[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3883-3884]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             CLEAN AIR ACT

  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the importance 
of a landmark piece of legislation, the Clean Air Act. Congress passed 
the Clean Air Act over 40 years ago with broad bipartisan support from 
both Chambers of Congress, and President Nixon wisely signed it into 
law. Since then, we have seen remarkable benefits to the health of our 
Nation. We have seen significant reductions in pollution from lead, 
mercury, sulfur dioxide, and a host of other contaminants. America 
reduced pollution and made remarkable strides in improving public 
health even while our economy adjusted and thrived. In fact, the Clean 
Air Act has a long track record of promoting job creation and economic 
growth while reducing pollution.
  The economic benefits of the Clean Air Act are significant. For every 
$1 spent on Clear Air Act protections, we get $30 of public health 
benefits in return.
  In the year 2010 alone, the Clean Air Act saved 160,000 lives and 
avoided millions of cases of pollution-related illness, including 1.7 
million cases of asthma exacerbation, 130,000 heart attacks, 86,000 
emergency room visits, 3.2 million lost school days, and 13 million 
lost work days.

[[Page 3884]]

  This is a profoundly important law. It protects every single American 
from the types of pollution that can cause asthma attacks, lost school 
days for young children, emergency room visits, heart attacks, strokes, 
and even premature deaths.
  The House of Representatives recently passed a continuing resolution 
for the remainder of the fiscal year that would make truly Draconian 
cuts to Clean Air Act funding and authority. These policy riders do not 
belong in the 7-month budget. And I am glad the Senate recently voted 
down that legislation.
  Upon passage of the House bill, the American Lung Association, which 
is the leading organization working to save American lives from the 
ravages of lung disease, said:

       The House of Representatives also adopted amendments that 
     would block implementation of the Clean Air Act and its 
     lifesaving protections . . .
       These provisions and others adopted by the House would 
     result in millions of Americans--including children, seniors 
     and people with chronic disease such as asthma--being forced 
     to breathe air that is unhealthy.
       Breathing air pollution can cause asthma attacks, heart 
     attacks, strokes, cancer and shortened lives.

  That is coming from one of the most respected public health 
organizations in the world telling us that this weakening of the Clean 
Air Act would have dire public health consequences, that more Americans 
will get sick from toxic pollution.
  We can and should be flexible and listen to the industries affected 
by the law, but we cannot undermine its purpose. Legitimate concerns 
about regulation should be addressed so we can prosper and grow jobs in 
the United States of America. It is important that the Clean Air Act be 
enforced in a commonsense manner that is workable for American 
businesses, but we cannot abandon its core charges--to preserve public 
health and ensure the cleanliness of the air we breathe.
  I know there is often tension between the EPA, the regulated 
community, and stakeholders seeking to navigate the Clean Air Act, and 
there probably always will be. Our economy functions best and in a way 
that is best for our citizens when we seek a robust Clean Air Act and 
are responsive to the needs of our economy.
  An example of this working well is recent praise that the 
administration received from the CEO of a leading energy company, who 
said:

       When I look at what EPA has done so far . . . it's actually 
     been pretty moderate.

  When the same CEO was asked whether Congress should delay the 
administrations's work to protect public health for 2 years, he said:

       That's just two more years of uncertainty where I think a 
     lot of the investment will remain on the sideline in our 
     industry instead of being invested in technology. We know how 
     to build . . . I don't support delay for those reasons.

  I support continued implementation of the Clean Air Act and will 
oppose efforts to undermine this important law. For my part, the 
decision is very simple: We should let doctors and scientists dictate 
our public health policy instead of politicians. I hope my friends on 
both sides of the aisle will come to this same conclusion as well and 
vote against efforts to weaken the Clean Air Act.
  For more than 40 years, we have seen that protecting the air we 
breathe does not have to come at a cost to the Nation's economy. Both 
can improve, both must improve hand in hand.
  To close, I would like to reiterate that the Clean Air Act has been 
successful in reducing levels of dozens of dangerous air pollutants and 
protecting the health of millions of Americans, all while our economy 
grew. This is a landmark law that has had strong bipartisan support for 
decades. The Senate should not weaken it.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________