Paul Tonko

It is worth reminding everyone that we teach children the importance of 'reduce, reuse, and recycle.' There is a reason recycling is third in that slogan.

We have been sweeping deficiencies in domestic markets, education, and infrastructure under the rug so long as China was willing to accept our waste.

The closure of this market has had major impacts on the U.S. recycling system, causing municipalities to scale back once profitable programs, many of which are now actually costing local governments money.

I look forward to our witnesses advising us on a path forward because, knowing the environmental and climate impacts of plastic waste, as well as the newfound economic pressures on local governments' recycling programs, now is the time for…

Reducing waste and encouraging recycling can play an important role as we seek to make our nation more sustainable.

Continuing our U.S. leadership in nuclear engineering and physics starts in our schools and higher education systems.

Shame on us. We can fix this by passing the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment Act.

I think this is simply stigma written into our laws.

It would be ridiculous for Congress to impose such barriers to lifesaving medicine in the middle of an epidemic.

Opioid use disorder is a treatable chronic brain disease.

I championed a provision in the SUPPORT Act based on my Medicaid Reentry Act which we are considering today.

It is pretty concerning that you have missed a deadline by almost a year at this point.

I strongly encourage that we meet them quickly.

These are critical deadlines that have been missed.

Excluding climate from the budget, eliminating research and voluntary industry partnership programs and weakening modest, existing rules... does not give me any indication that the Agency is taking this environmental threat seriously.

I share that concern. Like so much of what we have seen from this administration, this budget would put the climate, our air, our drinking water, our land, our communities, and our planet at greater risk.

This Administration is clearly shouting that it doesn't care about safe drinking water.

This budget proposal simply does not allow the EPA to fulfill its mission to the American people, and therefore it is a proposal that we must reject.

I am extremely concerned by the political leadership's continued treatment of scientific expertise within the agency and outside advisors.

I believe many of us are concerned that EPA is not acting urgently or comprehensively enough to address serious risks to Americans' drinking water.

If enacted, I fear this funding level will jeopardize the Agency's ability to fulfill its mission of protecting Americans' health and our environment.

It is imperative that this transition is fair to impacted workers and communities. We cannot leave anyone behind.

The science is clear--we need to transition our economy to becoming carbon neutral as soon as possible.

We can either do a relief for those most wealthy and bloat our deficit or we can prioritize our children and their health.

The EPA established the lead action level in 1991 based on feasibility and not based on impact on public health.