Mr. Speaker, I submit my opening statement given at the hearing. Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing. Today, we are here to discuss the impact of greenhouse gas regulations on small businesses. America's small…
Mr. Speaker, I submit my opening statement given at the hearing.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing.
Today, we are here to discuss the impact of greenhouse gas
regulations on small businesses. America's small businesses
are the lifeblood of this country's economy. Competition,
innovation and the entrepreneurial spirit have driven
America's prosperity, and it is our job in Congress to ensure
that we facilitate and promote an environment of economic
opportunity. It is also our job to protect the well being of
America's citizens, with the bottom line of providing the
highest quality of life possible for each and every person.
Based on actual results, and future projections, it is
clear that the Clean Air Act strikes a balance between
economic growth and keeping each and every one of us healthy.
By 2020, for every taxpayer dollar invested in the Clean Air
Act, there will be an estimated 30 dollar return in benefits.
In the year 2010 alone, the Clean Air Act prevented over
160,000 deaths, over three million lost school days and 13
million days of lost work. These numbers are illustrative of
the benefits to both businesses and public health facilitated
by the Clean Air Act.
The regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act
is imperative to protecting public health and welfare. The
threat posed by climate change is based on peer-reviewed,
accurate, and concrete science--the threat is real, and
preventative steps are necessary. The EPA's regulation of
greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act is a measured,
commonsense approach to mitigating climate change that
protects not only public health and welfare, but business as
well.
Opponents of greenhouse gas regulation claim that small
entities will be overly burdened by costly and unattainable
emissions standards. However, the EPA's implementation of the
``Tailoring Rule'' is a small business-conscious method of
protecting public health, and this country's employers and
employees. The tailoring rule, by setting a high greenhouse
gas emission threshold, exempts 95 percent of all stationary
sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Essentially, the
tailoring rule lifts a regulatory burden off of small
businesses.
In written testimony provided for today's hearing, the
Small Business Majority, a representative of US small
businesses, states that:
``Some will claim that a variety of small businesses--
everything from bookstores to diners and plumbers--would be
impacted by the greenhouse gas standards. This simply isn't
the case.''
Further, as described in the Small Business Majority's
testimony, a significant number of small business owners
welcome measures to reduce environmental pollution; this
sentiment cannot simply be ignored.
As I have said at this subcommittee's past two meetings, we
cannot have a productive discussion about the impacts of
regulations without considering both costs and benefits. For
example, when we talk about the new tailpipe emissions
standards we cannot simply discuss a potential increase in
the sticker price of a vehicle.
The proposed standards for heavy and medium duty trucks--
despite a marginal increase in sticker price--are projected
to save over $74,000 over the life of the truck, and save
over 500 million barrels of oil. Multiply that times all the
trucks on the road, and the reduced fuel consumption and
reduced greenhouse gas pollutant emissions can help us
achieve energy independence while improving our public
health.
I look forward to having a well rounded discussion about
greenhouse gas emission standards, their costs and their
benefits, with today's witnesses.