or Login to see your representatives.

Access Candidates' and Representatives' Biographies, Voting Records, Interest Group Ratings, Issue Positions, Public Statements, and Campaign Finances

Simply enter your zip code above to get to all of your candidates and representatives, or enter a name. Then, just click on the person you are interested in, and you can navigate to the categories of information we track for them.

Public Statements

Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011

Floor Speech

By:
Date:
Location: Washington, DC

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HARPER. I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Mississippi is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. HARPER. This amendment filed by the gentleman from Illinois would require a GAO study to be completed, 1 year, analyzing how health care costs are affected if EPA does not proceed with regulation in its role as determined in Massachusetts v. EPA.

You know, this case did not determine whether or how EPA should regulate greenhouse gases. To the contrary, it did not mandate that EPA move forward with global warming regulations, and it certainly did not direct the EPA to begin regulating tens of thousands or millions of stationary sources across the United States economy.

In any event, no GAO study is needed because the EPA, itself, has already concluded that greenhouse gases pose no direct adverse health effects.

Here's what the EPA has stated: ``Current and projected ambient greenhouse gas concentrations remain well below published thresholds for any direct adverse health effects, such as respiratory or toxic effects.''

So even if the EPA had concluded that there were direct health impacts, EPA's own administrators concluded that the agency's greenhouse gas rules are not going to be effective in appreciably reducing temperatures or global emissions.

Administrator Jackson has said: ``We will not ultimately be able to change the amount of CO

2 that is accumulating in the atmosphere alone.'' If anything, EPA's global warming rules will cause global emissions to increase as U.S. manufacturing and industry goes to countries with much less stringent environmental laws.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source:
Back to top