On the recordFebruary 17, 2011
I want to very quickly rise in strong support of Congressman Carter's amendment. I have three cement plants in my district in Midlothian, Texas. It is the cement capital of Texas. Mr. Chairman, Republicans are not for no regulation of mercury. We think this particular mercury rule is flawed. My good friend, the former chairman Mr. Waxman of California, talked about the rigorous analysis that was done. His definition of ``rigorous'' and my definition of ``rigorous'' are not one and the same. We think that analysis was fairly flawed. I would point out that most pollutants--and we do agree that mercury is a pollutant--are measured in tons. Mercury emissions from these plants are measured in pounds per year, so mercury is a trace element of these pollutants. We think that we should go back and actually do a real economic analysis and also a health analysis. My good friend from Massachusetts was talking about the dangers of health. Those are real dangers. But again, given that the trace amounts of mercury that are emitted per year are in pounds, it is a very tenuous connection to say that the mercury from a cement plant has a direct correlation with some of the potential side effects that the gentleman from Massachusetts was talking about. So I think this is a good amendment, and I want to support it. I now yield to my good friend Mr. Akin. I believe he has an amendment to the amendment.
