Ed Whitfield: “The amendment offered by the gentlelady from Maryland would require that we adopt a finding by the EPA that its boiler…”

“The amendment offered by the gentlelady from Maryland would require that we adopt a finding by the EPA that its boiler and incinerator rules will create 2,200 net jobs. The reason that we respectfully oppose that is because that is EPA's analysis. And from hearings and from independent groups, we do question the models that were used; we question the assumptions made; we question the lack of transparency in some of EPA's numbers. But more important than that, we've had the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners, who--you may or may not agree with their numbers, but they have concluded that these rules would put at risk over 230,000 jobs. So the EPA is saying, well, you are going to gain 2,200. They are saying that you are going to put at risk 230,000. Then we had the American Forest & Paper Association, who concluded that they are putting at risk, under these new rules, over 20,000 jobs. We may be picking up 2,200, but you are going to put at risk 230,000 plus 20,000 more. Then the whole argument that this administration seems to be making a lot of is that, if you issue regulations and you put additional requirements in, then you create jobs. But yet I believe that many people would say, in the history of our country, we've become a strong economic power because we've had individuals willing to invest money, to be innovative, to be free marketeers, to go out with a new product, produce it, create jobs, and that creates wealth and increases our gross domestic product.…”