On Earth Day, American Bridge is highlighting Senator Mark Kirk’s poor record on environmental issues.
“Senator Mark Kirk claims to be a moderate who cares about protecting the environment, but his record shows a commitment to big polluters,” said American Bridge President Jessica Mackler. “Sen. Kirk voted to cut funding to the EPA, block the Clean Power Plan, and delay important health protections. Despite acknowledging the dangers of climate change, Sen. Kirk continues to put Illinois’s natural resources at risk.”
Background:
Mark Kirk
Bad For The Environment
KIRK AGREED THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL AND CAUSE BY HUMAN ACTIVITY
January 2015: Kirk Voted To Agree That “Climate Change Is Real,” That It “Is Caused By Human Activities,” And That The U.S. Must Back Research And Development Of “Clean Fossil Fuel Technology.” In January 2015, Kirk voted for an amendment that, according to the Congressional Record, stated, “It is the sense of Congress that Congress is in agreement with the opinion of virtually the entire worldwide scientific community and a growing number of top national security experts, economists, and others that—(1) climate change is real; (2) climate change is caused by human activities; (3) climate change has already caused devastating problems in the United States and around the world; (4) the Energy Information Administration projects that fossil fuels will continue to produce 68 percent of the electricity in the United States through 2040; and (5) it is imperative that the United States invest in research and development for clean fossil fuel technology.” The vote was on a motion to table the proposed amendment to the Senate’s version of legislation directing the approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline, so that a vote for the motion was, in effect, a vote against the amendment. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 53 to 46, killing the amendment. [Senate Vote 15, 1/22/15; Congressional Record, 1/22/15; Congressional Actions, S. 1]
January 2015: Kirk Voted To State That “Human Activity Significantly Contributes To Climate Change.” In January 2015, Kirk voted for an amendment that, according to the Congressional Record, stated that “it is the sense of Congress that—(1) climate change is real; and (2) human activity significantly contributes to climate change.” The Senate rejected the proposed amendment to its version of legislation that directed the approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline by a vote of 50 to 49; it needed 60 votes to be adopted. [Senate Vote 12, 1/21/15; Congressional Record, 1/20/15; Congressional Actions, S. 1]
January 2015: Kirk Voted To State That “Climate Change Is Real,” That “Human Activity Contributes” To It, And Added Language Stating The Keystone XL Pipeline Would Not Significantly Impact The Environment. In January 2015, Kirk voted for an amendment that, according to the Congressional Record, stated that “it is the sense of Congress that—(1) climate change is real; and (2) human activity contributes to climate change.” The proposed amendment to the Senate’s substitute version of legislation directing the approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline also quoted several findings from the State Department’s January 2014 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the pipeline project, which Congressional Quarterly summarized as stating that “that the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline would not have a significant impact on the environment.” The amendment stated that these findings were “consistent” with its proposed sense of Congress on climate change. The Senate rejected the proposed amendment by a vote of 59 to 40; the amendment needed 60 votes to be approved. [Senate Vote 11, 1/21/15; Congressional Record, 1/21/15; Congressional Quarterly, 1/21/15; Congressional Actions, S. 1]
January 2015: Kirk Said Climate Change Was Real And Caused By Human Activity. According to the Chicago Tribune, “After criticism from environmental groups, Sen. Mark Kirk said Thursday that climate change is real and human activity contributes to it. The Illinois Republican issued a statement after Environment & Energy Daily reported Thursday on remarks Kirk made a day earlier to one of its reporters. According to E&E Daily, Kirk said climate change isn’t caused by industrial greenhouse gas emissions, but its report did not quote him directly on that point.” [Chicago Tribune, 1/9/15]
DESPITE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT HUMAN ACTIVITY CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE, KIRK VOTED TO SUPPORT ACTIVITES THAT HAD A NEGATIVE EFFECT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Kirk Voted To Cut The EPA’s Budget By $538 Million
Kirk Voted To Advance The Department Of The Interior, Environment, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2016. On June 18, 2015 Kirk voted to approve S. Rept. 114-70 in the Senate Appropriations Committee as it applied to S.1645. According to a press release from the Senate Committee on Appropriations, “The bill, the first such spending measure marked up in the Senate since 2009, recommends funding for the Interior Department, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Forest Service (U.S. Department of Agriculture), Indian Health Service (Department of Health and Human Services), and numerous agencies and programs regarding the management of public lands, including national parks and forests. The bill addresses growing concerns across the country about aggressive EPA regulatory proposals. It was approved 16-14. […] The bill provides $7.6 billion for EPA, $538.8 million below the FY2015 enacted level.” [S.1645, 6/23/15, United States Senate Committee on Appropriations, 6/18/15]
The Department Of The Interior, Environment, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill Slashed The EPA’s Budget By Over $538 Million. According to a press release from the Senate Committee on Appropriations, “The bill, the first such spending measure marked up in the Senate since 2009, recommends funding for the Interior Department, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Forest Service (U.S. Department of Agriculture), Indian Health Service (Department of Health and Human Services), and numerous agencies and programs regarding the management of public lands, including national parks and forests. The bill addresses growing concerns across the country about aggressive EPA regulatory proposals. It was approved 16-14. […] The bill provides $7.6 billion for EPA, $538.8 million below the FY2015 enacted level.” [United States Senate Committee on Appropriations, 6/18/15]
Kirk Voted Against Clean Power Plan
June 2015: Kirk Voted To Block The Clean Power Plan. According to Crain’s Chicago Business, “U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill, and several big environmental groups are feuding again, even as the senator points to a bill he passed to ban sewage dumping in Lake Michigan. The new sparks are over Kirk’s vote yesterday in the Senate Appropriations Committee to block the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, which would regulate the amount of carbon released from power plants.” [Crain’s Chicago Business, 6/19/15]
- Kirk Said His Vote Protected Coal Jobs In Illinois.According to Crain’s Chicago Business, “Kirk is not backing off. ‘The senator opposed new regulations on Illinois’ 36,000 coal jobs, which are responsible for 43 percent of electricity for Illinois families,’ said spokesman Kevin Artl.” [Crain’s Chicago Business, 6/19/15]
- Kirk Was Accused Of Voting “To Put Big Polluter Profits Before The Health Of Illinois Families” By The Sierra Club. According to The Hill, “The Sierra Club launched a week-long advertising campaign Mondayto slam Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) for voting to scrap the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) climate rule for power plants. The environmental group started its ‘aggressive’ campaign with a full-page ad in the Daily Herald, circulated in Chicago’s suburbs. It accuses Kirk of voting three times ‘to put big polluter profits before the health of Illinois families,’ and urges readers to tell Kirk to ‘stop attacking clean air’ and ‘support the Clean Power Plan.’” [The Hill, 7/6/15]
January 2015: Kirk Said He Supported Eliminating Standards Limiting Carbon Monoxide Emissions At Coal Power Plants. According to the Illinois Radio Network, “Regulations to reduce carbon dioxide emissions at existing coal-fueled power plants will be a target of the new Republican-controlled Congress. U.S. Sen. Mark S. Kirk (R-Ill.) says he’s in favor of getting rid of the regulations proposed by President Obama last year, because he believes they will lead to the loss of coal industry jobs in Southern Illinois. ‘They feel everybody just cares about the city of Chicago,’ Kirk said. ‘I fear that this new regulation will put a lot of mines out of business.” [Illinois Radio Network, 1/11/15]
Kirk Voted To Delay The Boiler Rule
2011: Kirk Voted For A Bill Delaying Implementation Of The EPA’s Boiler MACT Rules. In November 2011, Kirk voted for delaying an EPA rule known as the boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) rule. The vote was on the Long-Term Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011 that, according to WUSA, “included language from S. 1392, the EPA Regulatory Relief Act, which requires EPA to rewrite rules released earlier this year for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for major sources such as refineries and area sources such as hospitals and prisons. The standards set hazardous air pollution limits for new and existing industrial and commercial boilers.” The bill – which addressed appropriations rescissions, emissions standards, regulatory oversight and delay, and transportation funding – was rejected by the Senate by a vote of 47 to 53. [Senate Vote 196, 11/3/11; WUSA,11/4/11; Congressional Record, 11/3/11]
- The Provision Aimed To Eliminate Rules On Industrial Boilers And Incinerators That Reduce Mercury, Lead And Other Hazardous Air Pollution.According to a speech on the Senate floor by Sen. Barbara Boxer, “Let’s talk about one of the rules they want to cut back: industrial boilers and incinerators. This bill, called a jobs bill, would halt an EPA rule issued in February 2011 to reduce toxic air pollution. What do I mean? Toxic means it is toxic to our health; it will hurt us. People will die from toxic air pollution. People do die from toxic air pollution. The toxins the boilers and incinerators rule would reduce include mercury, lead, and other hazardous air pollution released by boilers and incinerators.” [Congressional Record, 11/3/11]
- Opponents Of The Boiler MACT Rules Claimed That Compliance Would Cost Up To $20 Billion And Cause Up To 60,000 Job Losses.According to the Heritage Foundation, “EPA officials last year pegged the capital cost of the rules at $9.5 billion. A study by the economic forecasting firm IHS Global Insight, prepared for the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners, put the figure at $20 billion. The U.S. Small Business Administration warned that the rules would cause ‘significant new regulatory costs’ for businesses, institutions, and municipalities across the country. And a Commerce Department analysis reportedly concluded that the rules would cause job losses of 40,000 to 60,000—much greater than the agency had claimed.” [Heritage Foundation, 5/25/11]
The Boiler Ryule Reduced Air Pollution That Was Linked To Asthma
The Boiler Rule Was Designed To Reduce Air Pollution That Caused Asthma. According to the New York Times, “Under the final rules, the roughly 13,800 largest industrial boilers will still need to meet specific limits on toxic emissions. Those limits will force some facilities such as chemical plants and refineries to install new controls, cutting back on air pollution that is linked to asthma, heart attacks and early death.” [New York Times, 2/23/11]
The EPA Estimated That A Three Year Delay In The Boiler Rule Would Cause 123,000 Asthma Attacks
The EPA Estimated A Three Year Delay In Boiler MACT Rules Would Result In 20,000 Premature Deaths, 12,000 Heart Attacks And 123,000 Asthma Attacks. According testimony of Regina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, before the Subcommittee on Energy and Power of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, “The Clean Air Act currently requires compliance with the boiler MACT standard no later than 3 years after promulgation of the standard, or 2015 under EPA’s current plan. […] According to EPA’s analysis accompanying the rulemakings, for just the major source boiler rule and just a 3 year delay, the bill would allow up to: 20,000 additional premature deaths; 12,000 additional heart attacks; and 123,000 additional asthma attacks that could have been avoided.” [Regina McCarthy Testimony, U.S. House of Representatives, 9/8/11]
The Asthma Rate In Chicago Was Almost Twice The National Average
The Asthma Hospitalization Rate In Chicago Was “Nearly Double The National Average.” According to a press release from Dick Durbin, “By gutting the Clean Air Act and severely limiting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to regulate toxic pollutants emitted by coal-fired power plants, refineries, and cement manufacturers, Republicans are disregarding a major public health problem which is triggered or worsened by those pollutants: asthma. Nearly two-thirds of asthma sufferers live in an area where at least one federal air-quality standard is not being met. In Illinois, the estimated direct costs of asthma-related hospitalizations in 2007 were more than $280 million. And, in Chicago, the asthma hospitalization rate is nearly double the national average.” [Dick Durbin, press release, 10/27/11]
Asthma Hospitalizations Cost Illinois Over $280 Million
2007: Asthma Related Hospitalizations Cost Illinois Over $280 Million. According to a press release from Dick Durbin, “By gutting the Clean Air Act and severely limiting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to regulate toxic pollutants emitted by coal-fired power plants, refineries, and cement manufacturers, Republicans are disregarding a major public health problem which is triggered or worsened by those pollutants: asthma. Nearly two-thirds of asthma sufferers live in an area where at least one federal air-quality standard is not being met. In Illinois, the estimated direct costs of asthma-related hospitalizations in 2007 were more than $280 million. And, in Chicago, the asthma hospitalization rate is nearly double the national average.” [Dick Durbin, press release, 10/27/11]
Published: Apr 22, 2016