Reps. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) and Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.) introduced two bills on Thursday that would repeal exemptions for oil and gas companies under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. As a press release from the members noted, the bills were introduced:

… in order to ensure that the hydraulic fracking industry follows the same rules that other industries do in preserving our natural resources. This legislation is focused on ensuring the safety and the health of the communities where the hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, process is already taking place.

Polis’ bill, the “Bringing Reductions to Energy’s Airborne Toxic Health Effect (BREATHE) Act” (H.R. 1154), is based on the premise that oil and gas wells and their associated infrastructure can cause significant air pollution. The bill would require companies to cumulatively account for air pollution from all of their wells in one area by requiring aggregate permits, rather than individual permits for each well. The bill also adds hydrogen sulfide to the list of hazardous air pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act.

Cartwright’s bill, the “Focused Reduction of Effluence and Stormwater Runoff Through Hydraulic Environmental Regulation (FRESHER) Act” (H.R. 1175), would require stormwater runoff permits for oil and gas construction and operations to protect surface water resources. This is essential because rain causes runoff from fracking sites that can contain sediment and other pollutants which end up in nearby waters. It would also mandate a study on the effects of oil and gas operations on surface water.

In additions to these exemptions from parts of the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, the oil and gas industries enjoy loopholes in a handful of other laws including the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Superfund Act, the Community Right to Know Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act.

At the same time oil and gas companies benefit from loopholes in laws designed to protect public health and the environment, they are making record profits. Last year, the largest five oil companies — BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell — made $118 billion in profits. They also receive $2.4 billion in tax breaks every year, effectively making Americans pay twice for gasoline, both at the pump and through the U.S. Treasury. Unfortunately, the House of Representatives seems set to continue this preferential treatment of the oil and gas industry. Just this week, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget preserves tax breaks for oil companies while calling for the sell-off of public lands. More benefits for big corporations, paid for by the middle class.

A version of this article originally appeared on Climate Progress.

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney campaigned in Craig, Colo., this morning, where he slammed the Obama administration for its energy policies. Romney implied in his speech that there are no clean energy jobs in Colorado, an assertion that is blatantly untrue:

And then of course there’s [Obama's] plan for energy. You see, he said he was going to create some 5 million green energy jobs. Have you seen those around here anywhere? No, as a matter of fact he’s gone after energy.

There are actually tens of thousands of clean energy jobs in Colorado. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics [PDF], the state had 72,452 jobs in “green goods and services” in 2010. In addition, the American Wind Energy Association also says that Colorado’s wind energy industry alone supported 4,000-5,000 jobs in 2011.

But these wind energy jobs could be at risk. Vestas, the wind turbine manufacturer, which operates four production plants in Colorado, says it will be forced to lay off more than 2,300 workers if the production tax credit for wind is not extended. Up to 37,000 jobs could be at risk nationwide without an extension of this key tax credit.

President Obama was in Iowa last week urging Congress to renew the credit.

Romney has implied [PDF] that he would like to see the credit expire:

… we should not be in the business of steering investment toward particular politically favored approaches. That is a recipe for both time and money wasted on projects that do not bring us dividends. The failure of windmills and solar plants to become economically viable or make a significant contribution to our energy supply is a prime example.

Meanwhile, Romney supports a Republican budget that would maintain billions of dollars in permanent tax credits for mature fossil fuel companies.

The benefits of Colorado’s renewable energy industry are not lost on residents of the state. A January 2012 poll from the Colorado College State of the Rockies Project found that 64 percent of state residents [PDF] believed increasing the use of renewable energy will be good for job growth in Colorado.

Romney’s choice of location Craig, Colo., is not a coincidence. In February, the American Energy Alliance, the Institute for Energy Research, and Americans for Prosperity — Koch-funded oil and coal industry groups — ran a video attacking the president’s energy policies called “The Perfect Storm over Craig, Colorado.”

These and other pro-fossil fuel groups have poured millions into ads attacking clean energy. In April, a ThinkProgress analysis found that Americans for Prosperity, Crossroads GPS, the American Energy Alliance, and the American Petroleum Institute had spent more than $16 million on energy ads against the president’s energy policies. Energy issues made up 81 percent of campaign ads in April.