EPA Regulatory Relief Act of 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chair, my amendment is very simple. What it says is that if the EPA administrator finds that the regulation creates more than 1,000 jobs, then the administrator can shorten the 5-year delay which the bill would impose.

So, very simply, the EPA administrator can come forward and say, look, 1,000 jobs have been created by this, and therefore this delay of 5 years will be shortened. That's all the amendment calls for. And in a time when we have such tremendous need for jobs in America, I would think that if the EPA can identify 1,000 jobs created in connection with this rule, then we should certainly be able to shorten the 5-year period of delay.

So I ask for support for this amendment because I'm sure that everybody on both sides of the aisle agrees wholeheartedly with job creation.

And there has been, I believe, a false choice offered to the American people. And this false choice is very simple to describe, and that is that we can either have rules that limit emissions from boilers or we can have jobs, but, according to some people in this body, we can't have both. We can't have both clean lungs, be free of mercury, be free of other neurotoxins and contaminants, and have jobs. I argue we can have both. And if the EPA administrator can demonstrate that there are jobs created here, then the 5-year period should in fact be shortened.

I argue that what we need to do here is to stand for jobs. And according to EPA, what we have seen is that this underlying rule, which would be delayed by the bill, actually will create and has been estimated to create up to 2,200 jobs. So let's see if that's actually right. Let's see if the proposal, as set forth by the rule, would create jobs as the EPA administrator says it will. And if it does, we should say let's go forth.

The economic impact of the boiler regulation is exceptionally positive.

The EPA's data shows that by reducing the particulate matter pollution from industrial boilers we will generate net economic benefits of $22 billion to $56 billion every year. So why wouldn't we want to take full advantage of that economic activity, as all of us are concerned about jobs.

The over 40 years of success of the Clean Air Act have demonstrated that strong environmental protections and strong economic growth go hand in hand. They are not one versus the other. They go together. Since 1970, the Clean Air Act has reduced key pollutants by more than 70 percent while, at the same time, the economy has grown by over 200 percent. So much for the claim that regulation kills jobs. That's not true. It's not right. It's inaccurate. And I say, by supporting my amendment, we can see who's right.

I see no reason why the Republican majority wouldn't support my amendment if they believe, as they claim, environmental regulations hurt jobs. We have a chance to see. And I want to see if people really believe what they claim, and they can demonstrate their commitment to what they argue by supporting my amendment.

The benefits outweigh the projected costs of compliance by as much as 13 to 1 in this case.

The misleading report from the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners claims that over 300,000 jobs are at risk. This is wrong. The National Association of Clean Air Agencies found that the industry commission report is based on exaggerations and omissions. The report from the industry substantially overestimates the cost of compliance with regulation. And the boiler owners have ignored many benefits of the rule--thousands of new jobs to install and operate and maintain pollution control equipment.

The public health benefit, that is nearly $40 billion a year. Creating green economy jobs to make our air cleaner would create jobs throughout the supply chain--for example, installing and operating scrubbers.

So it's important that we make jobs the focus of our work here in Congress. The Republican majority has seen fit not to introduce any jobs bills during its time as the majority. Here's an opportunity to say, if you really believe that regulations kill jobs, vote for my amendment and we will be able to see, because the administrator, if 1,000 jobs can be generated, will be able to delay this rule.

Now, if you really don't believe it and you just want to do what the boiler owners want, then of course you will vote ``no.'' But if you really believe what you say, you will vote ``yes.''

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source