Debbie Lesko

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chair, respectfully, my Democratic colleague, Mr. Pallone, said: We are not banning gas stoves. Yet, the Department of Energy studied this for many years, and in their own analysis, their own book, and their own standards called the technical support document in table 1032, it says that only 4 percent of the gas cooktops that they have tested will meet the qualifications. That is 96 percent that will not. It says that is 4 percent of market share, meaning 96 percent won't. Even if it is true, which I don't think it is, where Mr. Pallone says that now 50 percent already qualify, that means 50 percent don't. To me, that is at least a 50 percent ban. Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

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

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chair, I agree with my Democratic colleague, we should be talking about the issues that are important to Americans today, like securing our border, lowering our crime rates, lowering the cost of living. We have crisis after crisis in our country, and you know what the Department of Energy does under the Biden administration? They go after our gas stoves. That is why I had to bring this bill to the floor. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber).

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

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chair, I agree, we need to focus on important issues, so may I suggest to my Democratic colleagues that they talk to President Biden and say stop going after our gas stoves, so we don't have to talk about this? Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington State (Mrs. Rodgers), the chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, my colleagues keep saying we are not banning gas stoves, but what would they call it when the Department of Energy's own analysis says that of the gas stoves that they have tested, only 4 percent of the market share would qualify for their new proposed rule? That means about 96 percent won't. Then they revised it to say, well, almost 50 percent will qualify. Well, that means more than 50 percent won't. I call that a ban. We are mixing words here. The other things that my Democratic colleagues keep asking is: Why wouldn't we want to save money? It is only 12 cents a month. Who is going to give up the choice of what type of stove they want for 12 cents a month? Nobody. That is not a good exchange. I would also say that if the Biden administration is not doing anything, why do all of these people support my bill? The National Association of Homebuilders, the American Restaurant Association, the American Gas Association, the American Home Appliance Manufacturers, numerous other energy companies. Mr. Chairman, I would read a little bit from the National Restaurant Association, because it talks about why this bill is important. We didn't bring it. The Republicans didn't bring this on; it was the Biden administration. With all these crises going on in our country, he has to pick on gas stoves. I don't understand why. This is what the National Restaurant Association says: Natural gas is a critical energy source for many sectors of the economy but none more than the restaurant industry. In fact, natural gas is the preferred cooking energy source for 76 percent of restaurants. Cooking with an open flame from natural gas is critical for a variety of dishes to ensure a responsive, consistent, and precise heat source that affects the quality of food served. Natural gas also allows restaurants to use certain cooking techniques that cannot be replicated with an electric stove. Finally, banning or overly restricting natural gas use could burden restaurant owners with higher operating costs, particularly local and independent restaurants. The cost to convert existing infrastructure to handle the power capacity needed to operate a commercial kitchen alone would be prohibitive for many locally owned restaurants. I say the same is true for individual homeowners. They don't want to change. They like the features on their gas stove. They don't want to give them up. Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support my bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to this amendment, which is nothing more than an attempt to delay implementation of the underlying bill. Secretary Granholm could simply say that my bill affects energy security, even though it doesn't. The Biden administration's ban on gas stoves is the result of the Democrats' war on natural gas. They want to force a transition away from affordable and reliable energy by banning the products that Americans use every day. The Department of Energy's gas stove ban is actually an energy security threat. Because it is not economically justified, it will not result in a significant savings of energy, and it will reduce consumer choice for natural gas kitchen ranges and ovens. Its goal is to eliminate the use of natural gas, which is used to support America's energy security. Natural gas kitchen ranges and ovens are currently the preferred choice of 40 percent of American households. Nearly 187 million Americans use natural gas because it is affordable and reliable. According to industry estimates, homes with natural gas appliances save up to $1,068 per year, compared to all electric homes. Natural gas stoves are affordable, reliable, and widely popular. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and support the underlying bill, the Save Our Gas Stoves Act. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment strikes the language preventing the Department of Energy from implementing any substantially similar rule. Removing this language would allow the Department of Energy to just reissue another gas stove ban after my bill becomes law. I rise in opposition to this amendment, which strikes important language in the underlying bill. That language would prevent the Department of Energy from reissuing a nearly identical rule to ban gas stoves. H.R. 1640 allows the Department of Energy to issue energy efficiency standards that are cost effective and that have a significant amount of energy for consumers. This is the current standard under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, and H.R. 1640 does nothing to change that. The Biden administration's politically motivated proposal to ban a majority of gas stoves violates the statutory requirements of EPCA because it fails to save consumers money or energy and because it removes products from the market simply because they use natural gas. The Energy and Commerce Committee held hearings on this and conducted oversight. The facts are clear that the Department of Energy should withdraw this misguided rule, and DOE should be prohibited from reissuing a substantially similar rule. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and support the underlying bill, the Save Our Gas Stoves Act. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chairman, yes, indeed, the energy efficiency standards deal with both gas and electric stoves. The problem is that it disproportionately would ban the majority of gas stoves, not electric stoves. That takes away consumer choice. That is why I brought this bill to the floor, and that is why I oppose this amendment. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Chair, our Nation is facing a tragic fentanyl crisis. Our kids are dying. Our neighbors are dying. During the last 2 years, if I may remind my Democratic colleagues, they were in charge. They were in charge of the House, they had control of the Senate, they had control of the Presidency, and they did nothing to stop this fentanyl crisis. Late last year, I visited the Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office in Phoenix, Arizona. It is truly revealing. It is one of the busiest medical examiner offices in the Nation. In Maricopa County last year, fentanyl and its analogues were involved in 60 percent of all the drug-related deaths. Once more, there are record amounts of fentanyl coming across our southern border into our Arizona communities. Did you know that last Thursday, officers at the Arizona Nogales Port of Entry seized over 207,000 fentanyl pills and over 16 pounds of fentanyl powder just in 1 day. With border officials only able to seize 5 to 10 percent of all illegal drugs, these numbers are truly terrifying. House Republicans are taking action. We are the ones introducing this bill. We are the ones getting something done. We are introducing the HALT Fentanyl Act. Madam Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation, to stop this deadly drug crisis and save lives.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I am from a border State, and I have been to the border multiple times. There is absolutely an invasion at our southern border. Even worse, title 42 ends today. Without title 42, the number of illegal immigrants at our southern border is expected to skyrocket. The Biden administration has no plan. In fact, I heard multiple times from my Democratic colleagues today how we should work together on a comprehensive plan. May I remind my Democratic colleagues that they were in total control of the House, the Senate, and the Presidency for the last 2 years, and they did absolutely nothing. The Secure the Border Act is the solution. This bill disincentivizes illegal immigration, ends catch and release, builds the wall, and reinstates President Trump's successful remain in Mexico policy. Republicans want secure borders. Republicans want to protect our communities from deadly fentanyl. Republicans want to protect the innocent immigrant children from being sold into sex slavery, like is happening today. It is time to pass this legislation and secure the border now because President Biden won't.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss an issue that has impacted far too many women across the United States, triple-negative breast cancer, or TNBC. One in eight women in the United States will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. In Arizona, there will be approximately 6,240 new breast cancer-related cases just this year. TNBC is an invasive breast cancer that accounts for 10 to 15 percent of all breast cancers. Unfortunately, TNBC tends to grow and spread faster than any other cancer, has fewer treatment options, and tends to have a worse prognosis. Researchers at the University of Arizona have been working to create a less toxic treatment for TNBC, and a new study has provided clues about potential new approaches to treatment. This is good news in the fight against cancer, but we must continue to invest in research and innovation to combat TNBC and protect women.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I ask all of you to join me in praying for Eric Morgan. Eric Morgan is a constituent of mine in Arizona, and he also served as the former Republican chairman for the legislative district in my congressional district. On April 5th, Eric was involved in a very serious motorcycle accident. They thought he was going to die. Fortunately, with the help of the doctors and nurses and multiple surgeries, he has now been released out of the critical care unit in a hospital in Arizona, but he has a long road for recovery. Mr. Speaker, the prayers have helped Eric and his wife, Heather, and their family. I want Eric and Heather to know that all of us here in the U.S. House of Representatives and the people in the gallery are praying for Eric's total and complete healing.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 1. This bill will unleash American energy and reduce gasoline and energy prices for all Americans. Look at this chart. Since Biden has taken office, gasoline prices have gone up 51 percent, utility gas prices have gone up 44 percent, and electricity prices have gone up for Americans 24 percent. H.R. 1 is here to help Americans with these outrageous cost-of-living increases. I am honored that my legislation to disapprove of President Biden's decision to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline was included in this package. President Biden's decision to cancel the pipeline was a terrible decision that led to increased gasoline prices and the loss of thousands and thousands of jobs. Now is the time to stand up for the American people. Now is the time to help reduce the cost of gasoline, utility gas, and electricity. Now is the time to support H.R. 1.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Chairman, our energy security is under attack. This administration has drained our Strategic Petroleum Reserve, selling off 40 percent of the reserve in just the last 2 years. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is now at its lowest level in 40 years, posing a threat to our country in the event of a real emergency. Yet, this administration has failed to implement even a simple plan to replace the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That is what this bill does. With the Strategic Production Response Act, Republicans are stepping up to the plate to ensure any nonemergency release is accompanied by a plan to increase the percentage of Federal lands and water leased for oil and gas exploration. This is responsible. This is common sense. This bill is a critical step in unleashing our domestic energy production, increasing our emergency supply, and delivering on our promise to protect our Nation's energy security.