[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 120 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4998-S4999]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                     Nomination of Brett Kavanaugh

  Ms. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong concern 
about Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court. In 
particular, I want to discuss today his troubling record on the 
environment and what that means for people's health.
  Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated that he simply doesn't believe that 
existing law allows new environmental threats to be addressed via any 
sort of regulation. I am talking about existing law designed to protect 
human health and our environment.
  When you take a look at Judge Kavanaugh's record, one thing becomes 
abundantly clear: Judge Kavanaugh has tried to weaken Clean Air Act 
protections even though the act controls pollutants such as smog and 
carbon monoxide, which contribute to asthma, heart attacks, and even 
premature deaths. They put our health at risk.
  In a 2012 case, Judge Kavanaugh authored an opinion that found the 
EPA had exceeded its authority when the Agency directed upwind States 
to literally stop blowing smoke onto their downwind neighbors. The good 
news is that the Supreme Court was more sensible than Judge Kavanaugh. 
Justices Kennedy and Roberts joined four others in a 6-to-2 decision to 
overturn Judge Kavanaugh's lower court ruling. Writing for the 
majority, Justice Ginsburg found that the EPA does have the power to 
act to protect people's health. I agree with the Supreme Court's 2012 
decision, and so do most Americans. An April 2018 poll found that 75 
percent of Americans support even stricter limits on smog.
  What Judge Kavanaugh particularly doesn't like is that the Clean Air 
Act specifically gives the Environmental Protection Agency the right--
the duty, even--to regulate new pollutants that threaten people's 
health. He has objected to using the law to establish new programs to 
reduce mercury--a potent toxin that harms developing brains. In 2014, 
Judge Kavanaugh lashed out at tough standards for mercury--a toxin that 
has been found to harm children's development.
  Judge Kavanaugh's narrow view of the Clean Air Act could be extremely 
damaging to our efforts to address climate change by regulating 
greenhouse gases. Although the act does not mention greenhouse gases by 
name, the Supreme Court has held that the EPA does have the power to 
regulate them. In fact, the Court held that the act requires the EPA to 
address any air pollutants that are found to endanger human health. But 
Judge Kavanaugh still seems to have a problem with adding new 
pollutants to that list. This is even though Judge Kavanaugh claims to 
believe what virtually every scientist tells us: that manmade climate 
change is real and is an enormous threat to our planet and to our 
health. But merely accepting climate science is too low a bar because 
even if Judge Kavanaugh believes in the urgent challenge of climate 
change, he doesn't seem to believe there is an urgent need to address 
it, as his record demonstrates.
  Over the next few decades, the Supreme Court will have many 
opportunities to weigh in on how our government can work to protect our 
environment, particularly regarding climate change.
  And the stakes are high: Scientists tell us that in order to avoid 
dangerous global warming, we must reduce our carbon dioxide emissions 
to zero sometime between 2050 and 2065. But in 2018, global carbon 
emissions are still increasing, not decreasing.
  At the same time, President Trump is attempting to backpedal on every 
commitment our country has made toward fighting global warming. He is 
pulling us out of the Paris climate agreement. He is pulling back the 
Clean Power Plan. He is looking for ways to force utilities to keep 
expensive coal plants online--a move that would cost Americans billions 
of dollars in increased electricity bills.
  All of these moves will hurt the environment and harm the health of 
Americans, and in each case, Judge Kavanaugh's record shows that he is 
likely to act as nothing but an enabler.
  My State of Minnesota is already experiencing the cost of climate 
change. The rains in Minnesota are growing more intense, leading to 
increased damage from flooding. As our winters grow milder and our 
summers warmer, plant and human diseases are spreading. Many scientists 
predict that the forests in my State will retreat rapidly, leaving 
Minnesota looking like Kansas by the end of this century.
  But it does not need to be all bad news. A rapid transition to 
emissions-free energy sources is necessary to avoid the worst effects 
of climate change, but this change will bring economic opportunity to 
our country. We just need to rise to the challenge. In Minnesota, wind 
and solar and biofuels are already potent drivers of job growth.
  If Judge Kavanaugh succeeds in overturning the Federal obligation to 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the clean energy transition in our 
country will certainly slow. We will lose the competitive advantage to 
China and other economic rivals in the race to develop the technology 
and innovations of an affordable, clean energy future.

[[Page S4999]]

  Right now, we have a President who pushes coal and fossil fuels 
which, unless their carbon dioxide emissions are captured, must become 
the energy sources of the past. President Trump's energy policy is 
backward-looking and puts our economic competitiveness at risk. But 
presidents serve only for a term or two, which brings us back again to 
Judge Kavanaugh.
  Hopefully, we will be able to recover from the backward environmental 
policies of the Trump administration. But Supreme Court Justices serve 
for life, so we cannot afford a Justice who is hostile to our 
environment and to human health. We cannot afford a Justice who rejects 
actions to fight climate change. We just don't have the time.
  Thank you.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.