Kathy Castor

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, our neighbors are suffering an affordability crisis. They want policymakers in Washington, D.C., to help solve problems and bring down the cost of living. Every time the President and congressional Republicans deny that this is happening and say that everything is great and everything is well, they are doing a real disservice to hardworking American families. Tariffs, higher electric bills, the cost of housing, and the cost of groceries, you can't turn a blind eye to it, and you shouldn't. What you should do is adopt my motion to recommit and defeat this bill. Vote ``no.'' Our neighbors deserve better.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 4758. It is a bill that is going to sock it to the pocketbooks of our hardworking neighbors back home. Republicans appear to be doing everything they can to stick their heads in the sand when it comes to the affordability squeeze. Higher costs, that is the last thing that our neighbors back home need right now. Yet, there is this relentless march by Republicans to bring bills to the floor that rip away savings from people who could really use it right now. What does this bill do? It guts a very popular, commonsense initiative that hardworking Americans rely on. In 2022, Congress passed some rebates to help people afford home appliances through two home energy rebate initiatives that helped to lower their electric bills. The first is the Home Efficiency Rebates Program, or HOMES. That is the rebate to households that conduct whole-house energy-saving retrofits. That means that our neighbors can increase insulation in their homes or improve their HVAC systems. The second is the Home Electrification and Appliances Rebate Program, or HEAR. That provides rebates to upgrade electric panels, conduct weatherization, or purchase an appliance like an electric water heater or air-conditioner, because oftentimes we know that people need a little bit of help with that upfront cost. If they can get a little help to afford an upgraded appliance, that is going to save them money in the long run. Mr. Speaker, it is just a real head-scratcher as to why Republicans are bringing this bill in the midst of an affordability crisis, but I think if you listened to the State of the Union Address last night, that is a little bit illuminating because the President said that everything is great in America. He solved it. There is no affordability squeeze. Look, our economy is roaring. Everybody is doing great. That is not what I hear from my neighbors back home in Florida. Everything costs more. In fact, 80 million Americans are struggling to pay their utility bills. Electric rates across the country are up by 13 percent on average and are higher in a lot of places. Then, these illegal, arbitrary tariffs have added to this affordability squeeze. Many analyses have it that the average household is paying $1,700 more per year because of the Trump tariffs, and Republicans in Congress have been supportive the entire way along. Even after the United States Supreme Court ruled last week that the tariffs--these high import taxes, the highest in 100 years on households, making their groceries, their appliances, and everything else cost more--are illegal and that the President doesn't have the authority to do that, the President doubles down and says that he does. In fact, the President is going to inflict more pain, and Republicans last night in this Chamber cheered--cheered--more taxes on hardworking Americans. This relates directly to the bill that we are debating today because we are talking about affordable appliances. Do you know what tariffs have done to the cost of appliances? Tariffs have driven a steady rise in appliance pricing, hitting American consumers with higher costs for essentials like refrigerators, washers, dryers, and dishwashers. Since most appliances rely on imported steel, aluminum, and foreign- made components, such as motors and control boards, tariffs on both finished goods and parts have pushed up production and import costs. Retailers and manufacturers are working on very slim margins. They have passed along all of these increases directly to shoppers, leading to some of the fastest price jumps in years. Now that the President thumbs his nose at what the Supreme Court has told him and is now inflicting new pain and new taxes on Americans, new tariffs, that is going to keep the prices of appliances elevated at a time when people are really under the gun and feeling the squeeze. They are going to make it harder to replace or upgrade big-ticket items. The result is the persistent squeeze on American budgets with no meaningful relief in sight. People will tell you this. They will say that they might have listened to that speech last night, but they are out of touch. Everything is not all well. The affordability crisis is not solved, and now Republicans bring a bill to the floor that makes it harder and makes everything more expensive for people back home. Mr. Speaker, 54 States and territories are already getting these rebate initiatives out, getting the money into the pockets of consumers. Governors and State energy offices have dedicated their own funding and staff time, and they are working with the Department of Energy. This is something that Americans of all political stripes will support, and they need it. Texas received $689 million to help Texans afford new appliances and weatherize their homes. Ohio received $249 million. Republicans are going to rip that away. Kentucky received $134 million. In Georgia and North Carolina, where rebates are already in place, participating families are saving over $1,000 a year. That doesn't make up for the tariffs, the pain inflicted and the higher costs that people are paying, but it will sure help. Every dollar will help working families right now. In Florida, I know my neighbors are very eager to take advantage of the $346 million in cost savings that will come under these initiatives. We received it just last week. Mr. Speaker, do you know why it is particularly important to parts of the country that have experienced disasters and hurricanes? I will tell you a story. I was meeting with a small business owner and homeowners last week who are still recovering from Hurricanes Helene and Milton. One of my neighbors, Rebecca, is a retiree on a fixed income and living in a 960-square-foot home in St. Petersburg. When Hurricane Helene hit, she lost her car, her furniture, her washer and dryer, and her air-conditioner. What happened in the subsequent months? Electric bills went up, up, up. Last year, she paid $170 in May, $258 in June, and $314 in July. As people try to rebuild, they could really use these rebates as they are replacing their appliances. Why do Republicans want to make life so much harder and more expensive? I guess it is because they believed what the President said last night, that everything is great, everything is fine, nothing to see here. Mr. Speaker, that is out of touch. It is really out of touch. For all of these reasons, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to the committee. If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. My amendment would require the Secretary of Energy to certify that implementation of this act would not increase costs for homeowners and renters. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record the text of this amendment immediately prior to the motion to recommit.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the bill also says it would gut the ability of manufacturers, consumer groups, and others to arrive at consensus. Most of what happens when the Department of Energy goes to update energy efficiency standards is that everyone gets together and they work out a consensus. It is a consensus that helps consumers save money but ensures that there is not a burden on business. Over time, technology has improved time and time again. Some of us are old enough to reflect on the very limited choices we had decades ago on our household appliances. Now we go shopping. We have wide consumer choice. I know my friends on the other side of the aisle like to say this is a mandate. They are telling us what to buy. People are smart. They know better than that. When consumers go shopping, it is up to them to decide: Do I want the energy efficient model? Do I want the midsize model? What benefits us? What really applies and helps my family? They have the choice to make. Over time, through this important energy efficiency initiative at the Department of Energy, people have really saved a lot of money. It has allowed our manufacturers to do well. To gut these energy efficiency standards would be a gift to China. People are already suffering, paying more because of tariffs on some household appliances and supplies. If we really want to help consumers save money, why don't we do something to get the tariff revenue back to hardworking Americans? A lot of the big businesses now are saying to the Trump administration that they want that tariff money back. What would really be fair is to get that tariff money back to the hardworking Americans who paid those import taxes, those illegal tariffs and arbitrary tariffs, imposed by a President who would like to wield them for retribution, creating--let's get back to the state of the Union-- creating chaos and instability at a time when American families really need policymakers looking out for them and their wallets. In the end, Mr. Speaker, energy conservation programs have been a very critical and valuable tool to our neighbors back home to help them save trillions of dollars over the past decades. It saves hardworking Americans thousands of dollars per year. It helps businesses save money. Why in the world, especially on the day of the State of the Union Address, in the middle of an affordability squeeze, would the Republicans bring another bill to the floor that is going to increase the cost of living for our neighbors back home? It is not right. I think Mr. Pallone is absolutely correct. People are out of touch in Washington, D.C. They listen too often to the loud voices of the powerful special interests and not to the hardworking Americans who are really suffering with higher costs. Mr. Speaker, people deserve a whole lot better. I hope they will vote this bill down and get back to work serving the people whom we represent.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4626. I thank the ranking member for yielding time. Mr. Speaker, we are here at a time when later today we are going to hear the State of the Union Address. Based upon everything we know with the state of the Union, things are very expensive. Our neighbors back home are suffering a real affordability squeeze. Especially when we are talking about energy, we know that 80 million Americans are struggling to pay their utility bills right now. Look at our home State of Florida, Mr. Speaker, where FPL and TECO were just granted the largest rate hikes in history. That is $6 billion that Floridians are going to have to pay, higher costs at a time when they are really struggling with groceries and housing and hurricane repair at the same time. Across America, electric utility rate hikes are at about 13 percent, much higher in some places. We know that manufacturing jobs decreased last year in 2025. Much of that is because of these arbitrary tariffs, the highest import taxes in about 100 years that Americans are paying for. Even the Supreme Court said we can't do that. They are arbitrary. They are illegal. People really deserve to get some money back from the illegal tariffs. Then when we add on top the impact of the big, ugly bill. It is anticipated that due to the big, ugly bill passed by Republicans last summer, hardworking Americans are going to pay about 61 percent more on their electric bills over the next decade. Of course, there are healthcare costs, too, because of that big, ugly bill. My guest for the State of the Union Address tonight is a small business owner from Tampa, Linda Misner. She and her husband own a healthcare business, a wellness business, in Tampa. With the benefit of the Affordable Care Act tax credits, they were paying about $300 per month. Just like a lot of Florida families, they are hardworking Americans, small business owners. As they are too young for Medicare, healthcare costs are just killing them. Without the tax credit, their health insurance premium will go from about $320 per month to $3,000 per month. That is outrageous. Republicans ripping away that healthcare tax credit means that Linda and her husband now have had to go to an insurance plan that does not provide the same coverage. It doesn't provide prescription care. They are really at their wits' end, like a lot of Americans. Things are too expensive. Everything the Republicans and the President have done has made life harder. It has made going to the grocery store like a military exercise. We are trying to figure out what we can buy. To add insult to injury, we should be working together on legislation that will help our neighbors back home. What bills do the Republicans bring to the floor of the House today, the day of the State of the Union Address? They bring a bill that is going to make things more expensive. They are going to make electricity bills more expensive. Energy efficiency standards are very popular. They are some of the most important tools that we have in helping to keep the pressure on lower electric bills. They have been a success. Energy efficiency standards used to be bipartisan for refrigerators and air conditioners and dishwashers, but that has gone by the wayside. I don't know why. Mr. Pallone kind of shined a light on that. High- powered corporations with all too much influence here in Washington, D.C., are calling the shots. Utility companies and oil and gas companies want us to use more energy. They want us to consume more. They don't want us to be energy efficient. People really deserve better these days. What does H.R. 4626 do? It guts those efficiency standards that have saved the average American household about $6,000 over the last 10 years. In fact, Consumer Reports, a very well-respected and trusted organization, the Consumer Federation of America, writes: ``Appliance efficiency standards ensure that any of the huge array of product choices available to consumers incorporate energy-saving designs and technology that help limit energy consumption and utility bills.'' ``Energy efficiency doesn't just directly save money but also puts downward pressure on utility rates. Energy efficiency gains have helped create a downward trend in household energy consumption over the past 20 years, reducing the amount of investments utilities have had to make, preventing costs that they would have otherwise passed on to consumers. While energy efficiency alone can't solve all energy affordability challenges, it plays an important role in helping to counterbalance rising electricity prices.'' Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record this letter from Consumer Reports and Consumer Federation of America. February 23, 2026. Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Brett Guthrie, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Frank Pallone, Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Speaker Johnson, Leader Jeffries, Chairman Guthrie, and Ranking Member Pallone: The undersigned groups write in strong opposition to H.R. 4626, which would grant new powers to the executive branch to weaken or remove appliance and equipment efficiency standards and set roadblocks to future improvements. If enacted, this bill would raise costs for households across America. Appliance standards ensure consumers and businesses have access to cost-saving technologies that help reduce their utility bills. Without existing standards, the typical US household would have spent an additional $6,000 on utility bills over the past decade, according to a recent report. With these savings, it's not surprising that these standards have broad public support. Surveys conducted in 2025 by Consumer Reports showed that an overwhelming majority (87 percent) of consumers across the political spectrum (82 percent of Republicans and 94 percent of Democrats) believe, that new home appliances for sale in the U.S. should be required to achieve at least a minimum level of efficiency.'' Respondents say that their top motivation for wanting a more efficient large home appliance is lower energy bills. Appliance efficiency standards ensure that any of the huge array of product choices available to consumers incorporate energy- saving designs and technology that help limit energy consumption and utility bills. Even with potentially higher upfront costs, energy efficient appliances still provide much more than adequate bill savings for consumers across the country. Existing efficiency standards deliver a 3x to 5x return on investment for buyers. Minimum efficiency standards are especially valuable for the ∼44 million American households who rent, and typically have no direct control over the appliances within their homes. Energy efficiency doesn't just directly save money but also puts downward pressure on utility rates. Energy efficiency gains have helped create a downward trend in household energy consumption over the past 20 years, reducing the amount of investments utilities have had to make, preventing costs that they would have otherwise passed on to consumers. While energy efficiency alone can't solve all energy affordability challenges, it plays an important role in helping to counterbalancing rising electricity prices. By potentially enabling the executive branch to roll back efficiency standards, H.R. 4626 would increase costs for consumers. H.R. 4626 would add needless steps to an already lengthy rulemaking process and set arbitrary minimum savings thresholds and payback periods that would put future improvements to many standards out of reach. For the above reasons, the undersigned consumer organizations respectfully oppose H.R. 4626. Thank you for this opportunity to address these policy measures. The undersigned groups welcome the opportunity to discuss how Congress can improve affordability for consumers, but this bill takes us in the wrong direction. Sincerely, Chris Harto, Manager, Sustainability Policy, Consumer Reports, Washington,

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3617. I wish we were here discussing how we could lower the cost of living. I wish in the Energy and Commerce Committee, where we are controlling the time, we could discuss a bill that will lower electricity prices for our neighbors back home. Or even as the title of this bill suggests, it is related to critical minerals, but when you read the bill, Mr. Speaker, the text of the bill, there is nothing related to critical minerals. It is kind of a sneaky little bill. Actually, if we pass this bill, it is quite likely that energy bills and electricity bills are going to go up. It is likely that this will lead to higher costs across the entire economy. Electric bills are already sky-high. American families last year were suffering from, on average, about 13 percent increases in their electric bills. They were much higher in many places across the country. In Florida, they passed along a $6 billion rate increase. They were calling it the largest rate increase and the highest rate increase in the history of the country. What have we seen out of this administration? We have seen just the sabotage of affordable, reliable, clean, and cheaper energy coming onto the grid, and now this. This is an important topic. I have gained a little bit of knowledge not just from the Energy and Commerce Committee, but I serve on the bipartisan Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. My colleague, Republican Rob Wittman, and I led a critical minerals working group in the last Congress. It is clear the United States is way too reliant on China. Beijing has weaponized the critical mineral supply chain. That is why Democrats leaned into it and passed important policies in the bipartisan infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act to spur domestic manufacturing and policies that enabled us to work with our partners and allies across the globe to counter China. We didn't do anything like threaten Greenland or insult Canada. We thought it was important to work together to counter all of the coercion from the Chinese Communist Party. There have been major investments in domestic critical mineral supply chains, breaking the dependence on China. The United States energy sector relies on a broad portfolio of critical minerals, so we have to have a resilient supply chain for the advanced technologies and the innovation in energy generation, storage, and transmission. The International Energy Agency estimates that mineral demand for clean energy technology will almost triple by 2030 and quadruple by 2024. Therefore, the development of diverse, resilient, and sustainable critical mineral supply chains, free from Chinese Communist Party influence, will be fundamental. However, this bill just doesn't do it. As I said before, it is a sneaky, sneaky little bill. It was introduced the last Congress. It hasn't gone anywhere because it doesn't solve any problem. It doesn't get to the heart of the matter. Mr. Speaker, if you look at what they want to do, they say: We are going to amend the Department of Energy's mission to include securing the supply of critical energy resources--not minerals--and it directs the DOE to conduct ongoing assessments to develop strategies to strengthen critical energy resource supply chains--not minerals. Again, this vague definition risks diverting resources away from critical minerals actually and towards--and here is where we will yank the curtain back on what this really is about. It is about everything that this administration has done to serve the fossil fuel industry, the dirty fuel industry, from canceling clean energy projects that would help lower electric bills that would bring cleaner and cheaper resources onto the grid, projects like offshore wind that is fully permitted and ready to go and provide resources we can rely on during winter storms. This administration has canceled large-scale transmission projects to help bring the additional load we need onto the transmission system, just to make the grid more resilient in America as we suffer through these extreme weather events. We cannot afford these diversions. We cannot afford the Republicans continuing to sabotage cleaner, cheaper energy in America. This kind of sneaky maneuver reminds me of what they have done on tariffs this entire Congress that we finally overcame. Everyone kind of understands now that they are paying more at the grocery store because of the President's arbitrary tariffs. I know he likes to say: Oh, other countries are going to pay these tariffs, but all of the experts, everyone knows, prices are higher because of these import taxes. In fact, tariffs are at their highest level in about 100 years. That is how high they are. The Budget Lab at Yale says on average households are paying probably $1,700 more than they would have without these crazy tariffs that the President wields like a tool of retribution and fear. That is not how you--you have got to keep the American people and their pocketbooks central rather than you are threatening Greenland. He has to have Greenland. He is going to insult Canada and put tariffs on Canada. Thankfully, later this afternoon, we are going to debate and try to remove some of these arbitrary added taxes on the American people and lower the cost of living. That is why your shoes, your clothes, and, yes, electric equipment and metals are costing more right now. It is costing everybody way too much more. Here is what they did here in the House of Representatives. They actually said: We are not going to be able to debate a removal of tariffs in the House of Representatives, the people's House. They were able to get away with it for a year, almost a year after the President's liberation day. They snuck it into a rule so we wouldn't have any debate on the high cost of living driven by these import taxes. Well, last night, late last night in the House of Representatives-- while you were probably watching ice skating in the Olympics--because three brave Republicans crossed over and joined all of the Democrats, we are going to have that debate. We are going to have that vote because what is central to people's lives right now is their pocketbooks. They are just being hammered, not just by their electric bills, but also their grocery bills and everything they buy. We have a responsibility in this House to look out for the people back home rather than serve the special interests. This Congress has been all about serving the special interests, and that includes the folks who really are pushing this bill. It is not about critical minerals. If it were, then it would actually be in the text of the bill, but it is not. It is about, again, giving a gift to political supporters, the polluters who are running the show and the agencies that have all too much influence here in the Halls of Congress while electricity prices are up well over 13 percent and 80 million Americans are struggling to pay their electric bills. I say Americans deserve a whole lot better. They deserve a whole lot better than what they are getting from this Congress. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat this sneaky little bill, and let's get on to the debate on how we improve the cost of living and serve the people who sent us here.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 169 inventors who will be inducted as the 2025 Fellows of the National Academy of Inventors (NAI). An induction ceremony will take place on June 4, 2026, in Los Angeles, California to celebrate these distinguished inventors and their incredible accomplishments. The ceremony will be presided over by Dr. Paul R. Sanberg, FNAI. To be named as a Fellow, these individuals were nominated by their peers and underwent a review process by the NAI Selection Committee, which ultimately deemed their innovations as making a significant impact on the quality of life, economic development and the welfare of their communities, the residents of Florida and the United States. The NAI Fellow program has 2,253 Fellows worldwide representing more than 300 prestigious universities and governmental and non-profit research institutes. Collectively, the Fellows hold more than 86,000 issued U.S. patents, which have generated over 20,000 licensed technologies and 4,000 companies, and created more than 1.4 million jobs. In addition, over $3.8 trillion in revenue has been generated based on NAI Fellow discoveries. Among NAI fellows, there are more than 170 presidents and senior leaders of research universities and nonprofit research institutes, over 796 members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, about 60 inductees of the National Inventors Hall of Fame, 76 recipients of the U.S. National Medal of Technology and Innovation and U.S. National Medal of Science, and 59 Nobel Laureates, among other awards and distinctions. Founded by Dr. Paul R. Sanberg at the University of South Florida in 2010, the NAI's mission is to recognize and encourage inventors with patents issued from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, enhance the visibility of academic technology and innovation, encourage the disclosure of intellectual property, educate, and mentor innovative students and translate the inventions of its members to benefit Florida and communities all throughout the United States. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my neighbors in Tampa Bay and the citizens of Florida, I am proud to honor the 2025 Fellows of the National Academy of Inventors for this outstanding achievement. We must commend these inventors for their invaluable contributions to society, which continually propel us forward. May their example inspire future generations to pursue their own paths of discovery and innovation, ensuring a bright and innovative future for us all. I include in the Record the following list of the names of the 2025 NAI Fellows Class: Reza Abdolvand, University of Central Florida; Gregory Abowd, Northeastern University; Anant Agarwal, The Ohio State University; Ali AL-Marzouqi, United Arab Emirates University; Mansoor Amiji, Northeastern University; Ana Claudia Arias, University of California, Berkeley; Aravind Asokan, Duke University; Gregory Auner, Wayne State University; Jennifer Avari Silva, Washington University in St. Louis; Ahmad Bahai, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Hua ``Kevin'' Bai, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville; David Baker, University of Washington; Sathy Balu-iyer, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York; Dafna Bari Sagi, NYU Langone Health; Matthew Barth, University of California, Riverside; Haim Bau, University of Pennsylvania; Magdy Bayoumi, University of Louisiana at Lafayette; Zdenek Bazant, Northwestern University; Rohit Bhargava, University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign; Suresh Bhargava, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology; Stephan Biller, Purdue University; Christian Brechot, University of South Florida; Igal Brener, Sandia National Laboratories; Robert Brown, Case Western Reserve University; J. Quincy Brown, Tulane University; Louis Brus, Columbia University; Carol Carter, Stony Brook University; Chan-Byoung Chae, Yonsei University; Krishnendu Chakrabarty, Arizona State University; Joseph Chang, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; Goutam Chattopadhyay, California Institute of Technology & NASA Jet Propulsion Lab; Eugene Chen, Colorado State University; Ji-Xin Cheng, Boston University; Gari Clifford, Emory University; Gloria Coruzzi, New York University; Sheng Dai, Oak Ridge National Laboratory & University of Tennessee, Knoxville; James Dalton, Louisiana State University; Kapil Dandekar, Drexel University; Sylvia Daunert, University of Miami; David Deamer, University of California, Santa Cruz; Andr6 DeHon, University of Pennsylvania; Zhiqun (Daniel) Deng, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Tomas Diaz de la Rubia, The University of Arizona; Deepakraj Divan, Georgia Institute of Technology; Ravi Droopad, Texas State University; Tal Dvir, Tel Aviv University; Maher ElKady, University of California, Los Angeles; Omolola Eniola-Adefeso, University of Illinois at Chicago; Hongyou Fan, Sandia National Laboratories; Shanhui Fan, Stanford University; Omar Farha, Northwestern University; Benny Freeman, The University of Texas at Austin; Tahir Ghani, University of California, Berkeley; Swaroop Ghosh, The Pennsylvania State University; Barney Graham, Morehouse School of Medicine; Rasim Guldiken, Oklahoma State University; Jay Guo, University of Michigan; Satyandra Gupta, University of Southern California; Vineet Gupta, University of Texas Medical Branch; Hossam Haick, Technion--Israel Institute of Technology; Eva Harth, University of Houston; David Haussler, University of California, Santa Cruz; Donald Haynie, Centers for DiseaseControl; Abdelsalam Sumi Helal, University of Florida; Yehia Ibrahim, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Erick Iezzi, U.S. Naval Research Laboratory; Ehsan Jabbarzadeh, University of South Carolina; Yali Jia, OregonHealth & Science University; Eugene John, University of Texas at San Antonio; Darren Johnson, University of Oregon; Emil Jovanov, The University of Alabama in Huntsville; Tibor Juhasz, University of California, Irvine; Raghu Kalluri, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; Dilhan M. Kalyon, Stevens Institute of Technology; Raghuraman Kannan, University of Missouri- Columbia; Mark Kelley, Indiana University; John Kellum, University of Pittsburgh; Michael Koeris, U.S. Department of War--Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; Elisa Konofagou, Columbia University; Rosa Krajmalnik-Brown, Arizona State University; Florian Krammer, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai; Yue Kuo, Texas A&M University & National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University; Jih-Sheng ``Jason'' Lai, Virginia Tech; Carlito Lebrilla, University of California, Davis; Jean-Pierre Leburton, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Jason Lewis, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Guoqiang Li, Louisiana State University; Jenshan Lin, National Science Foundation; Lih- Yuan Lin, University of Washington; Stuart Lipton, The Scripps Research Institute; Bin Liu, National University of Singapore; Jun O. Liu, Johns Hopkins University; Ping Liu, University of California, San Diego; Yan-Fei Liu, Queen's University; Leslie M. Loew, University of Connecticut; Boon Thau Loo, University of Pennsylvania; Dusan Losic, Adelaide University; Jian Lu, City University of Hong Kong; Na (Luna) Lu, Purdue University; Daniel Ludois, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Alan Luo, The Ohio State University; Barbara Lyons, Lawrence Technological University; Chris Malachowsky, NVIDIA & University of Florida; Heidi M. Mansour, Florida International University; H. Alan Mantooth, University of Arkansas; David Martin, University of Delaware; Prasant Mohapatra, University of South Florida; Yaakov Nahmias, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Arokia Nathan, University of Cambridge; Maiken Nedergaud, University of Rochester; Daniel Nelson, University of Maryland, College Park; Henry Nguyen, University of Missouri-Columbia; David Nolte, Purdue University; John O' Shea, National Institutes of Health; Subba Reddy Palli, University of Kentucky; Bernhard Palsson, University of California, San Diego; Dipanjan Pan, The Pennsylvania State University; Marios- Christos Papaefthymiou, University of California, Irvine; Nikolaos Papanikolopoulos, University of Minnesota; Chandrakant D. Patel, Hewlett-Packard & University of South Florida; Stacey Patterson, Florida State University; Sanjoy Paul, Rice University; Dehua Pei, The Ohio State University; Danyll J. Pines, University of Maryland, College Park; Kevin W. Plaxco, University of California, Santa Barbara; Marc Porter, The University of Utah; George Prendergast, Lankenau Institute for Medical Research; Shashank Priya, University of Minnesota; Eric Prossnitz, The University of New Mexico; Alfredo QuinonesHinojosa, Mayo Clinic; Sdnivasa Raghavan, University of Maryland, College Park; Barry Rand, Princeton University; Arijit Raychowdhury, Georgia Institute of Technology; Jochen Reiser, University of Texas Medical Branch; Shunlin Ren, Virginia Commonwealth University; C. Patrick Reynolds, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center; R. Michael Roe, North Carolina State University; Steven Rosenberg, National Institutes of Health; Todd Rosengwt, Baylor College of Medicine; Joe Ruscito, Medical University of South Carolina; John Ruter, University of Georgia; Alan Saltiel, University of California, San Diego; Paul Santene, University of Toronto; Marios Savvides, Carnegie Mellon University; Patrick Schnable, Iowa State University; Mark Schoenfisch, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; John Schroeder, Texas Tech University; Mathias Schubert, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; James Schwob, Tufts University; Mohamed Seleem, Virginia Tech; Mark Sheplak, University of Florida; James Simon, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey; Dennis Slamon, University of California, Los Angeles; Barbara Slusher, Johns Hopkins University; J. Cory Smart, Georgetown University; Stuart Smith, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte; Gurindar Sohi, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Stephen Soper, University of Kansas; Timothy A. Springer, Harvard University; Mircea Stan, University of Virginia; Hung-Jue Sue, Texas A&M University; Shang-Hua Teng, University of Southern California; Kevin J. Tracey, The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research; Philip R. Troyk, Illinois Institute of Technology; Chad A. Ulven, North Dakota State University; Kripa K. Varanasi, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Jesse Wainright, Case Western Reserve University; Andrew Wang, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center; Yan Wang, Worcester Polytechnic Institute; Adam Wax, Duke University; Rob Webster, Vanderbilt University; John Weidner, University of Cincinnati; David C. Weindorf, Georgia Southern University; Muthu B.J. Wijesundara, The University of Texas at Arlington; Tien Yin Wong, Tsinghua University; Tzong-Lin Wu, National Taiwan University; Cheryl Xu, North Carolina State University; Yajun Yan, University of Georgia; Lan Yang, Washington University in St. Louis; Yasha Yi, University of Michigan; Richard Zare, Stanford University; Wen Zhang, New Jersey Institute of Technology;Otto Zhou, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; and Zi-Qiang Zhu, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for votes on January 14 and January 15, 2026. Consequently, I am not recorded for Roll Call No. 24 through Roll Call No. 31. Had I been present, I would have voted: NAY on Roll Call No. 24; NAY on Roll Call No. 25; NAY on Roll Call No. 26; NAY on Roll Call No. 27; YEA on Roll Call No. 28; NAY on Roll Call No. 29; YEA on Roll Call No. 30; and NAY on Roll Call No. 31.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 100th Year Anniversary of Ballast Point Elementary School in Tampa, Florida. For 100 years, Ballast Point Elementary has educated students and provided the foundation of success in life. Ballast Point Elementary was originally housed in a small, three-room wooden building with each grade level of students seated in a single row. A new Ballast Point Elementary School was opened at the beginning of the 1925 to 1926 school year amidst the significant population growth and development of the 1920s. The talented educators, custodians, nutrition experts, counselors, the Parent Teacher Association and South Tampa neighbors have provided dependable support throughout the years in lifting the school and students every step of the way. Under the leadership of Mrs. Glenn Hinson, Ballast Point Elementary's first library opened in 1963 with a collection of approximately 12,000 books, providing roughly 11 books per student. As Principal Hinson noted, ``We have a good community interest and a strong PTA support.'' In addition to the PTA's donation of several hundred dollars worth of books, the school board also granted $1,500 to the library. This early development proved Ballast Point Elementary's unwavering commitment to its mission: fostering a learning environment where students feel valued, challenged, and inspired. Tampa is patriotic community, and Ballast Point Elementary has served many students from nearby MacDill Air Force Base military families through the years. It is a true point of pride. Ballast Point Elementary has a distinguished record of achievement, receiving both the Florida 5-Star School Award and the Golden School Award for the past 14 consecutive years, along with recognition as a Grade ``A'' Florida School for 16 consecutive years. Ballast Point Elementary's inclusive goal of a minimum of one year's growth for all students aligns with the Hillsborough County School's overarching vision of preparing students for life. Ballast Point Elementary embodies an educational institution that allows students to thrive and feel inspired. Mr. Speaker, I am incredibly proud to support the high-quality public schools and talented teachers in Tampa and Hillsborough County. On behalf of my neighbors who value high quality education and talented teachers, I celebrate Ballast Point Elementary on 100 years of educating thousands of young students in a community that loves the spirit of a Ballast Point Bulldogs.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. 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.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. 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.''

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. On behalf of the over half a million hardworking neighbors back home and across the Tampa Bay area, I rise in strong support of the extension of the lifesaving and cost-saving ACA tax credits. Families are being crushed by inflation and high healthcare costs, and they need the savings that the ACA tax credits provide. Mr. Speaker, 4.7 million Floridians, one in five who live in the Sunshine State, depend on the ACA. It is estimated that without the tax credits, over 1.4 million Floridians will lose their health insurance entirely. They are entrepreneurs. They are caregivers. They are cancer patients. They are part-time workers. They are small-business workers who have seen their premiums more than double, and they deserve so much better. That includes Yohanna, a small business owner in Tampa and the mother of a daughter with Down syndrome, who without enhanced tax credits defaults to an insurance plan where every visit will cost her $150 for a copay. It includes Matthew, a truck driver from St. Petersburg, whose premiums rose from $64 a month to $736 per month. We need to extend these tax credits, and we need to do it now.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding the time. I rise in opposition to H.R. 4593 with a great concern that House Republicans simply do not care to work on any solutions to lower the cost of living for our hardworking neighbors back home. In 2025, House Republicans failed to bring one bill to the floor to lower the cost of living or to tackle the high rate of inflation, but here is some good news actually: By tomorrow, thanks to House Democrats and a handful of Republicans who stood up to their Speaker, the House will vote to lower the cost of healthcare coverage for millions of Americans. That is a little bit of good news. If Americans were hoping that Republicans in Congress would start 2026 off with some relief for their pocketbooks, I am sorry to report that, no, Republicans are not bringing bills to lower the cost of living. I congratulate my Republican colleagues, their first bill of 2026, to set the tone, is to address showerheads. This is critical. You heard that right. It is ridiculous, isn't it? It is so out of touch. The President promised he was going to cut Americans' power bills in half, but since he took office last year, electric bills are up by 13 percent across the country, and they are much higher in some places. There are 80 million Americans who are struggling just to pay their electric bills. In Florida, the Republican-controlled utilities commission just approved the highest rate increases in the history of the country--they are calling them that--a $6 billion rate increase. Across the country, folks are facing about $86 billion in electric rate increases, so hold on to your wallet. Rather than help, Republicans have only made things worse. They have gone along with arbitrary tariffs that have raised the cost of living and taken a hatchet to cleaner, cheaper energy. They have gone along with illegally halting energy projects. They ended tax cuts and rebates that helped people afford their electric bills in order to pay for tax breaks for billionaires. They are out of touch. Folks in the Northeast are worried about their rising electric bills because the President in December arbitrarily terminated five offshore wind projects that were under construction. That energy onto the grid would have helped keep the pressure on lower electric bills. The President canceled final approval for what would have been the Nation's largest solar farm, a 6.2 gigawatt project in the Nevada desert. He illegally ended low-cost solar installation for working- class families that would have helped them and their family budgets. The President now has canceled major upgrades to the power grid out of the bipartisan infrastructure law, such as the Grain Belt Express transmission line. Republican policies now--we are adding it up--have cost Americans about 266 gigawatts of planned electricity generation projects in 2025 at a time when there is a surge of new demand for electricity across the country. They are out of touch. Speaking of being out of touch, of course, the President doesn't believe there is an affordability crisis. He has called it a hoax. The real issues for the President are shower pressure, redecorating the White House, and so much more. Yes, it was last April that the President thought it was so important he issued an executive order to end the Obama-Biden war on water pressure and make America's showers great again. He is out of touch. However, he urged Congress to codify that order, so that is what we are doing here tonight on the first bill of 2026 by this Republican majority. Are they serious? What has been the President's focus during all this time he has called the affordability crisis a hoax? Well, he paved over the Rose Garden. He has torn down the East Wing of the White House to make way for a grand ballroom funded by people who have business in front of the Federal Government. I haven't been over to the White House, but all of the pictures show 24 karat gold ornamentation all through the White House. He has installed marble floors. I have seen him tweet that out. He has also added his name to the Kennedy Center. For those of you who haven't come to Washington, D.C., he has put banners of his picture up on Federal buildings. He is proposing to put his likeness on gold coins.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I think you get my drift here. It was so galling as people are trying to pay their electric bills and their grocery bills that the President here is bragging about how he has redone the Lincoln bathroom, yes, with gold showerheads. We don't need to redefine what constitutes a showerhead. We don't need to weaken energy and water conservation measures that help people save money. We don't need to make life more expensive for hardworking neighbors back home. We don't need to boost foreign manufacturers who want to import inferior products to the U.S., but that is what they are doing. No, in 2026 we are going to need real solutions. I beseech my colleagues to work with us to tackle the high cost of living. You can look back on 2025 now; Federal spending is up. They added $2 trillion to the national debt and they have lost manufacturing jobs when you add it all up. Now their answer on the first bill of the Congress in 2026 is showerheads. They are out of touch.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this Republican charade and to stand up for my neighbors back home who deserve quality and affordable health coverage. That includes over half a million of my hardworking neighbors across the Tampa Bay area. Mr. Speaker, 4.7 Floridians, or one in five who live in the Sunshine State, are doing everything right. They are entrepreneurs. They are caregivers. They are part-time workers and small business owners like Linda Misener and her husband. Their premiums will go from $288 per month to over $3,200 per month next year. They cannot afford $39,000 for their healthcare. They are terrified that they are going to lose everything. David, who is being treated for pancreatic cancer, is unsure how he will continue treatments and afford everything else. It is unconscionable that Republicans are ripping away coverage to fund their tax breaks for billionaires, the wealthy, and the well- connected. Americans deserve so much better. Mr. Speaker, defeat this Republican bill. Bring the 3-year bipartisan extension to the floor now.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3616. It is another Republican bill that fails to address skyrocketing electric bills that are a part of the overall affordability squeeze that is gripping the country right now. What should we be doing on the floor of the House right now? We should bring up the discharge petition to make sure that healthcare costs don't skyrocket for 20 million Americans and 4.7 million Floridians back home in the Sunshine State. Now that the discharge petition has the necessary number of votes to come to the floor and extend those lifesaving and cost-saving ACA tax credits, we should be doing that instead. That would have a real impact. That would send a great sign to folks back home who are struggling with the rising cost of living and are wondering how they will pay for their health coverage next year. That would really help our neighbors back home. Alas, we are not doing that. At a time when prices are up, inflation is up, and despite the Republican promises to do something about it, all of their bills and their policies are making it worse and making life even more expensive. Household electricity prices are up across America by about 13 percent and a lot higher in some places. Why is that the case? First of all, the big, ugly bill that Republicans passed in July to provide tax breaks to the wealthy and well-connected took away tax credits to keep cleaner, cheaper energy producing across America. They ripped away rebates for households to help them afford the cost of upgrading their homes, making their lives more energy efficient. Also, these arbitrary Trump tariffs are at the highest levels since the 1930s. We see it in our grocery bills, but it is also impacting electricity costs. Costs are way up for poles and wires and things that we import for our electricity systems. Those are being passed along to consumers. The Trump administration has canceled hundreds of projects across America, some that were permitted and approved, ready to bring cleaner and cheaper energy onto the grid to help keep electricity prices lower. All of that is a recipe for skyrocketing electricity bills. What do Republicans in Congress do? They keep bringing these random bills to the floor to boost the profits of polluters. This bill is a good example of that. This bill would elevate the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission above any other Federal agency, give it unprecedented veto power, and transform it and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation into political actors. That is a world away from the independent agencies that they are now where they act in the public interest and not in the interest of polluters. Mr. Speaker, FERC doesn't even want this power. They lack the capacity and the staff for this highly technical work. When we discussed this bill 2 years ago, David Ortiz, then FERC's Director of the Office of Electric Reliability, testified before the Energy and Commerce Committee that FERC couldn't execute on the bill because FERC does not have the capacity to assume other agencies' expertise. That was before FERC lost 11 percent of its staff-- hardworking public servants--due to resignations and layoffs under the Trump administration. This bill doesn't do anything to provide FERC with the staff or funding they would need to implement the bill. No, it doesn't. Polluters simply want to short-circuit any oversight of their higher costs and pollution. That is what this is about. FERC already has the power to intervene and comment on agency rulemaking dockets if they think there could be a reliability issue, as does NERC, as does any of the grid operators, and any utility. This polluter-friendly bill is a way to sabotage cleaner and cheaper energy, however, and energy storage. It is a recipe for higher costs and electric bills for American families. Regional grid operators have the necessary expertise and staffing to maintain reliability on their grids already. Regional operators know that there are cheaper, cleaner, and more reliable energy sources available, not just expensive coal and gas. There are modern grid solutions that the committee has refused to take up this year. That is another reason electric bills are so high. There are solutions like energy storage, demand response, grid- enhancing technologies, and regional and interregional coordination that can provide reliability at a lower price with less pollution. Republicans also don't want us to know that, while this bill gives FERC more responsibilities that it cannot meet and does not want, the Trump administration has been busy gutting the agencies that are already working to ensure that we have a reliable grid. For example, the Trump Department of Energy eliminated the Grid Deployment Office last month. That was an office created under the bipartisan infrastructure law to manage important and cost-saving investments to make our grid more reliable. Over $3 billion in grid deployment investments were cut in October. The real Republican mantra should be a less reliable grid with higher costs because that is what this year has produced. Republican energy policy is creating a less reliable environment for businesses, making it harder for companies to invest in America. Just yesterday, Ford announced they were laying off all 1,600 employees at their battery manufacturing plant in Glendale, Kentucky. In October, on top of the grid modernization cuts at the Department of Energy, DOE canceled 321 awards, totaling $8 billion in funding. The largest award was $316 million to support the manufacture of components from recycled EV batteries in Kentucky. That would have helped us compete with Chinese batteries. Mr. Speaker, $197 million was supposed to help a plant in St. Louis producing 30,000 metric tons annually of critical minerals products. Mr. Speaker, $117 million was intended to support production of synthetic graphite, including construction of a large plant in Alabama. Also, $31 million was cut that was going to build an advanced glass factory at the site of an old coal plant in Detroit. As a result, the United States will have less capacity to support real and reliable power. This bill does not solve problems. It doesn't tackle the affordability crisis. It makes it worse. It doesn't even support more reliable power. Republicans are just trying to slap a new permitting reform label on bad ideas that they have never been able to pass into law. Here we are, the last week in session this year, Mr. Speaker, and Republicans have not brought a single bill to the floor of the House that would lower costs for hardworking families. They have no new ideas here. They have no ideas on how to make energy more affordable for everyday Americans and no ideas to help us out of this healthcare crisis. Mr. Speaker, people really deserve better. They deserve better over the holidays, and they deserve better from this Congress. I urge my colleagues to vote against the bill.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3632. It is a bill that will raise energy prices for American families by forcing them to pay for outdated polluting plants that are poisoning their air and water. A reliable and affordable energy supply is vital to our way of life. Unfortunately, this bill and Republican policies are making electricity less reliable and less affordable. Mr. Speaker, electricity bills are up about 13 percent on average across America this year. They are higher in many places. In Florida, they just approved the largest rate increase in the history of the country. They approved $7 billion in rate hikes for Florida Power & Light. Tampa Electric and Duke Energy in my neck of the woods also hiked rates this year. For TECO customers, we are paying 82 percent more than 5 years ago, or $939 more than we were. Electricity prices are climbing more than twice as fast as the rate of inflation. Why is this happening? It is because of Republican policies. It is the chaos and dysfunction. Let's go ahead and get into this. Why are electricity prices so high? What is driving the cost increases? First, there are the arbitrary Trump tariffs. They are now at the highest levels than they have been since the 1930s. Estimates are that the average household is going to pay at least $1,000 more because of tariffs. When we talk about energy, we are talking, as well, about how we modernize the grid, power poles, wires, and everything that goes into an electrical system. The utilities are passing that on to hardworking families. Then we have the big, ugly bill that Republicans forced through here last summer. Predictions were when we take a hatchet to cleaner, cheaper energy poised to come onto the grid, when we rip away tax credits and rebates for consumers to keep their electricity bills low, prices are going to go up. That is what we are seeing now, too. The big, ugly bill is estimated to raise electricity prices by a staggering 61 percent over the next decade, particularly as a result of Republicans declaring war on clean, cheap energy and crippling the American clean energy industry. I don't know, Mr. Speaker. Did you see the jobs report that came out this morning? It doesn't look good. In today's jobs report, the number of manufacturing jobs continues to slide. November was the seventh straight month of monthly decline. A lot of that goes back to the big, ugly bill and what the Trump administration has done over the past year in canceling clean energy projects. My colleagues have heard all about them. An offshore wind project might be approved, permitted, and ready to come online. He says: No, we are not going to do that. Mr. Speaker, that has an impact on the bottom line for our families. We might have another project coming online that is ready to go. It is cleaner energy. Everyone knows that solar power with storage and wind power with storage is the cheapest energy online. The Trump administration and Republican policies said no. When our constituents open up that electric bill, I want them to understand that all of this has a cost and that they deserve so much better than the chaos and dysfunction, the distraction of tearing down the East Wing to build a ballroom, and the parties with dancing girls at Mar-a-Lago. Why don't my colleagues focus on people's cost of living for a change? We would think that folks in Congress would come here to help solve problems. Is there going to be an answer for higher healthcare costs? In Florida, 4.7 million of my neighbors rely on the Affordable Care Act tax credits. Do Republicans have any answer for the 20 million families here during the holiday season who can't buy holiday gifts they want to put under the tree for their families? No, they will have to pinch every penny to pay for their healthcare. Many will go without. Mr. Speaker, think about the cancer patients now who are looking at the new year and how they are going to afford their treatment. It is electricity costs. It is groceries. It is healthcare costs. Then my Republican colleagues will waste our time with a bill that is another in the line of special treatment for polluters at the expense of hardworking American families today. This bill would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission broad authority to force utilities to keep expensive and polluting fossil fuel power plants operating for extended periods, up to 5 years. What that does is it locks customers into paying billions of dollars more for power plants that were slated for retirement, despite the volatile fuel costs and the environmental harm. They want to continue to block cleaner and cheaper energy, which is the cheapest energy coming onto the grid right now. I think they are living 20 to 30 years ago. Electricity generated by coal is on the decline. While it was about 50 percent of the electricity generation in America in the year 2000, here we are, 25 years later, and it is only 20 percent of electricity generation. The main reason for that is simple. Coal is more expensive than a lot of the other options we have today. In almost every case today, it is actually cheaper to build new renewables than to keep existing coal plants running. Coal is only getting more expensive. Three-quarters of coal plants saw costs rising faster than inflation just over the past few years. This bill is anticonsumer. Frankly, it is anti-American. People deserve better. If we want to lower electricity bills, I would ask my colleagues to march down to the White House because the President is the only one arbitrarily taking energy generation offline and hiking electricity costs. During the last administration, the number of utility-scale electric power plants actually increased by over 2,000. We produced more energy than ever before. We have a commitment to serve the people that send us here and to help them lower their bills through rebates, through energy efficiency, through help for their pocketbooks, not the bottom line of polluters who have all too much power here on Capitol Hill. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Energy already has the authority under the Federal Power Act to prevent power plants from retiring if doing so would cause reliability problems. Republicans want to go further. This bill requires States to file reliability complaints 5 years before a generator retires. It is almost impossible to predict the impact of a plant retirement that far ahead. This bill gives polluting plants a pass to ignore Federal, State, and local environmental laws. As we have already seen multiple times just this year, these plants aren't even reliable. Mr. Speaker, we will have a whole lot more to say on this, but I really wish we would not waste people's time by coming here and making their lives more expensive at a time when they are clamoring for help on their groceries, on their healthcare, and on their electricity bills. Republicans brought a bill that actually hikes electricity and utility costs. They deserve so much better. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko), the ranking member of the Environment Subcommittee.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I had a raised smile when I saw that poster, ``House Republicans are Strengthening the Electric Grid,'' because it is such a canard. It was just a few months ago where the Trump administration canceled hundreds of millions of dollars to modernize America's electric grid in red States and blue States. It was a complicated system of wires and transmission. Mr. Speaker, you would think that, in a country such as ours, where we know electricity demand is going up, that one thing we could agree on investing in is modernizing our electric grid, but no. The Trump administration, just like they have taken a hatchet to cleaner, cheaper energy, has taken a hatchet to those hardworking people and the folks who keep the lights on for us. Grid modernization is important, so the last thing Republicans and this administration are doing is strengthening the grid. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Scholten).

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I simply must call out some of the hypocrisy coming from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. We have watched over the past few months as electricity costs for hardworking Americans have gone up. People are asking why this is happening. We talked about the impact of the arbitrary tariffs that are raising the cost of living on everyone. The Republican policies in the big, ugly bill have taken a hatchet to cleaner, cheaper energy coming onto the grid. When that is married up with the very significant project cancellations of the Department of Energy and across the administration, it comes to lost or delayed private investments of $53 billion; 324 projects canceled or delayed, or layoffs; over 24,000 megawatts lost that could have been coming onto the grid to keep prices lower. That adds up to over 13 million homes that could have had cleaner, cheaper energy powering them. There is so much hypocrisy here in Washington right now. For decades, Republicans claimed to be the party of free markets and of business and competition. This bill is anti-competition. I remember a day when Republicans actually championed competition in the electricity sector. Those days are over, and that means that our neighbors back home are going to pay higher prices. Today's bill has nothing to do with free markets. Instead, it is government intervention into the electricity sector that would make a Soviet planner blush. Instead of letting power plants compete to see who can deliver reliable power at lower costs, Republicans would instead establish a 5-year plan to mandate which power plants stay online and forcing Americans to pay the bill. This bill has more in common with Karl Marx and Chairman Mao than it does with the pre-Donald Trump Republican Party. Mr. Speaker, we can't take our eye off the ball here. The reality is that the President promised to cut Americans' electricity bills. He promised that he would cut them in half by the time he was 1 year into his term. Here we are, at the end of the year, and energy bills are up, way up, over 13 percent in many places. I think that is a failing grade. I think it speaks to the weakness of these arguments, as they try to paper over the struggles of American families and like to pretend that they are doing something, while we watch healthcare costs go way up and the costs of groceries weigh people down. They want free markets when it means well for their fossil fuel allies, but they want government intervention and socialized costs the moment consumers might actually benefit from lower prices. The hypocrisy here is just staggering. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for closing. Mr. Speaker, this is a really tough time for the folks we represent back home. It is made worse by Trump's unfolding energy crisis. It is an affordability crisis. Looking ahead, looking in the years ahead, I think my colleagues had a point: We are going to need more energy. So it makes no sense at all for Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration to take a hatchet to cleaner, cheaper energy that is poised to come on the grid, cancel projects, and throw people out of jobs. I pointed out earlier that if you looked at the jobs report that came out this morning, manufacturing jobs were on their seventh month of decline. Part of that is because the Trump administration went into this year saying that we don't believe in solar power and wind power and storage and everything that makes your power more efficient. At the same time, they passed the big, ugly bill that rips away all sorts of cost-savers, like for families back home that are going to replace their heating and cooling system, a little bit of help in their pocketbook to do it in an affordable way. Meanwhile, the President, what did he promise? He said: I am going to make life more affordable. But everything that they have done, whether it is arbitrary tariffs, canceling projects, killing jobs, now trying to pass bills that heap costs on our families back home, everything they have done has raised the cost of living. I was flabbergasted when the President said: This whole affordability thing, it is a hoax. You tell that to the hardworking people back home going into the grocery store or the people now looking at their health insurance bill that this Congress refuses to solve. Then you bring a bill to the floor to add insult to injury, to make life even more expensive by making their utility bills more expensive? They are already up 13 percent on average across the country. Ever since Republicans took the majority here, we have been waiting for one bill to lower the cost of living. We have nothing. Just this year, utilities have asked for $34 billion worth of rate increases. American families have each spent $1,200 more this year to fund Trump's tariffs. Electricity prices are up by 13 percent. Natural gas prices are up by 8 percent, and the big, ugly bill will increase electricity prices by 61 percent. American families simply cannot afford the weight of all of this any longer, and they deserve so much better. What do the Republicans want to do today? They want to pass another bill that will increase prices by up to $6 billion each year. This is not a hoax. This is not a hoax. Instead, they offer a Christmas gift to the Nation's largest polluters. But I guess Republicans in Congress just believe what the President said: Affordability is a hoax; nothing to see here. Mr. Speaker, I want to be clear to all Americans. I don't care if you are a Democrat, a Republican, or Independent, how you are registered, we are going to stand up for you. We are going to fight back at every turn. We are going to fight for your pocketbook. We are not going to let them get away with this. We are actually going to do something about it because we know you deserve better. This is not a hoax. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone for yielding the time. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3628. I think we all know that our neighbors are really struggling with higher electric bills. They are really grappling with how to pay these higher costs. Household electricity prices across America are up by 13 percent this year--17 percent in North Carolina and 15 percent in the State of Georgia. Folks really are at their wits' end because it is all coming down at once. In Florida, the three largest investor-owned utilities have requested $34 billion in price hikes this year. Last month, the DeSantis- appointed utility commission approved a $7 billion rate hike for Florida Power & Light customers. FPL customers will be paying much more over the next few years. In Tampa, I was with some neighbors who were burning their electric bills, throwing them into a garbage can, lighting them on fire because they are struggling to keep the lights on. If you are a TECO customer, you are going to be paying about $939 more annually than you were 5 years ago. Madam Speaker, folks back home are really wondering: Can Congress get its act together to help lower the cost of living and work on solutions? I hate to report that, no, Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration have shown no interest in doing that or in tackling lower electric bills. In fact, they are making it worse. Electric bills are going up for a number of reasons. Let's talk about it. There is the big, ugly bill that Republicans passed in July. That is projected to raise electricity rates by 61 percent. Why? They took away a lot of the tax credits to speed cheaper energy onto the grid. They ripped away rebates to help consumers save money on their electric bills. They canceled a lot of jobs that were helping people pay the bills. Then when we add on the arbitrary tariffs of the Trump administration, that has a significant cost. Projections are that the average household is going to pay about $1,600 more per year. Some estimates are up to about $2,000 a year. That is, yes, on our coffee and groceries and consumer goods. It is also impacting electric bills. We do import poles and wires and energy, and that is raising electric bills, too. The Trump administration has also canceled billions of dollars' worth of cheaper, cleaner energy projects and solar projects in every State. No one has been immune to this. That has also fed into skyrocketing electric bills. All of this adds up. We are looking at a healthcare cliff in just another couple of weeks. Congress has only one more week to act to reinstitute the ACA tax credits. That is 4.5 million Floridians who will face higher healthcare bills, in addition to what they are doing to higher electric bills and our groceries. I would say to American families that they deserve so much better than they are getting here. This bill, H.R. 3628, amends the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act to four States to favor more expensive, dirty energy over cleaner, cheaper energy. It is a ridiculous requirement that they want to add, and it directly conflicts with the provisions in the law right now that require States to maintain a diverse portfolio of electricity and engage in prudent resource planning. Who loves this? Oil and gas companies love it. Investor-owned utilities love it. They will profit at the expense of hardworking Americans. Energy generated by wind, solar, and stored in batteries is often cheaper. It should make up a substantial portion of our electricity portfolio. Madam Speaker, we need to lower electric bills by speeding cleaner and cheaper energy to the grid, especially to meet rising demand, and to do it while we protect clean air and clean water. America cannot afford to turn its back on half of all of the new electricity that is poised to come onto the grid over the next 5 years. We need a modern transmission system and a modern electric grid. We need to speed up clean energy and not throw a wrench in it and make people pay more back home. They are already paying too much.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the South Tampa Chamber on its 100th anniversary. The South Tampa Chamber is a leader and positive force for the entire Tampa Bay area particularly small business owners and the military families who serve at MacDill Air Force Base. President Kelly Flannery, in particular, has helped lift the organization to one of the stellar``go to'' business organizations in Florida. The Chamber has devoted a century of commitment to community involvement, connection, and growth, and we plan to cherish the lasting partnerships created for generations to come. The history of the South Tampa Chamber began as the Port Tampa Assembly of Businessmen in 1926 with a goal to strengthen the rapidly expanding relationship between commerce in the Port Tampa area and the community. The South Tampa Chamber called on local leaders to support efforts to expand transportation, improve infrastructure and economic prosperity. These efforts led to the development of the Port Tampa Chamber of Commerce and allowed for the expansion of the South Tampa Chamber. Throughout the years, the Chamber evolved from the South Gandy Chamber of Commerce to what it is known as today, the South Tampa Chamber of Commerce. In 2017, the South Tampa Chamber became one of twenty chambers in the State of Florida designated as a Certified PLUS Chamber by the Florida Association of Chamber Professionals. This achievement is due to the dedication to work in the membership areas of programming, advocacy, and leadership and administration. These membership areas serve as a framework to guide a prospering community that may continue to contribute to the Tampa Bay area. The South Tampa Chamber membership association comprises over 600 businesses, organizations, elected officials, and community leaders. Through collaboration with partnerships such as the MacDill Air Force Base for over 75 years, the South Tampa Chamber has been able to support our Military with special programs and initiatives. In 2018, the South Tampa Chamber was recognized as a Three-Star Chamber of Valor by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This award is recognized as the highest honor for local and state chambers for a demonstration of support to Military personnel and their family members. Mr. Speaker, I am incredibly proud to support the network of individuals who foster a connection to community and success. On behalf of my neighbors of Tampa Bay, I am proud to congratulate the South Tampa Chamber on 100 years of exhibiting a forum for members to thrive through business partnerships and opportunities. It is dedicated business members, like those at the South Tampa Chamber, that make our Tampa Bay community a driving city for economic and local commerce growth. Our community is proud to have the South Tampa Chamber, and I applaud them on this incredible milestone of a century of members networking, conducting business, and enriching the South Tampa Community.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3109. I know my Republican colleagues want to pretend that this is a simple, unbiased study bill, but it is not. The bill asks the National Petroleum Council, a council that is made up of members from the oil and gas industry, to create a report that says that the United States needs more oil and gas. I fear that what this is a recipe for is higher electric bills and higher costs for hardworking Americans who already are being crushed by higher bills. There are unbiased public servants who could write this report--for example, at the Department of Energy--but, of course, Elon Musk and the Trump administration have pushed out more than 3,500 public servants there. As a result, the Department of Energy is in trouble. The Department has even had to ask external lawyers for things like defending against challenges relating to their illegal cancelations of projects across the country. To bring this bill at a time when people really want to see the Congress work to solve problems, I think, demonstrates that Members are out of touch. It is part of a very disturbing Republican trend, led by the President, to purge the government of real experts and to slash and burn, like medical research, finding the cures and treatments that we need to survive and thrive; trying to illegally dismantle the Department of Education; and going after public health and really ruining a lot of the expert public health advice that helps keep our neighbors healthy and safe. Then, here, when we are talking about oil and gas and their lobbyists, they are so firmly in control of the agenda here in the United States Congress. I just think my colleagues are not solving problems. Watching the President just remain out of touch is so painful to people back home that they feel betrayed. Even during the Republican shutdown, was the President focused on trying to negotiate a solution there or trying to take us out of the healthcare crisis? No. He was giving the White House a makeover. He tore down the entire East Wing to make way for a 90,000-square-foot, $300 million ballroom, funded by corporations that have a lot to gain monetarily; and he had ``Great Gatsby'' parties at Mar-a-Lago with dancing girls. It is just mind-boggling. Back to electric bills. Let's not forget that President Trump convened oil industry executives and lobbyists at his home last year to ask for $1 billion for his Presidential campaign. Well, now they are coming to collect. Even after almost 2 months, when Speaker Johnson had the House of Representatives shut down because he didn't want to find a solution to rising healthcare costs and he wanted to avoid a vote to release the Epstein files, we could have been focusing on, behind the scenes, some ways to lower costs and solve real problems, but they continue to bring bills like this: a study on how we produce more oil and gas. Here is the connection to higher bills. While they want to pad the profits of oil and gas companies, what they are doing to sabotage jobs and cleaner, cheaper energy now is showing up in people's electric bills, and they are angry. I was with neighbors a couple of weeks ago who were burning their electric bills because costs are increasing so dramatically. Why? On January 20, the President froze Federal leasing for wind projects and blocked permits for projects that had already been approved. On February 5, the Army Corps of Engineers halted permits for 168 renewable energy projects on private lands. In March, as part of his tariff war, he imposed a 10 percent tax on energy imported from Canada, hitting Midwestern States with higher gas prices. In April, the Trump administration abruptly fired the entire staff overseeing the low-income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps working families afford their utility bills. Weeks later, the White House proposed cutting it entirely. In May, the Secretary of Energy ordered an old Michigan coal plant to stay online, forcing the company to spend nearly $1 million a day. These are costs that are passed on to families across the Midwest. In June, the Trump administration's EPA proposed a rule to allow coal and gas power plants to emit unlimited amounts of climate pollution, locking us into a dirtier and more expensive future. In July, Republicans passed their big, ugly bill, which will saddle American families with price hikes of at least $110 next year and up to $4,000 annually within a decade. In August, EPA announced an illegal cancellation of the $7 billion Solar for All Grant Initiative, which was intended to bring affordable energy to more than 900,000 hardworking American households. In September, the Trump administration unveiled a more than $600 million bailout for coal plants to keep them online. In October, while shutting down the government to deny Americans access to affordable healthcare, the White House tried to claw back billions in clean energy funds. These actions are costly, and American families deserve better. We should be working together to solve problems and not wasting time on trying to figure out how we pad the profits of industries. Instead, we should be looking out for the pocketbooks of the people who sent us here. People deserve better. Hardworking Americans expect better of this Congress. I hope that we can send a message on this bill and the next one that we are not going to put up with it anymore. We want real solutions to lower the cost of living. Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore