On Friday, Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY) and Rep. Ed Case (D-HI) debated a proposed amendment on the House Floor.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
00:02Clerk will designate the amendment.
00:04Amendment No. 164, printed in Part A of House Report No. 118-559, offered by Ms. Tenney of New York.
00:12Pursuant to House Resolution 1316, the gentlewoman from New York, Ms. Tenney, and a member opposed will each control five minutes.
00:20The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from New York.
00:22Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment to prohibit any funding to finalize, implement, or enforce
00:28the Federal Acquisition Regulation, known as FAR, Council's proposed Federal Acquisition Regulation
00:34Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate-Related Financial Risk Rule.
00:41Mr. Chair, this disastrous rule proposed by the FAR Council has numerous constitutional, national security, and practical concerns,
00:48none of which have been adequately addressed by the FAR Council, nor the Council on Environmental Quality, who have pushed for this rule.
00:55First and foremost, this rule requires all federal contractors that do more than $50 million worth of business
01:03with the federal government to disclose all scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.
01:07This rule also seeks to require major federal contractors to comply with the Paris Climate Accords,
01:13which has never been ratified by the Senate.
01:15But the most objectionable part of this rule is the requirement that companies set climate targets
01:22and then have them, and required to have them, validated by one specifically named company
01:28called Science-Based Targets Initiative, or SBTI.
01:33SBTI is a foreign entity based in London which inherently carries national security concerns.
01:40Under this rule, every major federal contractor, including companies critical to our national security
01:46and our defense industrial base, would have to provide this foreign company
01:51with information about all of their scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, and then strategize on how to reduce them.
01:58Despite the existence of numerous American and U.S.-based companies that could fill the same role,
02:05the FAR Council and CEQ, Council on Environmental Quality, chose a foreign entity as the named sole source provider.
02:13Why? Because SBTI is nothing but a front for Democratic donors and advocacy groups.
02:20SBTI is owned by the We Mean Business Coalition, which is a project of the New Venture Fund,
02:27which is managed by none other than Arabella Advisors.
02:31Arabella Advisors, for those who do not know, is the George Soros-funded left-wing advocacy group
02:38that funnels dark money to left-wing causes and candidates.
02:42To summarize, the Biden administration has named a subsidiary of one of its top donors,
02:49a left-wing dark money organization, as the sole source provider for all climate target validating for all major federal contractors.
02:58During a hearing in the Science, Space, and Technology Committee on this rule,
03:02even the Democrats' witness said that SBTI was a poor choice for this role,
03:08yet the Biden administration forged ahead anyway.
03:12I look forward to continuing my work with Chairman Lucas, Chairman Obernolte,
03:16and all my colleagues on the Science, Space, and Technology Committee
03:19to get to the bottom of this rule's creation and halt its implementation.
03:23Mr. Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment, and with that, I reserve.
03:28The gentlelady reserves. For what purposes does the gentleman from Hawaii seek recognition?
03:32Thank you, Mr. Chair. I claim time in opposition.
03:34The gentleman is recognized for five minutes.
03:37Thank you, Mr. Chair. I read this amendment carefully,
03:41and what I saw in this amendment and the policy choices that it engages
03:45have nothing to do with what I just heard from the proponent of this amendment.
03:49So let me deal with the merits of this amendment as it stands,
03:52and as it relates specifically to the Department of Defense.
03:56And this amendment, in that context, is just another in a long line of initiatives by my colleagues
04:02to drive out of the Department of Defense any concern for, much less mention of, anything
04:09bearing the name of or in any way implicating the dreaded phrase climate change.
04:15Based on this amendment, this apparently includes any reference to consideration of greenhouse gas emissions
04:22or extreme weather risk in federal procurement.
04:25All this despite the fact that the DoD itself is eyes wide open on the realities of climate change
04:32as we've seen repeatedly in this debate.
04:35So let's unpack the real amendment here and ask ourselves what it actually does.
04:41Well, very directly, first of all, this amendment would defund any requirement by DoD
04:47that greenhouse gas emissions or climate-related risk
04:52be disclosed by companies doing business with the Department of Defense.
04:56Now, it's nothing new to utilize federal procurement to address broader concerns,
05:01especially when the largest procurement office in the federal government is the Department of Defense.
05:06So the only real conclusion to be reached from the amendment
05:10is that greenhouse gas emissions and climate risks are not broader concerns,
05:15nor are they concerns, certainly, to the Department of Defense.
05:19In fact, for the Department of Defense and federal government contracting,
05:24to look at this amendment, those can't be factored in at all.
05:28They can't even be known.
05:30So let's just take a couple of examples, and yes, let's assume everything else.
05:34So let's take out of this argument the false argument
05:37that somehow it is going to detract from quality, cost, quantity.
05:42Let's equalize that. That's all part of federal procurement anyway.
05:46And let's just look at the amendment itself and with DoD requirements in some real examples.
05:51So let's take an example.
05:52One contractor, a proposed contractor, is utilizing the dirtiest, largest-emitting,
05:58most unsustainable forms of energy for a product,
06:01while the other, quality, quantity, productivity, everything else equal,
06:06has invested in clean energy consistent with international emission targets,
06:11not to mention our own targets.
06:13Should we factor that in at all in federal procurement?
06:16Should we even know that?
06:18Should we effectively penalize the company that is doing the right thing
06:21and incentivize the company that is not?
06:25I think the answer is that we should know it, and we should factor it in.
06:29Let's take another example.
06:30One contractor has fully disclosed any risks of extreme weather conditions
06:35on its business model, its financial stability,
06:39its climate-related resilient preparedness,
06:42the continuity and predictability of operations on key supply chain components,
06:47while the other has ignored the obvious concerns that may lead to disruption of key components
06:52and higher costs, unexpected costs in the procurement cycle,
06:56physical insolvency.
06:59Should we factor that in?
07:01Should we even know it in federal procurement?
07:03I think the answer is yes.
07:06Clearly, in both instances, realistic and prudent defense procurement,
07:10not to mention compelling national policy, says yes.
07:16This amendment at the end of the day is grounded in the incorrect,
07:19incorrect assumption that a strong defense industrial base
07:23is fundamentally incompatible with cleaner, sustainable energy and climate resiliency.
07:30That is not correct.
07:31We know that, and the Department of Defense knows that,
07:35and the Department of Defense, moreover, knows that if we don't address climate-related risks
07:40around the world in all parts of its operations,
07:43from operations to readiness to procurement, that it faces greater risks.
07:49Let's let the Department of Defense address these issues
07:52without weighing in with denial and diversion and fear-mongering.
07:57I urge that we oppose this amendment and reserve the balance of my time.
08:01The gentleman reserves.
08:02The gentlelady from New York is recognized.
08:04Mr. Chair, with all due respect, the gentleman is wrong about this amendment.
08:08It simply states the amendment defunds and causes us not to fund
08:14the implementation of this particular rule.
08:16It has nothing to do with climate change.
08:18It has nothing to do with any of those allegations he's just set forth in his prepared notes.
08:24It's all bluster.
08:25This rule is about the fact that this is a sole-source contract.
08:30SBTI was incorporated after the rule was actually made.
08:35They were looking, trying to find a company that they could use that would get the answers they wanted.
08:41There's no choice for any American company.
08:43No U.S.-based company in this category has a choice.
08:47They must use this Arabella Dark Money Super PAC money umbrella
08:52that is funded by left-wing George Soros and all these organizations
08:56in order to go to get their contracts approved.
08:59There isn't a choice.
09:00You can't go to anyone else.
09:01Even the Democrats in the Science, Space and Technology Committee
09:05admitted there was no other choice.
09:07And here's a company created after the fact that they needed somewhere,
09:12somebody to validate what they wanted, not to determine what the actual science was.
09:16This isn't a debate about climate change.
09:19It's a debate about science and making sure that our companies have their secrets secured,
09:25that they're with American-based companies that we can provide oversight for,
09:28that the Department of Defense can provide its oversight.
09:31It's not about some kind of climate issue.
09:35It really doesn't address that at all.
09:37It really addresses the national security concerns.
09:40It addresses the problem that we have a company that is foreign-owned,
09:45which is requiring American-based companies to disclose only to them, with no choice, a sole source.
09:51This is not, you know, not actually acceptable under DOD rules.
09:55And that's why we want this particular rule to be held up
09:59until we can get other options for our U.S.-based companies
10:03that ensure the security of the American people.
10:05This is a sad attempt at trying to politicize, again, the Department of Defense
10:10under the guise of some kind of climate rule.
10:13With that, I yield.
10:15The gentlelady's time has expired.
10:16The gentleman from Hawaii is recognized.
10:19Thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:20Well, again, let's read the amendment.
10:22There's no mention in this amendment of this mysterious company.
10:26There is no commitment by the Department of Defense to use a specific company.
10:31This is a matter of disclosure.
10:33These companies have to disclose this information to the Department of Defense.
10:37This is also still a proposed rule, and certainly there is enough time in the process
10:42for us to carry out any concerns over, you know, directed sole sourcing or national security,
10:49which I think is just a red herring.
10:50Of course this is about climate change.
10:52Of course this is about a continued effort to deny climate change.
10:57I urge opposition to the amendment.
10:59The gentleman's time has expired.
11:01The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from New York.
11:04Those in favor say aye.
11:06Those opposed say no.
11:08In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to.
11:12Gentleman from Hawaii.
11:13Mr. Chair, I request a recorded vote.