EPA has never considered the cost of additional health care required because someone loses a job, and I don't understand how that is possible, why that is not a legitimate cost.
Ed Whitfield: “EPA has never considered the cost of additional health care required because someone loses a job, and I don't understand…”
Editor's note · Context
Whitfield criticizes EPA for not factoring job loss health costs into their analysis.
Share
More from Ed Whitfield
27 States filed a lawsuit against the Clean Power Plan, and the Supreme Court issued a stay.
So many critics say that that flexibility argument--we're giving maximum flexibility to the State--is really a red herring.
Amen. I was just in China and we saw their reports in the local press. They're building new power plants they know they don't need. They just want the jobs, more coal emissions. So, again, it's a global challenge. It's not just America's…
There are strong feelings on the issue because many people, and we are speaking for our constituents, believe that EPA is exceeding its legal authority under the direction of a president who is trying to impose his will on climate change…





