Letter Supporting Amendment to the “Gasoline Regulations Act of 2012"

The Honorable Ed Whitfield
Chairman
Subcommittee on Energy and Power
Committee on Energy and Commerce
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Bobby L. Rush
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Energy and Power
Committee on Energy and Commerce
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Whitfield and Ranking Member Rush:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation representing the interests of more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region, supports the amendment in the nature of a substitute to the “Gasoline Regulations Act of 2012,” which is expected to be marked up this week by the Energy and Power Subcommittee of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. This bill would require the federal government to consider the true costs of major environmental regulations that affect gasoline prices—an analysis mandated by existing law but routinely ignored by the current Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—and would provide EPA the ability to consider costs and feasibility when setting National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone under the Clean Air Act.

Regulations are a necessary part of a complex society. But an unbalanced regulatory process has led to an unprecedented increase in major, economically significant regulations, some of which are harming the economy and inhibiting job creation. Nowhere is this problem more pronounced than at EPA, which has spent the past three years issuing a wide array of large, expensive regulations that affect virtually every facet of the U.S. economy, from homeowners, hospitals and farmers to small businesses and manufacturers.

Such regulations are almost always expensive. In response, EPA uses a host of tools and strategies to avoid disclosing their true cost. Sometimes, EPA looks only at benefits. Other times, it limits consideration only to a small group of manufacturers being directly regulated, without considering costs being passed through to consumers. It often refuses to measure the increase in energy prices resulting from new regulations on energy producers. And EPA rarely, if ever, considers the potential loss or threat of loss of jobs from its regulations—despite a provision in almost every single environmental statute requiring it to do so.

We are now at a critical juncture: the costs of several regulations on EPA’s 2012 agenda could significantly impact the prices consumers pay at the pump. The amendment in the nature of a substitute to the “Gasoline Regulations Act of 2012” ensures that any of the major new regulations affecting gasoline prices receive a fair, thorough analysis of their true costs and benefits. The bill would require a full study of their cumulative impacts, one that includes not only health and social benefits but actual impact on economic competitiveness, trade, energy supplies, consumer spending, and jobs. The bill would create an independent committee to carry out the study, cutting down on the common problem of EPA conducting an overly-rosy analysis to justify the rule it wants to put in place.

The amendment in the nature of a substitute to the “Gasoline Regulations Act of 2012” would ensure that EPA’s gasoline sector regulations protect America’s citizens and natural resources without harming the national economy or competitiveness. The Chamber urges the Subcommittee to report the bill favorably.

Sincerely,

R. Bruce Josten

Cc: Members of the Subcommittee on Energy and Power 

Read the Letter: 

120416_GasolineRegulationsActof2012_Whitfield_Rush