We use analytics tools to understand how people use the site. They're optional: if you decline, the site works the same, no analytics cookies are set and Google gets only a cookieless, anonymous count signal. Your votes are saved either way; the details are in the privacy policy.
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4626) to amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from prescribing any new or amended energy conservation standard for a product that is not technologically feasible and economically justified, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4758) to repeal provisions of Public Law 117–169 relating to taxpayer subsidies for home electrification, and for other purposes.
Official title: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4626) to amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from prescribing any new or amended energy conservation standard for a product that is not technologically feasible and economically justified, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4758) to repeal provisions of Public Law 117-169 relating to taxpayer subsidies for home electrification, and for other purposes.
What Do You Think?
How would you vote?
Referandom Vote
Vote to see the result.
How Congress Voted
What Happened in Congress?
✓Agreed To
February 24, 2026
HousePassed 208 to 187
Where the Bill Stands
✓Introduced, done
✓Committee, done
✓Floor Vote, done
4Outcome, current stage
What This Bill Does
This resolution provides for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 4626) to amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from prescribing any new or amended energy conservation standard for a product that is not technologically feasible and economically justified, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4758) to repeal provisions of Public Law 117-169 relating to taxpayer subsidies for home electrification, and for other purposes.
I will set the stage on exactly why this bill is necessary. In 1975, Congress established the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, or EPCA, to increase American energy production, encourage efficient energy use, and bolster national security.
I rise today in support of H.R. 4626, the Home Appliance Protection and Affordability Act, sponsored by my colleague from Georgia's 12th District. This legislation modernizes energy efficiency authorities to lower costs for households and protects consumer choice.
Specifically, they imposed costly climate change codes, restricting which appliances families can use to cook their food and heat their homes. The Homeowner Energy Freedom Act would change that. This bill is simple, but its implications are significant.
I missed votes today due to being sick. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 71, YEA on Roll Call No. 72, YEA on Roll Call No. 73, and YEA on Roll Call No. 74.
You have to love these Republicans. I mean, they have no problems with subsidies for Big Oil, Big Tech, Big Ag, or big tax cuts for multimillionaires and billionaires. Yet, when it comes to helping consumers afford electric water heaters or stoves, all of a sudden, they have a big problem.
Sorry, folks, apparently Republicans in Washington don't have time for any of that. They are focused on passing another appliance bill instead--talk about out of touch. This bill repeals and rescinds funding for three important Department of Energy programs.
We are here at a time when later today we are going to hear the State of the Union Address. Based upon everything we know with the state of the Union, things are very expensive. Our neighbors back home are suffering a real affordability squeeze.
I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question and to support my bill, the RELIEF Act. If they vote ``yes'' and deny me the ability to bring forward the RELIEF Act, they are keeping your life more unaffordable.
There is not a shred of difference between Democrats and Republicans on those issues. Why then can we not by unanimous consent say let us fund these agencies through the rest of the year?
More efficient appliances will not only save money, but they conserve water, conserve energy, and reduce overall emissions that are killing our planet. This bill, without an amendment, would gut the program that sets these standards and pave the way for the administration to repeal existing standards.
I was absent from the floor and missed Roll Call Nos. 71 through 74. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 71, H.R. 6329, YEA on Roll Call No. 72, S. 2503, NAY on Roll Call No. 73, the previous question on H. Res. 1075, and NAY on Roll Call No. 74, adoption of H. Res. 1075.
I was unable to attend the first vote series today due to a delayed flight into Washington, D.C. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 71, YEA on Roll Call No. 72, NAY on Roll Call No. 73, and NAY on Roll Call No. 74.
Comments
Comments with insults, hate speech or personal information are removed.