On the recordSeptember 23, 2011
I rise in opposition to this amendment for a number of reasons. First of all, the TRAIN Act, the underlying bill that we're talking about here, applies to 14 regulations of EPA. It does not delay in any way any of those regulations, except for two, and that's referred to as the Utility MACT and the Cross-State Air Transport Rule. And even on those two acts, it only delays the Cross-State Transport Rule by 3 years, and it delays the Utility MACT by 1 year. The whole purpose of the TRAIN Act is simply to look more closely at the cumulative impact on jobs, on electricity prices, on American competitiveness in the global marketplace. EPA has done a very thorough job on most of these regulations in calculating benefits, but they had not looked closely in all of them on cost. Under the TRAIN Act, we're simply asking this independent government agency to look at all costs and all benefits. Another reason that I would speak in opposition to this amendment, one of the things that it requires this independent body to do is to examine the effect on green energy companies. Now, there's nothing in the TRAIN Act that's selecting one industry to give some favorable treatment to, and that's particularly what this amendment does. I might add, on green energy, the green energy industry has received increases of 153 percent of subsidies. Subsidies have increased 153 percent for green energy.…





