Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WEBER of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a very simple and commonsense amendment to H.R. 5538, the Department of the Interior and EPA appropriations bill.
This amendment passed by a voice vote last year, and I hope all Members can support it again today--or should I say tonight.
America's job creators have faced an onslaught of regulations from the EPA, Mr. Chairman, even as Congress has consistently reduced the Agency's budget year after year. The EPA has proposed lower national ozone standards, regulations on new and existing power plants, regulations on waters of the United States, just to name a few.
All of these regulations are based on questionable scientific data and will lead to higher energy prices for hardworking families and small businesses and, without a doubt, will negatively impact American jobs.
The Agency has cited its authority under the Clean Air Act as the basis for many of its regulatory actions. However, when it comes to evaluating how its regulations impact American jobs, the Agency has failed to follow the law.
Section 321(a) of the Clean Air Act clearly states: ``The Administrator shall conduct continuing evaluations of potential loss of shifts of employment . . . including, where appropriate, investigating threatened plant closures or reductions in employment allegedly resulting from such administration or enforcement.''
Mr. Chairman, the EPA is even now involved in ongoing litigation for its failure to comply with this provision, and Congress has repeatedly heard testimony reinforcing EPA's failure to comply with section 321(a).
In response to questions for the record during her Senate confirmation hearing, Administrator McCarthy said that the ``EPA has not interpreted section 321(a) to require EPA to conduct employment investigations in taking regulatory actions.''
Mr. Chairman, Congress put this provision into the Clean Air Act for a reason: to provide a necessary check on the regulatory powers of unelected bureaucrats at the EPA. In response to the EPA's refusal to follow the law, Congress must act to ensure that the true impact of regulations on jobs are disclosed to inform the public and Members of Congress.
Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WEBER of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments. She actually raised a good argument for the amendment. I mean, we are telling the EPA that they need to do their job. No money can be spent in contravention of section 321(a). They can't go after a company, for example, if they haven't done the job analysis, and that is exactly what this amendment says.
So I simply want to reiterate what I said. The law says the administrator shall conduct continuing evaluations of potential loss of shifts employment. I don't understand what the administrator does not understand about ``shall.''
So it is a commonsense amendment. It actually reins in the EPA and keeps them from destroying more jobs as they seem wont--have the habit--to do.
Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source