SENATE APPROPS BILL UPS EPA FUNDING ABOVE PRESIDENT’S REQUEST

House Appropriators Punt Vote on Interior-Environment Bill

Tamar Hallerman
GHG Monitor
8/2/13

Senate appropriators unveiled a draft Fiscal Year 2014 Interior-Environment spending measure Aug. 1 that would slightly increase funding for the Environmental Protection Agency above the White House’s budget request. The Senate draft would up funding for the Agency by 4 percent over the request to $8.48 billion. The measure would boost funding for Science and Technology programs and State and Tribal Assistance Grants, which houses EPA’s Underground Injection Control program as well as clean air and water implementation programs for states and tribes, to $3.6 billion, a 15 percent increase above the amount proposed by the Administration.

Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairman and ranking member, respectively, of the Senate Interior-Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, said in a joint statement that they hope the draft will be a “meaningful start” to the appropriations process. “While we acknowledge there are many differing views about this complex bill, we commit ourselves to work with one another and our colleagues to move forward effectively,” the duo said.

House Approps Punts Vote on Companion Measure

Reed and Murkowski’s joint statement came in sharp contrast to leaders on the House Appropriations Committee, who following a bitterly divisive, all-day markup July 31, decided to punt a final vote on their contentious version of the FY 2014 bill until after Congress’ August recess, which begins next week, pushing further consideration until mid-September at the earliest.

The House measure would slash funding for the EPA to $5.5 billion, 33 percent below the White House’s FY 2014 request, while dramatically cutting funding for popular air quality and water programs. It also would cap EPA’s personnel to 1992 levels and cut funding for the Administrator’s office by more than 30 percent compared to pre-sequestration FY 2013 levels. The measure also includes more than two dozen policy riders, including one that would block the agency from regulating CO2 emissions from new and existing power plants. Committee leaders have said that the provision is meant to take aim at President Barack Obama’s recently announced climate plan, which bypasses Congress entirely in favor of executive-level actions to curtail greenhouse gas emissions and boost the deployment of renewable energy projects and energy efficiency efforts.

House lawmakers worked their way through about a dozen amendments to the bill this week, rebuffing a series of Democratic amendments aimed at removing several policy riders from the measure, CQ Roll Call reported. The outlet said the committee did adopt an amendment from Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) that would bar EPA from using federal funding to promulgate rulemakings that use the Obama Administration’s recently-revised social cost of carbon estimates as part of their cost-benefit analyses.

Partisan Divide Over EPA Spending

A partisan divide over the role of the EPA and government spending was ubiquitous throughout the House markup this week. Democrats complained that the cuts to EPA’s budget were draconian and politically motivated. “It’s death by 1,000 cuts,” said Jim Moran (D-Va.), ranking member of the Interior-Environment Subcommittee. He compared the cuts to EPA and other federal conservation programs to the Dr. Seuss children’s book The Lorax, and said that previous Republican presidents would be “disgusted” by the spending measure. “This bill devalues our most precious natural resources. It prohibits the government from protecting and cleaning our air and water. It prevents the Environmental Protection Agency from implementing the laws that this Congress has passed,” he said. Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) called the measure “perhaps the worst bill this committee has considered for Fiscal Year 2014” due to its “thoroughly inadequate allocation, coupled with severe reductions and ideological policies.”

But committee Republicans said the cuts were necessary to reign in what has become an “overzealous agency,” according to Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.). “In recent years, enabled by excessive stimulus funding, EPA’s done more harm than good. EPA has introduced far too many regulations that wreak havoc on the job producers in this country, causing the loss of thousands of jobs, damaging our economic recovery and putting our energy security at risk,” he countered.

Republicans said the large cuts were necessary given the fiscal climate. “For years we’ve heard people talking about making tough choices on spending. Ladies and gentlemen, this bill makes tough choices on spending,” Interior-Environment Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said. “The Committee recommendation is an illustration of what happens when Congress tries to achieve deficit reduction entirely through reductions in discretionary spending. Significantly reducing our federal budget deficit and the national debt, however, will not occur until mandatory savings are achieved.” Moran countered that the fiscal crisis cited by Republicans is “manufactured” and that the cuts to federal interior and environmental programs are subsequently unnecessary. “There are ways to generate new revenue that in fact would spur our economy. That’s what we need to do to once again start fulfilling our economic and social potential,” he said.