Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation Act of 2011

Floor Speech

Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, this amendment makes needed changes to the economic analysis mandated by the underlying bill; but fundamentally this bill, itself, we believe, is an assault on the Clean Air Act, not really a bill that requires a study.

The legislation began in committee as a bill to require a new study on the economic impacts of EPA rules to cut air pollution. At that point, the bill simply required a burdensome and redundant study of EPA rules and did not affect any of the rules it proposed to examine.

It changed in committee. The Republican members amended it to indefinitely delay implementation of two very key rules to reduce power plant pollution, the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule.

Now Mr. Whitfield has proposed amending the bill to further eliminate those rules altogether and prevent EPA from being able to clean up power plants in the future. Mr. Latta has offered an amendment to force EPA to listen to polluters' accountants rather than scientists when setting air quality standards. This bill is now a direct attack on the heart of the Clean Air Act. That act has saved thousands of lives.

The bill still contains a study on the economic impact of EPA rules, although I'm not sure why it would do that. The Rush amendment, Mr. Chairman, would make the study required by this legislation a little less biased and a little more useful.

The bill creates a new government bureaucracy to conduct a complicated study of EPA rules. It's not necessary. In addition, the bill ensures that the final study will be unbalanced and inherently biased. It's one thing to take a hard look at regulations. It's another thing to cook the outcome of that examination.

The Rush amendment ensures that the committee will look at both the costs and the benefits of EPA rules.

The bill's supporters originally presented this bill as a means to gather more facts on key EPA rules. As amended by the Republicans, it's increasingly clear that the facts really don't matter.

I support the Rush amendment, but I remain staunchly opposed to final passage of the bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Source