Repealing of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose H.R. 1023 which would not only repeal the EPA's commonsense fee on methane pollution but would also eliminate over $1 billion of financial and technical assistance for small- and medium-sized oil and gas producers to reduce their methane emissions.

The bill also repeals tens of billions of dollars for local communities to make smart investments in the clean energy technologies of the future.

It is so frustrating that during so-called energy week, House Republicans are not focusing on how we can lower consumers costs, combat the climate crisis, or protect public health.

Instead, we are taking time to vote on whether strong regulations on methane emissions are even necessary or if we should invest in American energy at all, regardless of whether it is cleaner oil and gas or accessible renewable energy.

Addressing methane emissions, particularly fugitive methane emissions, is one of the most important steps we can take to combat the climate crisis, and there is across-the-board recognition that we need to do more to get methane emissions under control.

Additionally, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund will expand access to financing for clean energy projects across the country, helping American families and businesses create good-paying jobs, reduce pollution, and lower costs.

Last Congress, House Democrats were proud to advance legislation that reduces methane emissions from the oil and natural gas industry, incentivizes the adoption of clean energy technologies, and delivers significant economic and public health benefits. We can't let the House Republicans drag us into the past.

I understand that no program is perfect, so let's talk about how to make it better. Be that as it may, instead of coming up with ways to make these programs better, Republicans cannot help but think of ways to make them worse or eliminate them entirely.

For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to the committee. If the House rules had permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. That amendment would have ensured that this bill would not have gone into effect until the Secretary of Energy had determined that it would not increase energy prices.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PETERS. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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

The yeas and nays were ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source