[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 50 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E665]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


HEARING ON: ``ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF EPA GREENHOUSE GAS REGULATIONS ON 
                            SMALL BUSINESS''

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 7, 2011

  Mr. KUCINICH. 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.

                          ____________________