XXXX Opposed $8.3 Billion to Clean Superfund Sites. In 2004, XXXX voted against increasing Superfund spending by $8.3 billion over five years and reinstating the Superfund tax on major polluting industries to provide funding for Superfund cleanups. [Vote 45, 3/11/04] XXXX Voted Against Hazardous Fuel Reduction. In October 2003, XXXX voted against an amendment that required the treatment of slash and other long term fuels management for hazardous fuels reduction projects. [Vote 422, 10/30/03] XXXX Voted Against Reinstating Superfund Taxes To Charge Polluters For Environmental Cleanups. In 2004, XXXX voted against reinstating a tax on polluters to help pay for cleaning up the Superfund toxic waste sites. The bill in question would have increased revenue by $1.1 billion in fiscal 2004 and by $15.6 billion over 10 years. The Superfund tax expired in 1995, and by 2003, the special trust fund created from the taxes on chemical and petroleum companies had dwindled from a high of $3.6 billion to a projected $28 million. Sen. Lautenberg, the amendment’s sponsor said Republicans’ rejection of the “polluter pays tax” sends a clear message that the GOP “stand with the corporate polluters and not with American families.” [Vote 97, 3/25/03; Associated Press, 3/25/03] XXXX Voted Against $100 Million For Brownfield Cleanup. In 2003, XXXX voted against an amendment to increase federal funding for the Superfund by $100 million, with the funds set aside for the cleanup of brownfields, which are abandoned and contaminated urban industrial sites. [Vote 27, 1/23/03] XXXX Voted Against A Six-Month Delay in Implementing Proposed New Source Review Rules. In 2003, XXXX voted against delaying for six months Environmental Protection Agency rules regarding the New Source Review (NSR) section of the Clean Air Act that would let industrial plants upgrade their facilities without improving air pollution controls. The Edwards amendment would have postponed the rules from taking effect until at least Sept. 15 while they were studied by the National Academy of Sciences. Edwards argued that the proposed rules would result in increased air pollution and health problems. Republicans who said the new regulations would help manufacturing companies become more efficient and reduce U.S. use of foreign oil. They also said the current rules prevented companies from making some technological changes that would cut pollution. The proposed rules were supported by manufacturing groups, but opposed by environmental organizations. [HJ Res. 2, Vote 12, 1/22/03; Associated Press, 1/22/03] XXXX Voted For Study of Proposed New Source Review Rules. In 2003, XXXX voted for authorizing a National Academy of Sciences study of new rules regarding the New Source Review (NSR) section of the Clean Air Act without delaying implementation of those rules. NSR requires utilities to install better pollution controls when an expansion or modernization results in the release of increased pollution from a coal-burning plant. The proposed rules would result in increased air pollution and health problems. Republicans said the new regulations would help manufacturing companies become more efficient and reduce U.S. use of foreign oil. They also said the current rules prevented companies from making some technological changes that would cut pollution. The proposed rules were supported by manufacturing groups, but opposed by environmental organizations. [HJ Res. 2, Vote 11, 1/22/03; Associated Press, 1/22/03] XXXX Voted to Prevent Americans From Having To Clean Up After Polluters. In 2002, XXXX voted for an amendment that would force polluters to pay for the clean-up of the messes they make by reinstating the original Superfund taxes. According to the New York Times, “The trust fund's main source of money had been a series of special taxes imposed on chemical and oil companies and other businesses. But those taxes, which brought in about $1 billion a year, expired in 1995….In 1994, taxpayers paid $250 million for Superfund cleanups, or about 21 percent of the $1.2 billion fund, and corporate taxes provided $950 million, or about 79 percent.” [HR 3009, Vote 97, 4/29/02; New York Times, Hernandez, 4/15/02] XXXX Voted For A Measure With Funding For Superfund And New Rules On Arsenic In Drinking Water. In 2001, XXXX voted for a bill that provided $7.903 billion for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including $1.221 billion for the Superfund Program. The bill also restricted the use of funds to delay a new standard for arsenic in drinking water. The conference report was agreed to, 87-7. [HR 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01] 125