|
Human
Events...
EPA to
Regulate Dirt
by Jarrett Stepman
10/26/2011
House
members of the Energy and
Commerce Committee bickered about the definition of dust in a hearing
about a
Republican bill to stop overreaching Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)
regulations.
Democrats
at the hearing on the Farm
Dust Regulation Act of 2011, sponsored by Rep. Kristi Noem (R.-S.D.),
fired a
number of vicious shots at the the bill, calling it merely a red
herring. They
claimed that the EPA doesn’t regulate
dust at all, and that the wording of the bill was intended to strip the
EPA’s
power to regulate other destructive particulates, such as soot from
urban
factories.
Republicans
claimed that the bill
would prevent future EPA dust regulation that is currently on the books
from
strangling farmers and businesses with red tape, and that the current
regulations hurt farmers and increase the headache and cost of
compliance.
Rep.
Harry Waxman (D.-Calif.) summed
up the Democrat opposition with some over-the-top rhetoric: “Today’s hearing considers
yet another bill
to allow more air pollution, more asthma and more heart attacks. And once again, it’s a
bait and switch.”
Waxman
also said that the bill would
have “sweeping environmental effects,” and that stopping the regulation
of dust
is “pure fantasy.”
“EPA
does not regulate farming
practices to reduce dust, and has expressed no intention of doing so in
the
future,” said Waxman.
Rep.
Ed Markey (D.-Mass.) compared HR
1633 to an Internet hoax spread to gin up anger about a fake e-mail tax
increase, and then compared it to a bill regulating fairy dust.
“Just
like the e-mail tax hoax, there
is no plan to regulate farm dust any more than there is to regulate
fairy dust.
There is no attempt to accomplish that goal,” said Markey.
Although
Democrats insisted that the
bill was just a fantasy based on trumped-up, imaginary regulation,
backers of
the bill said otherwise.
Rep.
John Shimkus (R.-Ill.) asked
Noem, who was on the panel of witnesses, “How many agricultural groups
are in
support of this bill?”
Noem
answered, “Over 100.”
Shimkus
then said, “Are they just
crazy? They have
nothing else to worry
about but just the EPA?”
“Waxman
continued to say over and over
that their dust is not regulated, and it is.
The EPA does regulate dust, and the [EPA]
staff considered tightening
those standards,” Noem continued.
“When
he says there is no concern, there is valid concern in rural America.
One
of the agricultural groups that is
supporting the bill, the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG),
wrote a
letter to the committee last month, saying that a slight raise in
overall
particulate matter standards would require the EPA to regulate farm
dirt under
the current standards.
“And,
for what purpose? Scientific
studies have never shown rural
dust to be a health concern at ambient levels,” said the NAWG letter.
In
her written testimony, Noem
explains exactly how the EPA regulates dust.
“Under current law, the EPA’s standards
include all types of dust,
including dust generated from agricultural activities and the dust that
is
typical of rural areas. This
type of
dust is naturally occurring and includes soil, windblown dust, and dust
coming
from dirt roads. I
call it farm dust.”
“Farmers
and ranchers that are already
subject to the standard for dust in ‘nonattainment’ areas like Arizona
know its
impact on businesses,” explained Noem.
In Arizona, it can cost some producers over
$1,000 per day to comply
with dust standards.”
Read
this and other articles at Human
Events
|
