- 5/21/2025
During remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday, Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) spoke about the Republicans' effort to overturn a California regulation on electric vehicles using the Congressional Review Act.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00And colleagues, today on the Senate floor, we are expecting to see some outrageous attacks
00:08on my home state of California and important provisions of the historic Clean Air Act.
00:17And while it's not too late to turn back at this moment, I think it's important for
00:23all of my colleagues to know that I will be back here again and again and again throughout
00:31this process to make sure that everyone knows what these votes mean, not just for the precedent
00:38and procedures of the United States Senate, but for the health of my constituents in California
00:45and about the real threat to human life that comes when California is denied the ability
00:54to control toxic air and greenhouse gas emissions.
01:01But before I do, I want senators and the American people to fully understand what we are about
01:08to witness on the Senate floor.
01:10Put aside all the procedural back and forth, I'll get back to that in a few minutes.
01:18But overall, it's actually pretty simple.
01:22Senate Republicans are preparing to vote to overrule the parliamentarian, the nonpartisan
01:31umpire, referee for the Senate that lets us know what's in order, what's not in order.
01:37Senate Republicans are preparing to vote to overrule the parliamentarian.
01:46They'll argue that they're not, but that is indeed what's happening here.
01:52Now, they want to do that in order to bypass the filibuster in order to get the Clean Air
02:00Act.
02:00Now, as I stand here right now, those joint resolutions that are going to be before us
02:08are subject to Rule 22 of the Senate and therefore subject to the 60-vote filibuster threshold.
02:18They are subject to debate.
02:21They are subject to amendments that's already been determined.
02:25But in this moment, they are in regular legislation and are subject as a result to the legislative
02:36filibuster.
02:40But if we see happen today what we expect to see happen, the status of these same bills,
02:48maybe later this evening, will be very, very different.
02:51If Senate Republicans have the way that we expect them to do, all of a sudden, these same measures
03:03that are subject to the legislative filibuster and debate and amendments will all of a sudden
03:12be expedited procedurally.
03:15No amendments allowed.
03:19Very limited debate.
03:24Colleagues, as I said here yesterday, it's not just the why Republicans are willing to
03:29endanger the health of Californians.
03:32It's also the how they're doing it that is threatening.
03:38A bit of history.
03:39In 1967, the Clean Air Act passed this body under regular order by a vote of 88 to 12.
03:51In 1990, the landmark Clean Air Act amendments passed the Senate 89 to 11.
04:00Overwhelming bipartisan support.
04:03But today, Republicans are trying to pass these bills to gut California's Clean Air Act authority
04:11under a simple 50-vote threshold.
04:18They're plotting to overturn the Senate parliamentarians' determination, plain and simple.
04:25Why is that significant?
04:27Well, the majority leader said it himself at the very start of this Congress, that when
04:34it comes to overriding the parliamentarian, quote, that's totally akin to killing the filibuster.
04:42We can't go there.
04:44People need to understand that.
04:47Period.
04:48End quote.
04:49But fast forward to this week, and we've heard all sorts of excuses and explanations and mental
04:58gymnastics as to why, all of a sudden, overturning the parliamentarian is not akin to killing the
05:06filibuster.
05:07That's a complete 180-degree shift.
05:10But in one way, I guess, it might be right.
05:15No, this isn't the same as killing the legislative filibuster.
05:19This actually goes way, way beyond that.
05:24Because first, they're doing more than going nuclear on the parliamentarian.
05:29They're going nuclear on the Congressional Review Act itself.
05:34It's true that the parliamentarian does not make law.
05:39Under the Constitution, the House and the Senate set their own procedures, limited by the
05:45requirements set in the Constitution.
05:49For the good of the order and an actual functioning democracy, we have all come to rely on the
05:56parliamentarian to call balls and strikes and set the rules of the road.
06:00But the Congressional Review Act is a law, and it says that all points of order are waived during
06:11a CRA resolution.
06:14And that's what we're debating right now, an actual CRA resolution relating to hydrogen fuel.
06:23Now, I oppose this particular resolution, but at least it is following the law and Senate procedure.
06:33But what is about to happen is going to be against the law and against Senate procedure.
06:42As I understand it, Senate Republicans are preparing to have this Senate go nuclear, not just once, but twice.
06:51First, we'll go nuclear and overturn the rule on points of order during a CRA, which is in the law.
07:04Then Republicans plan to go nuclear a second time to throw out the rule book and use the CRA
07:11against any agency action that any agency submits, no questions asked.
07:21So like I said, this goes way beyond just the legislative filibuster.
07:27So let's play it out a little bit.
07:29So we're clear as to what this would lead to.
07:32Under this logic, the Trump administration could send an endless stream of non-rule actions to Congress,
07:41going back to 1996, including vaccine approvals.
07:48After all, we have an HHS secretary with more than a spotty history as it pertains to the health and safety of vaccines.
07:58The administration could send broadcast licenses because we know this is an administration
08:06that is not shy about attacking anybody in the media community that disagrees with their agenda.
08:16We could see this administration send us merger approvals.
08:19Again, not just those that are pending, but going back to 1996.
08:23And any number of government decisions that apply on President Trump's long list of enemies.
08:34All it would take is a minimum of 30 senators to introduce related bills,
08:41and the Senate would be bogged down voting on agency actions, large and small, all day long.
08:50Is that how we want to spend our days here in the Senate, voting on every vaccine approval
08:59because Secretary Kennedy decides to send them to Congress?
09:03And what about the next Democratic administration?
09:07All bets would be off.
09:11Consider mining permits.
09:15Consider fossil fuel project approvals.
09:18Consider LNG export licenses or offshore leases, IRS tax policies, foreign policy,
09:28and every project 2025 or DOGE, disruption or overreach.
09:36Every agency action that Democrats don't like, whether it's a rule or not,
09:41and no matter how much time has passed,
09:43would be fair game if Republicans go through with this and establish this precedent.
09:52So let's take a step back.
09:55Republicans are admitting that they don't have the votes to pass these California resolutions
09:59under the Senate rules that the parliamentarian says apply in this case.
10:05So they'll overrule the parliamentarian.
10:12Why not throw out the rule book altogether?
10:15By voting to go nuclear on the CRA, they're ignoring the law,
10:20not just Senate rules, but the text of the law itself.
10:25By voting to overrule the parliamentarian,
10:27they're saying that the rules are whatever Republicans say they are,
10:32not what the parliamentarian has determined.
10:37The majority here can tell themselves whatever they want,
10:41and they can twist themselves into pretzels and nuts
10:43to try and justify these reckless actions.
10:48But despite their smoke-and-mirrors approach to confuse the general public,
10:53we're all going to see it today with our own eyes if they go forward.
11:00The majority wants to go nuclear to bypass the filibuster
11:04and pass a bill for the first time in Senate history.
11:11It has happened for nominations before.
11:14It has happened on a few procedural questions before,
11:19but never on a bill or three bills.
11:24Never.
11:26And if this happens under a Republican majority,
11:29it would actually be pretty ironic.
11:31The party that claims to be the staunch defender of the filibuster
11:34threw the rules aside as soon as it was convenient.
11:39Now, I've been honest on my views of the filibuster.
11:42I do think it needs to change overall going forward,
11:45but it was my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
11:48who fought hard to keep it.
11:50Well, there's about to be a new precedent on the record,
11:53unless we step back at the last minute.
11:58And it will stand as a guidepost going forward.
12:02Now, Democrats are in the minority today,
12:06but Democrats will be in the majority again someday.
12:09Maybe later, maybe sooner.
12:11But we will certainly not forget what happens here today.
12:19History will not forget.
12:23Mr. President, California will not forget
12:26what's at stake today either.
12:27I yield for now, but I will be back.
12:33Mr. President, the senator from California.
12:53Thank you, Mr. President.
12:54I thank my colleague, Senator Padilla,
12:56for his eloquent speech on this subject.
13:00Today, I want to talk about what's taking place in this chamber.
13:04And I want to talk about it in two respects.
13:07I want to talk about what it will mean for the American people
13:09in terms of the air that we breathe and the water that we drink.
13:14That's the most important thing.
13:16But then I want to also talk about what it will mean for this institution,
13:20for this Senate.
13:21What it will mean for the filibuster.
13:23What it will mean for whether things can get passed on a simple majority vote
13:28at the behest of the oil industry or any other special interest.
13:33Or whether things in the future will continue to require 60 votes
13:37to get through this body.
13:39So let's start with the first and most important thing.
13:42What does the repeal of California's Clean Air Waiver,
13:48that is, its right to set its own standards for the air that we breathe,
13:52what does this mean for the people of California?
13:54What does this mean for the people of the United States?
13:58Well, this is downtown Los Angeles in 1955.
14:03Now, I don't remember 1955.
14:06I didn't come around until 1960.
14:07But I do remember air that looked a lot like this when I moved to Los Angeles.
14:13I remember days when there were smog alerts.
14:17We still have some of those.
14:19I remember when it was unhealthy air to breathe
14:23and people were advised not to go outside if they didn't need to.
14:29And kids couldn't go out on recess because the air quality was so bad.
14:35But this is what places in California, like Los Angeles,
14:40how many places in the San Joaquin Valley looked like just a few decades ago.
14:46The San Joaquin Valley, where so much of the food of the nation is grown,
14:51these areas have experienced the rapid rise of personal automobiles
14:55and the expansion of our population, America's West, its suburbs, and its cities.
15:01Because on days like this, you just couldn't walk outside sometimes without hacking.
15:07If you had asthma or a breathing problem, it was even more severe.
15:11And California families, through no fault of their own,
15:15were on the front lines of a health risk unseen
15:18since the worst days of the Industrial Revolution pollution.
15:22The smog was so bad that in one instance, mass panic broke out in California
15:28because there was a belief that there was some kind of chemical weapons attack.
15:34Now, this was in part due to these amazing increases in population,
15:37but it was also our unique topography.
15:41The San Gabriel Mountains in Los Angeles,
15:44the Sierra Nevadas in the Central Valley or for the Central Valley,
15:48they trap fossil fuel emissions and keep smog clouds hanging over our cities
15:54where they may not hang over other parts of the nation.
15:58So the San Gabriel Mountains, for those of us in L.A.,
16:01but the Verdugo's and other mountain ranges
16:03and the Sierra Nevadas have an impact on the Central Valley.
16:09And all that means that 10 million Californians are living in areas
16:13that are under distinct and elevated threats from air pollution.
16:20And what that has meant historically is higher rates of respiratory issues
16:23like asthma and chronic lung disease.
16:26It has meant increased risk of heart disease,
16:29chronic headaches, immune system issues,
16:33and most significantly, increased cancer risks.
16:37And that is multiplied by us living now on the front lines of the climate crisis.
16:45We have devastating and year-round fire dangers
16:48that put millions of other pollutants into our air.
16:53So we need, deserve, and reserve the right as Californians
16:58to do something about our air.
17:01And in fact, this is why California became the first state in the nation
17:05to regulate the emissions of automobiles back in 1966.
17:09Because we understood then, as we do now,
17:12the risks that Californians face if we don't take action.
17:18And over the past 60 years, since our skies looked like this,
17:21California has led on this issue.
17:24And now, we're being targeted for it.
17:27And what will the cost of that be?
17:30By revoking California's right to protect its citizens from dirty air,
17:37we face not just dirtier air, but we also face a sicker society.
17:44The American Lung Association projected that our nation's moving
17:47to zero-emission vehicles in the next decade
17:50would generate more than $1 trillion in public health benefits
17:56and save more than 100,000 people from premature death.
18:02So, this is really the heart of the question for this body.
18:08And that is, what's more valuable to us?
18:10Is it the unfettered right to pollute the skies
18:12and make them look like this?
18:15Or do we want to save about a trillion dollars in money
18:18we would have to spend otherwise
18:19on treating asthma and treating lung cancer
18:22and treating heart disease
18:23that's caused by air like this?
18:29That electric vehicle requirement
18:32can save more than 100,000 people from premature death.
18:38So, I guess we have to ask ourselves,
18:41how much is life worth?
18:43What would it be worth to us
18:45to be able to live a few years longer?
18:49And I suppose the answer to that question depends on,
18:51well, what kind of life is that?
18:52What kind of health are we in?
18:56But I would say a few more years is worth a lot.
19:01It's worth a lot.
19:02It's certainly worth more than contributions
19:04from the oil industry
19:05to be able to live a little longer,
19:08to be able to live a little healthier.
19:11And by targeting California,
19:13as this effort is doing,
19:15which comprises 11% of the nation,
19:18and our goal of decarbonizing our transportation sector,
19:22we are sowing poison seeds for the future.
19:26Seeds that will grow to be more asthma
19:28and more sickness and more hospitalizations
19:30and more death.
19:31That is the bleak but blatant reality
19:33of what we are debating here today.
19:35If the Republicans go nuclear
19:39to repeal California's clean air rules,
19:45that is what this will mean.
19:47It will mean shorter lives,
19:49poor quality of life,
19:50because what we're breathing in the air,
19:54and ultimately when they strike down clean water rules,
19:56what we're drinking in our water
19:57is going to be dirtier,
19:59and the American people
20:01are going to be more plagued
20:03by a whole variety of cancers.
20:07Now, I mentioned the term going nuclear.
20:09What does that mean?
20:11This gets to the second point I want to make today,
20:14which is how the Republican majority
20:16intends to go about repealing California's ability
20:20to set the standards for its own air.
20:23That is, how does the Republican majority
20:25intend to foist its will
20:28on millions of people in other states?
20:31How are they determined to overturn states' rights?
20:34How are they determined
20:35that the federal government should tell a state,
20:38no, you can't protect your people
20:40from air pollution,
20:42not to that degree you can't,
20:44because we answer to a higher authority,
20:47and that higher authority
20:47is called the oil industry.
20:50So how are they going to do it?
20:52Because in this body,
20:54for better or worse,
20:55it generally takes 60 votes to get things done.
20:58That is the filibuster.
20:59It requires 60 votes.
21:01And to repeal California's law,
21:05if you were to take that step,
21:06it requires 60 votes.
21:08Don't just take my word for it.
21:10We ask the parliamentarian,
21:11who's the expert,
21:12does this require 60 votes?
21:14Is this subject to the filibuster?
21:16And the answer is,
21:17yes, it does.
21:18Well, you would think that'd be the end of the story,
21:22but you can overrule the parliamentarian,
21:27say the parliamentarian is wrong,
21:30and then reduce the threshold to 50 votes.
21:32Now, you might ask,
21:34how is that possible?
21:35Is the filibuster really that fragile
21:37that whenever it is ruled
21:40that you need 60 votes,
21:41you can simply overrule the parliamentarian?
21:44And the answer is yes.
21:45The rule is that fragile.
21:48Which means if Republicans move to go nuclear,
21:51to overturn the parliamentarian,
21:53to do away with the filibuster,
21:54to do away with California's clean air,
21:59they'll be setting a precedent
22:00that at any time and for any reason,
22:06for any state, for any rule,
22:08for any non-rule,
22:09for any waiver,
22:10for any license,
22:12for any grant,
22:13for any anything,
22:15a new majority can simply say,
22:19well, we'd like to vote on this with 50 votes,
22:21and if the parliamentarian says it takes 60,
22:24you just vote to overturn the parliamentarian.
22:28So that is the import of what we're doing today,
22:31which is we are setting a precedent
22:34that the filibuster is essentially now meaningless,
22:37because if you can do away with the filibuster
22:39to do away with one state's clean air,
22:41well, you can pretty much do away with the filibuster
22:44for everything and anything.
22:49So that is the momentous nature
22:50of what's happening today.
22:53The majority here
22:54may force Californians to breathe air like that again,
22:59and the majority here may decide
23:01they're getting rid of the filibuster.
23:03Now, getting back to the underlying merits here,
23:09the American Lung Association found
23:11that our transition to cleaner air
23:14and zero-emission vehicles
23:15would result in 13 million
23:18fewer lost work days in the next 10 years.
23:22So what does that mean, 13 million?
23:24It means 13 million less times
23:28that you're so sick you can't go to work.
23:31You get 13 million more days of health
23:35with these clean air rules.
23:38Think about that.
23:4013 million more healthy days
23:43for you, the American people,
23:45if we achieve our emissions goals.
23:50Now, since my swearing in six months ago
23:53to the Senate,
23:55I've had the privilege of visiting communities
23:57all over California,
23:58talking to Californians
24:00who are on the front lines of this,
24:02and yes, some are environmental activists,
24:05and yes, some work on science and climate issues,
24:09but there are others too,
24:13and they are the people
24:14who put food in your grocery stores,
24:16they're the people who spend
24:17so much of their days outside
24:21breathing the only air available to them,
24:23they're the people who will be sicker,
24:25some of the people who will be sicker,
24:28work less, maybe die earlier
24:30if we let the fossil fuel industry win this week,
24:34the people who spend hundreds of hours each month
24:36on their hands and knees,
24:37making sure that all the rest of us
24:40can have fresh berries and greens
24:41and other crops
24:43that California puts on your plate.
24:46I am, of course, talking about farm workers.
24:49I invite any of my colleagues
24:52to consider what millions more pounds of smog
24:54in our air over the next decade will do to them.
25:01And, of course, it's not just farm workers.
25:04It's all of us.
25:06All of us who spend time outdoors.
25:11All of us who can't help but be outdoors.
25:13All of us are going to be breathing in dirtier air.
25:19All of us are going to be suffering more sick days.
25:23All of us are going to be plagued by more cancers.
25:27If we repeal the rules that each state gets to set
25:32that has a waiver,
25:35wants to join California's healthier air rules,
25:38that will be the repercussion.
25:43Used to be there was a bipartisan consensus
25:45in favor of cleaner air.
25:47It wasn't just Democrats.
25:49Richard Nixon, who founded the EPA,
25:53Pete Wilson, Ronald Reagan,
25:55they all understood the importance of the environment
25:57and clean air and clean water.
26:00They helped California take the environmental movement
26:02and make it mainstream.
26:04We got pollutants out of our air
26:06and out of our water
26:07and out of our communities.
26:09Where is that party now?
26:10Where is the party that helped write the Clean Air Act?
26:14Where is the party that says
26:15Congress should not meddle
26:16in what one state is doing to govern itself?
26:25And what will happen
26:26when you lose the majority
26:30and Democrats have the opportunity
26:36to follow this precedent,
26:37what will happen to your state?
26:40We decide we don't like your state's rule
26:42on Mifepristone.
26:43Or we don't like the fact
26:45that your state got a license
26:46to export liquid natural gas.
26:49Or we don't like a grant
26:51that your state got in transportation.
26:53Or we don't like some rule
26:55that benefits your state.
26:56will you argue to us that you can't overturn the parliamentarian?
27:06Will that be your argument?
27:10Because
27:10that fight will be over.
27:14So I will remember where I am today.
27:19I will remember what we're doing today.
27:20I think we all would
27:22and will.
27:23I hope it's not the day that
27:26we made it easier to pollute California's skies.
27:31I hope it's not the date
27:32we made it easier to
27:34make water
27:35filled with more forever chemicals
27:38like PFAS.
27:40I hope it's not the day
27:41we decided that we could
27:42eliminate a state's right
27:44to control
27:45the quality of the air
27:46that their citizens breathe
27:47or the water they drink.
27:49And I hope it's not the day
27:50we decided that
27:51it was worth getting rid of the filibuster
27:53to satisfy the fossil fuel industry.
27:57And with that, I yield back.