Overview

Title

To repeal section 138 of the Clean Air Act, relating to environmental and climate justice block grants.

ELI5 AI

H.R. 10454 is a bill that wants to stop giving money to programs that help people fight air pollution and climate change, especially in communities that need help the most. It also plans to take back money that was set aside for these programs but hasn't been used yet.

Summary AI

H.R. 10454, introduced in the House of Representatives, seeks to repeal section 138 of the Clean Air Act. This section relates to the Environmental and Climate Justice Block Grants. The bill proposes to rescind any leftover funds that were previously allocated under this section. The Act is titled the "Ending Green Giveaways Act."

Published

2024-12-17
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-12-17
Package ID: BILLS-118hr10454ih

Keywords AI

clean air act environmental justice climate justice section 138 block grants fund rescission h.r. 10454 ending green giveaways act marginalized communities legislative transparency

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
204
Pages:
2
Sentences:
9

Language

Nouns: 70
Verbs: 14
Adjectives: 7
Adverbs: 0
Numbers: 11
Entities: 20

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.14
Average Sentence Length:
22.67
Token Entropy:
4.30
Readability (ARI):
12.78

AnalysisAI

Summary of the Bill

H.R. 10454, introduced by Mr. Flood, aims to repeal Section 138 of the Clean Air Act, which deals with environmental and climate justice block grants. These grants are specifically designed to support initiatives that address pollution and climate impacts in vulnerable communities. The bill is officially titled the “Ending Green Giveaways Act.” Beyond repealing the section, the bill also calls for the rescission of any unused funds that were allocated under this provision.

Significant Issues

The proposed repeal raises several significant issues. Primarily, the termination of this section could severely reduce support for environmental and climate justice initiatives. These initiatives often serve marginalized communities disproportionately affected by climate change and environmental pollution. Furthermore, the rescission of the unobligated funds might disrupt ongoing or planned projects, potentially wasting resources that have already been invested.

Additionally, there is an absence of any stated rationale for the repeal. This lack of explanation could be perceived as a lack of transparency and might lead to public distrust. The bill's language regarding the rescission of funds may also prove difficult for those unfamiliar with legislative processes to understand, potentially necessitating further clarification for stakeholders and the public.

Impact on the Public and Specific Stakeholders

Broadly, the repealing of Section 138 may impact community-based environmental projects across the country. These projects often aim to mitigate pollution and manage climate-related risks in underserved areas, and halting them might leave many communities vulnerable to environmental challenges. Thus, the bill might negatively affect public efforts towards reducing environmental inequities and improving community health.

For specific stakeholders, such as local governments, non-profit organizations, and community groups currently relying on these block grants, the bill presents a significant challenge. The potential abrupt cessation of funding could force these entities to halt or scale down their programs, leading to a host of logistical and financial issues.

Conversely, proponents of the bill might argue that this legislation reduces federal spending on these grants, directing funds to other areas they may deem more critical or effective. However, without clear reasoning provided within the bill, it is challenging to understand the desired reallocation or savings' benefits fully.

In conclusion, while the bill may have fiscal motivations, its broader implications suggest potential adverse effects on environmental justice efforts and vulnerable communities' well-being. More clarity and transparency from lawmakers could help address these concerns and foster more informed public discourse.

Issues

  • The repeal of Section 138 of the Clean Air Act may significantly reduce support for environmental and climate justice initiatives, particularly affecting marginalized communities that rely on these block grants for addressing pollution and climate impacts. (Section 2)

  • The rescission of unobligated funds designated for environmental and climate justice initiatives could lead to sudden and disruptive halts in ongoing or planned projects, potentially wasting resources already committed to these efforts. (Section 2)

  • The bill lacks an explanation or justification for the repeal and rescission, which could lead to perceptions of reduced transparency and accountability in the legislative decision-making process. This absence of reasoning may undermine public trust and can be politically controversial. (Section 2)

  • The legislative language concerning the rescission of unobligated balances may be difficult for those unfamiliar with the legislative process to understand, which might necessitate further explanation to convey the impact of these actions to stakeholders and the general public. (Section 2)

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the act states that its official name is the "Ending Green Giveaways Act."

2. Repeal and rescission relating to environmental and climate justice block grants Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section of the bill repeals Section 138 of the Clean Air Act and cancels any leftover funds that were set aside for environmental and climate justice block grants under that section.