Rahall Legislates that Water Stop at State Lines. Seriously.

Yesterday evening the House of Representatives passed The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act (HR 2018), a bill that turns back the clock forty years on the environmental and public health protections in the Clean Water Act. This brazen attack on public protections is the closest big industrial polluters have ever come to completely gutting laws that protect Americans’ ability to access clean water.

Colorado Democratic Representative Jared Polis perhaps said it best:

“Let’s not fool ourselves, the bill before us today isn’t just about the role of federal government, the bill isn’t just a push for state sovereignty; rather, this bill would satisfy two very niche special interests at the cost of the American public. This bill is designed to benefit mountaintop coal mining companies and large factory farms.”

Polis is, of course, absolutely right. Meanwhile, cowards like Nick Rahall keep up this charade that this is somehow about “protecting Appalachian jobs.” Inconveniently for them, there are facts. The FACTS ARE: Mining jobs in Central Appalachia have increased since the MOU because companies are doing less mountaintop removal and relying more on underground mining. Underground mining employs more people.

We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again: There IS an attack on mining jobs in Central Appalachia, and its called mountaintop removal.

The Votes
There were several recorded votes. One for the final bill, once on the motion to recommit, and then 6 amendments related to protecting clean water. I’ve excluded the Capito amendment, because the politics around that will be substantially different. Most Democrats voted FOR these pro-water amendments, and most Republicans voted AGAINST these pro-water amendments. We’ll note the variation below.

Lets look at the vote on final passage first.
(HR 2018 Mica-Rahall: Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act”)

Ds voting Aye: Altmire, Baca, Barrow, Boren, Boswell, Cardoza, Costa, Costello, Critz, Cuellar, Holden Matheson, McIntyre, Rahall, Ross, Peterson
Rs voting Nay: Dold, Fitzpatrick, Flake, Hayworth (NY), Johnson (IL), Lance, LoBiondo, Reichert, Riggell, Smith (NJ), Wittman, Wolf, Young (FL)

For brevity’s sake (and because HTML tables take forever to make) The other amendments were Jackson-Lee (1 – 2), Carnahan, Blumenauer, Connolly, and Polis.

So, between all of these votes and the amendment votes on HR 1 earlier this year, a clearer picture is beginning to emerge of where politicians stand on protecting water quality in this country. Generally, most Democrats have voted for what we would call environmental protection. There have been 11 votes when a meaningful number of them have bucked their party and voted against protecting clean water. These are listed below. Generally, most Republicans have opposed what we would call environmental protection. There have been 8 votes when a meaningful number of them have bucked their party and voted to protect clean water. These are listed below.

*please click to “embiggen” table

So, for instance, Republicans Chris Smith, Tim Johnson, and Mike Fitzpatrick have cast 8 of 8 “good” votes in favor of protecting clean water. Democrats Boren, Critz, Holden, Matheson, Rahall, and Ross have cast 11 of 11 “bad” votes in favor of eliminating protections for clean water.

By Meg Holden
A journalist and editor with a keen eye for detail, Meg served as AV’s Communications Intern for summer 2011.

Memory loss. Muscle weakness. Mood swings. Kidney failure. Death.

It sounds like a doctor’s report on an aging patient, and it could well be. But these are also symptoms of mercury exposure, which affects everyone—especially children.

We all know that coal is the single biggest contributor to air pollution in the United States. We’ve read the pamphlets, watched the videos, and heard the statistics. We’ve been shocked, appalled, and disgusted—but we don’t have to be resigned to watching coal-fired power plants poison our air, water, and families. We can take action.

The EPA has recently proposed stronger regulations for mercury, arsenic, and lead—all poisonous to humans—as well as acid gases and other air pollutants. The new national standards would keep 91 percent of the mercury in coal from polluting our air and water.

A coal-fired power plant in Virginia

In a world where one coal plant can produce 170 pounds of mercury in a year, this is not only desirable, but crucial to our national health. The amount of mercury in an old-fashioned thermometer—1/70th of a teaspoon—can contaminate a 25-acre lake. Limiting the amount of mercury and other pollutants that coal-fired power plants can release into our air is a vital step toward ending coal’s black grip on our lives.

The EPA’s proposed regulations will prevent huge amounts of toxic gases and particulates from entering our air and waterways. According to the EPA, the regulations will prevent

“as many as 17,000 premature deaths and 11,000 heart attacks a year. The new proposed standards would also provide particular health benefits for children, preventing 120,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 11,000 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children each year. The proposed standards would also avert more than 12,000 emergency room visits and hospital admissions and 850,000 fewer days of work missed due to illness.”

The health costs associated with the life cycle of coal, from mining to processing to burning to disposal- are huge; the total is over 345 million dollars, according to a study by Harvard University.

But coal companies don’t want to emissions regulated, and they’re doing everything they can to weaken the final rule. Some groups with special interest in coal are saying that the pollution from coal power plants aren’t harmful to humans. American Electric Power claims that the new regulations will result in the closure of five power plants and a loss of 600 jobs.

“…We will have to prematurely shut down nearly 25 percent of our current coal-fueled generating capacity, cut hundreds of good power-plant jobs, and invest billions of dollars in capital to retire, retrofit, and replace coal-fueled power plants,” AEP chairman and CEO Mike Morris said. “The sudden increase in electricity rates and impacts on state economies will be significant at a time when people and states are still struggling.”

That’s right, Mike, people and states are still struggling. Struggling to breathe the heavy metal- and particulate-laden air that coal-fired power plants emit daily. Struggling to pay the medical bills for their parents, siblings, and children who have been exposed to mercury and other poisons. Struggling to find a safer, cleaner way to provide for their families.

And if you are concerned about jobs and the economy, you would support EPA’s regulations, as they tend to create jobs. A study by CERES and Political Economy Research Institute of the University of Massachusetts shows that this regulation plus the Clean Air Transport Rule (CATR), a program aimed at smog- and soot-forming pollution, will create over 290,000 jobs.

Help stop the economic and public health struggle. Show your support for the EPA’s regulations on air pollutants.