The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE IMPACTS OF COAL” mentioning the Department of Interior was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H5574-H5580 on July 28, 2015.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE IMPACTS OF COAL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 6, 2015, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
General Leave
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the topics of this Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from West Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, tonight, we want to talk about these three subjects as it relates to coal. You have already heard recent remarks made a few minutes ago about the war on coal, but we want to talk about the impacts of coal, the regulations, and the Clean Power Plan. That is what we are going to be talking about tonight are these three primary subjects.
I want to put things in perspective. We want to talk about how does this coal industry--you hear us, many of us that come from coal country, we have been fighting about coal, fighting for coal--why do we do that?
Look at the impact. For those of you that aren't coming from a coal community, now, we mine coal in 27 States, but just look at this, the impact, what it has--between coal mining at $58 billion a year and then the generation of power from coal totals $142 billion.
Now, maybe that doesn't mean a lot to a lot, but $142 billion, put that in context with the automobile industry. All of us are familiar with cars. We all hear the commercials on television. We know about the discussion about how you have got to have the latest car.
This is bigger than the car industry. The automobile industry is $130 billion. That is why many of us, all across this country, are concerned about this future of the coal industry. It is larger than the automobile industry. I want you to understand that. Everyone should make sure they grasp the impact of that.
This war on coal that many of us have been talking about for some time, I want to make sure that people understand how it affects us individually and affects a State like West Virginia.
{time} 1845
Just 7 years ago the unemployment rate in West Virginia was the seventh best in the country. But after 7 years of a war on coal, after regulation after regulation after regulation, West Virginia's unemployment rate now has dropped and we are in the last place in the Nation.
Think about that impact for all of us. You go from number 7 to 50th in just 7 years. Combine that with the families of our coal miners. Just in the past 3 years, 45 percent of the coal miners in West Virginia have lost their jobs, 45 percent. These are people. These are real people. They are not statistics.
The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) uses this chart. He has shown us over the years--my 5 years in Congress--he showed us that these are the people we are talking about all over this country who are losing their jobs.
But in West Virginia, 45 percent of them have lost--in the coalfields of West Virginia, the unemployment rate is staggering, and that hasn't stopped the administration.
We are talking about unemployment rates in counties two and three times the rate of the national figures: 13.5 percent, 13 percent, 12 percent, 10 percent. That is tough for a family, a community, a State, all to be able to survive.
We keep talking about mines shutting down. I want people to understand, when you shut down coal mines, you really affect a community. These people all have families. When these men lose their jobs, it affects other people.
The administration and the EPA can shut down our coal mining industry. Yes, they can. They are doing a pretty good job of it, if that was their intent, was to shut down and for people to lose their jobs.
But think about it. When these men lose their jobs, it is not just the coal miners who are losing their jobs. It is the other individuals in the community.
We are talking about the railroad workers, the barge operators, the trucking industry, all that come to pick up the coal at the mine to take it to the power plant.
The machinists, the concrete suppliers, the people that put the conveyor belts in, and the building that we have to do with it, all of them lose their jobs. The timber industry.
Then go outside and talk to the school board when the school boards are struggling to make ends meet because so many of their employers are gone and their tax base is eroded with it. But, also, go to the grocery store and find out that is the impact. Grocery stores, pharmacies, restaurants, apartment buildings.
We have got a map that shows, again, the impact of this as we get into this. We have got several speakers here tonight to talk more about it.
This is a location of all the power plants across America. There are over 500 coal-fired plants operating today around this country.
But just in the last month the Sierra Club, Bloomberg, Earthjustice, and all have been touting the fact that they want by the year 2017 to take one-third of those red dots off the map.
Almost a third of our capacity to generate electricity can be gone because of the rules and the way some of the environmental groups are pursuing this. One-third of them.
Now, in terms of grid reliability with this, you have to deal with what they have talked about. If we continue to shut down coal-fired power plants and don't replace them, whether that is with wind, solar, or gas, our grid reliability is going to be in question.
How many times are we going to lose our power? FERC has already said that, if we don't do something by 2017, they are saying the Midwest is going to start experiencing rolling blackouts. So let's be careful with this.
I am going to stop now. We have tried to frame some of the argument about this history of how we got to this point that you are seeing the frustration in Congress. But I wanted to put that again in context.
This industry is bigger than the automobile industry, but we don't have the big communities. We don't have the Detroits and the Grand Rapids. We just have Farmington, Lumberport, small towns that make up the backbone of rural America. That is what we are trying to fight for.
I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson) for his comments.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Thank you to my colleague for yielding.
You made a comment just a minute about, you know, we don't have the Detroits, we don't have the New Yorks, we don't have the big cities in coal country.
We may not have those big cities in coal country, but I guarantee you those big cities get some of their electricity from the coal that is produced by the coal miners that live in our region.
Over the past 5 years, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation has spent more than $10 million of its budget to pursue a wholesale rewrite of one of the agency's regulatory programs.
Dubbed the ``stream protection rule'' by the agency, this massive regulatory undertaking has little to do with protecting streams and much more to do with riding roughshod over State regulatory programs.
This rule rewrite means more Americans will be out of work and that electricity bills of hard-working families could increase.
As OSM's related draft environmental impact statement indicates, the Appalachian Basin, home to thousands of Ohioans who depend on the coal industry for their livelihood, to put food on their table, to put clothes on their children, to send their children to school, could see as many as 450 production-related jobs lost per year, with potential adverse impacts of $37 million annually.
This appears to be of little concern to the administration, as Interior Secretary Sally Jewell was recently quoted as characterizing the job loss in coal country associated with this rule rewrite as
``minor.''
I invite Secretary Jewell to join me on a trip to any coal mine in Ohio and directly tell the hard-working miners--look them in the eye and tell them that this new rule has only minor impacts.
I will clear my schedule, and I will be available any day, anytime, to go with her if she wants to come there.
Furthermore, this regulation omits and ignores the relevant input from those stakeholders with the most expertise in regulating mining, the States who have been doing it for years.
In fact, 9 of the 10 States originally involved in the rules development have withdrawn their support due to OSM's exclusionary tactics.
This is unacceptable, and it is why I urge the House to consider H.R. 1644, the STREAM Act, as soon as possible.
Introduced by my colleague from West Virginia, Alex Mooney, the STREAM Act would direct the administration to conduct a comprehensive study of the effectiveness of the Stream Buffer Zone Rule that has been in place since 1983. We have been doing this for a long time and protecting streams in the process.
While this study occurs, a prohibition on the promulgation of new rules addressing the stream protection or stream buffers will be implemented to ensure that the Secretary incorporates the findings of the study into any future rulemaking.
This is just one example, Mr. McKinley, of the regulatory overreach of this administration and its devastating impacts on coal miners, on families that depend on the coal industry for their livelihoods, and the businesses that depend on cost-affordable, reliable electricity across our country.
I appreciate you giving me the time to share that.
Mr. McKINLEY. Thank you. You have been one of our stalwarts in pushing this legislation for all 5 years you have been here on this.
So I know people across this country recognize the work that you are doing on behalf of the coal miners and this whole industry.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. I am proud to be on your team.
Mr. McKINLEY. We have a host of other folks here to address the issue. We have got this chart up. Eventually, we are going to get to that in the next part of it.
But what we are talking about here is here are all the regulations. These are all the regulations that are affecting the coal industry, the manufacturing industry, all promulgated from the Clean Air Act. We will get to that in a minute. But, in the meantime, let's hear from some more individuals.
I yield to the gentleman from the Third District of West Virginia
(Mr. Jenkins).
Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Congressman McKinley, thank you for your leadership as chair of the Coal Caucus. It does great work. I am honored to be a part of it, and I am honored to work with you.
Mr. Speaker, as you well know and as the people of America need to know, we are at a critical point in this war on coal, and it truly is a war on coal.
Coal is vital to the people of West Virginia and to West Virginia's economy and to this country. Coal supports many crucial investments in southern West Virginia, in my congressional district.
Its revenues help support tourism, roads, and infrastructure. It will make King Coal Highway a reality and make sure we do not have a bridge to nowhere, like we already have in southern West Virginia.
Coal puts food on the table. Coal pays the bills. Coal supports families. Coal generates the revenue that provides for our roads, our schools, our police, and our fire departments. Coal keeps the lights on.
But, sadly, this administration doesn't recognize the value of coal or of the people who work to mine it. They are proposing regulation after regulation to make it harder to mine coal, harder to burn coal, and harder to produce affordable energy from coal.
We have lost an estimated 43 percent of our coal jobs in just the last 6 years. While that is a sobering number, it is more than a statistic.
Each one of those employees has responsibilities. They have bills. They have families. They have rent or house payments. How will they provide for themselves and others without their coal jobs?
We must stand up for West Virginia jobs, West Virginia energy, and West Virginia coal. That is exactly what I am doing in Congress as a member of the House Appropriations Committee.
At one hearing, I did ask EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy to come to West Virginia and listen to us. She declined. So I brought Logan County coal miners to Washington to testify before Congress.
They shared how coal provides good paychecks to support their families and how they are worried overregulation will put them out of work.
I am working in Congress to ensure our miners will be able to provide for their families and that our State still has access to affordable domestic energy. I will continue to fight each and every day.
Thank you for your leadership.
Mr. McKINLEY. Thank you for your comments.
Before we go to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Congressman Kelly, I just wanted to add, because you talked about education, that the Duke Energy plant over in New Richmond, Ohio--the closure of that cost them
$1.5 million out of their school system, out of their property taxes, with that.
You are absolutely right when we talk about the impact it is going to have on schools when we start depriving that.
But then you have FirstEnergy's Albright plant. They lost $380,000. The AEP plant over in Lockbourne, Ohio, is $406,000.
This is real money that is hurting the communities. It is depriving our school systems of money, all pushing an ideology. So thank you for joining this fight.
I yield now to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, it is about time. Time is running out. I think right now we look at what is happening in coal country and nothing could be more alarming than what is happening.
This is one promise the President kept. When he ran as a candidate, he said: You can continue to generate electric power by burning coal. But if you decide to go that way, we will bankrupt you. That is one promise he has kept.
Now, in Pennsylvania alone, coal is responsible for over 40,000 jobs and 40 percent of our electric power. The Associated Press calls it the workhorse of America's power system.
But the extreme overreach by the EPA is threatening jobs and forcing energy costs for families and manufacturers to skyrocket, which hurts every single American. That is something I think the general public has to understand.
While maybe they don't go down in those mines and while maybe they don't bring that precious product out from underneath the ground and while maybe they don't work in a coal-fired power plant, one thing they do know is, when they hit that switch to turn on the power, it is reliable because of coal.
Coal has always been the standard. Coal has always driven the fact that we not only have coal that is abundant, we have coal that is accessible and we have coal that is very affordable.
{time} 1900
Why in the world would we go away from this workhorse of America's power system? That is one of the reasons we reintroduced the Coal Country Protection Act; that is H.R. 2637.
It is just a commonsense bill that would stop any EPA regulations from affecting America's power plants until four outcomes are achieved: number one, no job losses; number two, no loss in GDP or economic growth; number three, no higher electric rates; and, number four, no interruption in the reliable delivery of electrical energy. These are pretty commonsense goals.
Now, who would be able to verify that or who would certify? Well, the Secretary of Labor could do it; the Congressional Budget Office could do it; the Energy Information Administration could do it; the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission could do it, and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation could do it.
You said about time. It is about time, but it is time not just for the coal country people to stand up and fight for coal; it is time for the whole country to stand up and fight for coal. It is well past the midnight hour.
As we continue to shut down mines and lose jobs and shut down communities and raise people's electric rates and then people at home sit back and wonder: What are they doing in Washington? Why do they continue to hurt us at every turn?
The answer is the people making some of this policy have never done what you have done; they have never walked in your shoes; they have never had to do what we have done in coal country to protect electric power.
Why in the world would we do this now at a time when the country is looking for jobs, at a time when the country is looking for less dependence on foreign nations for energy? Why now? Why, Mr. President? Why continue to push in the direction you have been pushing?
The bottom line is this is just not about coal country; this is about our whole country.
Mr. McKinley, I would like to thank you for fighting this fight. The 5 years we have been here together, this has been something we fought to go every day in every way and will continue to do.
It is time now for the people in America to also be heard. Please do not sit in silence and suffer in silence when your voices need to be heard. We need to have everybody standing up for coal, standing up for the production of electricity that is affordable and reliable, and we just need to look at where we are going and say: My goodness, the people we sent to represent us, the people we sent to protect us, it is time for them to stand up and do exactly what they took a pledge to do.
I thank you for all your efforts. I thank my colleagues for being here tonight. This is something we will never give up on, we will never walk away from. It has come to our shoulders. We can't ever walk away from it because it is not an option.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, I think one of the biggest shortcomings here is I don't think other Members of Congress and I don't think the American public understand the magnitude of this industry. That is why I started off with that chart, to show you that between the coal and the coal-fired electrical plants, it is larger than the automobile industry.
Now, just walk with me, just imagine that if we told the automobile industry that they had to cut back one-third of their capacity of cars, but that is okay, they are going to say, because what we do is people will ride bikes or they will take the train or the bus. That is not our culture in America. They would fight back, too.
You and I are fighting--and the rest of these people that represent our coal fields. We have enjoyed the cost of electricity coming from low cost because of coal. In America, all across, we showed 49 of the 50 States burn coal--49--and this administration wants to stop that, wants to cut back.
I would say, if you are going to cut back the coal industry, then look at the automobile industry as well; if you are going to go after one huge component of our economy, go after the automobile industry as well with it.
Thank you very much for what you said.
We talked about a lot. Now, let's continue on.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gibbs).
I think Congressman Gibbs from Ohio, I think you had some remarks you wanted to make.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for holding this Special Order on this very important topic.
In the very near future, this affects every Ohioan across the country, but very soon, the EPA is expected to release its Clean Power Plan. This is just another burdensome regulatory scheme that will increase energy costs.
The Energy Information Administration--that is the government agency dedicated to the impartial analysis of data--reported it will cause the price of electricity rates to rise for consumers.
Ohio families are already stretching their budgets as much as they can, struggling to make ends meet. Raising their monthly electric bills is just going to make their struggle worse.
Earlier this month, the House passed the Ratepayer Protection Act, as you know, to stop the implementation of a clean power plan while the courts address the legal challenges to the plan and give Ohioans a break from the EPA's heavy-handed regulations.
Sadly, the EPA's refusal to listen to the public and industry input is not without precedent. When considering the redefinition of waters of the United States rule, the agencies did not take into account the opinions of their State partners. Within hours, 27 States and countless organizations filed lawsuits challenging the rule.
Additionally, at the end of June, the Supreme Court found that the EPA failed to consider compliance costs when proposing new rules for power plants.
If the EPA continues to push forward with this plan, it will only hurt those who want reliable, affordable energy. It is time to set aside partisan agendas.
I encourage the EPA to start from scratch and work with the stakeholders and industry partners to create a commonsense plan that strengthens our energy infrastructure and safeguards our environment.
Again, Congressman McKinley, I thank you for holding this Special Order today--and Mr. Speaker--because this affects a large region of our country. I know you talked about, what, 400 coal-fired plants across the country.
This is important to our economy, and you have to have reliable and affordable energy for businesses to grow and create jobs. This Clean Power Plan is going to lay around and strangle our businesses and put people out of work across the Midwest and across my State in Ohio.
I thank you for doing this tonight.
Mr. McKINLEY. Thank you very much. Thank you for bringing up the Ratepayer Protection Act because, as you know, after we followed the MATS rule, after the Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional, you didn't hear the President complain because they had effectively accomplished everything they wanted before that rule.
I am afraid that is why the importance of this Ratepayer Protection Act is because, if we continue to shut down our coal power plants and deprive our communities of taxpayer moneys to run our schools, then that winds up--if it is ruled unconstitutional later on, then how do we recover the moneys that we have lost? Can we reopen a school that was closed because a community lost its operation? Do we recover? How do we recover that? That is why it is important.
I am really glad you brought up the Ratepayer Protection Act because we need to make sure that the courts have ruled before the action is taken. You and I are going to be paying more for our utility bills as a result of that if and until it is ruled unconstitutional. We know it is coming; they know it is coming. Thank you for bringing that up.
Our next remarks we have are from one of our--I can't say one of our newest Members, but he is a Member from Kentucky that has been very outspoken. I appreciate very much Congressman Barr from Kentucky.
Can you share some thoughts tonight?
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr).
Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman, my colleague and friend, from West Virginia for his leadership in the Congressional Coal Caucus, to my colleagues from Pennsylvania and Ohio, and all over the country representing coal-producing States where good people--men and women--working in the coal mines literally power America.
They come from an industry--they work in the coal mines; they support the coal miners--an industry that provides affordable and reliable energy that powers the American economy and has been the backbone of the American economy.
Instead of celebrating that industry, instead of applauding the heroic work that these men and women do, day in and day out, underground and above ground, what is the response of the Federal Government over the last 6 years? It has been to singularly punish this industry.
I can't think of an administration from either party in the history of the United States that has singled out a single industry with the level of vindictiveness, frankly, and targeted a single industry and literally bankrupted many of these companies.
I don't understand it for a variety of reasons, but let me just share with you a little bit about the coal industry in Kentucky. We could very well be the poster child for demonstrating the tremendous negative impact and the consequences of this heartless, aggressive, anticoal policy from the EPA and from this administration's regulatory policy.
Since 2009, the Commonwealth of Kentucky has lost more than 8,000 coal mining jobs throughout our State. For every one coal mining job, three additional jobs are directly tied to every coal mining job. This is a direct result of the administration's war on coal.
Sure, there are competitive pressures from natural gas, and we celebrate the fracking boom and the result of discoveries in natural gas, but I can tell you what the coal industry says. It is not cheap natural gas that is the cause of these lost jobs; it is the fact that the Federal Government has put its heavy hand of regulatory power on the scales to make this industry noncompetitive.
Just to give you a sample of the problem, in the first quarter of 2015 alone, Kentucky's coal employment numbers dropped another 10\1/2\ percent.
What does that mean in total? Coal production in Kentucky has decreased to its lowest level since 1963. In 2015, production levels are currently half of what they were just two decades ago; yet demand for energy in the United States has suddenly increased.
There are more than just statistics, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to talking about the face of the war on coal. Many of my colleagues have shared these stories about what this really means, what all of these regulations really mean in the real world. It is not statistics on a page; it is not about coal production percentages on decline.
What it is really about, it is about Sally, the young woman in Wolfe County, Kentucky, that I met with tears in her eyes at the end of a townhall meeting.
She came to me as her Congressman and she said: Do they know what they are doing to our family? My husband lost his job because the coal mining employer that he works for didn't get a permit, and so now, he is out of work. Don't those people in Washington understand that I have got kids? We are going back to school; it is August, and I can't afford shoes for my kids. I had to go to Walmart and buy them flip-flops, just so they wouldn't be embarrassed to go back to school.
Now, I want the regulators in Washington, D.C., to come back to Kentucky, to eastern Kentucky, and meet Sally and look Sally in the eye and ask her to describe to them what the impact of this war on coal is for her.
What about Robert? Robert the coal miner from Wolfe County, Kentucky, in my district, he gets up at 3 a.m. every morning to commute an hour to go to work in the coal mines just to put food on the table.
Or what about James, who looks at me with an incredible expression and says: Andy, don't they understand what they are doing? They are putting people out of work. They are making life harder on the American people. Surely, these are the people who say they are fighting for the working man. I am the working man. Congressman, what are they thinking?
Then you talk about Chris, Chris who says: Congressman, I don't know much about politics; I don't really care much about politics, but if you can go save my job, I am for you. Can't the politicians in Washington fight for people just to go to work and provide for their families? These are paychecks that these people depend on.
Finally, it is Curtis, Curtis who said to me that his father crawled on his belly for decades to take care of his family, and because of his father's hard work, he had opportunities.
This is more than statistics. This is about real people who have been victimized by bureaucrats in Washington who are out of touch--if the bureaucrats in Washington would at least just go to these places--West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky--and look these people in the eye and ask them what they think about their policies.
Worst of all, it is all done in the name of the environment. We all love the environment. These coal miners love the environment. They come from a beautiful part of the country, in Appalachia.
It is not about not wanting to help the environment or environmental stewardship, but what is so sad is that these regulations aren't going to do a darn thing about global carbon emissions.
The Clean Power Plan rule that this administration has proposed would reduce global carbon emissions by less than 1 percent--for what, $8 billion in additional annual cost to our economy and thousands of American families without paychecks.
This is wrong. The Congress of the United States is right to stand up for these families. The Congress of the United States is right to stand up for jobs.
That is why I support all of the legislative work done by this House by these good Members--the STREAM Act from my colleague and friend from West Virginia; the coal residuals bill that the gentleman, the chairman, has championed and done a great job in supporting, my colleague, Ed Whitfield, the chairman of the Energy Subcommittee on the Ratepayer Protection Act; the REINS Act, which we just voted for and passed out of this House, which would stop all of these costly regulations.
{time} 1915
Mr. Speaker, it is time for us to stand up for American jobs, for American energy, and for American-produced coal power. I thank the gentleman for his leadership.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman touched on something that I don't know that our listeners or even the other Members of Congress quite grasp, but the gentleman touched on it in one statement he made. It is the claim that CO2 emissions of the world are the target of our global warming issue.
I will just accept, for discussion purposes, that that is the basis of their war on coal, this ideological fight that we are involved in. I will use the United Nations' statistics--not the Republican caucus', not the coal country's numbers, but the United Nations'.
They say: Congressman Barr, if you were to stop all coal-fired capacity in every school, church, hospital, power station--if we were to stop all burning of coal in America in total so that there became no coal being consumed in America--you would reduce the CO2 emissions of the world by two-tenths of 1 percent.
Mr. BARR. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McKINLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I would also make this point that this is the United States of America.
In the United States of America, we solve problems through entrepreneurship, free enterprise, and innovation. We put a man on the Moon because we are Americans. We believe in freedom, and we believe in innovation.
If there is a problem with carbon emissions and climate change, then we should solve the problem the American way, through fossil energy research. What we should not do is supply a Soviet-style, command-and-
control solution from Washington, which will not solve the problem.
What we need to be doing is exporting American technology to China and India and other countries that have inferior electricity-generating capabilities.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to touch base again before we go to our last speaker.
Again, these are all of the rules. This is the overwhelming number of rules that we are trying to deal with in America in dealing with fossil fuels, from ozone to new source performance standards. I could go on.
There is the regional haze and the greenhouse gas tailoring rule. We have to deal with those. Let me show the impact as already predicted is going to happen. It is that we are going to see higher utility bills. If we want to see that, just keep doing it because that is exactly what is going to happen.
This chart has been produced that shows, just in West Virginia 7 years ago--let's just say for discussion--you had a $100 bill for your monthly electric. Now, because of all of the rules, we are at $160. That is a 60 percent increase in the cost of utilities. Some might argue it is because of the cost of coal. No. The cost of coal has dropped.
The point here is that the power plants--the utilities--are having to put excessive money into the production of electricity to meet some of those rules that we talked about over there. It is coming out of our pockets. Someone is paying for that. You and I are paying for that.
In addition, we are already 60 percent up. Look at Arizona. They are suggesting that the increased cost in Arizona is going to go up 40 percent; in the State of Washington, 37 percent; in California, 24 percent. All we have to ask is: Is this what the consumers want?
Let me show you another chart here.
This talks about where coal is being used. Now, this administration has been very effective in shutting it off. You have heard the horror stories of what has happened in Kentucky. I have heard of some of it in West Virginia. In Ohio, it is the same story--in Indiana, in Illinois. The impact it is having on our industry is destructive. They are destroying the industry. The industry is on its knees now.
But what about overseas?
The International Energy Agency has already indicated that they have a voracious appetite for coal elsewhere outside of America. No one else is following the administration's lead on this idea of this war on coal.
They are still burning coal. They are burning coal every which way they can. Whether it is in China or in India--wherever they are--they are using coal. As a matter of fact, from the year 2000 to 2013, they increased their appetite for coal by 70 percent; but in America, we dropped. It is important to understand where this fight is and what we have to do to fight for the individuals.
Mr. Speaker, as we start to wrap up our discussion tonight about coal and its impact, about the Clean Power Plan and the effective regulations, I yield to the gentleman from the Second District of West Virginia (Mr. Mooney), one of our newest Congressmen.
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman McKinley for his leadership on this issue and in our great State of West Virginia. I thank Congressman Barr for his great comments and for his telling some personal stories about how this affects real Americans from different States.
Mr. Speaker, our great country is blessed with abundant natural resources. Unfortunately, President Obama has made a campaign commitment to destroy coal as a domestic energy source, and he is intent on fulfilling that promise.
Just 2 weeks ago, the Office of Surface Mining, under the Department of the Interior, released its latest set of rules and regulations that will cripple the coal industry not only in West Virginia, but across the country. These new rules and regulations are over 2,500 pages in length.
If you do not know exactly what that looks like, here it is, ladies and gentlemen. It is six folders full of new regulations--2,500 pages. This is what it looks like, okay? The Department of the Interior has given us 60 days to go through this. It is a lot of work. At the very least, a 120-day extension is needed beyond the current 60-day comment period.
I have already joined Chairman Bishop of the Natural Resources Committee, on which I serve, and 43 Members of Congress in sending a letter to the Obama administration, requesting a 120-day extension of the comment period for the recently announced job-killing stream buffer zone regulation right here.
My hard-working staff and I of the Second District of West Virginia have been going through this very hard over the last several days since it came out. We have been trying to look at all of the ridiculous regulations in this bill, and we have come across a couple of things that, I think, are worth pointing out so far.
For instance, on page 1201 of the proposed regulation, it reads:
Ensure that electric power transmission lines and other transmission facilities that are used for or are incidental to surface mining activities on the permit area are designed and constructed to minimize electrocution hazards to raptors and other alien species with large wingspans.
The Office of Surface Mining is worried about protecting raptors and other birds from electrocution, so they have created a special regulation just to prevent that from happening. That is right. Here it is--required. We found on page 1201, buried within thousands of pages of regulations, that coal companies are to build special power lines to prevent ``raptors from getting zapped.''
I wonder if the environmentalists have the same concerns for their own projects. According to the Smithsonian, somewhere between 140,000 and 328,000 birds die each year from flying into wind turbines.
On page 1100 exactly, we have even more new rules here. It reads:
You may not conduct any surface mining activity that is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species listed by the Secretary or proposed for listing by the Secretary or that is likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat in violation of the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
That is a long sentence with a lot of ``ors.'' This absurd regulation would prohibit mining near animals that the Director of the Interior has simply proposed for listing as endangered or as threatened.
It would be one thing to prevent mining operations around animals that are actually endangered, but this regulation goes far, far beyond protecting endangered species. This is a stunning regulatory power grab that an environmental extremist Secretary will use to put miners out of business.
Even more ridiculous is just the heart of this rulemaking, which is to fundamentally change the definition of a ``stream'' to include temporary streams. Temporary streams are, essentially, ditches that fill up with water when it rains, and the water goes away quickly. They are calling them ``streams'' now.
A recent study from the National Center for Mining estimates that these rules will destroy as many as 80,000 coal jobs across the country. My colleague Congressman Andy Barr put some names to those stories of individuals who are losing their jobs. He just referred to them in his remarks, and I appreciate that.
These are hard-working American taxpayers who are simply trying to provide for their families; and these idealistic, extremist regulations are putting them out of work. It is harming families not only in our States of West Virginia and Kentucky, but across the country. These new regulations would be catastrophic to the coal industry and to all of the hard-working American families who depend on coal to keep their energy costs low.
The economy of the Appalachian Region and West Virginia, in particular, are uniquely threatened by these regulations because of our mountainous topography and abundance of small streams.
Industry estimates say this administrative action could mean 45 to 79 percent of the coal reserves in the Appalachia would no longer be usable. The damage from such a critical blow to the industry would create a ripple of hardship in our State.
I think my colleague Congressman McKinley mentioned this already, but over 90 percent of the energy consumed in West Virginia is produced by coal power, and distress in the coal industry will raise home energy prices and business energy costs for everybody. Low-income folks are going to struggle with this.
Furthermore, approximately 60 percent of West Virginia State business tax revenue is derived from coal revenues. A significant decrease in these revenues would put a severe financial strain on the State budget, and it could potentially hurt crucial services in our State, like public schools, State-funded health clinics, and the funding of our law enforcement agencies.
I want to continue to work with my colleagues on the Natural Resources Committee, and I thank my colleague from West Virginia and my colleague from Kentucky for cosponsoring my bill, H.R. 1644. It is also known as the STREAM Act.
I want to first move it swiftly through committee before any real damage can be done by this harmful new rule. It is time that the administration wakes up and realizes that their regulations are hurting hard-working American taxpayers for no good reason.
{time} 1930
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments on that and for bringing up also the Clean Power Plan as we were wrapping up with that.
Because I am intrigued--and maybe the rest of the Members should be as well--with the idea that is being promoted by the senior Senator from Kentucky, which is maybe we should not be so quick to jump on the Clean Power Plan.
The President may very well be overturned on this constitutionally. But if the States implement this voluntarily and impact our schools, our communities, our environment, our health care, our hospitals, by shutting down, we won't be able to recover from that.
So the Senator has come up with an intriguing concept, and that is just say no. It kind of reminds me of Barbara Bush a few years ago.
As a result of that, we already have several States that are either saying no or are deeply and seriously considering saying no.
States like Oklahoma, Indiana, Wisconsin, Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi are not going to jump on this legislation just yet.
The rule, they are coming from the administration because they have seen the strategy here, which is just to use a bullying tactic, push it through, knowing full well 5 or 6 years from now it is going to be overturned in the courts. But we will never get our jobs back.
Those individuals that you were talking about, Congressman Barr, those individuals that came up to you, they are not going to have a job.
They will have left Kentucky. They will have gone someplace else to try to find something else. They are going to be uprooted from their communities.
No, we have to fight. This is the fight now.
I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr).
Mr. BARR. I agree with you 100 percent.
I would just mention, too, it is not just about the coal mining jobs and the coal miners who will lose their jobs.
My district is mainly not a mining district. My district mainly is known for thoroughbred horses and bourbon distilleries and cattle, in addition to the University of Kentucky and the City of Lexington, but we do border the coal industry.
What I do know about those senior citizens on fixed incomes or low-
income folks who live in those noncoal-producing counties in my district is that their electricity bills are going to double or triple if this Clean Power Plan goes into effect.
I have talked to the utilities. Over 90 percent of the electricity in Kentucky comes from coal. Coal keeps the lights on. Coal provides affordable energy.
The estimates from the utilities is that, in a single year, folks who live below the poverty line are going to see their electricity bills increase by two times, maybe three times, and that is simply something that they can't afford.
So this is an assault on low-income Americans, not just coal-mining families, but, also, fixed-income seniors and other low-income Americans.
Mr. McKINLEY. I do appreciate the gentleman's additional comments.
So as we leave here tonight, let's make sure that we go back over what we have talked about.
We have talked about the impact on coal. We have talked about the individuals, as you just referred to on their electric bills. We see the drama that is going to play out over this.
We have seen the numbers of regulations that are coming forth with this, with these bullying tactics, this hostility toward coal. We have seen this last result, the Clean Power Plan. These have to stop. America needs to wake up.
This is something that is happening, but we have the ability here to reach out and try to communicate to more people across West Virginia and the Nation, in Kentucky and Illinois, to Montana, to California, to demonstrate to them that you are already using coal. You are getting the advantages of coal.
Work with us to get the clean coal technology so that we can cut down our emissions. The idea of shutting off coal is short-sighted, and the rest of the world isn't following.
Someone said about leadership: You know, if no one is following you, then all you are doing is a man taking a walk.
So we have to find people that can lead. We have groups that are willing to take this on and fight for coal, fight for the jobs and the people that are affected by this.
So I thank you all for coming out here tonight.
I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
____________________
