Bill to Block EPA Climate Regulations Moves Forward in Congress

picture-6706-1473698561.jpg
on

On Tuesday, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives moved one step closer to passing a bill to permanently prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating global warming pollution. The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the bill, H.R. 910 or the โ€œEnergy Tax Prevention Act,โ€ in a vote that fell mostly along partyย lines.

Under the guise of lowering gas prices, the bill would deliver several very lethal blows to EPA efforts to address climate change โ€“ and to President Obamaโ€™s energy agenda โ€“ by:

  • Prohibiting the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide and six others) in connection with climateย change.

  • Repealing previous EPA actions and rules on climate, overturning the EPAโ€™s science-based endangerment finding stating that greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, threaten public health and therefore are โ€œair pollutantsโ€ which must beย regulated.

  • Prohibiting Clean Air Act standards for improving vehicle fuel efficiency afterย 2016.

  • Preventing the EPA from allowing ambitious states, such as California, to set tougher vehicle emissions standards for greenhouseย gases.

In a misleading attempt to gain public support for the bill, Representative Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and one of the billโ€™s co-sponsors, has been claiming that the bill would keep gas prices in check by reducing additional EPA regulations on oil refineries. โ€œMake no mistake โ€“ if we allow the EPA to move forward unchecked, its actions will only drive gasoline and other energy prices higher,โ€ Upton said in the L.A. Times.

However, Politifact, the nonpartisan Pulitzer Prize-winning project that serves as a political truth-o-meter, found Uptonโ€™s claim to be absolutely false, saying โ€œthereโ€™s no proof that the law would actually stop gas prices from rising.โ€ Additionally, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson pointed out before two U.S. House subcommittees last weekย that:

The bill still would block any Clean Air Act standards for greenhouse gas pollution from cars and trucks after 2016 โ€ฆ All told, nullifying this part of the Clean Air Act would forfeit many hundreds of millions of barrels of oil savings. At a time when gas prices are rising yet again, I cannot, for the life of me, understand why you would vote to massively increase Americaโ€™s oil dependence.

Unbothered by the truth, Upton and others nonetheless continued to repeat this unfounded claim throughout committeeย proceedings.

House Democrats offered three failed amendments to insert language into the bill acknowledging EPA findings โ€“ which the National Academy of Sciences also strongly confirmed โ€“ on the science of climate change. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas)., who last year apologized to BP during Gulf oil spill hearings, ignorantly dismissed climate change as โ€œa theory that hasnโ€™t been provenโ€ while other Republicans made the point that Congress shouldnโ€™t be โ€œlegislating science,โ€ even as they moved legislation forward to do preciselyย that.

To that end, Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) likened House Republican efforts to undo EPAโ€™s science-based findings with the โ€œway the Vatican was able to repeal the finding of Galileo.โ€ (For the record, the Vatican eventually โ€˜fessed up to being wrong.)

While 31 Republicans and three Democrats in the House โ€“ all unsurprisingly funded by climate policy saboteurs, Koch Industries โ€“ voted to dismantle portions of the popular Clean Air Act, diverse groups have voiced their opposition to H.R. 910, including small business and consumer interests, former military officers, health and medical professionals, and, of course, scientists.

On the other hand, the bill has plenty of support from big industry polluters, who reportedly gave it the go-ahead during a secret meeting in January with the billโ€™s sponsors, Reps. Upton and Ed Whitfield (R-Ky) and Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.). The full House will vote on โ€“ and likely pass โ€“ the bill later this spring, probably before the Congressional break for Easter at the end of April. Meanwhile, Democrats in the Senate are scrambling to rebuff similar last-minute efforts to handcuff the EPAโ€™s climate authority as part of an unrelated vote this week. Unfortunately, these kinds of attacks on the EPA are becoming disturbing and regular occurrences that arenโ€™t likely to disappear any timeย soon.

Photo: Juan Pablo Garnham, Creative Commons

picture-6706-1473698561.jpg
Ashley is Senior Editor of DeSmog. She is also a freelance science and environmental journalist, and a contributing science writer for Natural History Magazine. Her work has appeared in publications such as The Atlantic, Slate, Science, Scientific American, Discover Magazine, Hakai Magazine, and Medium.

Related Posts

on

Canadian environmentalist Tzeporah Berman makes the case for a "bold idea" to end the era of coal, oil and gas.

Canadian environmentalist Tzeporah Berman makes the case for a "bold idea" to end the era of coal, oil and gas.
on

High demand for wild-caught species to feed farmed salmon and other fish is taking nutritious food away from low-income communities in the Global South.

High demand for wild-caught species to feed farmed salmon and other fish is taking nutritious food away from low-income communities in the Global South.
Analysis
on

Premier Danielle Smith can expect new tariffs, fewer revenue streams, and a provincial deficit brought on by lowered oil prices.

Premier Danielle Smith can expect new tariffs, fewer revenue streams, and a provincial deficit brought on by lowered oil prices.
on

Jeremy Clarkson spreads well-worn conspiracy theory that casts inheritance farm tax policy as plot to โ€œreplace farmers with migrantsโ€.

Jeremy Clarkson spreads well-worn conspiracy theory that casts inheritance farm tax policy as plot to โ€œreplace farmers with migrantsโ€.