I frankly don't understand the purpose of this amendment. Last spring, FERC issued an updated policy statement, an interim guidance, detailing how the Commission should treat new applications for natural gas pipelines and account for greenhouse gas emissions. The Commission, a month later, clarified that both documents were drafts and that it would seek further input and comments on the drafts. That is it. These documents are not final rules or orders from the Commission. They are not law. They are a draft, draft documents that the Commission has put out to solicit industry and stakeholder feedback, and that is the way we want the government to work for it to be responsive. Withdrawing these documents from draft status, which is what I think the gentleman's amendment would do, would have no impact on any policy and, instead, I think, would just create further confusion and possibly release FERC from the duty to consider industry's comments on the draft. It may be that the real reason that the Republicans offered this amendment is that they don't think that FERC should consider greenhouse gas emissions. They don't think that these emissions should matter when FERC makes a decision about whether or not to authorize a new natural gas pipeline. This doesn't change the law. The law currently requires FERC to consider the greenhouse gas impacts of a certificate it grants.…
Share & report
More from Frank Pallone
I have no additional speakers, and I am prepared to close. Mr. Speaker, again, this is a bill that addresses wasteful spending, and I think it is important for us to make sure we support it on a bipartisan basis. Mr. Speaker, I yield back…
Let me just say that respite care is obviously very important, and this bill goes a long way toward dealing with that. I would ask all my colleagues to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.
On that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 214, nays 192, not voting 27, as follows: [Roll No…
Again, what we are trying to do here, as the chair of the committee has said, is get rid of bad actors. I think this is an effective way to do it, so I would hope everyone would join me on both sides of the aisle in voting ``yes'' on this…





