Weekly Report - October 7th

Statement

This has been a busy week in Washington and one that has a direct and immediate impact on the District.

Among the bills we voted on this week, there were two pieces of legislation dealing with the EPA. The first bill, H.R. 2681, directs the EPA to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of three rules (collectively known as "Cement MCAT") before moving forward.

I know you are busy, so I'll keep the explanation brief. Basically the EPA is trying to force all cement manufacturers to invest in the latest and greatest emissions reducing technology regardless of the cost.

There are about one hundred cement facilities in the country and we've got two of them. We therefore have a serious stake in getting the environmental and economic aspects of this right.

By their own estimates, the EPA concedes that Cement MACT will cost the nation's cement facilities $2.2 billion, resulting in the possible "idling" or closure of twelve plants. They also concede that the rule will drive up the average cost of cement by 5.4 percent and that domestic production will likely fall by 12 percent.

Maybe it goes without saying, but aside from the hundreds and hundreds of jobs in the district that are directly tied to the cement manufacturing industry (plant workers, drivers, logistics specialists -- and the hundreds of employees of all of the restaurants and stores they keep afloat), we've got thousands and thousands of unemployed construction workers who don't need to see the cost of one of the most common building materials go up.

And beyond all that, when domestic production of concrete does drop in this country by 12 percent, we're not going to suddenly need less cement. The manufacturing jobs will simply move to China or some other country.

I want to be clear about this. Florida's natural resources, particularly along the Nature Coast, are our most precious asset. Our local economy is based in no small part on tourism and the desire of thousands to make Central Florida home for their retirement years. We all breathe and drink and go fishing in the same air and water. Our wives and kids (and someday grandkids) do too. We have a genuine responsibility to make sure that we get the balance right between protecting the environment and ensuring that manufacturing jobs stay here at home.

All we are arguing for in this legislation is balance and care with something that could ruin the lives of hundreds, if not thousands of our neighbors. We've got 13% unemployment in our community and what this legislation is telling the EPA to do is to go back and conduct a cost-benefit analysis before they push these rules through.

There isn't a person out there who wants their kids drinking polluted water. If there is, the EPA should find him and bring him to my office so I can set him straight. But what we're wrestling with here is that we've got 219 regulations currently under consideration -- each one of which would cost $100 million or more to implement. Beyond that, we've got 4,226 different regulations, at varying costs, and at varying stages of development. And if you're a small manufacturer in this country, what you're being told by your government right now is, "go figure it out… and create some jobs while you're at it."

It's a killer and anybody who hasn't blindly signed on to follow the EPA can tell you that.

In any case, we passed the Cement MCAT bill in the House today and we've got another similar bill that we'll be voting on next week. I'll have more about that later, but since this one is directly tied to the jobs your neighbors are hanging onto, I wanted to get this one out now.

As always, let me know what's on your mind and please feel free to forward this on to others. The more input I get, the better I can do my job. Thanks again.

Sincerely,
Rich Nugent
Member of Congress

Source