Resolution of Disapproval of EPA Rule--Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. RISCH. I thank my colleague, Senator Barrasso. You were cheating, looking at my notes over my shoulder. A well made point.

I come at this whole proposition from a little different way than perhaps a lot of my colleagues do. All of this debate has been about global warming and about whether we should regulate carbon and how we should do that and what have you. But that is not really the issue on this resolution. This resolution is about the separation of powers. The Constitution of this great land that we all took an oath to uphold is very specific in separating the powers of the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. The Founding Fathers wisely separated the different branches so that none could overpower the other. What are we doing here? The movement by the administration and by the Environmental Protection Agency is to take from the legislative branch the power that belongs to the legislative branch.

It is obvious in the debate that is going on here that we have deep differences, which we should have, because this is a major policy decision that will affect every single American. It has profound effects on the economy. It has profound effects on the movement of jobs overseas. These are things that should be debated and are things that should be decided by elected persons--not by the people at the EPA, who are not elected and who are not answerable to the electorate.

When this happens, what you get is a deterioration of the Constitution of this great country. Each of the branches is constantly tugging at the other, attempting to pull power away from the other and attempting to consolidate power within itself. This movement by the EPA to effect policy is one of those power struggles. Every single Member of this body should be concerned about the shift of power from the legislative branch to the administrative branch.

What has happened here, as everyone can see, is this has become polarized. Again, it has become a partisan argument that we should allow the EPA to do this because we can't seem to get it through the legislative branch as quickly or as efficiently or leaning to the left as we want. That is wrong. It is just plain wrong. It should be decided right here. Those policy decisions should be debated here. Those policy decisions should be made on the floor of this body and on the floor of the House of Representatives. This is not a job for nonelected persons. It is a job for the people who have been elected and who have to go home again and face reelection and listen to the voters say: You did a great job controlling global warming or, you doofus, what are you doing? You can't possibly do it the way you want to do it.

That is a debate which should be held here. Why has this become so partisan? At the end of the day, we all know how this is going to come out. There are going to be 55 votes, give or take a couple, to defeat Senator Murkowski's resolution. It is going to be generally on a party-line basis. At the end, the administration will claim a great and glorious victory again. But it will not be a great and glorious victory for the American people; it will be a defeat for the American people. And more important, it will be a defeat and another erosion of the Constitution of this great country and movement of power from the legislative branch where it belongs to the administrative branch, to the bureaucrats, to the people who are not elected. That is a wrong way to do this. It should stay right here in the legislative body.

I yield the floor back to my good friend, Senator Barrasso.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source