WVADA NEWS 17 “These job losses will not be confined to California, but they will be spread all across the nation. Workers in auto manufacturing, oil and gas production, and the agriculture sector across this country would lose jobs because of California’s EV mandate, and the elected officials who represent Michigan auto workers, Nebraska corn farmers or West Virginia gas workers had no say in California and EPA’s decision.” “The decision to limit consumer choice, increase car prices and cost hundreds of thousands of jobs was made by California, and approved by a federal administration that had already been rejected by the American voters.” “I decided to use the CRA process to introduce this resolution against EPA’s approval of the California electric vehicle mandate for two reasons. First, enactment of the resolution would vacate EPA’s rule approving the California waiver, stopping the EV mandate and protecting consumers and workers across the country. Second, because a vote here in the Senate and in the House would allow the elected representatives of Americans of all 50 states, not just California, to decide whether a nationally significant policy should be implemented.” “The Biden EPA did not submit its approval of the California EV mandate for review under the CRA and claimed its action was not a rule. That was a clear effort to avoid accountability from Congress. Fortunately, President Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin decided to give the American people a say by submitting the approved California waiver to Congress as a rule under the CRA. That submission by the Trump EPA triggered my right, as a senator, to introduce this resolution to block California’s EV mandate.” “Nothing in the Congressional Review Act, Senate rules or Senate precedents gives unelected staff at the GAO the authority to prevent elected senators from considering a resolution of disapproval against a rule.” “A GAO opinion has never been used to cut off the Senate’s ability to consider a CRA resolution of disapproval when the federal agency actually submitted the rule to Congress. In fact, GAO has repeatedly recognized that its legal opinions are unnecessary when agencies submit a rule to Congress.” “My Democrat colleagues argue that there will be profound institutional consequences by the use of the Senate not allowing GAO a veto over the use of the CRA against agency-submitted rules. I, on the other hand, disagree. Such a GAO veto has never existed before, and we must remember that the CRA is all about protecting the authority of elected representatives over unelected agencies.” “My Democrat colleagues say that our action today undermines the legislative filibuster, and that is simply not true. I support the legislative filibuster. I have supported the legislative filibuster as a senator in the majority and as a senator in the minority.” “I want to make two things crystal clear: The procedural action we have taken today is not about the filibuster and not about the Parliamentarian. Instead, the procedural issue before the Senate was simply whether GAO staff should be able to block resolutions of disapproval against agency-submitted rules. I have explained why my answer to that is no.” “Despite the best efforts of the Biden administration and congressional Democrats to shield this EV mandate from the will of the American people, the Senate will have its say. I urge my colleagues to vote tomorrow for the resolution of disapproval.” If you have not already done so, please thank Sen. Capito for sponsoring this joint resolution. Direct your emails to JT Jezierski at jt_jezierski@capito.senate.gov and Adam Tomlinson at adam_tomlinson@epw.senate.gov.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTg3NDExNQ==