Jason Altmire: Manufacturers need pragmatism from EPA on upcoming air quality rule

When I was growing up in Western Pennsylvania in the 1970s and ’80s, the region’s rich industrial heritage was a point of local pride and known the world over. Many of the men and women working on the shop floors in and around Pittsburgh were your quintessential Nixon and Reagan Democrats. Hardworking and independent, the workers were the heartbeat of America’s manufacturing economy.

Much has changed since then, as the region’s economy has become more diversified. Manufacturing is sleeker and cleaner, though its good-paying jobs are still one of the surest tickets to the American middle class. Unfortunately, the sector continues to face pressures — the number of people working in manufacturing in the Pittsburgh area sits at near historic lows and has been roughly flat over the last decade. Meanwhile, broader employment in Allegheny County still has not recovered to pre-pandemic levels.

One culprit for these economic headwinds is Allegheny County’s designation by the EPA as being in “non-attainment” under its national ambient air quality standard for fine particulate matter, or PM2.5. These are tiny particles smaller than the diameter of a human hair that are emitted from a variety of everyday sources, including construction, transportation, manufacturing and agriculture. When an area is found to be in “non-attainment,” it essentially becomes off-limits for new investment, and facilities may even be forced to halt operations. Unfortunately, this wet blanket over the Pittsburgh region’s economy could be about to get much heavier.

This fall, the EPA is expected to announce a stricter revised standard for PM2.5 that will have serious economic consequences if the agency follows the advice of overzealous environmental activists. These groups are calling for a standard that would cause a 10-fold increase in the number of counties in non-attainment, impacting nearly 40% of the U.S. population and putting as many as 850,000 manufacturing jobs at risk. Pennsylvania would be one of the states hardest hit, standing to lose up to 23,000 manufacturing jobs and $4.5 billion in economic activity. These figures, published in a recent study by Oxford Economics, illustrate the high cost of taking such a one-sided approach.

I have always believed that when policymakers only listen to the extremes, two things will happen — increased polarization and bad public policy. There is an abundance of both today, so EPA need not pile on.

As someone who worked in the health care industry for many years I appreciate the importance of EPA’s mission to promote public health. But moving more than a third of the country into non-attainment is nonsensical in the extreme.

Less important, it may also be bad politics. These newly downgraded areas could find themselves short-changed when it comes to benefitting from some of President Biden’s signature legislative achievements like the CHIPS Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act. Domestic manufacturing has enjoyed a significant renaissance in recent years, and the president continues to make the sector a priority, with 800,000 jobs added back on his watch. But if EPA overreaches, “Bidenomics” could find a lot of wind missing from its sails — right as the president is asking voters for another term in office.

In my interactions with then-Vice President Biden during my time in Congress, his pragmatic streak and command of the issues facing Western Pennsylvania were second to none. He has a deep connection to the commonwealth and its people and understands the economic hardship a heavy-handed EPA can inflict on this region. But it is impossible to miss the impatient rumblings from those on the left hoping to push the Biden administration further away from the center.

Most Americans — and I would wager many members of Congress — are not familiar with a regulation as arcane as PM2.5, but there is much at stake for the region and the country with EPA’s upcoming rulemaking. Reasonable people can agree that protecting public health and providing industry with clear, attainable regulations do not need to be mutually exclusive. Some good old-fashioned Joe Biden pragmatism at EPA would go a long way to getting that balance right — and preventing an ill-timed economic mess.

Jason Altmire, a Democrat, represented Pennsylvania’s 4th District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2007-13.