On the recordJune 9, 2015
I would only respond the same as I did to the last one, that the EPA could vacate the bill by making a spurious decision and I would oppose this amendment.
Source
congress.govJim Inhofe: “I would only respond the same as I did to the last one, that the EPA could vacate the bill by making a spurious decision…”
Editor's note · Context
Inhofe expresses opposition to Boxer's amendment regarding the EPA's authority.
Share
More from Jim Inhofe
Nov 15, 2022
We are proud to honor the achievements of Ms. Cheryl Black, and on behalf of a grateful nation, we salute her 43 years of service to our great Nation. We offer her our thanks and congratulate her on a well-earned retirement…
Jul 23, 2023
Senators Vitter, Crapo, Alexander, and I sent a letter to Senator Lautenberg yesterday expressing our disappointment that Republicans' sincere effort to work on a bipartisan TSCA reform had been rebuffed.
Jul 23, 2023
It is imperative that any TSCA modernization efforts be bipartisan, based on sound science, protective of public health, and continue to allow American industry to lead the world through responsible innovation.
Other voices in this conversation
