By STEPHEN POWER
WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee said Monday he'll press forward with legislation to block the Obama administration's plan to regulate emissions of heat-trapping gases linked to climate change. But Rep. Fred Upton (R., Mich.) warned that some competing proposals to achieve that goal could backfire.
Mr. Upton, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, said the Environmental Protection Agency shouldn't regulate companies' emissions of greenhouse gases, and that permanently stripping the agency of its authority to do so is the best way to give businesses clarity about federal policy.
Mr. Upton spoke ahead of a hearing that his committee is scheduled to hold Wednesday on draft legislation – introduced last week – that would strip the EPA of its authority to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions.
Mr. Upton said the hearing would feature testimony by the EPA's administrator, Lisa Jackson, and Texas' attorney general, Greg Abbott, who has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the legal and scientific arguments behind the EPA's regulations to combat climate change.
Mr. Upton said he doesn't believe that climate change is "necessarily man-made."
Mr. Upton, who has a small-scale model of a wind turbine in his office, said he favors greater use of cleaner energy sources by U.S. businesses. But he said he does not favor using "giant subsidies" to encourage companies to use wind, solar or other low-carbon power sources.
"You don't subsidize different forms of power -- you let the market run on its own," Mr. Upton said in the interview.
Some of Mr. Upton's fellow Republicans have broached the idea of blocking EPA regulation of greenhouse gases by denying the agency funds needed to implement its proposed regulations.
Mr. Upton said such a measure would simply keep U.S. businesses "on pins and needles" and possibly delay companies' construction investment decisions, since companies could still be legally obligated to get air-quality permits from the agency or state regulators -- and if the agency didn't have the money to issue the permits, the projects could still be delayed.
"It could be a bigger can of worms than you might imagine," Mr. Upton said. "You need a legislative fix" to quash the EPA's legal authority altogether, he added.
Mr. Upton's draft proposal to block the EPA regulation has drawn criticism from environmentalists, some of whom have accused him of backtracking on past statements in which he described climate change as "a serious problem" and that the U.S. has a responsibility to reduce its emissions.
"The market is tilted in favor of the dirty energy sources, and we're paying for it with our health," said David Doniger, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, "Somehow you have to level the playing field so that public health and natural resources are protected from the pollution."
Write to Stephen Power at stephen.power@wsj.com
No comments:
Post a Comment