[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 8]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 11469-11470]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            IN OPPOSITION TO ANTI-ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. GARY C. PETERS

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 19, 2011

  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed at what the House 
Republican Leadership did this week. Unemployment remains above 9%, job 
growth is sluggish, and we are facing a catastrophic default on our 
national debt. Yet this past week the Republicans passed three bills 
that do nothing to create jobs, but instead advance a narrow agenda 
built on environmental degradation.

[[Page 11470]]

  First, the Republicans brought the misguided BULB Act to the floor. 
The BULB Act was rushed to a vote under the fictional pretense that 
American families were under the imminent threat of having light bulbs 
snatched from their homes. The truth is, under President Bush, new 
energy efficiency standards were adopted for light bulbs with 
bipartisan support. Incandescent bulbs are not banned, as the floor 
speeches this week would have you believe, and industry groups like the 
National Electric Manufacturers Association opposed the BULB Act 
because it would harm the investments light bulb manufacturers have 
already made to raise the efficiency of their products. This bill was 
unhelpful and unwanted and responded only to a problem manufactured in 
the minds of the political right. The bill fortunately failed on the 
House floor, but it did not fail in wasting our time.
  We then moved on to the Energy and Water appropriations bill. This 
bill guts clean energy programs seeking to research and develop new 
wind and solar technologies while increasing investments for oil and 
gas companies. It cuts things like advanced vehicle technologies and 
weatherization assistance, which support good paying jobs in Michigan 
and elsewhere. The bill also includes language that makes it easier to 
pollute our drinking water. While many attempts were made to rebalance 
the bill in a more equitable manner, the Republicans insisted on their 
support for oil companies earning record profits and turned their backs 
on advanced energy and science.
  Finally, last week we considered a bill which should be called the 
``Dirty Water Act.'' Named instead the Clean Water Cooperative 
Federalism Act, this bill is one of the most brazen attacks on the 
Clean Water Acts in memory. The bill strips the authority of the 
Administration to block environmentally harmful projects and enforce 
water quality standards. The supporters of the bill claim it is the 
name of states' rights. But dirty water does not stop at state 
boundaries, which is why the Clean Water Act was created in the first 
place. We recognized decades ago that patchwork standards and varying 
state enforcements don't keep our drinking water clean.
  My home state of Michigan relies on billions of dollars in tourism 
that flow into the state because of the recreational fishing, boating, 
and beautiful beaches visitors to our state enjoy. These dollars go 
away if we let our water quality standards slide. My Republican 
colleagues need to learn that clean water creates jobs, and that a 
dirty environment kills jobs.
  I opposed all three of the measures considered this week, and hope 
that the Republican Leadership will stop with these senseless attacks 
on the environment and instead concentrate on creating jobs for the 
American people.

                          ____________________