I share some of my colleague's concern about excess spending in EERE. EERE received over $16 billion from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, of which there are billions in unobligated balances remaining. These reasons are exactly why, and my colleague from Texas alluded to this in his amendment, we reduced EERE spending by $1.5 billion below fiscal year 2024. In fact, the House bill has reduced funding for EERE below the fiscal 2016 level. However, respectfully, my colleague's amendment goes too far in my view by eliminating funding for EERE. I am actually a supporter of EERE. The work that they do advances research and development on renewable technologies, advanced manufacturing, and battery improvement. That includes essential work on critical minerals that will help lay the groundwork for technologies that will reduce our reliance on foreign supplies. I think that is an issue we all can support. I support strategic reductions to EERE, but I am not in favor of eliminating the account and walking away from its ongoing work. Mr. Chair, for those reasons I must oppose my colleague's amendment, I urge my colleagues to do the same, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Share
More from Chuck Fleischmann
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1370 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 8997. The Chair appoints the…
In regard to the energy and water bill that is before the House today, I respectfully rise in opposition to the amendment. We discussed earlier today in some very strong and positive debates about the role of the NNSA and the strong…
I claim the time in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Tennessee is recognized for 5 minutes.
For the same reasons with the previous amendments, I respectfully urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.





