Washington, D.C. – In response to President Obama’s speech this afternoon at Georgetown University regarding his plan to bypass Congress and move forward with major new regulations, Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Environment Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart (R-Utah) released the following statements.
Chairman Smith: “I am disappointed the President has once again signaled his intent to move forward with new rules that will make energy more expensive for hardworking American families. Just as House Republicans work to expand our nation’s energy potential, the Obama administration is doing the opposite. The President plans to use executive orders to bypass Congress and create more red tape that will increase the price of electricity and gasoline. And the President’s plan will have little or no impact on climate change.
“Affordable, reliable energy is crucial to a thriving economy. And it is only through sustained economic growth that we will be able to make the investments in research and technology necessary to fully understand and properly deal with problems like climate change.”
Chairman Stewart: “The President's announcement today makes clear that with his final election behind him, he is free to abandon his campaign promise to the nation of an ‘all of the above’ approach to meet our energy needs. And to what end? Even the President's own EPA is on record stating that any US carbon regulations will have little to no global effect due to accelerating growth of emissions overseas. Economists predict that these regulations will increase domestic energy prices and encourage manufactures to relocate overseas. This is unacceptable. Our nation is blessed with an abundance of affordable and reliable energy, yet the president has chosen to abandon these resources to appease a small group of radical environmentalists with American families footing the bill.”
“The President ran on a platform of protecting the middle class and working families. The proposed regulations are going to do the exact opposite—increasing costs and hurting the families who can least afford it.”