Steve Cohen: “This is a bad amendment to a bad bill, so it's doubly bad. This would take almost anything that protects the air, the…”

“This is a bad amendment to a bad bill, so it's doubly bad. This would take almost anything that protects the air, the water, the public from carbon emissions away from the opportunity of the EPA to protect us. Many cities, such as Houston, Texas, and L.A. and other cities, have problems with smog. They have programs that they have to put a price on pollutants that cause urban smog, and these programs are part of the State-approved implementation plans through the EPA to protect the air. They are improving the air quality in Houston and Los Angeles, but under this amendment, if Texas or California ever needed to change these programs, they wouldn't be able to do so. Los Angeles has had enough smog, so has Houston and the rest of the country, and we have to be able to have laws that effectively protect our air. Public health programs are important, and the amendment would risk the ability of EPA also to have its sanctions that they put into place. Right now, EPA, to ensure civil enforcement procedures, they change their penalties every 4 years to keep up with inflation so they're effective deterrents. This would stop this from happening, and eventually the deterrents would be less than necessary to stop bad actors from engaging in risky behavior that causes harm to the environment and harm to humans.…”