PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 26, 2013
The Residential Energy and Economic Savings Act or the TREES Act - Authorizes the Secretary of Energy (DOE) to: (1) establish a grant program to provide financial, technical, and related assistance to retail power providers to support the establishment of new, or continued operation of existing, targeted residential tree-planting programs; and (2) create a national public recognition initiative to encourage such providers to participate in such programs.
Sets forth requirements that must be met for tree-planting programs to qualify for assistance, including a requirement to provide free or discounted shade-providing or wind-reducing trees to residential consumers interested in lowering their home energy costs. Authorizes the Secretary to award grants only to providers that have entered into binding legal agreements with nonprofit tree-planting organizations.
Requires a provider, in order to qualify for assistance, to consult with such organization and state foresters to establish a local technical advisory committee, which shall provide advice and consultation to the program. Authorizes the advisory committee to: (1) design and adopt an approved plant list that emphasizes the use of hardy, noninvasive tree species, native or low water-use shade trees, or both; (2) design and adopt planting, installation, and maintenance specifications and create a process for inspection and quality control; (3) ensure that tree recipients are educated to care for and maintain their trees over the long term; (4) help the public become more engaged and educated in the planting and care of shade trees; (5) prioritize which sites receive trees, giving preference to locations with the most potential for energy conservation and secondary preference to areas where the average annual income is below the regional median; and (6) assist with monitoring and collection of data on tree health, tree survival, and energy conservation benefits generated under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-6] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. 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.1807 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.1807 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.1807 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.1807 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.