[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 26, 2023)] [Senate] [Page S1357] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Date: 2023-04-26
Chamber: SENATE
Mr. PADILLA: I rise today in opposition to a resolution that has been presented to overturn the EPA's lifesaving heavy-duty NOX rule. Across the country, heavy-duty vehicles, including trucks and buses, make up one-third of all transportation NOX emissions. Now, this is the same source of smog and soot that darkens skies in many communities and certainly poisons the lungs of too many Americans. In an effort to address those real challenges, the EPA's heavy-duty vehicle pollution rule is projected to cut NOX emissions from the heavy-duty sector by nearly half over the next dozen years. This represents a monumental investment and significant step forward in our Nation's health and air quality that will benefit all Americans. But instead of supporting this rule, some Members have suggested that we reverse course and instead leave in place an outdated pollution standard--a rule that even the heavy-duty vehicle industry acknowledges is too weak--and, in so doing, endanger the lives of thousands of Americans. This makes no sense. Consider the Inland Empire in Southern California. Truly this region, this geographical area, is the heart of our Nation's supply chain. No one in the Inland Empire wants the economy to shutter, but residents in the region know all too well the dangers that surround them. Children's playgrounds, veterans health centers, schools, and entire neighborhoods are surrounded by warehouses and distribution centers. Now, the warehouses in and of themselves aren't threatening our air quality or public health, but think about the emissions from the trucks that carry goods to and from those warehouses. As a result, communities throughout the Inland Empire, which happen to also be mostly Latino and low-income communities, experience higher rates of asthma, decreased lung function in children, and higher rates of cancer. It is not hyperbole. The data is there. Statistics are clear. It is not just the Inland Empire. I raise that as the most significant example. In fact, it is communities all across the country near freight corridors that are impacted--almost 72 million people who live near freight routes. So yes, Mr. President, I am standing up for the fundamental human right to clean air for all Americans. Now, truth be told, I actually wanted the EPA to be more ambitious in its final NOX rule and to align more closely with California's stringent heavy-duty vehicle rules. California proudly leads the Nation in decarbonization and emissions reduction, and we have done so by working thoughtfully and collectively with industry and communities to cut deadly NOX and other pollution from vehicles while we transition to zero-emission vehicles. So to my colleagues who claim negative business or economic impacts, California is doing this while having just grown from being the fifth largest economy in the world to the fourth largest economy in the world. Economic growth and environmental protection are not mutually exclusive. Economic growth and protecting public health are not mutually exclusive. We can and must do it all together. Last I checked from business leaders whom I talked to--I mentioned industries at the table and also at the State level--they actually appreciate that regulatory certainty that I know you and I have talked about, Mr. President, where we lay out a rule, an agenda, a policy objective, and work together to create a plan to achieve it and keep that plan, not ripsaw back and forth about what regulations are going to be in place from one year to the next, from one congressional majority to the next, et cetera. I am also continuing to push the EPA to finalize a strong phase 3 heavy-duty vehicle rule with my clean air and clean transportation partners in the Senate, including Chairman Carper of the Environment and Public Works Committee and Senator Markey and others. But, at the very least, we can't undercut two decades of progress we have already made, and this CRA undermines the scientific and technical expertise behind these important standards and public health protections. And we know that the CRA is part of a bigger effort to stop the bold action we are taking to tackle the climate crisis. So, colleagues, for the sake of clean air, for the sake of our environment, and for the sake of the health of all communities across the country, I urge you to oppose this repeal. I yield the floor.