Search
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in comments
Search in excerpt
Filter by Custom Post Type

Key Votes on Amendments to H.R. 6147

In consideration of H.R. 6147 Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2019, the American Energy Alliance has identified the below amendments to Division A as key votes.

YES on Amendment #138 (renumbered to #43 in the rule) offered by Rep. Mullin et al. This amendment seeks to prohibit the implementation of the previous administration’s methane rule. The methane rule was designed and intended as a tool to strangle energy production on federal lands. The rule is unnecessary, given that methane emissions have been falling in recent years even as natural gas production has increased rapidly. Oil and gas producers already have an economic incentive to capture methane as it is a versatile product in its own right. This unjustified rule should be stopped.

YES on Amendment #139 (renumbered to #44 in the rule) offered by Rep. Mullin et al. This amendment seeks to eliminate the use of the so-called social cost of carbon. The social cost of carbon calculation is entirely notional and cannot be justified on scientific or economic grounds. During the creation process, the social cost of carbon models and calculations were manipulated to reach a desired end goal. The social cost of carbon designed by the previous administration should be discarded.

YES on Amendment #143 (renumbered to #56 in the rule) offered by Rep. Grothman. This amendment would prevent implementation of the 2015 ground level ozone rule. The EPA decision to tighten ozone standards was regulatory excess. While the new administration is working to review the rule, prohibiting funding for the rule will ensure that it is not revived through litigation.

NO on Amendment #25 (renumbered to #41 in the rule) offered by Rep. Beyer et al. This amendment seeks to remove the bill language protecting Americans from the overreaching Obama administration “waters of the United States” definition. That WOTUS definition was an attempt to usurp state authority to regulate water sources.  While the EPA is now working through the process of repealing and replacing the rule with a definition that more accurately reflects the intent of Congress, the American people need to be protected from the previous definition being revived through litigation.

AEA urges all members to support free markets and affordable energy by voting YES on Amendments #138, #139, and #143 and NO on Amendment #25.  Should a vote on any of these amendments occur, AEA will include each in its American Energy Scorecard.

Free-Market Coalition Encourages Fuel Economy Reform

WASHINGTON – This morning the American Energy Alliance and 14 co-signing organizations sent a letter to Deputy Administrator King of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in support of NHTSA’s issuance of a notice of proposed rule making (NPRM) for model year 2022-2025 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for light-duty vehicles. Reconsidering these mandates will allow NHTSA and the EPA to better determine whether those regulations represent what’s best for all stakeholders involved – including the millions of American families whose vehicle purchasing options will be determined by CAFE regulations.

American Energy Alliance President, Thomas J. Pyle, made the following statement:

“Whatever the initial logic of the program, recent years have shown the CAFE mandate to be an anachronism. The U.S. is awash in oil, producing more than ever before in our history, and notwithstanding political turmoil in certain countries, there is no prospect of the world market running out of oil. Reconsidering the regulations for model year 2022-2025 vehicles is a start for NHTSA and the EPA to reevaluate the efficacy of the CAFE mandate as a whole. Substantive reform of the CAFE program would result in lower costs and more consumer choice for American families. We support all efforts towards this goal.”

The text of the letter can be read here.

###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]
202.621.2955

AEA Applauds President Trump on the Nomination of Judge Kavanaugh

WASHINGTON — The American Energy Alliance (AEA) commends President Trump on his nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. AEA President Thomas J. Pyle, made the following statement:

“President Trump has made another outstanding decision in nominating Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. As a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, a primary venue for litigation against the administrative state, Kavanaugh established a solid track record of evaluating important regulatory issues relating to energy and environmental policy, and applying the Constitution in a fair, impartial and consistent manner.

“Judge Kavanaugh’s willingness to challenge executive branch regulatory overreach will fortify the Court and strengthen citizens’ constitutional protections from the administrative state. His voiced criticism of the doctrine of Chevron Deference, which hands legislative power to unelected federal bureaucrats, will help begin the process of clawing back power from unaccountable government agencies.

“President Trump made an exceptional pick in nominating Judge Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court and America will be stronger for it.”

###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]
202.621.2955

Conservative Coalition Rallies to Warn of Disastrous Economic Impact of Carbon Tax​

WASHINGTON – This afternoon the American Energy Alliance and 19 co-signing organizations sent a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy requesting that H. Con. Res 119, expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy, be brought before the House of Representatives for consideration at the earliest opportunity.

“No matter how the revenue is divvied up, the core of all carbon taxes is the same — American consumers will be forced to pay more on their electric bills, more at the pump, and more for consumer goods with no tangible benefit for having done so.

“There’s no such thing as a ‘conservative carbon tax’. Congress has made great strides in putting money back in the hands of American families through tax reform, it would be a shame to negate that impact through an increase in energy prices that a carbon tax would inevitably cause,” said AEA President Thomas J. Pyle.

The text of the letter can be read here.

###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]

Statement on Scott Pruitt’s Resignation

WASHINGTON – This afternoon Thomas J. Pyle, President of the American Energy Alliance, made the following statement in regards to Scott Pruitt’s resignation as Administrator of the EPA.

“In the short time Administrator Pruitt was at the EPA, he accomplished much to reorient the Agency towards environmental improvement and away from an obsessive focus on global warming. The work he started on transparency, on the Clean Power Plan, on Waters of the United States, on State authority, on the federal fuel mandate, on the ethanol mandate, and on a host of other issues will ensure that the Agency remains focused on improving the environment rather than inhibiting consumer choice or compromising prosperity.

“We look forward to continuing to work with Acting Administrator Wheeler to fulfill the promise of this Administration, and we are confident that his knowledge, experience, and judgment will help the Trump Administration achieve its objectives with respect to environmental and energy issues.”

 

###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]

AEA Comments on EPA Proposal Concerning Boosted Renewable Fuel Quotas

WASHINGTON – American Energy Alliance President Thomas J. Pyle has issued the following statement on the EPA proposal to raise renewable fuel blending requirements by 3.1 percent:

“Today’s proposal ignores the underlying problems of the Renewable Fuel Standard. This fundamentally broken Washington-knows-best regulation causes millions of American families and businesses to pay more at the pump.

“Doubling-down on the broken and failed RFS by raising the renewable fuel blending requirements will only cause more harm to American consumers. It’s time for Washington to finally repeal the RFS, get government out of the business of picking winners and losers, and let the free market move our energy economy forward. Enough is enough.”

FOR MORE: Through a targeted digital campaign, AEA continues to encourage voters to let Washington know that the RFS should be swiftly and fully repealed.

###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]
202.621.2955

AEA Commends Dismissal of ‘Frivolous’ Climate Lawsuits

WASHINGTON — American Energy Alliance commends Judge Alsup and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California for their dismissal of the climate change lawsuits filed by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland against the five major energy producers. The ruling correctly concluded the complaint of climate change to be beyond the proper purview of the courts. Thomas J. Pyle, President of the American Energy Alliance (AEA) made the following statement:

“These lawsuits were nothing more than a shakedown of energy companies designed to bail out financially mismanaged cities. This frivolous litigation ignored the benefits of affordable, reliable energy and should be seen as an insult to California residents, especially those who are already struggling to make ends meet.

“Judge Alsup’s judgement said it well: ‘our industrial revolution and the development of our modern world has literally been fueled by oil and coal. Without those fuels, virtually all of our monumental progress would have been impossible. All of us have benefitted.’

“The U.S. District Court ruled correctly in dismissing these lawsuits, and Californians are better for it. We hope plaintiffs of similar litigation elsewhere take heed.”
###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]
202.621.2955

New Survey: Voters (Still) Find Vehicle Subsidies “Unfair”

WASHINGTON – American Energy Alliance has released the results of a nationwide survey of 1002 likely voters (margin of error, 3.1%) conducted in early June on the topic of electric vehicles. The findings include:

  • A sizable majority of voters (72%) said they did not trust the federal government to make decisions about what kinds of cars or transportation technologies should be subsidized or mandated.​​​​
  • Despite a generally positive attitude towards electric vehicles, most voters are resistant to the idea that they should pay for people to buy electric vehicles. About two-thirds (67%) of respondents thought that they should not pay for people to buy electric vehicles.
  • There is resistance to the idea that the cost of charging and other electric vehicle infrastructure should be socialized across the rate base. Almost 7 in 10 respondents (69%) indicated that electricity customers should not be forced to pay for charging stations.
  • Consistent with other research we have done, about 80% of the respondents indicated that they prefer to make their own decisions about what kinds of cars or fuels they should buy and use.
  • With respect to the CAFE mandate, most voters (51%) think that it is unfair that those who purchase larger vehicles subsidize those who purchase smaller cars, and less than (just 45%) favor the program.

Thomas J. Pyle, President of the American Energy Alliance, issued the following statement: 

“It should come as no surprise that Americans continue to believe that they, not bureaucrats or the elites, should be making the decisions relevant to their lives. It is good to reaffirm that people don’t really want to pay for the toys of the rich. Those who seek to expand tax credits for electric vehicles should be aware of how the issue is viewed in the public’s eyes.”

Topline results can be viewed here.

###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]
202.621.2947

AEA Urges Dismissal of Mayor de Blasio’s Climate ‘Shakedown’

WASHINGTON – Today, the following statement was released by Thomas J. Pyle, President of the American Energy Alliance (AEA) regarding energy producers’ motion to dismiss New York City’s climate change lawsuit at a hearing before Judge John Keenen in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York:

“New York’s liberal mayor Bill de Blasio has been an enthusiastic advocate of more residential growth along New York’s waterfront while at the same time attempting to secure billions from energy companies to abate alleged damage from rising sea levels. This blatant hypocrisy isn’t even the worst part of this story. It’s obvious his shakedown of energy companies is designed to bail out a financially mismanaged city – one struggling to keep itself above troubling financial waters. De Blasio’s frivolous litigation ignores the benefits of affordable, reliable energy and should be seen as an insult to New York City’s residents, especially those who are already struggling to make ends meet.”​

###

For media inquiries, please contact Erin Amsberry
[email protected]
202.621.2955
 

Who Exactly Joined the Swamp in This Example?

Joni Ernst campaigned as a stalwart conservative, loudly embracing the smaller government message of the tea party movement. She differentiated herself from her opponent by declaring she does not “believe the government should pick winners and losers in our economy” and that she is “philosophically opposed to those mandates or those subsidies that are coming from the government.” Those comments were specifically in reference to ethanol subsidies and mandates like the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). Yet today, Senator Ernst sings a different tune. Instead of working to get rid of all subsidies, she has decided to dive head first into the Washington swamp, vociferously objecting to even the slightest tweaks to the disaster that is the RFS. Which is why it is the height of hypocrisy for the Senator to make the comments she made today about EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.

Earlier today, Senator Ernst described Scott Pruitt as “about as swampy as you get.” Pruitt’s apparent transgression was that he signed an extortion letter she demanded last year and now it appears that President Trump may announce a deal that supersedes that letter. Senator Ernst held EPA nominees hostage demanding a promise of protection for her special interest backers in the ethanol industry, and is now calling someone else swampy because he is trying to do his job.

Administrator Pruitt has enforced the RFS law as written, despite what whatever personal reservations he may have. Now his boss, the President, has ordered him to come up with a compromise to address some of the manifest shortcomings of the RFS, and so he is attempting to do so. There is nothing swampy about that; it is just trying to do the job he was appointed to do.

Ernst, on the other hand, is demanding not only that Pruitt ignore the direction from his boss to find a compromise, she is demanding that Pruitt stop enforcing the law as written, disregard the plain text of the RFS, and instead creatively interpret it to favor her preferred special interests in the ethanol industry.

Which of these people sounds like the swamp monster in this tiff?