Ken Calvert: “I would like to remind the gentleman, with this bill, we have cut EPA almost 30 percent since 2010. While we have…”

“I would like to remind the gentleman, with this bill, we have cut EPA almost 30 percent since 2010. While we have expressed a number of frustrations with EPA's overreach over the last few years, and even here today, I cannot support an amendment with cuts of this magnitude which put important programs at risk. An across-the-board cut of this magnitude would reduce priorities like the geographic programs, Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, and others, State recovering loan funds, the 28 national estuary programs, several State grants like radon, lead, and beach protection, just to name a few. These are programs proposed for elimination in the President's budget that Members on both sides of the aisle requested funding in this bill. In fact, I had 5,200 requests. The amendment would also significantly reduce funding for the Superfund program. The proposed budget would propose to reduce the program by 31 percent, which would impact new cleanups and slow ongoing cleanups. The President's budget also proposed to reduce the State categorical grants by 44 percent and cut the Diesel Emission Reduction Grants by 83 percent, which are essential to air quality in my home State of California. States need resources to best serve our constituents back home; therefore, I think this amendment just goes too far. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Minnesota. Ms. McCOLLUM.…”