Protecting American Energy Production Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Protecting American Energy Production Act.

Now, as a Coloradan from an energy-producing State, I don't oppose fracking, and frankly, opposition to fracking is not in the Democratic agenda. However, I think we can all agree that fracking must be done safely and with transparency.

This bill would allow natural gas producers to keep abusing loopholes that allow them to hide dangerous chemical components in their fracking fluid, and that is something I don't think any of us should support.

Having served as the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security in the last Congress, I have worked closely on this issue for many years. I have introduced legislation that would ensure that our communities would be safe from the dangerous chemicals that are often used in fracking fluid.

Fracking releases thousands of harmful chemicals that poison our drinking water and pollute our air, including hydrogen sulfide, which causes nausea, vomiting, and headaches; benzene, a known carcinogen; toxic metals; acids; and even diesel fuel.

A significant number of scientific studies prove negative health effects like cancers, asthma, and birth complications are caused by fracking chemicals. These chemicals particularly affect the most vulnerable in our society, including children, people who are pregnant, the elderly, lower-income communities, and communities of color.

For example, those who gave birth while living near a fracking site had children who are two to three times more likely to be diagnosed with leukemia between the ages of 2 and 7 than those who were not exposed.

For older adults, a study found that living near fracking sites in Pennsylvania during its so-called fracking boom between 2002 and 2015 were more likely to be hospitalized for cardiovascular disease than those in neighboring States where fracking was banned.

What complicates our ability to regulate these hazardous chemicals is that only in retrospect can we assess the damage that is being done in the name of oil and gas production.

It was just 2 years ago that scientists were able to conclude the extent of harm caused by the fracking fluid in 2016, that was almost 10 years ago.

A study found it caused 410,000 asthma flare-ups; 2,200 new cases of childhood asthma; and 7,500 excess deaths, costing $77 billion in health impacts.

Now, these examples are only a drop in the bucket.

We don't even have accurate numbers of just how many Americans are affected because the law prioritizes polluters over people by protecting the exact chemical makeup of fracking fluid that fracking companies call ``proprietary information.''

It has been proven that fracking chemical disclosure requirements lead to significant declines in the use of hazardous chemicals and better water quality.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Speaker, there have been significant declines in the use of hazardous chemicals and better water quality.

Rather than passing this bill, which only protects oil and gas producers, we should require more transparency to the public.

Families shouldn't have to choose between their health and their house just because it is close to a drilling site.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation and work in a bipartisan way to make sure that where we do fracking it is done safely.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source