Frank Pallone

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, we all know that American families are struggling to make ends meet. President Trump promised to cut energy bills in half in his first year, but that has not happened. In fact, electricity prices are up by 13 percent across the Nation and 80 million Americans are struggling to pay their utility bills. These increases did not just happen. They were a direct result of the Trump administration's disastrous policies, policies that have been rubber-stamped by House Republicans. It is bad enough that Trump and congressional Republicans have ignored the affordability crisis and have instead done everything they can to help out their rich and big corporate interest buddies, but House Republicans are bringing up a bill today that will actually increase your monthly energy bill and make the appliances in your home more expensive to operate. It is hard to imagine being more out of touch with the needs of everyday Americans. First, I have to mention that H.R. 4626 would make the appliances in your home more expensive to operate, sending your already high electricity bill even higher. Like all other appliance-related debates, this bill is just another way to kill floor time for Republicans who seem to only be able to garner enough Republican votes for bills to help their corporate polluter friends. This bill guts the appliance energy conservation standards program at the Department of Energy. This program is credited with helping American households save $6,000 on their energy bills over the last decade. The standards are projected to help reduce peak demand by 32 gigawatts by 2040. In a world where data centers are popping up all over the country, driving up costs and demand, we can't ignore the benefits from appliance efficiency. Instead of recognizing energy efficiency as a helpful tool against rising costs and increasing electricity demand, House Republicans have made it the enemy. This bill gives the Trump administration the power to eliminate efficiency standards, and it even prevents States from setting their own standards when the Federal Government fails to act. It creates arbitrary thresholds for new efficiency standards and eliminates the system of periodic reviews to examine if more savings are possible for certain products. Together, these changes to the program will ensure that new energy efficiency standards get caught in a confusing and arbitrary process that delays finalization of new efficiency standards and allows for the roll back of existing standards. Basically, this bill guts the program and makes it unworkable. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Energy already has a robust process for finalizing energy efficiency standards. New standards must be technologically feasible and economically justified. The current process already has the buy-in and participation from a wide range of stakeholders, including consumer advocates, manufacturers, and energy efficiency advocates. In fact, many of the efficiency standards that were finalized over the last few years are the result of a consensus agreement between these parties. Rather than recognizing that the current process is successful at bringing everyone to the table, House Republicans have chosen to villainize it. Rather than celebrating the savings that Americans see as a result of efficiency standards, House Republicans mislead the public by misrepresenting how these standards work and how consumers save money. With this bill, House Republicans are making the affordability crisis worse. They are gutting a successful and established program that saves Americans money. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), the ranking member of our Energy Subcommittee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to clear up a few things. Mr. Speaker, I will say, first of all, that energy conservation standards are not bans. We have to keep repeating this over and over because Republicans are adamant about misleading the public. Energy conservation standards improve the efficiency of new appliances. They do not mandate the removal of existing appliances, and they do not mandate the removal of an appliance based on its fuel source. It is also important to note that, by law, the Department of Energy is prohibited from setting standards that would eliminate a product based on fuel type, such as gas appliances. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Suozzi).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I rise again in strong opposition to this bill. Tonight, President Trump will be in this very Chamber to deliver his State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress. We will continue to hear a series of mistruths, empty promises, and gaslighting, I would say, to the American public, so just let me provide a dose of reality here on the issue at hand. Electricity prices are up 12 percent across the Nation, a far cry from President Trump's promise of cutting electricity costs in half in his first year. Residential natural gas prices are up 20 percent since the President's inauguration. When families struggle to pay their utility bills, they often fall into debt. Since December 2023, household utility debt has risen over 30 percent, climbing to a whopping $23 billion. Families are having to choose between keeping the lights on or paying for food or medicine. That is because President Trump and congressional Republicans have been more focused on lining the pockets of their corporate polluter friends instead of providing relief to the American people. The affordability crisis is real. It is quite literally hitting homes as well, as the cost of buying a home feels out of reach for far too many and rent is increasingly unaffordable. Families are struggling to afford childcare and groceries. As the American public knows all too well, President Trump and Republicans have caused their healthcare costs to rise too. Let's also not forget about the President's disastrous tariffs, which cost the average American household nearly $1,200 in 2025. Apparently, the affordability crisis isn't real. The President says it is not happening, or sometimes he says he fixed it. However, the American people know when they are not being told the truth. As much as I wish it did, it doesn't stop there. With the help of his Republican colleagues, President Trump has eliminated more than 172,000 clean-energy jobs, shuttering factories and projects across the country, and canceled enough renewable energy. As we know, renewable energy is cheap. It is clean. It helps American families. People would think that Republicans would be prioritizing legislation to address affordability, but that is not the case. Look at what is happening here today. Right now, this bill that we have before us is a retread from last Congress. It is the same bill that we voted on in the last Congress. It says it is about affordability, but it is only in name. In actuality, this bill will raise household utility bills. In case my Republican colleagues haven't been listening, the American people can't afford any more price hikes. The American people have been crystal clear. They are in need of help. I hear from my constituents all the time about the rising cost of living, and it is time that Republicans stand up to President Trump and actually do something about it. I don't see it happening, but I hope we will see it. I urge a ``no'' vote on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 50th anniversary of the ordination of Reverend Geoffrey B. Curtiss. Please join me and his parish, Trinity Church in Asbury Park, New Jersey, in celebrating this milestone of devotion and service of Reverend Curtiss in his priesthood. To Reverend Curtiss, priesthood is an opportunity to connect, teach, and empower his congregants for the better. For a significant period, Reverend Curtiss served at the All Saints Episcopal Parish in Hoboken, New Jersey. Admirably, Reverend Curtiss oversaw the consolidation of three local Episcopal churches and facilitated the bridging of communities complete with benevolent initiatives and ministries. In these spaces, Hudson County low-income youth were provided after-school resources, summer programing, and a partnership to the Jubilee Family Life Center. In 1982, as president of the Hoboken Clergy Coalition, Reverend Curtiss advocated and established the Hoboken Shelter for the Homeless. Throughout his tenure, Reverend Curtiss has taken to activism in numerous good-faith organizations for causes such as housing access, youth enrichment, racism, and urban renewal. These organizations have included the Hoboken North Hudson YMCA, Hoboken Rotary Club, Diocesan Council, Episcopal Urban Caucus, Department of Missions Board, the Commission to Dismantle Racism, and the Union City Renaissance Urban Renewal Associates. Today, Reverend Curtiss and his wife, Linda, retired to Bradley Beach, having owned their house here since 1985. Reverend Curtiss serves as an Assisting Priest at Trinity Church Episcopal Parish in Asbury Park. He is a volunteer at the Monmouth County New Jersey Reentry Corporation and the Monmouth Affordable Housing Coalition. He is also a board member of the human rights organization, Cristosal, where he continues his lifelong mission to support the dignity of every human being. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that my colleagues will join me in honoring Reverend Geoffrey B. Curtiss for his lifetime dedication to his faith, advocacy, and community.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, at a time when American families are struggling to make ends meet, as costs for healthcare, energy, housing, education, and groceries are skyrocketing, House Republicans are wasting floor time on a bill that does absolutely nothing to provide any relief. To make matters worse, this bill does not help Americans address the critical mineral supply. It just props up polluting fossil fuels at the expense of cheaper and cleaner energy technologies. Critical minerals are a critical component of many modern technologies, from our cell phones to solar panels to electric vehicles. The demand for these minerals will only increase as the world continues in transition to clean energy. We must strengthen our domestic production, processing, and recycling capabilities as well as cement relationships with our allies to access new critical mineral supplies. Democrats were in the process of doing exactly this with the bipartisan infrastructure law that included $3 billion for battery manufacturing and recycling, to build out a circular and sufficient supply chain that reuses critical minerals instead of letting them waste away in landfills. Instead of building on this important work, Republicans took a sledgehammer to these investments. Their big, ugly bill repealed vital clean energy tax credits and programs and canceled billions of dollars in projects that would have helped with critical mineral supply. The Trump administration also shut down the Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains, the office Congress created to lead a lot of the clean energy and critical mineral supply chain work. The administration also canceled more than $700 million in battery and manufacturing grants that that office had issued. Now, this is extremely harmful to our economy and to families' monthly power bills because the rest of the world, particularly China, is making the necessary investments in the clean energy transition. In 2022 alone, China installed roughly as much solar capacity as the rest of the world combined. China controls more than 70 percent of the world's battery manufacturing capacity. Today we rely on imports of minerals such as cobalt, lithium, and graphite that are integral components of clean energy technology. China controls around 80 percent of the world's processing capacity for these critical minerals, posing serious national economic and energy security risks. We should all be concerned about securing domestic critical mineral supply chains, but this bill does not solve the problem. In fact, it would only risk diluting resources away from critical mineral supply chains and toward fossil fuels. The only mention of critical minerals in this bill starts and ends with its title. Instead, it focuses on critical energy resources, which is defined as any energy resource that is essential to the energy sector. This overly broad language will inevitably result in additional resources spent on fossil fuels like coal and natural gas at the expense of actual critical mineral and clean energy supply chains. With this bill, Republicans are handing the Trump administration yet another tool to prop up polluting fossil fuels at the expense of cheaper and cleaner energy technologies. If Republicans truly want to be competitive with China, canceling clean energy projects that drive market demand is not the solution. Under Trump's watch, we have lost more than $30 billion in American manufacturing investments. Mr. Speaker, electricity prices are rising across the country, including in my State of New Jersey. Americans are going into debt to heat their homes this winter. President Trump has failed on his day one promise to bring down prices for American families. Instead, his big, ugly bill is projected to increase electricity prices by an additional 61 percent. Now, Mr. Speaker, I hear from my constituents every day that affordability is their top concern. Yet, today we are here debating yet another Republican energy bill that would do nothing to lower prices for Americans. Frankly, I think it is a shame. My concern is that with this bill, Republicans continue to ignore the affordability crisis while they give the Department of Energy new authority which they will use to give more support to their oil and gas buddies. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), who is the ranking member of the Energy Subcommittee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Landsman), a member of our committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3617. I think it is important to provide a little perspective here. At a time when Americans are struggling to afford their electricity bills, we are wasting floor time debating a bill that will not even meaningfully improve our critical mineral supply chains. In fact, this bill is just a retread from last Congress. That is right. The Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act, so-called, was included in House Republicans' polluters over people act last Congress, a bill that sold the American people out to corporate polluters. Here we are again, debating the same old bill because Republicans have no new ideas. H.R. 3617 is merely a distraction from the fact that they have no real plans to address issues that are important to Americans, like their increasingly unaffordable electricity bills. My Republican colleagues need to start taking the affordability crisis facing the American people seriously. Eighty million Americans are struggling to pay their utility bills. Electricity prices are rising more than twice as fast as inflation across the country. Families are having to choose between paying for housing, medicine, food, or keeping their lights on. It is just unacceptable. As elected officials, we have a responsibility to address this issue. We must address this because hardworking Americans are in desperate need of relief. Yet, to President Trump and his Republican accomplices, the affordability crisis is just a made-up scam. That is what the President says. I have said it before, but it is worth repeating: Republicans' big, ugly bill will raise electricity prices by a staggering 61 percent, and the American people are hurting because of President Trump's policies. We should be focused on advancing bipartisan legislation to end this affordability crisis, not a bill that seeks to provide additional support for the fossil fuel industry under the guise of supporting critical minerals. Republicans would rather spend precious floor time on a bill to support their fossil fuel friends instead of supporting the American people. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I urge opposition to the legislation.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of David Emerson Mitchell, who passed away on January 2, 2026, after a 15-year battle with multiple myeloma, a rare blood cancer. He was 75. David spent his life working on issues that mattered--with people he cared about--to leave the world a little better than he found it; and he did. It was David's own battle with cancer that prompted him, in 2016, to found Patients For Affordable Drugs. Confronted firsthand with a drug pricing system that put lifesaving medicines out of reach for millions of Americans, David became a voice for patients who, for too long, have faced immeasurable hurdles to access the medications they need. His goal was both simple and audacious: to hold drug companies accountable for extreme, nonnegotiable prices that ignored patients' ability to pay. Under his leadership, Patients For Affordable Drugs became a trusted, bipartisan force for reform, centering patient voices in a debate long dominated by corporate interests and helping change the trajectory of drug pricing in this country. Over nearly a decade, Patients For Affordable Drugs worked with a coalition of allies to push for meaningful reform nationwide. That work paid off in 2022 with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act. For the first time in history, Medicare was granted the authority to negotiate lower drug prices for America's seniors. Undoubtedly, David's work and the advocacy of Patients Ford Affordable Drugs played a major role in delivering the most significant change to our Nation's drug pricing policy in generations. This year alone, seniors are expected to save $1.5 billion in out-of-pocket expenses on prescription drugs. For that, I will always be grateful to him. Beyond this landmark achievement, David was a central voice before Congress. He testified before the health committees in both the House and Senate numerous times, representing patients across the country struggling to afford their medications. He organized patients to visit with their Members of Congress and to share their personal stories. It was his ability to connect the realities of everyday Americans with policy changes that made him such an effective advocate. He was described as ``the face of the opposition to the pharmaceutical industry in Washington.'' His advocacy was marked by clarity, discipline, and moral focus. When the entrenched perspective was that high drug prices were necessary to support innovation, David countered with a simple message that will continue to resonate: ``Drugs don't work if people can't afford them.'' Before founding Patients For Affordable Drugs, he helped shape some of the Nation's most effective public-health campaigns, including efforts to reduce drunk driving, increase seatbelt and child safety seat use, and improve roadway safety. Those campaigns saved countless lives, often quietly and outside the spotlight, but their impact was profound. David's genius was not just in identifying public health problems, but in knowing how to solve them--and how to build the momentum needed to drive real solutions. He helped demonstrate that patients are not passive observers of policy, but essential participants in shaping it. Those of us who knew David and worked with him are so grateful to him for his tenacious advocacy and all that he accomplished. David Mitchell lived a distinguished life in service to others, and the world is safer, fairer, and more humane because he was in it. I am hopeful his work will continue to inspire countless others to channel their own challenges into advocacy and reform, just as he did. His legacy will endure in the lives he touched, the patients he empowered, and the laws he helped change. Mr. Speaker, please join me in honoring the distinguished life of David Mitchell. Those of us who knew David and worked with him are so grateful to him for his tenacious advocacy and all that he accomplished. David Mitchell lived a distinguished life in service to others, and the world is safer, fairer, and more humane because he was in it. I am hopeful his work will continue to inspire countless others to channel their own challenges into advocacy and reform, just as he did. His legacy will endure in the lives he touched, the patients he empowered, and the laws he helped change.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I thank Ranking Member DeLauro and Chairman Cole for their hard work. I rise in support of this Consolidated Appropriations Act. As Republicans continue to slash healthcare, drive up healthcare costs for millions of Americans, and double down on their big, ugly bill that cuts a trillion dollars from our healthcare system, Democrats are fighting to lower healthcare and prescription drug prices for everyday Americans. Today, we are finally considering priorities Democrats fought for, including authorization of policies and increased funding for important programs. Community health centers, hospitals that care for underserved communities, and teaching health centers will all benefit from these Democratic initiatives in the bill. The healthcare package includes increased funding for the World Trade Center Health Program, which will ensure our first responders and survivors get the care and treatments we as a Nation promised them. Democrats also fought to lower prescription drug prices by cracking down on unfair practices by pharmacy benefit managers, as well as guaranteeing access to no-cost generic medications for low-income seniors and people with disabilities on Medicare. This healthcare package had bipartisan support and was included in an omnibus appropriation bill last year or a year ago and was suddenly yanked by Republicans because of a tweet by Elon Musk when he was in the President's graces. I am glad to see it will finally pass as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act today. Unfortunately, Mr. Chair, Republican leaders refused to include the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits in this bill, which passed the House overwhelmingly earlier this month. I urge our Senate Republican colleagues to stop stalling and extend the ACA subsidies immediately to lower healthcare costs for millions of Americans who are bearing the brunt of the Republican healthcare crisis.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise also in strong opposition to this amendment. In 2023, 12,429 people died in drunk driving crashes nationwide. In Kentucky alone, 198 people were killed. In Pennsylvania, 321 people lost their lives. These deaths were preventable. Advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology will prevent impaired drivers from illegally operating vehicles and causing deaths and injuries. I understand that my Republican colleagues are concerned about privacy, but the technology being developed does not track the vehicle's location or collect, use, or store any data that would compromise the privacy of vehicle occupants. Privacy is a concern, and my friends should weigh in on the rulemaking process. NHTSA, the agency involved with this, should work with government agencies that have expertise in this area to ensure that consumer data is secure, anonymous, and protected from unauthorized use. That can and should be addressed as part of the rulemaking process. It is not right, though. Preventing impaired drivers from illegally operating vehicles and causing fatalities should be a nonpartisan issue, and the work on that needs to continue. The problem here is that while NHTSA has not finalized the rule, they would not be able to do any work related to the rule or advanced alcohol monitoring technology if this amendment passes. That is going to just cause more deaths from drunk driving. I would implore everybody: Please, privacy can be addressed, but we should not stop this work from continuing. We can't have drunk drivers on the road. It is not just them but everyone else who is killed and injured as a result of those drunk drivers.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the affordability crisis has spread to nearly every facet of American lives. Utility bills are skyrocketing across the country. Trump's disastrous tariffs are being passed on to the American consumer. Grocery prices are up, making it hard for families to put food on the table, and Republicans delivered their latest blow with failing to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits which will result in soaring healthcare premiums for more than 20 million Americans. In many cases, Americans are seeing monthly premiums either two, three, or four times higher than they were last year for their healthcare insurance. To make matters worse, we are in the midst of a housing crisis that is crushing American families' dreams. We are witnessing historically high home prices, coupled with a devastating shortage of housing. The cost of buying a home feels out of reach for too many, while rent is simultaneously ballooning at an unsustainable rate. Manufactured homes, however, are an important component of our affordable housing stock. We should all be concerned about the cost of buying a new home, but this bill does not solve this crisis. In fact, it only makes housing affordability worse. First, it revokes the Department of Energy's May 2022 energy conservation standard for manufactured housing, robbing residents of $5 billion in savings. Manufactured homes are often far less efficient than other homes, costing owners about 70 percent more per square foot in utility bills. Many low-income residents have reported foregoing basic necessities like food or medicine in order to keep their lights on. To suggest that the Department of Energy standards for manufactured homes negatively impact affordability is entirely false. As I stressed, it is entirely false. When talking about affordability, it is imperative that we also consider the cost of actually living in these homes, and energy use is a big part of that. This is even more important at a time when electricity costs are up 13 percent nationwide. If my Republican colleagues really want to get at the root cause of the current housing affordability crisis, they should look at Trump's disastrous tariffs on essential building materials and appliances, not energy efficiency standards that actually lower monthly energy bills. Now, this bill also strips the Department of Energy of its congressionally-directed authority to set efficiency standards for manufactured homes and sends the responsibility to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, an agency with a history of failing to protect manufactured housing residents from high energy costs. Prior to the passage of a bipartisan bill called the Energy Independence and Security Act in 2007 when George Bush was President, he signed that into law, and HUD was then responsible for setting energy efficiency standards for manufactured homes. However, the agency, HUD, failed to act, leaving residents without an updated energy code since 1994. It is no wonder that 44 percent of manufactured housing residents face a high energy burden. Now, the Department of Energy in May 2022 set a standard that was long overdue that said that manufactured housing residents had gone without a modern standard for nearly 30 years before the Department of Energy issued a final rule, and they did so. As a result, the standard that exists now, which this bill would repeal, essentially saves about $475 a year in savings on utility bills; but this bill repeals those savings. It repeals the DOE standards, and that is what is unacceptable about this bill. We should be fighting to raise the standard of living of manufactured housing residents, not lowering it with higher costs. That is why I strongly oppose the bill. The affordability crisis is quite literally hitting home for millions of Americans, and H.R. 5184 would only saddle residents with even higher utility bills at a time when they can least afford it. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Energy.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Oregon.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, while I appreciate that my colleague from Massachusetts offered an amendment to improve the bill during the subcommittee markup, unfortunately, his amendment fell short of addressing the fatal flaws in this underlying bill. The amendment allows the Department of Energy to make efficiency recommendations to the Department of Housing and Urban Development on energy conservation standards. While this change is better than completely writing the Department of Energy out of the process like the original bill did, the fact of the matter is that this bill still nullifies the Department of Energy's manufactured housing rule standard for energy efficiency and, therefore, jeopardizes billions in savings for American families. Additionally, the bill, as amended, does not specify what HUD should do with the recommendations from the Department of Energy. Even if the Department of Energy submitted recommendations, HUD is likely to ignore them. Let us not forget that when HUD had sole authority to issue energy codes for manufactured housing prior to 2007, the agency failed to act. Again, it is important to ask: Why should we entrust HUD to act differently now? This bill undermines the Department of Energy's authority to set efficiency standards and will rob much-needed and long-overdue savings from manufactured housing residents. I still strongly oppose the bill, as amended. Families who live in manufactured housing deserve to have efficient and safe homes. Let's fight to raise their standard of living, not lower it. My colleague from Massachusetts mentioned support from the housing group. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from five major organizations that deal with manufactured homes: Americans for Financial Reform, Grounded Solutions Network, National Association for State Community Service Programs, Next Step Network, and ROC USA. Hon. John Thune, Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Hon. Chuck Schumer, Minority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Hakeem Jeffries, Minority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Leader Thune, Leader Schumer, Speaker Johnson, and Leader Jeffries: We write to you as representatives of organizations that advocate for and support the production of affordable homes for lower-income families, urging you to oppose H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. This bill would result in high energy costs for families who live in new manufactured homes, undermining their affordability at a time when those families are having trouble paying their bills. Manufactured homes have long been--and must remain--a key source of housing for many limited-income residents. Yet some of these homes are built with poor insulation, air sealing, and windows, leaving residents with unaffordable monthly energy bills. These costs are a burden for the residents, who have a median household income of roughly $40,000. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last updated energy requirements for manufactured homes more than three decades ago in 1994. Unfortunately, those outdated rules have allowed the continued construction--up to the present day--of homes that are poorly insulated and sealed. In response to HUD's inaction, Congress stepped up in 2007 by directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to set energy efficiency standards for the homes. Standards finalized by DOE in 2022 would significantly improve affordability, with energy bill savings that far exceed the modest added construction costs. While DOE and its national labs have much greater building energy expertise, HUD already has an active compliance program for its manufactured home standards, and cooperative use of that infrastructure would improve compliance with the DOE standards and ease the compliance burden for manufacturers by creating one enforcement mechanism. Unfortunately, the timely and effective implementation of the cost-saving standards has faced opposition, including litigation, from segments of the industry. H.R. 5184 would revoke the 2022 DOE standards, and it would go further, eliminating DOE's authority to set standards for manufactured homes altogether. This would leave only HUD's three-decade-old code in place, along with the unlikely prospect that HUD and the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee would suddenly update energy efficiency standards after decades of inaction. While many manufactured homes already are built well above the DOE standard, many others are still built to the baseline HUD Code level. Congress can and must take steps to improve housing affordability, including expanding production of homes in which families can afford their energy bills and be safe and comfortable during extreme weather. H.R. 5184 would have the opposite effect, locking in the unaffordable and harmful status quo for too many families who live in manufactured homes. For these reasons, we urge you to vote against H.R. 5184. Sincerely, Americans for Financial Reform. Grounded Solutions Network. National Association for State Community Services Programs. Next Step Network.

Mr. PALLONE. I don't want to read the whole thing, but this was addressed to the House bipartisan leadership. It says: ``We write to you as representatives of organizations that advocate for and support the production of affordable homes for lower income families, urging you to oppose H.R. 5184, the Affordable HOMES Act. This bill would result in high energy costs for families who live in new manufactured homes, undermining their affordability at a time when those families are having trouble paying their bills.'' I won't get into the rest of it, but I just wanted to point out that many more organizations that deal with manufactured homes, than what was cited by my colleague from Massachusetts, oppose this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains on both sides?

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.