Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I thank the chair for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1615 and in support of our gas stoves.

Across southern Michigan, people--including chefs in my district and, most importantly, my wife--are bewildered by the attacks on gas stoves, and many can't wrap their heads around it.

Here is the deal: a climate group with deep ties to the CCP published a questionable study on gas stoves. President Biden's climate czar and Energy Secretary have met with this group, and despite the group's deep ties to the CCP, American taxpayer dollars continue to be funneled to them.

Shortly after publication of the study, a Consumer Product Safety Commission member said that a gas stove ban was ``on the table.''

Let's be clear. The House is not going to stand by while the administration continues to restrict the freedoms of Americans, undermine energy security, and make life even more costly for families.

About 40 percent of Americans are utilizing gas stoves, and we are not going to restrict our own freedom because a group connected to the CCP would like us to.

Natural gas is safe, it is reliable, and it is affordable for millions of Americans. Natural gas makes America strong, resilient, provides stability, and has been the key factor in cleaning up our environment unlike other nations.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to support our freedom, energy security, and a prosperous future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.J. Res. 45, introduced by my colleague, Mr. Good.

This resolution will block President Biden's illegal debt transfer scheme.

Forcing those who either did not attend college, saved and sacrificed to pay their way through school, or those who paid off their loans to pay for someone else's debt is simply unfair.

Estimates show 570,000 of my constituents, nearly three-quarters of my district, will not benefit from this giveaway. Yet, as taxpayers, they will still be on the hook for over $3,500.

It will further fuel inflation but does nothing to address the rising cost of college. Simply put, the President's illegal debt transfer is a slap in the face to those who paid their bills or did not go to college.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 467, the HALT Fentanyl Act.

A recent poll shows just 16 percent of Americans are satisfied with how things are going in the United States.

Why?

Washington has largely ignored pressing issues in the past 2 years. While the fentanyl epidemic may not grab headlines in the mainstream media, it has lost the pulse of mainstream America, few issues are more important.

Illicit fentanyl poisonings are now the number one cause of death among Americans aged 18 to 49. Nearly every American knows a friend or a relative who has struggled or even overdosed. I do.

Despite the crisis, Congress has continued to kick the can down the road by temporarily extending the class-wide scheduling order. Each time, law enforcement is left scrambling as we approach the deadline, which would let many of the fentanyl-related substances become legal.

We must permanently give law enforcement the tools they need to keep Americans safe. The HALT Fentanyl Act complements other solutions like the recently passed Secure the Border Act, which will help properly root out the flow of illicit drugs and limit supply.

Mr. Chair, I urge the bill's passage, which will represent another step toward restoring the voice of the American people in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S.J. Res. 11. The legislation will disapprove of the Environmental Protection Agency's misguided heavy-duty vehicle rule that seeks to upend our economy in order to meet President Biden's extreme climate goals.

As a member of the Conservative Climate Caucus, I am not against reducing emissions--far from it. It should be done through innovation, not top-down government mandates that ignore reality. Trucks today show the power of innovation--I drive one of those--having already reduced emissions by 98 percent.

It seems like this administration has closed their eyes to any side effects of their rush to green. From tailpipe emissions regulations that will force people to buy expensive and less practical EVs to new rules on power plants that will threaten the reliability of our electric grid. It seems like the EPA hasn't even thought about the economic and energy security of our constituents.

In their final rulemaking, the EPA said they considered cost when deliberating these regulations. I am not sure how that could be true when they estimate it will cost thousands of dollars per truck to upgrade them with the necessary equipment.

The fact is small-truck owners and operators might not be able to afford these changes and will either go out of business or be forced to pass the cost on to the customer. On top of this, the rule also applies to trucks and equipment used by my farmers and farmers across the country.

Our supply chains are already stretched thin. Inflation is sky-high. Either of these scenarios worsens our economic outlook and raises prices for the consumers across the board. The trucks that haul our food, our energy resources, and our goods will be impacted. This is just the first of several, strict, heavy-duty vehicle emissions rules that the Biden administration is implementing.

In our modern digital economy, people and commerce depend on our truckers more than ever before. This rule will put further strain on our supply chain and increase costs for Michiganders and people across the country.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the resolution.

Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Chair, here is the deal: It is January 19, 2021. Gas is $2.38 per gallon. We had just replenished our Strategic Petroleum Reserve. American energy dominance provided stability across the geopolitical landscape.

The following day, the war on domestic energy began with the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline and executive action restricting domestic production.

In a matter of mere months, gas prices would reach record highs. Our emergency reserves would be tapped for political purposes, and we would be begging adversaries to increase their production while an empowered Russia and an empowered China both eyed territorial expansion.

This is what the radical Green New Deal looks like in implementation.

My constituents have told me about the energy bills that they can't budget for, the unaffordable rate spikes in peak hours, and even stories of gas tanks being drilled into.

Everything costs more when energy costs more.

With H.R. 1, energy will cost less.

The Lower Energy Costs Act will unleash domestic production. H.R. 1 includes permitting reforms, increased production and processing of critical minerals, and an undoing of the Biden administration's regulatory stranglehold on the energy sector.

In Michigan, activists have long eyed shutting down Line 5, an essential international pipeline sustaining 34,000 jobs across the Midwest and billions in economic activity.

Language I authored, included in H.R. 1, would protect these pipelines from being unilaterally shut down by an overzealous executive branch.

Prosperity, opportunity, and security are on the line.

I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 1.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 5, the Parents Bill of Rights Act. I thank Representative Letlow and Chair Foxx for their leadership in defending the God-given rights of parents and protecting kids as well.

Parental involvement in their children's education is paramount to a student's success. However, in recent years, we have seen a push by some to exclude parents from their children's education. This is why I recently introduced the PROTECT Kids Act with Senator Tim Scott which has been included as an amendment to H.R. 5.

The PROTECT Kids Act would require any Department of Education-funded elementary or middle school to seek and acquire parental consent before changing their child's pronouns or preferred name on any school form.

This provision is straightforward, common sense, and will safeguard the critical relationship between parents, schools, and children.

When a child goes on a field trip or fails a test, their parents are told and are often required to sign an acknowledgment or a permission slip.

Why should relatively small things require notification but something as significant as a child's pronouns or a change in accommodations can be withheld from the people who raise and love them?

Recent polling shows this has the broad support of the American people. Three-quarters of Americans believe schools should be required to obtain consent from parents.

Parents have a fundamental right to raise and educate their children how they choose. We must pass the Parents Bill of Rights Act to help mitigate issues we have seen nationwide and to support parents who need the support to do right by their kids as well.

On this side of the aisle, we believe this is the right way to go, and we believe that in the end it will promote education, family, and individualism as well.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the love, dedication, and faithfulness of George and Norma Carpenter of Allen, Michigan.

In 1943, in the midst of a war George bravely served in, George and Norma were married. Soon they will be celebrating their 80th anniversary.

Throughout the years, George and Norma have continued to set an example for our community, not only

through their dedication to each other, but also to their faith as devoted members of the Countryside Bible Church.

George and Norma are currently 98 and 97 years old, respectively, and are still strong in their health as well as their love for each other.

With over 100 descendants, the Carpenters have left a tremendous mark on the community and beyond. I would like to recognize this remarkable couple and congratulate them as they celebrate their extraordinary milestone.

Mr. Speaker, since being sworn in as Michigan's Fifth Congressional District Representative, I have been fortunate to get to know so many great people.

From Lake Michigan to Lake Erie, I have been traversing southern Michigan to meet with my constituents and discuss the many issues that are important to them.

I have met with Michigan DNR at Warren Dunes State Park to discuss how we can protect the Great Lakes and our natural resources here in Michigan.

I have been able to tour several small businesses and manufacturing facilities across the district, meet with law enforcement from Berrien County to Monroe, and have meetings with local leaders in Adrian, Jackson, Marshall, Monroe, New Buffalo, Niles, Stevensville, and Three Rivers.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to continued meetings with my constituents and serving the great people of Michigan's Fifth District that celebrate Michigan's 186th birthday this very week.

Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 21.

Michiganians are facing hardships due to President Biden and Secretary Granholm's war on American energy. My constituents are struggling to afford to fill up their tanks and heat their homes.

Instead of abandoning his failed progressive policies and unleashing domestic energy production to lower costs for hardworking Americans, the Biden administration decided to use America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve as a political Band-Aid.

President Biden has sold off over 250 million barrels of oil, draining our SPR to its lowest level since 1983. America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve is to be used in cases of national emergency, not political emergencies. Energy security is national security.

H.R. 21 is a commonsense measure to ensure that our SPR remains ready for when we face global supply disruptions that threaten our economy and prevents politically motivated withdrawals. Let's pass it.

Mr. Chair, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chair, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

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

Mr. Chair, I think we need to remember that H.R. 21 is about strengthening the SPR by requiring any nonemergency use to be accompanied by a plan to produce American oil resources.

This amendment undermines the purpose of the bill. It would deprive the country of the benefits of secure American supplies of cleanly produced fossil energy. We should reject this anti-American energy amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chair, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chair, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, this amendment prohibits the leasing plan from decreasing land and water for recreation, but this is unnecessary. Nothing in the bill changes any existing laws related to land and water access.

Energy production and conservation are not mutually exclusive. Republicans are good stewards and desire to be good stewards as well of all of our resources. In fact, every year, $900 million in royalties are paid by energy companies drilling for oil and gas on Federal land, and those royalties are put into this fund. The money is used to protect national parks and the land surrounding waters and national wildlife refuges.

This amendment is nothing more than an attempt to delay the implementation of H.R. 21, so I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

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

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment prohibits oil and gas exploration in a specific area of the Outer Continental Shelf off the California coast.

This amendment excludes a tract of land from oil and gas exploration from being included in the leasing plan. Virtually, all oil and gas leasing in the OCS occurs in the Gulf of Mexico.

Oil and gas exploration in the OCS accounts for roughly 15 percent of all domestic oil production and 2 percent of domestic natural gas production.

By further limiting this potentially vast resource, we will not be able to meet demand for oil and gas as it increases, and it will.

Mr. Chair, 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, H.R. 21 is about strengthening the SPR by requiring any non-emergency use to be accompanied by a plan to produce American oil resources.

This amendment undermines the purpose of H.R. 21 and would deprive the country of the benefits of secure American supplies of cleanly produced fossil energy.

Rather than deprive Californians--including the hardworking Californians in the energy production industry--the benefit of increasing American energy and security, we should embrace the pro- energy policies of H.R. 21.

We should reject this anti-energy amendment.

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

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment goes further than the scope of H.R. 21. Nothing in H.R. 21 affects

any laws or statutes on the books that regulate offshore oil and gas development.

The purpose and scope of this bill is limited: it is to protect our SPR from political use and to ensure we are adequately prepared for future legitimate emergencies. It does nothing to impact existing Department of the Interior regulations.

It simply requires the Secretary of Energy to develop a plan to increase production if it is used without declaring an emergency. This is not a vehicle to impose new restrictions.

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

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment further restricts the land that could be eligible for the production plan. It sets a vague requirement to ensure that land in the plan provides ``a fair return for taxpayers.''

The Biden administration has hamstrung our ability to produce American energy. This has had a disastrous consequence for Americans.

Energy prices have skyrocketed under this administration and still remain high. We have grown more reliant on our adversaries such as Venezuela, Iran, and China for energy--dirty energy. I would argue that producing more American energy to lower prices for families is a ``fair return for taxpayers.''

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

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

This amendment would require the leasing plan to include a consultation plan with Tribal Governments. Current law allows for sufficient consultation with relevant agencies and Tribes. This bill does nothing to change underlying leasing laws that the Department of the Interior is subject to.

So 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, this amendment would prohibit the leasing plan from including leasing where it would disproportionately burden communities of color, low-income communities, or Tribal and indigenous communities. However, current law allows for a process requiring consultation with relevant agencies, Tribes, and communities.

This bill does nothing to change underlying leasing laws the Department of the Interior is subject to, so I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

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

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment would prohibit the leasing plan from including leasing on Federal lands that are viable for renewable energy production.

This amendment is nothing more than an attempt to force the government to pick winners and losers in the marketplace by mandating only renewable production on certain lands. It is also shortsighted given some of the serious environmental and land degradation concerns the build-out of massive swaths of solar panels and wind turbines create.

The intent of H.R. 21 is to protect the SPR and increase domestic production of oil and gas. This would do the opposite.

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

Mr. Chair, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chair, I do insist on the point of order.

The amendment violates clause 7 of rule XVI of the rules of the House because it is not germane to the underlying bill.

Specifically, the bill limits the drawdown of petroleum in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve until the Department of Energy develops a plan to increase the percentage of Federal lands leased for oil and gas production. The amendment would require the Secretary of Energy to develop a plan to offset any drawdown of petroleum products in the reserve with measures that reduce the demand for oil.

Measures to reduce the demand for oil is a different purpose for the plan in H.R. 21. The amendment is not germane.

Mr. Chair, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, I insist upon my point of order.

Mr. Chairman, clause 7 of rule XVI prohibits the House and its committees from considering nongermane amendments.

This amendment is not germane because it violates the subject matter test of germaneness.

H.R. 21 proposes to limit the drawdown of petroleum in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve until the Department of Energy develops a plan to increase the percentage of Federal lands leased for oil and gas production.

This amendment would introduce a new subject matter into the bill. Specifically, the amendment requests leases or permits issued to be accompanied by a certification. This is about permit holders, not a leasing plan. This idea should be judged on the merits in a separate bill.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

H.R. 21 is about strengthening the SPR by requiring any nonemergency use to be accompanied by a plan to produce American oil resources. This amendment is unworkable as a matter of certification, and if it were to work, it would lead to inhibiting the price signals necessary for generating more supply.

The market economy allocating resources through supply and demand is the best system for assuring affordable quality goods and depends on prices to signal more supply. This amendment seeks to curtail price signals for largely uneconomic messaging purposes.

This amendment undermines the purpose of the bill, and so, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 3, which condemns the epidemic of attacks on pro-life and faith-based organizations.

Unfortunately, Michigan's Fifth District has not escaped these attacks. Last June, Jane's Revenge vandals graffitied and smashed the windows of Jackson, Michigan's Right to Life and my own office. It was a despicable act. The Jane's Revenge perpetrator, who has yet to be caught, even accidentally graffitied a neighbor's house, as well.

Yet, this darkness presented an opportunity to show the best of our community. Volunteers from the community came out to clean up the broken glass and help board up the windows.

In contrast to this positivity displayed by everyday Americans, and despite congressional efforts we have spearheaded, President Biden's Justice Department has stayed silent on these acts of domestic terrorism.

Today, congressional Democrats have an opportunity to right the wrongs of this administration and join us in condemning these acts of violence as we condemn all acts of violence, as well.

Volunteers at pregnancy centers who remain committed to their convictions and efforts understand they have a target on their backs. These volunteers are individuals spending their time and their money to clothe, feed, provide

shelter, and minister to women in crisis.

Is this the progressive America my colleagues talk about? I think not. Does their idea of progress consist of political violence targeting those who provide services to women and families? Are intimidation and violence acceptable to the Biden administration and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle? I hope not.

Madam Speaker, I strongly urge support for this resolution for the benefit of lives, security, and decency in our country.

Madam Speaker, while the baby formula shortage no longer draws as many headlines, parents are still suffering as a third of American families still struggle to find baby formula, according to recent Census Bureau statistics.

Countless parents are still searching store after store in hopes of finding formula to feed their children. That is unacceptable. Parents deserve both solutions and answers.

Months ago, the Energy and Commerce Committee unanimously advanced my resolution calling for the Biden administration to release documents related to the recall of infant formula and potential impacts on the infant formula supply chain.

Let me reiterate. This was passed unanimously in committee with support from both sides of the aisle. I am urging the Speaker and Democrat leadership to allow a full vote on this resolution immediately.

We need to hold the administration accountable and ensure that this level of failure never happens again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to what I believe is the inappropriately named Respect for Marriage Act because if what my colleagues have just said were actually all that was here, it would be a different story to some degree. But that is not what we are talking about.

The bill betrays our country's commitment to the fundamental right of religious liberty by depriving religious and faith-based organizations of their tax-exempt status and depriving individual people of faith of being able to carry out fully their faith without repercussions. Licenses and government contracts are also put at risk here with this legislation.

As a result, religiously affiliated and faith-based organizations will be at risk of being compelled to make hiring decisions in contradiction to their tenets. And I am not just talking about Christian religions. We are talking about all that are impacted by this.

It puts us at risk for Catholic Charities' ability to find foster and adoptive homes for children in need; or a gospel rescue mission's ability to serve the homeless; and it would likely be the end of the school choice initiatives that rely on religious schools--schools of faith--to serve at-risk children trapped in failing schools. Additionally, businessowners across the country who conduct their businesses based on their sincerely held faith, beliefs, and principles would be subject to lawsuits simply because they have a traditional view of marriage.

Again, if all that my colleagues have just even recently said were the only thing about this legislation, it would be another story; but it isn't, it goes way beyond. A deep appreciation for and commitment to following science in the positive endeavor of continuing the human race is important.

Mr. Speaker, I ask for opposition to this legislation and a more thoughtful approach.

Mr. Speaker, we learned this morning of a prisoner swap with the Kremlin: basketball star Brittney Griner for the merchant of death, Viktor Bout.

Left behind once again by this administration was Michigander Paul Whelan.

While we rejoice with the Griner family, Paul's parents, constituents in my district, will soon have their fourth Christmas without their son.

Paul's family is doing their best to stay upbeat and is genuinely happy for the Griner family, as we all are. But it is hard to fathom the magnitude of disappointment with this latest lopsided swap.

We are keeping the Whelans in our prayers, just as we are keeping up the pressure. For years now, I have spoken about Paul's wrongful imprisonment on this floor. I was hoping the next time would be to celebrate his release. Sadly, it is not.

Today, once again, it is time for Paul Whelan to come home.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor World War II veteran Herb Elfring of Jackson, Michigan, for his distinguished service to our country. Herb truly embodies the very best of America and the Greatest Generation.

Herb turned 100 years old earlier this year, and he is one of a very few survivors of the Pearl Harbor attack to still be alive.

From 1940 to 1945, Herb served in the U.S. Army National Guard and was stationed in Hawaii at the time of the attack, barely avoiding fire from Japanese planes. Herb would earn promotions and various medals for his bravery in the line of duty.

Herb and his late wife, Ruth, were married for 57 years and had five children, eight grandchildren, and seven great-grandchildren.

To this day, Herb remains active in the Jackson community.

Thank you, Herb, for your service to our country and legacy in the Jackson community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 7353, a bill originally introduced by Representative Walorski of Indiana, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII.