Greenhouse Gas Regulations at a Glance

The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) rules regulating greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions under the Clean Air Act could have severe, negative effects on the economy, the job
market and American businesses. Although reducing GHG emissions is an important goal, it
should not be at the expense of our economy.

What’s wrong with EPA’s decision to regulation GHGs from stationary sources?

 The American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) estimates that GHG regulations could
reduce business investment by $97-$290 billion in 2011 and by as much as $301 billion in 2014.

 ACCF also estimates that cutting capital spending by $100 billion would result in 720,000
lost jobs across all sectors of the economy.

 By the EPA’s own estimates, these regulations could affect as many as six million American
businesses and organizations already struggling to stay afloat—including industrial facilities,
power plants, hospitals and agricultural and commercial establishments.

 In order to comply with these new regulations, businesses would need to obtain permits
before moving forward with construction and modification—hampering potential growth and
expansion.

 Many states are facing extreme financial strain even without the added permitting
requirements of EPA’s regulations.

Now is not the time for a mandate that would cost U.S. jobs and harm our already fragile
economy. Furthermore, the Clean Air Act is not suited to regulate GHG emissions and it’s
Congress’ responsibility—not a federal agency—to enact any such measures. For the sake of
U.S. jobs and the American economy, members of Congress should delay the EPA’s regulation
of greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources.