background levels. even epaso low that admits they have not determined how to reach full compliance. the marginal cost of ratcheting down the existing spread standard goes through the roof that thestimates standard would cost 3.9 billion dollars to $15 billion annually and the 16 part would be $39 billion annually. cost of study puts the 65 parts per billion at $140 billion a year, which would make this the agency s most expensive .egulation ever the study also estimates 1.4 million fewer jobs and household cost averaging $830 per year. these costs come on top of all of the other rules we have seen manythis administration, of which also impact the energy and manufacturing sectors. moreover, this rule is yet another chapter in the administration efforts to force more extreme client policies on the american people. i would like to just name a few of them. we have done the utility mac, the same and, the cross state the tiertion rule, three, the 111 b, all on top of .his propos
graduate school as a sociology major if i really wanted to hone in on a specific professional degree area. we do offer a lot of professional degrees, of course. whereas cheryl s analogy lines right up. you know, nursing profession, for example. some of our s.t.e.m. degree professions whether it s engineering or whatever. i think we have to be a little bit open because at the four-year level you re moving into a lot of breadth and depth. you have to allow for the very important majors and the arts and the sciences. my college was huge in the arts and those students do everything from designing your wedding ring to fixing your picasso. yeah. i want to move forward because we don t have a ton of time and i have a lot of questions, but i think you touched on two points that i want to circle back to later in the conversation. one, the value of, you know, collecting data on outcomes and publicizing it. and two, the fact that there is incredible diversity in the college system in
due to a lawsuit brought forth by environmental and department of health. that leaves us to ask the question, mr. chairman why is this rule so very important, and why did the court force the epa to act? well we know that there are serious health affects caused by the ozone and the epa s proposal will improve air quality and result in significant public health benefits. children, the elderly and people with respiratory diseases such as asthma will be impacted directly by this rule. the epa estimates that there are currently 25.9 people in the u.s. with asthma, including 7.1 million children, and mr. chairman my seat in chicago has been disproportionately impacted by asthma and the affect the ozone has on asthma. the recent study shows cooke county, illinois it s home to over 13,000 children with as ma, and mr. chairman i don t know what value can be placed on preventing all of these dire circumstances, and all the illnesses and premature deaths and emergency room visits but th
to each and every one of you. god bless you and god bless the united states of america. coming up on c-span2. a hearing on fuel standards and then paul ryan discusses corporate tax reform. after that we hear from white house budget director on the upcoming debate over the debt ceilings. thursday a senate subcommittee looked at the epa s renewable fuel standard program. the head of air and aviation testified about raising the amount of fuel required for transportation. this hearing is an hour and 5 0 mntsinutes minutes. sg good morning, everyone. the ideas here are lotable and improve energy security and improve the environment. day old product domestication has doubled. and lower demand has been anticipated and the increase use of natural gas improved energy efficiency lowered greenhouse gas emissions. many years we chased the mandates. the epa is required to release the volumes by november 30th of the proceeding years to allow those covered to plan for the future. the epa
defeating isil on the ground in iraq recognizing only there defeat can be a lasting defeat, a sustained defeat. that is the approach we are taking. on the ground in iraq and syria. as we discussed earlier, there are other parts of the counter-isis strategy. on the intelligence side, which is challenging, on the counter messaging side, foreign fighter flows. guys who potentially come in and out, including to this country. there are different dimensions to combating. but the strategy on the ground is as i described. mr. langevin: are we trying to artificially hold together iraq? sec. carter: i believe there are indications there can be a decentralized but multi-sectarian but unitarian iraq, the path the prime minister says he is on. the fact others say he is on. i think we should give them a chance. sectarianism is not a good outcome. mr. langevin: thank you. committee member: thank you for your service and what you are doing to protect our country. i have a question building o