Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4593) to amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to revise the definition of showerhead; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5184) to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from enforcing energy efficiency standards applicable to manufactured housing, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6938) making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a new year in America, but judging by the remarks of the gentlewoman from Indiana, it is the same old Republican Party. Here is where we are at on January 7, 2026. We have a Republican President who promised to put America first. Instead, in just under a year he has bailed out Argentina, bombed Venezuela, gave Qatar an air force base in Idaho, pardoned the former Honduran drug trafficking president, and cozied up to dictators all around the world.

We have a Republican majority that promised to bring down prices. Guess what. Prices are going up. Families across this country are hurting. People are losing health coverage because you guys chose deliberately, Mr. Speaker, to let the Affordable Care Act tax credits expire. Rent keeps going up. Grocery prices keep going up. Paychecks are not keeping pace.

Meanwhile, the President of the United States is openly boasting that America is now running a foreign country. His own advisers can't even answer basic questions about what the hell comes next, what the plan is, how this ends, or when the Venezuelan people can expect democracy.

We have a Speaker of the House who is the weakest and most incompetent Speaker of the House in the history of this body. I mean, honest to God, Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether that is a good thing for the country or a bad thing. On one hand, he is so incompetent he can't get anything done. On the other hand, the things he wants to get done are crazy.

Don't ask him his opinion on anything. He doesn't have one. He doesn't watch the news. I don't even think he goes outside. I don't know what keeps him so busy that he doesn't have an opinion on anything, but he certainly isn't legislating.

With all that is going on--conflict, economic strain, and real crises facing the American people--let us turn to the calendar and see what important issue that this Republican majority has us debating on the floor this week, Mr. Speaker. Do you want to know what it is? It is not housing, not food prices, not rent, not war and peace, foreign policy, or America's future, no, no, no, no. All of us are here on the floor right now at the behest of this Republican majority to debate showerheads. You can't make this stuff up.

As if that weren't bad enough, they are still trying to pass last year's appropriations bills. Let that sink in. These are bills that should have been passed months ago. That is the state of governance under this Republican majority: late, unserious, and completely detached from the lives of the people they claim to represent.

One of these appropriations bills funds the Department of Justice and Federal law enforcement. That brings us to something Republicans would rather forget, but what our country must not: Yesterday marked the 5- year anniversary of the January 6 insurrection.

It has been 5 years since a violent mob, whipped into a frenzy by the lie that Trump won the election even though he lost, stormed into this building to overturn a free and fair election.

Mr. Speaker, it has been 5 years since law enforcement officers, Capitol Police, and others were beaten, crushed, stabbed, pepper sprayed and hunted down by a MAGA mob determined to overturn the election and stop the peaceful transfer of power.

They hunted Members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike. I can still remember them chanting ``hang Mike Pence'' because I was here that day, Mr. Speaker, right where you are sitting right now, right in that chair. I was one of the last Members to leave the House floor, and I watched officers barricade the Chamber doors behind me here with furniture, knowing that they were outnumbered but refusing to surrender. I smelled the tear gas. I felt the chaos. I saw the mob outside of the Speaker's lobby.

The officers who were here that day saved lives. They upheld their oath to the Constitution. Many of them were hospitalized. Many were permanently injured. Some died either from injuries sustained that day or by suicide after the trauma that they endured.

Nearly 2,000 people were arrested, tried, and found guilty for their crimes that day. What did Donald Trump do? He pardoned every single one of them. He pardoned the criminals who beat officers bloody, desecrated this building, and tried to tear American democracy apart. In my book those pardons were unforgivable, unforgivable.

Do you know what he did yesterday? He put up a disgusting, disgraceful statement on the official White House website lying about what happened that day, blaming the police, blaming the police and calling everyone who was here that day innocent. There was not a single mention, not a single mention of the 140 officers who were assaulted that day with weapons like bear spray, stun guns, hockey sticks, broken pieces of furniture, and flag poles--not a single mention.

In fact, the White House even put up a statement that ``zero law enforcement officers lost their lives,'' which is

a disgusting lie. It is a disgusting lie and a disgrace to the memory of Officer Brian Sicknick who laid in honor in the rotunda of this Capitol Building after he died in the aftermath of January 6.

After all of that, after all of that, Speaker Johnson still refuses to display a plaque in the Capitol Building to honor the officers who stood up to the mob that day, a memorial he is required by law to put up. I mean, you know, here it is, Mr. Speaker. Here it is right here. That is what the Speaker refuses to put up.

This is what it looks like. It is not the real one because the real one is downstairs in storage somewhere. Speaker Johnson refuses to hang it up.

Why? Why? We all know why. We all know why. He won't hang it up because he is Donald Trump's puppet. That is all this is. If he hangs up the plaque, Trump might get mad at him. What a pathetic and shameful abdication of duty.

I am sure the gentlewoman won't address a single point I made here about January 6. I don't know whether she is afraid of the repercussions, but the bottom line is that I just want to say, for the record: Shame on Republicans for trying to cover up their complicity in what happened that day, and shame on them for wasting the people's time on showerheads while ignoring the economic, democratic, and moral crises staring this country in the face.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me just respond to the gentlewoman: A lot of words, a ton of words, but as I predicted, there is not a single word about the brave officers who defended this Chamber and defended every Member of Congress on January 6 who were attacked by a violent mob. I heard not a single word, not a single word.

I just also want to remind the gentlewoman, because maybe she forgot, regrettably, Republicans are in charge. They are in charge of the House, they are in charge of the Senate, and they are in charge of the White House. So they can complain about Joe Biden and they can complain about Democrats, but they are running this show.

I was really fascinated to hear the gentlewoman talk about the shutdown. Again, the Republicans are in charge of everything. They have the votes to do whatever they want to do, but when the government shut down--it was a Republican shutdown, by the way. When it shut down, they could have worked on the appropriations bills, by the way, which were already late by definition. By the time of the shutdown, they were already late. Republicans could have worked on getting the appropriations work done.

What did my Republican friends do?

They decided to go home and take a vacation. They just left. They walked away. They did not do a thing. They went on an extended vacation rather than doing the people's business.

I have to say to the gentlewoman: With all due respect, I do townhalls all the time. I don't know whether the gentlewoman does. I know a lot of Republicans do not, but when I do my townhalls, what I hear from people is about the high cost of living. I hear about the high cost of groceries. I hear about the high cost of healthcare. I hear about the high cost of housing.

Mr. Speaker, do you know what I don't hear people talk about? It is showerheads. When they talk about freedom and liberty, they don't talk about showerheads. I don't know what planet my Republican friends are living on, but I have news for them: The number one issue in America is not showerheads.

It is healthcare. It is affordability. It is housing. It is making sure that they can support their families. People look at life through their kitchen window, and they have to pay bills. They have to make sure that they make ends meet, and right now, under this Republican economy, life is too damn expensive. People can't afford basic needs.

I just gave a 1-minute speech before we got into this debate about the increase in hunger in this country.

Do you know what the Republican response to that is, Mr. Speaker, what the Trump administration is doing to combat hunger?

They are now banning the monthly report, which gives us the data on how many people are hungry in this country. No, we are not investing in programs to help combat hunger. We are not fighting for higher wages. We are not trying to lower healthcare costs. We are just going to hide the information from people so that people don't know how bad the situation is.

So, again, I appreciate all the gentlewoman's words, but, quite frankly, they ring hollow. What people want us to do is to fight to make life more affordable and more reasonable for them.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, again, the gentlewoman said nothing about January 6 or nothing about the brave men and women who protected this Chamber and all of us on that terrible, terrible day.

I have to say that I was more than amused by listening to the gentlewoman spout about how great everything is right now: The Trump economy is perfect. Everybody is doing great. Everything is wonderful. Everything is terrific.

I don't know whether the gentlewoman holds townhalls or not, but I wonder whether the voters of Indiana actually share that point of view. I have got to tell you, I don't think so because I don't think the voters in general in this country, the citizens of this country, share that view.

Every poll that I have seen, every townhall that I have been at--by the way, not only in my district but in other States--people have complained about how expensive things are. They say Trump's economy is making life more expensive, more difficult. The price of health insurance is going through the roof because this Chamber won't extend the ACA tax credits. Groceries are going up. I don't know whether the gentlewoman goes to the supermarket or not, but the price of groceries is going up.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from Politico titled: ``Poll: Trump's own voters begin blaming him for affordability crisis.''

Mr. Speaker, I don't want to be lectured about wealthy people in this country because the Republicans have done everything they can to help those who were well off get more and those who are struggling get less.

We saw the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that included tax cuts for multimillionaires and multibillionaires, giveaways to billionaires, giveaways to Big Ag, Big Tech, Big Oil, and we see cuts to programs that help average people in this country to get by.

By the way, their big, ugly bill included a trillion dollar cut to Medicaid. They are cutting moneys for SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. That is basically to help people put food on the table. By the way, increasingly, a majority of the people who are on SNAP are working families, and they are cutting that at the same time that groceries are going up. However, if you are a billionaire, don't worry about it.

We are fighting a war of oil right now because we want to make sure Big Oil, that invested so heavily in the last campaign, gets their payback. The bottom line is, when it comes to people who are well off, well connected, and have lots of money, you know, they are doing fine. Everybody else is getting screwed.

If you ask the average person on the street about what they think of Donald Trump's economy, I will tell you what they will say. They will say it sucks.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I will tell everybody a little secret here. The Republicans are really clever, but not really as clever as they think they are. The big, beautiful bill that they passed, the one that includes tax cuts for multimillionaires and multibillionaires and the one that guts Medicaid by a trillion dollars, is incredibly unpopular. It is incredibly unpopular.

In fact, the Kaiser Family Foundation said that 64 percent of American families oppose it, and even FOX News says that 59 percent of the American people oppose it.

Why do they oppose it, and why is it so unpopular? It is because of what is contained in it. Rather than fix that--and we just heard the gentlewoman do this. Rather than fix it, they renamed the bill the Working Families Tax Cut Act. That never passed the House. That is a new title they made up.

They think all they need to do is change the title of a bill, and then the American people won't realize all the garbage that is tucked into the bill. It is like lipstick on a pig. It is ridiculous. This is insane.

The American people are hurting because of the Republican policies. The American people are hurting because they won't extend the ACA tax credits.

By the way, people will see their health insurance costs go down if the ACA tax credits are extended. The gentlewoman is all upset about it, but I will urge her to talk to some of her Republican colleagues, by the way, who have signed on to a discharge petition to force a vote on extending the ACA tax credits. We will begin that debate today and vote on it tomorrow.

It is not just Democrats. There are some Republicans who are hearing from their constituents that they are getting screwed over on their healthcare, and they want us to do something.

The bottom line is, they can change the titles of bills and all that kind of stuff, but if they don't change the substance, if they don't get Donald Trump to back off on his tariffs--which, by the way, are responsible for rising housing costs in this country--if they don't get him to change his views on that, things are going to continue to get worse. They can change the titles of bills all they want, but they are not changing the reality for millions of Americans.

It is hard to believe that in the House of Representatives, which is supposed to be a serious body, this is what we are talking about. We are changing titles of bills so that maybe the American people won't know what we are talking about.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H. Con. Res. 33, which calls for the plaque honoring the brave police officers that defended this Capitol and our democracy on January 6 to be put up in the Capitol as required by law.

Mr. Speaker, I am sick and tired of Republicans standing up and proclaiming their unwavering support for law enforcement when they won't even honor the law enforcement that saved them, that saved us and our democracy here on January 6.

Yesterday was the fifth anniversary of the January 6 attack on the Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump. Over 140 officers were injured, an officer was killed, and others died by suicide following the trauma of that day.

Do you know how the White House marked this anniversary? They marked it by putting up an Orwellian web page, rewriting history, and claiming it is the officers who were to blame for the violence. How disgusting. How despicable. How disgraceful.

I ask my Republican colleagues: Do you really believe that crap? When you look in the eyes of the Capitol Police who guard this building, do you accuse them of being responsible for the violence of that day?

How dare the President of the United States say such a thing, and how shameful of this Republican majority to stay silent in the face of this depravity and rewriting of history.

Republicans found the time to illegally slap Donald Trump's name onto the Kennedy Center, defacing a memorial to a great President in a single day, within 24 hours, but a legally required honor for the officers who defended this democracy? It is 5 years of excuses, 5 years of delay, 5 years of cowardice and disrespect to law enforcement by Republicans.

When all is said and done, history will not look kindly on these Trump Republicans and this Republican majority, and they all know it.

At this point, let me say to my Republican friends that it is always the right time to do the decent thing, the thing the law requires, which is to hang the plaque honoring these brave men and women who put their lives on the line to defend us, to defend this building, and to defend this democracy.

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 yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, again, no discussion, no comments on what happened on January 6 or about what the White House put on its web page yesterday, blaming police officers for the violence of January 6, saying that no police officer died when we know that is a lie, and no explanation as to why we are having such a difficult time hanging a plaque that, quite frankly, the law requires us to hang.

Again, the gentlewoman voted against an amendment to force the Speaker to hang the plaque. I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman if she wants to explain why she voted that way. Does she have any reaction to the White House's horrific and disgraceful statement yesterday, basically smearing the brave men and women who are in our law enforcement and the Capitol Police officers?

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman.

And nothing. And nothing. I mean, really? That is what things have come to? We can't even come together and stand in defense of the Capitol Police who defended us that day? We can't honor them? Somehow that is a no-no because Donald Trump doesn't like it. I mean, that really is shameful.

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

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

Mr. Speaker, let's be honest about what we have seen from this Republican majority. Republicans can't govern. They can't lead. They won't and don't fight for the people who sent them here.

They rush, rush, rush to the floor to redefine what a showerhead is. That is the big issue. They move at lightning speed on tax breaks for billionaires. They bend over backward to enrich Trump and his inner circle, going so far as to invade another country to grease the skids for Big Oil. It is not about democracy. It is not about human rights. It is not even about drugs. It is about Big Oil.

The priorities of Big Tech, Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Banks move at lightning speed. Tax cuts for the wealthy pass overnight. Corporate giveaways face no obstacles.

When it comes to protecting healthcare for millions of Americans, suddenly there is hesitation. Suddenly, there are delays. Suddenly, there is no money. Suddenly, they move in slow motion. Suddenly, we can't do anything.

It may be 2026, but it is the status quo for this Republican majority. It is a new year but the same BS for them except when it comes to what is happening in Venezuela. Then they are dragging us back to 2003.

Other than that, it is always the same funding from elite donors with phony talk about helping regular people. It is the same contempt for their own voters. It is the same recklessness abroad. It is the same incompetence at home.

Here is what Republicans always underestimate. The American people are paying attention. They are not stupid. They know when billionaires get everything and everyone else gets excuses. They know when governance is replaced by stunts, distractions, and culture war nonsense. There is always a reckoning for that kind of failure. This year will be no exception. They know all the gimmicks.

We passed this monstrosity of a bill called the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The American people are horrified by what is in it. There are excessive giveaways to the wealthiest in this country. There are cutbacks in healthcare. There are cutbacks in everything that matters to working families. Every poll that is done says that it is incredibly unpopular.

What do they do? Rather than fix the problem, they come up with a counterfeit name for the bill. It is no longer the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Now it is the Working Families Tax Cut Act. I don't know what the hell that is. I don't know who came up with that idea. Maybe some pollster gave it to them, as if changing the name of what they call this big, ugly bill will make a difference.

Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that with all that is going on in this country right now, with all of the concerns that the American people have, and with people desperately pleading with this Republican President and this Republican majority in the House and Senate to do something to make their life better, we have an opportunity to maybe legislate and help people. Instead, we are talking about showerheads. I mean, really? I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I will also again remind people about the vote on the previous question. We have a chance to actually do something positive today, and that is to honor the men and women who protected us on January 6. Unfortunately, Republicans on the Rules Committee all voted ``no'' to require the Speaker again to hang the plaque.

They all voted ``no.'' Not a word has been said. There is no explanation as to why. Not a word about what happened on January 6 has been spoken on this floor by the Republicans today. I don't know how that can be. I don't know how that can be.

Mr. Speaker, I was there that day. I was in the Speaker's chair. I saw what happened. I saw what happened when I walked out to the Speaker's lobby. I saw the people who protected us being beaten by this angry mob, and not a word. We can't get the Speaker of the House to hang up this plaque. That can change with the previous question vote.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the affordability crisis has spread to nearly every facet of American lives. Utility bills are skyrocketing across the country. Trump's disastrous tariffs are being passed on to the American consumer. Grocery prices are up, making it hard for families to put food on the table, and Republicans delivered their latest blow

with failing to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits which will result in soaring healthcare premiums for more than 20 million Americans. In many cases, Americans are seeing monthly premiums either two, three, or four times higher than they were last year for their healthcare insurance.

To make matters worse, we are in the midst of a housing crisis that is crushing American families' dreams. We are witnessing historically high home prices, coupled with a devastating shortage of housing. The cost of buying a home feels out of reach for too many, while rent is simultaneously ballooning at an unsustainable rate. Manufactured homes, however, are an important component of our affordable housing stock.

We should all be concerned about the cost of buying a new home, but this bill does not solve this crisis. In fact, it only makes housing affordability worse.

First, it revokes the Department of Energy's May 2022 energy conservation standard for manufactured housing, robbing residents of $5 billion in savings. Manufactured homes are often far less efficient than other homes, costing owners about 70 percent more per square foot in utility bills. Many low-income residents have reported foregoing basic necessities like food or medicine in order to keep their lights on.

To suggest that the Department of Energy standards for manufactured homes negatively impact affordability is entirely false. As I stressed, it is entirely false. When talking about affordability, it is imperative that we also consider the cost of actually living in these homes, and energy use is a big part of that. This is even more important at a time when electricity costs are up 13 percent nationwide.

If my Republican colleagues really want to get at the root cause of the current housing affordability crisis, they should look at Trump's disastrous tariffs on essential building materials and appliances, not energy efficiency standards that actually lower monthly energy bills.

Now, this bill also strips the Department of Energy of its congressionally-directed authority to set efficiency standards for manufactured homes and sends the responsibility to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, an agency with a history of failing to protect manufactured housing residents from high energy costs.

Prior to the passage of a bipartisan bill called the Energy Independence and Security Act in 2007 when George Bush was President, he signed that into law, and HUD was then responsible for setting energy efficiency standards for manufactured homes. However, the agency, HUD, failed to act, leaving residents without an updated energy code since 1994. It is no wonder that 44 percent of manufactured housing residents face a high energy burden.

Now, the Department of Energy in May 2022 set a standard that was long overdue that said that manufactured housing residents had gone without a modern standard for nearly 30 years before the Department of Energy issued a final rule, and they did so. As a result, the standard that exists now, which this bill would repeal, essentially saves about $475 a year in savings on utility bills; but this bill repeals those savings. It repeals the DOE standards, and that is what is unacceptable about this bill. We should be fighting to raise the standard of living of manufactured housing residents, not lowering it with higher costs.

That is why I strongly oppose the bill. The affordability crisis is quite literally hitting home for millions of Americans, and H.R. 5184 would only saddle residents with even higher utility bills at a time when they can least afford it.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Oregon.

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

Mr. Speaker, while I appreciate that my colleague from Massachusetts offered an amendment to improve the bill during the subcommittee markup, unfortunately, his amendment fell short of addressing the fatal flaws in this underlying bill.

The amendment allows the Department of Energy to make efficiency recommendations to the Department of Housing and Urban Development on energy conservation standards. While this change is better than completely writing the Department of Energy out of the process like the original bill did, the fact of the matter is that this bill still nullifies the Department of Energy's manufactured housing rule standard for energy efficiency and, therefore, jeopardizes billions in savings for American families.

Additionally, the bill, as amended, does not specify what HUD should do with the recommendations from the Department of Energy. Even if the Department of Energy submitted recommendations, HUD is likely to ignore them. Let us not forget that when HUD had sole authority to issue energy codes for manufactured housing prior to 2007, the agency failed to act.

Again, it is important to ask: Why should we entrust HUD to act differently now?

This bill undermines the Department of Energy's authority to set efficiency standards and will rob much-needed and long-overdue savings from manufactured housing residents. I still strongly oppose the bill, as amended. Families who live in manufactured housing deserve to have efficient and safe homes. Let's fight to raise their standard of living, not lower it.

My colleague from Massachusetts mentioned support from the housing group. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from five major organizations that deal with manufactured homes: Americans for Financial Reform, Grounded Solutions Network, National Association for State Community Service Programs, Next Step Network, and ROC USA.

Hon. John Thune,

Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Chuck Schumer,

Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Mike Johnson,

Speaker, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Hakeem Jeffries,

Minority Leader, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Leader Thune, Leader Schumer, Speaker Johnson, and

Leader Jeffries: We write to you as representatives of

organizations that advocate for and support the production of

affordable homes for lower-income families, urging you to

oppose H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. This bill would

result in high energy costs for families who live in new

manufactured homes, undermining their affordability at a time

when those families are having trouble paying their bills.

Manufactured homes have long been--and must remain--a key

source of housing for many limited-income residents. Yet some

of these homes are built with poor insulation, air sealing,

and windows, leaving residents with unaffordable monthly

energy bills. These costs are a burden for the residents, who

have a median household income of roughly $40,000.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last

updated energy requirements for manufactured homes more than

three decades ago in 1994. Unfortunately, those outdated

rules have allowed the continued construction--up to the

present day--of homes that are poorly insulated and sealed.

In response to HUD's inaction, Congress stepped up in 2007 by

directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to set energy

efficiency standards for the homes. Standards finalized by

DOE in 2022 would significantly improve affordability, with

energy bill savings that far exceed the modest added

construction costs.

While DOE and its national labs have much greater building

energy expertise, HUD already has an active compliance

program for its manufactured home standards, and cooperative

use of that infrastructure would improve compliance with the

DOE standards and ease the compliance burden for

manufacturers by creating one enforcement mechanism.

Unfortunately, the timely and effective implementation of the

cost-saving standards has faced opposition, including

litigation, from segments of the industry.

H.R. 5184 would revoke the 2022 DOE standards, and it would

go further, eliminating DOE's authority to set standards for

manufactured homes altogether. This would leave only HUD's

three-decade-old code in place, along with the unlikely

prospect that HUD and the Manufactured Housing Consensus

Committee would suddenly update energy efficiency standards

after decades of inaction. While many manufactured homes

already are built well above the DOE standard, many others

are still built to the baseline HUD Code level.

Congress can and must take steps to improve housing

affordability, including expanding production of homes in

which families can afford their energy bills and be safe and

comfortable during extreme weather. H.R. 5184 would have the

opposite effect, locking in the unaffordable and harmful

status quo for too many families who live in manufactured

homes.

For these reasons, we urge you to vote against H.R. 5184.

Sincerely,

Americans for Financial Reform.

Grounded Solutions

Network.

National Association for State Community Services Programs.

Next Step Network.

I don't want to read the whole thing, but this was addressed to the House bipartisan leadership.

It says: ``We write to you as representatives of organizations that advocate for and support the production of affordable homes for lower income families, urging you to oppose H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. This bill would result in high energy costs for families who live in new manufactured homes, undermining their affordability at a time when those families are having trouble paying their bills.''

I won't get into the rest of it, but I just wanted to point out that many more organizations that deal with manufactured homes, than what was cited by my colleague from Massachusetts, oppose this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains on both sides?

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

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

I listened to the gentleman from Colorado, but I just want to stress that this bill isn't about resolving conflicting standards or regulatory confusion on the part of the Federal Government.

This is about the fact that the Department of Housing and Urban Development failed to act for decades on energy efficiency, leaving a 1994 energy code untouched for over 30 years.

Now, when the Department of Energy is seeking to put in place a standard, well, what happens? First of all, when it was supposed to go into effect, President Trump this summer basically postponed it.

Now, they are trying to remove the standard entirely, but removing the Department of Energy's authority to set efficiency standards will only leave residents unprotected from high energy costs.

The Department of Energy is required by statute to consult with HUD in setting efficiency standards, and

DOE has worked extensively with HUD on this for years.

Technically, HUD can still update the energy code for manufactured homes, but they have been severely delinquent in doing so. Just as I mentioned, HUD has had over 30 years to set a stronger standard, and they just choose not to.

H.R. 5184 does not magically rewrite history. Giving HUD sole authority now does not take away the fact that the agency left manufactured housing residents with energy bills that are 70 percent more per square foot compared to site-built homes for decades.

DOE's energy sector experts are best positioned to set efficiency standards for manufactured homes, and it is the only agency that has successfully produced modernized standards. Those standards would save $475 a year on utility bills and have a real impact on Americans' wallets, safety, and security. Of course, though, President Trump doesn't want that, so he set aside the standard, and now they want to eliminate it completely. All that is going to do is raise utility bills tremendously for people who live in manufactured homes.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that we need to do a lot more to address housing affordability, but let me assure everyone that this bill is not the solution because it doesn't do anything to bring down costs. In fact, it only raises costs on hardworking American families, particularly hurting low-income, rural, and senior households.

I think there is a misunderstanding on the other side of the aisle about the Department of Energy's process in setting efficiency standards for manufactured homes, so let me just clear a few things up.

The Department of Energy would not issue an energy conservation standard if the benefits of the rule did not far outweigh the costs. DOE is required by statute to consult with the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It is also specifically required to ensure that the standards are cost effective based on the impact on the purchase price of the home as well as the total life cycle construction and operating costs.

Affordability is really at the core of the statute that directs the Department of Energy to set efficiency standards for manufactured homes, and as such, affordability is a guiding principle in the Department's May 2022 final rule that set the efficiency standards.

In fact, in order to accommodate price-sensitive, low-income purchasers, DOE adopted a tiered approach in the

final rule based on the size of the manufactured home. This standard is projected, as I have said, to save manufactured housing residents $5 billion, even when you include the upfront costs.

In fact, in the first year of home ownership, energy savings greatly exceed the marginal increase that might come from the initial purchase. The bottom line is that the benefits in energy savings to the consumer immediately offset any increase in purchase price. I think it is important to reiterate that affordability is about more than just the purchase price.

A lower purchase price doesn't mean anything if you are spending 70 percent more per square foot on energy bills like manufactured housing residents currently are. Over 40 percent of manufactured housing residents face a high energy burden, meaning that more than 6 percent of their income is going toward energy costs.

Given the recent trends in energy costs, it is more important now than ever that we maintain the Department of Energy's standard to protect these residents from even higher energy bills.

I think if my Republican colleagues really wanted to address housing affordability, they would be speaking out against Trump's tariffs. These are tariffs that the President has put on essential building materials. That is the problem right now. Hopefully, today, the Supreme Court eliminates these tariffs, but right now the increased costs of manufactured housing is primarily based on the tariffs. That is what is driving up the costs.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side keep talking about efficiency standards driving up costs but, in fact, it is not the case. The costs that are driving up manufactured home prices is because of Trump's disastrous tariffs.

President Trump has issued tariffs on essential building materials on inputs, like lumber, gypsum, steel, and even appliances and cabinets. These tariffs are driving up the costs of new construction, renovations, and affordable housing development.

Tariffs are raising construction and renovation costs and disrupting supply chains, placing upward pressure on home prices. Trump's tariff policies are not only undercutting the supposed goal of reducing the cost of living for Americans but they are also exacerbating the housing crisis by slowing the production of housing and adding exorbitant costs to the process.

The ever-changing tariff landscape, because we don't even know what it is from one day to the next with him, is creating uncertainty for homebuilders and putting the dream of buying a new home out of touch for perspective home buyers. Even the National Association of Home Builders has criticized Trump's tariffs as harming housing affordability and driving up costs. American consumers are feeling the pinch and paying the price for Trump's tariffs.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is time for my Republican colleagues to look in the mirror because what is really contributing to the housing crisis in a major way is Trump's tariffs, not energy conservation standards that save American consumers money. Stop demonizing efficiency standards, not only in this bill but on so many occasions, and start addressing the root of the problem.

Mr. Speaker, that is President's Trump's bad policies. I don't know if anything has come forward yet. Hopefully, today the Supreme Court is going to throw these tariffs out, and maybe we will have some relief. That is the problem here.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to stress again the nature of this bill is totally the opposite of what the Republicans say. It should be titled the unaffordable homes act because electricity prices are rising across the country. Americans are going into debt to heat their homes this winter.

President Trump has failed on his day one promise to bring down prices for American families. Instead, his big, ugly bill is projected to increase electricity prices by an additional 61 percent.

How are American families supposed to shoulder the financial burden as they struggle to afford the cost of their daily necessities that have been inflated by his senseless tariff policies?

I hear from my constituents every day that affordability is their top concern, and we should be focused on advancing bipartisan legislation to end this affordability crisis. Instead, my Republican colleagues are trying to repeal the Department of Energy's energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing through this bill.

Mr. Speaker, these standards were thoughtfully developed in consultation with HUD to balance upfront costs and long-term affordability. These standards are sorely needed as energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing haven't been updated for over 30 years.

As a result, electricity bills for manufactured homes are 70 percent higher than site-built homes. It is cruel and senseless to try to overturn energy efficiency standards for manufactured housing as families are facing unprecedented increases in their electricity bills.

The Department of Energy's manufactured home efficiency standards are estimated to save homeowners $475 per year on their utility bills. Collectively, these standards would save 17 million Americans $10 billion over 30 years.

These efficiency standards are good for our wallets, and they are good for the economy. It is really unconscionable for Congress to consider overturning these standards amid this affordability crisis.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 977 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, earlier this morning, the Rules Committee met to produce a rule, H. Res. 977, providing for the House's consideration on the following three bills:

First, the rule provides for H.R. 4593, the SHOWER Act, to be considered under a closed rule. It provides 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, and provides for one motion to recommit.

Second, the rule provides for H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. H.R. 5184 would be considered under a closed rule. It also provides for 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, and provides for one motion to recommit.

Third, the rule provides for H.R. 6938, Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act, 2026. H.R. 6938 would be considered under a closed rule, and it also provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

The rule provides for separate votes on division A and divisions B and C.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. These bills reflect a simple governing philosophy: freedom of choice, fiscal responsibility, regulatory clarity, and a government that focuses on the American people, not bureaucracy.

Let me begin with the appropriations package. Beginning with H.R. 6938, the Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act of 2026, these bills make targeted, disciplined investments to strengthen American energy dominance, reinforce our nuclear deterrent capabilities, support law enforcement, and expand access to critical minerals. These policy priorities are shared by President Trump, congressional Republicans, and millions of Americans. Importantly, this appropriations package ends Biden-era policies enacting a more conservative vision, all while cutting fiscal year 2026 spending by nearly $2 billion, delivering significant savings for taxpayers. Let me repeat that: Passing full year appropriations ensures we are not defaulting to Biden-era spending levels or radical priorities. It allows Congress to reset funding levels in support of the conservative policies aligned with President Trump's agenda.

The Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act of 2026 provides $78 billion in discretionary funding, including resources to stop the flow of fentanyl, and provides critical funding to support State and local law enforcement. It increases funding for the Drug Enforcement Administration to combat the fentanyl crisis, supports the Department of Justice grant programs that target opioids and child exploitation, and facilitates immigration enforcement. It protects the Second Amendment by keeping long-standing safeguards in place that prevent Federal agencies from restricting lawful firearms, ammunition, and sporting equipment without congressional approval, and decreases funding for the ATF. It also maintains pro-life Hyde protections to ensure taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortions.

The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act directs $58 billion towards national security and strengthens America's energy independence. These investments are essential to restoring American leadership in nuclear energy and achieving the administration's goal of dramatically expanding nuclear capacity by mid-century. At the same time, they eliminate wasteful Biden-era offices that prioritize ideology over outcomes.

The Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act provides $38 billion to expand access to public lands, reverse harmful regulatory overreach, and rein in agency budgets. It increases funding for responsible onshore and offshore energy development in oil and gas, exempts farmers and ranchers from burdensome greenhouse gas emissions reporting schemes, and reduces funding for the EPA.

In addition to these wins for the American people, I am proud that my office was able to secure $8 million in community project funding for Indiana's Ninth Congressional District. This funding will support projects, including a riverbank stabilization plan for the Ohio River shoreline in Clarksville, Indiana, and support booster pump stations that are needed to increase water capacity to serve constituents in Bloomington, Monroe County, and the home of Indiana University football and students at Indiana University.

Funding in this package will also provide residents and businesses in Brown County with long, and greatly needed, sewer services and support for

the city of Madison's stormwater mitigation project to reduce flooding and improve water quality.

These investments will support critical infrastructure and local priorities that communities themselves identified, bringing improvements from shoreline protection, to water systems, to supporting economic development that will directly benefit residents across the Ninth District.

Together, these bills reflect a disciplined approach to governing by investing in community priorities, cutting unnecessary spending, and reducing good governance.

Turning next to H.R. 4593, the SHOWER Act, this is a simple bill with a simple goal: end the regulatory whiplash and return consumer choice and common sense to a basic household product. A showerhead should not require extensive regulation. Yet, under the Obama and Biden administrations, bureaucrats redefined a clear term to advance an ideological agenda creating confusion for manufacturers and frustration for consumers.

This was the status quo under the leadership of Democrats--regulate everything in our lives right down to our showerheads. It is incredible if you think about it. This may seem like a ridiculous bill to be considering by our Democrat counterparts. Believe me, it is ridiculous that their policies would require legislation to prevent this kind of government intrusion, but here we are.

The Biden administration regulated every nozzle in every American home individually, reducing water pressure and frustrating homeowners, all while increasing costs for compliance. Ending this rule will permanently save Americans billions of dollars, reduce regulatory bloat, and restore a workable standard.

The Department of Energy estimates that eliminating this rule, along with dozens of related inflationary standards, will save consumers $11 billion and will cut more than 125,000 words from the Code of Federal Regulations.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I turn to H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act, which I was proud to author with Congressman Mike Flood. This bill addresses a real problem in the housing market, one that affects our most vulnerable homebuyers. It reduces the upfront costs of buying a home, making it easier for Americans to achieve the dream of homeownership. The Affordable HOMES Act restores clarity by placing manufactured housing standards back under the Office of Housing and Urban Development where they belong and eliminating duplicative regulatory authority by the Department of Energy.

It overturns a 2022 Biden administration rule that increased manufactured housing costs, again, without regard for what consumers want or how the market actually works prioritizing energy efficiency under the Green New Deal and directly contributing to the housing affordability issues we see today.

The objective here is clarity so manufacturers can build more homes and families can afford them.

Mr. Speaker, this rule moves legislation that reflects fiscal discipline, regulatory sanity, consumer choice, and a commitment to affordability and growth. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bills.

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

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

I am not sure if the gentleman from Massachusetts heard my opening, but this is about housing. We literally have a bill called the Affordable HOMES Act, and it addresses the cost of housing.

He also commented that we are only appropriating and considering our appropriations bills yet today, but we weren't the ones who shut down the government for 41 days, preventing us from doing our appropriations work. They did this. The Democrats shut down the government to fight for taxpayer-funded healthcare subsidies that would go to the wealthiest ObamaCare enrollees across the Nation.

Think about that, Mr. Speaker. They shut down the functioning of the government, preventing us from appropriating on the very good things that we talked about in the opening comments, meaning millionaires would be eligible to receive tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer- funded subsidies for their ObamaCare plans. This would give $350 billion in taxpayer bailouts not to the American people, but to big health insurance companies, all while they are receiving record profits.

This incentivizes bad actors to manipulate individuals to sign up for coverage through the ACA marketplace, oftentimes without people even realizing that they had been enrolled.

This is government waste, fraud, and abuse at its worst, and I am proud the House Republicans stood up against that.

The gentleman from Massachusetts also referenced the SHOWER Act that we have here today. I would just like to say that I will stand up here every day of every week to restore freedom of choice and freedom of movement back to the American people.

You have to start somewhere, Mr. Speaker, from electric vehicle mandates to prohibitions on gas stoves and heaters. Showerhead efficiency and efficiency standards in affordable homes and manufactured housing will cause the cost of homeownership to go up and void American Dream opportunities for millions of Americans, but that is business as usual with Democrats in Congress. Closing businesses and demanding quarantine is Big Brother knows best, and that is what the Democrats are best at.

House Republicans are going to fight back to restore that personal choice, all while ensuring fiscal responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleague on the other side of the aisle that House Republicans did pass a funding mechanism out of the House of Representatives to the Senate, and because of the 60-vote rule in the Senate we did need the help of Democrats in the Senate to fund the government. They held out, again, for the purpose of funding taxpayer- funded healthcare subsidies to benefit the wealthiest ObamaCare enrollees in the Nation and fat cat insurance companies.

I would also note that much of what the gentleman has been referring to, the deflection is like a magic trick. You can say words, just like he accused me of saying many words, but the facts outweigh the deflection, which is that it took much of 2025 to rid ourselves of the sleepy Joe, America last, Biden economic hangover, but Republicans in Congress and President Trump have delivered. America is now reaching new milestones under Republican leadership, turning the tide back to American greatness.

Let's just look at the economy. Quarter three GDP growth was a roaring 4.3 percent, the fastest growth in years. The deficit is being addressed. The Federal Government's cumulative deficit for fiscal year 2026 at the end of November was 19 percent lower than the same time last year. Core inflation is at 2.6 percent, the lowest we have seen in 4 years.

Rents are falling month after month, and shelter inflation is at a 4- year low. Gas prices are down to their lowest levels in 4 years. Stocks were at near highs by the end of the year, with the S&P climbing by 17 percent in 2025.

All of this occurred before the gains of the Working Families Tax Cut Act are realized, and we are just getting started.

It will take us a while to recover from the years of inflationary policies of the Biden administration, but the facts show that House Republicans under President Trump's leadership are delivering on promises to reduce costs for American families.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Ciscomani).

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

Let's just review some of the wins in the Working Families Tax Cut Act because taxpayers are expected to take home an additional $91 billion in refunds and keep an additional $30 billion in their paychecks from reduced withholdings.

Taxpayers are set to continue to receive support in tax years to come through a double standard deduction and lower tax rates, making the 2017 tax cuts permanent, an increase in the standard deduction by up to $1,500 per family in 2025, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security, a boost to the child tax credit of $2,200 while indexing its value to inflation, expanding access to childcare and paid leave tax credit permanently, expanding the 529 savings accounts to help families choose education that best fits their needs, and expanded health savings accounts so American families can control their own healthcare. That doesn't sound like benefits to millionaires and billionaires. It sounds like benefits to hardworking American families.

Also, I note that the subsidies that the gentleman from Massachusetts so wants to support, the American people would not see a dime of that. It would go directly to insurance companies who, again, are seeing record profits.

The one thing we can do is continue to support health savings accounts, continue the Trump-era tax cuts from 2017, making them permanent, and continue to promote the tax provisions in the Working Families Tax Cut Act that received no Democratic support, by the way, that really will help American families.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Haridopolos).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford).

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

Mr. Speaker, this rule is very straightforward. We are here to cut burdensome red tape and regulatory overreach that leads to higher energy costs for Americans. Commonsense reforms like these are simple and long overdue.

We are also here to move an appropriations package that provides critical funding and returns us to more responsible spending levels while delivering for the American people.

One thing we have noted is that there is fraud in government programs, including in Medicaid and SNAP. Republicans have sounded the clarion call to try to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse, while Democrats want to minimize it.

We have known about it for decades, even when we went after some of the waste, fraud, and abuse in ObamaCare, and guess what. After we passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the CBO stated that healthcare premiums would go down as a result of our work.

We went after Medicaid fraud, especially involving illegal immigrants. By the way, a Federal court recently ordered officials to turn over Medicaid information to ICE enforcement. If illegal immigrants weren't accessing Medicaid on Democrats' watch, as they tirelessly asserted, then why would a Federal court provide such an order?

We went after waste, fraud, and abuse through our rescissions package, and once again, Democrats refused to acknowledge that that premise ever existed.

Mr. Speaker, we are cutting out waste, fraud, and abuse. We are becoming fiscally responsible. We are putting the American family first by reducing burdensome regulations that increase costs.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to moving these bills out of the House this week. I ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``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, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5184 because it will lead to higher costs for hardworking American families, especially higher electric bills that are spiking under Republican policies.

Despite President Trump's promise that he was going to lower electric bills, he was going to cut them in half, electricity prices are up by over 13 percent over last year and much higher in many places. Americans have been hammered with about $86 billion in rate increases. In Florida, the Republican utilities commission just passed along the highest rate increase in the history of our State. Some are characterizing this as the largest rate increase in the history of the country.

The Republican big, ugly bill is also driving prices higher, along with Trump's illegal interference with clean energy projects that were ready to come on line and help lower prices. That is just not smart, and neither is this bill that would gut the Department of Energy's ability to set energy efficiency standards for manufactured homes. These were goals given by Congress in a bipartisan way years ago to help our neighbors save money back home.

Yes, Americans are facing a housing affordability crisis, but they are also facing an energy affordability crisis. Republicans are using this bill to try to prevent a false choice between tackling both of those problems, but Republicans have done nothing to address the economic instability of hardworking American families.

Just ask my neighbors back home in Florida. Florida has more manufactured homes than any State in the country, about 800,000 manufactured homes, so that is 10 percent of all manufactured housing in the United States. What the Republicans will not tell you is that manufactured homes often have very poor insulation. They use about 50 percent more electricity than other types of construction.

Utilities in Florida do not offer any efficiency programs designed for manufactured homes, so there is no help there. As a result, it is incredibly difficult for the people living in these homes to pay their electric bills. It is only getting worse with longer, hotter summers fueled by climate change.

At the end of the year, my hometown newspaper actually took a look at the soaring electric bills for manufactured homes. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the Tampa Bay Times article of December 30, ``For Tampa Bay's mobile home residents, high electric bills can be a crisis.''

For Tampa Bay's Mobile Home Residents, High Electric Bills Can Be a

Crisis

(By Emily L. Mahoney and Max Chesnes, Dec. 30, 2025)

Energy efficiency standards for mobile homes haven't been

updated in decades, allowing leaky walls to sap budgets.

Rebecca Parris rushes to the bank before it closes.

The power could be shut off soon to her 960-square-foot

mobile home in St. Petersburg, she fears, if she doesn't pay

Duke Energy her overdue bill. The deep red ``Action Required:

Bill Past Due'' banner on a Dec. 16 email from the company--

and the handful that came before it--makes her heart pound.

A neighbor chips in $95, and she speeds over to Bank OZK to

cash the check. This month's crisis is narrowly averted. But

she's already thinking about next month.

``I've worked my ass off my whole life,'' said Parris, 67,

still sitting in the driver's seat of her car from her dash

to the bank. ``But it's been really hard.''

Mobile homes have long been an affordable option for people

with fixed or lower incomes, when a big down payment and

mortgage are out of reach. But beyond the smaller purchase

price lurks a hidden danger: Because of outdated

manufacturing standards, mobile homes can have much higher

electric bills than traditional houses.

For a series of stories on energy affordability, the Tampa

Bay Times asked readers to submit information about their

electric bills. Hundreds responded, and many said they paid

higher bills this year than ever before. Yet even in this

climate, mobile home residents stood out--some with bills

ranging from $300 to $500, roughly comparable to houses twice

their size.

Retired and on a fixed income, Parris has struggled this

year to keep up.

After Hurricane Helene's storm surge flooded her home last

fall, she lost her car, her furniture, a new washer and

dryer. The salt water also damaged her air conditioner, which

she replaced about a month after the storm.

Then she watched this year as her Duke charges climbed:

$170.09 in May.

$258.06 in June, a payment she missed.

$314.85 in July, which ballooned to more than $500 counting

what she still owed.

``It's so so stressful and daunting,'' Parris said. ``I

deal with financial pressures every day like this.''

Rebecca Parris, 67, is struggling to keep up with high

power bills in her 960-square-foot mobile home in St.

Petersburg. ``It's so stressful and daunting,'' she said. ``I

deal with financial pressures every day like this.''

Lowell Ungar, director of federal policy for the American

Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, a national advocacy

group, said that while codes for traditional houses have been

constantly improving to require builders to make them more

efficient, mobile home regulations haven't budged in decades.

``In terms of their energy equipment and components,

they're not built very well,'' he said, referring to the

homes' insulation, windows and water heaters, for example.

``The federal code hasn't been changed since 1994--and it

wasn't very strong then.''

Unlike other types of housing, mobile homes are only

subject to federal energy standards, not state building

codes. In 2007, Congress recognized that these requirements

were too weak and passed a law directing the U.S. Department

of Energy to update them. That still hasn't happened.

The agency released updated rules in 2022, but delays to

their compliance date, bureaucratic back-and-forth and

pressure from the manufactured home industry has led to a

``long saga'' of delays, Ungar said.

A bill in Congress called the Affordable HOMES Act, a

Republican-sponsored measure that is advancing with the

support of some Democrats, would roll back the Department of

Energy's most recent attempt to update the standards and

block the agency from setting future ones.

Proponents contend that stricter standards will make new

homes cost more for consumers, an agrument that Ungar said is

outweighed by the larger savings on energy bills, which

result in lower monthly costs even with a slightly higher

mortgage.

``It is beyond frustrating that this has dragged on now

for, depending how you count, 30 years since the energy code

was last updated and 18 years since Congress told the

Department of Energy to fix the problem,'' Ungar said.

``Every year, there's tens of thousands of new homes that

stick their residents with these bills for the decades that

people are in those homes.''

Parris blames the poor insulation in her 1970s home for

leaching cool air in the summer. She'll set her air

conditioning to 77 degrees, but the temperature inside rises

to around 87.

Duke representatives have told her that her new air

conditioning may have been installed improperly, Parris said,

and have explained that her kilowatt usage is double what

they would expect of a home her size.

Poor insulation exacerbates costs that are already rising

because of hikes to base rates and--particularly stark this

year--steep hurricane recovery fees from 2024's disastrous

season.

Brad Coath paid more when he bought his mobile home to get

it upgraded with extra insulation. It's paid off, he said, as

he's noticed it holds its temperature well in the summer.

Still, Coath, a 66-year-old retired nurse, has seen the bills

for his St. Petersburg mobile home swell.

He's enrolled in Duke's budget billing program, which

averages out bills across each quarter to make them more

predictable. They went from around $150 to over $200 this

summer, prompting him to cut back on travel and put off

bigger expenses.

``I get so tired of the PSC just rubber-stamping everything

that comes across their desks,'' Coath said, referring to the

Florida Public Service Commission that approves utility

hikes. ``Do these people not get bills? How do I get that

job?''

Duke Energy has emphasized that the storm cost recovery

charge, which is around $32 monthly for a household using

1,000 kilowatt-hours, will fall off bills in March, which is

also when a separate seasonal discount kicks in. Tampa

Electric's hurricane fee, which is about $20 per month for

the same energy use, will last longer, until September 2026.

Both companies noted they have programs to help mobile home

residents improve their efficiency, like home energy audits

that can lead to discounts. Duke, for example, offers rebates

up to $600 for air conditioner replacements to qualifying

mobile homeowners, and smaller rebates for duct repair. They

are funded by all Duke customers through a charge on their

bills.

Edward Cifelli, 83, moved to Dade City with his wife almost

20 years ago because the rolling pastureland reminded them of

their longtime New Jersey home.

Electric bills for their double-wide usually hover around

$200, an amount they can manage even as the rent for the lot

their home sits on continues to creep upward.

But in August, their Duke bill hit $300 for the first time

Cifelli can remember. He doesn't understand why utilities

charge residents for hurricanes when those should be an

expected part of doing business in Florida.

``It doesn't seem right to me that we pay a certain amount

of money, and when it gets a little expensive for them, they

make us pay extra,'' he said. ``Old people are always

concerned about outliving their savings, and that's where we

are.''

Mr. Speaker, it says: ``Energy efficiency standards for mobile homes haven't been updated in decades, allowing leaky walls to sap budgets.''

They profile an older woman, a retiree on a fixed income in St. Petersburg, who lives in a 960-square-foot manufactured home. After Hurricane Helene, she has really been struggling. She lost her car. She lost her furniture, her washer and dryer, and her air-conditioning.

Now, her electric bills are soaring because of the costs of hurricane recovery and these longer, hotter summers. Her electric bills this year went from $170 in May to $258 in June to $314 in July. That is not affordable. Energy efficiency standards are needed for future residents so they can save money over the long term.

In this story--and I will recommend it to everyone that is concerned about this issue--there is one expert that goes into this and says that in terms of their energy equipment and components, manufactured homes are not built very well. ``The Federal code hasn't been changed since 1994--and it wasn't very strong then.''

It goes on and says: ``Unlike other types of housing, mobile homes are only subject to Federal energy standards, not State building codes. In 2007, Congress recognized that these requirements were way too weak and passed a law directing the U.S. Department of Energy to update them. That still hasn't happened.'' And it needs to happen.

This expert says that people are saying we need more affordable housing, but if you let folks off the hook for future improvements to manufactured homes, you are simply going to weigh down the people who live in them over time. You are not doing them any favors.

This expert says that every year there's tens of thousands of new homes that stick their residents with these bills for decades. That is not right. We can do better than that.

This bill also would move the authority to set these standards from the Department of Energy to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Well, HUD hasn't set energy standards for manufactured homes since 1994, and it was a bipartisan Congress that moved it back to DOE where they have the expertise to do it.

If these standards were to take effect, the DOE standard would save residents an estimated $475 a year on their electric bill. That is not peanuts, especially for that retiree in St. Petersburg who could use every cent right now.

If anything, Congress should be pressing DOE to strengthen standards. Energy efficiency standards are not the barrier to building affordable manufactured homes. Mr. Speaker, more than 58,000 homes already have been built to higher DOE Zero Energy Ready Homes criteria, most in 2025, because many want to do better for their residents. The technology is there and the building materials are there.

These are the people also mostly being hurt primarily by the Republican policies raising the cost of living, whether it is arbitrary tariffs--and maybe the Supreme Court will give us a little relief from these arbitrary tariffs. People are paying, according to one analysis, up to $1,200 to $1,600 more because of arbitrary tariffs every time they go to the grocery store or for construction materials, canceled energy projects, and the big, ugly bill and cuts to healthcare.

While speaking of healthcare, thanks to the American people speaking out, along with hospitals, doctors, and nurses, every House Democrat and 17 Republicans yesterday voted to extend the ACA tax credits and lower costs. I hope this is catching. I hope this would catch on with our Republican colleagues because people are feeling very insecure when it comes to their family budgets.

You add on something like this where there is no hope for the future to help save money if you are going to live in a manufactured home, your arbitrary tariffs, all this is weighing down on people. If Republicans actually wanted to lower household costs, they would restore tax credits, as well, related to residential clean energy that they gutted as part of the big, ugly bill. They were working to help people save on the high cost of electricity, saving them thousands of dollars on appliances like their AC and heating systems and helping them install solar and batteries or helping them make other home efficiency improvements.

But the Republicans have rejected all of that. They said that is not important. It is more important to give a pass or do a favor for Big Oil companies or the Big Utility companies. Well, we are on the side of the people because they deserve so much better.

Unfortunately, we know the tone the Republicans set last year. I just hoped at the beginning of the year the Republicans would turn the page. Mr. Speaker, 17 did yesterday on healthcare tax credits. I would hope on energy bills they would also look to partner with us to help lower the cost of living. That may be too much to ask for, otherwise they wouldn't be offering bills like these that heap more costs and pain onto our neighbors back home.

Mr. Speaker, American families deserve so much better. This bill needs to be rejected. You need to stand on the side of the people and their pocketbooks for a change.

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

The American people are struggling to make ends meet. They are feeling the pinch of the affordability crisis and bearing the brunt of rising costs at the hands of Republicans. Yet my colleagues continue to turn a blind eye to the cost-of-living crisis. In fact, President Trump has called the affordability crisis a con job and a Democratic scam.

That is how out of touch they are, Mr. Speaker. Healthcare costs are skyrocketing, and electricity bills are through the roof. Meanwhile, President Trump just illegally invaded Venezuela, and Secretary Kennedy is putting children's lives at risk by restricting access to vaccines.

There is a lot this Congress could be doing this week, but the first bill Republicans bring to the floor in 2026 is about showerheads. It is almost impossible to believe. To make matters worse, this bill will actually drive up monthly utility bills for American families.

Electricity prices are up 13 percent across the country. Eighty million Americans are struggling to pay their utility bills, and Republicans want to make that financial pain even worse. Meanwhile, grocery prices are surging, and, of course, monthly healthcare premiums are skyrocketing across the Nation, thanks to the healthcare crisis Republicans created by failing to extend the Affordable Care Act's enhanced premium tax credits. As a result of their inaction, more than 20 million Americans are now facing skyrocketing monthly healthcare premiums. In many cases, and I will say in my home State of New Jersey, Mr. Speaker, they are double or triple the cost that they paid last year.

We just heard a debate on the discharge petition a few minutes ago, and as a result of that discharge petition, and no thanks to most of the Republicans and the leadership, we are going to have an opportunity to vote on the premium tax credits. The bottom line is that that has nothing to do with the Republican leadership. This was a Democratic initiative that a few Republicans finally joined with us so that we have an opportunity to vote on it.

There isn't a single thing that the Republicans can point to about dealing with the affordability crisis that they have created. President Trump and his Republican accomplices are completely out of touch with the alarming reality millions of Americans are facing. Republicans have no plans to address affordability, and I think today proves it.

They are beginning this new Congress with a bill that changes the definition of ``showerhead'' in order to open the door for the Trump administration to increase already rising monthly utility bills and to waste our scarce water resources. This bill would actually increase costs for consumers.

In Trump's first term, he redefined ``showerheads'' to allow them to use significantly more energy and water. Showerheads with multiple nozzles could vastly exceed the current limits. For example, a showerhead with eight nozzles could use up to 20 gallons of water per minute under Trump's 2020 definition.

Think about this, Mr. Speaker: You are raising the costs. You are increasing utility bills not only for electricity but also for water. You are wasting energy, and you are wasting water.

The bottom line is that manufacturers didn't want this. They largely rejected this move by President Trump

and didn't produce showerheads that exceeded the limit that existed. That was because they knew that consumers value money-saving and water conservation showerheads that are good for both their wallets and the environment.

Energy and water conservation standards, Mr. Speaker, save consumers money. The only reason that we have these energy-efficient standards both for showerheads and for so many other things is that Congress, on a bipartisan basis, decided to establish a program where if the Department of Energy or other Departments, mostly the Department of Energy, could show that, in fact, you could save money for consumers and eliminate a lot of waste in terms of water and energy, then they would put forth these standards. These are bipartisan standards.

In 2024 alone, energy and water conservation standards slashed $576 off Americans' utility bills while cutting our energy and water consumption.

I am just trying to point out, Mr. Speaker, that Republican priorities are completely out of touch with the concerns of everyday Americans. They are out of touch with the manufacturers and out of touch with the average American.

The only Republican priority is pleasing President Trump with whatever he wants. They give in to his every wish, even if it means driving up utility bills for American families.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), the ranking member of our Energy Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), a member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Frankel).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Riley).

I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I have to respond to the chairman of our committee who, of course, I respect a great deal.

The Republicans have never supported the Affordable Care Act. When we passed it--and I was one of the drafters how many years ago now--I think there were none--certainly almost no Republican votes.

They were not there when we tried to expand tax credits because we knew that in order for people to be able to afford their health insurance, we would have to reauthorize the tax credits from time to time or expand them for certain incomes. They were never there.

Frankly, I don't want to go into this in any great deal or depth today, but the bottom line is that I and most Democrats believe that healthcare is a basic right and that we, as a Congress, have a responsibility to make it so that most people, if not all Americans, can have health insurance because, otherwise, they can't see a doctor. They end up in the emergency room. They get sicker, and our society suffers for it, either financially, healthwise, or whatever.

I don't really want to get into this debate about who, when, and where because the bottom line is that the Republican Party has never supported any of this. Many of them don't even believe, I think, that somehow we should be helping Americans pay for their health insurance. In any case, they have never supported the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare. They have never supported the enhanced premium tax credits, and so talking about when you did it or didn't do it, to me, is irrelevant.

The bottom line is that the majority had the opportunity to extend it during the reconciliation bill. My colleagues did not. Republicans had the opportunity right through the end of this year to extend it before it expired, and all these double and triple costs per month for health insurance started on January 1. My Republican colleagues didn't do it and are not doing it now.

We had the debate just a half hour or 1 hour ago about the bill that is finally coming to the floor, not because of the Republicans but because every Democrat in this House signed a discharge petition and we got a handful of Republicans to sign the discharge petition, overturning the right of the Speaker to determine what bills come to the floor. So it will come to the floor tomorrow, but when I was here for the debate on the rule, there was only one Republican who got up and said that they were supportive of extending the tax credits.

I am going to see tomorrow how many Republicans come to the floor and say that they are going to extend the tax credits or vote to extend the tax credits. There will be very, very few, unfortunately, because this is not what Republicans support.

In any case, I will talk a little bit about the affordability crisis in general. Across the country, the American people are trying to find ways to afford the rising prices of groceries, electricity, and their water bills. We hear from our constituents--I do every day--that affordability is their top concern. As democratically elected Members of Congress, I think it is our job to address these concerns--not only health insurance, but electricity costs, water costs, and so many things that deal with affordability.

I see my Republican colleagues only seem to be interested in fighting the Trump administration's latest culture war on showerheads.

Mr. Speaker, I have tried not to laugh about this because I think the issue has a level of seriousness, but it is incredible that not only are they

bringing up this bill as their first bill of the new year, but the fact is that the bill does nothing to help the American people.

If the majority was doing something with showerhead bills to bring down costs, I would say ``fine,'' but that is not the case. This is only being done because President Trump has been complaining about efficiency standards for everything since his first term. I think he is completely out of touch with the realities that everyday Americans face.

The truth is simple that efficiency standards lower costs for Americans. I have said it before, but it is worth repeating: In 2024 alone, energy and water conservation standards slashed $576 off of American utility bills while cutting our energy and water consumption. Why is that a bad thing? It is a good thing.

It is totally, in my opinion, kind of dishonest for Republicans to claim that the cost of compliance with environmental regulations and efficiency standards drive up prices. They do not. It is not conservation that is driving up prices for Americans. It is Republican policies, and I would particularly point to Trump's tariffs that are driving up costs for the average American.

The Republican Party let the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credit expire without any safety net, so millions of Americans are going to lose their health insurance. Some have already decided not to sign up because they can't afford it. They are going to lose their health insurance. We will have more tomorrow and the next day and the next day. Until we pass this enhanced tax credit bill, more and more Americans will have no health insurance and the negative consequences from that.

Let's also talk about the big, ugly bill--Republicans call it the big, beautiful bill--that is projected to increase electricity prices for American families by 61 percent. Nearly 1 in 20 American households are in severe utility debt. This winter, families are forced to make the impossible choice of heating their homes or putting food on the table.

We have to address this issue, but somehow that is not enough for my Republican colleagues. They now are trying to pass partisan legislation to increase utility bills, too. That is what this bill does.

Again, all I can say is that the Republican Party's priorities are senseless, cruel, and misguided.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.