Date: 2011-04-06
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

I thank the distinguished gentleman for all of his work. I come as a peacemaker. Madam Chair. Houston. by the American Lung Association. is the seventh most ozonepolluted city in the Nation. The Supreme Court clearly said under the Clean Air Act that it authorized the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases as it makes a judgment that it impacts on climate change. At the same time there are industries that happen to be oil and gas that can sit down and benefit from a real study that will talk about best practices and also have the engagement that we need to have. It is reckless to talk about what scientists have said. The Members are not scientists. and I believe you cannot rid the EPA of its jurisdiction. I would ask my colleagues to be thoughtful. along with the industry. and lets have a reasonable study. This impacts national security. I ask my colleagues to support my amendment. Madam Chair. I rise today to offer an amendment to H.R. 910. "Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011." H.R. 910 prematurely eliminates the responsibilities of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. My amendment would require an assessment of the industry by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ensure accurate consideration of how proposed regulations would affect energy production levels. feasibility of implementation on the industry. as well as the adverse environmental effects of delaying implementation of proposed regulations. My amendment would also ensure the Environmental Protection Agency retains its ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the authority provided by the Clean House Act. I cannot envision any American living in a polluted area wanting to support a permanent ban on the Environmental Protection Agencys ability to regulate greenhouse gases. The potential negative impact of greenhouse gases is supported by the scientific community. The National Academy of Sciences reported in 2010: "Climate change is occurring. is caused largely by human activities. and poses significant risks forand in many cases already affectinga broad range of human and natural systems." It is clear that quality of our air impacts the quality of our health. The Clean Air Scientific Advisor Committee. EPAs independent science advisors. reviewed evidence from roughly 1.700 studies in the scientific research of the health impact of ozone. They unanimously concluded that the EPA needs ozone standards. This would ensure an adequate margin of safety for the public as required by law. This is about protecting our nations health. industry. and our environment. As a Houstonian the affects of H.R. 910 are of particular concern to me. A study conducted by the American Lung Association ranked Houston as the 7th most ozonepolluted city in the country. Children. teens. senior citizens. and people with lung diseases like asthma. chronic bronchitis. emphysema and others are particularly vulnerable to poor air quality and are at risk for developing irreversible lung damage. A rise in poor air quality has the potential to increase emergency room visits and hospital admissions for respitory problems which increases the cost of healthcare to tax payers. In HoustonBaytownHuntsville. TX. over a million children under the age of 18 will be negatively impacted if air quality continues to decline. Children exposed to air pollution suffer stunted long growth. as well as development of asthma. and increased respitory infections. According to the American Lung Association. researchers have also concluded that prenatal exposure to air pollution harms children. and increase the risk of babies being born with low birth weight. We owe it to our children to provide clean. healthy air. We have an agency that is charged with regulating our air quality. My amendment would ensure the EPA can continue to protect our nations health by regulating green house emissions. This amendment will ensure that the EPA reports to Congress its findings on the long term negative impacts of greenhouse gases. Findings from a recent EPA study titled "Assessment of the Impacts of Global Change on Regional U.W. Air Quality: A Synthesis of Climate Change Impacts on GroundLevel Ozone" suggest that climate change may lead to higher concentrations of groundlevel ozone. a harmful pollutant. Additional impacts of climate change include. but are not limited to: increase drought. more heavy downpours and flooding. and harm to water resources. agriculture. wildfire and ecosystems." Not only would the deregulation of greenhouse gases impact the health of our citizens. it will also. have a negative impact on our ability to maintain and create new jobs. Poor health and low air quality only discourages industries from coming to an area. New industries will not be willing to move into areas that are polluted which negatively impacts job growth in those communities. Currently there are programs in Houston such as the Energy Efficiency Incentive Program which aims to significantly reduce Houstons emissions of greenhouse gases and criteria air pollutants. The oil and gas industry is also investing alternative energy sources and improving air quality standards. such initiatives look towards the future. ensures job creation. and protects our nations health. I believe the Environmental Protection Agency plays an essential role in providing appropriate and balanced guidance to the industry. which in turn encourages them to have a workable timeframe to determine the appropriate measures to improve our nations air quality. The EPA ensures that energy industries have a reasonable standard to base their operations. My amendment requires the EPA to carefully study this issue and to determine the long term impact on health. the industry and the environment. I strongly urge my colleagues to support a reasonable. fair and measured response to addressing regulation of greenhouse gases. Under current law. The Clean Air Act provides the EPA with the authority to take steps that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. On April 2. 2007. the Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gas. constitute "air pollutants" as the phrased is used in the Clean Air Act. Such pollutants may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. As a result. the government has the legal authority to issue standards for greenhouse gas emissions. As the Clean Air Act falls under the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency. it is therefore legitimate for the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases. My amendment ensures compliance with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling. As written. H.R. 910 would overturn Massachusetts v. EPA. As written H.R. 910 would overturns a ruling by the Supreme Court. Such an action is too extreme when there are other more tenable solutions available. We cannot allow a total eradication/elimination of the responsibilities of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases. This would impact the health of our nation. negatively impact industries. and overturns a Supreme Court ruling. The present version of H.R. 910. without amendment fails to provide a studied and measured approach when trying to find a balance between the need for our nation to maintain quality air levels and the need for our nation to continue job growth. This bill takes a sledge hammer approach that is too extreme. The purpose behind my amendment is to reach a compromise. To ensure that fair and reasonable regulations can be implemented without adverse effects to our nations air and our nations industry. Madam Chair. I believe it is very important to provide the EPA with the opportunity to carefully study this matter and report back to Congress within 60 days and urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment.