively.

Americans are struggling to afford basic necessities. A new report from The Century Foundation found that utility prices are up 32 percent since 2022. That is nearly three times the rate of inflation. Nearly a quarter of that jump occurred just this year alone. These rising costs are debilitating to the middle class. Nearly 1 in 20 households are in severe utility debt.

Roughly 4 million Americans are at risk of having their utility bills sent to collections. It is an incredible number. They have done nothing wrong. They just can't afford to keep up with the exponential rise in electricity prices. They can't afford to pay the bill.

Now, the two bills that are on the floor today, in my opinion, will only increase the average utility bill even further. Just last week, the U.S. Energy Information Association found that natural gas prices will rise by 16 percent in 2026, primarily due to increased LNG exports amid flat production growth.

Secretary Chris Wright promised to double LNG exports to countries like China within 5 years. The next bill that we are going to consider is all about giving more LNG to China, to Beijing, to Communist China. Why are we helping them?

The American people desperately need a solution to lower energy costs at home. Why does the President or the Secretary refuse to take care of the American people that the Trump administration is supposed to represent?

Now, I have said it before, but it bears repeating: The Trump administration only cares about bailing out themselves and their fossil fuel friends.

It is time for Republicans to come to the table to work with Democrats on a solution to this affordability crisis, and it can begin here with the Energy and Commerce Committee.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, today is an extraordinary day in this Chamber.

If my colleagues will vote for this measure, then we will see justice triumph over politics. Truth will triumph over deception and obfuscation. Transparency will triumph over dark money. Partisanship will fall away to bipartisanship, and grass-roots, the people, will reclaim the people's House with this vote.

It is going to be a victory for survivors; not just survivors of the Epstein sex trafficking scandal, but the 1,000 survivors who exist. Some of them are victims. They are no longer alive, and some have committed suicide. They share one thing in common: Their youth was robbed from them, and much of their lives were robbed from them. But they are claiming it back. We are going to help them claim that back.

However, it is not just a victory today if this vote prevails for those survivors. It is a victory for every person, man or woman, boy or girl, who has been victimized sexually in this country. Anybody who has been a victim of sexual assault, or maybe they have been victimized by a family member, maybe it is not a billionaire, but they are all waiting and watching to see what we do today.

They are wondering: If I go to mom or dad, will anything happen?

If I go to the sheriff, will anything happen?

We have a chance today to make something happen, something that has not happened, something that should have happened decades ago, and that is to get justice for these victims and survivors, and transparency for America.

That is what this vote is about today.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Greene).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the generosity of Representative Jim McGovern for granting us this time.

I am embarrassed for my own party today. I am embarrassed we withheld swearing in a duly-elected Representative of the people for 49 days just to avoid this vote that is finally going to happen today.

I am embarrassed that my own party isn't going to yield me time to debate this. Even though they say they support it and I authored it, they don't even want to yield me time to debate this during the bill debate.

However, Mr. Speaker, let me tell you whom I am thankful to: these three brave women, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Nancy Mace, and Lauren Boebert. They have been threatened, and they have been intimidated physically and politically--it is disgusting--not by the far left. They have been intimidated by people in our own party.

For what?

It is for seeking justice for these victims.

So my hat is off. I congratulate them for standing strong.

I have always wondered: Where were the Republican men during this battle?

We have taken 5 months. These three women and I have had to drag our party to this floor today to even vote on this.

Ro Khanna is the most to be thanked here. In an extraordinary display of bipartisanship, he did not hesitate when I asked if we wanted to bring this bill to the floor together, if he would stand in the trenches with me. He said yes.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. Speaker, all that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing, and we have had a lot of good men doing a lot of nothing on the other side of the aisle until we did something. Three brave women, myself, and the Democratic Caucus, we did something. Then, what did they do? They have opposed us every step of the way. They have lied about the legislation.

Let me tell you some of the lies they have told. They have said that it doesn't protect victims. Well, if that is so, why were dozens of victims with us today at a press conference, urging this body to pass this legislation? It is because this legislation specifically protects victims.

They have said this legislation does not prevent the release of child pornography. Of course it does. We have a specific provision in our legislation to prevent that.

They have said so many falsehoods about this legislation, but now they are going to vote for it--hopefully enthusiastically. Really, they have been drug to this.

Our judicial system is broken. If it were working, there wouldn't be a thousand victims who haven't seen justice yet. They are victims of the Epstein class.

I begrudge nobody's success if they become a billionaire, but if you think being a billionaire or buying politicians keeps you out of the judicial system, lets you rape young women, lets you traffic women, you have another thing coming when this bill passes.

Do not let the Senate muck this up. There have already been efforts to derail our discharge petition. The Oversight Committee has released thousands, tens of thousands of documents. That is fine. Keep working. How many names have they released? Zero.

They are still protecting, or the DOJ is protecting, pedophiles and sex traffickers. The time for that to stop is now.

Our Speaker says: Oh, this bill needs to be amended in the Senate, and specifically, he is trying to create a loophole. He is trying to categorize the pedophiles as victims. He is saying: Oh, we don't want to embarrass the people who went to the rape island. We should protect those names against unreliable accusations. Is he calling all of these victims unreliable?

They have testified to the FBI. The FBI has these names in their possession.

I asked the FBI Director in a hearing: Have you looked at the documents?

No. He trusts everybody who has been there for decades.

That is wrong. Do not let the Senate muck this bill up. If Senators are a party to that in the Senate, they are part of this coverup that we are trying to expose. I am sorry if one of their billionaire donors is going to get embarrassed because he went to rape island.

That is what they have coming. In fact, they need to be on the other side of bars, a lot of them. Some of them will be embarrassed, but some of them need to go to prison, and the survivors know that.

Mr. Speaker, how will we know if this bill has been successful? We will know when there are men, rich men, in handcuffs being perp-walked to the jail. Until then, this is still a coverup.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my Senate colleagues: Do not muck up this bill.

The President has already said that he will sign it. That means that he will sign the bill that we have here today.

Do not change this bill. He is ready to sign it. Give it to him. Put it on his desk. Let's get justice for these victims.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).