It didnt gist come out of thin air. Its not just by more efficient ebb e Energy Sources its by conserving energies. Thats correct. As we become more e fishlt consumers save, dont they . Yes they do, senator so i just want to make that point. The cost benefit analysis under the Clean Air Act or clean waterer act, theres direct savings, that senator boxer has talked about the number of premature deaths and workdays which pashlts have to stay home because their child cant breathe. Or the days lost at summer camp. It will also safe us money. Correct. You look at globally, the cost is incredible. In maryland, we have taken steps to deal with our power emissions. Weve done that and weve had a growing economy. Its helpd our economy. You have a dual objective. In maryland were one of nine states part of the regional initiative. Weve taken some pretty extreme measures. Talk a little bit, as part of a reasonable oefrt how have you taken into consideration based on numbers. As we mentioned before very e fisht ways to skom in a regional area, to make row ductions in a wee that is very helpful to the american role in our economy. We give the states flexibility to do a plan on their own or to join regionally. And our costs show our skost Analysis Shows that regional plans ternd to be mr Cost Effective because e because there are more choices. I thrill thats what youre getting at senator. More choices for states to use more choices to have flerksblety to make the most cost e fiktive changes that are available to them. China is reeding the world right now on renewable energy. They do it this is not a country that has the samt values that we do as far as our global responsibleties looking at ourselves in a democratic state. Theyve done it because their people are demanding it. When you go to china, you see pollution. They recognize its in their economic best. We cannot deal with Climate Change unless we have global cop ration and requires u. S. Leadership. Thank you, senator. Put that chart back up, if you would. I just want to make sure everyone understands. That did not row fut the accuracy of this chart. Thank you, mr. Chair. Thanks for your testimony today. All of us think that its very successful. I can talk a little bit about my state. Highest standards on protecting the enviernt. At the state level probably in the world mplt one ft best records in the world of responsibilitily dwoching our resourss and protecting our pristine envooirnt. I also think Affordable Energy is very pornt. In my state, the citizens of alaska pay some of the highest energy costs in the country. And i also very importantly think the rule of law and the constitution is posht, which im assuming you do, as well. I certainly dont think theres been a lot of talk about china. I still dont think the president and chooip that aut rised the epa to do anything. Last time i looked at the constitution, that wasnt where he put his authority. One of the things ive had concern about is the o Obama Administration two step. The president and his staff want to get something done. Thats laudable. A rot of these require a head nod. And then, if that dubt work out he ends uptaking kmektive action anyway. Thiss numerous examples. Stwls no doubt that the 1002 coastal, is theres flo doubt that has to be done by congress. Epa wanted to expand its authority. It didnt go anywhere. I think the chashman has laid out what youre trying to do sdnt work it doesnt work for agencies to then say welt, dont do it. Thats not how the system works. In your agency, in my view, has been one of the biggest abusers of this twostep approach. But its not jus my view. Are you familiar with the recent utility air regulatory group. Let me read a provision of that. Do you thrill this rule brings about an expansion of your regulatory thorty . Correct. Senator, if i could respond no just respond to that sequel. What provix. Sections 111 b and 111 d. The questions crs had with regard to your authority to issue this reg . Have you read that . If the epa can respond to the crs analysis of this regular ration and your authority under the Clean Air Act to issue that. We ed be lap pill to do that. Do you thrill that this regulation dramatically expands your authority . I do not. I believer that we are following what the Clean Air Act requires. This is a statute that congress enacted to protect Public Health department from the air pollution. That determination kwuz upheld and the epa, then, has taken actions bassed on that finding sdsh. I think youre doing exactly what the epa reprimanded you to do. You are tarking cig nef kabltly amousht of power wuz telling. Youve tried to get this aut ri saigsz before and congress has not passed it. Youre not allowed to move forward with the regulation to do Want Congress wont allow. Tlfgs tome e testimony by tony clark who said quote. He later said in spite of epas promise and for exampleblety i states are seeting it mat authority to the epa. J i dont agree with it, senator. Let me go ahead and give you an additional minute of my time because you have taken that. More than half of them believe its not legal under the clear air act. Thank you very much chairman. We always have an interesting diskugsz. For the second con sec tifr year there would be no fishing this year. The lobster has been disappearing. The message here is clear. Clie malt change is taking dollars and jobs away from new englands fishing communities. We certainly see that in rhode island she adds the more dramatics potential in which higher sea levers combine with more sbins wenters. Another voice that has come out recently comes from the economy magazine. The coal,electric power and all the mat e mote it eive industries would have had their way, American Cities would like like chinese cities today. Ae among them were ford climbing to cut off automobile production e production in the next fiver queers. In 1974 to convince that installing scrubbers on coalfired power plants would be a disaster. Needless to say, this was all nonsense mplts aadulthood mortality would have increased by 167. Thats dead people. Over the course of 40 years the author goes onto describe it as a fairly reliable pat earn. In retrospect the Industry Response to the envierntal regulation can best with described as mendacious, homicidal, kbreed day u kwin rjing. The fact that the carbon is gradually cooking the climate. In the struggle for clean air, they made fooms of themselves at the right tile chl it is infur rating to see them cough up the same tired, halfbake bake edd j. And i take that statement from, again, a conserveative bub lip kagsz this is the economist magazine showing that there is room for a principle, conserve stif position. I cannot have a simpluation in which the other side refuses to knock the reality of what is happening in rhode island. Of what is happening in maine in oregon, and around the world and the country. This stuff is not complicated. You measure it. You see it real if you never want to eat anything from the ocean and you dont think it provides anything useful, that may be of no swres e interest to you. Those are not the high points for has beenty. So i support this rule wholeheartedly wholeheartedly. I urjts my colleagues to look at both sides ofrt ledger. Not just the sosz fill fuel industry side. Are you aware as a result of the 2010 epa sue and settlemented. Gina mccarthy says this success is yours as much as mine. That was on the day that the set ltmented was made public. Yet e yet, it doesnt apoor that the rum was a success to any of the real e real affected parties like the states or the American People who are facing high e tlek tristy bill tsz and job loss. Would you say that wyoming and West Virginia have the same input. I speak with states all the time. They have very good access to discuss all of these issues with us. They certainly know how to rooech us. And do. When the majority of states rook to a rule, you have done something wrong. There are actually significant associate benefits. Those are all raid out in our ira. It dusz seem that most of the benefits comes from reduceing the originals. I wonder if the dmk is double counting and its taking credit for another rumtle. In adigsz, it is a standard ands the result of a rule. It would not make sense to 5 00 non. I mean, that was the reason given. The rule in no way requires anybody to build in addition in particular. It should not be required under the new sourss sourszs. Ill note, since last fall, theres been a plan using it. And that is moving awlong. Tech nolgs is out there and used. This else es certainly not the only kmachl. So we have to do all of these things. And to make the best efforts and increase the share of nonfossil fuels and primary energy con sungs. They will achieve the reductions of 2628 . What role did the ep action play in setting these big targets in the u. S. China agreechlt for the u. S. So if question is what rote did the epa play . So its if administrations responsibility . I would defer that to others to speak about. Im focused on the Clean Air Act and our authorities under that. With regarding to this specific deal, the economists said that the cost to the United States are mump more real than thoer to china. It means china wont have anything to do for 16 years. Thats mostly fashion. I want to thank you for your very calm preb e presentation. This is a situation where the Clean Air Act requires you to act. It doesnt require us to act. It rooirs you to implement the act unless we repeal the Clean Air Act. Is thiss about my understanding. Senator sullivan, and i think in a very aggressive way. Now, i think maybe im wrong. I have not nikons 346 executive orders, reagans 381. Well, im sorry. The record just disproves your point. I believe this is not an administration gone rogue. The figs case was massachusetts versus epa. And the third was utility air resources group, the epa. Dont you have to follow the law. We do. Weve got the largest number of people. Were up to 38 million people. Im going to put in the record the actual votes. Six people were absent. They asked that their sfwengss be entered into the record. We actually had 54 votes at that time. We didnt have the 0. But we had a majority. In this recent debate, with the support of the chairman. And 5940, the hovan amendment that says Climate Change is caused by human 5 00 tifrty. It was fit bustered. I have 40. Let me tell you whos included who aid the same thing. Reufers, ap. Plit cole. U. S. A today. There was no question that all of these out lets rorted this. Not because they were reported fur any other plan e particular reason other that be this is the truth. This is a fact. You cant make this stuffer up. We know that Climate Change increases ozone in some cases. So when youre scleebing uch the carbon, youre really helping the help e health of the people, is that not strew. Thaekt. My understanding is that was put forward in the d. C. And coalition for responseble regulation. Versus the epa. Thats the endangermented finding . Yes, correct. So in the endangermented finding, you found that extreme weather e veblts and we know that happens. We ne that happened in a lake in ohio. Which is dech stating. Isnt it clear that those of us who believe that Carbon Pollution does, in fact increase the likelihood that people will have breathing difficulties,hearted attacks. Isnt is that, in your mind, a proven fact . Mpblt in the year 2012 74 renew ebb owner jill. We have one krirks oal fire pewered fire plabt that holdsle 30e 820 people. And thats the deer creek station. In your calculation, you calculated at 1 pnt. Had the epa considered deer creek under construction, you received a plant. The results of this coal plant running less than half of the time it runs now doesnt work. Wed simple lip have to know whether or not the plant would continue to operation mplt. Operating a base load coal unit 2,000 hours per year is unek father or mother kal. The big stone plan is in the middle of a 400 400 million dlart e plan. You are now telling if plant that they may not be able to operate at all. And are now being told that they need to do even more to make these additional plans implement e lefted. Thank you, sfat xx, for your question. And we certain lyly are welcoming. Gh. In plar if states think weve got something factually wrong, we urge them to tell us, and many of them have. So, again, i presume that dwrour state your state is having that kvrgs with us. And if we got something fact chummily wrong, then we will address that. We want to make sure that the rule is appropriate and correct. We think this can woork. There are large states that are divided in terms ofs energy markts. To the best of my knowledge, weve receive ds no suggests on how to fixz the problem that we share with you today. This is a major proposal. Weve got no feed baek. Im just cure yousz. Are we cig e sug jeszing that the fieblg rile im suggesting as is ushltly the case with epa regulations that the comment e kmentss that we receive may well leads to agistmented ins the final rule. I sdoent have any experience with an epa rule ef role where that has not hatched. Thats kwhie the process is so important. So yes to the extent that adjustments are aprep rat, within our authority and needed to make sure that the rule can work right. All of us want clean air. Im going to par sfraz a little bit, but that the cost to the aver rajs American Family would be approximately 1400 dlarsz a year to comply with this particular rule mplt. Did you have or are you aware of what the estimated cost or what the an tis pated cost for a family would be to skplie with this rule . We did that here. Its all available for herb to take look at. Im nt sure about the spoefk study that you cited, but we did do a formal look we need to make sure that Everybody Knows because states will you want you will mat li decide what to do lie ep here, we are confident that states will make the best choices for the families within their borders and that will take into consideration cost. The rule is all built on the things that are happening now in this industry. Things that are happening now is that utilities are using less carbon intensive more economical fuels. They are investing in Energy Efficiency. Those things together reduce Carbon Emissions but overall because of the tremendous impact the Energy Efficiency could have we expect bills to go down. My time is up. May i read one sentence into the record. Some will see their electricity rates almost double as a result of cpp impacting the midwest. Thank you. Thank you. Thauj thank you for testifying. Its an immediate threat to families and communities in every corner of this country and in the world. Our country has been a leader in creating the problem. Now thanks to the hard work of this administration were on track to solving this problem. The administrations proposed rules are strongly supported by health professionals. Im sure youre aware the academy of pediatrics Public Health association, several other associations sent a letter to the epa which stated the changing climate threat is the health of americans alive now and future generations. The nation as a short window to act to reduce the threats. Given that statement from some of these leading and well respected Public Health organizations, can you elaborate on the Public Health risks American Families will face if we fail to reduce Carbon Emissions from power plants. There are some pretty immediate impacts as we see temperatures go up. Those kinds of conditions are more conducive to ozone formation. Ozone has well demonstrated impacts on families including exacerbating asthma and bringing on asthma attacks leading to all kinds of medical expenses as well as missed school, missed work and that sort of thing. Increases in drought which is severe drought which is occurring that has significant impacts on Public Health. The changes in temperatures are changing the seasons of various allergens. They are changing the patterns of various vectors that can lead to disease. These are the kinds of things that scientists are seeing as a result of Climate Change impacks that are occurring. Sea leave rise along the coast has exceeded 18 since 1850. The northeast has experienced extreme weather events that are more intense and more frequent than what we have seen before. Theres more talk of the potential talks of reducing emissions there are significants costs to the economy if we decide to do nothing. Has the epa looked at other costs of failing to enact strong Emission Reductions. Would you agree the cost providing billions of dollars every year from extreme weather far out weigh the costs . I certainly would. The greatest cost is to do nothing here and the kind of impacts that youre citing are ones that scientists are saying are happying and will happen during the future. Those are very, very costly events. Implementing the rule that provides flexibility in communities to bring jobs and invest in Energy Efficiency to reduce the need for electricity that those are very positive economic benefits. Thank you. Senator bitter. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank my colleagues for letting me jump ahead because i have another commitment in a few minutes. Ill br brief. As you know i submitted requests for documents on these rules and development of these rules last congress. Now, epa is Still Producing some of those documents but from what has been produced there is a really dramatic pattern of very frequent decal meetings of phone calls and emails between epa and nrdc leading outside environmental group. Again, the number of these communications is pretty staggering and unprecedented as far as i can see. In addition there are some correspondence between epa and rdc thats not been produced or posted to the docket. Why is that and will that excluded correspondence and documentation will submitted . Im not exactly sure of the answer to that question. Ill be glad to get back to you on this. If you can get back to us. Hope hopefully that will be corrected including that additional kor correspondence and documentation. It shows a level of communication and detail and consultation that i think is pretty staggering. Let me put up one email june 2013 before the rule was proposed and in this rdc attorney dave hawkins advised as long as the compliance date for the limtss is a few years after the sip submission deadline. This is very detailed direction before the rule was even proposed. We get a lot of detailed advice from a lot of people and have many meetings with a lot of different stake holders who weigh in with us. We put the input in a proposed rule. If the rule is not grounded in science and the law then people tell us that. Thats how we proceed. Prior to this email, had epa even considered issuing a model in. I cant speak to exactly when we would have had those conversations. I can assure you that the notion of a federal Implementation Plan is fully laid out in the Clean Air Act. Thats what motivating us to think about the need for a backstop federal plan. If you can follow up and answer that question directly whether epa considered issuing a model fit prior to the e mail that would be useful. Did advice have significant bearing on the model fit eba is now developing . We have not yet proposed a model fit. Were going through that process now. Weve gotten a number of comments from a variety of stakeholders urging us to consider doing a model fit. Were be working our way through the process to figure out what the appropriate proposal is. Is epa planning to issue its model fit before the sip deadline. We intended to propose it this summer. That would be before the deadline, the other deadline. It will be what we propose is it would be 13 months after the 111 d rule is finalized. Well have a proposed fit out in the summer and i would expect we would have that finalized withen a year. Okay. I continue to be concerned with these secrets on costs of carbon. Ive asked you for the names and titles of those folks the under your supervision that have participated in the interagency working group. We havent gotten that. Can you provide that to us . Senator, theres not been a secretive process at all and the gao has confirmed it was not an inappropriate process and the agencies across the government participated in it. Its not a process that the epa was in charge of. Ill take that back. Its not a secretive process but you wont commit to that. I will commit to get back to you. So you wont commit. Thank you. Let me thank both senators who have been very flexible with their time to accommodate. I appreciate that very much. For those of who us live in states with millions of people, theres states seeing the impact of Climate Change the epas proposal to regulate our source of largest Carbon Pollution has been a long time coming. Any substantial reaction theres room for improvement. While we strive for perfection we know its hard to achieve. Had some discussion of this before. Its my understanding the difference the different targets based on feasibility of the systems and other variables. However as written stakeholders have already made substantial require more than states the impact. For example, delaware has made substantial investments in Energy Efficiency. These stakeholders express if this issue is not addressed early actions may be at a competitive disadvantage. Have you heard similar concerns. If the answer is yes, is the epa considering adjusting the state targets to discuss these . If so, what are these possible actions . Thank you. This is an issue thats been raised in comments from ail Different Directions and from a number of different stakeholders. Something were paying a lot of attention to. We paid so much attention to it that in the fall we put out a notice of Data Availability identifying some of these issues that people have raised so we can be sure to get as much input as possible on it. Our final rule has to be founded in our authority under the Clean Air Act to determine the best system of Emission Reduction for this sector. Thats what we will be striving to do. Were looking very closely at all of these things. While i cant speak to what any final decisions might be because the rule wont be final until june other midsummer. I can assure you were looking hard at those questions. We want to make sure that we make as many add justments as we can to improve the rule while staying within the Legal Authority that we have. They were put at a disadvantage. I think we managed to fix that. My hope is we can do the same thing here. I comment on the issue today. It was unique perspective. I dont come from a place called hope. I come from a place called beckley. I still have a lot of family i just live in West Virginia but other place is real to me. Now representing delaware which is the lowest lying state in the United States of america. If we dont curve our fossil fuel emissions over time that significant push of my staff, state will be lost to the sea. Some parts are already starting to be lost to the sea. Can you take a few moments to talk about how this rule might address both concerns and how does this rule help to make sure West Virginia ends up being in economic ruin or damage substantially. Helping to make sure that my state remains on the map. Sure. This country and others must take in order to address us and we believe thats the responsible and appropriate thing to do. We are very aware of the impacts that are occurring in the Electricity Generating sector today. There are many forces that go way beyond what epa might or height not do in this rule or any other rule thats changing the way energy is produced in this country. As we talk with the industry we understand that from them. We understand also that that can have impacts on local communities that are built up around a certain types of thats happened. We must be very sensitive to those impacts as well. This rule looks to the future. The portion of power still being generated by coal. We see another 30 its very important domestic industry. Other sources of energy including ones where theres tremendous opportunity for investment in our local community. So were keeping all of those things this mind and fully believe that the flexibility that this Program Allows will allow for that range of types of operations and thats good and healthy. Thank you. One of the major source of Electricity Generation does not create any emissions of any harm that im aware of is nuclear. It provides electricity to about 20 of our needs in this country. Why does the proposal discount Nuclear Generation and what is the epa doing to address this issue . Senator, this rule is about the fossil fuel fired Electricity Generation. Thats the sector that missed the air pollutants that were authorized to address. Looking at the types of Emission Reduction approaches that the fossil fuel fired generation fleet can adopt say that again. You dont have to. Thank you. We identified some key approaches that that industry is now taking. This is not this rule is not an energy plan. It should not be an energy plan. We understand the significant role that Nuclear Power generation plays in the country and it itself is subject to various pressures and issues. We want to make sure that states who have invested in Nuclear Energy and wish to do so that that can be a significant compliance option for states and it will be. We have received a lot of comment on the exact question that you ask about how we figured that into the targets and well be sorting through all that information and the rule. Thank you. My time has expired. Thank you so much. The most pashtstient members. I appreciate your patience. I think senator kapatoe youre the next. I would like to thank the administrator mckay coming before us today and discuss this important rule. I represent the state of West Virginia. We have just under two million hard working americans who receive 95 of our electricity from coal Power Generation. The West Virginia coal industry supports family strengthens National Security and powers not only my state but provides affordable electricity. We could be keeping the lights on this this room. I have serious concerns about the proposed regulation. We have heard already today that 32 states have raised serious objections. You predict we will reduce likts electricity prices by 8 . This doesnt add up. Our monthly electrical bills are 23 lower than the national aver raj average. Im concerned in formulating these regulations ep has not considered the impact. You kind of touched on this but i think we need to get into it some more. You dont really have great track record here. If you look at the mats rule, the epa predicted that regulation would result in the 5,000 megawatts. Between 50 and 60 megawatts will be taken offline. Thats ten times mistake there. The cumulative effect of these regulations cant be overstated. I think theres concern about the reliability if were looking back to last winter and touring some power stations in first energy and others in my state. Some of these were running at near capacity to keep our homes warm, to keep our seniors warm. Our hard working coal miners in West Virginia have made our state the hardest working behind wyoming. It has a huge economic impact. One of the most disturbing things and the first question i would like to ask you is you say in your opening remarks that epa stakeholder out reach and Public Engagement has been unprecedent. Youve talked a lot about the, i think you said millions of comments. How many comments a lot . A lot. I am interested in your definition of outreach. I know that this is not just me. An invitation has been lodged for the epa to come to a coal producing state like West Virginia. None of these were produced in a coalproduceing state. Ive reached out and invited the epa to talk about the Economic Impacts of this rule and these rules in our state. Can we count on epa to come and talk to the people of West Virginia about how this is affecting their livelihood, their electrical bills and why havent you come to state like West Virginia to come talk about this with the citizens . Theres a lot in what you just said. Ill do my best to respond. I want to mention a couple of things. You raised some real points. I appreciate you thinking about your state. The estimates and the projections that we include in our ira for this rule are ill lus ustrative. We understand there could be some differences in how regulations impact local or regional areas that might differ from the national. Were hearing a lot about that in the comments. I want to mention in establishing the targets in the rule, somebody mentioned the targets are different from every state. They are. The one result of that is that states that are very coal intensive remain coal intensive even under our proposed rule. I come from indiana 90 something percent. Yes, its in the 90s. Those states as we looked at the application of these different technologies across the country, states like yours and like mine that are very coal intensive remain that way. The targets are not as owner as some would say as states that are less coal intensive. The design of the rule was to take each state where it was in its Power Generation and to acknowledge that. Some of that is what was prompting senator carper to note that some state receive inequities in the rule because of that. We tried to build this into the design because we recognize there are differences around the country. Its not reasonable to expect in indiana or West Virginia to suddenly become a delaware in terms of its energy mix. That just wont happen. Where ever the state is whatever its mix is there are opportunities there. There are opportunities in indiana and West Virginia and everywhere to reduce the Carbon Intensity of the power production. That is how the rule lays out the process. To the extent we havent gotten it right people are telling us how they think we should adjust it in order to get that right. What about the visit to West Virginia . Why didnt you visit coalproducing states . We did have a lot of meetings around the country. We met in many states. We wanted to have those in locations where people were comfortable coming. We used a lot of epa offices. Thats not really a great answer. Im not trying to be antagonistic. I dont think its a great answer. You can get to West Virginia. Were not that isolated. Its a beautiful spot. This heavily impact, heavily impacts the economics of our state. Our ability to compete. Were getting all the time, you have to transition out of coal. You have to make a change. All these kinds of things you say technology, you got to use clean technology, it hasnt been proven to be able to be run in a efficient and costefficient way. That will help my state tremendously. Lets push forward on the research and development. Quick question in the final analysis. Of the 32 states lodged mayjor ob jek objections, what is the plan . Because this is a proposed rule everybody always tells us things they think we can do better. That sounds like us. We get that too. We welcome that. Im not counting states in tally. To answer your question what the Clean Air Act says is if a state does fotnot submit plan then epa would put in place a federal plan to implement the obligations that we finalize in the rule. This is my really last question. You mentioned forming Regional Alliances in the northeast. If somebody was listening to me and saying that coal provides 95 of the electricity in West Virginia who will be in my Regional Alliance . I think states are having a lot of conversations about that. States will need to find mutual reasons to come together. They also dont have to. Im not sure what conversations West Virginia is having with other states. Again, i feel like because of where we are and what we have and the Natural Resources we have we are disadvantaged. Thank you. Thank you. He really wanted to be here. He wrote a very interesting Opening Statement where he quotes the department of defense saying Climate Change is an immediate risk to u. S. National security. I asked to put that entire statement. Without objection, so ordered. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to follow up on senator from West Virginia and then also from south dakota in regard to the baselines. I really feel like the 2012 baseline is arbitrary. You have this complicated formula to determine the targets that the states must meet. In arkansas because we have a new power plant that be was online not online until december 2012 it really doesnt accurately represent where arkansas is at. Were going to be in a situation where were number six or seven on the list. In reality because of the formula scripts theyre really two or three. You talk about opportunities for states to cover emissions and all of this. Thats true. The reality is the electricity bill for the average person in arkansas people on fixed incomes, single moms will increase significantly. I guess, what i would like for you to do is look at the 2012 baseline. Look at the catch 22 situations that youre putting states in like arkansas and it sounds like south dakota is in the same situation. Again, id really like for you to commit to work the targets out in that regard and make it such that i disagree toetstally with the rule but it can be fair. Thank you. Weve had a number of discussions about the arkansas situation in particular. The 2012 issue has been brought up by a number of states. We included information from 2010 and 2011 so people can take a look at how that might make a difference to look at different years. Were very open to hearing those concerns and trying to work them through. The other thing id like to talk about is reliability. Talk a lot about cost and things. Are you familiar with southwest power pool . Yes. For those that arent that are listening, southwest power pool is mandated to ensure reliable supplies of power, adequate Transmission Infrastructure and competitive wholesale prices of electricity. I think youd agree theyre the folks when you flip the switch the electricity comes on. As a result of that if they dont do a good job, if they dont provide reliable power then they pay fines or held responsible to the federal government. I think youd agree they are nonpartisan. Its an agency doing their best to make things work. They reviewed your mandates and produced reliability impact assessment. Have you reviewed that . Not that one specifically. Im aware that they have done that. I really think you should. I think its important. They found that the significant new generating capacity not krntlykrnt ly currently planned will be fleedneeded to replace about 9,000 megawatts in our region alone by 2020. Significant new Transmission Infrastructure will be needed. Currently takes up to eight and a half years to study plan and conduct, im sorry, construct transmission and costs up to 2. 3 million per mile of new transmission. The scenario theyre come can go up as such its going to be very very difficult to do this as youre proposing would you tell us it affecting reliability. They have come up with four things they ask you to do. First i recommend conferences jointly sponsored by the epa Regulatory Commission focusing on impacts and power system reliability. I guess my question to you is would you agree to do that. That to me is a very common sense approach to actually making sure that weve heard a lot of talk today about we need to do something. We need to do the right thing. Would you commit to actually doing that and getting groups together and talking about the unintended consequences that we might see . Those technical conferences with already scheduled. The first one will happen next week. Then there are several more around the country. Very good. Second. I recommend a detailed comprehensive study of the north American Power system conducted by the e lekelectric reliability. Would you consider Going Forward with getting a good study, a good independent study to address the potential unintended consequences that southwest power pool. I think several of the other independent systems are concerned about. I believe narc is already doing that kind of work and has put some information out. I want to note that until the states decide what sit that they intend to do by way of compliance its very not very possible to do a real reliability study. Whats very good about the conversations that are happening and the work that spp and others are doing is theyre doing exactlyexact ly what you just described their job to be which is thinking ahead, looking ahead, planning. Thinking about contingencyies and how things might roll out. Whatever the incoming factors are. Whatever its anticipated weather e weather events. Whether its shifts in use of fuels based on anticipated prices. Those kind of conversations are exactly what should be happening and what is happening. The study that or the study that southwest power pool coming up with the 9,000 megawatts and the difficulty in constructing. Right. I would add also just the difficulty in getting easements and all the hassle that goes with that. One of their recommendations is to extend the dom appliance schedule by five years. Weve heard that. We heard concerns about the interim compliance of 2020. Thats causing a lot of anxiety. Its an idea that several people and organizations have raised again. Thats another thing that were looking very closely at. Im very much opposed to the rule. I really do think you need to look at the reliability and the impact its going to have and also the significant impact. I know that you mentioned that states will have the ability to reduce their footprint and things. Yet, the reality is at the end of the day lots of people will have significantly increased utility bills as a result of regulation. I think pretty good data to show. Its all pain and very limited gain. Thank you. Thank you. I do have two minutes remaining. I want to make a couple of comments. First of all not only is the tax increased its most regress regressive tax increase that you can have. That seems to be kind of gone unnoticed of what a regressive nature this is. Put that chart up, will you. These are the states who are re rejecting this. These states have said that they cannot comply and will not. Even professor lawrence tribe of harvard stated proposal is unconstitutional. She asked you the question, what happens if they dont do it. Your response is they would have to take the fifth. Thats what it says. You cant take away their highway funds. What are you planning to do . I would respectfully disagree the program is unconstitutional. Theres a variety of programs out there. Let me just concludes there are certain facts that we have dealt with. Number one, this is a proposal that the states reject. They reject it. It ignores the will of congress. You can argue the different times its come up. Its never passed. The type of regulation that would come through a bill that was introduced and as i mentioned the first one is not by a democrat. It was by a republican in 2002. It was rejected. They have to go to the unelected bureaucrats. Thats why theyre trying to do it through regulation. They cant do it through legislation. The third thing is it relies on unreasonable assumptions. Youve seen the other chart that we had up here a minute ago. If you just look at it and use common sense this is not reliable. The cost, it will cost billions. It will increase or energy bills. Its going to be on those who can afford it the least and then if all of that happens and if all of that is correct and all of this talk about the science settle, even though if that were true, it still is not going to reduce the emissions worldwide. We heard that not from people really on my side or any other side except we have heard that of course from the first director of the epa in response to our questions and response again to house member. These things are out there. I know this has become a religion. I know well have a lot more discussions about it. Well do what we can to keep my people in oklahoma from inkiring the largest tax increase in history for something that is not going to be corrected. May i put something in the record . Yes. Not 30 seconds. Sdp you you can have the last word after i do my 30 seconds. I will. You can have whatever time you want. The answer is no. Go ahead. Ill have a press conference immediately afterwards to tell you what hes stieffling me from doing. Californias electricity bill is far lower than oklahoma and we are prospering because we have taken on clie mate change and we have cheaper cost than they do. Without objection. Were adjourned. On the next washington journal, we talk to congressman dana rohrabacher. He will discuss the president s ask for authorization for the use of military force against isis. Then representative jerry m mcnerney of california is here to talk about combatting isis. Later our bus tour of historically black colleges and universities will continue. Washington journal is live every morning at 7 00 a. M. Eastern. You can join the conversation with your phone calls and comments on facebook and twitter. Here are some of our futured programs for this president s day weekend. Live coverage of the savannah book festival with nonfiction authors and books. Former senior addvisor for president obama and on American History tv saturday morning, the 100th anniversary of the release of the film, the birth of a nation. The showing of the entire 1915 film. Sunday at 8 00 on the presidency, George Washington portraits focusing artists captured the spirit. Find our complete Television Schedule and let us know what you think about the programs youre watching. Keep track of the republican led congress. Any congress best access on cspan, cspan 2, cspan radio and cspan. Com. Prime minister David Cameron answered questions about swiss banks helped customers evade taxes. This is 35 minutes. Order. Questions to the Prime Minister. Thank you. This morning i had meetings and i shall have further such meetings today. Does my honorable friend recall the general election of 1983 . A conservative land slide win in which i and 100 other conservatives were elected for the first time. Is he aware that unemployment was 3 million and today its 2 million. I inflation was 8 and today its under 2. Does he agree that these comparisons coupled with the trumped card that he and baroness shared in the form of a left wing Opposition Leader im very grateful to my right honorable friend. I wasnt a voter in 1983. It is true that this government is cutting unemployment and its also true that every labor government always puts up unemployment. What we can see is the count has fallen by 55 since the last election. It does speak to a Bigger Picture which is this government has created a thousands jobs for every day that its been in office. We all remember the predictions of the leader of the labor party that our plan would cost a million jobs with unemployment tumbling. Perhaps today is the day he should apologize. Mr. Speaker an hour ago we learned that linked the hsb tax scandal are several donors including a former treasury of the party who have given nearly five Million Pounds to the party. How can the Prime Minister explain the revolving door between torey party hq and the swiss branch. I saw this list before coming to the Prime Ministers questions. One of the people name seconddegreeed is the labor donor. Im very clear. People should pay their tacks in our country and no government has been tougher than this one in chasing down tax evasion and tax avoidance. Lets talk about the difference between him and me. None of these people have given a penny on my watch. Hes up to his neck in this. Lets take stanley fink who gave 3 Million Pounds to the conservative party. He appointed him as treasurer of the party and gave him a peerage for good measure. Now can he explain what steps hes going to take to find out about the tax avoidance activities of lord fink. The difference between him and me. When people donate to the conservative party they dont pick the candidates, they dont clooz choose the parties. The only reason hes sitting there is because of a bunch of trade Union Leaders dded he was more left wing than his brother. He cant get away from it. Hes a dodgey Prime Minister surroundsed by dodgey donors. He didnt just take the money. Its always to be said. The question will be heard and the answers will be heard because this is a democratic chamber. I dont care how long it takes, they will be heard. He didnt just take the money. He appointed the man who was head of hsbc as a minister. Mr. Speaker, it was in the Public Domain in september 2010 that hsbc was enabling tax avoidance on an industrial scale. Are we seriously expected to believe that when you make Stephen Green a minister four months later he had no idea about these allegations . Im glad hes brought up the issue of stephen gradeeen who is a trade minister. Its same Stephen Green he appointed as head of his council. Hes the Stephen Green later welcomed as a trade minister into the government. Its the same Stephen Green looking a bit coy today invited on a trade mission as late as 2013. Every week he gets more desperate because he cant talk about the economy. He cant talk about unemployment. He comes here with fiction after fiction. Let me deal while ive got a moment with the fiction we had last week. He came here and if you remember, he talked about something called intermediary tax relief. It turns out, mr. Speaker as long as it takes. As long as it takes. I said the questions must be heard. The responses must be heard. Last week the labor leader asked me six times about the tax treatment of hedge funds. Now it turns out that the treatment hes complaining about was sgrointroduced in the autumn of 1997 by the government. It was extended in 2007. Who was in power in 2007 . Labor. Who was the city minister in 2007 . I think well find it was ed somberdy. I know the Prime Minister doesnt care about tax avoidance but this day of all days hes going to be held accountable for answering a question. Now, he is pleading ignorance as to what was happening with Stephen Green. The minister in charge issued a press release in november 2007. Does the Prime Minister expect us to believe that in Stephen Greens three years as a minister he never had a conversation with him about what was happening at hsbc . Why did labor welcome Stephen Green as a trade minister. Why were they still booking meetings with him in 2013 . My responsibility is the tax laws of this country and no one has been tougher. Let me remind him about what we found. Hedge funds cutting their taxes by flipping currencies. Foreigners not paying stamp duty. Allowed under labor. Banks not paying tax on all their profits. Allowed under labor. Banned by the tories. Those two were the friend of the tax dodger, the friend of the hard working taxpayer. Doesnt this all sound familiar. The Prime Minister appoints someone to a senior job in government. There are public allegations but he doesnt ask the questions. He turns a blind eye. Isnt this just the behavior we saw with andy coleson. It is desperate stuff because they cant talk about the economy because its growing. They cant talk about unemployment because its falling. They cant talk about their Health Policy because its collapsing. What have we seen this week . We cant even go in front of a business audience because hes offended every business in the country. He cant go to scotland because hes toxic. They cant talk to women because they got a pink bust during the country. They have even offended britains nuns. No wonder people look at labor and say they havent got a prayer. He took the money. He gave a job to the head of hsbc and he lets the tax avoidance get away with it. Theres something rotten at the heart of the conservative party and its him. For 13 years they sat in the treasury. They did nothing about tax transparency. This government has been tougher than any previous government. Thats why their desperate. Thats why theyre losing. Orpdder. Mr. Burns. Last week it was named as having the Fastest Growing Digital Economy in the united kingdom. Would my right honorable friend agree with me that the talent of our people combined with the long Term Economic plan that britain remain a world leader in the creative industry. My honorable friend is right. Its a vital part of our economy and country. When we look at film and television and you see the Great Results of the baftors. The high hopes for the oscars. Its training of some of our digital effect specialists because of many of our creative people is a key part of this vital and growing industry. Kathy jamison. Last week i warned the Prime Minister about falling wages. This week he said britain needs im glad to see hes waking up to reality. Would you not agree with me that the people who most need it are the families who lost 16 pientsnts a year under his government. What the laydy will find its good that the wages are growing ahead of inflation. Because we have raised 10,000 pounds the amount of money you can earn before you start paying taxes, as a result people are better off. In scotland theres 175,000 more people in work today than when i became Prime Minister. As a result of growth in the jobs market, growth in wages cuts in taxes, increase in minimum wages, things are Getting Better for families in scotland. Mr. Speaker, for years the supernational chain aldi has been sitting. Does the Prime Minister agree the Supermarket Chain should be forced to release assets. What we need to see is Successful Development go ahead and the use of these sites. If they cant be used forretail then they could be made available for other uses. One of the changes weve made is to liberalize the used glasses in planning so we dont have long term planning blight of development not going ahead in towns and cities where houses and jobs and investment are needed. Given the Prime Ministers new found concern that employers should give their staff decent pay rises, can he explain why he didnt apply that principle to his own government when they decided not to implement the 1 pay increase for staff . What we does with the hs staff is make sure the lowest paid people are getting pay rise and in the nhs you have progression pay. Everyone will get at least a 1 rise. Many people because of progression will get a 2, 3 or 4 pay rise. Alongside that pay rise they will be paying less in tax. Diesel and petrol prices are coming down. People can see standards of living are rising because we have a long Term Economic plan and were sticking to it. Maria miller. More than ever before business and commuters and students use the trains to get around. Theyre increasingly frustrated that our trains are stuck in the analog age. Access to the internet can be really difficult and very limited. Can my friend consider this important issue and see what the government could do to help commuters and others get access to wifi on our trains . I think my right honorable friend is right to raise this. Its vital for businesses and individuals to be able to access wifi and do their work and other contacts while on train. Im pleased to announce plans that trains will see wifi on trains across the crutches or sticks, he is deteriorating sadly by the week. Ive been told his case will be reconsidered and yet the department for work and pensions is callously snatching it from you on the 25th of february. Will the Prime Minister immediately rectify this heartless and disgraceful injustice . Im very happy to look at the individual cases that the right honorable gentleman raises but of course, with the replacement of the disability living allowance with a personal independence payments, the most disabled people will be getting more money and more assistance rather than less. But as i said i will happily look at the case. Given the widespread cynicism about mr. Peter lily. Give them the wide spread sin cynicism about politicians promises and claims. Will my friend remind people however long it takes, that this government has presided over the creation of more than 2 million additional private sector jobs which is far, far more than we ever promised and doesnt that discredit the claims of the opposition that our efforts to cut the deficit would destroy jobs. My friend is right. We have created 2 million additional private sector jobs. If you look at the extra number of people in work it is 1. 75 million more people. Behind the statistics are families that now have a pay packet and job and chance to have a more secure future all during the time that the opposition claimed that our policies would cost one million jobs. He was 100 wrong. They said there were a dozen prosecutions in relation to the case load. None of them have come to court yet. Can you explain why that is the case. For prosecutions for tax evasion they have gone up 5fold since 2010 leading to hundreds of years of imprisonment. In our country, the tax collection agency, hmrc is independent of government, and carry out the investigations and order the prosecutions. Its very important that in a free country that ministers are not given the details of whos being investigated and what the prosecutions are. Now this doesnt happen in other countries and we have a word for it. Its called corruption. But it seems to be the path suggested by the party opposite. Thank you mr. Speaker. My the honorable gentleman is entitled to be heard with courtesy. Mr. Davis. Thank you mr. Speaker. My constituents are not able to see a gp as quickly as we should. Does the Prime Minister agree that we need more it aavailable for my constituents in whales. Weve made the commitment that were going to have 7 day opening, 8 dlok 8 in the evening. Thats hrthe government in whales, it is their decision to cut the nhs that has landed and provide gps in whales because it is the right policy. The ant yim n and others. Would the Prime Minister be prepared to meet a group from that committee because while the report is a work plan for the next parliament, the issue of security of synagogs in the Jewish Communal buildings is too urgent to wait till may. Can i commend the honorable gentleman from prominent areas. I have met with the Jewish Leadership Council and regularly discuss with them the issue its. I have made sure to try to ever sit down to hear their views too. Partnerships have awarded 14 new grants totaling 1. 74 if fp 23507b8g9sds will ur78g9z bd iing i weve seen investment in manufacturing ut put increase. Thats happening in all the regions of our country which is worth while. Well be playing our part by investing 10 Million Pounds in the development of the advance Manufacturing Research center in south york shire. I think these and other cult catapults can make a real difference in terms of backing the revileal in our alal in our country. As i was reading the report, the fact is the labor government prosecuted more companies than this government has done. Its a major scandal that many and others do not feel the tax of this country. What are they doing . When we chaired the ga we put at the head of the agenda tax trancesparency and tax avoidance so the events were discussing events which by the way and allegations of crimes that all took place when labor were in power were if this to happen again we wouldnt have this situation because we have the automatic Transparent Exchange of tax information. Thank you plk. According to a recent survey the Emergency Service at our b county hospital in dorchester is the number one in the country. Would my friend praise the staff that work there and reassure that the money will follow that good work. Minister. I certainly join my honorable friend in congratulating the county hospital. I think their work shows what can be done when we better integrate social scare and how can we better treat fail people in the community. The best place for them is often not a and taerks wum treating after their ailments and helping them feel better at home. Its a plan that we feel is well under way. Is this sharon dolling i said order. I said a moment ago that the honorable gentleman had a right to be heard with courtesy. The honorable lady has a similar right to be heard with courtesy and here no doubt will be heard with courtesy. Mrs. Sharon hodson. I just wanted to know if the Prime Minister has had conversations with lord green about tax avoidance in hsbc and if not, why not . Tirks when i appointedconsulted the house of ethics. I made the appointment. It was come edd and he was Still Holding meetings from them. What does my friend thinks what britains families need to get on most of all is the security of a good school place and weere providing them the security of a good job and Safe Community and were providing them but i have to say the labors campaign, the wheels are falling off the wagon but i think the wheels are falling off
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.