On the recordSeptember 23, 2011
I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to emphasize what my friend from California just said. What the amendment does is to make sure that you add to the analysis the impact on clean energy jobs and clean energy companies. Why wouldn't you want to make sure explicitly that that is a part of the analysis? I invite you to come to Portland, Oregon, where it is, I think, the wind energy capital. It's making a lot of difference in our community and across America. Wind energy, for instance, is the fastest growing in terms of installed capacity, and costs are going down. It is an area that makes a difference to the economy. What my colleague from California is urging is to make sure that it's a part of the study. It is unfortunate that we're to this point this morning anyway. We started this odyssey in 1990 with the Clean Air Act. After 8 years of study at EPA, the conclusion was this is a real problem, and the Clinton administration and the EPA started the rulemaking process. The Bush administration drug its feet until 2005 with an inadequate response that was thrown out by the courts. Finally now, after 21 years, we're starting to move forward with something that wouldn't take effect until 2015. In the meantime, there would be many jobs that would be available in construction and in clean technology.…





