Jeff Duncan

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about a piece of property in South Central Alaska known as the Bering River Coal Field located in the magnificent Copper River Delta. This issue goes back to the days of Theodore Roosevelt as a conservation effort. The United States government has the opportunity to purchase the mineral rights to this field. This Congress provided the U.S. Forest Service $8 million to buy the Bering River Coal Field through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, but the appraisal came in at $6 million. The Korean Alaska Development Company that owns it will sell for $8 million, and I want to thank a gentleman, Joe Shinn, and the KADCO board of directors for staying at the table. We have an opportunity, and I believe the members on both sides of the aisle would agree if you could by acclamation to give the Forest Service the ability to purchase this remarkable property for conservation. But the United States government cannot pay more than appraised value unless we in Congress authorize them to do that. The difference is between $6 million and $8 million dollars, and I ask my colleagues, if not now then, in the future, to help the United States of America to set aside the Bering River Coal Field in perpetuity for all future generations to enjoy.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3293, the Expediting Federal Broadband Deployment Reviews Act. I thank House leadership for allowing this legislation to come to the floor. I thank my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee on both sides of the aisle for supporting this legislation in committee and supporting it here today. Mr. Speaker, in the 21st century, broadband internet access is no longer a luxury. It is a necessity. It connects our communities. It drives economic growth and allows our constituents to fully engage with the digital age. Yet, millions of Americans still lack access to reliable high-speed internet. This digital divide is a barrier to opportunity, holding back businesses, hindering education, and limiting access to essential services. H.R. 3293 takes a crucial step towards bridging this divide and streamlining the process for deploying broadband infrastructure. Currently, the review process for obtaining permits and authorizations can be lengthy and bureaucratic, causing significant delays in deployment. This bill establishes an interagency strike force to coordinate and expedite these reviews, ensuring that Federal agencies prioritize broadband expansion. Streamlining these Federal processes will help get broadband deployed in the rural parts of America just like the Third District of South Carolina. The benefits of H.R. 3293 are clear. Faster broadband deployment will create jobs, stimulate economic development, and improve the quality of life for countless Americans. Students will have access to online learning resources. Telehealth services will become more accessible, and rural communities will be better connected to the global economy. H.R. 3293 is a commonsense solution that will help us achieve universal broadband access. It is a critical investment in our future, and I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about a piece of property in Alaska. Southeast Alaska is called the Copper River Delta. There is a coalfield there called the Bering River coalfield. Mr. Speaker, this goes back to Teddy Roosevelt's days as a conservation effort. The United States Government has an opportunity to purchase the coal rights of this field. I thank the gentleman, Joo Shin, and the KADCO board of directors for staying at the table. The appraisal came in at $6 million. The Korean owner, Joo Shin, wants $8 million for the property. We have an opportunity, and I believe that Members on both sides of the aisle could agree by acclamation with this conservation effort. The United States Government cannot pay more than the appraised value unless we, in Congress, authorize them to do that. The difference is between $6 million and $8 million. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues, either now or in the future, to help the United States of America set aside the Copper River Delta area, the Bering River coalfield, in perpetuity for this conservation effort.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I think the difference between the Republican Party and administration and Democrats comes down to government mandating certain choices and Republicans believing in free markets, market choices, and market opportunities. If Americans want to buy something that, in their mind, is more efficient and that can save them money, maybe will last longer, that is up to the Americans. The market will step up and provide those opportunities and products. If you want an electric vehicle, the market is going to provide that. It shouldn't be mandated. I thank my colleague from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles) for approaching this bill that is dealing with washing machines, but the broader picture is the mandates from the administration to tell Americans the only choices they have aren't going to save them that much money in the long run, as we pointed out. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion to recommit and vote in favor of this legislation, H.R. 7673. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, just a point. The payback periods for many of these appliances are uneconomical. Republicans look long term. Republicans look toward quality and value for Americans. For example, the payback period for the Department of Energy's proposed clothes washer standard for a ventless electric combination washer and dryer is--are you ready for it?--46 years. Forty-six years for a washing machine that, if we are lucky, will last 15 years. Americans know they have to replace a lot of appliances over a period of time. Mr. Speaker, it is sort of a bittersweet moment for me because this may be the very last time I get to speak from the House floor, and it is an honor to be here to represent the Energy and Commerce Committee's Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee that I chair on this bill, but it has been an honor to work on so many other bills over time. I have enjoyed working with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Ranking Member Pallone has been a phenomenal ranking member for the Energy and Commerce Committee to work with. I have enjoyed it. There are so many others on the other side of the aisle, too many to name, but Representative Henry Cuellar is a good friend and Scott Peters. Albio Sires was a good friend of mine who is no longer in Congress. It has been an interesting ride for 14 years in the United States Congress. I have seen a lot on this House floor, from last year with the Speaker's debate from the original Speaker election that happened in this Congress back to John Boehner, Speaker Boehner, calling me a hardhead on the floor, something I wore as a badge of courage because I was representing my constituents in the Third District of South Carolina, who sent me to Washington to be that hardhead because they were tired of seeing runaway government. They were tired of seeing government spending that has created a balance of about $35 trillion in debt that our Nation faces today. That is a number that is unfathomable. To work on energy policy has been something that I came to Washington to work on, and I was blessed with the opportunity to become the chair of the Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee. We dealt with energy, grid security, and climate change in this Congress--retitled that committee--but we focus a lot on American energy, American energy independence. There are four words that I talk about often. Those are produce, deliver, utilize, and export. We are blessed in this Nation with abundant resources that we need to produce more of because using natural gas, as an example, we have in abundance. We can't even measure the amount of natural gas we are blessed with in this Nation, and utilizing that natural gas has helped us lower our global carbon emissions. The carbon emissions in the United States have gone down because of the use of cleaner-burning, American-produced natural gas. If we produce more, we are going to need to deliver those assets whether it is liquid fuels or gas or electricity down power lines, transmission lines. That is the delivery component. We have to deliver that resource, whether it is electricity produced at a nuclear power plant or whether it is natural gas or liquid fuels going to the refinery. We need to produce more. We need to deliver it to where it can be utilized. We need to utilize it to create the electricity that meets the demands of America and the globe, and energy demand in this country and globally is not going down. It is only going up, and it is going up exponentially globally. We can help so many people around the world improve their quality of life, their standard of living, by exporting more United States-produced natural gas to help them meet their global carbon emissions goals by utilizing cleaner burning U.S. gas, taking their coal-fired power plants offline and using U.S. gas to produce the electricity that makes the lives of their constituents and their citizens much better. These are things we have worked on, and I hope Congress in the future will continue to work on, yes, lowering our global carbon emissions because, yes, cleaner air is just the right thing. Whatever side you come down on on the global climate change aspects, cleaner air is good, and we can do that by utilizing more U.S.-produced natural gas. Produce more, deliver more, utilize more, and export more to help our friends and allies in Eastern Europe that are facing energy security issues because they depend on Russia. They look west to the U.S. to help them meet their energy needs. Yet, we debate things like washing machines, stoves, and dishwashers, but we have had the opportunity to work on real substantive issues for American energy policy under my tenure as an Energy and Commerce subcommittee chair, but also under Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a great American who chaired the Energy and Commerce Committee for this Congress. She has been a great leader. She also is somebody who cares about more than just energy. She cares about the whole spectrum of energy and commerce, from children's online safety to privacy, data privacy. She also understands the need for American energy independence. I have been blessed with the opportunity in Congress to stand here, and I give a shout-out to Representative Doc Hastings, who was the former chair of the Natural Resources Committee who gave me the opportunity twice back in the day when we actually did motions to recommit and had those speeches. Ranking Member Pallone may remember those days. Honestly, that was some of the most fun debate on the House floor. You heard cheers. Trey Gowdy was up here, and others. I miss those days in the United States Congress when we interacted a little bit more. I thank the Energy and Commerce Committee staff that is sitting behind me and the full committee staff that has made this job much easier, providing us the information we need to debate properly. This is a great institution that I have been honored to be a part of. I thank the House staff because they are great. They make order out of all this chaos. It is chaos many, many days, but we are all here elected, both Republican and Democrat, to do what is best for the United States of America, a country that we love, every one of us. We may have differences on how to get there, but making America great, being the best nation we can be, providing for our constituents, providing for our Nation, being a strong nation, is something everybody believes in. We just have different approaches. Nobody dislikes one another, and that is what really makes the United States House of Representatives so special. Mr. Speaker, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to do this today on the floor. I thank my creator for giving me the opportunity to do this. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I remind Americans that this mandate by the Biden administration on washing machines will only save them about $9 total over the lifespan of the unit itself, which is about 13\1/2\ years, a savings of only $9 over 13\1/2\ years. Unbelievable. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles), my friend.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 7673, the Liberty in Laundry Act, and I thank Congressman Ogles for leading on this issue. Throughout the 118th Congress, the Energy and Commerce Committee has been on the front lines for defending the needs of everyday Americans against the radical climate agenda of the Biden administration. This administration has prioritized expensive and unreliable energy policies that have diminished the quality of life for our friends and neighbors across the country. These harmful policies have sought to direct the energy we use and even the appliances we buy. We stood on this floor and we talked about gas stoves, dishwashers, and HVACs. In Congress, we talked about the push to electrification and the mandates from the U.S. Government to Americans to tell them what kind of cars they have to drive--not what they want to drive, but cars they have to drive. Today, we are addressing the assault on clothes washers. This bill protects the affordability and quality and choice for Americans to decide for themselves what suits their needs best. Thanks to radical climate policies, Americans will spend 34 percent more on appliances today than they did just a decade ago. These appliances are not only more expensive, they offer a lesser quality with fewer features Americans rely on and shorter lifespans. This legislation will prevent the DOE from enforcing standards for clothes washers unless they are technologically feasible and economically justified, are not likely to result in additional cost to the consumer, and will result in significant conservation of energy. The American people have spoken. They cannot afford and they don't want more of the same. They have overwhelmingly rejected the Democratic Party and their pandering to the radical climate lobby. Everyday Americans are tired of record inflation, high-energy costs, and just the struggle they have every day to make ends meet. This legislation addresses kitchen-table issues for Americans and their families. The out-of-touch policies of the Biden administration are why the American people decided to elect President Donald J. Trump to a second term. In the 119th Congress, House Republicans will continue to fight for hardworking Americans and unleash our energy to lower costs and improve the quality of life for those across the country. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 7673, the Liberty in Laundry Act. I thank Representative Ogles for leading this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1612, I call up the bill (H.R. 7673) to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from prescribing or enforcing energy conservation standards for clothes washers that are not cost-effective or technologically feasible, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 7673.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the remarkable career and leadership of John L. Humphries as he retires as President and General Manager of WYFF 4 after more than four decades in broadcast television. John led two of Hearst Television's most honored and successful brands for eighteen years, most recently leading Hearst's NBC affiliate in the Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, South Carolina and Asheville, North Carolina, television market. He is said to have built upon the culture of excellence in journalism and community service in both markets. In 2018, Broadcasting & Cable named him General Manager of the Year for mid-size television markets as the station earned a Southeast Regional Emmy for Outstanding Newscast and, in 2022, it received a prestigious national Edward R. Murrow Award. The many state and regional achievements have included three consecutive Associated Press of South Carolina's Outstanding News Operation in 2017, 2018, and 2019 and the South Carolina Association of Broadcasters Station of the Year recognition in 2021. Before joining Hearst Television, John was General Sales Manager for WBTV in Charlotte, North Carolina, and held the same position at WSPA- TV/WASV-TV in the Greenville-Spartanburg market. He began his career at Charlotte's WSOC-TV, initially as a Production Specialist. He holds a bachelor's degree in Speech from Appalachian State University, in Boone, North Carolina, for which he served on the Alumni Council and currently sits on the Department of Communication's Professional Advisory Board. Among his industry and charitable associations, John serves as president of the South Carolina Broadcasters Association Board of Directors, the board for the Greenville Chamber of Commerce, and the South Carolina Chapter of the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. In 2016, he was named one of the region's 50 Most Influential People by Greenville Business Magazine. Mr. Speaker, as John signs off and embarks on a well-deserved retirement, it is a privilege to be able to serve the Third District of South Carolina and to celebrate those who make a difference in our community.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support today of H.R. 5646, the Stop Campus Hazing Act, legislation that I have been the lead Republican cosponsor of for the past three Congresses. Mr. Speaker, 10 years ago last Saturday, a young man named Tucker Hipps, a senior counselor at Palmetto Boys State, and a political science major like myself at my alma mater Clemson University, was found in the waters of Lake Hartwell, having fallen off a bridge in an apparent and suspected incident of campus hazing. Mr. Speaker, 10 years later, the Hipps family, who are with us today, are still searching for justice for Tucker. I continue to pray that they find those answers. I am proud of the South Carolina State legislature that they named their campus hazing legislation after Tucker. Today, I am proud to bring bipartisan legislation to the House floor along with my friend that you just heard from, my colleague Congresswoman McBath, to honor Tucker's memory and the memories of hundreds of other campus hazing victims by mandating greater transparency in fraternity hazing reporting. No parent should have to endure what Gary and Cindy Hipps have had to go through, the senseless loss of a beloved son. The, as yet, fruitless search for answers or bringing those responsible to justice. Yet, in Tucker's loss and the loss of so many others, we may learn lessons that inform the policy choice that we make today. We act today so that parents may know and make informed decisions about the colleges that they send their kids off to. I thank all the people involved in this legislation that has taken way too long, from Cindy Hipps to the Clery Center to the DeVercelly family. I thank them for being here today. I thank Chairwoman Foxx and Ranking Member Scott for their support, as well as Clemson University and the fraternal councils for realizing the need to move forward with these reforms. I thank the sponsor of this bill, Congresswoman McBath, for all her tireless efforts to bring us here today. May God bless the memory of Tucker Hipps, and in his memory, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the remarkable career and dedicated service of Mr. Farris ``Carlos'' Hill, a pillar of our Ninety Six, South Carolina community, as he retires from the Department of the Air Force. Carlos' journey is a testament to dedication, perseverance, and commendable service to our Nation both in uniform and as a civilian leader. Born in 1964 to a working-class family in Greenwood, South Carolina, he learned the values of hard work and determination from a young age. Notably, he attended the first integrated first grade class in our state, an experience that undoubtedly shaped his character and resilience. Following his graduation from Ninety Six High School in 1982, Carlos, fueled by his work ethic, secured an Air Force ROTC scholarship to Clemson University. This marked the start of his lifelong dedication to our Nation. Earning a degree in Civil Engineering in 1986, he embarked on a distinguished military career. His assignments spanned Chanute AFB, Mather AFB, and Dyess AFB, where he excelled as an aircraft maintenance officer. He further served as an Assistant Professor of Aerospace Studies at Rutgers and Princeton Universities, inspiring future Air Force leaders. Transitioning to the Air Force Reserve after nine years of active duty service, Carlos balanced his military responsibilities with a successful civilian career at General Electric. His unwavering commitment extended to deployments in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. During his second mobilization, he sought opportunities to further his military career through the Air Force Legislative Fellowship Program. This prestigious program allowed Carlos to work closely with congressional members and staff, providing him with invaluable legislative experience and insights that would shape his future career in legislative affairs. In 2013, Carlos assumed the crucial role of Mobilization Assistant to the Director of Legislative Liaison at the Pentagon, while concurrently serving as the Director of Air Force Reserve Policy Integration in a civilian capacity. He became a vital bridge between the Air Force and Congress, securing vital resources and advocating for both the active force and Reserves. His promotion to Brigadier General in 2015 was a fitting culmination of his outstanding military career. Retiring from the Reserve in 2019, Carlos remained dedicated to his civilian role, shaping policies as Director of Air Force Reserve Policy Integration at the Pentagon. Here, he continued to serve with distinction, shaping policies that directly impacted the lives and careers of thousands of Air Force Reservists. Carlos' civilian tenure was marked by his unwavering commitment to improving the operational readiness and quality of life for Airmen. He was instrumental in identifying and resolving issues affecting the Air Force Reserve, developing legislative strategies, and coordinating with Congress on significant policy matters. His efforts included formulating Air Force Reserve strategic goals, managing policy initiatives, and maintaining liaison with Congressional Defense Committee Chairs and a wide range of other members of Congress. He also ensured that Air Force senior leaders were fully prepared for Congressional testimonies and engagements, significantly contributing to the successful navigation of complex legislative landscapes. Beyond his military and government service, Carlos has remained deeply involved with Clemson University where he actively serves on the Alumni Association Board. His dedication to mentoring and supporting students, especially those in the ROTC program, has left a lasting impact. Carlos frequently returns to Clemson to speak with and mentor current students, including Air Force ROTC cadets. In recognition of his significant contributions, Carlos was honored with the Clemson University Distinguished Service Award in 2023, highlighting his exceptional service and commitment to the university and its community. As Carlos embarks on a well-deserved retirement, I extend my deepest gratitude for his unwavering commitment. His exemplary service has been a true inspiration for future generations.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Chair, I want to let John Garamendi know we are thinking about him and praying for him. This amendment threatens to weaken our Nation's defense capability by preventing the critical production of plutonium pits at the Savannah River Site. Plutonium pits are a key component for nuclear weapons. Due to factors including plutonium aging, safety and security advancements, global risk, and weapons modernization, these pits need to be replaced from time to time. The United States has not had the ability to produce new pits in the quantities required for the nuclear weapons stockpile since the previous pit production facility at Rocky Flats, Colorado, was shut down in the 1990s. When construction is complete, the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility will produce at least 50 of the 80 new pits per year required by the Department of Defense to sustain the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. This amendment would prohibit funding for the Savannah River Plutonium Modernization Program, which funds facility construction as well as workforce development, process design, and other critical functions so that SRS can begin producing pits as quickly as possible once the construction is complete. This bipartisan program has been supported by both the current and former Presidential administrations. Similarly, this amendment was soundly rejected during consideration of the fiscal year 2024 Energy- Water Development appropriations bill. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1341, I call up the bill (H.R. 7700) to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from prescribing or enforcing energy conservation standards for dishwashers that are not cost-effective or technologically feasible, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and insert extraneous material on H.R. 7700.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7700, Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act, and I thank Congressman Langworthy for leading these efforts. The Biden administration has lost sight of the original intent behind the Department of Energy conservation standards. Instead, they are contradicting the statutes and doing so at the expense of Americans' quality of life, their pocketbooks, and their energy bills. Instead of harnessing the abundant resources we are blessed with in this country, the Biden administration wants to lower your standard of living by telling you what appliances you can have in your home, and they want you to pay more for it. An analysis from the Department of Energy found that their dishwasher efficiency mandates would increase the upfront cost by up to 28 percent. It is estimated that these proposed standards may take consumers over 16 years to pay back the increased cost on a dishwasher that won't even last 12 years. The Biden administration has abused the Department of Energy's appliance standard program to go beyond the authority granted to them by Congress by proposing these overreaching standards. Americans will suffer the consequences of the Biden administration's rush-to-green agenda. The DOE's net zero rush-to-green energy agenda is reaching into your home to impose cost increasing regulations on appliances in every corner of your home. We have debated gas stoves and other appliances here, and now here we are today debating on dishwashers. The Biden administration has proposed over 15 regulations that affect appliances, like I mentioned, not only gas stoves but hot water heaters, refrigerators, freezers, and now dishwashers. They argue these regulations will save money and reduce emissions, but that is just simply not the case. One study found these regulations could increase the cost for the average American family by over $9,000. These increased efficiency standards mean Americans need to run their appliances twice as long to get the same effect, and we all know it. You run the dishwasher, you open it up, the dishes aren't clean, and you have got to run it again. It happens to every American family multiple times. You are not saving money. You are not saving water and electricity running your highly efficient appliances when you have to run them two or three times just to get the dishes clean or to get them dry. This bill would prevent this abuse from the DOE, and it will prevent the Department from enforcing standards on dishwashers unless they are technologically feasible and economically justified, they are not likely to result in additional costs to the customer, and they won't enforce the standards unless they will result in a significant conservation of energy. American families know that is just simply not happening in their homes. I urge all my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 7700, Stop the Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act, to protect affordability and preserve the quality of life that Americans expect and deserve. I thank Representative Langworthy for leading this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Biden administration's own Department of Energy in their analysis finds that efficiency mandates could increase the upfront costs by 28 percent and it could take consumers 12 years to pay back the increased cost on a product like a dishwasher that may only last 7 to 12 years. Mr. Speaker, it is going to take you 12 years to pay for something that may wear out in 7 years based on DOE's own analysis. That makes no sense. The gentlewoman mentioned earlier that Republicans were not wanting to help American consumers, that they want to take money out of their pocket. This is actually the opposite of that. We are wanting to help save the American public money over time by stopping these reckless rush-to-green regulations like we are voting on today dealing with both refrigerators and dishwashers and then gas stoves but only because they have a green agenda that really wants to do away with fossil fuels. Let's just call it what it is. That is their agenda, to end the use of fossils fuels in the United States of America at a time when we, as a growing nation, growing population, and growing metropolitan centers, need more energy. The demand for energy is only going up. It is not going down. The continued war against American- produced fossil fuels is costing Americans' ability to improve their quality of life and their standard of living. We need to continue debating the need for efficient, reliable, affordable, and dispatchable energy resources, something that is 24/7/ 365 always on, always ready, always available, not weather-dependent, and not sunlight-dependent, intermittent energy sources. We need to continue debating that. Instead, we are having to push back against an administration that, under broad legislation passed by the United States Congress, has given them the ability to write rules and make regulations without the necessary congressional oversight in many cases. That is why, I believe, the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron deference to say that these agencies don't just have carte blanche to do whatever political agenda pushes them in the mindset to do. I think Congress needs to focus on really defining what those rules are in the legislation we pass here, and I think that is what the Supreme Court is ultimately going to force us to do. They it made very clear with no ambivalence and no ambiguity. We have a Nation that is hurting because of the Biden economic factors that are causing inflation. It started with energy on day one by stopping the Keystone pipeline, ending lease sales on the Outer Continental Shelf, destroying the American energy base. The Democrats will say: Well, energy production is up. It is, but it is up because of past administration policies that expanded oil and gas leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf and on Federal land. These things don't pop up out of the ground overnight. It takes decades sometimes to get an energy product to producing. The permitting process alone takes years. Then you have to find the resource and produce the resource and get it online where Americans can benefit from it. Guess who else can benefit from it, Mr. Speaker. The world can. With the abundance of natural gas we have in this country, we could be a tremendous exporter. We export a lot, but we could do a lot more because of the abundance of natural gas we have here to help the quality of life and standard of living of people all over the globe. Yet this administration says we are going to put this pause, which was basically a ban, on LNG exports. That hurts our allies in Europe who are facing Vladimir Putin's cutting on and off the spigot of natural gas. It hurts folks around the world who are in energy poverty, and America could help raise them out of that poverty. Americans know they are hurting because it started with energy. We talk a lot about that. Americans also see a border that is wide open and 16-plus million people who have crossed our southern border who are raping and killing American citizens. The crime rates are going up in cities. They are straining our social services at the State level and in our own communities causing our property taxes to go up and our State income taxes to go up to pay for folks who aren't even legally in the United States of America. That is because of Joe Biden's open- border policies. Sure, we ought to debate a lot of things in this Congress instead of debating regulations on efficiency standards on dishwashers, gas stoves, refrigerators, freezers, and all these things, but the Biden administration has definitely overreached in these areas. It is because they have a green agenda that they are pushing. Republicans want to help Americans maintain their standard of living, improve their standard of living, and improve their quality of life. We can do that by lowering taxes. We can do that by improving the economy which the Biden economic policies have not done. We saw tremendous spending in the IRA and other things. More government spending equates to higher inflation. That is not me saying it. That is economists all over the globe who understand that simple concept. We want to improve the quality of life of people and not make their appliances that they rely on every day be less efficient, cost more, and in the case of dishwashers, having to pay for something that wore out 3 or 4 years ago and they are still paying on it. If you factor in the cost savings, it is pennies a day. In fact, it is probably pennies a year. It gets into less than a $20 savings over the life of the appliance. That is not saving the American people money. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 7700, the Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act. Let's protect affordability, and let's preserve the quality of life for Americans. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the legislation would prevent the Department from enforcing standards on dishwashers unless they are technologically feasible and economically justified, unless they are not likely to result in additional costs to a consumer, and unless they will result in significant conservation of energy. Americans know that this new standard and even older standards are not working. They are having to wash their dishes multiple times. We have seen over and over agencies overreaching the constitutional mandate they were given. Thank goodness the Supreme Court last week overturned the Chevron deference, and now Congress can use other tools like pieces of legislation to direct agencies on what they should do and the limits they can do it under. Sure, there is other legislation we ought to take up, but we have had to use Congressional Review Act legislation. We have had to use legislation like this to push back against these agencies and their overreach. Thankfully, Mr. Langworthy knows a lot about this. He filed the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Langworthy).

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen), a valuable member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I don't have any further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, to address the gentlewoman, I wasn't going to engage in a colloquy on the floor during a debate on this issue, but I do load and unload the dishwasher. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that, many times, I have opened the dishwasher, loaded properly, with the right amount of dishwashing liquid or pod put in, that all the dishes aren't clean. They were rinsed off before they were put in, to the gentlewoman. I would run it again. Americans know this. This isn't just me and my household. Americans know they have to run the dishwasher ofttimes more than once. How is that a cost savings? How is it a cost savings when you have to run it more than once? Americans know you open that dishwasher after its cycle, and apparently the heating component of the efficiency standards didn't dry the dishes, so they get them out before they put them in the cabinet because you don't want to put wet dishes up. You get a towel down, and you dry every one of them off. Cup, knife, fork, plate, pan, you dry it off before you put it up. Mr. Speaker, you might as well have just washed it in the sink versus using an inefficient dishwasher that is becoming more and more inefficient based on these standards. I am not going to stand here and be lectured by someone who seemed very pious about dishwashers or washing laundry or loading a refrigerator properly to stay away from the hotspots because we are going to go to refrigerators next. I am sure some of these same comments are going to be brought up. Guess what, I don't have to because the American people know. The American people know what they deal with every day, and they know they are going to pay more for an appliance that is less efficient, and they may still be paying for it when the thing is worn out. That is unfair to the American people. We should be about improving the standard of living and quality of life of Americans. I will address one other thing that the gentlewoman said: the so- called border crisis. Every American knows we have a border crisis. We have had over 16 million people in our country not with a visa, not with a permission slip, to come here illegally. They reside in our communities because guess what? Every State is a border State now, even California and even South Carolina, where I come from because these migrants have been bussed or flown at taxpayer expense into our communities. I won't stand here and hear it be called a so-called border crisis because Americans know it is a border crisis when 16 million people illegally enter. We are not talking about 6, but 16 million or more. Those are just the ones we know about. What about the ones that the Border Patrol see cross the border, who go into the bushes, and they go after them? They can't find them, and they are not counted in the got-away numbers because they have been told that those migrants may have gone back across the border, so they are not counting those numbers. What about the ones who cross the border in areas that aren't patrolled currently, those people who come through who have no encounter with law enforcement at all, who are never counted. They may have nefarious goals in mind because all of these illegal aliens that have crossed our border aren't just from Mexico or Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Latin-American countries. A lot of them are coming from China and Russia and the Middle East. America knows we have no idea who is in our country. Let me say that again: Americans, we have no idea who is in our country. When I got into this conversation about energy prices and the border and economics and inflation, high interest rates, cost of goods costing more now than they did 4 years ago, ofttimes 28, 30, 35 percent more, Americans know. They don't want to pay more for an appliance that is inefficient. That is the gist of this debate. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Speaker, enacted in 1975, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act provides specific criteria for the DOE to follow in order to propose a new appliance efficiency standard. I went over those standards earlier. The Biden administration has consistently ignored these requirements by proposing and finalizing standards that violate the statute. Mr. Speaker, I owe the gentleman from New Jersey an apology because I misspoke earlier when I said the payback period was 12 years. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a link to the Federal Register, Wednesday, April 24, 2024. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024- 04-24/pdf/2024-08211.pdf. This is a table in the Federal Register, and it says it is a 16-year payback for dishwashers. I said 12. I apologize for misspeaking because it is really 16 years. This is not just words. These are in the Federal Register. Americans know that these standards will lessen the efficiency of appliances, will cost them more in upfront costs, and ultimately cost them more in inconvenience, in multiple run cycles, in cost over the lifetime when you have a 16-year payback. Mr. Speaker, this is the right piece of legislation to push back against the administrative overreach, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 7700, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1341, I call up the bill (H.R. 7637) to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from prescribing or enforcing energy conservation standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers that are not cost- effective or technologically feasible, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.