Providing for Congressional Disapproval of A Rule Submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that we are considering two resolutions today that are designed to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from moving forward with critical regulations to reduce carbon emissions from existing and new power plants.

That previous resolution that was just aired in the House and now this resolution should be called exactly what they are, that being an attack on EPA's Clean Air Act authority. These resolutions would block this administration or any future administration from taking meaningful action to curb carbon emissions from our power plants.

We have ample evidence from more than four decades' worth of clean air regulation that shows that a strong economy and strong environmental and public health protections do indeed go hand in hand. So let's stop promoting this false notion that we cannot improve the air we breathe while simultaneously growing our economy and, yes, creating jobs.

The EPA's Clean Power Plan will promote public health. The EPA estimates that the Clean Power Plan will reduce carbon pollution from the power sector by 32 percent--32 percent--below 2005 levels. There will also be significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and NO

X emissions.

This is a tremendous public health victory. It will avoid thousands of premature deaths and an estimated 90,000 asthma attacks in children in 2030 alone.

Mr. Speaker, I understand the concerns of the individuals, families, and communities that may have their jobs lost or displaced due to this energy transition. We share those concerns.

I agree that these people who have dedicated their lives to providing us with reliable power deserve a lot more than a pink slip, but we do these people no favors by promising job security that the economy will no longer deliver.

Instead of working together to find ways to ease the transition for States and communities that already are challenged by the many changes that are happening in the electric utility sector, we are spending time trying to turn back the clock. It cannot be done.

EPA is a convenient scapegoat here, but the transition that is occurring is driven by much more than EPA regulations. Natural gas--its abundance and low price--is out-competing coal within the utility sector. Power plants are aging.

Even more important, the economy has changed. Many of the older plants are located in areas that once had far more demand for electricity, demand from large manufacturing plants and heavy industry. Those factories have closed or modernized, both resulting in far less electricity use.

There are new technologies. Wind and solar generation is growing, and those renewable energy sources have strong, broad-based, public support.

Other technologies that enable the electric grid to be smarter, more flexible, and more resilient are being deployed now, and more are in development. State policies to encourage energy efficiency and to diversify energy sources are also driving this transition.

As I have said before, Mr. Speaker, was the transition from wire to wireless communication a war on copper? Was the transition to the automobile a war on horses? No, of course not.

EPA's regulations are playing some role in driving the changes we see. That is true. But the Agency is doing what Congress directed it to do on behalf of all Americans: to act in defense of public health and to act in defense of our environment.

Let's put aside the EPA scapegoating and have a real dialogue on our changing power sector and what can be done to support those working in impacted industries. Meanwhile, we are debating these resolutions as our negotiators are in Paris working on an international climate agreement.

The bottom line is there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is happening and is primarily caused by human activity, particularly the burning of fossil fuels.

Climate change is no longer a problem for future generations. We are already feeling its effects in every corner of our Nation and across the globe, which threaten our economic and our national security.

The Clean Power Plan will play a significant role in the fight against climate change. The United States' action alone won't stop climate change, but action by the rest of the world without the United States' action also will not succeed.

Other countries will have an excuse to delay action as long as the giant, the United States, does as well. This is the dynamic that has prevented us from action in the past. But now we have seen major commitments from the world's largest developed and developing nations.

Mr. Speaker, the Clean Power Plan demonstrates United States leadership and is key to our effort to secure an ambitious and lasting international climate agreement.

We cannot fool ourselves that the Clean Power Plan, an agreement in Paris, or any one action alone will solve all of our climate crises. But these rules will deliver substantial benefits to our society, and they will move us in the right direction.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject these resolutions. Let's work together in a meaningful strategy to address the problems that are emerging from the transition in our own electricity sector while promoting a cleaner, more sustainable Nation and growing significant jobs that are not yet on the radar screen.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), my colleague and friend. He is the cochair of the SEEC Coalition in the House, the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition. He is an outstanding leader with SEEC, and he is an outstanding leader for his district and the Commonwealth of Virginia.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor). She is a member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Power, and that reports to the greater Committee on Energy and Commerce that we both serve. I have witnessed her straightforward thinking and her very strong, passionate response on behalf of climate change.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), a member of the Ways and Means Committee and, more important to this discussion, an outstanding, passionate voice concerning climate change and carbon emission.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source