The National Association of Manufacturers was cited several times in the House floor debate Thursday on H.R. 910, to prevent the EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.
Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), Congressional Record, Page H2370:
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Chair, we are here today because the EPA has continued to push this effort to pass a national energy tax. It was tried through cap-and-trade over the last year and a half. That bill went through the legislative process and was defeated in a bipartisan way. This is not a Republican or a Democrat issue when we’re talking about preventing the EPA from running millions of jobs out of our country, and that is literally what’s at stake here.
Believe me, as people look through the letters of support and as we comb through the days of testimony that we’ve had on this over the last 2 years with regard to this concept of the EPA’s regulating greenhouse gases, Madam Chair, we are talking about a proposal by the EPA that, according to the National Association of Manufacturers, would run 3 million jobs out of our country.
Now, we should all be here working feverishly to create jobs. In fact, our legislation, the National Energy Tax Prevention Act, will create jobs because it will remove the uncertainty that exists today where so many employers, so many of our job creators, are scared to death of the threat now of regulation coming over; because, again, Congress rejected their proposal for the national energy tax through cap-and-trade in a bipartisan way.
The analysis Rep. Scalise is referring to is, we presume, the earlier NAM-ACCF analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill. EPA regulation of greenhouse gases could have even greater economic consequences than that cap-and-trade legislation, which as negotiated legislation included many exemptions, subsidies, delays and deals intended to minimize the harm and job loss. EPA regulation can evade the same policy and political compromises, exacerbating the uncertainty that Rep. Scalise is right to emphasize.
Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), chief sponsor of H.R. 910, also inserted an NAM-cosigned letter into the record (page H2372):
March 9, 2011.
Re Upton-Inhofe Bill a Key Step Toward Stopping EPA’s GHG Regulations.
DEAR CHAIRMAN UPTON AND CHAIRMAN WHITFIELD: On January 2, 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began regulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from stationary sources. EPA’s rules require industrial sites, power plants and other businesses that emit GHGs above certain thresholds to apply for a permit whenever they want to build or modernize their facilities. In today’s fragile economy, when we need American businesses to be expanding at full speed, these rules create uncertainty and delay.
We welcome the efforts of lawmakers from both parties to stop the EPA’s harmful regulations so that business growth and hiring can continue. We applaud the leadership that you and Senator Inhofe are providing on this issue through the introduction of The Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 (H.R. 910). This bipartisan legislation is helping to keep attention squarely focused on the issue and building momentum toward a solution.
Congress, not EPA, should be guiding America’s energy policy. Without action by lawmakers, EPA’s regulations will make it difficult to attract new manufacturing capacity and jobs to the United States, let alone double U.S. exports in five years, as President Obama has pledged. Moving your legislation forward is a critical first step.
We look forward to working with you to stop harmful regulations and in doing so, strengthen the economic recovery, support American manufacturing and create jobs.
American Chemistry Council, American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, American Forest & Paper Association, American Iron and Steel Institute, American Petroleum Institute, Brick Industry Association, CropLife America, Industrial Minerals Association, National Association of Manufacturers.
National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, National Lime Association, National Mining Association, National Oilseed Processors Association, National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, The Aluminum Association, The Fertilizer Institute, U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) also mentioned the NAM in his statement after the House passed the bill, 255-172. Thank you, sir.