[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 26, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Page S1357]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Vehicle Emissions

  Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to a 
resolution that has been presented to overturn the EPA's lifesaving 
heavy-duty NOX rule.
  Across the country, heavy-duty vehicles, including trucks and buses, 
make up one-third of all transportation NOX emissions. Now, 
this is the same source of smog and soot that darkens skies in many 
communities and certainly poisons the lungs of too many Americans.
  In an effort to address those real challenges, the EPA's heavy-duty 
vehicle pollution rule is projected to cut NOX emissions 
from the heavy-duty sector by nearly half over the next dozen years. 
This represents a monumental investment and significant step forward in 
our Nation's health and air quality that will benefit all Americans. 
But instead of supporting this rule, some Members have suggested that 
we reverse course and instead leave in place an outdated pollution 
standard--a rule that even the heavy-duty vehicle industry acknowledges 
is too weak--and, in so doing, endanger the lives of thousands of 
Americans. This makes no sense.
  Consider the Inland Empire in Southern California. Truly this region, 
this geographical area, is the heart of our Nation's supply chain. No 
one in the Inland Empire wants the economy to shutter, but residents in 
the region know all too well the dangers that surround them. Children's 
playgrounds, veterans health centers, schools, and entire neighborhoods 
are surrounded by warehouses and distribution centers. Now, the 
warehouses in and of themselves aren't threatening our air quality or 
public health, but think about the emissions from the trucks that carry 
goods to and from those warehouses. As a result, communities throughout 
the Inland Empire, which happen to also be mostly Latino and low-income 
communities, experience higher rates of asthma, decreased lung function 
in children, and higher rates of cancer. It is not hyperbole. The data 
is there. Statistics are clear.
  It is not just the Inland Empire. I raise that as the most 
significant example. In fact, it is communities all across the country 
near freight corridors that are impacted--almost 72 million people who 
live near freight routes.
  So yes, Mr. President, I am standing up for the fundamental human 
right to clean air for all Americans.
  Now, truth be told, I actually wanted the EPA to be more ambitious in 
its final NOX rule and to align more closely with 
California's stringent heavy-duty vehicle rules. California proudly 
leads the Nation in decarbonization and emissions reduction, and we 
have done so by working thoughtfully and collectively with industry and 
communities to cut deadly NOX and other pollution from 
vehicles while we transition to zero-emission vehicles.
  So to my colleagues who claim negative business or economic impacts, 
California is doing this while having just grown from being the fifth 
largest economy in the world to the fourth largest economy in the 
world. Economic growth and environmental protection are not mutually 
exclusive. Economic growth and protecting public health are not 
mutually exclusive. We can and must do it all together.
  Last I checked from business leaders whom I talked to--I mentioned 
industries at the table and also at the State level--they actually 
appreciate that regulatory certainty that I know you and I have talked 
about, Mr. President, where we lay out a rule, an agenda, a policy 
objective, and work together to create a plan to achieve it and keep 
that plan, not ripsaw back and forth about what regulations are going 
to be in place from one year to the next, from one congressional 
majority to the next, et cetera.
  I am also continuing to push the EPA to finalize a strong phase 3 
heavy-duty vehicle rule with my clean air and clean transportation 
partners in the Senate, including Chairman Carper of the Environment 
and Public Works Committee and Senator Markey and others.
  But, at the very least, we can't undercut two decades of progress we 
have already made, and this CRA undermines the scientific and technical 
expertise behind these important standards and public health 
protections. And we know that the CRA is part of a bigger effort to 
stop the bold action we are taking to tackle the climate crisis.
  So, colleagues, for the sake of clean air, for the sake of our 
environment, and for the sake of the health of all communities across 
the country, I urge you to oppose this repeal.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I would ask unanimous consent to be able 
to complete my remarks before the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.