Last Friday, February 3rd, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R, FL-01) introduced a bill in the House or Representatives. The bill is transparently called “H.R. 861 – To Terminate the Environmental Protection Agency” (EPA). Here is the link to the bill.

The Environmental Protection Agency had a 2016 annual budget of $8.139 billion and a staff of 15,376; without clarification (it’s so new that the full body of the bill isn’t available yet), this bill seems that it would eliminate all of it.

RELATED: The EPA tragedy in Colorado isn’t the only thing that agency might muck up

It has three co-sponsors: Rep. Thomas Massie (R, KY-04); Rep. Steven Palazzo (R, MS-04); and Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R, GA-11). Once the bill leaves committee, it will be introduced to the House floor.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates. </s> A Republican congressman from Florida has introduced legislation aimed at eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a federal agency created in 1970 by President Richard Nixon and tasked with protecting human health and the environment.

No text has yet been published for H.R. 861, introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Matt Gaetz on 3 February 2017, aside from its title calling for the agency's "termination." (Gaetz's office told Snopes.com in an e-mail that they did not yet have the final draft of the bill, but they provided us with an interim copy which currently states that "The Environmental Protection Agency shall terminate on December 31, 2018.")

The freshman lawmaker had previously told the Pensacola News Journal that if passed, the EPA's functions would fall under individual state jurisdictions:

When it was originally created, states and local communities didn’t have the technology or expertise to protect the environment. We’ve come a long way in the last 50 years. Time and again, I’ve seen constituents unknowingly subject themselves to the oppressive jurisdiction of the EPA by doing simple things.

Gaetz has also said on Twitter that the bill would not impact the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which has monitored rising sea levels in his state that have been attributed to climate change.

According to the Huffington Post, Gaetz was more critical of the agency in an e-mail he sent to Republican colleagues, saying that "the American people are drowning in rules and regulations promulgated by unelected bureaucrats. And the Environmental Protection Agency has become an extraordinary offender."

Gaetz's bill has been co-sponsored by three other GOP congressmen: Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and Rep. Steven Palazzo of Mississippi.

In January 2017, President Donald Trump's administration reportedly implemented a funding and grant freeze against the EPA while also limiting the agency's external communications. Trump's appointee to head the agency, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, has publicly expressed skepticism regarding climate change and has sued the EPA multiple times to combat regulations governing the gas and oil industries. </s> A House Republican is working on legislation that if passed would completely abolish the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Freshman Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) outlined his plan in a letter to colleagues obtain by The Hill and first reported by The Huffington Post.

“Today, the American people are drowning in rules and regulations promulgated by unelected bureaucrats; and the Environmental Protection Agency has become an extraordinary offender,” Gaetz wrote in the letter soliciting support from lawmakers.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Our small businesses cannot afford to cover the costs associated with compliance, too often leading to closed doors and unemployed Americans,” he continued. “It is time to take back our legislative power from the EPA and abolish it permanently.”

It would be the first piece of legislation sponsored by Gaetz, who represents the tip of Florida’s panhandle and was previously a state lawmaker.

The EPA was created 46 years ago and has a budget of more than $8 billion. It is responsible for enforcing numerous landmark laws like the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Superfund Act.

President Trump once said on the campaign trail that he wanted to abolish the EPA, but later expressed support for at least some of its functions.

His nominee to lead the EPA, Scott Pruitt, has said that he supports the agency’s existence, but it has gone too far under former President Barack Obama Barack Hussein ObamaBiden makes supporters nervous; his gaffes could derail him Difference between primaries and caucuses matters in this election Harris apologizes and says she didn't hear questioner call Trump policies 'mentally retarded' MORE.

Gaetz did not specify which federal authority would be responsible for enforcing the laws that currently fall within the EPA’s jurisdiction, or if the laws would also be repealed. </s> GOP Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz is preparing to introduce a “Green Real Deal” resolution to contrast with Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal, according to Politico.

Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her resolution on Feb. 7 and immediately faced criticism for its scope and potential cost, which reached toward tens of trillions of dollars. (RELATED: Ocasio-Cortez Bungled Green new Deal’s Release. Her Staff Took Its Webpage Offline)

A draft of Gaetz’s resolution, obtained by Politico, recognizes risks to the U.S. from climate change, citing Department of Defense reports that identify certain military assets and bases as at risk to rising sea levels and increasing severe weather events, such as hurricanes.

“Climate change creates new risks and exacerbates existing vulnerabilities in communities across the United States, presenting growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of economic growth,” the draft says.

Energy lobbyists have seemingly received copies of Gaetz’s resolution are beginning to line up behind it in support.

“Congressman Gaetz deserves to be applauded for taking the lead in crafting a bold resolution that identifies actionable climate solutions that will benefit America’s economy, environment, and national security,” Heather Reams, executive director of Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, said in a statement.

Gaetz’s resolution pushes market-driven innovation and competition from companies developing green energy technology. It does not set any emission reduction goals.

The draft pledges “to reduce and modernize regulations so that clean energy technologies can be deployed, and compete.”

In contrast to the Green New Deal, the draft Green Real Deal resolution takes a positive view on nuclear energy. Ocasio-Cortez’s resolution did not mention the energy sector, causing some controversy among pro-nuclear energy experts.

Gaetz’s legislation takes a wide-ranging approach to cutting emissions through investing in fossil fuel carbon capture technology, new and updated nuclear and hydropower placements, making the power grid more efficient and granting energy companies improved access to public lands.

The resolution pledges to “empower individuals, states, and the marketplace” to develop and disseminate new technology that will cut the United States’ carbon emissions. </s> BOSTON – U.S. Sen. Ed Markey is a lead sponsor of the Green New Deal, a resolution mapping out a path to address climate change and fuel a greener economy, but he won't be voting in favor of the proposal when it hits the U.S. Senate floor Tuesday.

Dismissing the vote scheduled by U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as a "sham vote" that seeks to "make a mockery of the debate in the Senate on climate action," Markey said Monday that he and other Democrats will vote "present" Tuesday as a way of rebuffing McConnell, a Kentucky Republican. It could also allow Democrats to avoid a vote that could reveal rifts within the party.

"They are calling this vote without any hearings, without any expert testimony, without any true discussion about the cost of climate inaction and the massive potential for clean energy job creation," Markey said at his Boston office.

He added, "Senate Democrats intend to show unity on the issue of climate change. We will be turning the tables on Republicans who have no plan on climate change and have no intention of passing legislation to combat it."

The nonbinding resolution, which Markey sponsored with U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, seeks to move the country toward "net-zero greenhouse gas emissions" and the creation of "millions of good, high-wage jobs" in clean energy sectors. It is a resolution, not detailed legislation, and does not prescribe specific ways to attain the goals it lays out.

McConnell's decision to call a vote on the Green New Deal resolution is similar to a 2017 attempt to compel Democrats to vote on an amendment that proposed an entirely government-run, single-payer health care system, Politico reported. That amendment failed 0-57, with 43 Senate Democrats voting "present," Politico said.

"It's just a political stunt by Mitch McConnell to play games with an existential threat to the planet," Markey said Monday when asked why Democrats would vote present rather than in favor of the resolution. "We're going to stand together on the process in order to ensure that we have hearings on the substance of climate change, which they refuse to have."

McConnell has previously bashed the Green New Deal as unrealistic and too expensive. He's also advanced Republican claims that the resolution would lead to the elimination of all combustion engines.

"Cars, lawn mowers, commercial airliners – everything must go," he said on the Senate floor earlier this month, according to a transcript from his office. He added, "All this and more can be ours – for the low, low price of a staggering expansion of centralized government and – wait for it – upwards of 93 trillion dollars. $93 trillion is more than every dollar our federal government has spent in its entire history to date, combined. It's more than the combined annual GDP of every nation on Earth."

Markey, who was joined by activists from the Environmental League of Massachusetts, the Sierra Club and labor union SEIU 32BJ, pointed out that McConnell is calling for a vote on a resolution that tries to address climate change while plains states cope with significant flooding and the associated economic pain.

"Biblical, record-breaking flooding linked to extreme weather and climate change has devastated the Midwest. Thousands of families were forced to flee their homes and a U.S. Air Force base in Nebraska was seriously crippled," he said. "The deadly flooding in the Midwest is what climate change in the American heartland looks like. But no region of the country is immune."

Regardless of Tuesday's anticipated vote on the Green New Deal, Markey said the resolution has succeeded in "helping to organize, mobilize and galvanize the public" and has served as "the opening of a national discussion" about climate change and a green economy.

"There has been more climate debate in the last six weeks than in the last six years," he said, noting that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were not asked about climate change during their 2016 debates.

He said climate change has been catapulted into the top tier of issues for the 2020 presidential and Congressional elections – and that Republicans can ignore it "but only at their own political peril."

He said the Senate could be asked again to weigh in on climate change and related legislation once the U.S. House, which is under control of the Democrats, begins to hold hearings and advance bills through committees.

"We're more than willing to have this political debate. The hearings will be held in the House, legislation will start to come out of the House and then it will be sent over to the Senate and we will see if Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell have the ability to stonewall a debate for a year-and-a-half on climate change and the Green New Deal," he said. "If they try to do that, they are going to do so at great political peril in the election of 2020." </s> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee said on Tuesday it planned a June 20 hearing on the Trump administration’s proposal to freeze fuel efficiency standards at 2020 levels through 2026.

FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Capitol building reflected in water at sunrise on the day of the U.S. midterm election in Washington, U.S., November 6, 2018. REUTERS/Jim Bourg

Two subcommittees will jointly hold the hearing, committee Chairman Frank Pallone and other Democrats said in a statement, saying they “look forward to questioning both the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency.”

Heidi King, the deputy NHTSA administrator, and Mary Nichols, the head of the California Air Resources Board, are both likely to testify at the hearing, officials said.

Last week, 17 major automakers including General Motors Co, Volkswagen AG and Toyota Motor Corp urged the White House to resume talks with California aimed at avoiding a lengthy legal battle over the standards.

Pallone and Representatives Jan Schakowsky and Paul Tonko said in a joint statement that “rolling back our clean car standards threatens American jobs, public health, the climate and consumers.

“The automobile industry doesn’t even support the Trump Administration’s proposal – no one does, except the oil companies that stand to profit from Americans spending more at the pump filling up less efficient cars,” the statement added.

Automakers last week backed a compromise on vehicle emissions, warning that the lack of a deal could lead to “an extended period of litigation and instability.”

In a letter to California Governor Gavin Newsom also signed by Daimler AG, Ford Motor Co and Hyundai Motor Corp, the 17 car companies urged a compromise “midway” between the Obama era standards that require annual decreases of about 5% in emissions and the Trump administration’s proposal.

In a separate letter to President Donald Trump last week, they urged “both the federal government and California to resume discussions and to remain open to regulatory adjustments.”

The White House said on Thursday that California had “failed to put forward a productive alternative, and we are moving forward to finalize a rule with the goal of promoting safer, cleaner, and more affordable vehicles.”

Eighteen states, including California, have vowed to sue the administration if it finalizes the freeze. In August 2018, the administration called for stripping California of the right to impose stricter emissions rules or to require a rising number of zero-emissions vehicles.

The Trump plan would increase U.S. oil consumption by about 500,000 barrels a day by the 2030s but reduce automakers’ regulatory costs by more than $300 billion, the agencies said. </s> WASHINGTON ― The major climate and energy proposal known as the Green New Deal failed to advance in the Senate on Tuesday as Democrats slammed Republicans for orchestrating a bad-faith exercise designed to expose divisions in their ranks.

Most Democrats, most of whom view the resolution as an ambitious road map to address the threat of climate change, declined to engage by voting “present.” Republicans, meanwhile, all voted not to advance the resolution after spending weeks ridiculing it as “loony,” unnecessary and wildly unrealistic.

The measure, which was nonbinding, fell short of the necessary 60-vote threshold needed to advance to a final vote. Four members of the Democratic caucus voted against it: Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, Doug Jones of Alabama, and independent Angus King of Maine.

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) jointly issued the resolution, which staked out the basic tenets of what future legislation on a Green New Deal should strive for, including guaranteeing clean-energy jobs to millions of Americans, bolstering electric vehicle manufacturing and generating as much of the nation’s electricity from renewables as possible over the next decade.

Sixty-four Democrats signed on as co-sponsors from the start, a number that ballooned to 100 in just a few weeks, with 89 co-sponsors in the House and 11 in the Senate. But the resolution proved divisive as Republicans lampooned it with unfounded claims that the proposal called for banning hamburgers and risked triggering a “genocide.”

Unions that rely on the fossil fuel industry for high-wage jobs came out against the resolution. In response, some moderate Democrats dismissed the resolution’s goals of aiding Americans suffering the health effects of pollution and issued their own weaker, less specific climate proposals instead.

Last month, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced he would be bringing the resolution to the floor to give senators an “opportunity to go on record and see how they feel,” betting it would prove too radical for a good number of Democrats.

But Democratic leadership urged members to unite against the gambit by voting “present,” a strategy they view as their best option to contain divisions within their ranks regarding the resolution. The party executed a similar move in 2017 when Republicans teed up a vote on a “Medicare for All” plan authored by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-V.t.).

In just six short weeks, everyone is debating a Green New Deal. There’s been more debate about climate change in the last six weeks than in the last six years.

Supporters of the resolution maintained they had achieved what they had set out to do by igniting a national conversation about climate change, an issue that scientists have grown increasingly alarmed about. Indeed, coverage of climate change increased greatly on cable news shows, especially on Fox News.

“This resolution has struck a powerful chord with the American people,” Markey said at a Monday press conference. “The Green New Deal was always designed to be an opening of a national discussion. And it has worked. In just six short weeks, everyone is debating a Green New Deal. There’s been more debate about climate change in the last six weeks than in the last six years.”

While many GOP senators relished mocking Democrats over the Green New Deal and its botched rollout, few have offered serious proposals of their own to address the threat of climate change.

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) on Monday called the Green New Deal a “silly proposal,” but credited it for bringing the issue of climate change “to the top” and “forcing Republicans to say what we’re for.” To that end, he said he supported a “Manhattan Project for clean energy that focuses on advanced computing, solar, green buildings, cars — those are all items Republicans should be able to support.” But Alexander said the matter ought to be handled by boosting funding to existing programs rather than through a new, transformative proposal like the Green New Deal.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), the first 2020 contender to speak, recounted the destruction she witnessed in Iowa last week, where the Midwest’s historic floods wreaked havoc. She cited the mounting death toll from climate catastrophes in wildfire-charred California and storm-ravaged Puerto Rico, Texas and Florida, and criticized Republicans for zealously reversing Obama-era greenhouse gas regulations. </s> WASHINGTON — The Senate confirmed Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency, an agency Republicans desperately want to rein in after what they charge was eight years of dangerous activism under the Obama administration that hurt businesses, jobs and the economy.

Pruitt maybe just the person to do it. As Oklahoma attorney general he sued the agency many times in that pursuit and has vowed to curb the EPA’s regulatory reach once in office.

Democratic senators Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who both represent energy producing states, voted for Pruitt. Moderate Republican Susan Collins of Maine voted against him.

“He’s exceptionally qualified,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. “He’s dedicated to environmental protection. And, as someone with state government experience, he understands the real-world consequences of EPA actions and knows that balance is the key to making policies that are sustainable over the long-term.”

The vote came a day after a federal judge ruled the Oklahoma attorney general’s office must turn over thousands of emails related to Pruitt’s communications with fossil fuel companies, which have a large presence in his state.

Environmental activists and many Democrats pushed to delay the confirmation vote until those emails are released — probably sometime next week — but Republicans had no interest in a delay, especially after Democrats deliberately slow-walked the confirmation process for many of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet.

In a last fit of protest, Democrats kept the Senate in session overnight so they could make speeches about their concerns with Pruitt and his close ties to the oil and gas industry.

“Mr. Pruitt has extreme environmental policy views. And he has zero experience running an environmental protection agency. In fact, he does not believe in the fundamental mission of EPA,” said Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico. “Attorney General Pruitt made his name opposing EPA rules that protect human health and the environment, fighting against clean air and clean water, disregarding the science behind the EPA’s protections for human health and the environment, on behalf of for-profit special interests, not the public interest.”

At a press conference Friday, Merkley said the first batch of emails will be released on Tuesday, with a second batch released on February 26. They scanned documents will be transferred to the Center for Media and Democracy, then the Senate will get copies. So Democrats originally requesting the vote be postponed until March 3, but that request was denied.

Democrats also lost a motion to extend debate until February 27, in a mostly party-line vote.

McConnell argued that Democrats were simply using stalling tactics. “The goal here is to feed the base, to give people a chance to get organized and complain and they want to have Pruitt out there over the recess so all of their supporters can come express themselves,” McConnell told reporters Friday.

In an extraordinary lobbying blitz against Pruitt, the labor union that represents EPA employees urged their members to call senators and urge them to vote against Pruitt.

The Senate is scheduled to begin a week long recess after votes Friday and will return to confirm more Cabinet nominees when they return.

Next up will be Commerce nominee Wilbur Ross, Interior nominee Ryan ZInke, Housing and Urban Development nominee Dr. Ben Carson, and Energy nominee Rick Perry. </s> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Republicans on Tuesday defeated the “Green New Deal” resolution that called for tackling climate change by moving the United States off fossil fuels, while Democrats said the vote was a political stunt on an issue that will rise in importance.

The vote was 57 against the resolution in the 100-member chamber, with 43 Democrats voting “present.” Republicans won over Democratic Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema and one independent senator, Angus King, who usually votes with the Democrats.
U.S. Representative Matt Gaetz proposes a bill to eliminate the United States Environmental Protection Agency.