On the recordMay 1, 2019
I didn't get a chance to come down during the debate on the underlying bill, and the committee, of course, raised this issue. The hope is that the President is going to sign a bill to go back into an agreement that he already decided to get out of. So, when the statement is made--it only reverses the President's action if the President signs the bill. The President is not going to sign this bill. So why are we here? Why are we spending a whole week? I understand we need to get this climate debate off our chest and eventually move forward, and I hope we will do that in a bipartisan manner. As to the amendment that we are debating here, not bad, I think, trying to understand the green jobs that will occur. But I think those of us from fossil fuel areas, coal mining areas, marginal oil, well, we would probably like to see an evaluation of job losses that could occur as part of this. They are going to tout the job creation. Let's look at the areas--and they touted rural America. Let's look at the areas where coal mines will close, coal-fired power plants will close, and the economic impact that will be impacted there. We are pretty excited about working with the Energy and Commerce Committee on, as is, I think, the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, conservation, innovation, adaption. Our focus is going to be: Let's affect the carbon dioxide emissions without raising energy costs and slowing the economic activity.…





