WASHINGTON -- Before the House of Representatives votes on trade promotion authority, or fast track, this week, we should be crystal clear about the impact it will have on the environment.

And no matter how its supporters dress their bill up, their fast track bill will be bad for environmental protection efforts.

It is insulting to my colleagues and all Americans when Congress tries to imply that this bill includes strong language that adequately addresses environmental concerns. They cannot be serious.

But this is a serious issue.

The United States has made tremendous strides regarding the protection of our air, land and water. Americans of all political stripes place a high degree of importance on protecting the environment.

Fast track supporters attempt to curry favor with environmentalists by pointing out that this bill mentions the environment. They are missing the point.

We don’t want the environment “mentioned;” we want it protected.

This bill, however, will not protect the environment.

One look at NAFTA, a trade agreement passed under fast-track authority, shows why we should be terrified at extending current trade rules to future agreements.

Chapter 11, a provision intended to protect multinational corporations from their host states, has been abused by corporations that refuse to be bound by lawfully-decided and publicly supported environmental regulations.

California was one of the first states to run into the Chapter 11 problem when it tried to protect its environment from the harmful effects of MTBE.

When California halted the use of the gasoline additive, a Canadian corporation called Methanex sued the United States under NAFTA’s Chapter 11 for almost one billion dollars because of lost revenue it said it would incur from California’s decision to protect its environment.

This does not seem to bother most Republicans fast track supporters. Congressman Lloyd Doggett of Texas attempted to amend the Chapter 11 provision during committee consideration of the bill, but to no avail.

His common-sense amendment was voted down by Republicans who felt uneasy about holding corporations accountable to high environmental standards.

In fact, nothing in the trade promotion authority bill makes environmental protection mandatory.

When the bill’s proponents laud their inclusion of “principal negotiating objectives” on the environment as proof of their concern, don’t be fooled. This is window dressing that does nothing to hold other countries to rigorous environmental standards.

These objectives merely encourage our negotiators to seek that other countries live up to their environmental standards -- no matter how low those standards are.

This trade promotion authority bill weakens strong environmental standards and ignores weak ones. As for environmental standards, if this is a fast track, it is a race to the bottom.