Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
VIRGINIA IS RECOGNIZED.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M
HAPPY TO YIELD FOUR MINUTES TO
A FORMER MEMBER OF OUR
TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE, NOW A
MEMBER OF THE WAYS AND MEANS
COMMITTEE, THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OREGON, MR. BLUMENAUER.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OREGON IS RECOGNIZED FOR FOUR
MINUTES.
STILL A MEMBER
IN MY HEART, MR. RAHALL.
I APPRECIATE YOUR COURTESY IN
PERMITTING ME TO SPEAK ON THIS.
I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO DEBATE
ON THE FLOOR, AND I REALLY
COULD NOT DISAGREE MORE WITH
THE PROPONENTS OF THIS
LEGISLATION.
THEY WOULD SEEK TO OVERTURN A
40-YEAR RECORD OF TRYING TO GET
PEOPLE TO FOLLOW THE LAW.
LOOK AT THE RECORD OF WHAT
STATES HAVE DONE OVER THE COURSE
OF THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS
DEALING WITH WATER QUALITY AND
IT ISN'T THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT OVERREACHED AND THE
STATES HAD DONE TOO MUCH, WE
HAVE THE CLEAN WATER ACT BECAUSE
THE STATES CONSISTENTLY FAILED
TO MEET THEIR OBLIGATIONS.
TODAY THERE ARE WIDE VARIATIONS
AROUND AMERICA IN TERMS OF HOW
ZEALOUSLY INDIVIDUAL STATES TAKE
THEIR RESPONSIBILITY AND HOW
THEY BALANCE.
THERE'S TREMENDOUS PRESSURE FOR
SHORT-TERM ECONOMIC GAIN AT THE
EXPENSE OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
IN SOME PARTS OF THE COUNTRY
PEOPLE DON'T -- IT DOESN'T
BOTHER THEM TO BULLDOZE MOUNTAIN
TOPS INTO STREAMS INDIANA FACT
E.P.A. HAS NOT BEEN -- INTO
STREETS AND IN FACT E.P.A. HAS
NOT BEEN VIGILANT IN KEELING --
DEALING WITH THAT.
IT'S ONLY BEEN RECENTLY THAT
WE'VE BASKETBALL COMING TO GRIPS
WITH THAT ISSUE.
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT E.P.A. HAS
THE OPPORTUNITY TO WITH HOLD, TO
HAVE SOME SANCTION WHEN STAKES
DON'T FOLLOW THROUGH ON --
STATES DON'T FOLLOW THROUGH ON
THEIR PLANS.
THIS BILL WOULD TAKE AWAY THE
ABILITY OF E.P.A. TO HAVE
SANCTIONS.
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE A
THIRD PARTY TO BE ABLE TO DO
SOME MEDIATION WHEN THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STATES.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS
COMBINED TO PENNSYLVANIA OR --
CONFINED TO PENNSYLVANIA OR WEST
VIRGINIA OR OREGON BECAUSE THEIR
WATERWAYS ARE INTERCONNECTED,
THEY TRANSCEND BOUNDARIES.
WE NEED TO HAVE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT MAKING SURE THAT AT A
MINIMUM THERE ARE REASONABLE
STANDARDS THAT ARE ENFORCED AND
THAT THE PLANS THAT ONE
ADMINISTRATION ON A STATE LEVEL
COMMITS TO ARE ACTUALLY FOLLOWED
THROUGH.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO SPEND VERY
MUCH TIME ON GOOGLE TO FIND OUT
THAT THERE ARE PLACES AROUND THE
COUNTRY RIGHT NOW WHERE LOCAL
AUTHORITIES, WHERE STATE
AUTHORITIES ARE NOT MEETING THE
HIGHEST STANDARDS OF WATER
QUALITY.
I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT THIS IS
A STEP BACK.
LUCKILY IT'S NOT GOING TO BE
ENACTED INTO LAW, THE
ADMINISTRATION WOULD VETO IT, I
CAN'T IMAGINE IT GETS VERY FAR
IN THE OTHER BODY.
LOOK AT -- AND FRANKLY LOOKING
AT THE LIST OF THE
ORGANIZATIONS, THE LIST THAT WAS
CITED OF THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT
THIS ARE NOT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
CHAMPIONED CLEAN WATER, THEY'RE
THE PEOPLE THAT WANT LOOSER
RESTRICTIONS, THAT WANT TO BE
ABLE TO POLLUTE MORE, WHO WANT
TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THEIR OWN
DECISIONS.
BUT THE PEOPLE WHO CARE ABOUT
FISH AND WILDLIFE, PEOPLE WHO
CARE ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTIONS, PEOPLE WHO CARE
ABOUT THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF
THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, THEY ARE
UNIFORMLY OPPOSED TO THIS
LEGISLATION.
MR. SPEAKER, THIS IS IMPORTANT
BUSINESS.
THERE ARE ECONOMICS INVOLVED
WITH PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT.
IN STATE AFTER STATE THERE'S A
LOT OF MONEY TO BE MADE BY
HAVING HEALTHY HUNTING AND
FISHING, THERE IS MONEY TO BE
SAVED BY HAVING HEALTHY
WATERWAYS AND HEALTHY
COMMUNITIES.
AND IF WE DON'T STOP THE
POLLUTION IN THE FIRST PLACE
THEN THAT PUTS THE BURDEN ON
LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO SPEND MORE
ON WATER QUALITY AND WATER
TREATMENT.
I STRONGLY SUGGEST MY COLLEAGUES
TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THE HISTORY
OF THE LAST 40 YEARS, LOOK AT
THE UNEVEN APPLICATION OF CLEAN
WATER AT THE STATE LEVEL, LOOK
AT HOW JUDICIOUS APPROACH ON THE
PART OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
HAS HELPED PROMOTE COMPLIANCE,
EVEN THE SO-CALLED VETO POWER OF
E.P.A. HAS BEEN INVOKED ONLY 13
TIMES IN 38 YEARS.
REJECTED.
THIS IS A BAD BILL, IT SHOULD BE
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
RESERVES.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM WEST VIRGINIA
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO IS
RECOGNIZED.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I RESERVE THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN
RESERVES THE BALANCE OF HIS
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM WEST VIRGINIA
IS RECOGNIZED.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M
READY TO CLOSE AS WE HAVE NO
FURTHER REQUESTS ON MY SIDE
UNDER GENERAL DEBATE.
SO I'LL GIVE MY CLOSING COMMENTS
NOW.
HOW MUCH TIME DO I HAVE LEFT,
MR. CHAIRMAN?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
WEST VIRGINIA HAS 17 1/2
MINUTES.
THANK YOU.
THIS IS ABOUT THE PROCESS AS I
DESCRIBED IN MY OPENING
COMMENTS, NOT THE POLICY.
THIS BILL IS NOT ABOUT WHETHER
THE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY SUPPORT
CLEAN, SAFE WATER, WE ALL
SUPPORT CLEAN, SAFE WATER.
I DO NOT KNOW A SINGLE MEMBER IN
THIS HOUSE THAT WANTS TO TURN
BACK THE CLOCK ON THE GAINS THAT
THIS NATION HAS MADE IN THE LAST
40 YEARS TO CLEAN UP OUR RIVERS
AND STREAMS.
THIS BILL IS ABOUT THE PROCESS
AND PRECEDENT, IT IS ABOUT
WHETHER WE SHOULD BE ALLOWING
ONE FEDERAL AGENCY TO RUN ROUGH
SHOD OVER THE LAW, OVER THE
STATES AND OVER OTHER FEDERAL
AGENCIES TO SET POLICY ACCORDING
TO POLITICAL IDEOLOGY.
I DO NOT THINK WE SHOULD BE
ALLOWING ANY AGENCY OF OUR
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO BE RUN IN
THAT MANNER.
IF THIS CONGRESS ALLOWS THE
E.P.A. TO PUSH THE NFL -- THE
ENVELOPE IN CIRCUMVENTING THE
LAW, CIRCUMVENTING PUBLIC
COMMENT AND PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION, IT LAYS THE LEGAL
GROUNDWORK FOR THE NEXT
ADMINISTRATION TO DO THE EXACT
SAME THING.
MAYBE UNDER THE GUISE OF CLEANER
AIR AND CLEANER WATER, MAYBE
UNDER THE GUISE OF LOWERING
THOSE STANDARDS.
BUT THE PRECEDENT THAT WOULD BE
SET COULD BE DEVASTATING.
BY NOT TAKING ACTION THE
CONGRESS IS GIVING THE E.P.A.
THE AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT IT
DEEMS POLITICALLY NECESSARY AND
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THIS AND
EVERY CONGRESS HAS THE
RESPONSIBILITY TO RESIST.
SO THIS BILL, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS
NOT ABOUT WHETHER ANY MEMBER IN
THIS INSTITUTION SUPPORTS THE
ENDS THAT THE E.P.A. IS TRYING
TO REACH.
IT IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE
BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD BE
ALLOWED TO USE ANY MEANS TO
REACH THOSE ENDS AND I DO NOT
BELIEVE THEY SHOULD.
THERE ARE PLENTY OF MEMBERS ON
THIS FLOOR TODAY WHO BELIEVE
THAT THE INTENTIONS OF THE
E.P.A. WITH RESPECT TO ITS
MISSION TO ENSURE CLEAN WATER
ARE NOBLE.
I PUT MYSELF IN THAT CATEGORY.
BUT WE ALL HAVE TO WORRY WHEN AN
AGENCY GOES TO SUCH LENTION TO
CIRCUMVENT THE CONGRESS --
LENGTHS TO CIRCUMVENT THE
CONGRESS AND THE RULE MAKING
PROCESS SO AS TO IMPOSE ITS OWN
AGENDA.
BECAUSE AFTER THE NEXT ELECTION
OR THE ELECTION AFTER THAT OR
THE ELECTION AFTER THAT SOME
FUTURE E.P.A. MAY NOT HAVE SUCH
NOBLE INTENTIONS.
AND IF WE FAIL TO STAND UP TODAY
WE WILL SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES
OF OUR INACTION LATER.
THIS BILL IS ABOUT TRANSPARENCY,
IT DOES NOT TELL THE E.P.A. THEY
CANNOT AFFECT IMPROVEMENTS IN
WATER QUALITY.
IT SAYS THAT THEY CANNOT DO IT
WITHOUT LETTING THE PEOPLE, THE
PEOPLE HAVE A VOICE IN THE
PROCESS.
THAT'S THE WAY THE RULE MAKING
PROCESS IS INTENDED TO WORK, BUT
THIS E.P.A. HAS EFFECTIVELY
THWARTED THAT PROCESS AND
THUMBED ITS NOSE AT THE PEOPLE
BY ISSUING GUIDANCE AND TREATING
IT LIKE REGULATION.
AS I SAID IN MY OPENING
COMMENTS, I WISH WE WERE NOT
HERE ON THIS BILL TODAY, I WISH
IT WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY.
AND I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE A
COOPERATIVE FEDERAL RELATIONSHIP
AMONG THE AGENCIES AND THE
FEDERAL AGENCIES WITH THE STATES
AND WITH THE INDUSTRIES
INVOLVED.
BUT THAT HAS NOT OCCURRED AND
THEREFORE IT HAS CREATED A ERA
OF MISTRUST, DISTRUST,
BITTERNESS AND OUTRIGHT SCARED
ATTITUDE AMONG OUR COAL MINERS,
WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL HAVE A
JOB NEXT YEAR OR EVEN TOMORROW
AND FOR HOW LONG THEIR CURRENT
JOB WILL LAST.
SO WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, I DO
CONCLUDE BY SPEAKING IN SUPPORT
OF THIS LEGISLATION AND I YIELD
BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
WEST VIRGINIA, MR. RAHALL,
TIME.
YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO IS
MR. CHAIRMAN, HOW
MUCH TIME DO I HAVE?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO HAS 12 MINUTES REMAINING.
THANK YOU.
I THINK WHAT THIS BILL IS
ADDRESSING, WE HAVE 21ST CENTURY
PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES AND
WE'RE LOOKING FOR 21ST CENTURY
SOLUTIONS.
I WANT TO LAY OUT THE FACTS HERE
A LITTLE BIT AND I APPRECIATE MY
COLLEAGUE FROM WEST VIRGINIA FOR
HIS SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
WE HAVE TO REALIZE THAT THE
STATE E.P.A.'S HAVE TO HAVE AN
IMPROVED PLAN BY THE FEDERAL
E.P.A. AND THAT'S THE FRAMEWORK
THEY'RE WORKING UNDER AND YOU
JUST CAN'T HAVE THE FEDERAL
E.P.A. COMING IN DURING THE BALL
GAME AND TRYING TO CHANGE THE
RULES AND UNDERMINING THE
EFFORTS OF THE STATE E.P.A.'S.
I WANT TO COMMENT TO THE
GENTLEMAN FROM OREGON'S COMMENTS
ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO
GO BACKWARDS AND WE'VE MADE
PROGRESS IN THE LAST 40 YEARS
AND THE STATES DIDN'T DO
ANYTHING IN THE LAST 40 YEARS OR
BEFORE.
LET'S REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED
PRIOR TO 1972.
I GREW UP 12 MILES FROM THE CITY
OF CLEVELAND AND THE COLORADO --
AND A RIVER.
I REMEMBER WHEN THE RIVER CAUGHT
ON FIRE.
I REMEMBER WHEN I COULDN'T SWIM
IN THE WATER ANYMORE.
THOSE EVENTS CAUSED THIS
CONGRESS TO PASS THE CLEAN WATER
ACT AND ESTABLISHED THE U.S.
E.P.A.
AND ALSO GIVE AUTHORITY FOR THE
STATES TO SUFFER THEIR PROGRAMS.
PRIOR TO THAT NOBODY WAS
CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT
AND WE DIDN'T HAVE WHAT WAS THE
ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT WHERE
WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING
CLEAN WATER.
PROGRESS.
SINCE THEN WE'VE MADE TREMENDOUS
ON POLLUTION WE'VE MADE
TREMENDOUS PROGRESS IN
DISCHARGES, WE DON'T HAVE
DISCHARGES GOING INTO OUR LAKES
AND RIVERS AND STREAMS LIKE WE
DID 40 YEARS AGO.
WE'VE MADE SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS
ADDRESSING NONPOINT SOURCE
POLLUTION AND NOT TO SAY WE
DON'T HAVE MORE CHALLENGES BUT I
WANT TO TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE
TALK ABOUT ONE SIZE FITS ALL AND
THE U.S. E.P.A. HAS AN AGENDA
RIGHT NOW THAT'S OVERREACHING
AND THEY WANT TO SET POLICIES
AND PARAMETERS THAT FITS FOR
EVERYBODY TO WORK UNDER.
I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.
THE NUTRIENT STANDARD.
YOU HEAR A LOT ABOUT PHOSPHOROUS
SEDIMENT POLLUTION IN OUR LAKES
AND RIVERS AND STREAKS AND TO GO
IN THERE AND SET A NUMBER, A
NUMERICAL NUMBER THAT THEY CAN'T
EXCEED THAT IN DISCHARGE AT THAT
LEVEL -- DISCHARGING AT THAT
LEVEL CAUSES SOME PROBLEMS.
FOR US, 40 YEARS WE'VE BEEN
WAITING UNDER A SYSTEM CALLED
THE NARRATIVE STANDARD WHERE
STATES CAN GO IN THERE AND LOOK
AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT
WATERSHED, IN THAT STREAM OR
RIVER AND DETERMINE, BECAUSE I
CAN TELL YOU IN EVERY RIVER AND
STREAM IN THIS COUNTRY THERE'S
DIFFERENT THINGS HAPPENING, THE
BIOOLOGY'S DIFFERENT, THE P.H.
IS DIFFERENT, THE WATER FLOW,
SUNSHINE, WHOLE HOST OF THINGS
AND THEY CAN INCORPORATE THAT
AND COME UP WITH A PLAN HOW TO
ADDRESS THE ISSUE THEY HAVE IN
THEIR LOCAL LOCALE.
WHEN YOU SET A NUMBER AT SUCH A
HIGH LEVEL IT PUTS A STATE AT A
PROBLEM WHERE THEY CAN'T MEET
ATTAINMENT OR IT'S NOT POSSIBLE
AND WE'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN IN
FLORIDA AND NOW IT'S WHY THERE'S
LITIGATION PENDING BECAUSE
THEY'VE SET A ONE SIZE FITS ALL
WHERE FLORIDA IRONICALLY WAS
MOVING TO A POINT TO SET A
NUMERICAL STANDARD THAT THEY
WANTED TO ALSO ADDRESS,
INCORPORATE WHAT I CALL THE
NARRATIVE STANDARD SO THEY COULD
ADDRESS WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN
EACH LOCALE AND NOT A HUGE
REGION, TO ADDRESS THOSE
DIFFERENCES HAPPENING IN THAT
STREAM OR THAT RIVER.
SO ONE SIZE FITS ALL DOESN'T
WORK AND IT CAUSES PROBLEMS AND
THAT WILL MAKE US GO BACK WHERE
WE WERE, PROGRESS WE'VE MADE IN
THE LAST 40 YEARS.
I WANT TO ALSO ADDRESS IN THIS
BILL, WE TALK ABOUT THE
PERMITTING ISSUE.
ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS THINGS
I'VE SEEN SINCE JANUARY WAS A
REVOCATION OF A PERMIT, YES, IT
WAS IN WEST VIRGINIA, IT WAS A
COAL MINE OPERATION THAT WENT
THROUGH 10 YEARS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY, GOT
THE PERMIT IN 2007 AND THEN
THREE YEARS LATER THE PERMIT WAS
REVOKED.
NOT BECAUSE THEY WERE IN PERMIT
VIOLATION, THE ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS TESTIFIED IN MY
COMMITTEE THAT THERE WAS NO
PROBLEMS.
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA E.P.A.
DID NOT SUPPORT REVOKING THAT
PERMIT.
I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHY THEY
REVOKED THAT PERMIT OTHER THAN
MAYBE IT WAS ON THE AGENDA OF
SOMEBODY'S.
PERMIT.
THEY WERE NOT IN VIOLATION OF
IT'S ONE THING TO REVOKE A
PERMIT WHEN YOU'RE IN VIOLATION
OF THE PERMIT BUT WHEN YOU'RE
NOT IN THE VIOLATION OF THE
PERMIT, TO TAKE THAT PERMIT
AWAY, IT SETS A VERY DANGEROUS
PRECEDENT BECAUSE IF YOU'RE AN
ENTITY OF AN ENTERPRISE AND YOU
HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT TO BE IN
BUSINESS FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AND THAT FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AT THE WHIM OF SOME
BUREAUCRAT IN THE ADMINISTRATION
COMES AND PULLS THAT PERMIT ANY
TIME THEY WANT TO, WHO'S GOING
TO MAKE THAT INVESTMENT, CREATE
JOBS KNOWING THAT THEY COULD BE
SHUT DOWN TOMORROW BECAUSE THEIR
PERMIT'S NOT THERE SO THEY CAN
STAY IN BUSINESS?
THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL ADDRESSES.
THEY HAVE TO GET CONCURRENCE,
THE U.S. E.P.A. WOULD HAVE TO
GET CONCURRENCE FROM THE STATE
E.P.A. TO SUPPORT THAT -- IN
THIS CASE SHUT THAT BUSINESS
DOWN.
THIS IS REALLY A JOBS BILL.
WE'RE TRYING TO REALLY RELIEVE
UNCERTAINTY AND PEOPLE KNOW WHAT
THE PLAYING FIELD IS AND I CAN
TELL YOU, I THINK THE STATE
E.P.A.'S CAN DO A BETTER JOB IN
THEIR LOCALES BECAUSE THEY KNOW
WHAT'S GOING ON THERE THAN HAVE
A ONE SIZE FITS ALL POLICY BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND
OVERREACHING AND BURDENSOME
REGULATORY CLIMATE THAT KILLS
JOBS, KILLS ECONOMIC INVESTMENT
AND KILLS JOBS AND SO THAT'S WHY
IT'S IMPORTANT, I THINK, TO MOVE
THANKS JOBS BILL.
US -- THIS BILL FORWARD.
WE HAVE -- THIS IS A JOBS BILL.
WE HAVE SENT SEVERAL BILLS OVER
TO THE SENATE THAT ARE JOBS BILL
AND I URGE THE SENATE TO TAKE
THEM UP BECAUSE WE HAVE
UNEMPLOYMENT AT 9.2% AND RISING
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT
PEOPLE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
HAVE A JOB AND ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITIES AND WE NEED THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO CREATE THE
ENVIRONMENT FOR WHAT I CALL THE
JOB CREATORS TO HAVE THAT
CONFIDENCE TO MAKE THOSE
INVESTMENTS AND START HIRING
PEOPLE BACK AND GROWING THEIR
BUSINESSES.
AND THIS BILL IS REALLY
IMPORTANT TO ENCOURAGE
COOPERATIVES AND COOPERATIVE
ARRANGEMENTS, WORKING FOR THE
FEDERAL E.P.A. AND THE STATE
E.P.A.'S AND I WAS JUST REALLY
FLOORED IN THE COMMITTEE
HEARINGS WE HAD WHERE WE HAD
STATE E.P.A.'S COME IN AND SOME
OF THEM WERE ON THE OTHER SIDE
OF THE AISLE FROM ME, TESTIFY
AGAINST THE U.S. E.P.A. AND
THEIR ACTIONS AND THEIR
OVERREACH AND, YOU KNOW, A
STRONG ECONOMY, PEOPLE DON'T --
SOME PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND
THIS, I SAY THIS A LOT.
A STRONG AND GROWING ECONOMY
WILL PROVIDE THE RESOURCES TO
HAVE -- TO INVEST AND ENHANCE
THE ENVIRONMENT AND AN ECONOMY
THAT'S STRUGGLING RIGHT NOW AND
MAKES IT TOUGHER TO HAVE THOSE
RESOURCES AND IF YOU THINK OF AN
EXAMPLE, YOU LOOK AT SOME THIRD
WORLD COUNTRIES WHERE THEIR
BIGGEST CHALLENGE IS FEEDING
THEIR PEOPLE, THEY DON'T HAVE
THE RESOURCES TO BUILD SEWAGE
TREATMENT PLANTS AND WATER FILL
TRATION SYSTEMS AND DO OTHER
THINGS TO PREM -- FILL TRATION
SYSTEMS AND DO OTHER THINGS TO
PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT.
WE HAVE A STRONG ECONOMY AND WE
SHOULD BE WORKING WITH
BUSINESSES BECAUSE MOST
BUSINESSES AND MOST PEOPLE WANT
TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
EVERYBODY WANTS CLEAN WATER AND
CLEAN AIR AND SO I THINK
INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE COMMENTS
FROM MY COLLEAGUE FROM OREGON
THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE -- WE'RE
NOT DIRECTING -- PROTECTING THE
ENVIRONMENT, I THINK A STRONG,
GROWING ECONOMY DOES PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT AND I THINK THE
REGULATORY POLICIES ARE IN PLACE
AT THE STATE LEVELS BECAUSE THE
STATES ARE SET UP TO DO IT NOW,
DIFFERENT THAN 40 YEARS AGO, TO
REGULATE AND ALSO ENFORCE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LAWS.
WE HAVE RULES IN PLACE, YOU
KNOW, OHIO, WHEN I WAS IN THE
STATE SENATE TWO YEARS AGO WE
PASSED COMPREHENSIVE LEGISLATION
TO ADD ADDITIONAL REGULATION ON
THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY TO
PROTECT OUR WATER, GROUND, OUR
WATER ACURA FERRES AND OUR
SURFACE WATER AND I'M REALLY
ENCOURAGED NOW WITH THE
POTENTIAL WE HAVE WITH THE SHALE
TO MAKE US CLOSER TO BEING
ENERGY INDEPENDENT AND NOT
DEPENDENT ON -- AND SHIPPING
ALMOST $1 TRILLION A YEAR AWAY
TO OTHER COUNTRIES AND SOME OF
THOSE THAT DON'T REALLY LIKE US
TOO MUCH.
WE GOT THAT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE
A STRONG GROWING ECONOMY AND
PROVIDE THE ENERGY BUT ALSO
PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AT THE
SAME TIME.
WE JUST HAVE THE REGULATORY
PROCESS IN PLACE.
I THINK THIS ENABLES A STRONGER
REGULATORY PROCESS BECAUSE IT
EMBOLDENS THE STATES' E.P.A. TO
DO THEIR JOB AND WORK WITH
THEIR COOPERATIVE IN
WASHINGTON, D.C.
I THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
HIS TIME.
OHIO YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF
ALL TIME FOR GENERAL DEBATE HAS
EXPIRED.
PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE
AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A
SUBSTITUTE PRINTED IN THE BILL
SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS AN
ORIGINAL BILL FOR THE PURPOSE
OF AMENDMENT UNDER THE
FIVE-MINUTE RULE AND SHALL BE
CONSIDERED READ.
NO AMENDMENT IN THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A
SUBSTITUTE SHALL BE IN ORDER
EXCEPT THOSE PRINTED IN HOUSE
REPORT 112-144.
EACH SUCH AMENDMENT MAY BE
OFFERED ONLY IN THE ORDER
PRINTED IN THE REPORT BY A
MEMBER DESIGNATED IN THE
REPORT, SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS
READ, SHALL BE DEBATABLE FOR
THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE
REPORT EQUALLY DIVIDED AND
CONTROLLED BY THE PROPONENT AND
AN OPPONENT, SHALL NOT BE
SUBJECT TO AN AMENDMENT AND
SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO A
DEMAND FOR A DIVISION OF THE
QUESTION.
IT IS NOW IN ORDER TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 PRINTED IN
HOUSE REPORT 112-144.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK
RECOGNITION?
I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK, MY
AMENDMENT NUMBER 7.
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1
PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 112-144
OFFERED BY MS. JACKSON LEE OF
TEXAS.
PURSUANT TO HOUSE
RESOLUTION 347, THE GENTLEWOMAN
FROM TEXAS, MS. JACKSON LEE,
AND A MEMBER OPPOSED, EACH WILL
CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS, MS.
JACKSON LEE.
LET ME THANK
THE CHAIRMAN VERY MUCH, AND I
DEFINITELY SUPPORT COOPERATION
BETWEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE BEST
PART MORESHIP AND ONE THAT I
ENCOURAGE -- PARTNERSHIP AND
ONE THAT I ENCOURAGE.
HAVING BEEN PART OF THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT IN MY CITY OF
HOUSTON, I KNOW THAT UNFUNDED
MANDATES ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO
OVERCOME.
BUT I ARGUE VIGOROUSLY AGAINST
THE UNDERLYING LEGISLATION
BECAUSE IT DOES EQUATE TO
UNDERMINING THE HEALTH OF
AMERICANS.
WE NEED CLEAN WATER, NOT DIRTY
WATER, AND SO THIS AMENDMENT
STRIKES THE ENTIRE LEGISLATION
THAT CAUSES US TO IGNORE A
PARTNERSHIP THAT HAS BEEN
ESTABLISHED BETWEEN THE E.P.A.,
THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY, AND THE NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION
SYSTEM, WHICH IS A STATE
SYSTEM.
AND TO MY COUNT, SOME 47 STATES
HAVE INITIALLY GOT INTO THE
SYSTEM AND HAVE WORKED TO
ENSURE THEY HAVE CLEAN WATER.
WHY DO I SUGGEST THAT THIS IS A
VERY CHALLENGING APPROACH TO
TAKE THAT THE LEGISLATION HAVE?
BECAUSE IT PREVENTS THE E.P.A.
FROM TAKING ACTIONS TO REVISE
OUTDATED STATE WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS.
IT MAKES THE STATE THE FINAL
ASH TORE OF WHETHER AN NPDES
PERMIT, A LICENSE FOR WATER
QUALITY, IS IN FACT TO BE
IMPLEMENTED.
SO ONE STATE MAY DO SOMETHING
THAT IMPACTS NEGATIVELY ON
ANOTHER STATE.
THESE ARE THE PERSON WE ARE
CONCERNED ABOUT.
A WORKING NURSE AND A HEALTHY
BABY.
OR WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT A
GENTLEMAN NAMED MR. COLATIO,
WHO IS A RESIDENT OF PRESSWOOD,
WHO INDICATED SOME YEARS AGO HE
WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE WATER HE
DRANK FOR YEARS WITHOUT KNOWING
WHAT IT WAS CONTAMINATED WITH.
CANCER STUDY TRIGGERED FEARS IN
CESSWOOD WHICH AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME I'D LIKE TO
SUBMIT IN THE RECORD.
IT SAYS, I CAN'T HELP BUT
WONDER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO ME
IS IN THE WATER.
BILL.
IT STRIKES THE LANGUAGE OF THIS
IT SAYS, LET'S GO BACK TO THE
DRAWING TABLE.
I WANT TO BE ABLE TO HELP
MEMBERS, BUT IF YOU HAVE 47
STATES WHO HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN
THIS PROCESS, LET'S FIND A WAY
THAT WE CAN COME TOGETHER AND
HAVE CLEAN WATER AND NOT DIRTY
WATER.
THIS IS A STRAIGHTFORWARD
AMENDMENT THAT SAYS THAT THIS
IS OVERREACHING.
THE E.P.A. WOULD BE PREVENTED
-- PROHIBITED FROM RESOLVING
CONFLICTING STATE DECISIONS ON
PROTECTING WATER QUALITY.
JOIN ME IN SUPPORTING THE
JACKSON LEE AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEWOMAN
I RESERVE MY TIME.
RESERVES HER TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO RISE?
I WISH TO CLAIM TIME
IN OPPOSITION.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
THE INTENT OF H.R. 2018 IS TO
RESTORE THE BALANCE BETWEEN THE
STATES AND THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IN CARRYING OUT THE
CLEAN WATER ACT.
THIS AMENDMENT SIMPLY STRIKES
THE ENTIRE BILL, AS SHE STATED,
AND ENSURES THAT THE E.P.A.
WILL CONTINUE TO UNILATERALLY
FORCE ITS ONE ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL
FEDERAL POLICY ONTO THE STATES'
WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS WHICH,
BY THE WAY, THEY PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED.
UNDER THIS AMENDMENT, E.P.A.
WILL CONTINUE TO PASS UNFUNDED
MANDATES ONTO THE STATES,
ENSURES THAT THE E.P.A. ISSUES
GUIDANCE THAT FRUSTRATES STATES
THAT ENSURES THAT E.P.A. WILL
REVOKE ALREADY LEGALLY ISSUED
PERMITS, AS I STATED EARLIER.
I URGE MEMBERS TO OPPOSE THIS
AMENDMENT, AND I YIELD THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
JACKSON LEE, IS RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS, MS.
I THANK THE
GOOD INTENTIONS OF THE
GENTLEMAN, AND I AM CONCERNED
OF THE INTERPRETATION.
LET ME JUST SHARE WITH YOU VERY
BRIEFLY MY OWN STATE.
IN MY OWN STATE I AM AWARE OF
HOW TRIBUTARIES CAN IMPACT THE
BODY OF WATER THEY FLOW INTO
IT.
CURRENTLY THERE IS A DEAD ZONE
WHERE MARINE LIFE CANNOT
SURVIVE IN THE GULF OF MEXICO.
THIS DEAD ZONE ESTIMATED TO
REACH 9,421 SQUARE MILES IS DUE
TO INCREASED LEVELS OF NITROGEN
AND PHOSPHORUS THAT WASH INTO
THE GULF AND OTHER TRIBUTARIES.
THIS PREVENTS THE E.P.A. FROM
REGULATING CRITERIA FOR
POLLUTANTS THAT CAUSE DEAD
ZONES.
WE ARE THE PROTECTORS OF
AMERICA'S ASSETS.
IT'S WATERWAYS, THE DRINKING
WATER, IT'S THE ABILITY TO HAVE
THE ABILITY TO HAVE CLEAN WATER
FOR OUR FISH AND FOR FISHING.
I ASK YOU TO LET'S GO BACK TO
THE DRAWING BOARDS.
IF WE HAVE STARTS THAT ARE
ALREADY PARTICIPATING, LET'S
DEMAND IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCESS FOR E.P.A. TO RESTRAIN
ITSELF, BUT LET'S NOT TAKE AWAY
THE UNDERLYING POWER THAT IS
GOING TO ALLOW US TO HAVE CLEAN
DRINKING WATER.
AND SOMEONE WHO LIVES IN
CESSWOOD TO BE ABLE TO POSSIBLY
BE CANCER-FREE.
I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
THIS AMENDMENT.
WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, I
YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEWOMAN
YIELDS BACK HER TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE AYES HAVE IT.
I ASK FOR A RECORDED
VOTE.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO.
I ASK FOR A RECORDED
VOTE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS WILL BE
POSTPONED.
IT IS NOW IN ORDER TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 PRINTED IN
HOUSE REPORT 112-144.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK
RECOGNITION?
I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2
PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 112-144
OFFERED BY MS. JACKSON LEE OF
TEXAS.
PURSUANT TO HOUSE
RESOLUTION 347, THE GENTLEWOMAN
FROM TEXAS, HOSEA JACKSON LEE,
AND A MEMBER OWE -- MS. JACKSON
LEE, AND A MEMBER OPPOSED, EACH
WILL CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS.
I THANK THE
DISTINGUISHED CHAIRMAN AND,
AGAIN, I THANK MY FRIENDS ON
THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE.
I DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE MY
FRIEND, THE RANKING MEMBER, AND
I SEEK TO COLLABORATE AND FIX
PROBLEMS IS HOW I SEE MYSELF.
SO MY SECOND AMENDMENT SAYS,
LET'S WORK TOGETHER, BUT THERE
ARE SOMETIMES THE HEART OF A
MATTER THAT HAS TO BE
ADDRESSED.
MY AMENDMENT STRIKES THE
LANGUAGE THAT REALLY IS THE
HEART OF THE MATTER.
IT STRIKES THE LANGUAGE IN THE
BILL ENSURING THAT THE VITAL
ROLE PLAYED BY THE E.P.A. IN
DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT
CERTAIN POLLUTANTS ENTER OUR
WATERWAYS CAN STILL EXIST,
PROVIDES STATES WITH NEARLY
UNLIMITED AUTHORITY TO
DETERMINE WHICH POLLUTANTS CAN
ENTER OUR WATERWAYS, DOES NOT
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN STATES
DISAGREES.
IT ALLOWS 50 STATES TO CONFLICT
AGAINST EACH OTHER AND
ONEUPMANSHIPS, NO, I'M GOING TO
DO THIS, NO, I'M GOING TO DO
THIS.
IT STANDS UP FOR THOSE IN
CESSWOOD, ILLINOIS, THAT
WHETHER THE WATER CAUSES
CANCER, KIDNEY CANCER IN A
30-YEAR-OLD.
OF MY TIME.
WITH THAT I RESERVE THE BALANCE
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM
HER TIME.
TEXAS RESERVES THE BALANCE OF
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO.
I WISH TO CLAIM TIME
IN OPPOSITION.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
SECTION TWO OF THE
BILL WOULD NOT ALLOW E.P.A. TO
CHANGE PERMITTING DECISIONS OR
FROM WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF A
STATE WATER QUALITY PERMITTING
PROGRAM OR LIMITING FEDERAL
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE
STATE WATER QUALITY PERMITTING
ON THE BASIS THAT THE E.P.A.
DISAGREES WITH THE STATE
REGARDING A STATE WATER QUALITY
APPROVED.
STANDARD THAT E.P.A. HAS
BY STRIKING SECTION 2 OF THE
BILL THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
CONTINUE TO ALLOW THEM IMPOSE A
ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL POLICY ON
STATES.
I URGE ALL MEMBERS TO OPPOSE
THIS AMENDMENT.
I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN
RESERVES.
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS IS
I YIELD ONE
MINUTE TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM --
THE DISTINGUISHED GENTLEMAN
FROM NEW YORK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MINUTE.
NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE
THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.
I THANK THE GENTLELADY FROM
TEXAS FOR YIELDING.
I ALSO THANK HER
FOR OFFERING THIS AMENDMENT AND
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF THE
AMENDMENT.
IT WOULD STRIKE THE PROVISIONS
OF THE UNDERLYING BILL THAT
THREATEN EXISTING CLEAN WATER
ACT AUTHORITY RELATED TO THE
DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS UNDER
THE ACT.
I OPPOSE THESE PROVISIONS IN
THE UNDERLYING BILL, AND I VIEW
THIS AMENDMENT AS AN EFFORT TO
IMPROVE AN OTHERWISE VERY BAD
BILL, AND ON THAT BASIS I
SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
MY THANKS TO THE GENTLELADY
FROM TEXAS.
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK HER TIME.
THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED.
AND IS IT MY
--
RIGHT TO CLOSE, MR. CHAIRMAN OR
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO HAS THE RIGHT TO CLOSE.
LET ME REFER
MY COLLEAGUES, AGAIN, TO BASIC
FACTS.
47 STATES HAVE ENTERED INTO
AGREEMENTS WITH THE E.P.A.
BECAUSE THEY DECIDED IN SPITE
OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE ALL
HAVE ON MAKING SURE THAT WE DO
THE RIGHT THING, THAT IT IS THE
RIGHT THING TO DO, THAT CLEAN
WATER IS OUR PRIORITY.
AND I WOULD OFFER AS A VIABLE
PICTURE AND A RECOLLECTION OF
AMERICANS WHO HAD TO LIVE
THROUGH HISTORY WHEN WATER WAS
NOT CLEAN.
WE DID HAVE THAT ERA IN OUR
LIFETIME, OR AT LEAST IN THE
LIFETIMES OF MANY.
I WOULD ARGUE THAT'S NOT THE
LIFE WE WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK
TO, AND THIS PARTICULAR SECTION
IS PROTECTING US AGAINST
POLLUTANTS THAT DEGRADE SURFACE
WATER, RENDERING IT UNSAFE FOR
DRINKING, FISHING, SWIMMING AND
OTHER ACTIVITIES COMING FROM A
VAST ARRAY OF CHEMICALS.
BY REGULATING THE SOURCES THAT
DISPENSE THESE HARMFUL
POLLUTANTS, THE E.P.A. WILL
MAKE SURE THAT THE STATES HAVE
ACCESS TO SAFE DRINKING WATER.
YOU WANT A JOBS BILL, YOU
CREATE THE COMPANIES THAT WILL
HELP KEEP OUR WATERWAYS CLEAN,
PUT PEOPLE TO WORK CLEANING
WATER, PUT PEOPLE TO WORK
COMPLYING WITH THE RIGHT THING
TO DO TO ENSURE WE HAVE CLEAN
DRINKING WATER, AND BABIES AND
WORKING MOMS AND FAMILIES CAN
TURN ON THAT FAUCET AND ENSURE
THAT THEY CAN DRINK THAT CLEAN
WATER.
WE WANT TO WORK WITH INDUSTRY.
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO COME
HALFWAY, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO
RETURN AMERICA TO A TIME WHEN
YOU WOULD DIP DOWN AND YOU FIND
IN DEVELOPING NATIONS THE
ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF DISEASES
THAT CHILDREN HAVE BECAUSE THEY
DO NOT HAVE CLEAN WATER.
GO TO OUR DEVELOPING NATIONS.
SEE WHAT THEY'RE WASHING
THEMSELVES IN.
SEE WHAT THEY'RE DRINKING.
THAT'S NOT AMERICA.
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE
THE KIND OF NATION THAT WORKS
WITH OUR BUSINESSES BUT ALSO
FIGHTS FOR OUR CHILDREN AND
PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
CLEAN WATER.
I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO STAND
WITH US AND STRIKE SECTION 2 TO
ALLOW US, ONE, TO GO FOR A
COMPROMISE, IF WE CAN, BUT ALSO
TO STAND FOR THOSE WHO WOULD
WELCOME CLEAN WATER.
LET'S END DISEASES THAT CAN BE
CAUSED IN THIS RECKLESS MANNER.
I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
THE JACKSON LEE AMENDMENT, TO
SUPPORT CLEAN WATER IN AMERICA.
WITH THAT I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEWOMAN
YIELDS BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO.
THE STATES ARE
OPERATING UNDERLAND ALREADY
APPROVED PLAN FROM THE U.S.
E.P.A. HOW TO ADDRESS THESE
CONCERNS.
I DON'T SEE HOW WE GO BACKWARDS.
AND BY THE WAY, UNDER THE CLEAN
WATER ACT AND POLLUTANTS, THAT
PLAN IS REVIEWED EVERY THREE
YEARS.
I YIELD MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO YIELDS BACK HIS TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE AMENDMENT
OFFERED BY THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM
TEXAS, MS. JACKSON LEE.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE
NOES HAVE IT.
THE YEAS AND
NAYS.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM TEXAS, MS.
JACKSON LEE, WILL BE POSTPONED.
IT IS NOW IN ORDER TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 PRINTED IN
HOUSE REPORT 112-144.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM WEST VIRGINIA
RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT
AT THE DESK.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 3
PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 112-144
YOU ARE AED BY MRS. CAPITO OF
WEST VIRGINIA.
PURSUANT TO HOUSE
RESOLUTION 347, THE GENTLEWOMAN
FROM WEST VIRGINIA, MRS. CAPITO,
AND A MEMBER OPPOSED WILL EACH
CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM WEST VIRGINIA.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIRMAN
ON MY SUBCOMMITTEE, MR. GIBBS,
FOR HIS LEADERSHIP ON THIS
ISSUE.
MY AMENDMENT IS A SIMPLE
REACTION TO CONVERSATIONS THAT
I'VE HAD WITH THE ADMINISTRATOR
AND OTHERS AT THE E.P.A. AND
ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES.
IN QUESTIONING THE PRESIDENT I
SAID, MR. PRESIDENT, WHEN YOU'RE
GOING FORTH ON YOUR RULES AND
REGULATIONS AT THE E.P.A. DO YOU
CONSIDER A JOB AND ECONOMIC
IMPACT?
AND HE SAID, WE SHOULD.
AND I SAY WE SHOULD AND THAT'S
THE PURPOSE OF MY AMENDMENT.
THIS REQUIRES THE E.P.A. TO
ANALYZE THE IMPACT ON JOBS AND
ECONOMIC IMPACT PRIOR TO ISSUING
A REGULATION, POLICY STATEMENT,
GUIDANCE OR IMPLEMENTING ANY NEW
OR SUBSTANTIALLY ALTERED PROGRAM
UNDER THE CLEAN WATER ACT.
EARLIER THIS YEAR THE E.P.A.
RETROACTIVELY VETOED A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CLEAN WATER
ACT PERMIT THIS WEST VIRGINIA AT
THE SPRUCE MINE.
THIS CAME AS QUITE A SURPRISE
AND WAS VERY UNPRECEDENTED
BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THE
E.P.A., IF IT HAS IT'S BEEN
MAYBE ONCE OR TWICE IN ITS
HISTORY, EVER RETROACTIVELY
VETOED A PERMIT.
IT WAS A CHILLING EFFECT NOT
ONLY ON JOBS BUT ON THE ECONOMIC
IMPACT IN OUR STATE.
THIS ACTION HAS CAUSED A SLOW
BLEED OF JOBS THROUGHOUT
APPALACHIA, REACHING BACK TO
REVOKE A PERMIT IS PARTICULARLY
CONCERNING BECAUSE IT CAUSES
GREAT UNCERTAINTY FOR JOB
CREATORS IN OUR STATE.
THIS IS AT A TIME WHEN WE HAVE
AS A NATION 9.2% UNEMPLOYMENT.
WE NEED TO GET PEOPLE TO WORK.
WHY WOULD A COMPANY INVEST IN A
NEW PROJECT WHEN THEY WOULD
THINK THAT THEY WOULD BE
PERMITTED AND TO THINK THERE
COULD BE A REACHBACK BY THE
E.P.A. OR THE CLEAN WATER ACT
WHERE THEY COULD REVOKE THIS
PERMIT?
TO ME THIS JUST CHILLS JOB
CREATION IN OUR STATE.
THE E.P.A.'S IDEOLOGICAL WAR ON
OUR ENERGY PRODUCERS IS
MANIFESTING IT SELF IN OTHER
WAYS IN MY DISTRICT AND ACROSS
THE COUNTRY.
IN THE EASTERN PART OF WEST
VIRGINIA THE E.P.A., LISTEN TO
THIS, IS USING AERIAL
SURVEILLANCE OF FAMILY FARMS
WITH THE GOAL OF ENSURING
COMPLIANCE TO THE CLEAN WATER
ACT.
ACCORDING TO AN ARTICLE IN A
LOCAL NEWSPAPER, THE E.P.A. IS
GOING SO FAR AS TO REGULATE THE
TYPE OF SHEDS THE FAMILY FARMERS
CAN HAVE FOR THEIR CATTLE
OPERATIONS.
BUT WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THIS KIND OF
REGULATORY OVERREACH, THE
E.P.A.'S REPRESENTATIVE MADE IT
CLEAR THAT JOBS ARE IRRELEVANT.
AS THE NATION FACES 9.2%
UNEMPLOYMENT AND HUNDREDS OF
JOBS HANG -- HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF JOBS HANG IN LIMBO,
THE ADMINISTRATION HAS REFUSED
TO RECONSIDER THIS AGENDA.
THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE
REGULATORY ACTIONS UPON JOBS IS
OBVIOUS.
HOWEVER THE E.P.A.'S BEEN UNABLE
TO GIVE ME A STRAIGHT ANSWER ON
WHETHER IT DOES OR DOES NOT
CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON
JOBS OR ECONOMIC IMPACT.
SO LET'S PUT IT CLEARLY IN THE
LAW.
YOU MUST CONSIDER THIS TO STRIKE
THAT BALANCE BETWEEN ENVIRONMENT
AND ECONOMY.
ALL THIS AMENDMENT IS ASKING
FOR, QUITE SIMPLY, IS
TRANSPARENCY.
IT DOESN'T MANDATE WHAT A
DECISION HAS TO BE MADE
CONSIDERING WHAT JOBS OR
ECONOMIC IMPACT IS DISCOVERED,
IT DOES SAY THAT WHEN JOBS AND
ECONOMIC IMPACT ARE NEGATIVE YOU
HAVE TO -- THE E.P.A. HAS TO GO
TO THE LOCAL GOVERNANCE
AUTHORITY, WHETHER IT'S THE
GOVERNOR OR THE SMALLER
COMMUNITY, AND EXPLAIN THIS
ACTION.
SO IT'S TRANSPARENCY AND IT'S
ALSO, I THINK, WILL HELP FURTHER
CLARIFY DECISIONS BUT ALSO HELP
OUR ENERGY PRODUCERS FIGURE OUT
HOW TO WEAVE THE BALANCE BETWEEN
THE ECONOMY AND THE ENVIRONMENT.
IN CLOSING I'VE HEARD A LOT OF
TALK ABOUT OUR COLLECT OF GOAL
OF CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN WATER.
WE ALL SHARE THAT.
AND NO ONE MORE THAN EVERYONE ON
THE FLOOR SITTING HERE TODAY.
AND THOSE OF US ACROSS THE
COUNTRY.
BUT WE CANNOT AFFORD THIS
CONTINUED ASSAULT ON,
UNACCOUNTABLE, UNTRANSPARENT
ASSAULT ON OUR AMERICAN JOBS.
I'LL RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM
WEST VIRGINIA RESERVES HER TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK RISE?
TO CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND LET ME START.
WE HAVE HEARD A GREAT DEAL ABOUT
HOW REVERSALS ON THE PART OF THE
E.P.A. HAVE CAUSED UNCERTAINTY
IN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY,
UNCERTAINTY THAT LEADS TO JOB
LOSS, UNCERTAINTY THAT LEADS TO
A LACK OF INTEREST IN INVESTING.
HERE ARE THE
NUMBERS.
IN 40 YEARS THE E.P.A. HAS
REVERSED 13 PERMITS, 13 OUT OF
OVER TWO MILLION ISSUED.
THAT IS A VETO RATE OF .00065%.
I FAIL TO SEE HOW A REVERSAL
RATE OF SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN
1% CAN CREATE THE KIND OF
UNCERTAINTY THAT WE HEAR ABOUT
FROM OUR COLLEAGUES.
IN FACT, THAT KIND OF REVERSAL
RATE ENCOURAGES A RELIANCE ON
THE LEGITIMACY AND THE VALIDITY
OF A PERMIT GRANTED, NOT THE
QUESTIONING OF IT.
I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT OF
THESE 13 REVERSALS SEVEN TOOK
PLACE UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION
OF PRESIDENT REAGAN, FOUR TOOK
PLACE UNDER THE PRESIDENCY OF
GEORGE BUSH, THE FIRST GEORGE
BUSH, ONE UNDER GEORGE W. BUSH
AND ONE UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA.
I THINK WE ARE HARD PRESSED TO
DEVELOP A FACT-BASED ARGUMENT
THAT THERE IS AN ASSAULT OR THAT
THERE IS AN OVERREACH ON THE
E.P.A. -- ON THE PART OF THE
E.P.A.
NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBJECT
OF THE AMENDMENT ITSELF, THE
E.P.A. HAS TESTIFIED BEFORE THE
WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT
SUBCOMMITTEE THAT IT ALREADY
CONSIDERS THE IMPLICATIONS OF
ITS ACTIONS ON JOBS AND ON THE
ECONOMY.
IN FACT, MANY OF THE
REQUIREMENTS THAT BRING THE
E.P.A. TO DO THAT WERE ENACTED
BY THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WHEN
THEY LAST CONTROLLED THE HOUSE.
AND AS A RESULT I WOULD SUGGEST
THAT ENACTMENT THE -- OF THIS
AMENDMENT WILL ONLY DUPLICATE
THE ANALYSIS THAT THE E.P.A. IS
ALREADY UNDERTAKING.
AS A RESULT I FEAR THAT THIS
AMENDMENT WILL ONLY INCREASE THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR LITIGATION
RELATING TO ACTIONS ON THE PART
OF THE E.P.A., CAUSING A NEW
CAUSE OF ACTION IN THE CLEAN
WATER ACT FOR THIRD PARTY
LAWSUITS.
IF ANYTHING I FEAR THAT THE
EFFECT OF THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
BE TO TIE UP EFFORTS BY THE
E.P.A. TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH
AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN A
BUREAUCRATIC MORASS.
WITH THAT, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES
TO OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT AND I
RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEW YORK RESERVES HIS TIME.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM WEST
VIRGINIA IS RECOGNIZED.
I WOULD JUST LIKE
TO QUICKLY RESPOND IN TERMS OF
THE REVOCATION OF THE ONE
PERMIT.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE HUNDREDS OF
PERMITS THAT ARE SITTING AT THE
E.P.A. TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW
TO MEET THE BALANCE HERE.
LET'S LOOK AT THE TOTAL PICTURE,
THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING, OF JOBS
AND ENVIRONMENT.
I'D LIKE TO YIELD ONE MINUTE TO
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE
MINUTE.
THANK YOU.
I URGE THE MEMBERS TO SUPPORT
THIS -- MRS. CAPITO'S AMENDMENT.
HER AMENDMENT WOULD BRING
TRANSPARENCY TO THE DEVELOPMENT
OF REGULATIONS OR REQUIRE THE
E.P.A. TO PROVIDE A MORE ROBUST
ANALYSIS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS
OF ITS REGULATORY ACTIONS.
THIS WILL NOT HALT THE ISSUANCE
OF REGULATIONS, ONLY PROVIDE
BETTER INFORMATION TO THOSE WHO
ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WRITING THE
REGULATIONS, IN THIS CASE THE
E.P.A.
I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THE
E.P.A. CAN HAVE BETTER
INFORMATION TO MAKE BETTER
REGULATIONS AND IT HAS BEEN
TESTIFIED THAT WHEN THEY LOOK A
REGULATORY ISSUE, THEIR MAIN
CONCERN IS PUBLIC -- ENVIRONMENT
AND THEY DON'T DO ANALYSIS.
I URGE SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM WEST
VIRGINIA RESERVES.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK IS
RECOGNIZED.
MAY I INQUIRE AS TO
HOW MUCH TIME I HAVE LEFT?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEW YORK HAS 2 1/2 MINUTES.
I YIELD TWO MINUTES
TO THE RANKING MEMBER, MR.
RAHALL.
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK FOR
YIELDING.
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF THE
GENTLELADY FROM WEST VIRGINIA'S
AMENDMENT.
LET ME STATE THAT AT THE VERY
BEGINNING.
MY ONLY CONCERNS HERE WERE
ATTACHING AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
AMENDMENT TO THE PENDING
LEGISLATION WHICH IS DIRECTED AT
THE CLEAN WATER ACT
INTERPRETATIONS.
THE PENDING AMENDMENT BY THE
GENTLELADY FROM WEST VIRGINIA,
WHICH AS I SAY I POUR WOULD
APPEAR TO ME TO MORE BROADEN THE
DIRECTION IN WHICH THIS BILL
GOES WHICH I THINK DETRACTS FROM
THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE
LEGISLATION TO ZERO IN ON CLEAN
WATER ISSUES.
THE GENTLELADY'S AMENDMENT
SHOULD PROPERLY -- I BELIEVE IT
IS SUBJECT OF ANOTHER
STAND-ALONE BILL THAT'S BEEN
INTRODUCED IN THIS BODY TO JUDGE
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS.
I SUPPORT THAT LEGISLATION AS
WELL.
I MIGHT ADD IN ADDITION THAT I
BROUGHT THIS ISSUE UP WITH THE
HEAD OF THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE
OF REGULATORY REVIEW WHOSE JOB
IT IS TO DETERMINE AND TO
EXAMINE THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF
REGULATIONS THAT COME OUT OF THE
FEDERAL AGENCIES, THE WHITE
HOUSE OFFICE OF REGULATORY
REVIEWS JURISDICTION, NOT
E.P.A.'S JURISDICTION AS THE
GENTLELADY HAS PARAPHRASED THE
E.P.A. ADMINISTRATOR AND WE'VE
ALL HEARD HER SAY THAT JOB
REPERCUSSIONS, NOT NECESSARILY
PART OF HER JOB DESCRIPTION.
THE OFFICE HAS VERY LIMITED
STAFF AND DOES NOT HAVE THE
STAFF AVAILABILITY TO EXAMINE
THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF EVERY
REGULATION THAT COMES OUT OF
EVERY AGENCY OF OUR FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT.
TO WHICH THEY ARE CAST TO DO.
BUT CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO FULLY DO THEIR JOB.
SO THE BOTTOM LINE I DO SUPPORT
THE GENTLELADY'S AMENDMENT, DO I
WORRY THAT IT OVERLY BROADENS
THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF
LEGISLATION AND SHOULD BE
PROPERLY, AS IT IS, THE SUBJECT
OF A SEPARATE STAND-ALONE
LEGISLATION ON ITS OWN.
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
WEST VIRGINIA YIELDS BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK
RESERVES.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM WEST
RECOGNIZED.
VIRGINIA HAS 15 SECONDS AND IS
I WANT TO THANK MY
COLLEAGUE FROM WEST VIRGINIA FOR
HIS SUPPORT BECAUSE HE AND I ARE
SEEING FIRSTHAND -- WE WANT TO
SEE TRANSPARENCY, WE WANT TO SEE
THE INFORMATION MOVE FORWARD ON
THE ECONOMIC IMPACT.
WE'RE AT A PLACE WHERE WE NEED
JOBS, WE WANT JOBS, WE JUST WANT
TO SEE THE FACTS.
I YIELD BACK AND I URGE SUPPORT
THE GENTLEWOMAN
OF MY AMENDMENT.
TIME.
YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HER
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK IS
THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MR. CHAIRMAN.
FOR THE REASONS I'VE CITED I
URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE NO ON
THIS AMENDMENT AND I YIELD BACK
THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEW YORK YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE
OF HIS TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE AMENDMENT
OFFERED BY THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM
WEST VIRGINIA.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE
AYES HAVE IT.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK.
ON THAT I REQUEST A
RECORDED VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM WEST VIRGINIA
WILL BE POSTPONED.
IT IS NOW IN ORDER TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENT NUMBER 4 PRINTED IN
HOUSE REPORT 112-144.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM HAWAII SEEK
RECOGNITION?
MR. CHAIR, I SEEK
RECOGNITION --
HAND MR. CHAIR, I
SEEK RECOGNITION --
I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MS. HANABUSA OF HAWAII.
PURSUANT TO HOUSE
RESOLUTION 347, THE GENTLEWOMAN
FROM HAWAII, MS. HANABUSA, AND A
MEMBER OPPOSED WILL EACH CONTROL
FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM HAWAII.
THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
THIS AMENDMENT SIMPLY SEEKS FROM
THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE E.P.A.
TO SUBMIT TO CONGRESS WITHIN ONE
YEAR AND THEN ANNUALLY
THEREAFTER A REPORT ON ANY
INCREASE IN WATERBORNE
MICROORGANISMS WHICH INCLUDES
PROTOZOAS, VIRUSES, BACTERIAS
AND PARASITES.
TOXIC CHEMICALS OR TOXIC MET
A.L.S. IN WATERS REGULATION --
REGULATED BY THE STATE.
INCLUDING ANY FURTHER AMENDMENTS
TO THIS BILL.
MR. CHAIR, THIS IS NOTHING AS
IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US,
ESPECIALLY THOSE OF US IN
HAWAII, AS WATER QUALITY.
WE ARE THE ONLY ISLAND STATE,
AND, OF COURSE, OUR PRISTINE
WATERS ARE VERY CRITICAL TO US
FOR OUR MAJOR ECONOMIC ENGINE
WHICH IS TOURISM.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S ANY
DIFFERENT FOR ANY OTHER STATE,
ESPECIALLY THOSE OF US WHO HAVE
WATERING OCEANS AND EVEN THOSE
WHICH MAY HAVE NAVIGATABLE
STREAMS WITHIN OUR BORDERS.
WATER IS CRITICAL.
2018, WHAT IT DOES, IT SIMPLY
STATES THAT THE STATES NOW HAVE
THE RIGHTS TO REGULATE WATER
QUALITY.
BY DOING THAT, HOWEVER, WE NEED
TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND
TO ENSURE FOR ALL OF US AND OUR
CONSTITUENTS THAT THE STATES
ARE DOING A GOOD JOB.
ALL THIS AMENDMENT IS SEEKING
FROM THE STATES IS FOR THE
E.P.A. TO REPORT TO US SO WE
CAN KNOW IF IN FACT THEY'RE
DOING WHAT THIS BILL GIVES THEM
THE AUTHORITY TO DO WHICH IS TO
MAKE THE DECISIONS REGARDING
WATER QUALITY.
FOR THAT REASON, MR. CHAIR, I
ASK FOR THE SUPPORT OF THIS
AMENDMENT.
AND I RESERVE.
CAN YOU SEE THE
GENTLEWOMAN RESERVE?
I RESERVE.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO
RISE?
WISH TO CLAIM TIME
IN OPPOSITION.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
I THANK YOU,
CHAIRMAN.
IT AUTHORIZES THE E.P.A. TO
STUDY THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM ONCE
H.R. 2018 IS ENACTED.
WHILE THE AMENDMENT SEEMS TO
CARRY A BIAS IN THAT THE E.P.A.
CAN ONLY REPORT AN INCREASE OF
PATHOGENS OR TOXINS AND NOT
REDUCTIONS AFTER ENACTMENT OF
H.R. 2018, THE E.P.A. WILL HAVE
VERY LITTLE TO REPORT ON.
H.R. 2018 WILL LEAD TO A BETTER
WATER QUALITY DECISIONS MADE AT
THE LOCAL LEVEL AND THIS WILL
BENEFIT THE ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL
OF US.
H.R. 2018 WOULD LEAD TO WATER
QUALITY DEAD REGATION, NONE OF
US -- DEGRADATION, NONE OF US
IN THIS CHAMBER WOULD SUPPORT
IT.
IF THE SPONSOR WOULD LIKE TO
ASK FOR A UNANIMOUS CONSENT
REQUEST TO MODIFY HER
AMENDMENT, TO MODIFY LINE 5
AFTER INCREASE FOR THE PHRASE
OR REDUCTIONS WE THEN WOULD BE
ABLE TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT.
I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO RESERVES.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM HAWAII IS
RECOGNIZED.
MR. CHAIR, I
WOULD ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT.
HOWEVER, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO
PRESENT MR. BISHOP WITH ONE
MINUTE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE
MINUTE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
AND I THANK THE GENTLELADY FOR
YIELDING.
I WANT TO THANK HER FOR
OFFERING THIS AMENDMENT.
I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR I DO
NOT SUPPORT THE UNDERLYING
LEGISLATION BUT THIS IS A VERY
PRUDENT AMENDMENT THAT ALLOWS
US TO ASSESS AS WE GO FORWARD
WHETHER OR NOT THIS LAW IS --
THE PROPOSED LAW IS IN THE BEST
INTEREST OF OUR NATION'S CLEAN
WATER AND IN THE INTEREST OF
OUR NATION'S HEALTH.
SO I COMMEND THE GENTLELADY FOR
OFFERING THE AMENDMENT.
I AM VERY HAPPY TO HEAR THIS
MAY BE ACCEPTED.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
RESERVES.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM HAWAII
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO IS
I CONTINUE TO
RESERVE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO RESERVES.
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM HAWAII IS
MR. CHAIR, I
BELIEVE THEY WILL ACCEPT THE
AMENDMENT WITH THAT AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
DOES THE GENTLEWOMAN
YIELD BACK?
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEWOMAN
YIELDS BACK.
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO IS
I THINK WE ARE
HAVING A LITTLE PARLIAMENTARY
PROCEDURE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I DO THINK THE AMENDMENT WILL
BE IN ORDER AND -- JUST SHORT
PLEA -- SHORTLY.
I THINK IT IS A GOOD AMENDMENT
AND I WANT TO COMMEND MY
COLLEAGUE FOR OFFERING IT
BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL HAVE AN
ACCURATE REPORT FROM THE E.P.A.
WHEN THEY DO A STUDY WHETHER
WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS BECAUSE
OF 2018 OR GOING BACKWARDS.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE
HAVE THIS AMENDMENT AMENDED TO
PROVIDE THOSE WORDS, OR
REDUCTIONS, AND I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEWOMAN
YIELDS BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM HAWAII RISE.
I ASK FOR
UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ACCEPT THE
AMENDMENT.
THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE MODIFICATION.
MODIFICATION TO
AMENDMENT NUMBER 4 BY MS.
HANABUSA.
ON LINE 5 INSERT, OR REDUCTION,
AFTER INCREASE.
IS THERE OBJECTION
TO THE MODIFICATION?
WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT, AS MODIFIED, OFFERED
BY THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM HAWAII.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE AYES HAVE IT.
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.
IT IS NOW IN ORDER TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENT NUMBER 5 PRINTED IN
HOUSE REPORT 112-144.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO RISE?
MR. SPEAKER, I HAVE
AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 5
PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 112-144
OFFERED BY MR. POLIS OF
COLORADO.
PURSUANT TO HOUSE
RESOLUTION 347, THE GENTLEMAN
FROM COLORADO, MR. POLIS, AND A
MEMBER OPPOSED, WILL EACH
CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO, MR.
POLIS.
THANK YOU, MR.
MR. SPEAKER, OUR COUNTRY'S
SPEAKER.
WORST POLLUTERS DON'T DESERVE A
GET-OUT-OF-JAIL-FREE CARD.
I THINK THAT'S AN UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENT OF THE LANGUAGE OF
THIS BILL ABSENT THIS
AMENDMENT.
I ENCOURAGE COLLEAGUES ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE AISLE TO ADOPT
THIS AMENDMENT.
ONE THING I HOPE WE CAN ALL
AGREE ON IS THE MOST EGREGIOUS
POLLUTERS, THESE ARE POLLUTERS,
BOTH DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICANS
AGREE ARE THE MOST EGREGIOUS
POLLUTERS, THOSE WHO REPEATEDLY
IGNORE STATE REGULATION, ARE
BAD ACTORS AND SHOULD NOT BE
AMONG THOSE THAT BENEFIT FROM
THIS BILL.
THE STATES DESERVE TO HAVE THE
E.P.A. BACK THEM UP AND HELP
THEM KEEP TAB ON THE POLLUTERS
WHO CONTINUALLY VIOLATE STATE
RULES.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE VAST
MAJORITY OF THESE POLLUTERS
HAVE ESCAPED NOT ONLY
PUNISHMENT BUT INCREASED
SCRUTINY.
POLLUTERS THAT CONTINUE TO
VIOLATE THE LAW ARE CLASSIFIED
AS SIGNIFICANT NONCOMPLIANT.
THAT'S THE TERM THAT'S USED.
THIS CLASSIFICATION SIMPLY PUTS
THESE POLLUTERS ON A GREATER
IT DOESN'T CHANGE AUTHORITIES.
MICROSCOPE BY E.P.A.
IT DOESN'T ENGENDER SOME NEW
REGULATORY SCHEME.
IT SIMPLY ENSURES THAT THE
E.P.A. IS KEEPING A CLOSE EYE
ON THEM AND ENSURING THAT STATE
PROGRAMS ARE BEING FOLLOWED.
AGAIN, I BELIEVE IT'S A PIECE
OF THIS THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE
LARGER STATE.
IT'S ONE THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH
SUPPORTING STATES' REGULATION
OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS
INFRACTORS.
STATES SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO KEEP OUR WATERS
SAFE ON THEIR OWN.
ACCORDING TO A 2009 "NEW YORK
TIMES" INVESTIGATION, STATE
OFFICIALS CONTRIBUTE POLLUTANTS
-- THEY ALREADY HAVE PRIMARY
RESPONSIBILITY FOR CRUCIAL
ASPECTS OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT.
THE JOB NEEDED TO PROTECT OUR
HEALTH IS SIMPLY TOO BIG FOR
STATE REGULATORS ALONE.
AN EXAMPLE OF SIGNIFICANT
NONCOMPLIANCE FROM THE BUSH
ADMINISTRATION IN 2001 AND
2006, THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
FOUND THAT MACEY ENERGY, THE
SAME COMPANY RESPONSIBLE FOR
THE BIG BRANCH MINE DISASTER,
HAD ACCRUED OVER 2,000
SIGNIFICANT VIOLATIONS AND THE
STATE DIDN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES
TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE.
UNDER SIGNIFICANT NONCOMPLIANT,
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS
ABLE TO WATCH MACY.
THIS BILL OFFERS THE MOST
EXTREME POLLUTERS A GET OUT OF
JAIL FREE CARD.
AND IT BACKS UP STATE AUTHORITY
AND TO SUCCESSFULLY AND
REASONABLY KEEPS THESE PEOPLE
IN CHECK.
THE E.P.A. CAN KEEP A CLOSER
EYE, THAT'S ALL, A CLOSER EYE
ON THE MOST EXTREME VIOLATORS
OF THE LAW.
POLLUTERS WHO ARE HABITUALLY
NONCOMPLIANT.
WITHOUT MY AMENDMENT, THIS BILL
WOULD MEAN THAT OUR NATION'S
WORST OFFENDERS WOULD BE FREE
FROM E.P.A. SCRUTINY WITH SOLE
AUTHORITY BEING NEW, LESS
ORGANIZED AND NAIVE STATE
PROGRAMS RIGHT FOR LOOPHOLES
AND SOME OF WHICH DON'T HAVE
THE SCALE TO ADEQUATELY
REGULATE WHAT'S AT STAKE.
MR. SPEAKER, IF A STUDENT IS
DISRUPTIVE IN CLASS IT'S ONLY
COMMON SENSE THEY GO TO THE
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE
PRINCIPAL'S CLASS.
TEACHER DOESN'T HAVE AUTONOMY
IN THE CLASS.
THEY NEED TO KNOW THERE'S
BEHAVIOR.
GREATER CONSEQUENCES FOR BAD
I'D LIKE TO RESERVE THE BALANCE
OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
COLORADO RESERVES HIS TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO RISE?
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WISH
TO CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
GIBB GIBBS THANK YOU.
MR. POLIS SEEMS TO SUGGEST --
THANK YOU.
MR. POLIS SEEMS TO SUGGEST THAT
STATES WOULD ALLOW POLLUTERS TO
POLLUTE UNDER H.R. 2018 UNLESS
THIS AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED.
NOTHING CAN BE FURTHER FROM THE
TRUTH.
IN IT WOULD DEGRADE WATER
IT.
QUALITY, NOBODY WOULD AGREE TO
IF YOU HAD A PERMIT HOLDER WHO
IS IN SIGNIFICANT
NONCOMPLIANCE, DOES THAT NEGATE
WATER QUALITY PROVISIONS FOR
THE PERMIT HOLDER MAY BE
POLLUTING?
OF COURSE NOT.
NOTHING IN H.R. 2018 ALLOWS THE
PERMIT HOLDER TO VIOLATE THE
TERMS OF A PERMIT.
I URGE ALL MEMBERS TO OPPOSE
THE POLIS AMENDMENT.
I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO RESERVES.
MR. POLIS, IS RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO,
THE QUESTION AS TO
HOW MUCH TIME REMAINS ON BOTH
SIDES.
THE GENTLEMAN HAS
TWO MINUTES.
I'D LIKE TO YIELD TO
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK ONE
MINUTE, MR. BISHOP.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED.
THIS IS A WELL
THOUGHT OUT AND WELL CONCEIVED
AMENDMENT.
I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT OFFERED
BY THE GENTLEMAN BECAUSE THIS
IS AGAINST POLLUTERS WHO HAVE A
TRACK RECORD ON THE MOST
SERIOUS VIOLATIONS OF THE CLEAN
THOSE FOUND TO BE IN
WATER ACT.
SIGNIFICANT NONCOMPLIANCE AND
THUS THE RETENTION OF A FEDERAL
OVERSIGHT ROLE I THINK IS VERY
WISE.
LET ME JUST AMPLIFY THAT.
IN SEPTEMBER, 2009, "THE NEW
YORK TIMES" HIGHLIGHTED THAT
FROM 2004 TO 2008 506,000
VIOLATIONS OF THE CLEAN WATER
ACT WERE REPORTED FOR BOTH
MAJOR AND MINOR FACILITIES AND
DURING THAT TIME THE STATES
ONLY TOOK 11,000 ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS.
BASICALLY 2% ENFORCEMENT RATE.
WE NEED TO HAVE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT RETAIN ITS OVERSIGHT
ROLE.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD DO THAT.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
IT.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO
RESERVES.
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO IS
I JUST WANT TO
RE-EMPHASIZE, IF THERE'S A
PERMITHOLDER IN VIOLATION, THE
STATES HAVE AN OBLIGATION AND
RESPONSIBILITY TO STEP IN AND
TAKE ACTION AND ENFORCEMENT.
IF THEY DIDN'T I'M SURE THERE
ARE SOME ORGANIZATION THAT
WOULD FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST
E.P.A.
I DON'T THINK THIS AMENDMENT
DOES ANYTHING TO HELP THE BILL.
I THINK THE BILL HELP TAKES
CARE OF IT AND PEOPLE IN
VIOLATION WOULD BE PROSECUTED
I YIELD BACK MY TIME.
UNDER THE LAW.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
OHIO YIELDS BACK HIS TIME.
RECOGNIZED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO IS
THANK YOU, MR.
SPEAKER.
I DON'T AGREE WITH THE
GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO SAYING I
DON'T BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE
YET ANOTHER UNFUNDED MANDATE ON
THE STATES.
WHILE THE NUMBER OF UNREGULATED
FACILITIES HAVE MORE THAN
DOUBLED IN THE LAST DECADE,
MANY BUDGETS HAVE BEEN FLAT.
IN NEW YORK, FOR EXAMPLE, THE
NUMBER OF REGULATED POLLUTERS
HAVE DOUBLED IN THE LAST DECADE
BUT THE NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS
HAVE REMAPED THE SAME.
AGAIN, MY AMENDMENT SENDS
HABITUAL BAD ACTOR TO THE
E.P.A., NOT FOR PUNISHMENT,
SIMPLY FOR CLOSER SCRUTINY.
MY AMENDMENT DOES NOT AFFECT
PUNISHMENT.
IT ALLOWS E.P.A. TO KEEP A
CLOSE EYE ON THE FREQUENT
VIOLATE ARE.
AS WITH THE PRACTICE OF
SIGNIFICANT NONCOMPLIANCE.
I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES ON
BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE TO
SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT TO
ENSURE THAT THE WORST VIOLATORS
ARE PROPERLY INSPECTED IN
SUPPORT OF STATE REGULATION,
AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF
MY TIME.
ALL TIME HAVING
EXPIRED, THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE AYES HAVE IT.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO.
I ASK FOR A RECORDED
VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO WILL BE
POSTPONED.
IT IS NOW IN ORDER TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENT NUMBER 6 PRINTED IN
HOUSE REPORT 112-144.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA RISE?
MR. CHAIRMAN, I
HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 6
PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 112-144
OFFERED BY MR. CONNOLLY OF
VIRGINIA.
PURSUANT TO HOUSE
RESOLUTION 347, THE GENTLEMAN
FROM VIRGINIA, MR. CONNOLLY,
AND A MEMBER OPPOSED, EACH WILL
CONTROL FIVE MINUTES.
THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE
CONNOLLY.
GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA, MR.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
I'D BE REMISS IF I FAILED TO
NOTE THE IRONY OF THE
LEGISLATION BEFORE US TODAY.
AFTER SEVEN MONTHS OF RANTING
AND RAVING OF THE LACK OF
REGULATORY UNCERTAINTY WHICH
CAUSES ECONOMIC STAGNATION, THE
REPUBLICAN MAJORITY IS NOW
ATTEMPTING TO PASS A BILL WHICH
WILL REPLACE A CLEAR,
PREDICTABLE, NATIONAL CLEAN
WATER STANDARD WITH AN UTTERLY
UNPREDICTABLE PATCHWORK OF
STATE STANDARDS.
CHAOS DOES NOT FEDERALISM MAKE,
NOR AS ONE STATE'S ABILITY TO
SULLY A DOWNSTREAM STATE'S
WATER CONSISTENT WITH THE
COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION.
THIS LEGISLATION WITH THE
ORWELLIAN TITLE OF THE CLEAN
WATER COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM
ACT, WOULD HURT THE PRECIOUS
CHESAPEAKE BAY IN OUR REGION OF
THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION.
THE BAY WATERSHED THAT
ENCOMPASSES SIX STATES AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
LOGIC THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY, THE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, THE
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, THE
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND
OTHER SURVEYS WORK IN TAN DUMB
WITH STATES WITHOUT THE --
TANDEM WITH STATES THROUGHOUT
THE REGION TO HELP WITH THE
BAY.
THOUGH THEY DO NOT CORRESPOND
EASILY WITH STATE LINES, THIS
KIND OF INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
WITH ESSENTIAL AND EFFICIENT TO
RESTORE AMERICA'S LARGEST
ESTUARY.
H.R. 2018 WOULD UNRAVEL THAT
RELATIONSHIP, UNDERMINING BAY
RESTORATION.
I'VE DRAFTED A SIMPLE AMENDMENT,
MR. CHAIRMAN, TO EXEMPT
WATERSHEDS LIKE THE CHESAPEAKE
BAY FROM THIS BILL.
BY LIMITING THE JURISDICTION TO
WATERSHEDS WHICH DO NOT RECEIVE
FEDERAL AID FOR WATERSHED
RESTORATION AND RELATED
ACTIVITIES.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW
CRITICAL EFFORTS SUCH AS THE
RESTORATION OF THE BAY, LONG
ISLAND SOUND, THE GREAT LAKES,
GULF OF MEXICO AND SAN FRANCISCO
BAY AND OTHER GREAT WATERS TO
CONTINUE.
IT WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THE
UNDENIABLE FACT THAT WATER DOES
NOT STOP WHEN IT REACHES THE
STATE LINE.
THIS SEAMED IMPORTANT BECAUSE
THESE GREAT WATERS ARE AN
INTEGRAL PART OF OUR AMERICAN
HERITAGE.
THE CHESAPEAKE BAY WAS WHERE
JOHN SMITH ARRIVED AND FUNDED
JAMESTOWN.
THE FIRST COLONIAL EXPLORATION
OF VIRGINIA USED THE BAY TO
EXPLORE VIRGINIA.
THE CHESAPEAKE IS HOME TO THE
FRENCH BLOCK BLOCADE TO THE
BRITISH NAVY WHICH ALLOWED
GEORGE WASHINGTON TO HAVE
VICTORY AT YORKTOWN AND A
SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION TO THE
FOR 200 YEARS THIS CHESAPEAKE
REVOLUTIONARY WAR.
BAY WAS ONE OF THE AMERICA'S
MOST PRODUCTIVE FISHERIES,
FUELING THE GROWTH OF
COMMUNITIES SUCH AS ALEXANDRIA,
NORFOLK AND BALTIMORE.
AS WELL AS FLEETS OF BOATS.
UNFORTUNATELY DEVELOPMENT WIPED
OUT MANY OF THE FISHERIES THAT
WERE ONCE SO PRODUCTIVE.
WHEN JOHN SMICT ARRIVED IN THE
BAY, HIS CREW NEGLECTED TO BRING
FISHING LINE BUT THEY WERE ABLE
TO PULL FISH OUT OF THE BAY BY
SCOOPING THEM OUT OF THE WATER.
THE OYSTERS IN THE BAY WERE
THICK AND WERE SO PROLIFIC THAT
OF THE BAY DAILY.
THEY CLEANED THE ENTIRE VOLUME
THE SHAD RUNS UP TO JAMES AND
THE POTOMAC RISKERS WERE SO
IMMENSE THAT COLONIAL OBSERVERS
NOTED IT WOULD HAVE BEEN
POSSIBLE TO WALK ALL THE WAY
FROM THE JAMES FOR RICHMOND TO
MANCHESTER ON THE BACKS OF FISH
WITHOUT EVER TOUCHING WATER.
THESE FISH WERE SO LARGE AND
POWERFUL THEY SHOOK THE FIRST
MANCHESTER BRIDGE ON ITS PEERS.
OF COURSE THE BAY IS PART OF A
MUCH LARGER WATERSHED NOW.
TO RESTORE THIS GREAT WATER
BODY, MANY FEDERAL AGENCIES HAVE
BEEN WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
STATES, LOCALITIES AND LAND
OWNERS.
AS WRITTEN H.R. 2018 WOULD
RUPTURE THAT PARTNERSHIP
EFFECTIVELY GIVING ANY ONE STATE
THE AUTHORITY OVER THE REGION'S
MY SIMPLE AMENDMENT WOULD
RESTORATION EFFORTS.
PROTECT OUR ABILITY TO KEEP
WORKING TOGETHER AS A REGION TO
RESTORE THE BAY.
THIS REGIONAL EFFORT WAS FIRST
STARTED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL BY
A REPUBLICAN, MY OLD FRIEND,
REPUBLICAN U.S. SENATOR CHARLES
OF MARYLAND.
TO THE EXTENT WE'RE MAKING
PROGRESS TODAY, IT'S AS A RESULT
OF THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN
VIRGINIA WHOSE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
IS INVESTING OVER $100 MILLION
ANNUALLY IN PRIVATE LAND
CONSERVATION AND A
REPUBLICAN-LED INITIATIVE UNDER
A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR.
LET US NOT TURN OUR BACKS ON
THIS 30-YEAR PARTNERSHIP.
I ASK THE SUPPORT FOR THIS
COMMONSENSE AMENDMENT TO
AMERICA'S LARGEST AND MOST
CONTINUE THE IMPROVEMENTS TO
HISTORIC ESTUARY AS WELL AS OUR
NATION'S OTHER GREAT WATERS.
I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN
RESERVES THE BALANCE OF HIS
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WISH
TO CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION OF
THE AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEMAN IS