Opening Statement by Ranking Member Betty McCollum: Interior Appropriations Hearing on the 2017 EPA Budget

Opening statement by Ranking Member Betty McCollum (MN-D) at the March 22, 2016 Interior-Environment Appropriations Subcommittee Hearing with Administrator Gina McCarthy to discuss the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed $8.27 billion fiscal year 2017 budget.

I would like to join Chairman Calvert in welcoming Administrator McCarthy to the subcommittee this morning.

The Environmental Protection Agency was created to protect human health and the health of our environment and to ensure clean air and clean water for our families and for our children. In the 1970s, when communities across this nation saw the effects of mass pollution in their rivers and skies, the EPA was a bipartisan solution to address this public health crisis. It was an idea my Republican mother and my Democratic father both supported.

Because of the success of the EPA, today we often take for granted the quality of the water from our taps or the air that we breathe.

This year, however, the critical need for the EPA was once again unmistakable.

Our nation has watched a tragedy unfold in Flint, Michigan where children were poisoned by lead in their drinking water. Residents of Flint were betrayed by their state government and to this day still do not have safe drinking water available from their tap. This scandal shines a bright light on why it is necessary to have federal protections for our environment, our water, our public health.

Critics often argue that states are best able to regulate themselves. But Flint shows us that there is a role for the federal government in protecting these communities. And we, here in Congress, needs to look at the underlying law to ensure EPA can step in when a State is ignoring the public health of its citizens. Parents should be able to trust that their children are not being poisoned at school, at their places of worship, or in their own homes.

While the situation in Flint is unique because it was created by the state’s failure to implement protections for its residents, the issue of aging water infrastructure and lead pipes is pervasive. It is time for this country to have a serious discussion about its infrastructure. It is unconscionable that in America, the richest country in the world, there are children whose physical and cognitive development is being harmed because they lack access to clean drinking water – a basic human right.

Turning to the budget request, the President’s Fiscal Year 2017 budget request includes $8.27 billion for EPA. That amount is $127 million above the Fiscal Year 2016 enacted level. The request includes increases for core programs, targeting resources toward programs that matter most to public health and the environment.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the budget goes far enough. The budget requests an additional $77 million for grants to support states and tribes so they can implement their environmental programs. However, this increase would not even bring these grants back to FY 2012 levels. Furthermore, we all realize this nation’s water infrastructure is in crisis, yet, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which is a major funding source for municipal water infrastructure projects, is slashed by $414 million.

I also must express my disappointment that, once again, the Administration is proposing to cut $50 million from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative has made measurable strides in protecting and restoring the Great Lakes ecosystem, but much more work remains to be done.

With the great unmet demand for both water infrastructure and restoration projects, I have to I wonder if these cuts were proposed not on their merits, but because the Agency was trying to request other increases within an already strained top line number. The SRF and GLRI programs are among the few in EPA that have vocal bipartisan support. So, I will be working with Chairman Calvert to restore these cuts. I only wish that we could have the same kind of bipartisan support to restore the cuts that the agency’s core operations have faced.

For five years, EPA has been under attack and its budget has been slashed. Opponents of EPA view this as a victory, but the crisis in Flint, Michigan shows what they really were – irresponsible cuts that jeopardize EPA’s ability to provide state oversight and protect the public. I truly hope that something positive can come from this tragedy. That it will inspire both sides of the aisle to come together, as we did in the creation of the EPA, and ensure proper funding for our environmental regulations and public infrastructure, so that no mother has to worry that the water she gives her baby is poison.

Administrator McCarthy, I appreciate the work that you and the employees of the EPA do and I look forward to your testimony this morning. Thank you Mr. Chairman.