Transcripts For CSPAN3 Discussion On Energy Access Affordability 20240714

Topic for usea but one that were eager to have a conversation about and im hoping that this will be the first of a continuing conversation because the matters that were going to address this afternoon are taking on a degree of urgency. Theyve always been urgent, but i think, myself, that the urgency is growing. So thank all of you for coming. We have an excellent set of panelists here today for our discussion. We hope to have audience participation as well. Moderating todays session is mark wolfe. Mark will provide a discussion and will moderate the discussion on the need for Energy Assistance. He is an economist and is an expert on local and Regional Energy and housing financing. He has consulted regularly for federal, state foundation and nonprofit agencies. He is very experienced at testifying before congress, and he is the executive director of the National Energy assistance Directors Association. And the Energy Program consortium and is the Founding Partner of project energy savers. So again, thank you all for coming, and ill turn it over to mark. Mark . Thank you, barry. First, i would like to thank the United States Energy Association for hosting todays session. This is a very important topic. Energy poverty in the United States, its also a global issue. Id first like to thank Barry Worthington and his staff, kimberly grove r for working wih us to put this together. What is Energy Poverty . Simply put, its when a family cant afford to pay their home energy bill. They face difficult and daily choices paying for food, medicine and other essentials in order to pay for their energy bill. Before i talk broadly about Energy Poverty, though, i would like to introduce todays panelists. These are experts in the field who have worked across areas both from associations, corporate associations as well as for state government. Before that, id like to say just a word about the National Energy assistance Directors Association or neada. We represent liheap, the National Program that helps provide block grants to help lowincome families pay their Home Energy Bills. Our first speaker will be haly laasmemcquilkin. She serves as the northeast Regional Representative on the board of trustees for the National Energy assistance Directors Association. Haly works in the Delaware Department of health and Human Services and the office of community services. And the Delaware Energy and is also the delaware Energy Assistance director. She contributed to the 2018 edition of the sphere handbook which is one of the most widely known internationally recognized sets of common principles and universal minimum standards in humanitarian response. After haly, chris mele will speak. He began his career with the United States senate for Arlen Specter and worked for Vice President george bush and then president bush. Since 1998, chris has worked for the National Association of regulatory commissioners, and is the legislative director for energy where hes responsible for the legislative advocacy, regarding energy and transportation issues in washington, d. C. Nina moussavi works for the american gas association. She has told me shes passionate about advocacy and policy and is currently legislative analyst for aga, or the american gas association. She represents more than 200 National Gas Companies across the United States. Jessica franks will be the following speaker. Shes director of Government Relations for the Edison Electric institute or eei. The trade association for investorowned electric power companies. Jessica covers appropriations, education, workforce issues for eei. Before that, she was a Government Affairs representative at halliburton and worked for speaker john boner and speaker paul ryan. Our last speaker, is kenley farmer. The associate director for the affordability and Energy Efficiency division for the district of columbia. Kenley is responsible for the management of the districts property accessed clean manager program, the Weatherization Assistance Program and lowincome home Energy Assistance program. So we have a terrific panel, and but the intent is to provide you with a perspective on Energy Poverty in the United States and how its being addressed not just through one program but through a partnership of states, utilities and local governments all working together to help lowincome families pay their Home Energy Bills. So a couple things when youre thinking about Energy Affordability and Energy Poverty, what does it really mean . Is it just some broad topic . And we hear a lot about poverty in the United States. Affordability. But what specific do we mean by Energy Poverty . For lower income family, its about 10 of income is what their energy bill represents. Almost four times the rate for nonlowincome household. So that gives you perspective. The main point is that energy, because its a base need like food, like clothing, it doesnt rise proportionately with income. So a middle income family is paying maybe a little more for energy than a lowincome family because they have a bigger house. At the end of the day its close. A middle income family may earn twice as much as a lowincome family, the energy bill isnt twice the rate of a lowincome family. Theyll pay about 2. 4 of their income for energy, it primarily reflects they just have more income. The other thing to keep in mind about this that i think makes this very interesting is that energy bills peak. They peak in the summer and winter months. So if ill say that or well say statistics show 10 of a familys income goes for home energy for lowincome family, during the winter month and summer months, that can be 20 to 25 of their income. You can see how quickly this becomes unaffordable and an extreme burden on families. According to the u. S. Energy information administration, the average cost of home heating this winter was about 1,000. Like any other thing, these are averages. For families using propane delivered fuels, the cost is about 1600. For heating oil about 1500. An enormous burden when you think of a family maybe earning 25,000 a year. Electricity was 1174 but natural gas 584 reflecting much cheaper cost due to fracking and the overall growth in natural gas supplies. Lowincome families face agonizing choices every day when they have to buy energy. We surveyed families receiving Energy Assistance under the low income home Energy Assistance program last winter and what we found, while not surprising, reflects just how tight their budgets are. When energy price goes up because of a variety of factors, for lowincome family, they dont really have much choice to substitute. They cant go from saying, look, we wont go out to dinner and say well pay our gas bill. Middle income families can make those choices. Energy for them is just more affordable for that reason. What families told us was striking. 37 had closed off part of their home to save utility costs. 25 said they kept the temperature at a level they felt was unsafe. 17 have moved out of their house. They couldnt afford to pay the energy bill that winter. 36 went without food for at least a day. And for those families, its probably because they had to pay the heating oil bill. For natural gas and electricity, there are rules in place in terms of shutoff provision so its not quite as dire. For those using heating oil or propane, the bill has to be paid when the oil dealer comes. 41 went without medical or dental care and 31 said they didnt fill a prescription. So again these arent surprising, but these are families making tough choices when they have to pay their energy bill. And the last point id like to make about affordable thats become increasing lly concernin with the aging of our society. As people move out of in the hospital for a shortterm period, they come home and they need often equipment that needs to be plugged into the wall. They have to have access to Affordable Energy. 52 of the people who get Energy Assistance told us they have a disabled member in their family, many of who rely on electricity for breathing machines or refrigerated medicine so they have to have access to Affordable Energy. Its a life or death situation for them. Not only is Energy Expensive but the cost of home heating and cooling depends on factors outside of a familys control. So maybe a family should save up for the winter, but you cant do that when you dont know how cold its going to be because thats going to drive the cost of energy for you. You cant control pricing. You could have a peak in the economy and industrial demand will help drive up the price of energy. Or geopolitical factors. Issues in iraq or iran or venezuela that drive up the price of oil. So all of those things make it very difficult for family to plan for their energy costs. And the last thing id like to talk about is the lowincome home Energy Assistance program which in some ways is maybe the first thing i should be talking about. Thats the main federal program that helps families pay their Home Energy Bills. Its a Block Grant Program providing grants estates which are then usually redistributed to local agencies to help sign up people to give them grants to help pay their Home Energy Bills during the winter and cooling bill in the summer. The program is not adequately funded at all. We received 3. 6 billion last year. That sounds like a lot of money, but close to 28 of the u. S. Population is eligible. Its classified as low income. We can only reach about 20 , 1 out of 5, of the eligible population. Thats how thats the limit of what you can do with 3. 6 billion. So what the states have done is target the funds and the neediest of the needy families. About 80 of the families that receive Energy Assistance have a Family Member either disabled, elderly or have a young child under the age of 6. That really kind of reflects the limitations of the funding we have. Congress added 150 million in the house for liheap for next year. Now that may not sound like a lot. We can use 150 million to serve another 500,000 families. So thats really the situation. We have a program. Its not adequately funded, but it does reach a lot of families. It does make a difference. Id like to just give you a few examples of how liheap helps families. In california, again, maybe to give you more of a context. Its not just a bunch of numbers. California, a young mother of three lived in an older allelectric home and had electricity shut off due to past due bill of about 800. She worked full time making minimum wage and her husband a seasonal laborer. A very poor family. No electricity, the family could not heat their home, access hot water or operate appliances. The Liheap Program in california was able to assist the family by both paying their past due bill to get electricity turned on. They also referred her to the countys Weatherization Program to help increase the efficiency of her home to reduce her bill going forward. Another example, in connecticut, a single mother of two facing the challenges of being homeless. Came into the state for help because if you dont pay your energy bill, you can lose your apartment, your lease. Through the connecticut connected services she received a housing subsidy and 500 in liheap funds which allowed her to become current on her energy bill. Now 500 doesnt sound like a lot of money, but if you dont have any resources and youre facing eviction, that can make the difference between staying in your home and being evicted. And one last example i can give in colorado, a mother of three raising her children on her own because her husband had a stroke and was confined to a care facility. Her car was repossessed so she no longer was able to report to work. She received a shutoff notice for heat and could not allow her children to suffer in the cold. She reached out to the state Liheap Program and received assistance that allowed her to turn her energy back on. Again, these dont solve the problems of poverty but allows families to continue and stay safe. With that, id like to turn it over to haly, our next speaker. And one thing id like to do is have our speakers provide their talks and then open up to questions. Thank you. Hi. I guess mark really said everything that was no thank you. Mark said everything that was very, very important and most of it, what i would have wanted to say also, so, however, i would like to bring to attention some things here. For example, a couple years, how actually this entire journey started was a couple years ago, when i started to shift my research more towards Energy Access, i noticed that all the quantitative indicators diverged greatly from the empirical experiences. Global reports might note that developed countries have 100 Energy Access. While the people on the field and energy vendors, researchers and everybody else was conveying to us at the state level totally different story. We had thousands of disconnections, numerous and even in United States, people use candles and lanterns for evening activities. They use various unsafe Energy Sources for cooking and heating. They dont have sufficient capabilities for sanitation or personal hygiene because the electricity has been disconnected. They have moldy dwellings, and their thermal regimes of the household are often below World Health Organization recommended thermal standards of minimum of 65 degrees in fahrenheit or maximum over 86 in fahrenheit. So the question started, why dont these reports reflect so poorly what is actually happening on the field . And the reason is because Energy System is extremely complex system. And the issues with the reports, they try to minimize all those indicators down into very simple ways to look at the world. And energy meanwhile, even though energy is a hybrid system. So energy actually does support, and it is important because energy supports all the provisions of basic needs. For example, it supports all the cooking, lighting, heating, cooling, sanitation, medical care, accessing information and communication services. And in some reason in our society, it has become an implicit expectation that energy exists out there somehow magically and we really dont have to worry about, even though its a huge support from infrastructure. So and United States maybe we havent done as Much Research as European Countries have done it. And, for example, Englands National Health Service department of health and social care and other nongovernmental agencies have estimated that cold homes cost england alone around 850 million to 1. 3 billion pounds annually, which is a huge cost on a society. And that does not even count the economic costs like lost production and lost productivity from people who stay home and sick. So what are the questions that i think we sometimes dont think about it. For example, as a community, we need to discuss what does Energy Access truly mean to us . Does it mean that everybody who needs Energy Services, irrelevant of the cost, can access them . Or does it mean that everybody who needs energy can afford reliable, sustainable and modern energy . Do our Energy Strategies include all the aspects of Energy Access, availability, affordability, reliability and sustainability . Or do our strategies developed were developed without realizing that were overlooking some of those important aspects because we dont share our objectives with other stakeholders. For example, when we are developing Energy Efficiency programs, do we consider their affordability equally across the population . Do we include scenarios of Human Behavior into our Energy Efficiency outcomes and how they might materialize in the imperical world . Do we comp hent the causes of our ability in energy consumptsion. Do we understand the complexity of Household Income and how it can influence affordability of energy . Do we consider the availability of different Energy Sources and how they affect household capability to afford Energy Services and do we comprehend sufficiently the Budget Constraints and differentiate between disposable and cross income. Do we consider Human Behavior in prioritization of the expans. Energy poverty is also a little bit distinct from an income poverty because most of the Research Shows that Energy Poverty really does not fully overlap with income poverty. For example, the study shows that between energy and income poverty, even though there is a strong relationship between income poverty and fuel poverty, there are more people feel poor who are not income poor than there are people who are fuel and income poor and not all the people who are income poor or fuel poor. So it obviously, also includes a huge portion of the moderate income households. So that is basically the reason why we think that this kind of discussion is important so we all can get together and start discussing exactly when we do strategies that we do include as much affordability and availability and reliability and sustainability into it because i think often when we do strategies we dont think down all the intricacies of the strategy and how it trickles down to the household level. So i think thats it from me. Thank you, mark. Im with the National Association of regulatory utility commissioners. In short, the organization represents the public utility commissioners throughout the 50 states and territories. My comments here are going to be my own and are not necessarily the views of any of my members or their state agencies. Our primary focus, our primary job is to ensure that citizens of the states and territories have safe, reliable and affordable service. My members are, by and large, economic regulators. And when you look at the scope of their jobs, the addressing the Energy Poverty is kind of the small end of the scale. And mark and i were talking a couple days ago, and i kind of alluded to the fact that i feel like im going to be the skunk in the garden party at this one, but i think some of these things need to be addressed. And being an advocate, i look for message. And one of the issues when youre dealing with, be it federal dollars, utility dollars, state dollars, is the perception of what happens to it, where it goes, and what its for. And that perception ebbs and flows. Right now were in what i think everybody would agree is a pretty good economic time and, again, these oare im dealin in generalizations here. So if theres a point that an outlying point, i will accept that criticism, but in general, were looking at a good Economic System or an economic time, rather, and that doesnt help us with the message on the need for both weatherization and liheap. Weatherization is a key component, i might add. Congress will be marking up in the house anyway, will be marking up a bill tomorrow which increases, as mark mentioned, weatherization by 36 million and liheap by 150 million, if my memory serves. And both of those are key components. And i would submit to everyone in this room that, yes, the affordability, the payment of the bills is important, but also ensuring that folks have a home or apartment, what have you, that has the necessary weatherization so that the actual the actual bill comes down. And thats, i think, a first step. And i think its a big step. My members do not regulate, for instance, oil, propane, wood or coal. We are strictly looking at this problem through the lens of electric and natural gas systems. And i mentioned we have a perception issue. Mark also mentioned most of the liheap recipients are elderly, children, disabled. If you look at the perception either on capitol hill or in the population in general, i would bet that 70 , 80 of the public would never think that elderly make up the lions share and children and disabled of those recipients of this. And i dont know if its as an advocate, you know, advocates fault for not getting that out there, but i think that is one piece of information that has to be put forward in order to start addressing the problem is to allow the general population know where the problem lies. Who are we helping . Who are we trying to help . Some would say thats not a very big deal. I would submit that having wandered capitol hill for over 30 years, when youre talking to legislators, be they state or federal, they want to know why does this money need to be spent anyway . And we have the gamut, even in my own organization that runs from the one side where liheap is a Corporate Welfare Program to the other side where we shouldnt even have liheap because we should socialize all the cost. I mean, the sweet spot is somewhere in the middle. And its our job to inform legislators, policymakers and the general public where that sweet spot is. The other perception problem that we see, and theyre all kind of wrapped around the same axel, if you will, is that electric and gas prices over the course of the last, oh, i want to say ten years maybe a little more, in real dollars have been kind of flat. I mean, theres a little bit up here. A little bit up there. But generally, as when you look at all energy out there, theyve been flat. Im not saying they havent increased. But generally its been flat. When youre dealing with folks that are making the policy, be they state or federal, the question comes, why do we have to increase the assistance when in real dollars, were not seeing that . Well, youre not looking at price of oil. Youre not looking at price of propa propane. Youre not looking at price of wood. So you have that component thats in there. The other and i think final thing i want to bring up is that weve had as high as mark, check me if im wrong, i think the High Water Mark for liheap funding was 5 billion or in that neighborhood . 5. 1. 5. 1 billion. Now its down to 3. 3. 6. One of the issues that occurs and i think you were talking to mark about it earlier no, this is good. You have a situation between the cold weather states and the warm weather states. And the warm weather states, obviously, are saying, you know, my taxpayers are paying for this, but im not receiving the benefit because its all going to the cold weather states. And the cold weather states are sitting there saying, my taxpayers are paying for this and were not getting as much as how cold we are. So we cant we dont want to have a situation where the warm weather states and the cold weather states are fighting for the same resource. That doesnt help anybody. So we have to again, this is all message and perception. We have to be on the same team, on the same playing field. And here i am sitting up here. Im offering more challenges than im giving as far as solutions. Unfortunately, i think thats just the way the panel is going to go. I think we have more challenges than we have solutions. Again, skunk at the garden party right here. So when Economic Times are good, in general, you will see and im talking about, you can call them joe six pack and sally sweatsock or mom and pop or grandma and grandpa, whatever you want to call them. Its really funny because when the economy is good, then they are looking at, weve got to cut all this welfare programs out because nobody needs it, the economy is so good. And then when the economy goes bad, the same folks are saying, well, i cant afford to pay for somebody else because i can barely put food on my table. Its sort of like theres never a happy medium. And this again goes back to what i started with, and ill end it with. In my humble opinion, we have a perception problem within the ill use the big turn advocacy side. And i think it sometimes hurts our message. Whats the solution to that . Ill let the smart folks at the table figure it out, but ill throw that out there for discussion purposes. Thank you, chris. Our next speaker is nina moussavi. She works with the american gas association. Nina, as well as Jessica Franks, who will be speaking after her, works for the edson electric institute. Well give you a corporate side. How do the utilities think about Energy Affordable . At the end of the day, theyre the ones serving lowincome families and providing electricity. Our programs are the ones designed to help provide them with funding to keep the families connected so they can give you a perspective on how good these programs are and how good theyre working from their perspective. Nina . So my name is nina moussavi. These comments and remarks are my own. They dont represent that of our Member Companies. The american gas association, like mark said, we represent over 200 natural gas utilities across america. Those utilities serve about 71 million americans. So you can imagine that this is a program that we are passionately in favor of. Liheap comes as a top ten priority for our Member Companies every single year. That is kind of where i come in and partnering with Jessica Franks with eei, our role is to make sure that that program is protected in congress. And the challenges that we face are going to be a little bit different than the ones chris laid out because the challenges we face are in the appropriations cycle every single year. We have seen the program be zeroed out in the budget request from the administration for the last four years . Three years . Four years . And so when that happens, its then on jessica and myself, along with mark and with our other grassroots advocates over at the National Energy and Utility Affordability Coalition to go up on to the hill and make sure that were taking the information that haly laid out, that mark laid out and were able to show our members in congress that it is a program that needs to be protected. Not only does it need to be protected but there needs to be robust funding for it. Its always going to be a hurdle when youre talking about numbers. Its the most sensitive topic that you have across the nation. And its hard to be able to say that this program deserves more money than another program that also helps hardworking american families. But were able to take the information that we have and show that energy is a necessity. It is a right and to be able to pay your utility bill is something that you should never have to be deciding between taking your medication or putting food on the table and paying your utility bill. And when you frame it that way, its kind of hard to be grancy the program. And it really comes the part that comes into play is how much can we get . And how much can we, you know, move some numbers around to make sure were helping the most americans possible . Its, you know, chris mentioned the question of, why does this money need to be spent in this way . And mark laid out all of the facts. You have the most vulnerable parts of our population in america who are the ones who are the recipients of this program. And that is the reason why this money needs to be spent that way. And were luckily talking about a topic that brings everybody together. You would rarely have an electric Utility Association and a natural gas Utility Association working side by side, but i dont go to any meetings about liheap without jessica and vice versa. And i think that shows that this isnt a partisan issue. This isnt an issue that sees any sort of divide. And were really just tasked with making sure that our members, especially new members coming in are able to see that. Ill keep mine short and sweet so we can have questions and pass it off to jessica. Hi, everyone. Thank you, mark, for inviting me. Youre welcome. And thank you usea for hosting me. Appreciate all of your help. So i would also like to have the disclaimer of my comments are my own. My opinions are my own, but i do work for the Edison Electric institute. And i would say that something that most people dont know about me is that i buy my iphone chargers in bulk, and i always have a portable charger on me because i just hate the feeling of when your phone is about to die, you know, like all of a sudden you feel like youre just disconnected from the whole world and its just coming down on you. So i like to keep my phone charged at all times. Just so im not mildly inconvenienced, right . But when were talking about liheap recipients, were talking about people that are truly the most poor in our society who have to decide between whether or not they can pay for their electricity or pay for their medicine thats going to keep them alive. So im very fortunate to be in the position that i am in and that i can lobby to help people that truly, truly need it. So along with nina, i work with the National Energy Utility Affordability Coalition. Its so wordy. Its so much fun to say. And together we promote liheap on capitol hill. And annually, we host the liheap action day, where we bring in liheap recipients, liheap directors, Liheap Program coordinators, from all across the country to come in and lobby congress. Because, frankly, Congress Gets sick of talking to me and nina. So they like to talk to people who are truly recipients of the program who are truly on the ground, who can give those personal stories and put a face to this problem. So we bring them in, and we take them all around the capitol hill. They get their steps in as they walk around, and they share a challenge every year to see who can get the most steps. I havent won yet. And so its really, really great event that our Member Companies will help bring everyone in together to talk about and, you know, when were in those rooms, we really do let the people that are on the ground dominate the conversation because these members need to, you know, understand the problem from a National Perspective but also from right in their backyard. And thats really where, you know, you can get their attention. So just, for example, i happen to be from connecticut. And 63 of households that are eligible for liheap do not receive it. And connecticut actually receives 78. 7 million in 2017, but still couldnt service most people who needed it. Of those people who received it, 69. 4 were a vulnerable population. So 35 were over 60. 18 were under 6. 33 were disabled. These are the people who need the assistance the most. And so when we talk about liheap, as mark said, most of it is a block grant. And then theres also emergency funding. So for instance, if theres a really big storm in some part of the country, we really need to help out the people who have been hurt there. Liheap can take care of that. 49 is for heating and 51 is split up between cooling weatherization which is improving the systems, and crisis assistance. The eligibility is for those that are 150 below the federal poverty rate. Just the very, very, very low. When you think about the fact that in 2015 the Federal Reserve said that half of americans cant pay for a 400 emergency cost right now, its overwhelming how many people need this aid. And so what nina and i do is we go to congress and explain this to them. And for the most part, members of congress understand. And they listen to the stories. And they say, okay, yeah, this is a real need. This is something that government is here to do. But one of the difficulties with liheap is that it is not an entitlement. So it has to be appropriated every year. So when there are situations when congress is squabbling over some issue and it holds up the government from being funded, liheap gets hurt. If theres a continuing resolution where everything is kept the same, youd think that liheap would be kept the same but its actually not because its one of those few programs thats actually paid out in front mostly. And theres this little line in crs that say if thats the case, you shouldnt dump it all out. So liheap actually suffers under continuing resolution as well. So these are things we try to explain on the hill every day to make sure people are thinking about the people who really just need this help. Thanks. Thank you, jessica. Our last speaker is kenley farmer. We invited kenley to speak because she runs the Energy Assistance program for the district of columbia. And i thought now that youve heard sort of broad discussions about how the Program Works, funding issues, the kind of people, the characteristics of the people were serving, it would be helpful to give you a perspective of how does a state Program Actually work at the ground level. And d. C. Is a good example from my perspective of a program that integrates both federal money with state and local funds. And just for the record, i am speaking for my organization. So my comments are on the record, thank you. Kenley . Thank you, mark. Thanks, everyone. And the u. S. Energy association for hosting us today. So as mark mentioned, i am the associate director for the affordability and Efficiency Division of the district of columbia. So i am tasked with managing both of our Liheap Programs, as well as our Weatherization Program. And along with a new program tied to water affordability. So in the district we actually think of this in terms of utility affordability writ large while focussing on energy today, were also seeing that water is also a crucial issue for a lot of cities, including the district of columbia. You know, our programs have been designed with a goal towards mitigating utility costs, including those homes with the highest utility needs and the greatest utility burdens, as well as the least amount of available resources. And we see everyday people who are making the decisions that mark is talking about. So they are trying to decide how much do i pay towards my electric bill . How much do i pay towards my gas bill . Water bill . Medicine . Food . Transportation . You know, its something that is very real to us. And so were dedicated to that effort. And the district of columbia, we not only receive the federal liheap grant but since mayor bowser has been in off, shes been dedicated to ensuring we dont have to close our doors. Some previous years if the federal grant ran out, we would literally close down our offices, lock the door and we couldnt assist people. And the last five years, weve been able to keep our doors open, which i think is has been a great benefit to our constituents. It means were now not dealing with as many households who are in a state of crisis for a long period of time. Which has been, you know, i think a great benefit to the city as a whole. Just to give you a sense in the district. So the district recently surpassed about 700,000 residents. About one quarter of those, or 27 , is eligible for liheap assistance. I think most of you may know that liheap assistance, the maximum income level you can go to is 60 state Median Income and the district adheres to that maximum level. And again, in the district you do have to be responsible for utility bill in some way in order to receive assistance. So in fiscal year 2017, we served about 40 of the households who are eligible to receive benefits. So we are meeting the demand, but at the same time, were trying to balance that with conducting additional outreach and even driving that demand. So its definitely a balancing act. You know, even from a daytoday level, much less a weektoweek level. We also try to maximize the amount that we can give towards weatherization. So the rule is you can give up to 15 of your liheap grant to weatherization and we aim to meet that full level of funding each year. But again, its a balancing act. So if you are moving money over towards weatherization, that could hit your benefits funding level. So were looking at that, again, on almost a weektoweek level. I wanted to mention, too, i think mark was especially interested in the districts program, not only because we dedicate additional local funding towards Energy Assistance, but also because we have been trying to create a program that is holistic in many ways. So not only direct bill assistance, like liheap, but we also have a utility discount program. So that has to do with decreasing your rates once youre enrolled. So there is a an electric utility discount program, gas, as well as water. So that means that now those households have a lower rate on an ongoing basis once theyve been enrolled. The other thing i mentioned is the water affordability program. And the district we also have another program called solar for all. And that has to do with tying the districts clean energy goals, so we have very aggressive goals, including trying to be Carbon Neutral by 2050, but at the same time, having a lens toward equity and ensuring that were not leaving anybody behind as we strive towards those climate goals. So solar for all is dedicated to provide i providing the benefits of solar power to 100,000 lowincome households in the district. And that goal is high are than the one i mentioned before. Were trying to get to an even higher level of potential households because we recognize that, like a lot of american cities, affordability is an issue and housing costs, general costs in urban areas like this can be higher. So we see all these programs as being tied towards affordability at large. The last one ill mention is the last program mark talked about which is pace. Were also trying to use innovate of Financing Solutions for Affordable Housing in the sdringt district. Thats tying Clean Energy Finance to Energy Efficiency to bring down utility usage for Affordable Housing properties. So, you know, ive been tasked in this role to try to bring all these programs together so that were providing comprehensive solutions to these challenges. Thank you. Thank you, kenley. As we said, wed like to see this not just as presentations but also as a dialogue among ourselves and with the audience on the issue of Energy Poverty in the United States. Just to kick it off, maybe ill ask one question just to get the discussion going. As i said, about 20 of the population ill stand up. About 20 of the eligible population receives Energy Assistance, yet weve made, i think, pretty compelling arguments why this is an important need. Why do you think that we dont go beyond 20 . Why do you think were stuck at that level in light of the importance of Energy Assistance . Nina . Why are we stuck at only being able to serve 20 . Why politically, why cant we go beyond 20 . Why Wont Congress increase funding . Is there some problem there that we cant seem to get across when we make the case for Energy Assistance . The programs that need funding that when we are looking at liheap, it already receives a lot more than a lot of other programs. Not to say it doesnt need more. I think it should have 10, 11, 12 billion allocated to it because thats the only way wed be able to serve all the people that need funding. But i think when you are pushing for these largescale changes, there are going to be other advocates coming and pushing right back for their programs. So our approach has been to continue to show the need for it, to continue to bring real life stories to the member offices so that they know how this impacts their constituents. And i think thats why weve been seeing incremental increases. I think that thats going to be the most realistic way to get to where we need to be is small incremental changes because i think politically, there isnt a dem or republican on the hill who is willing to say that it needs to jump 2 billion, 3 billion because there are so many different interests that are going to be pulling at them. And when were looking at the house going for reelection every two years, there are very few members who are in a position where they can take a stance that pushes for one program over another. So i think thats kind of the issue that we run into. Term limits. I would also like to say that its important to remember that every year were starting from zero, right . The president says no more money for liheap. So every dollar that we get, we are very grateful for. Any comments . Any questions in the audience . I think wed like to open this up for questions. Certainly like to hear your questions or comments. And introduce yourself when you speak, if you could. Hi. My name is alex. Im from usea. I guess two questions. The first one is, what percentage of utilities have kind of, i guess, subsidy programs to support their Liheap Programs . So, you know, adding an extra dollar or two to my utility bills to subsidize Liheap Programs. And then the second question is, how much coordination is there between Liheap Programs and litech programs, so low income tax programs. Encouraging them to have more stringent sustainability or energy sufficient measures because the little bit that ive looked at it, a lot of the poorest states seem to have the less stringent or least stringent efficiency measures in their measures and at least moving forward that seems like a good way to help take care of this problem. So ill jump in for the utility one. Unfortunately, i dont know if jessica has an exact percentage of their Member Companies, and there are a lot of like municipal, locally run Utility Companies as well. But i will say that a lot of our companies have their own programs in addition to liheap. They have their own programs to help make sure their customers are not at risk of shutoff. Off the top of my head, Companies Like atmos in texas. They have a program that, like you said, tacks on a couple cents onto other customers to help subsidize those lowincome folks. It really is a team effort, i guess, for lack of a better word. The utilities are working on it. The assistance from the federal government is absolutely necessary. And i know the states actually have a lot of their own programs as well. In terms of the coordination between liheap and litek, because liheap is run individually by each state, i think thats a question that is more directed at nieda. The programs are not coordinated at all. What there is in li tech is sometimes states put in stringent Energy Efficient requirements in order to win the litech credits but there are two very separate activities. Litech is tied toward Building Construction or renovation where Energy Assistance is tied toward immediate bills. So in a sense, if we thought holistically about how programs go together, which we dont in the United States. The United States tends to think of things separately. A separate Health Care Program like medicaid. We have a separate food program, snap, Energy Assistance program, but rarely do you see all the programs put together in holistic box and thinking about it. How does this help a family . How does this help a community . Its really not how we do things in the United States. In europe you see more of an integration of resources. People think more in terms of Public Health and energy. Different type of discussion. Different type of approach. Mark, you just answered your own first question, and that was, why is there not the money there. There you go. Competition from these various other programs. There you go. Not a holistic approach. I was very glad that kenley brought up the water issue. And this is something you dont think about. If you are in a rural part of the country, you lose your electricity, youve lost your water and sewage. Because youre drawing off a well. Thats why its even that much more important to rural poverty. One of the issues in Energy Assistance and Energy Affordability and Energy Poverty, theres no firm definition like, this is it. This is what it is. Like if someone has cancer or heart disease, we know what that is. And medicaid knows how to treat it, and theres a formula for paying for it. So its fairly black and white. And in our case, the numbers depend on where you sit. But i thought maybe id open it up to our panel. When you think about Energy Assistance and Energy Poverty, how should we define it . All we have is a federal definition, but is that sufficient . Does that target funds sufficiently . Haly has thought a lot about this question. I thought wed start with her. Well, maybe i overthought about this. Thats, in my the world ive looked at, there are several things that kind of have bothered me in general is, i know Energy Poverty falls under Energy Access. And Energy Access is a really wide area. Like i said, it includes reliability, availability, sustainability. And other areas. And when we Start Talking about Energy Poverty, we sometimes forget those other areas like, well, what if i have money to afford energy, but i really have disconnections all the time because i happen to live in rural area. I mean, am i still energy poor . Or, yes, i can somewhat afford all my energy, but, wait a minute, i would like to afford gas because gas is one of the cheapest ones but theres no gas lines in my neighborhood. And that is quite a big reality. Theres often no gas lines, even though that is one of the cheapest ways to heat your house. From the Energy Access point of view, do you really have access if you dont have access to that most Affordable Energy that is out there . So definitely Energy Poverty would have to include all the areas of Energy Access. And if we start solving them like piece by piece, then it might end up the same way that we look at in Global Reports and it says you have 100 Energy Access because some areas might have electricity, but in reality, but in reality electricity is not the entire Energy Sector at all. There is also gas, fuel oil, kerosene, propane and other areas the same way. And the other side, like i said about Energy Poverty, Energy Poverty is very, very distinct poverty area because like i said before, it does not always overlap with income poverty. Its not like all the people who are income poor are also energy poor. There is very, very huge proportion of moderate income people who are moderately poor because they simply cannot afford it because the difference between is very huge. Thats the reason when chris said, the Energy Prices have been flat, whats the issue . Why do you want more money . But if you look at the Household Budget and Budget Constraints, you can only divide that pie or budget so many ways. Energy prices have been flat, but also have medications been flat, have all the other costs for household been flat . If theyre not, then they and they keep increasing, it doesnt matter the amount of money we contributed to Energy Poverty if the household prioritizes their medical first they put that money there first and they end up being energy poor in the end. Its a more comprehensive Society Issue we have to solve. How to make sure all those things that are so necessary for households are affordable. So, people are whatever we do, people still dont end up being energy poor because they only have so much disposable in, to spend. Anybody else . I can add to that, too. In terms of what haly is saying about a comprehensive plan. Like jessica mentioned, our portable chargers and how energy now is related to access to access to information. And so something weve been looking at and theres a new Affordable Housing property where we it will be the largest solar installation in the district. It also includes a battery backup storage for a Community Room so that theres a refrigerator that can be powered for medicine. Theres places people can charge their phones because we now live in a modern society where Information Technology is just a part of daytoday life. I think we see not only access to energy within your home but a storm or some emergency event where youre disconnected from Energy Despite your ability to pay for it, those of us with more resources are able to find somewhere to go to obtain what we need. Whereas many people do not have the same access to resources for phone, for medicine, things like that. So, i think were also trying to tie this idea of Energy Poverty in with resilience, which is a word that gets overused a lot. I think in this aspect were thinking of it particularly like post storm or post emergency event. Just back to your main question. I dont think a federal definition is sufficient. I think that like chris was saying, there are factors in Rural Communities that you wouldnt face in an urban setting. And i think that a federal definition oversimplifies the issue and it makes it so that there are marginalized populations who are being completely left out of this definition. I would agree. And i think that sometimes its just one event that pushes someone into Energy Poverty. Someone gets sick or they lose their spouse or something happens and maybe from holistically that person isnt, you know, the poorest of the poor, but when theyre in that situation, theyre running out of options and thats where government assistance is helpful. I think the other issue related to this is poverty is not evenly distributed across the United States. Some utilities could have 30 , 40 of the rate income and others 10 . Utilities view the need differently based on what their rate base looks like. And we have states, and theres a limitations what that state can do to raise funds. Sometimes when you look at the kinds of partnerships that reflects the kind of Resources Available because Energy Assistance is a fairly straightforward issue. You have a bill that needs to be paid. Its not like, what do you do about gangs . What do you do about immigration . What do you do about health care issues, complicated issues that have many, many social implications. Energy assistance is fairly straightforward and fairly easy to address in that sense. But, jessica, do you see an issue with among your members a difference in response depending on what their rate base looks like and how the Program Works with them . Is there a difference that you see . Not really. I think liheap is a top priority for all of our companies. Actually, im going to say that definitively. It is. We always have checkin points with our Member Companies to ask them, what are their top five priorities and they come back and talk about liheap. I think that utilities, they serve a lot of different people and they kind of i dont want to say are responsible for a lot of people, but they kind of end up being in contact with a lot of people. And because of that they can be in a position where theyre watching the ground, lets say. Yeah, certain states look very different. But i think ultimately, even if its very, very wealthy state, they still have a significant poor population and a very poor population. And so our utilities go home and see that and they come back just as much as the utilities who are mostly poor and they fight for it just as hard, i would say. I agree. Our board of directors releases a list of priorities every single year and liheap comes at the top of it. And our board is made up of Utility Companies. With regardless if youre in the north or south, its extremely important for all of our Utility Companies. I also think, though, that when youre looking at southern states, when oftentimes have higher poverty levels than northern states, the issue is just different. Yes, you have a higher percentage of folks who are eligible for it, but the eligibility levels in terms of the dollar amount might be less per person versus in the northern states where its colder most of the time and the heating costs are a little more expensive. I think it all evens out. Chris, do you see any difference among Public Service commissions . You were saying earlier to me that they have a wide range of responsibilities. How does Energy Assistance fit within those concerns . You cant put a one size fits all answer on that one, mark. I think its as diverse and divergent as the states are themselves and the population is. As i said earlier, i dont think theres much difference between my folks and congress and the population in general as to their views. Some take the view that, you know, we have to make it as easy and to get the aid not only get the money in, but to put the money out. So, theres some that would look at socializing all of these costs. The other side of the spectrum, there are some that would say that we already have too much. So i dont think i can give you a singular answer. Many states have been very proactive in their programs withal utilities. I mean maybe im just too old for myself here, but i remember when the Roundup Program was first coming out in pennsylvania. Thats where you round up i think it was mentioned out here. You round up your bill from 102. 60 to 103 or whatever. A lot of times my folks are in a position where they have to be the reactive as opposed to the active. Thats through the rate base. When a utility comes up with a pilot or an idea of how to do this, the commission looks at it and they try to determine whether or not that goes in the rate base. Its really hard to give a singular answer on that. Okay. I think it reflects the diversity of the United States and whats going to work in new jersey isnt necessarily going to work in new mexico. Yeah. I think we have a question over here. Hello. So, the panel speaking about how to address Energy Poverty has focused on bill assistance and liheap as a main way to do that. Im wondering if any of you have thoughts on these more Holistic Solutions that mark has alluded to. Chris and kenley both mentioned Energy Efficiency as a way to achieve longterm affordability. I would love to hear ways the program can be combined with other programs. Boy, if i had that answer. Well, part of lileap is set aside for weatherization, for making homes more Energy Efficient. Whetherization is also funded through d. O. E. Through its own appropriation. Thats one of the big things for Energy Subcommittee and energy commerce. Making sure thats authorized and taken care of so ultimately what ends up happening is the poor have systems that are more likely to break down, right . And so addressing that will kind of hopefully put everybody on the same starting point so we can move forward together. Jessica makes a great point. This may sound like a stupid example, but i can tell you from Life Experience in my younger days, you have a situation where a low income family or an elderly individual, their refrigerator breaks. Well, they have a lot invested in that machine. Not the machine itself, i mean, whats inside it. Thats their food. Well, chances are theyre not going out buying the most efficient refrigerator. Theyre getting the one that can get there that day that they can afford because they cant afford 200 worth of food spoilage. I mean, how do you how do you wrap those in the same program . I dont think you can under the system we have. Should we be able to . Yeah. But and i think the Weatherization Programs that are in place both federally and on the state level, i think, do a really good job at trying to be proactive about the situation. So, rather than having it be once the persons refrigerator breaks down they need a replacement, going in and assessing their low Income Customers and seeing what they can do and what they can invest in in their home now to prevent any sort of issue from happening. And, i mean, i think we well, im not going to speak for everybody, but Energy Efficiency is a goal for most everybody in the utility sector, the Environmental Advocacy community and it would only benefit our low income communities as well because theyre going to have a lower bill all around. I think they just address two very different things, like mark said, lmpiheap is being able to pay your bill now. Weatherization, all those topics are more longterm solutions. I can add one point to that. Just for example in the district, 80 of the households we serve are renters. And 75 of the households we serve, they live in multifamily buildings. Youre looking that in order to solve this problem, you really have to address the multifamily rental sector, which is challenging. The other piece of this, as we try to be holistic in our approach, i mention the solar for all program. Solar for all allows for the installation of largescale Community Renewable energy facilities. And then credits or energy from those largescale solar institutions can be applied to lowincome households energy bills. But youre not truly maximizing that effort if you arent also accoun accounting for Energy Efficiency. Were definitely focused like, laser focused on trying to align those three things. Direct bill assistance, and even the addition of clean energy resources. So the Solar Program require an audit not at this time. Were trying to take all those homes that receive solar power and feed them through our weather sdmra weatherization. Were trying to make sure all three of those programs are talking to each other. One of the tensions in the program is the amount of money available. Its not enough. We survey every few years families who receive Energy Assistance. We did the survey and we have 5 billion. About 10 of the recipients said the furnace was broken. When we surveyed recipients last year when we had about 1. 5 billion less, the number of people reporting broken or furnaces that needed repair or replacement had doubled. So, what it showed is states are making tough choices with reduced funding. One thing thats gone is our ability to repair furnaces and replace them. Again, part of the issue is resources. Efficiency, of course, extremely important. We spend about 10 or 350 million a year of the life funds for efficiency. We could spend a lot more. Theres no question. Thanks very much for the comments today. We know we can dramatically reduce the load of buildings, one by retro fitting or weatherization, building new the district is looking at putting passive houses. One of the standards for future building. The emo is about bringing back direct current to the house. Solar produces direct current. Batteries use direct current. Any appliance uses direct current. But we have to go through this conversion. If we had an energyefficient envelope and direct current, we would dramatically reduce the load of each house. If we thought in terms of a city block with a direct current microgrid, that could aggregate all those houses, then wie really got something that changes the nature of the grid and really impacts this, because thats a longterm thing, right . Is anybody i dont know how many presentations ive been to in the last year here in d. C. On this issue. Is anybody taken a clean slate approach and looking at it holistically as to how we can move forward, say, ten years down the track . I would say that there is an appropriation under the department of energy that congress will appropriate rate for building technologies, just for residential or commercial buildings and making them more Energy Efficient. One of the things the government is able to do with these partnerships, universities, is use the best and the pritest in the country to come up with technologies that will make things more efficient and just better for everyone overall. And so thats something that, yeah, i support it because our companies dont take customer dollars and then spend it on things that may or may not work, but when the government can partner with universities and say, okay, how do we get this to work, how can we make this better, thats something were supportive of and they do that on an annual basis. Im not sure of the specifics, the national labs, if they start from a clean slate or not but im sure they do a good job. And i can comments . So, just from the district perspective, we had a group of local leaders go to belgium to check out the passive house standard. The d. C. Current issue is one of my personal faivorites. I would love to see more activity in that regard. As a district were always trying to kind of drive towards the best solutions. Im not sure if this is directly on point, but im kind of of the philosophy, the kiss philosophy, keep it simple stupid, me being the stupid one. If you look at what is using the energy in a low income house, youre talking and this is in no order. Furnaces, specifically in the north, air conditioning, specifically in the south, hot water and keeping your food cold. Focus on those four appliances. The trouble is i know theres lots of troubles. As i said, keep it simple. The National Association of appliance manufacturers sees no market for direct term and there are 4 Million People in the world that have no electricity, poor electricity connection, still cooking with foss siil fu and no internet access. Theres 380 million in this country. The u. S. Could pool its resources together and its a huge market out there that would not only impact that but radio retroactively impact this. The other thing thats not being talked about is the vulnerability of the grid to attack. And we need to break it up soon. That should also be part of the discussion. It certainly is. Under d. O. E. They have the cesar office, they have cisa, offices dedicated to making sure the grid is safe, which is a top priority for Utility Companies because we can only imagine what would happen if the grid isnt secure. So, thats definitely a top priority. Yeah, ditto. Its just not being talked about in the same kind of conversations. I think a lot has to do with the again, everything revo e revolving around money, where funding is coming from. When youre looking at a program like liheap its coming out of a labor hhs appropriations bill so were not looking at it the same way cesar is looking at their funding. This is definite coordination going on, but i think they face a lot of different issues. Many of those governments electricities are looking at decentralized electricity because they dont have the fund to build a quhowhole grid syste such as solar home systems and that sort of thing. Are we looking at Energy Poverty in america . Too much in the lens of the traditional utility model instead of alternative solutions and developing similar to the work that were doing in developing countries . Well, can you be more specific . Yeah. Solar home systems providing the means instead of just Energy Efficiency, providing the means where these homes dont necessarily need to be linked up to a utility, be connected to the grid and pay those bills . So that would mean we would have to find a way to provide them, you know, with electricity solar panels on their house. I think kenley farmer was speaking on that. And Energy Storage solutions. Well, who would like to go first . I think when youre looking at the population of people who are at risk of having their service cut off, you are not looking at people who are necessarily in a position where they built their home so they were able to make the decision to have their home built entirely on solar panels. When you look at Affordable Energy, the more Affordable Energy resources are going to be the ones most affordable for folks. So, i think thats just not a conversation that a family who is a liheap recipient is going to be having when theyre trying to decide whether they can pay their bill or not is, well, maybe we can turn our whole house solar and not be connected to any utility. Simph that would solve our problem. I think thats a separate issue and looks at when new developments are built, can these houses be built with solar and not necessarily need to be connected to a utility line. Yeah, i think it might be a conversation thats not in the same realm of conversations when theyre trying to decide to pay their utility bill or buy groceries that day. So, in the district we do a lot of direct installation for low income households. Typical district house is kind of a federalstyle rowhouse. You cant put enough panels on that house to fully power the home. So, you know, thats kind of more specific to an urban environment. But i think in terms of what we were discussing about Energy Poverty, we would not want to pursue kind of a policy where people would at certain points in time due to weather or other circumstances not have access to power. I think thats what we do in general. Ive noticed what we do is even if the household has a ways to get energy from the solar farm or anywhere else, we still keep them connected to the grid and help them pay electricity just in case because that utility side seems to be more reliable, at this moment at least. Technological developments, i guess, havent got so far to catch up with it. Cass . Cassandra loveruth, nato. There was an article in this mornings express. It was talking about how the Navajo Nation has a huge problem with people who are not connected to the grid at all. I was wondering does anyone have any data or feeling or looked into in this country how many people do not have Energy Access or are not connected to the grid or in your individual states or industries . Thats exactly my point. That really bothered me it says United States has 100 Energy Access because i dont think we do. Probably part of the reason is we really dont collect that data. Very likely what we also dont do is field type mapping to find exactly out, you know, do all areas get electricity, do gas lines go in all areas or are people forced to take the more expensive fuel like propane or kerosene. Going back to Energy Access and the previous comments, there was Something Real important i wanted to mention. When we were talking about Energy Efficiency, utilities are doing and fuel vendors are doing really good with fuel efficiency. Weve gone a really long way. But i think we sometimes dont think about how the Energy Efficient materializes in the reporting world. For example and we only look at how many quantity the household is using on the energy and were thinking, well, if the household is using a large amount of quantity, we think 1,000, 3,000 kilowatt an hour annually, they must be a really efficient household. We totally ignore the fact that the household isnt Energy Efficient. Even though they got the smiley reports, youre really Energy Efficient. Its theyre really poor and they cant afford energy. We have not thought through all the way when we designed those kind of indicators, what those indicators really mean. So, thats why this kind of talk is really important when you do those kind of strategies that you talk with all the stakeholders who understand the other sides, how your indicators actually realized in the real world. A question in the back. Hi, United States Energy Association. Our Central Mission here is to increase Energy Access around the world. So, kudos to the entire panel for bringing this to light. This question is probably better suited to jessica or nina. Have you guys changed anything youre saying on the hill, structured your comments in the structure of Climate Change to maybe get the attention of the lawmakers . I havent. Nina, have you . I have not either. And the Simple Reasoning being that its Climate Change is a really controversial topic. Were trying to convince every member that they need to be in favor of this program and they need to protect it, so in terms of, you know, our advocacy efforts, its not worth it to bring in that topic because it also doesnt necessarily have a lot to do with making sure every american has access to energy. Its a tangential issue. The avenue i normally take is highlighting how many people in their district are eligible, how many people in their district are not receiving funds, the choices folks are having to make in their daytoday lives because i also think that somebody receiving liheap funds and somebody making that choice between paying their utility bill or buying groceries is also not necessarily thinking about Climate Change as their number one issue theyre thinking about. Theyre thinking about, can i put food on the table for my kids and heat our home when its 25 degrees negative outside. I think its just not a topic that comes up in our meetings. We dont specifically address Climate Change, but we are concerned about weather conditions becoming hotter. Were seeing cooling being more in the midwest and northeast more than in the past. Our basic approach is as Congress Considers adaptation bills, for lack much a better phrase, green for all, those kind of things, that Energy Assistance should be included because as we go forward, low income families are the least able to adapt to hotter temperatures and more extreme weather. We want it make the point that Climate Change and Climate Change adaptation should include provisions to help lowincome families adapt. Whether its installing cooling systems in their home, having just more Funds Available to pay for cooling. But its just a very real problem. Because liheap tends to think just next year. We dont have a tenyear perspective. Its very important to start thinking about that, especially as congress, even though my guess is nothings going to go anywhere this year, but as Congress Considers strategies, we want them to think about how to help low income families adapt. To Climate Change. Over there . Thank you. Jay morrison with Rural Electric cooperatives. The high cost of delivered fuels has come up a couple of times. Is conversion from delivered fuels to highefficient electric appliances and equipment part of the conversation here . Any comments from the group . It should be. There you go. It is part of the conversation. You see some states that focus on conversion. The liheap funds cannot be used for conversion. When we do efficiency, we focus on high star efficient appliances, insulation. Theres overall effort to help increase the efficiency of homes because that does reduce the demand for Energy Efficiency. Time for one last question. Recently there was an article in the hill as houses as part of infrastructure. Have you thought about how you could include your issue as part of infrastructure . Our funds cannot cannot be used for new construction. Thats part of the law. But, again, in terms of infrastructure for Affordable Housing, the most efficient construction makes the biggest difference in terms of what drives the need for assistance. Any comment from our audience im sorry, from our panel . I know even though our funds, lileap funds cannot be used for those kind of things, often we do work liheap incorporation with other programs like Healthy Homes to help. And also a portion we can help is weatherization to make homes Energy Efficient and quality. But thats more the quality of the wellbeing of the household from the public point of view. Healthy homes is mostly the ones that helps us assess all the oe portions to get a better dwelling. Okay. I would like to thank our panelis panelists. Haly, chris, nina, jessica and kenley. Thank you. Mark, thank you very much for organizing this session on this critically important topic. As i said in the beginning, this is kind of a new conversation for the United States Energy Association, but its a conversation that we very much want to be a part of. We look forward to helping continue the conversation and helping to cast a little light on the challenges and issues that we all face. As an industry were very proud of the fact that we think weve been keeping bills low. At one of our recent meetings it was commented that the average home today is paying 1,100 less for all energy. Not just gas and lektd but gasoline and other derivative products. Were very proud of prices being moderate. But what the average prices are doesnt mean much if you cant pay your bill as it is. Again, mark, thank you for organizing this. Let me thank each of the panelists for participating. And lets continue the conversation. If you would, join me one last time and thanking our panelists and mark. Thank you very much. Were adjourned. Thank you for coming. Starting at 8 00 eastern with President Trump at the 75th anniversary followed by former president s barack obama, george w. Bush and bill clinton. Thats tonight here on cspan3. Cspan will have live coverage as the president gives an Independence Day address from the Lincoln Memorial in washington. There will also be military bands and flyovers by the blue angels and the air force one fleet. Watch live thursday at 6 15 p. M. On cspan or cspan. Org or listen live with the free cspan radio app. Robert mueller comes to the house to talk to house judiciary and intelligence committee. The former special counsel will answer questions about his report on the russian interference in the 2016 election. Watch coverage july 17th beginning at 9 00 a. M. Eastern here on cspan3, online at cspan. Org or listen with the free cspan radio app. Tonight on the communicators we talk about the future of journalism in the able of bigtech firms with news media alliances david cavern and Matthew Schruers with the communication industry. Facebook and google, apple, they employ exactly zero journalists, okay . So, the amount of journalism theyre doing is zero. Theyre not going to city hall. Theyre not going to school board meetings. Theyre not covering the president. They rely on delivering our content and monetizing around that content. And if jew dont do that anymore, if we dont have local journalism so the question isnt whether or not we want a strong and vibrant journalism industry. The question is how to get there and should we do it with an antitrust issue. We tried that in the 1970s when newspapers were last threatened by a new media. The broadcast era. It didnt work. Watch the communicators tonight at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan2. New york times opinion writer and editor bari weiss says antisemitism is growing in left and rightleaning political groups. He spoke at the antidefamation leadership summit in washington, d. C. It was moderated by emma green, staff writer at the atlantic