Washington, D.C. - Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee led debate on the House Floor yesterday in opposition to H.R. 3684, the INVEST in America Act, a wasteful and partisan bill that leaves rural America behind and does little in real infrastructure. The bill prioritizes Green New Deal mandates over rebuilding America’s crumbling infrastructure. It also includes rush-to-spend drinking water provisions and removes statutory protections for cost and feasibility in Safe Drinking Water Act regulations. In fact, all the major drinking water utilities, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the National Association of Counties - all of whom are city and county groups that would benefit from the increased spending - oppose the AQUA Act, a drinking water provision in H.R. 3684. In addition, this partisan package excludes establishing a roadmap for the safe testing and deployment of autonomous vehicles (AV), a missed opportunity to secure America’s leadership in AV technology, and to make our roads safer.
The following are excerpts of remarks from debate from Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee:
Committee Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA):
“I support improving America’s infrastructure. But even a broad definition of infrastructure doesn’t include creating a massive network of centralized planning, unreasonable regulations, and undisciplined debt. This is not how we win the future.
[…]
“The legislation makes radical changes to EPA’s regulatory authority for drinking water contaminants. It promotes stringency rather than health. It will raise costs on ALL customers - including low- and middle-income families - and punish communities with the lowest rate bases."
Leader Rodgers also spoke in opposition to provisions from the No Exhaust Act, which were included as an amendment to H.R. 3648.
“This amendment provides subsidies for the rich to buy electric vehicles at the expense of taxpayers and everyone else’s electric reliability and utility bills. The amendment makes no consideration for American jobs, our growing reliance on China for critical minerals to make batteries, or the strain that electric vehicles undoubtedly will place on the grid.
“The amendment even mandates new building codes so everyone has to install expensive electrical equipment in their homes and buildings for EV chargers, even if nobody is driving an electric vehicle."
Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH):
“The majority has missed the mark with this so-called infrastructure bill that doesn’t even allow states to build new roads or bridges. How are my constituents in rural areas of Van Wert County going to get to school, work, doctor’s appointments, or the grocery store without roads to drive on?
“Rural America is not considered in this bill, and it does not increase safety on our roads.
“I filed my legislation, the SELF DRIVE Act, as an amendment to create a federal safety framework for autonomous vehicles, but it was not made in order. My amendment would have supported the safe testing and deployment of self-driving cars. This technology will save lives on roads, improve mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities, and keep innovation and jobs in the United States.
“Ironically enough, an amendment expressing the sense of the House to develop this type of federal framework was made in order. Yet, the bipartisan solution - the actual framework to improve roadway safety - will not be considered on the floor today.
“I am disappointed this House is not prioritizing safety and American leadership by supporting self-driving vehicles. I remain at the table to work with members on both sides of the aisle to enact legislation establishing a national AV roadmap."
Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL):
“I want to express my disappointment with the inclusion of a partisan auto safety title in this legislation before us today. I hope the Senate is listening and sees that this does not represent a consensus since this product completely bypassed the Energy and Commerce Committee.
“We even agreed in April to circulate a draft safety title to stakeholders with our majority counterparts, drafts I would add that were largely written by them. But sadly they walked away from their own proposals, completely ignoring minority and stakeholder concerns and bypassed regular order all together.
“One could only surmise the directive came directly from the majority leadership. And for what? To snatch defeat from the jaws of a bipartisan victory?
“The National Federation of the Blind even supported an amendment I drafted with their input to increase transportation access and benefits for Americans with disabilities. The Rules Committee voted not to make it in order.
“It’s truly puzzling that a vote for this previously bipartisan initiative would fall victim to such partisan politics."
Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC):
“This bill is riddled with problems, but the one example I want to focus on right now is the Low-Income Water Customer Assistance Program.
[…]
“All I am saying is that we should figure out the best way to attack it BEFORE authorizing $8 billion dollars to fund it. Funding the program prior to a study is backwards.
“The logical first step is to determine the scope of the problem first rather than just throwing $8 billion dollars at it - My amendment to this bill would do that. Additionally, GAO should carry out the study as opposed to the EPA.
“I would argue the Democrats even recognize the need for a study - they included it in the bill. I am just arguing it should be done BEFORE the implementation of a permanent entitlement at the EPA - the FIRST of its kind. This is irresponsible governing and will come at the cost of taxpayers."
Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ):
“Despite the fact that rail offers one of the most environmentally efficient ways to transport goods, this bill includes regulations that undermine the railroad industry’s ability to offer competitive services. The bill effectively prohibits movement of liquified natural gas by rail, despite extensive research into the safety of this method by the Department of Transportation."
Rep. John Joyce (R-PA):
“This is yet another partisan attempt at unnecessary and costly legislation. These rush-to-spend bills are bad for rural America and bad for my constituents.
“Every member in this Congress wants safe and clean drinking water for their communities and constituents. That is why we have already spent over a billion dollars in the last 6 months on drinking water and wastewater assistance. The additional tens of billions of dollars that this legislation will spend is wasteful and gratuitous. Under this proposal, the EPA would be tasked for the first time with administering a welfare program - which - would be worth $8 billion.
“Worse yet, these bills restrict the rights of local and municipal authorities to best meet their customers’ needs. In this legislation, local water utilities are prevented from taking action to collect overdue payments for up to 5 years - regardless of the income level of the offenders. It would rescind flexibility for modest communities to have variances for their small water systems.
“Furthermore, it would repeal provisions in the Safe Drinking Water Act that prohibit burdensome regulations where costs exceed benefits.
“Unfortunately, this legislation yet again demonstrates Democrats’ fixation on urban centers while leaving rural Americans behind."
