PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Aug 1, 2013
Energy Consumers Relief Act of 2013 - Requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), before promulgating a final rule that regulates any aspect of the production, supply, distribution, or use of energy (or that provides for such regulation by state or local governments) and that is estimated by the Administrator or the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to impose aggregate costs of more than $1 billion, to submit a report that contains: (1) an estimate of the total costs and benefits of the rule, (2) an estimate of the increases in energy prices that may result from implementation or enforcement of the rule, and (3) a detailed description of the employment effects that may result from implementation or enforcement of the rule.
Requires the Secretary of Energy (DOE): (1) to prepare an independent analysis to determine whether such rule will cause any increase in energy prices for consumers, any impact on fuel diversity of the nation's electricity generation portfolio or on electric reliability, or any adverse effect on energy supply, distribution, or use; and (2) upon making such a determination, to determine whether the rule will cause significant adverse effects to the economy and publish such determination in the Federal Register.
Prohibits the Administrator from promulgating any such final rule if the Secretary determines that such rule will cause significant adverse effects to the economy.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits the Administrator from using the social cost of carbon in any cost-benefit analysis relating to an energy-related rule estimated to cost more than $1 billion unless and until a federal law is enacted authorizing such use.
People & committees
Rep. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA-6] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 232 - 181 (Roll no. 432).
House roll call 432 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 232 - 181 (Roll no. 432).
House roll call 432 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 188 - 221 (Roll no. 431).
House roll call 431 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H5291-5292)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Capps motion to recommit with instructions, pending the reservation of a point of order. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House forthwith with an amendment to add a section prohibiting anything in the bill to apply with respect to rules that will result in reduced incidence of cancer, premature mortality, asthma attacks, or respiratory disease in children or seniors. Subsequently, the reservation of the point of order was withdrawn.
Mrs. Capps moved to recommit with instructions to Energy and Commerce. (consideration: CR H5291-5292; text: CR H5291)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H5291)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 1582.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5288-5293)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 1582 as unfinished business.
On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Cassidy moved that the committee rise.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Murphy (PA) amendment No. 6, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Waxman demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 315, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Murphy (PA) amendment No. 6.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 315, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Woodall amendment No. 4.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5285-5288)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 1582 as unfinished business.
On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Whitfield moved that the committee rise.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Connolly amendment No. 3, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Connolly demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 315, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Connolly amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Waxman amendment No. 1, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Waxman demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 315, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Waxamn amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 1582.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen to act as Chairwoman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 315 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2218 and H.R. 1582.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 315. (consideration: CR H5242-5249; text of admendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H5246-5247)
Rule H. Res. 315 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 315 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2218 and H.R. 1582.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 118.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 113-164.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 113-164.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 25 - 18.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1582 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1582 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1582 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1582 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.