Any one of these special-interest provisions hidden
in the annual spending bill is enough to wreck a vacation. Taken together, they
are a far-reaching assault on your health and public lands. Here’s how these
provisions would harm your summer vacation now and in the future.
1. The House bill would slash the budget of the
Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, by one-third. This would take
environmental cops—the enforcers of pollution reductions—off of patrol, which
will enable big polluters to continue polluting unchecked.
Public health protection should be a bipartisan
no-brainer. President Richard Nixon created the EPA in 1970 to protect
Americans from the unchecked pollution plaguing the entire United States,
including smog, untreated human waste, and cancer-causing pollutants. The Clean
Air Act signed into law by President George H. W. Bush in 1990, has produced
$30 in benefits for the American public for every $1 in polluters’ cleanup
costs over the past two decades. In 2010 alone the Clean Air Act prevented more
than 160,000 premature deaths, 86,000 emergency-room visits, 130,000 heart
attacks, 13 million lost work days, and 1.7 million asthma attacks.
Cutting one-third of the EPA budget would disembowel
enforcement of clean-air and other health laws, threatening Americans’ lives
and livelihoods.
2. The House bill would stop the EPA from reducing
carbon pollution from electric power plants—the largest domestic source of
climate pollution. Unchecked climate change would leave our children with a
hotter planet, more extreme weather, sea-level rise, and many other impacts
that would fundamentally change the way Americans vacation and live. (Sec. 445)
President Barack Obama’s recently announced Climate
Action Plan directs the EPA “to work expeditiously to complete carbon pollution
standards for both new and existing power plants.” By preventing the EPA from
developing such carbon-pollution reductions, the House bill would ensure a
hotter, more chaotic and extreme climate for decades to come.
3. The air in American cities is much cleaner
overall than it was 20 years ago. Yet 150 million Americans—almost half of our
nation’s population—live and recreate in places with unhealthy smog. The House
bill would prevent the EPA from modernizing standards to further clean up gasoline
and cars, which would cut smog-forming pollution from vehicles. (Sec. 451)
Cars and fuels are much cleaner than they used to
be, but they still emit an unsafe level of pollution. The House bill blocks
standards that would reduce smog-forming pollutants from cars and reduce the
sulfur content of gasoline. By 2030 these standards would prevent up to 2,400
premature deaths, 3,200 hospital admissions, 22,000 asthma attacks, and 23,000
respiratory symptoms in children every year.
4. The House bill would slash funds for
drinking-water and sewage-treatment infrastructure by 86 percent. (Sec. 435)
There are federal “revolving loan” funds that lend
states money so they can build or repair drinking-water facilities and
sewage-treatment plants. Their repayments provide funds for additional
projects. In its “2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure,” the American
Society of Civil Engineers gave our nation’s drinking- and clean-water
infrastructure a “D+,” warning that:
[M]uch of
our drinking water infrastructure is nearing the end of its useful life. There
are an estimated 240,000 water main breaks per year. … Capital investment needs
for the nation’s wastewater and stormwater systems are estimated to total $298
billion over the next twenty years.
The proposed funding cuts in the House bill ignore
the huge need for clean-water investments.
5. The House bill would cut the current budget for
the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement by more than 40 percent,
taking the cops off the beat who inspect and regulate offshore drilling
operations to protect workers’ lives and prevent disasters. (Title I, pp.
19–20)
While massive flares of burning natural gas due to
an offshore oil-rig blowout may in some ways serve as mood lighting for a
nighttime stroll on the beach, it would be much better if they came without the
ensuing danger to oil workers and the massive release of natural gas—made of
the potent climate pollutant methane. Even with an offshore natural-gas rig
burning out of control approximately 55 miles away from Louisiana’s coast,
however, the GOP still does not see drilling safety as a priority.
6. The House bill may allow continued degradation of
your favorite beach or fishing spot by virtually eliminating the National Ocean
Policy, which coordinates federal management of our oceans, coasts, and marine
life. (Sec. 439)
The National Ocean Policy, initiated by President
George W. Bush and finalized under the Obama administration, streamlines and
coordinates the efforts of the 17 different federal agencies that contribute to
the management of our ocean space. By eliminating all funding for the policy,
however, the GOP is removing efficiencies from the government’s limited ocean
funding and reducing the overall quality of ocean and fisheries management.
7. The House bill eliminates funding for the Land
and Water Conservation Fund, or LWCF—America’s premier conservation program—for
the first time in history. It would redirect offshore oil and gas revenues from
LWCF to unrelated spending instead of to parks, trails, and open-space
protection.
Congress created the Land and Water Conservation
Fund in 1964 to give federal, state, and local governments money to purchase
land, water, and wetlands for public use and enjoyment. These places provide
millions of Americans with hunting and fishing areas, preserve wildlife
habitat, protect archeological and historical sites, and help provide clean
water.
8. The House bill would slash the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service’s budget by more than one-fourth, limiting opportunities for
Americans to hunt and fish, potentially causing some parts of refuges to close
to the public, and devastating our nation’s ability to protect and recover
endangered species.
The bill would, for the first time in our nation’s
history, block the Fish and Wildlife Service’s ability to establish new
wildlife refuges or expand their boundaries. Forty-seven million visitors come
to America’s national wildlife refuges every year, providing approximately $4.5
billion in economic benefits through the purchase of fishing tackle, hunting
licenses, and other amenities.
9. The House bill would block the EPA from enforcing
rules to limit exposure to lead paint. (Sec. 443)
Exposure to lead paint can result in permanent
damage to the brain and nervous system in children, leading to behavioral and
learning problems, lower IQs, and hearing problems. It can also slow growth,
cause anemia, and, in severe cases, result in seizure, coma, and death in young
children. Lead is also a risk to pregnant women and can cause miscarriage,
premature birth, and reduced fetal growth. In adults, lead can damage kidney
function and the cardiovascular, nervous, and reproductive systems.
10. The House bill would block the EPA from
clarifying which streams and wetlands are protected by the Clean Water Act,
threatening sources of drinking water and waters that help with flood control.
(Sec. 435)
The EPA determines which waters to protect based on
the latest available science and best protects the public. Not allowing the EPA
to do their job of protecting and continually adapting to new contamination threats
to our waters means dirtier water for everyone.
Conclusion
To protect your summer—and every American’s health
and well-being—the House of Representatives must stand up to oil, coal, and
utility companies and their congressional allies. Otherwise we will suffer from
smoggy skies, dirty waters, and despoiled wild places for many summers—and
other seasons—to come.
About the authors: Arpita Bhattacharyya is Research
Associate to Distinguished Senior Fellow Carol Browner at the Center for American Progress. Daniel J. Weiss is a Senior Fellow and Director of Climate
Strategy at the Center. Michael Conathan is Director of Ocean Policy at the
Center. Matt Lee-Ashley is a Senior Fellow at the Center.
Special thanks to Jessica Goad, Tom Kenworthy,
Patrick Maloney, and the Natural Resources Defense Council for their help with
this column.
This article was published by the Center for
American Progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment