On the recordJuly 18, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear friend from Colorado for his leadership on this important issue. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this dirty air legislation. The House majority is, once again, substituting political ideology for sound science. Make no mistake: this is social Darwinism, at its worst, and a blueprint to make America sick again. The intent of the Clean Air Act and its amendments couldn't be clearer: public health and science should drive public policy. And safe, breathable air must be our paramount goal. Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required to review the public health impacts of carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, particulate matter, and sulphur dioxide every 5 years and update national air standards. The bill before us would roll that back and delay new standards for a decade. We cannot wait another decade, nor should we. We know the health impacts of increased smog: greater incidence of asthma, acute bronchitis in children, and, in some cases, premature death. In Fairfax County, where I live, 23,023 children could be at risk of another asthma attack due to poor air quality, and 136,327 adults over the age of 65 are at risk for a medical emergency. I come from local government, where we actually had to put into place regional programs to reduce smog. This wasn't a theological or ideological assignment for us. It was practical. And let me show you the progress we made because of this legislation, the Clean Air Act and its amendments.…





