DeGette Condemns Partisanship of the No More Solyndras Act

WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Rep Diana DeGette (CO-1) spoke in opposition to the "No More Solyndras Act" as flawed legislation born of biased and partisan oversight. While noting the importance of strong oversight and investigation of situations like Solyndra, DeGette criticized the bill for doing nothing to advance our nation's energy security or save the taxpayers money, particularly when the US must ensure our global competiveness in the 21st century clean energy economy.

The following is the text of Rep. DeGette's floor statement on the "No More Solyndras Act" as prepared for delivery:

"Mr. Speaker, during my time in Congress one important lesson I have learned is that good oversight results in good legislation. And biased and partisan oversight results in biased and partisan legislation. The "No More Solyndras Act" is a good example of that rule. It is bad legislation born of biased and partisan oversight.

The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee investigated the Solyndra loan in excruciating detail. But after 18 months, 300,000 pages of documents, 14 interviews with key officials, 5 hearings, and three subpoenas, my Republican colleagues have failed to prove any of the inflammatory accusations they have leveled at the Administration. Instead, they simply repeated one unproven allegation after another, trying to score political points, ignoring key exculpatory evidence and making false and misleading accusations about the Solyndra loan based on cherry picked evidence.

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. My job is not to defend the Administration. If something improper occurred on this loan, I would want to know about it and I would want to expose it. But the facts simply do not support the over-the-top allegations made by Republicans and their oil-funded Super PACs.

The career officials and Bush and Obama Administration appointees who worked on this loan told our investigators that political considerations played no role in decisions on Solyndra. They told us that there was no improper pressure to rush key decisions on the loan, to approve the loan, or to change the terms of the loan. Each and every one of these officials confirmed that there were no corners cut in the process and that decisions were made purely on the merits.

As David Frantz, a career civil servant who has served as director of the loan guarantee program since 2007 under the Bush Administration, stated: "through the whole history of the program from its inception to today, it has not been driven by any political considerations whatsoever."

But Republicans ignored the evidence before the Committee and repeatedly made false and misleading insinuations. For example, Subcommittee Chairman Stearns claimed that the Committee's investigation "reveal[s] a startlingly cozy relationship between wealthy donors and the President's confidants, especially in matters related to Solyndra."

But this is exactly the opposite of what the Committee found. Chairman Stearns was referring to unproven allegations of White House political favoritism on behalf of Solyndra investor George Kaiser, a supporter of President Obama. But the Committee interviewed two key White House decision makers, Adi Kumar and Heather Zichal about their interaction with Mr. Kaiser. The Committee learned that at the time the Solyndra loan was being reviewed, neither of these officials had any knowledge of Mr. Kaiser's support for the President, nor did they have any role in the substantive decisions on the loan. These are the key officials Republican claimed were at the center of the White House's improper activities, and yet they had no knowledge of Mr. Kaiser's political support and no involvement in the decisions on the loan.

These facts directly contradict the allegations Republicans have made for months. And they contradict the findings in the bill we are debating today. But the facts do not appear to matter to House Republicans.

Throughout the investigation, Democrats urged the Chairman to take a different path. We asked for responsible oversight that could actually shed light on why this company failed and what legislation might be needed to advance our energy security and our domestic clean energy sector.

Despite our requests, Republicans refused to hold hearings on the competitive challenges U.S. manufacturers face in the global clean energy market. They refused to seek testimony from the largest private equity investors in Solyndra, to understand why the company attracted so much private capital. And they refused to invite DOE witnesses to take a serious look at the legal and financial rationale behind the subordination of the Solyndra loan.

This was not a fair, complete, or effective investigation. The result? The legislation before us today is also not fair, complete, or effective.

The bill does nothing to advance our nation's energy security or save taxpayers money. It ignores the benefits of the DOE loan programs: 300 million gallons of gasoline saved, the world's largest solar power plants, the nation's first electric vehicle manufacturing facilities, and tens of billions in private investment off the sidelines and into the American economy.

The legislation allows DOE to award $34 billion in future loan guarantees, but prohibits DOE from considering any new applications. Refusing to allow DOE to even consider promising, cutting-edge applications is not the way to advance innovative energy technologies in this country. And the legislation also ties DOE's hands in the event a loan recipient needs additional capital - removing an important and legal refinancing tool that DOE and independent observers agree can help save taxpayer funds.

It's clear that this legislation is a political exercise. It is nothing but an attempt to keep the word Solyndra in the news and to give Republicans a platform to repeat their false and misleading accusations.

It is disappointing legislation and I urge members to vote no."