Scott H. Peters

Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with my colleagues, Representative Vargas, Representative Levin, and Representative Jacobs, to recognize Shawn VanDiver, an exemplary San Diegan for his unwavering service on behalf of Afghan allies who stood with our servicemembers through two decades of war.

Shawn VanDiver is the founder and president of AfghanEvac. Shawn built this grassroots organization into a nationwide coalition dedicated to ensuring that our Nation keeps its promises.

Since the Taliban took over Afghanistan in 2021, Shawn has brought together veterans, advocates, nonprofits, and government representatives to help our Afghan partners reach safety. His work has helped reunite families who are now rebuilding their lives in the United States.

Shawn is a Navy veteran. This service gave him the clear view that our military is more capable because of its alliances, and when he re- joined civilian life, he brought this insight to San Diego's civic consciousness.

Shawn's commitment to fairness and trustworthiness exemplifies our Nation's foundational ideals. The inspiration for his non-stop energy and advocacy is his commitment to our allies: when people risk their lives in support of our country and servicemembers, our commitment to them does not end when that war does.

As we continue to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks, which kicked off our involvement in Afghanistan, and the fifth anniversary of our withdrawal, every single one of us in this chamber should remember the countless Afghans who risked their lives to support our servicemembers. Our commitment to their safety is not only the right thing to do, but also the story we tell the world about ourselves. America, at its core, is a Nation of decent people that looks out for its allies. I thank my friend Shawn for always reminding us of this basic fact and I thank him for refusing to give up.

Mr. Speaker, my intention was to vote YEA on Roll Call No. 137, on the HEATS Act to streamline geothermal energy production.

Mr. Chairman, for nearly 20 years, electricity demand in the U.S. has barely moved, but that era is over.

Today, we are facing a potential for electricity demand to grow up to fivefold. Meeting this energy demand will be a challenge. The environmental laws of the 1970s were built for defense, but the environmental imperative of today is to build, and that is why we need permitting reform.

However, that doesn't just mean building pipelines and gas plants but also wind, utility-scale solar, and interregional high voltage electric transmission, all of the above. Like President Obama used to say, all of the above and like my Republican colleagues used to openly say at least before November of last year.

I was glad to see Chair Westerman introduce and advance the SPEED Act. Reforming NEPA, the most litigated environmental law on the books, is necessary if we are going to make America competitive and if we are going to protect our environment.

There are many important reforms in this bill, and I want to note that. That is why earlier this month I led a letter with 30 of my Democratic colleagues, outnumbering the members of the Freedom Caucus we saw on the floor this week, but explaining our support for reform and exactly what we needed to get more Democrats to ``yes'' on SPEED.

At the top of that list is permitting certainty, which the ranking member has already mentioned. Mr. Chair, if

you apply for a permit for a project that complies with the law, then you should be able to get that permit, and you should be able to rely on it.

Thoughtful permitting reforms, many of which are in the SPEED Act, are meaningless if the executive branch is allowed to revoke issued permits for no good reason, or if the permitting process can be subjected to political gamesmanship.

The language added to the SPEED Act at markup would have restricted some of the political interference with issued permits, and that was a great start to solving the problem. It wasn't everything we needed, but it was a lot. I was confident that a bipartisan bill was well within reach.

I was really disappointed this week that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, after seeing that good bipartisan progress, decided to force this bill in the other direction this week to satisfy grievances and score political points instead of doing what is best for the country. An all-of-the-above energy strategy is what we were after. That took a big hit this week.

Giving Donald Trump, or any President, the ability to decide what gets permitting reform, which would be the effect of the partisan amendment added to the SPEED Act behind closed doors, significantly reduces certainty for investment in America.

That provision codifies a broken permitting status quo, instead of setting a level playing for everyone. Energy producers, investors, and communities want to know that investment in America, regardless of the electrons powering that investment, is safe from the swing of the political pendulum, and, unfortunately, that goal has not yet been achieved.

We need to get permitting reform done in this Congress. I look forward to working with my colleagues across the aisle in the Senate to craft a bipartisan product that could become law. This is not the final draft. I think there is more we can do.