Ratepayer Protection Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2042, the Ratepayer Protection Act of 2015.

The EPA's clean power plan has raised a number of justifiable concerns. However, while I would like to find a solution to the issues raised by today's bill, I don't believe the present bill is the correct solution. For more than a decade, the focus of environmental debate has been on greenhouse gas emissions. In that time, we have passed two comprehensive bills, while the EPA has promulgated dozens of rules.

Now, I am not raising Cain with the EPA. The Agency, backed by the Supreme Court, has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases, including carbon. The Agency, however, has a different approach to regulating than I think many Members of Congress on both sides would prefer.

I acknowledge that global climate change issues are difficult, and the legislation would require a compromise, but this bill doesn't accomplish that. Congress should create a regulatory framework for the 21st century economy and environment. We should recognize that human activity has impacted the climate, but that does not mean regulating sectors of our economy out of existence.

Regardless of the public outreach conducted by the Agency, regulatory overreach can occur. I don't think allowing each successive administration to prescribe policies that affect so much of our way of life is a correct course of action.

We need to recognize our industries, and more importantly, our workers need time to adjust to the new environmental realities and implement changes, both technological and educational.

Mr. Chairman, I know many of our colleagues agree that our job as legislators is to ensure each of our constituencies are equally represented. I prefer we sit down and craft a bill that addresses the many challenges we face not only domestically, but as a world leader.

Unfortunately, the present bill doesn't address those issues I have laid out in a balanced and complete way. Allowing for endless legal challenges or partisan political decisions is not the proper way to handle an issue that affects the entire scope of the environment and the economy.

Today's bill is only a part of the challenge, the part that is directly in front of us, and I don't agree with that approach. I would like the opportunity to sit down with my colleagues to draft a fair and comprehensive legislation that reasonably balances the interests of all parties rather than a sector-by-sector approach that balances none.

I want to make sure that the folks back home get what they need, and I think it is an opportunity to bring all sides together. I have heard certainly from many groups they all want the same thing, but they want certainty.

The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. PALLONE. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, we want to be certain that their companies will be profitable, that their livelihoods will be protected, and their grandchildren have a clean environment. We can accomplish these goals not with endless delay or agency decree.

I want to thank my colleague, Chairman Whitfield, for addressing part of the problem, but let's work together to solve the whole problem.

For this reason, I oppose the bill and urge my colleagues to do the same.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source