HOUSE INTERIOR-ENVIRONMENT FUNDING BILL CUTS DEEPLY INTO EPA’S FY2013 REQUEST

Tamar Hallerman
GHG Monitor
06/22/12

The House’s Fiscal Year 2013 Interior-Environment appropriations bill emerged from subcommittee this week, taking aim at several Environmental Protection Agency regulations through deep spending cuts to the agency. At a subcommittee markup June 20, the panel approved a spending bill that provides EPA with $7 billion, about 16 percent less than the Obama Administration $8.34 billion request. If ultimately approved, the allocation would put EPA’s budget at its lowest funding level in 15 years, a committee fact sheet said.

The draft bill allots roughly $2.6 billion for state and tribal assistance grants—the vehicle through which EPA implements clean air and water programs via grants to states, tribes and local governments—representing a 23 percent cut from the Administration’s request. It also provides $2.48 billion for environmental programs and management, under which some of EPA’s clean air and climate research is conducted. The FY13 measure cuts down on climate programs across EPA and the Department of Interior by $101 million, or 29 percent. A Republican fact sheet said that the climate programs were too “expensive and uncoordinated.” The measure, which was released June 19, continues to cap EPA’s personnel levels, cuts funding for the office of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson by more than 30 percent and slashes money for the agency’s office of Congressional affairs by 50 percent.

Addressing EPA’s ‘Overreach’

Republicans on the Interior-Environment appropriations subcommittee said the measure is a “significant effort” to rein in EPA. “The legislation reflects significant efforts to rein in the EPA—an agency that has been rife with governmental overreach, overspending on ineffective and unnecessary programs and costly and questionable regulations,” a subcommittee fact sheet said. Subcommittee Chairman Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said the measure is “fiscally responsible” and focuses on “proven, core programs.” “The bill reins in funding and out-of-control regulation at the EPA, and reduces overall spending for the third year in a row. We’ve made some difficult decisions in this bill—decisions that will help reduce our budget deficit while funding many important agencies and programs at sustainable and appropriate levels,” he said in a statement.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) said that the bill will prevent EPA and other federal agencies from “stepping out of their lane and stifling our economic recovery.” During the subcommittee markup he said that the measure would help alleviate pressures on coal country by reigning in EPA’s regulations, including the agency’s recently proposed performance standards for new fossil fuel-fired power plants. “The Administration’s war on coal is simply the first battle—the Agency is already shifting its crosshairs towards other domestic fossil fuel industries. This bill wisely staves off the EPA’s announced intentions to regulate greenhouse gases by removing all requested funding for the job-killing New Source Performance Standards,” Rogers said.  

Democrats Say Measure Will Undermine Environmental Protections

Democrats on the subcommittee said cuts to EPA and other programs in the legislation would ultimately harm public health and the environment while failing to help the economy, as Republicans have argued. “The deep funding cuts to important conservation and environmental protection programs would, if enacted, cause serious harm to our environment,” Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim Moran (D-Va.) said at the markup. “Likewise, this bill again includes a number of riders and funding limitations that I believe do not belong in the bill and whose effect would be to undermine important environmental law. I strongly disagree on the need for these provisions. Protecting the public’s health did not cause the recession, and suspension of these laws will not sustain a recovery.”

Strategy Shift for Republican Leadership

The measure, which could be considered by the full Appropriations Committee as early as next week, appears to embrace a shift in strategy compared to last year’s Interior-Environment funding bill. Simpson hinted that instead of focusing on introducing policy riders that would slow, halt or bar EPA from regulating certain issues, the subcommittee instead focused on cutting down on regulations by reducing the agency’s budget. Last year’s FY2012 Interior-Environment bill was pulled from the House floor by Republican leaders after the measure became bogged down by policy riders. The budget for EPA and similar agencies was instead decided under an omnibus appropriations measure that passed in December. That compromise measure spared EPA of most budget cuts and nearly all of the controversial riders that were considered on the House floor.

Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) said that the bill in its current form represents “a serious setback” in efforts to preserve the environment. “Last year’s Republican proposal had abysmal funding levels and 39 riders for special interests; essentially including an entire authorizing bill on the back of an appropriations bill. This year’s bill is only marginally better,” he said. But Simpson said that while the cuts to EPA’s budget may look harsh, the agency’s coffers received uncharacteristically large boosts in recent years. “There are those who will no doubt try to portray Republicans as not supporting clean water, clean air, and a clean environment, but such assertions are simply untrue,” he said. “The reality is that the EPA has received unprecedented and unsustainable increases in recent years. In an environment of historic budget deficits and reduced spending, it should come as no surprise that the agency that saw the greatest increases over the last few years will inevitably see the greatest cuts.”

Obama Administration Maintains Veto Threat

Even though the measure is expected to sail through the full Appropriations Committee and the House floor, the bill is considered a non-starter in the Democrat-controlled Senate. The FY2013 measure also faces a veto threat from the White House, which previously vowed to veto any spending measures that do not adhere to the $1.047 trillion cap on discretionary spending agreed to in last summer’s debt ceiling negotiations. Instead, the House budget operates under a lower $1.028 trillion spending cap for discretionary programs, a move that the Administration says will stunt key government programs.