On the recordJune 20, 2012
Again, I believe this amendment is unnecessary, talking about ambiguities and the silence in the law when it comes to the Clean Air Act in the determination of cost. Here the issue of cost was silent, and we are simply saying we ought to have the issue of cost brought into this. When the term ``public health'' appeared in the first Federal Clean Air legislation in 1955, its ordinary meaning was ``the health of the community.'' In the American Trucking decision, as you pointed out, the Supreme Court affirmed that the definition of public health is ``the health of the public'' and does not refer to the health of nonliving entities. The Clean Air Act requires that ambient air quality standards be established to protect the public health with an adequate margin of safety. Nothing--nothing--in H.R. 4480 changes the definition of ``public health.'' Again, let me say that: Nothing in H.R. 4480 changes the definition of ``public health'' in the Clean Air Act or any obligations. It doesn't change any obligations to set such human health-based standards. So I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and with that, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly). The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.





