Jim Inhofe

Both statements are false, and through letters to you, and I appreciate very much the quick response I got from you, Ms. McCarthy, and on the record of this committee, we have asked the EPA to provide us with the data backing up these two…

I am concerned that the Administration's proposals threaten to undermine an important sector of our economy and the industries and jobs it supports in the name of modest environmental gains.

Instead of creating climate millionaires who benefit from carbon trading schemes and new regulations, let's remember that the pain falls hardest on low income families.

The President's plan lacks balance between cost and benefit.

Ultimately, this hypocrisy reveals the Administration is fully aware that the EPA's greenhouse gas regulations will put a drag on the economy.

The truth completely contradicts the Presidents' statement and begs the question as to why he and the EPA not only continue to deny the truth of it, but why it has raced to stop this information from disseminating into scientific record.

This reveals an astonishing double standard.

The message to energy producing communities is clear--if you like your job, community, and your electricity bill, you can't keep them.

Protecting and improving our natural environment is a goal shared by many. But there is strong disagreement about how to achieve these goals.

The President continues to misrepresent climate science.

In October 2012, when I was Ranking Member of this Committee, I released a report highlighting the Administration's systematic actions to delay the finalization of costly environmental regulations until after the 2012 presidential…

I am very concerned that the EPA waited over 3 months to publish a second try at proposed greenhouse gas new source performance standards for power plants.

I believe it undermines our economic recovery, threatens to keep off limits our energy abundance and manufacturing renaissance.

This climate plan can pass Congress, and I understand the temptation to ignore our system of checks and balances, pretend the Constitution doesn't exist and implement whatever plans the President would like.

It is clear that this EPA and this Administration has an agenda, and that agenda is not to create jobs, provide affordable energy, or fight poverty in these struggling communities.

I support legislative solutions that preserve and enhance our natural environment. However, I am deeply concerned that unilateral EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is already imposing major burdens on our economy without resulting…

The President may promise that if you like affordable energy, you can keep affordable energy. But like his other promises, we know that that is simply not true.

I think the social cost of carbon is a perfect example on point.

I think we are there yet.

That's an incredible thing that's going on.

He is totally unpredictable.

It's clear that Russia, China, Iran, ISIS see weaknesses in the President's rhetoric and it's not going to deter them from taking more aggressive action.

The problem is, as I see it, the President is relying on his political and his media advisors rather than his military leaders.

I guess what she's saying is you can't build a strategy that can last more than 2 weeks.

Six years in, we still have no strategy in the Middle East and no plan to deter Russia, China, Iran, and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and no updated national security strategy.