Jim Inhofe: “First, it is the Energy Information Administration that came out and did the study on this. They said that there would…”

“First, it is the Energy Information Administration that came out and did the study on this. They said that there would be fuel switching. I only have to ask the question, if you are not able to use coal-fired plants, what are you going to switch to? Is it going to be windmills? There would be fuel switching, and it would have a devastating effect in terms of the problems that already exist in terms of the cost of natural gas. The Senator from Vermont is passionate on this subject, and I don't want to be critical. But in talking about hotspots, that is the same thing that they said about acid rain--there are going to be hotspots-- and it didn't happen. Thirdly, the point that was brought up on being family friendly. When you look at the fact that they say studies show that not a single woman or child has a blood mercury level approaching the level at which even the smallest affect was observed in any study, where is the real problem there? If you want to be family friendly, let's be a little concerned about the cost of fertilizer, about the cost of heating our homes when winter comes. This is an exercise in futility. The President has already announced if this thing should pass--they will feel good and rejoice--he will veto it, and you can't override a veto. It is a done deal. The current rule regulates mercury for the first time. The current rule's cost is $2 billion, as opposed to $358 billion, a huge difference.…”