Nelson warns EPA overreach could harm Nebraska's economy

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson warned in a speech on the Senate floor that U.S. Environmental Protection Agency overreach on regulating carbon emissions could substantially raise Nebraskans' electricity rates and damage the state's economy. Nelson's comments came as he spoke in support of the Murkowski Resolution of Disapproval he cosponsored aiming to curb the EPA regulations. Many groups representing Nebraska's agriculture sector, energy users, manufacturers and businesses support Nelson's position on the resolution, scheduled for a vote later today.

"I am supporting this resolution to protect the Nebraska economy, and our nation's economy, from EPA overreach. It's that simple," Senator Nelson said in his floor speech. "I want to send a clear message: Nebraska's farmers, ranchers, business owners, cities, towns and hundreds of thousands of electricity consumers should not have their economic fortunes determined by unelected bureaucrats in Washington.

"Just because somebody's frustrated with the pace of action in Congress doesn't mean the EPA should become a super-legislative body."

The resolution would prevent the expansion of EPA authority to include the ability to regulate greenhouse gasses under the Clean Air Act. Its intent is to allow Congress to write the new regulations curbing carbon emissions, and does not change existing pollution controls in the Clean Air Act.

"I have no doubt that carbon emissions should be reduced in the U.S, but not through excessively costly EPA regulations or a complicated cap and trade proposal that could spur speculation that enriches Wall Street, while not cleaning their air above Main Street. In my view, greenhouse gas emissions should be reduced through a comprehensive energy bill -- one that promotes efficiency, innovation, new technology, and renewable energy such as wind and biofuels that can be produced in Nebraska's fields," said Senator Nelson in his floor speech.

The Murkowski Disapproval Resolution is supported by agriculture, business, manufacturing, and energy groups in Nebraska and across the country including: Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation, Nebraska Cattlemen, Nebraska Corn Growers Association, Nebraska Dry Bean Growers Association, Nebraska Soybean Association, Nebraska Wheat Board, Nebraska Wheat Growers Association, Nebraska Public Power District, Omaha Public Power District, Lincoln, Electric System, Nebraska Rural Electric Association, Tri-State Generation and Transmission, MidAmerican Energy, Nucor Corporation, CHS Inc., US Chamber of Commerce, Associated General Contractors of America, National Association of Manufacturers, and the North American Die Casting Association.

Michael D. Kelsey, Executive Vice President, Nebraska Cattlemen said: "The Nebraska Cattlemen appreciate Senator Ben Nelson's support in voting to protect beef producers from cumbersome EPA regulations. We believe that EPA is trying to go beyond their delegated authority which is why this resolution is very necessary."

Lori Luebbe, Executive Director, Nebraska Soybean Association said: "The Nebraska Soybean Association is concerned with the costs and adverse impacts on soybean producers and related industries that will result from the enactment of greenhouse gas regulations on the U.S. energy and industrial sectors. We must ensure that agriculture remains economically viable and that U.S. soybean producers can compete with foreign production."

Ron Asche, President of the Nebraska Power Association said: "We appreciate Senator Nelson's support for the Murkowski Disapproval Resolution as we believe this is clearly in the best economic interests of Nebraska's electricity consumers."

Dirk Petersen, Vice President/General Manager of Nucor Steel Nebraska said: "Nucor commends Senator Nelson for his vote to save American manufacturing jobs by preventing EPA from regulating greenhouse gases."

Doyle Hopper, Vice President/General Manager of Vulcraft and Nucor Cold Finish Nebraska said: "Nucor's over 900 employees in Nebraska would be subject to job-killing, higher energy costs if EPA regulates greenhouse gases. The vote cast by Senator Nelson is essential to preserve the competitiveness of America's steel industry, especially when our competitors in China, Russia, and Brazil would not be subject to similar restrictions."

Keith Olsen, President of the Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation said: "How carbon emissions should be regulated is a matter to be decided by elected officials; that debate is now ongoing on Capitol Hill. It is there that these policy questions should be answered."

A video of the floor speech is available on Senator Nelson's YouTube page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iY1pqodFDY

The full text of Senator Nelson's floor statement as prepared for delivery:

Madam President:

Today, I rise to speak in support of a bipartisan Resolution of Disapproval offered by my colleague, Senator Murkowski. And out of concern about a serious, harmful impact on Nebraska's economy that could result if the Environmental Protection Agency moves ahead with its plans to regulate carbon emissions in our country.

While I'll outline some of that impact in a moment, I want to first explain why I'm supporting the resolution. I am supporting it to protect the Nebraska economy, and our nation's economy, from EPA overreach. It's that simple.

I want to send a clear message: Nebraska's farmers, ranchers, business owners, cities, towns and hundreds of thousands of electricity consumers should not have their economic fortunes determined by unelected bureaucrats in Washington.

Finding a national consensus on how to control the levels of carbon emissions is the job of the elected members of Congress. Reducing carbon emissions will have a substantial economic impact on our country, but in different ways for different states. Congress should take the lead in determining the rules that will apply.

Just because somebody's frustrated with the pace of action in Congress doesn't mean the EPA should become a super-legislative body.

Much has been said about the impact of this resolution, but, in reality, it does only this: It seeks to bar the EPA from implementing the Clean Air Act in ways Congress--and by extension the American people--may not support. It doesn't change the Clean Air Act. It says Congress should write the new rules curbing carbon emissions.

The reason this is important can be found in what I've heard from many Nebraskans about the impact of the EPA's proposed carbon emissions regulations.

For nearly two years -- since the EPA's initial Proposed Rulemaking for Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act in July 2008--I have heard from Nebraskans.

Many agricultural, industrial and energy-related businesses and organizations in my state have warned that the EPA regulations will impose substantial new costs on farmers, ranchers, small businesses, communities and users of electricity. EPA regulations would impose a top-down government-directed regime that would raise the price of energy in Nebraska, add greatly to administrative costs, and create new layers of bureaucracy.

While no one can say how much-- because even the EPA doesn't know yet what requirements will be imposed on power suppliers --the cost in Nebraska will be significant.

Regulated entities such as Nebraska's Public Power two companies --which provide electricity directly to 1.34 million Nebraskans in a state of 1.7 million residents--would be subject to an inflexible regulatory process. It would require new permits to be acquired before facilities are built or modified, and before Best Available Control Technology is purchased, installed, and operated.

The application process for a single EPA permit for a new or modified source could cost the applicant hundreds of thousands of dollars and require more than 300 person-hours for a regulatory agency.

In Nebraska today, coal serves as our primary fuel source to produce electricity. We also have a great potential to move to renewable energy resources such as wind. But the EPA's regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions would force a move to other fuel alternatives at rate that would substantially increase the cost of electricity for consumers in our state.

Soaring electricity rates would have a detrimental impact on many businesses and manufacturers. One of them is Nucor Steel in Norfolk, one of the largest users of electricity in Nebraska.

If you couple the electricity rate increase with new regulations and review process for companies like Nucor to make major modifications to an existing facility or build a new facility, you have a recipe for trouble. EPA regulation of greenhouse gases would have chilling effect on new investment in our nation's manufacturing sector that we are just beginning to see come around from the economic downturn.

Further, these new regulatory costs are not limited to our utility consumers and manufacturers. They could devastate Nebraska's Number One industry: Agriculture.

According the Nebraska Farm Bureau, the EPA has estimated that 37,000 farms in my state emit more Greenhouse Gas Emissions than the Clean Air Act threshold levels allow. Permits generally cost more than $23,000, so the regulations could add $886 million in costs to our farmers.

Not only will our farms bear additional bureaucratic costs, but they will be put at a disadvantage in the global market place.

The Nebraska Soybean Association notes that every other row of our state's soybean crop is exported. The EPA's new regulations will put commodities such as Nebraska-produced soybeans at a disadvantage to our foreign competitors who are not subject to similar burdensome regulations.

Earlier this year, in his State of the Union address, the President called for doubling our exports over the next five years to create more jobs in America. That goal is at cross purposes with allowing new regulations to go forward that will hamstring our producers as they try to compete in the global marketplace.

Additionally, the Nebraska Corn Growers point out that the increase in the bureaucratic costs to farms will boost agriculture input costs. With that, our nation's farms will not even be competitive with foreign producers here at home. That, then, in turn will lead to more foreign dependence and less security for the U.S. food and fuels supply.

This strikes me as the possibly the biggest negative consequence of the EPA getting out ahead of Congress. As I pointed out time and time again during debate on the 2008 Farm Bill:

"If you love that we are dependent on other nations for our energy needs, you'll love even more relying on other nations for our food."

I am aware that some have argued that support of this Resolution is an attack on the Clean Air Act. Some say that if the resolution passes it would lead to an even greater reliance on oil leading to more situations like the spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

I am not going to go for a smokescreen argument against the Murkowski resolution.

The resolution would only prevent an unwarranted and ill-advised expansion of the Clean Air Act's implementation. Every current standard and control for air pollution would be preserved exactly intact, as written and authorized by Congress.

Now, I have no doubt that carbon emissions should be reduced in the U.S. But not through excessively costly EPA regulations or a complicated cap and trade proposal that could spur speculation that enriches Wall Street, while not cleaning their air above Main Street.

In my view, Greenhouse Gas emissions should be reduced through a comprehensive energy bill. One that promotes efficiency, innovation, new technology, and renewable energy such as wind and biofuels that can be produced in Nebraska's fields. An energy bill should help --not harm-- Nebraska and the American economy as it cleans up the air.

By pursuing that kind of a sound energy policy we will take important steps toward ending our reliance on energy from areas that can be unstable such as the Middle East, South America and Africa. Instead, we can create our own American energy from the sun, the wind and the biofuels available throughout the Midwest, and across our great land.

I believe there is bipartisan support for this type of comprehensive energy bill. I hope we can turn our attention to it soon.

We should work together on legislation that enables our agricultural and manufacturing industries to grow -- rather than wilt under layers of unilateral and bureaucratic EPA directives.

When Congress takes the lead in that manner, Nebraska families, farmers and businesses will prosper, and so will America.

I yield the floor.