through epa. >> through epa and sometimes public/private partnership. >> yes. and that rerue is all government funded? >> no. >> so in fact part of that funding of done by a group that was actually funded by awe motive industry? >> yeah. >> thank you. yield back my time. >> mr. kennedy you elicited the shortest answers of the day. congratulations. >> the gentleman from indiana. >> thank you. thank you for being here. a brief statement about -- i'm at the cardiovascular surgeon. i know, about health. i recently reviewed the data from the american lung association about particular matter. and look at the background on the funding for all the study and lo and behold everything they used was pretty much very far left leaning global warming activists foundations that privately funded these things. and in addition to that, the potential health benefits based on computer modeling. not on actually data but a computer model projecting their data results in to the future. not based on actual factual data with human studies. i had the chief medical officer come down from

the epa value its public comments and information submitted about epa and sab nominees. the pas review experts confidential financial information is available to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest. sab peer reviews are conducted in public sessions and compliance with the open government requirements of the federal advisory committee act. the public is invited to send them provide oral and written testimony for consideration by the sab. public comments help to ensure that all relevant science and technical issues are available as a reviews the science that will support our environmental decisions. another example of how well we do in science and maintain our integrity is the advisory committee which provides independent advice to the epa administrator on the science that supports epa national quality standards. the case act reviews the epa's integrated science assessment which delivers science in support of the clean air act. through transparent and open process we have also committed to enhancing agencies integrated risk information system assessment program.

not just epa. they are well done, credible, and they have not changed their methodology substantially since the last time we even look at the raw data. so we are very confident in the underlying science. and that we have done the right thing and paid attention to that which is what epa is supposed to do. >> thank you very much. i yield. >> think you, ms. johnson. the gentleman from wisconsin, former chairman of this committee, mr. sensenbrenner, is recognized. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. ms. mccarthy, on june 27, 2012, you sent a letter to me relative to the issues of ethanol and the waiver on the 15. i asked a question does the epa remain confident that it will not damage car engines from vehicles of model years 2001 and later. the letter you signed responded, the epa remains confident in the technical basis for the east 15 partial waiver decision. this question can be answered simply yes or no. you remain confident in the technical basis for the e-15 decision? >> i do. >> is what others

not just epa. they're well done, they are credible, and they have not changed their methodology substantially since the last time we even looked at the raw data. we're very confident in the underlying science and done the right thing and paid attention to that. which is what epa is supposed to do. >> on june 27, 2012. you sent a letter to me real toift issue of ethanol and the waiver on e15, and i asked a question, does the epa remain confident that e15 will not damage car engines from vehicle of model years 2001 and later. they responded the epa remains confident in the technical basis for the e15 partial waiver decision. this question can be answered simply yes or no. you remain confident in the technical basis for the e15 decision? >> i do. >> okay. here is what others are saying. ford says, ford doesn't support the introduction of e15 to the marketplace for the legacy fuel. for it is not approved in the owners manual as consider misfueling and any damage resulted from misfueling is not covered

epa standards. in developing these standards, aee urges the epa to provide maximum flexibility to incorporate advanced technology and services into their implementation plans. aee believes in establishing standards in this manner will move the united states towards a higher performing energy system for the 21st century. thanks to technology innovation, we have more options for meeting energy needs than ever before in history. we call those new options advanced energy. as documented in a report, impacts of advanced energy is more than a $1 trillion energy industry worldwide, and they grew 19% by $157 billion. advanced energy represents an opportunity to create prosperity across the economy as we modernize our methods of producing managing and using energy. advanced energy provides a wide range of technologies and services that can reduce emissions. advanced energy includes energy efficiency, demand response, solar, wind, natural gas and electric generation, hydro nuclear, electric vehicles, and more.

the epa is not proposing to do so. moreover, the epa wishes to encourage rather than discourage eor using captured co2 since the practice makes carbon storage itself more economic and thus promotes the use of technology on which the proposed standard is based. i dispute this -- >> could you wrap up, please? >> yeah. market forces are a thin reed on which to rest our clean energy and environmental policy. in conclusion, i just would like to add that as a resident of capitol hill, i urge the standard to serve federally-run facilities like the capitol hill power plant not far from us today. i thank you for this opportunity to share my views. >> thank you. [applause] >> [inaudible] >> my name is martin hayden, i am the vice president for policy and legislation at earth justice. i want to thank epa for moving forward on developing standards to control power pollution from -- carbon pollution from power plants and for holding today's listening session. we have an obligation to protect our children and future generations from

>> the epa permit. it's been sitting there in your office. >> i'm happy to follow up. >> there is also another plant that wants to export corso will be buried here in my district and altogether we have $52 billion that is being held up by the epa, which by the way is more than sequester. i'm just saying that there are a lot of jobs that are dependent and i would like to give that information to you so we can facilitate the jobs that i know this president wants and i really want to help him out in doing that. texas represents 50% of all adults in the united states and in my district, we have 30,000 people moving to our district and there has been over a million wells frats and a lot of bracketing and there is a general history in the united states of people independently drilling for oil and producing products that this nation relies upon and we are going to produce more than saudi arabia. i think it's because the independence and the driver of the american spirit are part of this. so that we can see a f

the epa won't come to listen to us, we'll come here. to the epa. by now it is clear that this administration and your agency have declared a war on colt. for kentucky it means a war on jobs and our state's economy. the president outright stated his intention for the coal industry. this is what he had to say. if somebody wants to build a coal power plant. they can. it will bankrupt them. they're going to be charged a huge sum for the greenhouse gas being emitted. a direct quote from the president of the united states. one of the first things president obama did upon taking office in 2009 was to push through congress' cap-and-trade bill to try to push it through -- i might add. designed to hike utility rights and bankrupt the coal industry. back in 2009, his party, the democratic party controlled both houses of congress. they held a super majority in the senate of 60 votes. they could actually pass anything they wanted to. but the bill only narrowly passed the house and could never pass the senate. it idled away and did not pass in the senate. that i

if the epa will not listen to us, we will come here to the epa. i know it is clear that this administration and your agency have declared war on coal. ons means a war on jobs and -- on our state economy. this is what he had to say -- if sony wants to build a coal power plant, they can. it will disregard them. they're going to be charged a huge sum for all of the greenhouse gas that is being quoted. that is direct from the president of the united states. one of the first things he did among taking office in 2009 was --push through congress bill try to push it through, i might add. 2009, the democratic party controlled both houses of congress. they held a super majority and a set of 60 votes. they could pass anything they wanted to. the bill only nearly passed the house i could never pass the senate. not pass iny did the senate. at his own party said no. what this president cannot get enacted into law was trying to enact through the bureaucracy. he has unleashed the epa to fulfill the same extreme mandates that were part of his bill. before you do,

epa can recognize that such

epa, do your job. thank you. >> thank you, and thank you for making the drive here. >> next on the panel we have -- [inaudible] >> thank you very much for the opportunity to be here. i appreciate the chance to come here on behalf of my state. it's my understanding these sessions are intended to gather stakeholder input on what people think about future carbon regulations on existing power plants. however i couldn't help but notice these sessions are scheduled only for states where coal does not have a large presence. like california, and massachusetts, other regions of the country, however, are well aware that coal provides nearly 40% of the nation's electricity. as such i ask all of you folks to hold a hearing in kentucky. to hear the concerns of coal country. but since epa refuses to cop to kentucky, i decided on behalf of kentucky's coalminers and their families i would bring their concerns to you myself. if the epa won't come to listen to us, we'll come here to the epa. by now it is clear that this

not the epa. epa shouldn't be setting the standard for what's going on right now. that's why i am here today. >> i'm going to ask each of you one question and make it extra in the short like five seconds because in the past we have a director of the epa who said she didn't look at the impact of jobs of regulation. if each of you had one thing to say to her very briefly, what would it be? cannot shame on you. >> what would you say to the -- with regard to looking at jobs and the issue of epa regulations what would you say? >> shame on you that is a good one. >> mr. horton, what would you say? >> spee2. >> mr. weiss? >> work with the congress to develop a plan that would help the situations we have been working on to protect public health. >> i would say how can you not consider that? is about what the government's job is? >> i would also agree the jobs are an important consideration. >> to make decisions based on that. >> in the interest of time and moving forward i'm going to yield now for five minutes. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. mr. weiss, the share of t

if the epa will not listen to us, we will come here to the epa. i know it is clear that this administration and your agency have declared war on coal. this means a war on jobs and on our state economy. the president has outright stated his intentions for the coal industry. this is what he had to say -- if someone wants to build a coal power plant, they can. it is just that it will bankrupt them because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all of the greenhouse gas that is being emitted. that is direct quote from the president of the united states. one of the first things he did mong taking office in 2009 was to push through congress' cap and trade bill to try to push it through, i might add. back in 2009, the democratic party controlled both houses of congress. they held a super majority and a set of 60 votes. they could pass anything they wanted to. the bill only nearly passed the house and could never pass the senate. it idled away and ultimately did ot pass in the senate. it ultimately did not pass in the senate. at his own party said no

20th and is available on epa's website for review. this type of standard must reflect the degree of the limitation acheviable through the best system. now source standards address the six common pollutants, but not air toxins. for existing sources covered under section 1-11 d, the subject of this listening section, epa doesn't set ix -- explicit standards -- we set guidelines and companies use them to set their policy while getting the necessary pollution reductions. section 1-11 d is reserved to address other pollutants that are not covered. greenhouse gases, including pollution are covered under the section. most have been shutdown for new, modified or reconstructed sources. few regulations have been iss d issued. the guidelines establish binding obligations for the states to address the carbon pollution. last month, epa posted a document setting out a number of key questions to guide public decision on our website. we will have that as we start to craft the proposal. two questions are fundamental and good to keep in mind for today.

ere t highest tce level thathe epa measured in the groundwatereached 130,00 again, the epa considers anything over 5 parts per billion unsafe. and toght, here at the adobe buildingn moffi boulevard in mountain view, the epwill have a public hearing. that hearing is scheduled to start at 70 where t epa will tellesidents in moreetail about what they found and what they did not find. we can also tellou the epa did not find any tc in new homes or buildings. did not find any new buildings with vapor intruon in them. but the agency does say it's it still does n know why this tce is now found outside the superfund tic plume. we c also tell you the epa will be handing out these brochures which will outline how they're going tory to attack is problem, a new method usin oxidation injected downnto t soil. hoping to consume this e withoutaving to d up more soil and more ter. we, of coue, will be covering it all and bri you the late ef at 11:0 for now, i'm steven stock, in mountainiew. back tyou. >> ay. thank you. >>new at 6:00, the family of a san francisco woman killed when she was run over in

she said she thought the epa had been cooperating. seemed to suggest hey, we're in compliance. i'm baffled that you're still missing things. >> no, if she really feels that way, she's been sadly miss informed by her staff. they've been playing hide-and-seek for months and months, even going back to her confirmation process. they withheld e-mails and redacted e-mails and other documents from us. so it's been like pulling teeth on a number of fronts. >> another thing i wanted to talk about was the science advisory board. it looks at the science that the epa is relying on when it makes its decisions. and the information that the epa looks at has to go through the board. mccarthy appoints people to the science advisory board which is then reviewing epa science. and congressman rohrabacher talked about it, that a number of these are people who have gotten epa grant money. she says no lines are crossed, but it certainly raises questions. >> i see a big problem, shannon. there are conflicts of interest, but the ability to skew the board comp

during the meeting, we learned these sa two homes exceeded the epa's indoor air eanup but the epa sayshe latest run of tts of 60 homes showed none of them exceeding the level. >> our fdings show that based all this indoor air testing that there's - we have addrsed the probm. >> reporter: tce was onc used by the semi conductor industry 30 years ago. the epa has removed ton of it fromnder this neighborhoo but ha more to reve. early ne year for three weeks, the epa will be drilling holes, then injtingodium into t ground toix that with the tce and turn it into carbon monoxide this will happen in a h spot and if it works well there, spots.l u it in the other hot geor kiriyama, nbc bay area news. thank you, george. >>> richmond police are still looking for a police invved in e chase in a crash that injured two people. it happened this aernoon on 6th and mcdonald. the chase started wn an officer recognized a man with felony warrant. during the chase, the car driven into another car with a mother one woman is inritical de. coition tonight. two suspes werecaught, a third man is still on t run >>>

>> epa. it's been your office sitting there. they followed all the rules and regulations. >> i would be happy to follow up to be a. >> there is another plan but wants to export coal so that i will not be burned in the district. altogether we have $52 billion being held up which by the way is more than the sequester. i'm just saying there's a lot of jobs in the district dependent unfortunately by your decisions and i would like to give that information to you so that -- we can take the jobs under this president wants. i really want to help them out and doing that and this much activity in our district which texas as you know probably represents 50% of the jobs in the united states that is created and in my district we cut 30,000 people live into our districto ourdistrict and has ba million wells as you know there has been a lot of tracking and there is a general history of the united states of people independently drilling for oil and producing products that this nation relies on. we are going to produce more than saudi arabia an

something else we need to think about is why the epa is the epa sneakiness regulation or you can make in this regulations because there is another real threat aside from the loss of these jobs, which is an important issue. we also have a catastrophic issue facing us. at issue is the issue of climate change. if you look at what happened one year ago today when hurricanes and he made landfills in the united states, over 100 people were killed. there is devastation throughout the east coast. when you look at what happened in colorado this summer in my home state, where we saw the potential impacts of climate change firsthand with 11,000 people being evacuated from their homes, 19,500 homes being damaged and over 1500 he and destroyed in these catastrophic flood. and so, when you look at climate change, you have to say, why is epa sneakiness regulation and what we can do? as we look at this whole issue, we look at number one, the need to reduce carbon pollution. we need to protect public health and the environment and we also need to provide assistance to communities and individuals that

the epa considers anything over five parts per billion unsafe.ast nig at a meeting to help answer public coerns, the epa announced that ear next year, it will inject another chemical into the ground that should neralize the tce. it is considered tox because it has been linked to cancer. en it evaporates, it could collect in homes or buildings through a pross called vapor intrusions andan also cause heart deformities in unborn children. >> i am concern the tc is affecting my heah and has been r many years now. >>> the epa is not sure how e mountain vi. groundwer in it is not clear iit is leernged leerninked to the fact that this chemical wa used once by the semiconductor industry roughly 30 years ago. >>> 6:26ight now. south san francisco police oking for the women at the center of an elaborate renl scam. this woman listed a five-bedroom home on san francco drive on craigslist back i october. she then gave a full tour of that home to three 19-year-olds who decided to rentwo ofhe oms. the victims, they paid that woman $1800 andhenoved in november 1

the epa says its critics are misreading and distorting the intent of the proposed rules.gressman lamar smith of texas issued the following warning. the draft rules sent to the white house for review could expand the epa's regulatory power to give the agency unprecedented new authority. a view echoed by other republicans at a recent hearing with epa administrator gina mccarthy. >> making matters worse, the courts defer to the epa especially when questions involve the analysis of science. >> the powerful d.c. circuit court is set to hear several important case that is will directly impact the epa and its ability to enforce clean air and water regulations that some big businesses worry will affect their bottom line. >> one big one that's coming up is an epa regulation that effectively outlaws the new coal fired power plant. it sets the standards impossibly high. so high it's beyond what our current technology can do. it would have huge impacts on coal state. >> to invoke the nuclear option and effectively end the filibuster will clear the way for congress to quickly approve

the epa now has a plan to solve the problem. homeownerstill kirnd about their own safety.today in the bay's" bob redl li in mountain view with more on the problem a the fix. good morning. >> reporter: the proem is high levelsf tce found in mountainview. alg this intersection at evandale and lund, partf a plume of tce that extends east underneath 101 lesshan a block away and underneath mfett field. according to the epa, the most rece tests here at lung and evandalerive showed lels of up to 110 par per billion in the groundwater. anything over 5 parts per billion is csidered safe. the epa annoued to residents around here that early next year it will inject another emical into the ground that should neutralize the tce. the epa adds, it has removed tons of tce but still hasor to do. >> we cleedp 5.25 billion groundwater and treated over 100,000 pounds of contaminates. >> reporter: tce is toxic because it has been linked to it can collectn homes and tes, buildis through vapor intrusion and cause heart deformies in unborn children. they are noture how tce got into the ground her

mamÁ >>> epa, epa >>> ay! >>> agarrenlo. cuidado, cuidado. no, no ay!cho te estÁ contratando, no yo sÉ quiÉn eres chamo, a mÍ que este seÑor no me hable >>> vamos hacer algo >>> o 26 mil. ya, ya va. >>> te doy 25 y una cena con moncho y boca real >>> ay! caiste, caiste malva o malvada. >>> caiste, caiste. (risas) (aplausos). >>> mentira. >>> bienvenida a quÉ locura! . >>> ay! malvada yo a ti te quiero. (risas). malvada sana >>> ay! mi luisa ana malvada un beso mi reina estas preciosa, estas bella, saludos >>> estaba esperando yo >>> caiste, caiste, caiste malvada, quÉ bueno. bueno atenciÓn, te vas a divertir, demasiado bueno atenciÓn en la proxima parte. elÉctrico venga. ( ♪ mÚsica♪) a bueno ten cciatenciÓn nos vam el autÓgrafo elÉctrico. despuÉs de una grabaciÓn. >>> cuidado. >>> quÉ bello espectacular. >>> conocido como mil house >>> estÁ flaco. (risas) >>> bueno se te nota. >>> muchas gracias. >>> a ti >>> gracias. >>> hay una lÍnea. mira. se le pararon los pelos de susto. >>> me regalas un autÓgrafo >>> acÁ viene. >>> ay! . >>> bienvenida a quÉ locu

>>>epa proposes a slew of regulations. the not so friendly reaction is next.ith my friends, we'll do almost anything. out for drinks, eats. i have very well fitting dentures. i like to eat a lot of fruits. love them all. the seal i get with the super poligrip free keeps the seeds from getting up underneath. even well-fitting dentures let in food particles. super poligrip is zinc free. with just a few dabs, it's clinically proven to seal out more food particles so you're more comfortable and confident while you eat. a lot of things going on in my life and the last thing i want to be thinking about is my dentures. [ charlie ] try zinc free super poligrip. >>> the epa under president barack obama has proposed a flurry of new regulations. second only to the department of health and human services. those rules have spawned numerous lawsuits and investigations and accusations of overreach. today the head of the agency found herself in the hot seat. correspondent shannon breem has more. >> her predecessor's alleged use of phony accounts along with claims policies are

what do you make of the epa's decision?ah, big oil absolutely has gotten a small victory here, but we have a big period where we're going to show the epa where ethanol has a permanent part in the fuel supply. one of the things that epa pointed out was that gas demand has been going down when in fact, if you look at the weekly data, we're pushing towards 138 billion gallons a year of gas demand which means ethanol production and ethanol blending is actually going up. so we're going to take the next 60 days to prove to the epa that some of the data was wrong, that they've been bullied by big oil, and this is really a fight for the fuel tank. i mean, every 1% share that ethanol gets is about a $4 billion hit to big oil. so they have a lot of reasons to fight us. but in general, i don't think we're going to go away any time soon. >> very quickly, i don't know if you know this, todd, i race cars. to be fair for ethanol-free fuel because we're worried about what it does to our fuel lines. lay it out right now. any risk in ethanol

aquÍ estamos todos a mÉxico >>mÉxico, mexico >>mÉxico mexico >>ya lo saben <epa <epa >con ustedes es suficiente, no me metan en eso, miren que ya corro bastante riesgo caminando >>que nos trae para hoy >esto es parte del acto de circo espaÑol donde los animalitos juegan con camisetas de barcelona y real madrid >>que lindos. quiero saber quie'en es el arbitro valiente que les saca tarjeta >>ademÁs seÑorita, bumbum hablado de la lanzada yo me lanzo primero no, yo iba a meter gol >la cuenta esta cerrda, pase lo que pase el seÑor diego se lanza en paracaidas >>si no gana mÉxico >>que tal si vamos a los astross, con el canciller del horoscopo >>muy buenos dÍas, hoy miÉrcoles 13 con la luna creciente mÉxico tiene unas posibilidad de ganar >>aries, nuevas oportunidad de ganar dinero tauro, comparte dinero te lo pediran, recuerda dar para recibir >>gÉminis, un desempeÑo hace que s fijen en ti no dejes de sonreir

commitment to build the epa site in 2013 is iron clad. does that mean that the obama speech in prague 2009 in which he said it was an agreement with iran over its nuclear weapons program, if that were to be achieved robustly, that will would be a rethinking of epaa? not totally locked in and no longer valid? >> we made a substantial commitment to epa to homeland missile defense and to the nuclear deterrent. so when the department went through its strategic choices management review, those were among the three, plus cyber and space capabilities that were going to be highlighted and protected and preserved. part and parcel of that and as we've gone through the various budget deliberations, it becomes really hard to protect those things you want to protect. epa is clearly one of those things we want to protect. we've done so far a pretty good job of protecting phases 2 and phase 1 and 2 and 3. we canceled phase 4. but that's where there is a connection between your question and iran. so we saw a more rapidly emerging north korean threat. and

we'll take another look at commodity futures after that epa ruling.should drop and indeed it is. ♪ ♪ you get your coffee here. you get your hair cut here. you find that certain thing you were looking for here, but actually you get so much more. when you shop at these small local businesses, you support all the things that make your community great. the money you spend here, stays here. in this place you call your neighborhood. small business saturday is november 30th. get out and small. became big business overnight? ♪ like, really big... then expanded? ♪ or their new product tanked? ♪ or not? what if they embrace new technology instead? ♪ imagine a company's future with the future of trading. company profile. a research tool on thinkorswim. from td ameritrade. >>> we reeled you this before the break. what happened 146 years ago today that changed wall street fore. back on this day in 1867 the first stock ticker was unveiled. prior to ticker stock prices were sent by mail. or messenger or even pigeon. the ticker was the brain child of edgar callahan w

which is part of which is now an ongoing discussion intended to help the epa a epa a and the states determine promising approaches for reducing carbon intended pollution from existing powerdee plant. car power plants are the nation's single largest source of carbon we pollution. the source we must address as wn work to combat climate change ae work to combat public change and one of the most significant health risks of our time. science tell us climate change is real and human activities are fueling the change and we must take action to avoid the most devastating consequences. in june the president called on agencies, including the epa, to take action and protect the country against climate change and lead the world in the effort. the president's call included a directive for epa to work "quickly to complete carbon standards for both new and existing power plants. closed quote. there are no federal standard in place to reduce the country from that large source of pollution. the epa responded and we will save consumers thousands of dollars at the pump and cut the carbon pollution from our cars

act alone -- kennedy epa act alone? -- can the epa act alone? guest: they can. they are starting to create carbon emission standards for the nation's existing power plants. .hey are taking a lot of input the weight that this section of the clean air act works, it says the feds create binding guidelines. it says to the states, create a plan to implement that. one lady states could implement this plan is to adopt a policy way the states could implement this plan is to adopt a policy. the idea is to lower emissions from existing power plants, that is difficult. you can build it into a new plan, it is tough to create and add on technology to an existing plan that lowers the carbon level. so a way from a states power next is to rent a portable power mix state's renewable levels. these standards could provide new avenues for renewable energy. host: the epa going around the country for listening sessions. they have one this morning at their epa headquarters in washington. it kicks off at 9:00 a.m. eastern time, go to c-span.or

. >>> (♪) epa. >>> okay. >>> okay. >>> mira director. >>> vÍctima marjorie mary. >>> gusto. >>> hola >>> bueno, creo que es la parte un poco difÍcil. >>> pero mÁs o men tÚ sabes. >>> okay. >>> trae el vestuario para que lo vea para un momento. >>> este va a ser todo mi trabajo del dÍa, y tienen mucho rato grabando?. >>> estaba comento anl el productor. >>>... pero me estaba diciendo que habÍan varias chicas en casting y todo eso. >>> hubo casting dÓnde se ensayo todo lo que habÍa que hacer o lo que se presuntamente se hizo. >>> cuanto mide?. >>> 1. 72. >>> ¿quÉ?. >>> ay! dios. >>> java. >>> un traje de mono. >>> eso no. >>> eso no va a pasar. >>> pero no. >>> como es esto. >>> como que no se lo va a poner. >>> llevo tiempo aquÍ esperÁndote. >>> pero este primero me vas bajando la voz y segundo no me lo voy a poner. >>> flaca, no tengo todo el dÍa. >>> ven para acÁ. >>> pero cÁllate la boca historia hablando con Él!. >>> me bajas la voz, me voy. >>> es una falta de respeto tuya. >>> pero no dale. >>> ay!. >>> fuera de aquÍ. >>> te vas!. >>> mira no tengo por quÉ perd el tiempo. >>> ve

we have been studying the economic impact and the epa impact for the past 15 years and yet we have epa mandating what we can and can't do without congressional approval. the transportation costs fund six to $8 more per barrel to bring that out of canada through a ford shale it down bring it through and into a refinery. yet we have some people who are trying to help -- and yet we are taxing them severely by keeping the price of crude up instead of bringing these pipelines and which would substantially reduce the cost of oil and other byproducts and reduce the tasks -- tasks that people have to pay at the pump. the politics to me is the villain of all of this and people who have -- [inaudible] >> host: russell evans? >> guest: there is no doubt that there's a gap in transportation costs and really two questions i heard. the transportation cost gap in the will of the epa with the same policy. they there increasingly interesting opportunities. if i can buy fuel and find some way to ship it, allen through gulf coast refinery or east coast refineries to an upper midwest refinery and sell it

had epa made any kind of calculation on that? the clean air act, we were not allowed to take that into account in announcing a transportation or a land use control that would achieve the standard. removing that number of cars would have just devastated it -- economically. the air would have been cleaner, but there wouldn't have been -- people wouldn't have been able to get to the hospitals and other things. what was the philosophy behind the law that said, "we don't want to count cost"? the philosophy is just as i stated at the outset, that we thought we knew what the bad pollutants were, that we knew how to measure them, we knew the level at which the health and environmental effects occurred, we could get them below that level with a margin of safety, and we had the technology that could achieve that at a reasonable cost. all those assumptions are wrong. and if those assumptions are wrong, then the law that embodies those assumptions is bound to drive us to an irrational result. and it's just particularly obvious in a case like

act alone -- kennedy epa act alone?can the epa act alone? guest: they can. they are starting to create carbon emission standards for the nation's existing power plants. .hey are taking a lot of input the weight that this section of the clean air act works, it says the feds create binding guidelines. it says to the states, create a plan to implement that. one lady states could implement this plan is to adopt a policy way the states could implement this plan is to adopt a policy. the idea is to lower emissions from existing power plants, that is difficult. you can build it into a new plan, it is tough to create and add on technology to an existing plan that lowers the carbon level. so a way from a states power next is to rent a portable power mix state's renewable levels. these standards could provide new avenues for renewable energy. host: the epa going around the country for listening sessions. they have one this morning at their epa headquarters in washington. it kicks off at 9:00 a.m. eastern time, go to c-span.org fo

ben epa regulation can undermined if congress is determined to do that. my final question that i asked in the research exercise is, what can you imagine for another opening for action and what should happen if you happen to be someone who supports the idea there should be an increase price of carbon sources of sentence for families to transfer to cleaner sources? that is what we are talking about here. i am agnostic about whether that happens through a permit system and trading on the market or whether it would happen to a carbon tax of some kind. i am not going to take a position. either way would require legislation. it is impossible to imagine that coming up again unless the democrats take control of both houses. wouldf that happens, what happen if the proponents tried the same game plan against? out, one ofort came the people who was a supporter ,f the cap and trade efforts said the arrest nothing wrong with the game plan. it was just that execution. -- stated there was nothing wrong with a game plan. there is chance let's improve. up because i am in

the epa wants to cut, yes cut the amount of ethanol in your gas.ig oil and maybe a big blow for corn farmers and ethanol producers. here now to talk about it andy. is this a big win for big oil? >> absolutely. the oil industry is convinced the epa that we've hit the ethanol blend wall and it's really impractical to increase the required amount of ethanol above what we're blending today. >> what's teeth knoll blend wall. >> for all intents and purpose we can only blend 10% of ethanol into the gasoline that consumers buy for a variety of reasons not with standing we got a lot of states that don't permit you to blend more. >> i assume you produce x amount of corn to use it. now you won't use that corn. you'll have too much corn we know from larry very smart economic mind when you have too much of something prices tend to go down. does this mean prices at the pump at least in the near term should go down because the corn blend in ethanol will be cheaper? >> well, i am expecting there's going be pressure on ethanol prices because that industry is plague

ben epa regulation can undermined if congress is determined to do that. my final question that i asked in the research exercise is, what can you imagine for another opening for action and what should happen if you happen to be someone who supports the idea there should be an increase price of carbon sources of sentence for families to transfer to cleaner sources? that is what we are talking about here. i am agnostic about whether that happens through a permit system and trading on the market or whether it would happen to a carbon tax of some kind. i am not going to take a position. either way would require legislation. it is impossible to imagine that coming up again unless the democrats take control of both houses. wouldf that happens, what happen if the proponents tried the same game plan against? out, one ofort came the people who was a supporter ,f the cap and trade efforts said the arrest nothing wrong with the game plan. it was just that execution. -- stated there was nothing wrong with a game plan. there is chance let's improve. up because i am in

as w first reported back in february, the epa discovered thesnew hotspots of the chemical tce, located here in mountain view, outside t original boundaries of t m.e.w. superfund site

an epa-- listen to this, an epa employee pleading guilty to bilking taxpayers out of nearly $1 millionears. john beale, former employee of the epa's office of air and radiation, took about two and a half years off between 2000-2013, claiming he was a cia agent working on a top secret research project with langley. beale took lavish trips to los angeles visiting relatives on the taxpayer dime, racked up $57,000 worth of travelling expenses and told the epa he contracted malaria while serving in vietnam and gave him a $18,000 value, handicap parking spot in d.c. beale neither served in vietnam and never had malaria. kirsten powers, still with us and listen to all of this. took 23 years to get this guy? doesn't this undermine the central premise of the obama administration, which is, no, it does, it does. >> the obama-- >> no, it does, president obama is all government, all the time. he wants the government to do everything, but they don't perform. obamacare is a shambles. this guy walks around, he's with the cia for god knows how many years? come on, the whole idea of government can do e

epa, congressman paul broun tried to make news with this question for epa administer gina mccarthy.listen carefully to how miss mccarthy responds and watch how he distorts it. >> let me ask you one more question because my time is running out. are you signed up for obama care? >> no, i am not. >> well, because i'm lucky enough as a federal government i have health care available to me, which i've signed up for. in a few years when that's not the case i'll be happy to have other available health care opportunities. >> to be clear mccarthy is referring to the fact she's lucky enough to already have health insurance, not knocking affordable care act. a few minutes later right to her face congressman stockton chose to take her words differently. that's number two in our countdown. >> earlier you gave me my favorite tweet of the day, which is i'm lucky enough -- the quote is from you. i love it. it seems i'm luckn enough not to have to sign up for obama care. that's wonderful. i wish my constituents could say the same. >> i think i was referring to i'm lucky enough to have access to good

epa. >>> hablame un poco. siempre que nos escucha ¿quÉ te gustarÍa un niÑo o niÑa?.varÓn. >>> siempre me dijeron lo vuelve loco un varÓn. >>> sÍ, porque tengo una hembra. >>> ponte aquÍ, vamos a hacer 20. ayudanos el juego de las m, adelante. >>> cuatro. >>> cinco gm. >>> ¿quÉ te gustarÍa un varÓn?. >>> me encantarÍa. >>> ¿comprÓ la ropa?. >>> no todavÍa. estoy esperando el sexo del bebÉ. >>> ¿sabes quien vende una ropa internacional?. genovevo. >>> el dueÑo de eso que me tiene impactado. >>> agarralo. >>> cuidado, cuidado. >>> vuela. >>> me falta esto. vente. >>> no, no, no. >>> una invitaciÓn. >>> pasale la bata. >>> la gente los paramÉdicos los mÉdicos de aquÍ para que lo vean. >>> le dieron con la punta. >>> atenciÓn. >>> saludos. >>> personal mÍnimo para que pueda hacer el desnudo. >>> tenga, tenga, todo el mundo. >>> calma, calma. >>> agarralo. >>> con cuidado. >>> carlos guillermo j. >>> le van a cortar la corbata y llevarÁ el huevo en la cabeza. ¿quÉ le va a pasar al huevo con la boca?. ay! mamÁ, dios. >>> cuidado. >>> (gritos). >>> hoy el programa lo que est

this is one of 11 public meetings the epa is hoping to get public input before releasing final ruleson regulating carbon emissions from existing power plants. .his is an hour and 40 minutes >> thank you all very much for in today'sarticipate session, which is part of what is now an ongoing national intended to help the environmental protection agency and the states determine effective ways to prevent carbon pollution from existing power plants. power plants are the nations single largest source of carbon pollution, a source we must address as we work to combat climate change. one of the most significant public health risks of our time. science tells us that climate change is real, that human activities are fueling that change, and that we must take action now to avoid the most devastating consequences. in june, president obama called on agencies across the federal government, including epa, to take action to cut carbon pollution to protect our country from the impact of climate change and to leave the world in this effort. the president's call included a "to work for epa expeditiousl

narrator: epa standards did not safeguard against cryptosporidium, because it was an unknown threat. once it contaminated the water supply, the treatment plant had no capability to kill the pathogen. so it spread throughout the system. biedrzycki: we saw an expenditure of $90 million to upgrade both water treatment plants. kaminski: cryptosporidium was a wake-up call. it was a wake-up call for us. it's a wake-up call for the nation. take care of your infrastructure before you have the kind of problem we had. biedrzycki: by no stretch of the imagination do i think we're out of the woods. recent cdc statistics indicate that up to 32 million cases of waterborne disease occur each year in this country. roy: but the vast majority of waterborne outbreaks go undetected. when people first get ill, they think, "oh, it's something i ate last night." they don't think, "oh, it's something i drank last night." narrator: the milwaukee incident pointed out the potential vulnerability of our drinking water infrastructure in controlling the spread of illness. biedrzycki: it's incumbent upon us to try

♪ [tose] ♪ ya te salvé, ya te salvé, y ahora ven a mí, que soy superman ♪ [aplausos] [algarabía] >>epa miedo de que llegara de golpe la policÍa. yo, como vecino, pues considerÉ que debÍa ir. uno quiere hacer una gracia y lo que le sale es una morisqueta. >>vienen ahora que estÁ muerto. >>vinimos a darle el pÉsame, comadre. >>lo mandaron a salir con las manos en alto y Él saliÓ. p---. lo engaÑaron. lo j---.

it goes to the epa taking it all over the country, no legislation, only regulation. he needs those liberal federal judges in the d.c. circuit to impose that through regulation. >> he is the president. he gets to appoint them. >> we have not a parliamentary system but a republic. this is the first time in american history, there should be marches in the street with peasants and pitch forks and torches. >> i don't know. the rhetoric is really inspiring. right? but what i think is a problem, this is really just a vicious power grab. they want to get as much through and done as they can while they have the opportunity and they're not going to care about the way they get it done as long as they can make it happen. you understand they are not concerned at all about the constitution. they're not concerned at all i don't believe about the good will of the american people. it's what they think is best for the american people whether you want it or not. >> what about the total, complete hypocrisy? >> you know, you're sitting there making rational arguments why they might have

take a look at what happened at the epa oversight hearing in the house this november. epa.essman paul browne tried to make some news with this question for epa administrate, jean gina mccarthy. listen to how she responds and how he distorts. >> let me ask one more time because my time is running out. are you signed up for obama care? >> no, i am not. >> why not? >> because i'm lucky enough as a federal government that i have health care available to me, which i've signed up for. in a few years, when that's not the case, i'll be happy to have other available -- >> well, our president says that obama care is -- >> well, to be clear, mccarthy there is referring to the fact that she is lucky enough to already have health insurance. show not knocking the affordable care act. well, a few minutes later in the hearing, right to her face, congressman steve stockman chose to interpret her words somewhat differently. and that's number two in our countdown. >> i think, though, you earlier gave me my favorite tweet of the day, which i'm going send out. >> shoot. that wasn't my intent. >

>>¡epa, que la sueltes! ¡suÉltala! >>¡atrÁs! >>¡suÉltame, c---! ¡suÉltame! ella] ¿estÁs viviendo con macavÍ? ¡dime la verdad! >>¡sÍ! ¡¿y quÉ?! >>te estÁs viendo con Él, ¡¿ah?! >>¿me vas a matar? [bofetada] >>¡y seguramente te lo estÁs tirando! ¿no? ¡¿te lo estÁs tirando?! >>a ti no te importa. ¡ay! >>¡¿te lo estÁs tirando?! ¡dime! >>yo para ti no soy nadie. [jadeos] tÚ no eres un hombre, jula. Él es distinto. >>¡ah, caray! >>¡estÁ lleno de vida! >>si es que la mujer se enamorÓ. >>Él no fue, jula. >>eso me lo va a decir Él. tÚ me dirÁs ¡dÓnde lo consigo! >>¡Él no lo matÓ! >>¡que me digas dÓnde estÁ! dÍmelo. ¿me lo vas a decir o no? >>¡ah! entonces la vaina es personal. ¡es que a ti no te importa con quiÉn yo me acuesto! >>sÍ es personal, porque con Él ¡le pusiste sentimiento! >>si tÚ no me quieres, jula. tu sÓlo me usas para jugar... para acordarte de tu mujer. [jadeos] tÚ no la mataste. claro... pero la atormentabas. y un dÍa... ella se matÓ. >>a ella no la matÉ... pero a ti, sÍ te voy a dar ¡un tiro como no me digas dÓnde consigo a macavÍ >>para matar, hay