U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

36–315 WASHINGTON : 2019

ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING FOR THE 

116TH CONGRESS 

MEETING 

OF THE

SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE 

CLIMATE CRISIS 

ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MEETING HELD 

MARCH 28, 2019 

Serial No. 116–1 

( 

www.govinfo.gov 

Printed for the use of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis 

(II) 

SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida, Chair 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N, New Mexico 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

JULIA BROWNLEY, California 

JARED HUFFMAN, California 

A. DONALD MCEACHIN, Virginia 

MIKE LEVIN, California 

SEAN CASTEN, Illinois 

JOE NEGUSE, Colorado 

GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana, Ranking 

Member 

MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

BUDDY CARTER, Georgia 

CAROL MILLER, West Virginia 

KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota 

ANA UNRUH COHEN, Majority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

MEMBER OPENING STATEMENTS

Chair Kathy Castor ................................................................................................. 1 

Ranking Member Garret Graves ............................................................................ 4 

COMMITTEE BUSINESS

Proposed Rules for the 116th Congress ................................................................. 5 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Amendment offered by Rep. Graves ....................................................................... 10 

Amendment offered by Rep. Carter ....................................................................... 14 

Amendment offered by Rep. Palmer ...................................................................... 17 

Amendment offered by Rep. Armstrong ................................................................ 22 

Amendment offered by Rep. Miller ........................................................................ 25 

(1) 

ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING 

THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2019 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:10 a.m., in Room 2247, 

Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Kathy Castor [chairwoman of 

the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Castor, Luja ́n, Bonamici, Brownley, 

Huffman, McEachin, Levin, Neguse, Graves, Griffith, Palmer, Carter, Miller, and Armstrong. 

Ms. CASTOR. The committee will come to order. 

Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess of 

the committee at any time. 

I recognize myself for 5 minutes to give an opening statement. 

Well, welcome to the organizational meeting of the House Select 

Committee on the Climate Crisis of the 116th Congress. Thank you 

for your service on this committee. I expect the time we spend together will be constructive as we aim to develop policy recommendations to address the climate crisis. 

Today, we will adopt the committee rules, but before we do that, 

I would like to introduce our members and give my colleague, 

Ranking Member Graves, the opportunity to introduce the members from the minority. 

This committee is authorized by House Resolution 6, and we 

have an important charge: to deliver recommendations to Congress 

and to the American people by March of 2020, just over 1 year from 

now, to address the climate crisis and, specifically, to achieve substantial and permanent reductions in pollution and other activities 

that contribute to the climate crisis. 

Now, I have a homework assignment for everyone, and that is to 

read the Fourth National Climate Assessment that was released by 

the Trump administration back in November. And I would like to 

just read the opening paragraph from the Fourth National Climate 

Assessment. 

‘‘Earth’s climate is now changing faster than at any point in the 

history of modern civilization, primarily as a result of human activities. The impacts of global climate change are already being felt 

in the United States and are projected to intensify in the future. 

But the severity of future impacts will depend largely on actions 

taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the 

changes that will occur. Americans increasingly recognize the risk 

climate change poses to their everyday lives and livelihoods and 

are beginning to respond.’’ 

2 

So for this committee, I expect that we will find areas of common 

ground. And this committee has the opportunity to recommend action to standing committees in the coming months, not to wait until 

March of 2020. Ultimately, to fulfill our charge, we must address 

what is necessary for America to truly address the climate crisis. 

And, with that, I would like to introduce members of the majority on the committee. First, Ben Ray Luja ́n from Nevada serves 

as—— 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. New Mexico. 

Ms. CASTOR. Excuse me. I knew that, but my script did not know 

that. I apologize. 

Of course, the Assistant Speaker is from the great State of New 

Mexico. He comes to this committee with deep experience in Congress on renewable energy policy, as he served as chairman of New 

Mexico’s Public Regulation Commission, where he helped strengthen the State’s renewable energy standard. He also serves on the 

great Energy and Commerce Committee. 

Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici from Oregon serves on the 

House Science Committee. And her district is in Oregon, already 

grappling with rising seas, ocean acidification, and wildfires. Congresswoman Bonamici co-chairs the STEAM Caucus, the Oceans 

Caucus, and will be a valued member of this committee. 

Congresswoman Julia Brownley from California is a longtime environmental leader in California and serves on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Congresswoman 

Brownley’s district suffered from horrendous wildfires in the past 

months. 

And I hope you will bring their perspective to us as we grapple 

with the climate crisis. 

Jared Huffman is also from California. He and I have shared a 

great interest in coastal issues and protecting our shores from oil 

spills. As chair of the Water, Oceans, and Wildlife Subcommittee 

in the House Natural Resources Committee, he brings a wealth of 

expertise to our committee. 

Welcome. 

Congressman Don McEachin from Virginia is one of Congress’s 

most prolific leaders on environmental justice. He also co-chairs the 

CBC’s Energy, Environment, and Agriculture Task Force and 

serves on the Energy and Commerce Committee with me, as well 

as the Natural Resources Committee. 

Congressman Mike Levin from California serves on the House 

Natural Resources Committee and is a clean-energy executive. He 

is new to Congress this term but brings great enthusiasm for tackling the issues ahead. 

Welcome. 

Congressman Sean Casten from Illinois is a scientist, an engineer by training, and a clean-energy executive from Illinois. So we 

will benefit greatly from his expertise on this committee. 

Congressman Joe Neguse from Colorado led his State’s consumer 

protection agency, which includes the Public Utilities Commission. 

And he is the founder of New Era Colorado, a nonprofit devoted to 

advancing clean energy in the State. 

Welcome, all. 

3 

So, with that, I would love to give Ranking Member Graves the 

opportunity to provide some opening remarks and introduce the 

other members from the committee. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Castor follows:] 

Opening Statement of Chair Kathy Castor 

As Prepared for Delivery 

Organizational Meeting of the Select Committee on the Climate 

Crisis 

March 28, 2019 

Thank you everyone for joining us. I’m so happy to welcome you to the very first 

meeting of the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. To start, I want to 

thank you for your service on this committee and I hope the time we spend together 

will be constructive for all of us and constructive for addressing the climate crisis. 

Today, we’ll be considering the committee rules, but before we do that I wanted 

to introduce our members and give my colleague Congressman Graves an opportunity to introduce members from the minority. 

Many of you already know me, many of you will get a chance to know me as we 

work together. I’ve been in Congress since 2006 and before that, like many of you, 

I served in local government, including as a county commissioner. In Florida, we 

see the effects of rising seas on our community every day. So when we talk about 

the climate crisis, we are talking about my home. 

This committee is authorized by House Resolution 6 and we have an important 

charge: to deliver recommendations to Congress and the American people by March 

of 2020—just one year from now—to address the climate crisis. And specifically ‘‘to 

achieve substantial and permanent reductions in pollution and other activities that 

contribute to the climate crisis.’’ 

I know we will have significant differences on this committee. I hope we can approach those differences constructively. 

I also think we will find areas of common ground and I hope this committee will 

address what we can do in Congress together today. 

But ultimately to full fill our charge we must address what is necessary for our 

country to do to truly address the climate crisis. 

With that, I would like to introduce members of the majority on the committee: 

Ben Ray Lujan serves as assistant speaker. He comes to this committee with deep 

experience in Congress on renewable energy policy and he served as Chairman of 

New Mexico’s Public Regulation Commission, where he helped strengthen the state’s 

renewable electricity standard. 

Suzanne Bonamici serves on the House Science Committee and her district in Oregon is already grappling with rising seas, ocean acidification and wildfires. 

Julia Brownley is long-time environmental leader in California and serves on the 

House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 

Jared Huffman is from California where he and I have shared a great interest 

in coastal issues and protecting our shores from oil spills. As Chair of the Water, 

Ocean and Wildlife subcommittee in the House Natural Resources Committee, he 

brings a wealth of expertise to our committee. 

Donald McEachin is one of Congress’s most prolific leaders on environmental justice. He also co-chairs the CBC’s energy, environment and agriculture task force and 

serves on the Energy and Commerce committee with me as well as the Natural Resources Committees. 

Mike Levin serves on the House Natural Resources committee and is another 

clean energy executive on our committee who is new to Congress this term. 

Sean Casten is a scientist and engineer by training and a clean energy executive 

in Illinois, so we’ll benefit greatly from his expertise on this committee. 

Joe Neguse from Colorado, has lead his state’s consumer protect agency, which 

also includes the Public Utilities Commission. And he is the founder of New Era 

Colorado, a non-profit devoted to advancing clean energy in his state. 

So welcome and with that, I’d love to give Ranking Member Graves the opportunity to provide some opening remarks and introduce the other members of this 

committee. 

4 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I am very happy to 

be here. And I appreciate the opportunity to join you in addressing 

what I think needs to be an important priority for this Congress. 

Coming from the State of Louisiana, where, a few jobs back, I 

had the opportunity to work on one of the largest resiliency 

projects in the Nation, working to help to protect our communities 

from flooding and the threat of hurricanes in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, working to restore some of the 2,000 square miles 

of our coastal wetlands that have been lost in one of the most productive ecosystems on the North American continent, Madam 

Chair, there is no question that when you bring up this topic, when 

you bring up the topic of climate change, it results oftentimes in 

folks taking very divisive views. Folks often run to their corner. 

I want to reiterate something that you said. I agree with you. I 

do believe that there are many things, many objectives that we 

share. I think that we may find ourselves in the same place, perhaps for different reasons, but in the same place. 

And I think that this is an opportunity for us to reset, to redefine 

the narrative, to work together to address issues that are of mutual 

concern. Obviously, the protection of our communities, the protection of our environment is something that we all share. And we 

have a diverse group of members that are here that I think are 

going to have the opportunity on both sides to provide input for us 

to move forward and achieve some of the goals that I know are important to all of us. 

I think something that we need to focus on is not less science but 

more, actually bringing more science to the table, introducing new 

fields of science into this topic to make sure that decisions and recommendations we make are grounded, to make sure that they are 

realistic, to make sure that they are actually going to advance 

some of the objectives that I believe we all share. 

So, once again, I want to say I am looking forward to working 

with you and all the members of the committee. We have a fantastic group of members that we are going to be working with to 

partner with some of your folks, starting with Morgan Griffith from 

Virginia. He serves on the Energy and Commerce Committee. 

Strong science background, and has already been a great asset in 

some of our discussions. 

Gary Palmer from Alabama that has been the beneficiary of— 

let’s see, the president of University of Alabama we trained at 

LSU. The coach of the football team we trained at LSU. But Gary 

played football for Alabama, but, more importantly, spent decades 

running a policy institute in Alabama. And, once again, just great 

background in helping to guide this Congress in thinking through 

the implications of policy. 

Buddy Carter from Georgia represents the entire coast of Georgia, and the only pharmacist in the Congress. Buddy serves on the 

Energy and Commerce Committee. And, once again, just a great, 

great asset for Georgia and for the Congress. 

Carol Miller from West Virginia, a bison farmer, a small-business 

owner. And lives in the area where I used to river guide, over in 

West Virginia, which we talked about a little bit yesterday. But, 

once again, bringing the perspective of small businesses, bringing 

the perspective of West Virginia, which I think is really important 

5 

to make sure that we understand the full impact of decisions and 

recommendations that we make here. 

And then last, Mr. Kelly Armstrong, who represents a very small 

district in North Dakota—represents the State of North Dakota. 

And Kelly has a background in agriculture and energy issues, a 

family business. And looking forward to input from North Dakota, 

which has participated in an energy revolution for this country 

and—— 

Ms. CASTOR. And I was glad to hear that the severe flooding in 

the Midwest has not affected your district. But our thoughts are 

with all of the folks across the Midwest who are going through that 

trauma right now. 

Mr. GRAVES. So that is the team. 

Ms. CASTOR. Terrific. 

Mr. GRAVES. I yield back. 

Ms. CASTOR. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Graves. 

Now we will move to our first order of business, the consideration and adoption of the select committee’s rules for the 116th 

Congress. 

I ask unanimous consent that the proposed rules be considered 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

[The information follows:] 

IN THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS

116TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION

MARCH 28, 2019 

A RESOLUTION 

Offered by Ms. Castor 

To adopt rules of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis pursuant to 

clause 2 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

Resolved, That the Rules of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis for the 

116th Congress shall be: 

RULE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS 

(a) The provisions of section 104(f) of H. Res. 6 (116th Congress) governing the 

proceedings of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis (hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘Committee’’) are hereby incorporated by reference and nothing herein shall 

be construed as superseding any provision of that section. The Rules of the House 

of Representatives shall apply to the Committee to the extent that they are not inconsistent with that title. 

(b) The rules of the Committee shall be made publicly available in electronic form 

and published in the Congressional Record not later than 30 days after the Committee adopts its rules. 

RULE 2. MEETINGS. 

(a) In General.— 

(1) The regular meeting date of the Committee shall be the first Tuesday of 

every month when the House is in session in accordance with clause 2(b) of rule 

XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. If the House is not in session 

on the first Tuesday of a month, the regular meeting date shall be the third 

Tuesday of that month. A regular meeting of the Committee may be dispensed 

with if, in the judgment of the Chair of the Committee, there is no need for the 

meeting. 

6 

(2) Additional meetings may be called by the Chair of the Committee as the 

Chair considers necessary, in accordance with clause 2(g)(3) of rule XI of the 

Rules of the House of Representatives. 

(b) Meetings of the Committee shall be called to order and presided over by the 

Chair or, in the Chair’s absence, by a member designated by the Chair to carry out 

such duties. 

(c) Notification.— 

(1) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(3) of rule XI of the Rules of the House, the Chair 

shall make a public announcement of the date, place, and subject matter of a 

Committee meeting (other than a hearing), which may not commence earlier 

than the third calendar day (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays 

except when the House is in session on such a day) on which members have 

notice thereof. 

(2) The agenda for each Committee meeting, setting out all items of business 

to be considered, shall be established by the Chair and provided to each member of the Committee at least 36 hours (exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and 

legal holidays except when the House is in session on such days) in advance 

of the commencement of such meeting. 

(d) The requirements of paragraph (c) may be waived by a majority vote of those 

present, a quorum being present, or by the Chair with the concurrence of the Ranking Member. If the requirements of paragraph (c) are waived, the Chair shall notify 

the members of the Committee at the earliest possible time. 

RULE 3. HEARINGS. 

(a) Announcement of Hearings.— 

(1) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(3) of rule XI of the Rules of the House, the Chair 

shall announce the date, time, place, and subject matter of any hearing of the 

Committee, which may not commence earlier than one week after such notice. 

(2) A hearing may commence sooner than specified in (a)(1) if the Chair, with 

the concurrence of the Ranking Member, determines there is good cause or the 

Committee so determines by majority vote, a quorum being present. The Chair 

shall announce the hearing at the earliest possible time. 

(b) Written Witness Statement; Oral Testimony.— 

(1) Filing of Statement.—To the greatest extent practicable, each witness who 

is to appear before the Committee shall file with the clerk of the Committee 

a written statement of his or her proposed testimony at least two business days 

in advance of his or her appearance. The clerk of the Committee shall distribute 

this testimony to the Members of the Committee as soon as is practicable and 

at least one business day before the hearing. The requirements of this subparagraph may be waived or modified by the Chair after consultation with the 

Ranking Member. 

(2) Each witness shall limit his or her oral presentation of testimony to no 

more than five minutes. 

(3) Truth in Testimony.—Each witness appearing in a nongovernmental capacity shall include with the written statement of his or her proposed testimony 

a curriculum vitae and a disclosure of any Federal grants or contracts or foreign 

government contracts and payments related to the subject matter of the hearing 

received during the current calendar year or either of the two preceding calendar years by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness. The disclosure shall include (A) the amount and source of each Federal grant (or 

subgrant thereof) or contract (or subcontract thereof) related to the subject matter of the hearing; and (B) the amount and country of origin of any payment 

or contract related to the subject matter of the hearing originating with a foreign government. 

(4) Availability of Information.—Statements filed under this paragraph shall 

be made publicly available in electronic form not later than one day after the 

witness appears. 

(c) Notification of Subject Matter.—As soon as practicable but no later than 36 

hours before the commencement of a hearing, the Chair shall make to the public 

and all Members of the Committee a concise summary of the subject matter under 

consideration at the hearing, any relevant reports from departments or agencies on 

such matters, and a list of witnesses, including minority witnesses. 

(d) Minority Witnesses.—When any hearing is conducted by the Committee on 

any measure or matter, the minority party members on the Committee shall be entitled, upon request to the Chair by a majority of those members, to call at least one 

witness, as selected by the minority members, to testify with respect to that measure or matter along with witnesses selected by the Chair. 

(e) Opening Statements.— 

7 

(1) Chair and Ranking Member.—At any hearing of the Committee, the Chair 

and Ranking Member, shall each control five minutes for opening statements. 

The Chair and Ranking Member may recognize other members within their respective five minutes. 

(2) Other Members.—The Chair may allow other members of the Committee 

to deliver oral opening statements, as appropriate, with the concurrence of the 

Ranking Member. Such statements shall not exceed five minutes in length and 

are to be equally distributed between majority and minority members to the extent practicable given the party makeup of the members present. Members not 

recognized by the Chair for oral opening statements may submit written opening statements for the record. 

(f) Questioning of Witnesses.—The Chair shall initiate the right to question witnesses before the Committee, followed by the Ranking Member and all other members thereafter. 

(1) Order of Member Recognition.—The right to question the witnesses before 

the Committee shall alternate between majority and minority members. A 

member of the Committee may question a witness only when recognized by the 

Chair for that purpose. The Chair shall recognize in order of appearance members who were not present when the meeting was called to order after all members who were present when the meeting was called to order have been recognized in the order of seniority on the Committee. 

(2) Procedures for Questioning of Witnesses by Members.—Each member 

shall be limited to 5 minutes in the questioning of witnesses and shall limit his 

or her remarks to the subject matter of the hearing. After consultation with the 

Ranking Member, the Chair may recognize members who have already had an 

opportunity to question the witness for a second period of 5 minutes once each 

member of the Committee present has been recognized once for that purpose. 

(3) Extended Questioning of Witnesses by Members.—Following the questioning of witnesses described in (f)(2) above, the Chair, with the concurrence 

of the Ranking Member or the Committee by motion, may permit a specified 

number of members to question one or more witnesses for a specified period of 

time not to exceed 60 minutes in the aggregate, equally divided between and 

controlled by the Chair and the Ranking Member. 

(4) Questions for the Record.—Each member may submit to the Chair additional questions for the record to be answered by the witnesses who have appeared. Each member shall provide a copy of the questions in an electronic format to the Committee no later than 10 business days following a hearing. The 

Chair shall transmit all questions received from members of the Committee to 

the appropriate witnesses and include the transmittal letter and the responses 

from the witnesses in the hearing record. After consultation with the Ranking 

Member, the Chair is authorized to close the hearing record no earlier than 15 

business days from the date the questions were transmitted to the appropriate 

witnesses. 

(g) Hearings of the Committee shall be called to order and presided over by the 

Chair or, in the Chair’s absence, by a member designated by the Chair to carry out 

such duties. 

(h) Oaths.—The Chair of the Committee, or a member designated by the Chair, 

may administer oaths to any witness before the Committee. The Chair or his or her 

designee may administer the following oath to all witnesses prior to receiving testimony: ‘‘Do you solemnly swear or affirm, under penalty of law, that the testimony 

you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so 

help you God?’’ 

(i) Claims of Privilege.—Claims of common-law privilege made by witnesses in 

hearings, or by interviewees in investigations or inquiries, are applicable only at the 

discretion of the Chair, subject to appeal to the Committee. 

RULE 4. OPEN PROCEEDINGS. 

(a) Meetings for the transaction of business and hearings of the Committee shall 

be open to the public, including radio, television, and still photography coverage, unless closed in accordance with clause 2(g) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives. 

(b) The audio and video coverage of Committee proceeding permitted under clause 

4 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives shall apply to the Committee. 

RULE 5. REPORTS. 

(a) Approval of Official Committee Reports.—Any report completed pursuant to 

section 104(f)(5) of H. Res. 6 (116th Congress) that purports to express the views, 

8 

findings, conclusions, or recommendations of the Committee must be approved by 

a majority vote of the Committee at a meeting at which a quorum is present, in 

accordance with Committee Rule 7(a)(3). The total number of votes cast for and 

against, and the names of those voting for and against, shall be included in the 

Committee report on the matter. 

(b) Notice of Committee Reports.—Any report described in (a) shall not be considered in the Committee unless the proposed report has been available to the members of the Committee for at least three business days before consideration of such 

report in the Committee. 

(c) Additional Views.—If, at the time of approval of a report, a member of the 

Committee gives notice of intent to file supplemental, minority, additional, or dissenting views for inclusion in the report, all members of the Committee shall be entitled to no less than two business days after such notice to file such views following 

clause 2(l) of rule XI and clause 3(a)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House. 

(d) Availability of Publications.—Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of rule XI of the Rules 

of the House, the Committee shall make its publications available in electronic form 

to the maximum extent feasible. Pursuant to sections 104(f)(5) and 104(f)(6) of H. 

Res. 6 (116th Congress), the Committee shall make its publications available to the 

general public in widely accessible formats not later than 30 calendar days following 

the respective dates for completion. 

RULE 6. COMMITTEE RECORDS. 

(a) Availability.—Documents reflecting the proceedings of the Committee shall be 

made publicly available in electronic form on the Committee’s website and in the 

Committee office for inspection by the public, as provided in clause 2(e) of rule XI 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, within 48 hours of such record vote 

after each meeting has adjourned, including a record showing those present at each 

meeting; and a record of the vote on any question on which a record vote is demanded, including a description of the motion, order, or other proposition, the name 

of each member voting for and each member voting against such motion, order, or 

proposition, and the names of those members of the Committee present but not voting. 

(b) Archived Records.—The records of the Committee deposited at the National 

Archives shall be made available for public use in accordance with Rule VII of the 

Rules of the House. The Chair shall notify the Ranking Member of any decision, 

pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause 4(b) of such rule, to withhold a record otherwise 

available. Upon written request of any member of the Committee, the Chair shall 

present the matter to the Committee for a determination, which shall be subject to 

the same requirements for conduct of Committee business under Committee Rule 

2. 

RULE 7. QUORUMS AND RECORDED VOTES; POSTPONEMENT OF 

VOTES. 

(a) Establishment of a Quorum.— 

(1) For the purpose of taking testimony and receiving evidence, no fewer than 

two members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum. 

(2) A majority of the members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum 

for those actions for which the Rules of the House of Representatives require 

a majority quorum. 

(3) A majority of the members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum 

for issuing an official Committee report pursuant to Rule 5 of the Committee 

rules and section 104(f)(5) of H. Res. 6 (116th Congress). 

(4) For the purposes of taking any other action, one-third of the members of 

the Committee shall constitute a quorum. 

(b) Recorded Votes.—A recorded vote may be demanded by one-fifth of the members present. 

(c) Postponement of Votes.—Pursuant to clause 2(h)(4) of the Rules of the House, 

the Chair, after consultation with the Ranking Member, may postpone further proceedings when a recorded vote is ordered on the question of approving any measure 

or matter or adopting an amendment and may resume proceedings on a postponed 

vote at any time after reasonable notice to Members by the Clerk or other designee 

of the Chair. When proceedings resume on a postponed question, notwithstanding 

any intervening order for the previous question, an underlying proposition shall remain subject to further debate or amendment to the same extent as when the question was postponed. 

RULE 8. COMMITTEE STAFF. 

(a) Professional and other staff of the Committee are subject to the provisions of 

clause 9 of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

9 

(b) Majority Staff.—The Chair shall appoint and determine the remuneration of, 

and may remove, the employees of the Committee not assigned to the minority. The 

staff of the Committee not assigned to the minority shall be under the general supervision and direction of the Chair, who shall establish and assign the duties and 

responsibilities of such staff members and delegate such authority as he or she determines appropriate. 

(c) Minority Staff.—The Ranking Member shall appoint and determine the remuneration of, and may remove, the staff assigned to the minority within the budget 

approved for such purposes. The staff assigned to the minority shall be under the 

general supervision and direction of the Ranking Member, who may delegate any 

authority he or she determines appropriate. 

(d) The Chair and Ranking Member have the right to secure one or more detailees 

to assist with the work of the Committee. 

RULE 9. BUDGET. 

(a) The Chair, in consultation with the Ranking Member, shall prepare a budget 

providing amounts for staff, committee travel, field hearings, investigation, and 

other expenses of the Committee. Funds authorized for the Committee as provided 

in clause 6 of rule X are for expenses incurred in the activities of the Committee. 

(b) Consistent with clause 9 of rule X, the Chair shall designate an amount equal 

to 1/3 of the amount provided to the Committee in the primary expense resolution 

adopted by the House of Representatives to be under the direction of the Ranking 

Member for the compensation of the minority staff, travel expenses of minority 

members and staff, and minority office expenses. All expenses of minority members 

and staff shall be paid for out of the amount so set aside. 

RULE 10. TRAVEL. 

(a) The Chair may authorize travel for any member and any staff member of the 

Committee in connection with activities or subject matters under the general jurisdiction of the Committee. Travel to be reimbursed from funds set aside for the Committee for any member of staff member shall be paid only upon the prior authorization of the Chair. Before such authorization is granted, there shall be submitted to 

the Chair in writing the following: 

(1) The purpose of the travel. 

(2) The dates during which the travel is to occur. 

(3) The names of the states or countries to be visited and the length of time 

to be spent in each. 

(4) An agenda of anticipated activities. 

(5) The names of members and staff of the Committee for whom the authorization is sought. 

(b) Members and staff of the Committee shall make a written report to the Chair 

on any travel they have conducted under this subsection, including a description of 

their itinerary, expenses, and activities, and of pertinent information gained as a 

result of such travel. 

(c) Members and staff of the Committee performing authorized travel on official 

business shall be governed by applicable laws, resolutions, and regulations of the 

House and of the Committee on House Administration. 

RULE 11. WEBSITE. 

The Chair shall maintain an official Committee website for the purpose of carrying out the official responsibilities of the Committee, including communicating information about the Committee’s activities. The Ranking Member may maintain a 

minority website. To the maximum extent feasible, the Committee shall make its 

publications available in electronic form on the official Committee website maintained by the Chair. 

Ms. CASTOR. You should have received copies of the proposed 

rules on the desk before you, and they were circulated on Tuesday 

night. 

Five amendments were filed yesterday afternoon and evening 

and circulated electronically. We spent many hours over the last 

couple weeks to find agreement on the rules with the minority and 

incorporated many of their changes. 

The first amendment we will consider is the Graves amendment. 

The clerk will report the amendment. 

10 

The CLERK. ‘‘An Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, Offered by Mr. Graves of Louisiana.’’ 

[The amendment of Mr. Graves follows:] 

Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on Climate Crisis 

(116th Congress) 

Offered by Mr. Graves of Louisiana 

Committee Rule 5 is amended by adding the following to the end— 

(e) Contents.—Any Committee report shall include— 

(1) the net effect on regional economies, including creation or retention of jobs 

and net revenue changes, and the related costs to the federal government as 

a result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee; 

(2) a quantification of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions reduced as a 

result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee; 

(3) a quantification of the effect on sea level rise as a result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee; 

(4) a quantification of the acres of wildlife habitat preserved or enhanced as 

a result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee; 

(5) a quantification of the change in global temperatures resulting from the 

implementation of recommendations made by the Committee compared to the 

change in global temperatures without the implementation of recommendations 

made by the Committee; 

(6) a quantification of the potential cost savings from pre-disaster mitigation 

as a result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee. 

Ms. CASTOR. The ranking member is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Madam Chair, in my opening statement, I talked about how I 

think it is important that we sort of reset the narrative, redefine 

this issue, and we introduce more science into the discussion of climate change, ensuring that we are not looking myopically, that we 

are looking much broader, that we are taking into consideration 

what are the implications of the recommendations that we ultimately make. It is important that we look at what happens in Virginia, what happens in West Virginia, what happens in Louisiana 

and in Florida and in our States that have experienced some of the 

impact of sea rise. 

And so what this amendment would do is it would ensure that, 

as we move forward toward our recommendations that we are 

going to be issuing to the Congress, that we actually go through 

and quantify and understand things like the net effect on regional 

economies, including the impact on jobs and revenue changes, making sure that we understand the actual amount of greenhouse gasses that these recommendations would impact or reduce, and understanding what that does in terms of how does that affect temperature, how does that affect sea rise. 

We need to use metrics, we need to use criteria to guide decisions. We can’t just go out there and say that I think it would be 

fantastic if we had everyone convert to wind-powered airplanes. 

Let’s understand the implications, both good and bad, to where we 

can understand the tradeoffs and make informed decisions. 

I will say it again: We want more science incorporated into this 

process. 

Quantifying the acres of wildlife habitat that are preserved or 

enhanced as a result of the recommendations that we make to the 

Congress. I talked about ensuring that we understand the temperature changes. 

11 

And something, once again, that is really important, especially, 

Madam Chair, thinking about just in recent years, Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, Michael, Florence, the wildfires in California, the 

awful flooding, as you noted, that is occurring in many of our Midwest and northern reaches of the United States as a result of snow 

melt, rainfall, and other watershed challenges, literally from the 

top of this country down to my State in Louisiana, where our rivers 

are at flood stage, making sure that we understand what type of 

pre-disaster or what type of mitigation and adaptation investments 

will return cost savings and how we can make the best principled 

investments to make our communities, our families, our homes, 

and our businesses as safe as possible. 

So I urge adoption of the amendment. I think it is important that 

we have quantifiable information and understand, if decisions that 

are being made or recommendations being made by this committee 

could cause adverse impacts, let’s make sure that they are balancing benefits as a result of those recommendations. 

I yield. 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman yields back. 

I recognize myself for 5 minutes in opposition to the amendment. 

I want to thank the ranking member for his thoughtful recommendations, but as we do our work, every member will have an 

opportunity and will have ideas about how we should evaluate the 

information that is presented to us, and we will receive a lot of expert testimony and recommendations. So, as we develop committee 

reports, members will have an opportunity to provide input on 

what any given report will cover, so it is premature at this point 

to include in our rules any specific analyses. 

Under rule 5(c), every member can have the opportunity to file 

additional views to committee reports. If the ranking member feels 

the analyses outlined in his amendment are not covered in the 

committee report, he will have the opportunity to provide any supplementary analysis as additional views. 

So I urge a ‘‘no’’ vote and yield back. 

Is there anyone else that would like to speak to this amendment 

on the Republican side? 

Then on the Democratic side? 

Mr. Huffman, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

So I just want to say with respect to this amendment and also, 

I believe, all of the other Republican amendments that are suggesting all of these quantifications and studies that they would like 

to see for anything that comes out of this committee, I would like 

to see some of that stuff too. But I think it is important, as we try 

to understand the costs and tradeoffs of some of these climate solutions that I hope we will be recommending, that we also really take 

a careful look at the cost of the status quo. Because, otherwise, 

what is the point of pretending that action is always expensive and 

inaction is always free? 

So I don’t think this committee has the budget or the scope or 

the timeframe to do the kind of exhaustive economic analysis, especially to the level of certainty that seems to be requested in many 

of these amendments. 

12 

But what I would offer to Mr. Graves and to my other colleagues 

across the aisle is I will be happy to work with you on a separate 

bill that would bring forward the kind of study that looks at both 

sides of the ledger, the cost of inaction and also the relative cost 

of some of the climate solutions that we are likely to recommend, 

so that we can point to the most cost-effective measures. 

That is a good way to go. It is getting harder to do that, though, 

because the government scientists that we would normally look to 

for this information are being reassigned and pushed out of their 

jobs, and their budgets are being slashed. In some cases, entire 

agency mission statements are being scrubbed of references to climate change; entire websites are being taken down and scoured of 

any references to climate science or climate data. The Trump budget continues this march against the kind of science and analysis 

that we would look to them to provide. 

So, in light of all that, we really do need, I think, a bipartisan 

bill in this Congress to begin to bring forward the cost of inaction 

on climate change as well as a menu of economic choices that some 

of these amendments point to so we can make good decisions. And 

I will be happy to work separately with you on that. 

Mr. GRAVES. Will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Yes. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you. And I want to thank you for your comments about working with us, and I would love to see if we can figure out a way to do that. Because, look, we can sit here and write 

a report that has utopian views. They have to be grounded. 

One of the challenges with this issue, as I stated in my opening 

statement, is that, when you look historically, what has happened 

is that folks just go to their corners. Folks go to their corners. And 

so what happens? Nothing. Nothing happens, largely. And so I 

would love to work with you on that. 

But I think that it is really important that decisions, recommendations we make have some type of sideboard, some type of 

criteria or parameters to where we know what the net effects are 

going to be. 

And, also, I use the word ‘‘net’’ intentionally, because that word 

is in here. ‘‘Net,’’ as you know, it actually considers different impacts based—it looks at a baseline condition and then determines 

what happens. And so, if you want to add the word ‘‘net’’ in here, 

you want to add the word ‘‘baseline’’ in here, I would welcome your 

changes to this amendment that would do that. 

Now, one comment that you made, you said that this committee 

doesn’t have the budget, the scope, or the timeframe. You and I, 

we serve on three committees together, which is incredible, but— 

and I always enjoy having discussions with you, because I think 

that you are thoughtful and you represent your constituents. Our 

constituents are very different, as we have discussed many times. 

But to go home to folks in West Virginia, to go home to folks in 

Virginia or Kentucky or Ohio and say that, I am sorry, we didn’t 

have the time or the budget to figure out if you were going to lose 

your job or not or lose your house or not, I am concerned that that 

is insensitive and that we could actually make irresponsible decisions—— 

13 

Mr. HUFFMAN. But if I might just reclaim whatever time I have 

left on that, I don’t think you are going to have to have that conversation, Mr. Graves. This committee is going to produce, at the 

end of our work, a report. There is no scenario under which that 

report causes any of your constituents to lose their jobs and force 

you to have that hard conversation. 

I would love for us in this Congress to move a lot faster and to, 

you know, maybe by the spring actually produce legislation where 

we could accelerate some of those conversations. But it is just not 

realistic to think that the product of this committee’s work is going 

to force you to have those hard conversations. 

I think you and I should work separately on bringing forward a 

study that will look at the economic baseline, that will look at the 

tremendous cost of the status quo. Because when you focus only on 

the cost of action, you are dignifying this notion that the status quo 

is free. We are going to pay for climate change whether we take 

action or not. 

And, in fact, I actually really like one of the points that you have 

put in your rule changes. You talk about bringing—— 

Mr. GRAVES. You better watch it. You are going to lose your—— 

Mr. HUFFMAN [continuing]. Bringing forward an analysis of the 

potential cost savings of pre-disaster mitigation. That is exactly the 

kind of thing we need to understand. Because I think it will show 

that many things we need to do to address climate change will save 

money and will have economic benefits, net benefits. 

And I will be happy to work with you separately on these things. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you. You better watch that—— 

Mr. HUFFMAN. I yield back. 

Mr. GRAVES [continuing]. You better watch that fiscal conservative talk. 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman yields back. 

Anyone else to be heard on the Graves amendment? 

Seeing none, hearing no further debate, the question is on adoption of the Graves amendment. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, say no. 

Mr. GRAVES. A recorded vote, please, Madam Chair. 

Ms. CASTOR. In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. 

The ranking member has requested a roll call vote. The clerk 

may call the vote. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n votes no. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Ms. Brownley? 

Ms. BROWNLEY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Brownley votes no. 

Mr. Huffman? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Huffman votes no. 

Mr. McEachin? 

[No response.] 

14 

The CLERK. Mr. Levin? 

Mr. LEVIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Levin votes no. 

Mr. Casten? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse? 

Mr. NEGUSE. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse votes no. 

Mr. Graves? 

Mr. GRAVES. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Graves votes aye. 

Mr. Griffith? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Griffith votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes aye. 

Mr. Carter? 

Mr. CARTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Carter votes aye. 

Mrs. Miller? 

Mrs. MILLER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Miller votes aye. 

Mr. Armstrong? 

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Armstrong votes aye. 

Madam Chair? 

Ms. CASTOR. No. 

The CLERK. Madam Chair votes no. 

Ms. CASTOR. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Six yeas, seven nays. 

Ms. CASTOR. The amendment is not adopted. 

The next amendment, the second amendment we will hear is the 

Carter amendment. We will now consider the Carter amendment. 

The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. ‘‘An Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, Offered by Mr. Carter of Georgia.’’ 

Ms. CASTOR. Without objection, further reading of the amendment will be dispensed with. 

[The amendment of Mr. Carter follows:] 

Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on Climate Crisis 

(116th Congress) 

Offered by Mr. Carter of Georgia 

Committee Rule 3 is amended by adding at the end the following— 

(j) Field Hearings.—In the event of field hearings, the Chair shall consult with 

the Ranking Member to determine both the topics and locations of field hearings. 

For every two field hearings organized and noticed by the Chair, the Ranking Member may organize and notice a subsequent field hearing. 

Ms. CASTOR. And the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes in 

support of his amendment. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And let me begin by saying that climate change is real. Protecting our environment is real. We understand that. It is someVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:11 Jun 15, 2019 Jkt 036315 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A315.XXX A315
15 

thing that is incumbent upon us as Members of Congress and particularly and specifically incumbent upon us as members of this 

committee to address and to address in a bipartisan fashion. 

My hope—and I hope that this is shared by all of us—is that the 

product that is generated out of this committee will be a bipartisan 

product, it will be a product that will benefit all Americans and 

benefit all of us. Because it is extremely important; we acknowledge that. We certainly feel like it will be something that we will 

take pride in and that all of us will have partnership in. 

It is important, and what my amendment does is essentially say 

that for every two field hearings that the majority has that the minority would have one. 

Now, in order to come about to a bipartisan consensus, it is important that we all share in our experiences, in our interests. And, 

certainly, the field hearings will be a big part of that. A big part 

of what we study here will be where we go and the hearings that 

we participate in. 

To Ranking Member Graves’ point about going to our separate 

corners, it would do us no good if we only looked at an agenda that 

favored one side. So my hope and my intention with this amendment is just to make sure that everyone has participation in this. 

I tell my staff often and one of my favorite sayings is that none 

of us is as smart as all of us. This just assures us that we are going 

to have the opportunity to share in the decisionmaking about the 

field hearings. 

So I would submit this amendment, Madam Chair, and I yield. 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman yields back. 

I recognize myself in opposition to the amendment for 5 minutes. 

One of the charges of this committee will be to hold field hearings. We will likely hold more field hearings than the typical committee in Congress, and I need your suggestions. Ranking Member 

Graves and I have already, roughly, talked about some areas of the 

country that we should visit to hear their stories and see what 

other communities are doing on the transition to clean energy. 

So I would like your suggestions, all of the members of the committee. I hope we will find a number of places of mutual interest. 

And I will be consulting with the ranking member about possible 

locations and topics, but all of you. But it is unnecessary to incorporate an arbitrary constraint on field hearings, as proposed in this 

amendment. 

I would also note that rule 10 governs travel by the committee. 

It allows the chair to authorize travel related to our jurisdiction 

and, therefore, could provide additional opportunities to engage 

with stakeholders outside of Washington, D.C. 

So this amendment is unnecessary at this time, and I urge a ‘‘no’’ 

vote. 

Is there anyone else that would like to be heard on the Carter 

amendment? 

Seeing none, the vote occurs on the Carter amendment. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, say no. 

The noes have it. 

Mr. CARTER. Madam Chair, I would ask for a recorded vote. 

16 

Ms. CASTOR. A recorded vote has been requested. The clerk will 

call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. LUJA ́ N votes no. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Ms. Brownley? 

Ms. BROWNLEY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Brownley votes no. 

Mr. Huffman? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Huffman votes no. 

Mr. McEachin? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Levin? 

Mr. LEVIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Levin votes no. 

Mr. Casten? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse? 

Mr. NEGUSE. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse votes no. 

Mr. Graves? 

Mr. GRAVES. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Graves votes aye. 

Mr. Griffith? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Griffith votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes aye. 

Mr. Carter? 

Mr. CARTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Carter votes aye. 

Mrs. Miller? 

Mrs. MILLER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Miller votes aye. 

Mr. Armstrong? 

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Armstrong votes aye. 

Madam Chair? 

Ms. CASTOR. No. 

The CLERK. Madam Chair votes no. 

Ms. CASTOR. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Six yeas, seven nays. 

Ms. CASTOR. The amendment is not adopted. 

The question now occurs on the third amendment, the Palmer 

amendment. 

And the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes to offer his 

amendment. 

Mr. PALMER. I have an amendment at the desk. I ask unanimous 

consent that the amendment be considered read. 

17 

Ms. CASTOR. Without objection. 

The CLERK. ‘‘An Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, Offered by Mr. Palmer of Alabama.’’ 

[The amendment of Mr. Palmer follows:] 

Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on the Climate 

Crisis (116th Congress) 

Offered by Mr. Palmer of Alabama 

Committee Rule 5 is amended by adding the following to the end— 

(e) Contents.—Any Committee report shall include— 

(1) the net effect on regional economies, including creation or retention of jobs 

and net revenue changes, and the related costs to the federal government as 

a result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee. 

Mr. PALMER. Am I recognized, Madam Chair? 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PALMER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

My amendment is simple and straightforward. It would require 

that the committee include in its reports the cost of its recommendations on local economies. 

This is a commonsense idea. The American people, our constituents, deserve to know the cost of the policies that get reported out 

of the committee. 

I would like to yield to the ranking member for a moment to 

amend the amendment. 

Mr. GRAVES. I just want to make sure I put it in the right spot. 

I want to ask my friend from California, all my friends from California, but especially my Huffman friend from California: So what 

about on this one, Mr. Huffman? If we included in here—if we 

amended this to put in a baseline, you know, to have a comparative 

in here, to amend the amendment, do a second-degree, and go 

ahead and look at the cost of no action or the failure to take action, 

would that lure you over to the bright side? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. GRAVES. Absolutely. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. So, approaching it this way, the net effect, which 

would involve a baseline analysis of the cost of inaction, is a great 

place for you and I to start on a separate bill that brings forward 

the kind of economic study that we are talking about here. 

But it is going to be a big study, let’s be really clear. And it will 

include—I don’t even know whether this committee’s report will include all of the specific menu of solutions that we would need to 

look at. It may need to be broader even than what this committee 

is able to undertake in the next 11 months. 

So let’s get to work on that, Mr. Graves. I mean, let’s not burden 

this committee with speculative economic hoops to jump through. 

Let’s you and I undertake this separately and do it right. 

Mr. GRAVES. Well, if the gentleman would yield back? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Yeah. 

Mr. GRAVES. Yeah. Thanks. 

So here is the challenge. Could we go out and go carry out a big 

report? Yes. But how are we going to know what the recommendations are? How could we possibly evaluate the recommendations? 

We would have to guess what the committee is going to do. 

18 

My concern—and the chair made mention of this before—my concern is what is going to happen is we are going to sit here and we 

are going to make these recommendations and, as you know, hand 

them out to the various committees, to Energy and Commerce and 

Transportation, Natural Resources and Science and others, give 

them recommendations—— 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Uh-huh. 

Mr. GRAVES [continuing]. And then it was said before that those 

committees can then go through and do an analysis. Well, why are 

we here? For what purpose? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. GRAVES. Absolutely. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. But by the same token—— 

Mr. GRAVES. Because I see the clock is frozen. We can talk as 

long as we want. 

Mr. HUFFMAN [continuing]. This is great. I love it. It is right 

twice a day. 

By the same token, by the time you know what this committee’s 

final recommendations are in the report, you are not going to have 

time to do the exhaustive net economic impact that you were talking about here. And what you are really doing is creating a recipe 

for this report never being completed. 

So, again, I want to invite you to work with me to do it right. 

Let’s broaden this subject. Let’s call in the National Academy of 

Sciences. Let’s have peer-reviewed science. Let’s look at the severe 

cost of inaction, and let’s compare it to the costs and benefits of 

some of the solutions that are likely to be required to address this 

climate challenge. And let’s put a bill together. 

Mr. GRAVES. And so, reclaiming time, I just want to actually reiterate or restate your words. You just said that we are not going 

to know what we are doing. And that is my very concern. That is 

my concern, is that we are not going to know what the implications 

of our recommendations are. 

And so we are asking for more science to be injected into the 

process to where we can make informed decisions, understanding 

the tradeoffs of decisions. 

And I believe the gentleman from Alabama’s amendment is appropriate. I want to ask unanimous consent if we can add ‘‘or the 

failure to take action’’ at the end the amendment before the period. 

Ms. CASTOR. Without objection. 

Mr. GRAVES. And I yield back. 

Mr. PALMER. Reclaiming my time. And I thank you, Madam 

Chair, for entertaining this discussion. I think it is very helpful, 

and I appreciate that very much. 

He mentioned my background. By the way, to correct the record, 

I practiced football at Alabama. 

But, also, prior to running the think tank, I worked for two international engineering companies, including Combustion Engineering 

in their Environmental Systems Division. And I understand a couple of fundamental principles: One, to get to the right solution, you 

must first properly define the problem. And, second, to get to a feasible solution, you have to understand the cause. 

So this amendment is offered in good faith. It is not to take away 

from the work, to impede the work. And I really would appreciate 

19 

the consideration of the committee to adopt this amendment. I do 

think we have time to do it. And, again, having worked in the engineering field, I understand costs and estimating. I actually worked 

on the cost side. 

So, with that, Madam Chairman, I would encourage the members of the committee to vote ‘‘yea’’ on this, and I yield back. 

Ms. CASTOR. Thank you. 

The gentleman yields back. I recognize myself for 5 minutes in 

opposition to the amendment. 

Thank you, Mr. Palmer, for this thoughtful amendment, but as 

noted during the debate on Mr. Graves’ amendment, under rule 

5(c), every member can have the opportunity to file additional 

views to the committee reports and the final report in March of 

2020. 

I anticipate there will be plenty of opportunities for us to incorporate the analysis of experts. We are going to rely on them—that 

it will be in our purview. If you feel the analysis outlined in your 

amendment is not covered in the committee report, you will have 

an opportunity to provide any supplemental analysis and additional views. 

And I think as the standing committees take up our recommendations, whether it is as we report routinely in the coming 

months or after the final report, there will be a lot of analysis, financial analysis, and discussion and debate over what course this 

country finally takes to confront the climate crisis. 

So, at this time, I urge a ‘‘no’’ vote. 

Is there anyone else who would like to be heard? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Would the chair yield? 

Ms. CASTOR. I will yield. I will yield to Mr. Luja ́n. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Madam Chair, I very much appreciate the conversation and the goals that are being outlined, with making sure that 

we are able to get information into this committee. I think that is 

why we have assembled and we have all agreed to this important 

responsibility. 

I just hope that when we leave here today that it is not being 

suggested that this information is not going to be allowed to be 

brought into this committee, that this committee rejected bringing 

evidence in, as we go out and we embark on our beautiful districts 

over the next few days and we are speaking about the important 

work of coming together in here, and that, truly, that we take full 

advantage of the witnesses that are coming in, the full opportunities that have been laid out in the rules as presented by Chairwoman Castor in 5(c), that we can submit additional information 

and evidence and datasets into the record as allowed. 

So I appreciate the conversation, and I very much look forward 

to working with my colleagues, and I yield back to the chair. 

Ms. CASTOR. I yield to Congresswoman Bonamici. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And I also appreciate the conversation, and it is a good one, that 

we are having. But I am very concerned about amending the rules 

of how the committee operates with things that we have to consider 

and could that be read as what we can’t consider if it is not in the 

rules. 

20 

So, again, all of these things are important conversations to 

have. I am certain that, as we move forward, we will be talking 

about all of these issues and how they affect our local economies 

and how the specific policies that we are talking about are going 

to affect the people we represent. But they don’t belong in the rules 

about how the committee operates. 

We will have a better product if all of these things are considered, but these are the rules about how the committee operates. I 

don’t want to limit us to telling us what we have to consider and 

not consider in the operational rules of the committee. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. CASTOR. I thank the gentlewoman. 

She yields back. I yield back. Would anyone else like to be heard 

in favor of the Palmer amendment? 

Mr. Griffith, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

I mean, this is straightforward. The amendment does not limit 

other discussions, but it sets out one of the concerns that I think 

a number of us have on the minority side, and that is that there 

are a lot of folks who will, you know, bring in proposals that sound 

great on paper, but if you don’t take in the human cost—my district has suffered tremendously with a huge number of loss of jobs. 

It may be something that we want to make sure we are looking 

at when we are looking at the science, but make sure we are having a positive impact or at least know what the negative impact is 

on the economies. Are we just forcing jobs to other countries, or are 

we actually doing something that is going to help the environment 

and the climate worldwide? 

Because if we don’t look at this and we just say, well, we are just 

going to look after what the United States is doing, and we shift 

the jobs from places like my district and other districts like mine, 

where we have natural resources and we have jobs that are heavily 

tied and the economy is heavily tied to the natural resources of the 

region, and we don’t look at how it is going to have an impact on 

the economy, I think it is a failure. 

And this amendment does not limit the committee. It is an 

amendment that helps, you know, be transparent. We are just 

going to say, here it is. Just like we need to take a look at the 

science, and if there is something that we can do, even if it has a 

cost associated with it, that will actually make a difference in the 

long run on the climate and make a positive difference, then we 

ought to have that information too. 

But I just think it is a fairly straightforward amendment that 

just assures that we are not going to go headlong into some policy 

that doesn’t benefit us on the climate effectively and negatively impacts large regions of the country. 

I yield back. 

Ms. CASTOR. I thank the gentleman. 

Would anyone else like to be heard on the amendment? 

Hearing no further debate, the question is on adoption of the 

Palmer amendment. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, say no. 

21 

In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the amendment 

is not adopted. 

Mr. PALMER. Madam Chair, I request a recorded vote. 

Ms. CASTOR. A recorded vote has been requested. The clerk will 

call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n votes no. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Ms. Brownley? 

Ms. BROWNLEY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Brownley votes no. 

Mr. Huffman? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Huffman votes no. 

Mr. McEachin? 

Mr. MCEACHIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. McEachin votes no. 

Mr. Levin? 

Mr. LEVIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Levin votes no. 

Mr. Casten? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse? 

Mr. NEGUSE. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse votes no. 

Mr. Graves? 

Mr. GRAVES. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Graves votes aye. 

Mr. Griffith? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Griffith votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes aye. 

Mr. Carter? 

Mr. CARTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Carter votes aye. 

Mrs. Miller? 

Mrs. MILLER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Miller votes aye. 

Mr. Armstrong? 

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Armstrong votes aye. 

Madam Chair? 

Ms. CASTOR. No. 

The CLERK. Madam Chair votes no. 

Ms. CASTOR. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Six yeas, eight nays. 

Ms. CASTOR. The amendment is not adopted. 

22 

The next question is on the Armstrong amendment. We will now 

consider the Armstrong amendment. The clerk will report the 

amendment. 

The CLERK. ‘‘An Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, Offered by’’—— 

Ms. CASTOR. Without objection, further reading of the amendment will be dispensed with. 

[The amendment of Mr. Armstrong follows:] 

Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on Climate Crisis 

(116th Congress) 

Offered by Mr. Armstrong of North Dakota 

Committee Rule 5 is amended by adding the following to the end— 

‘‘(e) Contents.—Any Committee reports shall include— 

(1) a quantification of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions reduced as a 

result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee.’’ 

Ms. CASTOR. And the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes in 

support of his amendment. 

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And in our pitch for field hearings, I will start. It is not easy to 

get to North Dakota, but when you get there, it is a fantastic place. 

Prior to getting elected into Congress, I represented a rural district in the State legislature. And in my district, we grow all the 

cereal grains; we have a huge livestock industry. We have an ethanol plant. We had the first small refinery permitted in the United 

States since 1976. That is now being converted to a biodiesel plant. 

We are on the southern half of the Bakken Shale oil play. So we 

have oil and natural gas. We move all of our commodities by pipe, 

truck, and rail. And we also, in the southern part of my district, 

have the largest wind farm in the State of North Dakota. 

So if you ever want to see an example of doing an all-of-the-above 

energy strategy, I would love to have you all to dinner at my house. 

But one thing they all have in common is—and, yes, even wind 

farms—they have an effect on greenhouse gas emissions. And when 

we are doing these things, we also have to remember every one of 

those economies that are in my district don’t exist just locally; they 

exist in a global economy. And we play in a global economy in 

every one of these fields. 

And, I mean, we can go back to 1992, and the U.N. Framework 

Convention on Climate Change stated their objective was to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level 

that would prevent dangerous interference with climate. 

The Paris climate accord does the same thing. In an effort to 

reach its stated goal of limiting global temperature increase by 2 

degrees Celsius, not Fahrenheit—my wife is from Oslo, Norway, so 

I always remember there are two types of countries in the world: 

There are the ones that use the metric system, and there are the 

ones that landed on the moon, so—provides that the parties aim to 

achieve balance in greenhouse gas emissions and removals by the 

second half of the century. 

So greenhouse gas emissions are clearly identified as an important variable in the climate conversation, and common sense just 

suggests that this committee should conduct itself by quantifying 

23 

the amount of greenhouse gas emissions reduced as a result of our 

recommendations. 

And I just—because the arguments on these are going to be the 

same both ways. And I just want to say—and I do, too, appreciate 

this conversation a lot, but I think the problem, when we go to the 

situation of every member can file their own report, I think that 

forces us back into our own bunkers. Because if this committee 

doesn’t have the resources, I don’t know how all your offices run, 

but we are really busy. 

And I think there is a big difference between filing reports on the 

record that we get from think tanks, whether they are a liberal 

think tank, a conservative think tank, gathering this information 

from outside resources, and this committee taking ownership of 

what we are putting there. 

And we have to consider the fact of what is the economic cost, 

what is the worldwide global impact versus how it affects producing States like mine. I mean, we are a commodity-based economy. We have 750,000 people in the whole State. We produce food 

and energy for the region, the country, and the world. And those 

are important factors to consider when we are doing this. 

So that is my amendment. Let’s follow the advice of every math 

teacher I have ever had and show our work. 

And, with that, I yield back. 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman yields back. 

I recognize myself for 5 minutes in opposition to the amendment. 

I want to thank Mr. Armstrong for his thoughtful comments. I 

anticipate that the committee will be synthesizing many of the expert opinions and analyses that are submitted to us, but it is premature to put anything in writing that hamstrings us in our ability 

to do so. 

As I noted during the debate of Mr. Graves’ first amendment, 

under rule 5(c), every member can have the opportunity to file additional views to committee reports as well. If Mr. Armstrong feels 

that those analyses outlined in his amendment are not covered in 

the committee report, he will have the opportunity to urge us on 

to do better, to provide supplementary analysis as additional views. 

So, at this time, I will urge a ‘‘no’’ vote on the amendment and 

yield back. 

Would any other member like to be recognized on the Armstrong 

amendment? 

Mr. GRAVES. Madam Chair? 

Ms. CASTOR. The ranking member is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GRAVES. I just had a quick question. I got hung up when he 

talked about representing rural North Dakota. Could you distinguish rural versus urban North Dakota? 

I am kidding. I yield back. 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman yields back. Any further discussion 

on the Armstrong amendment? 

Seeing none, the question occurs on the adoption of the Armstrong amendment. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, say no. 

In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. 

Mr. ARMSTRONG. I request a recorded roll call vote. 

24 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman requests a roll call vote. The clerk 

will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n votes no. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Ms. Brownley? 

Ms. BROWNLEY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Brownley votes no. 

Mr. Huffman? 

Mr. HUFFMAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Huffman votes no. 

Mr. McEachin? 

Mr. MCEACHIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. McEachin votes no. 

Mr. Levin? 

Mr. LEVIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Levin votes no. 

Mr. Casten? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse? 

Mr. NEGUSE. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse votes no. 

Mr. Graves? 

Mr. GRAVES. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Graves votes aye. 

Mr. Griffith? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Griffith votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes aye. 

Mr. Carter? 

Mr. CARTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Carter votes aye. 

Mrs. Miller? 

Mrs. MILLER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Miller votes aye. 

Mr. Armstrong? 

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Armstrong votes aye. 

Madam Chair? 

Ms. CASTOR. Votes no. 

The CLERK. Madam Chair votes no. 

Ms. CASTOR. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Six yeas, eight nays. 

Ms. CASTOR. The amendment is not adopted. 

We will now consider the Miller amendment. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. ‘‘An Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, Offered by Carol Miller of West Virginia.’’ 

25 

Ms. CASTOR. Without objection, further reading of the amendment will be dispensed with. 

[The amendment of Mrs. Miller follows:] 

Amendment to the Rules for the Select Committee on the Climate 

Crisis 

Offered by Carol Miller of West Virginia 

Committee Rule 5 is amended by adding the following to the end— 

‘‘(e) Contents.— Any Committee reports shall include— 

(1) a quantification of the effect on sea level rise as a result of the implementation of recommendations made by the Committee; and 

(2) a quantification of the change in global temperatures resulting from the 

implementation of recommendations made by the Committee compared to the 

change in global temperatures without the implementation of recommendations 

made by the Committee.’’ 

Ms. CASTOR. And my colleague from West Virginia is recognized 

for 5 minutes in support of her amendment. 

Mrs. MILLER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I rise today to speak in favor of my amendment. My amendment 

is very straightforward and simply provides accountability by establishing data instead of fear or conjecture. 

It requires that any recommendations made by this committee 

include a quantification of how the recommendation will affect sealevel rise. In addition, my amendment also requires the committee 

to quantify the change in global temperatures as a result of the 

recommendation. 

If this committee is serious about addressing the issue of climate 

change and the environment, this amendment should be easily accepted. I believe it is important that we and the American people 

know how actions taken by this committee will actually make a difference in our global climate. 

Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back. 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentlewoman yields back. 

I recognize myself for 5 minutes in opposition to the amendment. 

As with the other amendments, and noted during the debate on 

Mr. Graves’ amendment and the subsequent amendments, under 

rule 5(c), every member will have an opportunity to file additional 

views to committee reports and to offer their analysis, and we will 

all be working together to move these forward. 

If Ms. Miller feels the analysis outlined in her amendment is not 

covered in the committee report and committee discussions, she 

will have the opportunity to provide supplementary analysis as additional views. 

So I urge a ‘‘no’’ vote on this amendment and would like to see 

if any other member would like to speak on the amendment. I 

could yield them time. 

So I will yield back and recognize the ranking member. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Madam Chair, very quickly, I just want to make note, even referencing your opening comments, the charge of this committee is 

to carry out measures that help to prevent the adverse implications 

of polluting the environment, of climate change. If we don’t take 

science, if we don’t make science-based, informed decisions, I am 

concerned that we are just going to go out there and just throw everything at the wall without having some type of measure. 

26 

And I understand we can file supplementary views. This needs 

to be foundational. Nothing should be in the report without some 

type of analysis or quantification. I mean, what happens if we go 

out there and we go destroy economies? What happens if we do 

things that actually have an adverse impact on the very objectives 

that we are working to achieve? 

I want to thank the gentlelady from West Virginia for offering 

this amendment. This is about quantifying the effects on sea rise 

of our recommendations, quantifying the effects on temperature 

changes of our recommendations. These seem foundational to the 

very charge of this committee. 

And I can see that many of you are feeling that bipartisan tug, 

to my left. And I just want to give you an opportunity to throw in 

a ‘‘yes’’ vote on an amendment that really, again, is foundational 

to this committee’s charge. 

I urge adoption and yield back. 

Ms. CASTOR. The gentleman yields back. 

Mr. GRAVES. I can see it. 

Ms. CASTOR. Any other members who would like to be heard on 

the amendment? 

If not, hearing no further debate, the question is on adoption of 

the Miller amendment. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, say no. 

In the opinion of chair, the noes have it, and the amendment is 

not adopted. 

Mrs. MILLER. I would like to request a roll call vote. 

Ms. CASTOR. A roll call vote has been requested. The clerk will 

call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Luja ́n votes no. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Ms. Brownley? 

Ms. BROWNLEY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Brownley votes no. 

Mr. Huffman? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. McEachin? 

Mr. MCEACHIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. McEachin votes no. 

Mr. Levin? 

Mr. LEVIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Levin votes no. 

Mr. Casten? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse? 

Mr. NEGUSE. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Neguse votes no. 

Mr. Graves? 

Mr. GRAVES. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Graves votes aye. 

27 

Mr. Griffith? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Griffith votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes aye. 

Mr. Carter? 

Mr. CARTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Carter votes aye. 

Mrs. Miller? 

Mrs. MILLER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Miller votes aye. 

Mr. Armstrong? 

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Armstrong votes aye. 

Madam Chair? 

Ms. CASTOR. No. 

The CLERK. Madam Chair votes no. 

Ms. CASTOR. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Six yeas, seven nays. 

Ms. CASTOR. The amendment is not adopted. 

At this time, are there any other amendments to be proposed? 

If not, we will move to adoption of the rules. 

The question is now on adoption of the rules. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, say no. 

In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The rules are adopted. 

And, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the 

table. 

I now ask unanimous consent that the staff be allowed to make 

any technical and conforming changes to the rules, subject to approval of the minority. 

Hearing no objections, it is so ordered. 

I want to just briefly make an announcement here at the close 

that our website is up and running, climatecrisis.house.gov. The 

Twitter account is also available. I urge you all to follow 

@climatecrisis on Twitter. 

And if there is no further business, I would like to thank everyone for attending today’s meeting. 

I didn’t do final passage on the—okay. Excuse me. Let’s go back 

to—the question is now on adoption of the rules, all those—I 

thought we did—we did do that. Yeah, it was a voice vote. 

They have been working—our staff members have been working 

so hard to get to this point. I want to thank the minority staff and 

the majority staff for all of their hard work helping to launch this 

committee. It is not easy to bring a committee into existence that 

doesn’t exist. 

So thank you to everyone’s staff. We look forward to working together. 

So if there is no further business, I would like to thank everyone 

for attending today’s meeting, and I look forward to a productive 

year ahead. 

28 

Without objection, this meeting is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:01 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ