Political Quotes

On the recordOctober 5, 2011
I oppose this bill on substantive grounds because it nullifies EPA's rules to cut toxic pollution from cement kilns and threatens EPA's ability to reissue rules that are protective of public health. And we certainly had an exhaustive discussion of why we think this is not a good bill, but this bill has another problem: It does not comply with the Republican leadership's policy for discretionary spending. When Congress organized this year, the majority leader announced that the House would be following a discretionary CutGo rule. This requires that when a bill authorizes discretionary funding, that funding is explicitly limited to a specific amount. The protocols also require that the specific amount be offset by a reduction in an existing authorization. This rule was embodied in a document entitled, ``Legislative Protocols for the 112th Congress.'' The majority leader announced that compliance with these protocols is necessary for legislation to be complied with before the bill would be scheduled for floor consideration. Well, this bill fails to meet these protocols on two counts: First, the bill does not include a specific authorization for EPA to complete the rulemaking required by the bill. After all, EPA finalized the cement rulemaking more than a year ago. EPA will have to start from scratch, according to this bill, and follow a whole new approach for setting emission standards. That's going to cost money.…
Said by
Henry Waxman
Democratic · California
Source
govinfo.gov
Oct 5, 2011

Share

More from Henry Waxman

Dec 2, 2014

Today's hearing is about the Children's Health Insurance Program. This is a rare program in Washington that has enjoyed bipartisan support since its inception in 1997.

congress.gov
Nov 20, 2014

I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment. The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes. There was no objection.

govinfo.gov
Nov 20, 2014

The reason I qualified it is because I see no reason to oppose the amendment. It is not objectionable. But it doesn't actually fix the bill's four problems. Subsection 3(b) of the bill gives new sources amnesty from compliance with a new…

govinfo.gov
Jul 11, 2019

What the Constitution does not allow is our leaders breaking the Constitution, or the law, to serve their political needs.

congress.gov

Other voices in this conversation