Ed Whitfield

I think that is commendable and I do appreciate it, but the prohibition has been very specific about using those funds at the Federal level, State level or local level.

I have seven pages here of 25 specific instances where grantees of HHS receiving money from HHS are explicitly trying to influence laws at the State and local levels relating to all sorts of issues.

one of the things that is a little bit troublesome to me in the President's 2013 budget is that he in essence eliminates part of the anti-lobbying provisions of the use of Federal funds.

How much time do I have remaining? The CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky has 2 minutes.

At this time, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).

I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, we're here today because it's time to decide. President Obama and his administration have made a decision not to decide, even though his own Secretary of State, in their final economic environmental…

I might reiterate once again, this is a private company spending $7 billion of their own money. Before any of this ever became an issue, they acquired this material. They spent over $2 billion acquiring this material. Everybody is talking…

I do so reluctantly because we all have such great respect for Ms. Eshoo of California. She is a hardworking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee and provides great leadership. But we oppose this amendment for a couple of simple…

I yield myself an additional 30 seconds. Five of the major labor unions in America support this legislation because they recognize the additional jobs that will be available to them in the construction of the pipeline. So for that reason…

How much time do I have remaining? The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.

I yield myself 3 minutes. First of all, I would like to say to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, who is a very hardworking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee and provides great leadership, that we reluctantly oppose his amendment…

I don't see a good ending to the way in which the Republicans want to deal with the environment and job creation in this country.

I find it rather appalling that this agency would issue a rule this widespread, this costly, and not even know what the total costs are.

the benefits certainly did not come from mercury reduction, the primary benefits were coming from reduction of PM2.5.

I am a pro-labor, building construction trade guy, so they are barking up the wrong tree trying to stop the Keystone pipeline.

I am quite disappointed in this regulation is going to have profound impact in a negative way on the American people and their ability to compete in the global marketplace.

the Republicans are crying crocodile tears over the 6,000 temporary jobs that the Keystone XL pipeline will create

you are killing jobs left and right with no regard to what is going to happen to the people in those areas

What is the total cost?

Do you include the cost of a person who loses their job because of this regulation?

Like many people, I was quite disappointed when the President decided the Keystone Pipeline was not in the national interest.

If our President decides that sending three aircraft carrier strike groups to the Strait of Hormuz to defend the free flow of oil, if he thinks that is in the national interest, then one would also think a pipeline from Canada that would…

The CEO of TransCanada sat right there and said he would not support that legislation.

Without my bill this pipeline will not do a thing to enhance the security of our country or of our brave men and women stationed all over the world for purposes of protecting our fossil fuel interests.

Isn't it true that the State Department's own Environmental Impact Statement included review of an alternative not to build the pipeline at all and didn't the Environmental Impact Statement conclude that building the pipeline along the…