WINNERS OF THE GLOBAL ENERGY RACE ARE BEING DECIDED

On 2026-02-25, Representative Mike Levin (D-CA-49) delivered a floor speech titled "WINNERS OF THE GLOBAL ENERGY RACE ARE BEING DECIDED" in the House. The speech addressed the economy and also covered taxes, climate policy.

WINNERS OF THE GLOBAL ENERGY RACE ARE BEING DECIDED

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2026)] [House] [Pages H2314-H2319] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] WINNERS OF THE GLOBAL ENERGY RACE ARE BEING DECIDED (Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr. Casten of Illinois was recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.) General Leave Mr. CASTEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois? There was no objection. Mr. CASTEN. Mr. Speaker, families across America are struggling with ever-increasing energy prices. In the last year, electricity prices have soared, increasing by 13 percent under the Trump administration. Utility bills overall have increased at double the rate of inflation. We all know what is driving those increases. We have soaring demand from data centers and other loads, rising prices for natural gas, and much-needed repairs to the grid that have been put off for years. Those are all tangible, identifiable causes of these price increases, but at the center of it all is one really simple reason: American energy policy has always put producers first and families second. Mr. Speaker, you might think that, in a democracy, the fact that there are more consumers than producers would cause the reverse. Yet, in fact, for far too long, we have pursued an energy system with a single goal: Make sure that oil and gas and coal companies keep their profits as high as possible. We have pushed the most expensive, dirtiest forms of energy onto Americans because that is what has helped producers. The Trump administration has done everything they can to curb the rise of more competitive, renewable energy. You hear a lot about how the Trump administration hates clean energy, but that is not true. They don't hate clean energy. They hate affordable energy. Mr. Speaker, there is some good news. We have a plan to fix it, and I am here today because of the Energy Bills Relief Act, a consumer- focused, family-first approach to American energy policy. Renewable energy is the fastest, lowest-cost, most-affordable way to meet rising demand. Right now, there are bottlenecks in the system that prevent renewable energy from getting from where it is generated to where it can be used. Our Energy Bills Relief Act removes the red tape. It makes sure that we can build our domestic energy supply so that we keep your beer cold and your showers hot, and lower your bills at the same time. Mr. Speaker, to do that, we are also going to have to modernize our electric grid and increase capacity by providing much-needed, overdue upgrades using the latest technology. We are starting to fall behind other countries, which means that those costs could rise even further if we don't act, but we have time. We have time to catch up, and the Energy Bills Relief Act helps us to do it. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Levin), my good friend and partner in good trouble on this bill. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Illinois for yielding. It is an honor to work with the gentleman on this bill and other things. Mr. Speaker, last night in this very Chamber, the President declared that America is in a golden age. He said that energy prices were plummeting. He said that we are winning so much that we don't know what to do about so much winning. He celebrated record fossil fuel production and assured the American people that drilling alone is delivering affordability. He dismissed clean energy as a scam and suggested that the path forward is simply to double down on the past. I agree that every one of us should want America to be strong, prosperous, and secure. Yet, the real test of any energy policy is not what sounds good in [[Page H2315]] a televised address. It is whether working families feel relief when they open their utility statements. It is whether small businesses can forecast stable costs. It is whether seniors on fixed incomes are insulated from volatility rather than being exposed to it. Families don't experience energy affordability through slogans. They experience it through monthly statements. Electricity costs are up 13 percent, and residential gas prices are up nearly 60 percent across the country. One in six households is now behind on their electric or gas bills. Families are paying more to heat and cool their homes, more to keep the lights on, and more just to get through the month. For millions of Americans already stretched thin, this is yet another bill that they can't afford. This comes despite the President promising on the campaign trail to cut energy bills by 50 percent. It is not just a broken promise on costs. It is a strategic failure at a defining moment for America's economic future. We are living through the most important global energy transition since the industrial revolution. The countries that deploy clean energy the fastest are lowering costs, strengthening domestic manufacturing, and securing control over the energy supply chains that will define economic power for decades. This is the moment when the winners of the global energy race are being decided, but instead of leading, the United States is being pulled backward. Over the past year, more than 165,000 clean energy jobs have been wiped out or delayed. Projects capable of powering roughly 13 million homes have been canceled or frozen. Clean energy tax credits are under attack. Grants have been rescinded. Permitting for wind and solar has been effectively paused. Billions of dollars in private investment are sitting idle because Federal policy has injected uncertainty into the marketplace. At the same time, the administration is doubling down on fossil fuel policies that leave families exposed to volatile global markets and rising prices. Mr. Speaker, let's be honest about what is happening. Families are paying more because this administration is choking off the supply of clean, low-cost electricity while forcing ratepayers to subsidize aging, expensive fossil fuel plants. It is not ideology. It is math. It is math. If we are serious about affordability--truly serious--we must ask a different question. It is not how much we can drill, but rather how we build an energy system that delivers stable, low-cost power for decades? The truth--and it is a truth grounded in financial analysis, not political branding--is that clean energy is the lowest cost new electricity in the United States. Wind and solar, on an unsubsidized basis, undercut new coal and frequently undercut new natural gas generation. Utilities choose clean not because of ideology but because they are the least expensive options available to meet demand. That isn't to say that I disagreed with everything that the President had to say last night. In fact, I was genuinely pleased that he acknowledged the pressure that data centers are placing on our electric grid. The explosion of artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and advanced manufacturing is real, and it is transforming our economy. It is driving electricity demand upward at a pace that we haven't seen in decades. Ignoring that reality would be irresponsible, and confronting it is necessary. Mr. Speaker, the President suggested that tech companies should build their own power plants so that household rates don't rise. At its core, I think that intention is correct. Ratepayers should not be forced to subsidize infrastructure built to serve trillion-dollar tech companies. Families living on fixed incomes shouldn't be forced to underwrite private server farms for Big Tech. Small businesses shouldn't be absorbing the transmission costs created by hyperscale expansion, and protecting consumers must be the starting principle. Yet, the correct intentions of the President aren't enough. We need statutory guardrails so that utilities can socialize grid upgrade costs across all customers. Without clear cost allocation rules, transmission investments triggered by large new loads can be spread broadly rather than assigned to the source of the demand. Without modernized planning, the infrastructure required for rapid load growth can crowd out other investments and create bottlenecks that ultimately drive rates higher for everyone. {time} 1200 There is a second layer to this. Even if data centers build dedicated generation, the broader grid still absorbs the consequences of rising demand. If demand rises and the cheapest new resources are constrained, prices rise for everybody. If transmission is insufficient, congestion increases and wholesale prices spike for everybody. If fossil fuel generation continues to dominate, the corresponding volatility is transmitted directly into higher retail electric bills for everybody. In sum, if we restrict the cheapest sources of electricity while demand rises, prices are going to go up. It is not ideological. It is just supply and demand. If we slow the deployment of the lowest-cost wind and solar, if we delay transmission build-out, if we limit storage, then the system will rely more heavily on higher-cost generation, and consumers are going to pay the difference. If, on the other hand, we modernize the grid, we deploy the lowest- cost resources at scale--if we accelerate transmission expansion, integrate storage, and allow clean energy to compete fairly and fully-- then rising demand can be met with falling costs and less volatility. Infrastructure will be built more intelligently, enhancing reliability rather than undermining reliability. Again, this is not ideology. It is math. It is common sense. Today, along with my friend from Illinois (Mr. Casten), with whom I am so proud to work, we are embarking on really a n