EPA Regulatory Relief Act of 2011

Floor Speech

Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My amendment is a very simple amendment. It should get unanimous support here. It simply requires the Environmental Protection Agency administrator to consider increases in illness-related absences from work when establishing a compliance date for the boiler rule.

Last week, I offered similar language as an amendment to the Cement Sector Regulatory Relief Act, which, unfortunately, didn't pass. I don't think it was clearly understood by both sides of the aisle. However, I believe my amendment is more applicable to this legislation since boilers and incinerators pose an even greater health threat to the American people. In fact, EPA's analysis demonstrates that for every year this rule will be in effect, it would prevent up to 320,000 missed work- or schooldays.

During the debate on my amendment last week, the majority conceded, which I appreciated, that the amendment would do no harm because the majority thought that the language was already in the bill and that it would be duplicative and unnecessary.

The reality is that there's nothing in the underlying legislation that requires the administrator to consider illness-related absences from work when setting a compliance date. Now, indeed, it should have been in there--and I can understand why the other side thought it would be in there because it should have been in there--but it wasn't in there, and that's why I offered this amendment. But this factor is critical, and any establishment of a compliance date that does not consider the health of the American workforce is fundamentally flawed and inadequate.

As the majority correctly stated last week, the EPA already knows how many work days will be missed as a result of delaying the boiler rule, so my amendment will not hinder the EPA's decisionmaking process. Additionally, as the majority admitted last week, at worst, my amendment does no harm--or, as kind of the NBA rule, no harm, no foul. However, at best, my amendment ensures that EPA's decision is based on a more complete analysis of the economic impacts of the rule. And given the economic consequences of 320,000 days of missed work or school a year, it's imperative that EPA factor this information into its compliance date decision.

I ask the majority to recognize that if the United States is going to retain its status as the world's economic engine, then we need to have the world's healthiest and most productive workforce--and children. But that will not happen if we continue to let polluting boilers and incinerators undermine the health and well-being of millions of American workers and children.

I encourage my colleagues to understand the importance of a healthy workforce and support my amendment. On behalf of the millions of American workers and schoolchildren who have been forced to miss work or school because of sickness incurred by breathing toxic pollutants from boilers and incinerators--mercury, no less, which interferes with young people's abilities to think--I ask that you support my amendment. It's time to put partisanship aside and work together to strengthen the American worker and the American school child.

I urge passage of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Source