Andrew Clyde (R-GA)
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to "Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Certification Requirements, Labeling Requirements, and Enforcement Provisions for Certain Consumer Products and Commercial Equipment".
A Republican resolution with 6 Republican cosponsors · See all 6 cosponsors
Last activity — Became Public Law No: 119-8.
Became law
Passed both chambers and was signed by the President, or became law without a signature.
Nothing more in Congress: it is law. When it takes effect depends on the dates written into it — some parts start at once, others a year or more later.
What this bill would do
This joint resolution states that Congress disapproves of a specific rule submitted by the Department of Energy. The rule in question relates to the Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards, which covers certification requirements, labeling requirements, and enforcement provisions for certain consumer products and commercial equipment. Because of this resolution, that specific rule will have no force or effect.
Yes
No question was scored yes.
The opposite· 3 of 9
- Scored -3
Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?
The disapproval of energy conservation standards could lead to appliances that use more energy, increasing carbon emissions.
- Scored -3
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Disapproving the rule weakens environmental protections by potentially allowing less energy-efficient appliances.
- Scored -2
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Potentially increased energy costs due to less efficient appliances could disproportionately impact low-income households.
What Congress actually voted on
3 recorded votes have been taken on this bill. 2 of them decided something; the rest moved it along.
- The House: the vote on whether to pass the bill This is the real decision in this chamber. Passing here sends the bill to the other chamber, which must pass it too before it can go to the President. Passed 222 yes · 203 no
03/05/2025 · Roll call 59 · recorded as “On Passage”
- The Senate: the vote on whether to pass the joint resolution A joint resolution is a bill by another name: it goes to the other chamber and then to the President. Most of them are used to overturn a rule an agency has made. Passed 52 yes · 46 no
04/30/2025 · Roll call 223 · recorded as “On the Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 42”
- The Senate: a vote on whether to start debating something This decides only whether the chamber takes the measure up at all. Nothing about the measure itself has been decided when it passes. Motion to Proceed Agreed to 52 yes · 46 no
04/29/2025 · Roll call 222 · recorded as “On the Motion to Proceed H.J.Res. 42”
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- The provided text does not contain any details about specific sections or provisions that provide positive outcomes or benefits.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- The provided text does not contain any details about specific sections or provisions that create negative consequences or burdens.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Potentially increased energy costs due to less efficient appliances could disproportionately impact low-income households. Would children be better off under this? — Potentially reduced environmental protections could negatively impact future generations. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Potentially increased energy costs due to less efficient appliances could impact middle-aged individuals. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Potentially increased energy costs due to less efficient appliances could impact middle-class households. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Potentially increased energy costs due to less efficient appliances could impact seniors. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Potentially increased energy costs due to less efficient appliances could impact young adults.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Disapproving the rule weakens environmental protections by potentially allowing less energy-efficient appliances. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — The disapproval of energy conservation standards could lead to appliances that use more energy, increasing carbon emissions.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill disapproves a rule that may lead to less clear labeling on appliances, potentially harming consumer protection.
- Public Law (5/10/2025)
The text as it became law
- Enrolled Bill
The final version, on its way to the President
Arrived from the other chamber; nothing has been done to it there yet
- 5/9/2025
- Signed by President.
- Became Public Law No: 119-8.
- 5/6/2025
- Presented to President.
- 5/1/2025
- Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- 4/30/2025
- Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S2680-2683)
- Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 52 - 46. Record Vote Number: 223.
- Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 52 - 46. Record Vote Number: 223.
- 4/29/2025
- Motion to proceed to consideration of measure agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 52 - 46. Record Vote Number: 222. (CR S2644)
- Measure laid before Senate by motion. (consideration: CR S2644)
- 3/6/2025
- Received in the Senate, read twice.
- 3/5/2025
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 222 - 203 (Roll no. 59). (text: CR H991)
- On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 222 - 203 (Roll no. 59). (text: CR H991)
- Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H997-998)
- POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.J. Res. 42, the Chair put the question on passage of the joint resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Pallone demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.J. Res. 42.
- Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 42, H.J. Res. 61 and S.J. Res. 11. The resolution provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 42, H.J. Res. 61, and S.J. Res. 11 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate on each measure. The resolution also provides for one motion to recommit on H.J. Res. 42 and H.J. Res. 61 and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 11.
- Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 177. (consideration: CR H991-996)
- 3/3/2025
- Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 177 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 42, H.J. Res. 61 and S.J. Res. 11. The resolution provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 42, H.J. Res. 61, and S.J. Res. 11 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate on each measure. The resolution also provides for one motion to recommit on H.J. Res. 42 and H.J. Res. 61 and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 11.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 2/24/2025
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 2/12/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
- 119-SJRES-50: A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to "Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Certification Requirements, Labeling Requirements, and Enforcement Provisions for Certain Consumer Products and Commercial Equipment".
- 119-HRES-177: Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 42) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to "Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Certification Requirements, Labeling Requirements, and Enforcement Provisions for Certain Consumer Products and Commercial Equipment"; providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 61) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing"; and providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 11) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management relating to "Protection of Marine Archaeological Resources".
Mike HaridopolosRepublican · Florida
Doug LaMalfaRepublican · California
Laurel LeeRepublican · Florida
Mary MillerRepublican · Illinois
Derek SchmidtRepublican · Kansas
Claudia TenneyRepublican · New York