John Shimkus

I appreciate the sponsors of this legislation, Mr. Peters and Mr. McKinley, for moving this forward.

I do it. I am a politician, so I am not really trusted all the time but you are supporting the men and women--the working men and women.

HR 1166 or the USE It Act, introduced by Mr. Peters and Mr. McKinley, takes useful steps to accelerate development and deployment of CCUS projects.

Policies that seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a way that is economically beneficial must build upon our existing energy supply.

This is a thoughtful, widely supported bill. It is the kind of bipartisan legislation that we know we can enact in law.

This support has been driven by the plain fact that fossil energy, coal, oil, and natural gas, are and will remain central to our nation's economy for decades to come.

Carbon capture utilization and storage, or CCUS has been an important feature of Federal clean energy research and development policy for over 15 years.

Fossil energy will continue to fuel the majority of our nation's electricity production, our transportation, and remain absolutely essential.

We have been struggling with broadband deployment, especially in the areas that have been mentioned, for years.

I would encourage my colleagues that, as we move on this debate, just for electricity cost, just for clean generation, nuclear power has to be part of the portfolio.

Today's hearing will review the risks and harms of wildfires and what may be done to address these risks.

Today's hearing will review the risk and harms of wildfires and what may be done to address the risk.

My friends, and we discussed during the legislative hearings on the side, they say, 'Oh, trust us,' because it didn't work for ozone.

We are going to make an attempt to make sure their voices are heard.

The issues we're discussing in the bill before us today go back five decades.

This amendment has not been submitted to the Senate for ratification by either the Obama or the Trump administrations.

I wish we would return to regular order.

If I didn't know better, I would think... that this is a simple subject that certain parts of the industry have worked with a few environmental advocacy organizations to solve.

I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I do not oppose it. The Acting CHAIR (Miss Rice of New York). Without objection, the gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes. There was no objection.

While I will not oppose this amendment, this section, in particular, is objectionable. But putting Agency decisions on their website sounds like a reasonable proposal. I am concerned about the timing of 60 days--that would be something…

I wish I could debate longer, but my time has expired. The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee). The amendment was…

I claim the time in opposition to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes.

I claim the time in opposition. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes.

My colleague, Mr. Hudson, has led the committee's efforts to address GenX on behalf of his constituents in North Carolina. He has pressed EPA to complete its human health toxicity assessment on GenX using science. This amendment takes the…

I thank my colleague for the explanation. I also would highlight that under this bill, airports are exempt from the Superfund liability. It does pose a question of who cleans up the composed contamination on airports if we are going to…