Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank our colleagues for standing in respect of a great woman. She was not only a great woman for Arizona but a great woman and trailblazer for all women across America.

As was said, she was the first female majority leader to serve in the Arizona Senate. She went on to be the first woman to serve as a Supreme Court Justice. She stood up for truth. She stood up for justice. She was not only a wonderful woman and representative of Arizona but a wonderful American.

We are saddened by her passing, but she set the trail for all of us women. She was a great Republican, a great American, and we praise her each and every day.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 598, H.R. 3774.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 578, H. Res. 798, and YEA on Roll Call No. 577, H.R. 6126.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 560, H. Res. 559, and YEA on Roll Call No. 561, H.R. 340.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall no. 528.

Mr. Speaker, I am in support of funding the government so our military, Border Patrol officers, and other dedicated employees that are protecting our Nation can continue with their job and get paid while they are doing it.

I am also in support of House Republicans pushing and demanding that the Senate secure our border by including the bill that we have already passed out of this House, H.R. 2.

One of the biggest crises in our Nation right now is a result of this administration's disastrous border policies.

President Biden's policies have allowed 233,000 border crossings in just August of this year compared to 50,000 just 3 years ago under President Trump.

Biden has invited 211,000 additional migrants to fly directly into the United States from their home foreign country.

Biden has accepted 263,000 additional more migrants to apply for asylum via his new CBP One app.

Biden has allowed 151 migrants to enter our country that are on the terrorist watch list--and that is just who we have caught.

Biden has allowed migrant women and children to get raped by cartels. His policies have allowed young migrant children to be sold into sex slavery. His policies have allowed fentanyl to flood our border and kill our citizens.

This has got to stop, and Republicans are here to stop it and protect our Nation.

House Republicans have already passed a bill to secure our border that is now sitting over in the Senate waiting to be heard. Schumer won't even bring it up for a vote.

It is time for the Democrat-controlled Senate to pass our border security bill. It is time for the insanity at our southern border to end. It is time to pass this bill and pressure the Democrats in the Senate to secure the border.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Preserving Choice in Vehicle Purchases Act.

When I first read the Biden administration's plan to increase fuel standards, which require 67 percent of all new vehicles manufactured be all-electric by 2032, I was appalled. This plan does nothing to benefit America and everything to benefit our greatest adversary, China.

Electric vehicle batteries require at least a 1,000 percent increase in materials extracted from the Earth compared to a gasoline-powered vehicle.

Who dominates the extraction and processing of these materials? You guessed it: China. Nearly all the growth in mining to meet this demand is expected to come from offshore, non-U.S. mines. Who has been buying these mines? You guessed it: China.

China is the only one that stands to benefit from this drastic change in policy, and American consumers will suffer.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Davidson for sponsoring this bill and allowing me to talk.

The Biden administration's mortgage rule is the most recent in a long line of upside-down, absolutely crazy policies by this administration.

Recently, the Federal Housing Finance Agency increased loan-level pricing adjustments for Americans with good credit scores and decreased the fees for the majority of Americans who have poor credit scores. That makes no sense. It is upside down, and it incentivizes people not to have good credit scores.

Americans who have good credit scores and have been fiscally responsible should not be forced to effectively subsidize the loans of people with bad credit, especially in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis with still-high inflation rates and rising home prices.

The Middle Class Borrower Protection Act repeals this terrible policy and ensures that Americans are not unfairly punished for being fiscally responsible.

I have young adult children, and they struggle. They are not wealthy, as some of my Democratic colleagues have said, but they have struggled. They live paycheck to paycheck, but they try to have good credit scores.

One of them said to me: Jeez, with this crazy Biden policy of wanting to punish people with good credit scores so that they have to pay more to subsidize people with poor credit scores, why the heck should I work to have good credit scores?

That is what this administration is doing. This is like socialism. This is insane. That is why I support Mr. Davidson's bill. That is why I support Americans who strive to be fiscally responsible.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record on H.R. 1640.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my bill, the Save Our Gas Stoves Act. I never would have thought that I would need to introduce legislation to protect Americans' kitchen appliances, but this only goes to show how out of touch this administration's policies have become.

In February, the Department of Energy proposed an extreme regulation that would effectively eliminate nearly all gas stoves and gas cooktops on the market today.

The Department's proposed rule sets requirements for gas stoves at the maximum technologically feasible, or max-tech level. Based on the Department of Energy's own analysis and DOE's own technology support report, 96 percent of the market share of gas stoves will not, I repeat, not meet DOE's new proposed rule. That is a 96 percent ban.

Worse yet, no gas ranges passed DOE's new proposed rule tests. Gas ranges represent nearly 90 percent of all gas stoves sold.

What did DOE do after the public heard about this and pushed back? They adjusted their analysis, seemingly out of thin air. Now, they claim that nearly 50 percent of gas stoves will pass their rule. Guess what? That means more than 50 percent won't. Don't tell me they are not trying to ban gas stoves.

The DOE is justifying this proposed requirement under the false guise of saving Americans money. However, the estimated savings is just $21.89 over the next 14\1/2\ years. That is only $1.50 per year or 12 cents per month.

Consumers don't want to give up the features of the stoves they like for 12 cents per month. Consumers don't want to wait an extra 7 minutes to watch a pot of water boil for 12 cents per month.

Instead of DOE bragging about how they are going to save consumers 12 cents per month, maybe they should tell the public that natural gas is 3\1/2\ times cheaper than electricity and that, according to studies, households that use natural gas for heating, cooking, and drying clothes save an average of $1,068 per year.

Consumers don't want the government taking away the features on gas stoves that they like and use. That is not the role of the U.S. Government. That is why I introduced the Save Our Gas Stoves Act to protect Americans' consumer choice.

My legislation prohibits the Department of Energy from implementing this extreme rule and prohibits the Department of Energy from imposing standards that result in the unavailability of a product based on the type of fuel the product consumes.

Mr. Chair, I thank the American Association of Homebuilders; the American Restaurant Association; the American Gas Association; the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers; the Arizona Restaurant Association; the American Public Gas Association; the National Propane Gas Association; and several energy companies, including Southwest Gas, which delivers natural gas to consumers in Arizona, for their support of my bill and for their support for American consumer choice.

Mr. Chair, I am pleased that this is a bipartisan bill that has received bipartisan support and that my Republican colleagues and 29 of my Democratic colleagues already voted in favor of an amendment to H.R. 1 that did virtually the same thing as this bill.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on my bill. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of consumer

choice. I urge my colleagues to vote to save our gas stoves.

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

Mr. Chair, respectfully, my Democratic colleague, Mr. Pallone, said: We are not banning gas stoves.

Yet, the Department of Energy studied this for many years, and in their own analysis, their own book, and their own standards called the technical support document in table 1032, it says that only 4 percent of the gas cooktops that they have tested will meet the qualifications. That is 96 percent that will not. It says that is 4 percent of market share, meaning 96 percent won't.

Even if it is true, which I don't think it is, where Mr. Pallone says that now 50 percent already qualify, that means 50 percent don't. To me, that is at least a 50 percent ban.

Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).

Mr. Chair, I agree with my Democratic colleague, we should be talking about the issues that are important to Americans today, like securing our border, lowering our crime rates, lowering the cost of living.

We have crisis after crisis in our country, and you know what the Department of Energy does under the Biden administration? They go after our gas stoves. That is why I had to bring this bill to the floor.

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

Mr. Chair, I agree, we need to focus on important issues, so may I suggest to my Democratic colleagues that they talk to President Biden and say stop going after our gas stoves, so we don't have to talk about this?

Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington State (Mrs. Rodgers), the chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Chair, my colleague said, oh, this is going to save money. May I remind him that, according to the DOE, only $21.89 over 14\1/2\ years will be saved. That is 12 cents a month.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Fulcher).

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Wyoming.

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining on both sides?

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

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

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

Mr. Chair, my colleagues keep saying we are not banning gas stoves, but what would they call it when the Department of Energy's own analysis says that of the gas stoves that they have tested, only 4 percent of the market share would qualify for their new proposed rule? That means about 96 percent won't. Then they revised it to say, well, almost 50 percent will qualify. Well, that means more than 50 percent won't.

I call that a ban. We are mixing words here.

The other things that my Democratic colleagues keep asking is: Why wouldn't we want to save money? It is only 12 cents a month. Who is going to give up the choice of what type of stove they want for 12 cents a month? Nobody. That is not a good exchange.

I would also say that if the Biden administration is not doing anything, why do all of these people support my bill? The National Association of Homebuilders, the American Restaurant Association, the American Gas Association, the American Home Appliance Manufacturers, numerous other energy companies.

Mr. Chairman, I would read a little bit from the National Restaurant Association, because it talks about why this bill is important. We didn't bring it. The Republicans didn't bring this on; it was the Biden administration. With all these crises going on in our country, he has to pick on gas stoves. I don't understand why.

This is what the National Restaurant Association says:

Natural gas is a critical energy source for many sectors of

the economy but none more than the restaurant industry. In

fact, natural gas is the preferred cooking energy source for

76 percent of restaurants. Cooking with an open flame from

natural gas is critical for a variety of dishes to ensure a

responsive, consistent, and precise heat source that affects

the quality of food served.

Natural gas also allows restaurants to use certain cooking

techniques that cannot be replicated with an electric stove.

Finally, banning or overly restricting natural gas use could burden restaurant owners with higher operating costs, particularly local and independent restaurants. The cost to convert existing infrastructure to handle the power capacity needed to operate a commercial kitchen alone would be prohibitive for many locally owned restaurants.

I say the same is true for individual homeowners. They don't want to change. They like the features on their gas stove. They don't want to give them up.

Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support my bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

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

I rise in opposition to this amendment, which is nothing more than an attempt to delay implementation of the underlying bill.

Secretary Granholm could simply say that my bill affects energy security, even though it doesn't.

The Biden administration's ban on gas stoves is the result of the Democrats' war on natural gas. They want to force a transition away from affordable and reliable energy by banning the products that Americans use every day.

The Department of Energy's gas stove ban is actually an energy security threat. Because it is not economically justified, it will not result in a significant savings of energy, and it will reduce consumer choice for natural gas kitchen ranges and ovens. Its goal is to eliminate the use of natural gas, which is used to support America's energy security.

Natural gas kitchen ranges and ovens are currently the preferred choice of 40 percent of American households. Nearly 187 million Americans use natural gas because it is affordable and reliable.

According to industry estimates, homes with natural gas appliances save up to $1,068 per year, compared to all electric homes.

Natural gas stoves are affordable, reliable, and widely popular. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and support the underlying bill, the Save Our Gas Stoves Act.

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

Mr. Chair, again, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment. Even my Democratic colleagues admit that the Department of Energy is now saying that less than 50 percent of gas stoves would qualify for the new proposed rule, so more than 50 percent of the existing models of gas stoves would be banned.

I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

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

This amendment strikes the language preventing the Department of Energy from implementing any substantially similar rule. Removing this language would allow the Department of Energy to just reissue another gas stove ban after my bill becomes law.

I rise in opposition to this amendment, which strikes important language in the underlying bill. That language would prevent the Department of Energy from reissuing a nearly identical rule to ban gas stoves.

H.R. 1640 allows the Department of Energy to issue energy efficiency standards that are cost effective and that have a significant amount of energy for consumers.

This is the current standard under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, and H.R. 1640 does nothing to change that.

The Biden administration's politically motivated proposal to ban a majority of gas stoves violates the statutory requirements of EPCA because it fails to save consumers money or energy and because it removes products from the market simply because they use natural gas.

The Energy and Commerce Committee held hearings on this and conducted oversight. The facts are clear that the Department of Energy should withdraw this misguided rule, and DOE should be prohibited from reissuing a substantially similar rule.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and support the underlying bill, the Save Our Gas Stoves Act.

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

Mr. Chairman, yes, indeed, the energy efficiency standards deal with both gas and electric stoves.

The problem is that it disproportionately would ban the majority of gas stoves, not electric stoves. That takes away consumer choice.

That is why I brought this bill to the floor, and that is why I oppose this amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Madam Chair, our Nation is facing a tragic fentanyl crisis. Our kids are dying. Our neighbors are dying. During the last 2 years, if I may remind my Democratic colleagues, they were in charge. They were in charge of the House, they had control of the Senate, they had control of the Presidency, and they did nothing to stop this fentanyl crisis.

Late last year, I visited the Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office in Phoenix, Arizona. It is truly revealing. It is one of the busiest medical examiner offices in the Nation. In Maricopa County last year, fentanyl and its analogues were involved in 60 percent of all the drug-related deaths. Once more, there are record amounts of fentanyl coming across our southern border into our Arizona communities.

Did you know that last Thursday, officers at the Arizona Nogales Port of Entry seized over 207,000 fentanyl pills and over 16 pounds of fentanyl powder just in 1 day. With border officials only able to seize 5 to 10 percent of all illegal drugs, these numbers are truly terrifying. House Republicans are taking action. We are the ones introducing this bill. We are the ones getting something done. We are introducing the HALT Fentanyl Act.

Madam Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation, to stop this deadly drug crisis and save lives.

Mr. Speaker, I am from a border State, and I have been to the border multiple times. There is absolutely an invasion at our southern border.

Even worse, title 42 ends today. Without title 42, the number of illegal immigrants at our southern border is expected to skyrocket.

The Biden administration has no plan. In fact, I heard multiple times from my Democratic colleagues today how we should work together on a comprehensive plan. May I remind my Democratic colleagues that they were in total control of the House, the Senate, and the Presidency for the last 2 years, and they did absolutely nothing.

The Secure the Border Act is the solution. This bill disincentivizes illegal immigration, ends catch and release, builds the wall, and reinstates President Trump's successful remain in Mexico policy.

Republicans want secure borders. Republicans want to protect our communities from deadly fentanyl. Republicans want to protect the innocent immigrant children from being sold into sex slavery, like is happening today.

It is time to pass this legislation and secure the border now because President Biden won't.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss an issue that has impacted far too many women across the United States, triple-negative breast cancer, or TNBC.

One in eight women in the United States will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. In Arizona, there will be approximately 6,240 new breast cancer-related cases just this year.

TNBC is an invasive breast cancer that accounts for 10 to 15 percent of all breast cancers. Unfortunately, TNBC tends to grow and spread faster than any other cancer, has fewer treatment options, and tends to have a worse prognosis.

Researchers at the University of Arizona have been working to create a less toxic treatment for TNBC, and a new study has provided clues about potential new approaches to treatment.

This is good news in the fight against cancer, but we must continue to invest in research and innovation to combat TNBC and protect women.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all of you to join me in praying for Eric Morgan. Eric Morgan is a constituent of mine in Arizona, and he also served as the former Republican chairman for the legislative district in my congressional district.

On April 5th, Eric was involved in a very serious motorcycle accident. They thought he was going to die. Fortunately, with the help of the doctors and nurses and multiple surgeries, he has now been released out of the critical care unit in a hospital in Arizona, but he has a long road for recovery.

Mr. Speaker, the prayers have helped Eric and his wife, Heather, and their family. I want Eric and Heather to know that all of us here in the U.S. House of Representatives and the people in the gallery are praying for Eric's total and complete healing.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 1. This bill will unleash American energy and reduce gasoline and energy prices for all Americans.

Look at this chart. Since Biden has taken office, gasoline prices have gone up 51 percent, utility gas prices have gone up 44 percent, and electricity prices have gone up for Americans 24 percent.

H.R. 1 is here to help Americans with these outrageous cost-of-living increases.

I am honored that my legislation to disapprove of President Biden's decision to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline was included in this package. President Biden's decision to cancel the pipeline was a terrible decision that led to increased gasoline prices and the loss of thousands and thousands of jobs.

Now is the time to stand up for the American people. Now is the time to help reduce the cost of gasoline, utility gas, and electricity. Now is the time to support H.R. 1.

Mr. Chairman, our energy security is under attack. This administration has drained our Strategic Petroleum Reserve, selling off 40 percent of the reserve in just the last 2 years.

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is now at its lowest level in 40 years, posing a threat to our country in the event of a real emergency. Yet, this administration has failed to implement even a simple plan to replace the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That is what this bill does.

With the Strategic Production Response Act, Republicans are stepping up to the plate to ensure any nonemergency release is accompanied by a plan to increase the percentage of Federal lands and water leased for oil and gas exploration.

This is responsible. This is common sense. This bill is a critical step in unleashing our domestic energy production, increasing our emergency supply, and delivering on our promise to protect our Nation's energy security.