I might say to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon that it is correct that the court invalidated the current Air Transport Rule that we have in effect in America today, but I would also like to read from that decision because one of the reasons they invalidated this law was because EPA was looking at a regional basis rather than within individual States. The court said: ``It is possible that CAIR would achieve air transport goals. EPA's modeling shows that sources contributing to North Carolina's non-containment areas will reduce their emissions even after opting into CAIR's trading programs.'' My point in saying that is this still is a particularly effective Air Transport Rule. At this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter).
On the recordSeptember 22, 2011
Share & report
More from Ed Whitfield
Jun 8, 2016
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: At the end of the bill, add the following new section: SEC. 5. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS…
Apr 19, 2016
Nuclear energy is, and will continue to be an integral piece of our electricity portfolio.
Jun 8, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill, H.R. 4775. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Newhouse). Is there objection to…
Jun 9, 2016
In my view, an appliance that saves a few dollars per year on energy but doesn't work as well is being penny wise and pound foolish.





