On the recordMarch 18, 2015
Let me just say to my friend from Massachusetts that I appreciate his comments and his friendship as well. While we agree on many things, we do happen to disagree on this one amendment. Let me also say that I wish he was still a member of the Science Committee, and he would be welcomed back any time. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment would allow the EPA to continue to hide the data it says justifies its regulations. Peer review does not allow independent scientists to verify the EPA's claims. It is not a sufficient check to ensure that the EPA uses the best science available. H.R. 1030 promotes the fundamental principles of transparency and accountability. This amendment would make it harder to achieve that goal. Giving independent scientists an opportunity to examine the data that the EPA relies upon when it makes public regulations will ensure transparency and accountability. Public policy should be backed up by public data. Peer review alone will not give the American people all the facts. Americans deserve access to this data. They have the right to know if the regulations paid for with their tax dollars are based upon the best science available. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time. The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy). The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
