Photo of Iowa

Grassley News

Grassley Questions EPA on New Methane Reduction Plan... Read More >>

Grassley Urges Resolution to Congolese Children Adoption Suspension... Read More >>

For Immediate Release
June 15, 2010

TV ad by Americans United for Change


TO: Reporters and Editors
FR: Jill Kozeny, 202-224-1308
            for Senator Chuck Grassley
RE: TV ad by Americans United for Change
DA: Tuesday, June 15, 2010

In a TV ad being aired today, Americans United for Change attacks Senator Grassley for his support for a resolution offered last week by Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.  The ad is the same as one that’s been run by the group in other states, with the name of the senator being attacked changed.

The ad is false and misleading about the Murkowski resolution.  Here are important facts.

The Murkowski resolution (the language is below) simply would have overturned the EPA’s endangerment finding.  The endangerment finding allows and requires EPA to promulgate regulations to limit greenhouse gases like traditional pollutants.  It doesn’t affect anything other than greenhouse gases.

The issue ad shows pictures of the oil spill and, in Iowa, says that Grassley voted to let oil polluters off the hook.  That implies that the vote the ad is talking about had to do with oil pollution but, in reality, the vote had to do with EPA regulations of CO2.

In its Monday press release promoting the ad, the group calls on Senator Grassley to support the American Power Act, which is the Kerry-Lieberman bill that was written with BP at the table and which BP is strongly supporting.

BP is a major producer of natural gas, demand for which is expected to increase greatly with any CO2 limits because power plants will be forced to switch from coal to natural gas.  Under the American Power Act, BP will make a killing and Iowa families will pay more for their electrical bills, as well as for food and other goods.

Here is a comment from Senator Grassley:

“Under the controversial regulations that EPA is proposing and the proposed legislation, Iowa’s economy takes an even bigger hit than the East and West coasts.  I voted for the 1990 Clean Air Act, and what EPA is trying to do today exceeds its authority under that law.  I’m fighting to give Iowa and the rest of middle America a say in environmental protection.  It’s a matter of fair treatment and representative government.  These decisions should be made by Congress, where officials can be held accountable by the people, rather than by an unelected bureaucracy, in this case the same agency that tried to penalize farmers for the fugitive dust that kicks up from the tractor on windy days.  ”

Here is the complete, exact language of the Murkowski resolution, which had bipartisan support, including from Senators Rockefeller, Bayh, Pryor, Lincoln, Landrieu, and Ben Nelson, but was defeated by the Senate last Thursday:

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental  Protection Agency relating to the endangerment finding and the cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air  Act (published at 74 Fed. Reg. 66496 (December 15, 2009)), and such rule shall have no force or effect."

Here is the statement Senator Grassley issued last Thursday about his vote:


TO: Reporters and Editors
RE: EPA Resolution Fails in Senate
DA: June 10, 2010

Senator Chuck Grassley issued the following comment after the Senate failed to pass a resolution that would have blocked the EPA from moving forward with regulations on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses.  Grassley was an original cosponsor of the resolution.

“Our economy is sputtering and by not passing this resolution, Congress is ceding policy decisions that could have serious economic ramifications to a bureaucratic agency that is not accountable to the American people.  The EPA is simply trying to bully Congress by saying, ‘Either you pass a bill that will raise costs for American families and destroy jobs or we’ll pass regulations that will be even worse.’  The Obama administration has acknowledged this, but is still pushing forward.  EPA’s go it alone policy is a big problem for Iowa families and businesses who will be hit particularly hard because of Iowa’s energy intensive economy, especially in agriculture and manufacturing.”