Tenney Rejects Hanna's Support of Obama's Climate Change Agenda

Press Release

Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney (R, C--New Hartford) and candidate for Congress in New York's 22nd Congressional District, today criticized Rep. Richard Hanna for being one of only two Republicans to vote against a measure that would nullify part of Obama's Clean Power Plan. Obama's plan, which hands more power over to the already bloated Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), would enact strict regulations on emissions from all existing power plants, leading to serious job loss and hikes in electricity rates for individuals and businesses, with no measurable environmental benefits. Additionally, Hanna was one of ten Republicans to vote against a measure that would stop the same excessive regulations from being placed on all new power plants.

"Rep. Hanna has voted to advance Obama's job killing agenda by supporting these onerous regulations that will stifle businesses and dramatically drive up the cost of energy. Obama's plan would allow the EPA, a bureaucratic executive agency that has been riddled with scandal, to usurp state oversight and control over the electricity industry," said Tenney. "Many studies have shown that these costly regulations will fail to produce any meaningful impact on our climate or improvement to our environment."

Hanna stated in the explanation of his vote that he, "voted against this resolution because although this particular rule is deeply flawed, we should not tie our hands from promulgating responsible, market-based rules to reduce carbon emissions."

Tenney continued, "If the EPA's regulations are "deeply flawed' then why did Hanna vote to allow them? This deeply flawed plan will hurt the American worker by forcing businesses, who will be hit hard by an increased cost in energy, to pack up and move to countries where operating costs are lower."

According to a report by the Heritage Foundation, these regulations could increase the cost of electricity by 12 to 17 percent by 2031, cause an average annual employment shortfall of nearly 300,000 jobs and an income loss of more than $7,000 (inflation-adjusted) per person.

The EPA would require each state to submit a proposal on how they will meet these strict standards and if the EPA decides the plan is not satisfactory, it will impose a federally mandated plan on that state. The CATO Institute found that the enactment of these proposed regulations would only stop temperatures from increasing a mere 0.018°C by 2100.

Source