Alan Lowenthal: “The majority has repeatedly brought bills to this same House floor that add requirements for Federal agencies to use…”

“The majority has repeatedly brought bills to this same House floor that add requirements for Federal agencies to use more cost-benefit analyses; but now, when we are dealing with climate change, we are told that we should remove requirements to honestly consider the cost of climate change. Which way do you want it? Is cost-benefit analysis only a good thing when it suits the majority's purpose to slow regulation and a bad thing when it may shed some light on the true cost of our carbon-based actions? Ignoring the facts because we don't like them won't make the problem go away. Greenhouse gas emissions from human activities are causing climate change with profound monetary costs for our health, infrastructure, food security, and national security. Let's bring more information and transparency into the Federal rulemaking process by using the social cost of carbon to quantify those costs. That way we can understand the risks and make sound investments in our Nation's future.”