[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 175 (Wednesday, November 16, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7587-S7588]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LIFESAVING REGULATION
Mr. REID. Democrats and Republicans don't agree on much these days,
although I had a meeting with some veterans groups earlier today, and I
indicated to them that maybe they are going to bring us some good luck
because we were able to pass part of the President's jobs bill--the
veterans employment--with an overwhelming majority. That was really
good news, and I hope that is the beginning of some good days ahead of
us.
We do agree Congress must do something about the unemployment crisis
we face. We have 14 million Americans out of work. There is no more
pressing issue facing Congress or the country than jobs. Our plan, the
Democrats' plan to address this problem, has been very straightforward.
We have advocated for policies that will create jobs by investing in
what makes this country great--our infrastructure, our education
system, and our innovative workforce. Despite Republican
obstructionism, we have continued to fight for middle-class jobs,
bringing to the Senate floor bill after bill designed to bring
Americans back to work.
I met yesterday with the Business Roundtable, a stellar organization
with the finest business executives we have in America today. I told
them that I know they are all doing well financially, and I went over
what we had proposed a week or so ago; that is, we need to do something
about infrastructure that is deteriorating.
I said we were able to put forward a piece of legislation that said:
Let's
[[Page S7588]]
spend $50 billion creating hundreds of thousands of jobs. We would not
punish millionaires and billionaires. What we would do is, people
fortunate enough to make $1 million in a given year, we would say that
on any money they make over $1 million, they would have to pay a surtax
of seven-tenths of 1 percent. I said: Does anybody out here think that
is an onerous suggestion? Nobody raised their hand because it isn't.
But on a straight party-line vote, it failed.
So we are going to continue to fight for middle-class jobs, bringing
to the Senate floor bill after bill, as we have done, and we will bring
some more in the future to put Americans back to work.
The Republicans have taken a different approach. I talked about it
yesterday. They have advocated a wholesale repeal of so-called job-
killing regulations. We know and we were able to show yesterday that of
the jobs that have been lost, about three-tenths of 1 percent have been
because of regulations. Does that mean all regulations are perfect? Of
course not. That is why the Obama administration--as did the Bush
administration, as did the Clinton administration--had a review of what
regulations are onerous and we should change or get rid of. So we
understand that. For Republicans, that is their job-creating mantra:
Get rid of regulations. It doesn't work. They say that rolling back
everything from limits on air pollution to rules that keep our
worksites safe will create jobs and revive our economy. The problem is
it is just not true.
Business leaders and economists of every political stripe agree that
this GOP mantra is a falsehood. A respected academic adviser to two
Republican Presidents called this myth spread by Republicans to cover
up their woeful lack of meaningful work plans to create jobs
``nonsense'' and ``made up.'' I talked about him in some detail
yesterday.
The evidence, in fact, shows that government safeguards have little
impact, if any, on employment. The Bureau of Labor Statistics study
found that last year only three-tenths of 1 percent of layoffs were
caused by regulation. That is according to executives who ordered those
layoffs. Nearly 85 times as many jobs were lost last year because of
the slow economy.
But rather than work with us to turn this weak economy around,
creating hundreds of thousands, if not millions of jobs, Republicans
spent 11 months fighting Democratic policies that would have created
these jobs. Meanwhile, they spent these past 11 months focused on
killing regulations that make America safer, healthier, more efficient,
and more productive.
For example, Republicans want to halt updates to the Clean Air Act.
Since its passage 40 years ago during the Presidency of Richard Nixon--
do you know why President Nixon and the Congress got kind of interested
in that? In Ohio, the Cuyahoga River kept catching fire. The river
started burning, they would put it out, and it would start burning
again. So President Nixon and others felt that maybe we should do
something about the Clean Water Act. We also, during that same period
of time, did something about the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Air Act
alone has reduced emission of key pollutants by 70 percent, while the
economy has grown by some 200 percent during that same period of time.
Long-planned updates to the law would reduce emissions of mercury, acid
gases, and other life-threatening pollutants into the air, saving
lives.
Last year alone, the Clean Air Act saved the lives of more than
160,000 Americans, and it prevented 86,000 emergency room visits and 13
million lost workdays. This is money in the bank for all of us when we
can save lives, prevent emergency room visits, and keep people working
and not being sick. The Clean Air Act has prevented hundreds of
thousands of cases of heart disease, chronic bronchitis, and asthma.
It is wonderful that we have helped clean the air, but we also have
medicines that help. I can remember as a little boy going out to visit
a woman who lived on the outskirts of Searchlight--that is really a
couple miles out of the main part of Searchlight--and I have never
forgotten this. She had asthma, and my mom went out to see if there was
anything she could do to help. There wasn't a thing she could do to
help. This woman was in such a state of distress. She said, ``I can't
breathe,'' and she was making horrible noises that I have never
forgotten. So things are better. One reason they are better is because
of medicines but also cleaner air.
The Clean Air Act has prevented hundreds of thousands of cases of
heart disease, as I have indicated, chronic bronchitis, and asthma, and
last year alone it saved American companies and consumers $1.3 trillion
by reducing medical costs and increasing productivity.
Of course, all these benefits come with a price tag, but for every
dollar spent complying with the Clean Air Act, this Nation saves $30 in
emergency room bills, lost work days, and environmental cleanup. And
repealing the law of the Clean Air Act wouldn't make the costs go away.
Instead, it would shift them from corporations to consumers. Complying
with environmental safeguards is one of the costs of doing business in
the United States. It is a part of being a good corporate citizen. That
is why two-thirds of voters say that scientists at the Environmental
Protection Agency, not politicians in Congress, should set pollution
standards. Seventy-one percent of voters, including the majority of
Republicans, support the stronger environmental protections that are
attacked by congressional Republicans. Eighty percent of voters believe
those safeguards will improve public health and air quality.
There is plenty of evidence that smart, fair regulations save lives
and communities lots of money and also consumers lots of money. There
is more evidence that stronger watchdogs could have prevented disasters
such as the 2008 financial crisis or the West Virginia mining accident
that killed 21 people last year. Simply repeating the fiction that
regulations kill jobs doesn't make it a fact. But even if there is one
ounce of truth in the fable, there are many ways to steer the economy
out of the ditch and create jobs that don't risk American lives.
____________________