What they said. What they meant.

“I want to talk about this bill. I ask for immediate consideration of the bill.”

“I am asking the House to immediately take up this resolution to block an EPA rule on California ship pollution standards.”

“Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1530, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 210) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ``California State Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; Ocean- Going Vessels At-Berth; Notice of Decision'', and ask for its immediate consideration in the House. The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.”

“California made a rule about tanker ships. It is expensive. It will make things cost more for people. I don't see good results from this rule. California is trying to set rules for the whole country. I want to overturn this rule. I want my colleagues to vote yes.”

“I want the House to pass this resolution. It blocks California from enforcing expensive new pollution rules on cargo ships at its ports. These rules will raise prices for consumers across the country without clearly cutting pollution.”

“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution led by Representative Vince Fong of California. It would overturn a Clean Air Act waiver allowing California to regulate tanker emissions while they are at berth in California ports. These expensive regulations on tanker ships, ports, utilities, and operators will undermine safety and the compliance costs, including installing electric charging equipment to power tanker ships, will be passed down to consumers and raise the price of all goods that move through California. Beyond the staggering costs, where is the meaningful, measurable decrease in emissions that proponents claim will follow? Yet again, California has attempted to set a national standard without demonstrating any benefits. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.J. Res. 210 to overturn the waiver and restore common sense in our environmental regulation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”

“I want this bill to pass. I sponsored it. California should not be able to make shipping more expensive for the whole country. California ports handle about 40% of all U.S. containers. So California rules affect everyone. In 2023, the EPA allowed California's CARB to make new rules for ships at their ports. There are three problems with this rule. First, the technology does not exist at the scale they demand. The ships need special equipment. But it is not available or feasible. Companies are fined about $50,000 per ship per day if they can't comply. Shippers are already paying hundreds of millions every time they dock in California. You can't force companies to use tech that doesn't exist yet. Second, this rule puts California's fuel supply at risk. California needs oil shipments by sea. Making it harder to operate in California ports makes fuel more expensive. Third, the costs get passed to consumers. CARB says it will cost about $2.3 billion through 2032. I want to stop this bad rule. We can protect the environment without making everything more expensive. This is about being practical and keeping things affordable. I want my colleagues to support my bill.”

“I want Congress to pass this resolution to block California's new rules on cargo ship pollution. Ships cannot get the technology they need to follow these rules, and they face huge daily fines. Because so much of the country's cargo passes through California ports, these costs will hurt our fuel supplies and raise prices for consumers nationwide.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.J. Res. 210, my Congressional Review Act resolution because California should not be able to impose costly shipping mandates that drive up prices across the Nation, disrupt our supply chain, and put our energy security at risk. California ports handle roughly 40 percent of our Nation's containerized imports. When California raises the costs of moving goods, Americans across the country pay the price. In 2023, the Biden EPA approved a waiver allowing the California Air Resources Board, or CARB, an unelected body in California, to impose new mandates on vessels docked at California ports. There are three serious problems with this mandate. First, the technology and infrastructure needed to comply simply do not exist at the scale this mandate demands. Vessels are required to use State-approved emissions control technology, yet those technologies are not always commercially available or even feasible. Companies that don't comply face fines of approximately $50,000 per vessel per day. In fact, shippers right now are paying hundreds of millions of dollars each time they dock at a California port. You cannot mandate technology that does not exist at scale and then punish businesses for being unable to comply. Second, this mandate puts California's already vulnerable energy supply at greater risk. California relies on marine shipments of oil and petroleum products to help meet its fuel needs. Making it harder and more expensive to operate in California ports puts additional pressure on fuel supplies and drives prices even higher. Third, the costs don't stay with shipping companies. They ripple through the supply chain and ultimately reach American consumers. CARB estimates approximately $2.3 billion in compliance costs through 2032. My legislation is simple: Stop this unworkable mandate from driving up costs, disrupting our supply chain, and threatening California's energy security. We can protect our environment without putting our supply chains, energy security, and American families at risk. This is about common sense and affordability. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.J. Res. 210.”