U.S. EPA needs to find ways to cut spending and live within its means, House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans told the agency's chief financial officer today as Democrats argued the agency doesn't deserve blame for the United States' growing debt.

Furious about some of the rules that have came out under President Obama, House Republicans fired a warning shot this spring when they passed a spending bill that would have given EPA $7.1 billion for the fiscal year -- about 20 percent less than the agency ended up with and less than it received a decade ago. That bill didn't become law. But the Republicans will keep trying to shrink the agency, Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) said today.

"We must ensure that EPA meets its core mission at lower cost," Stearns said.

Barbara Bennett, EPA's chief financial officer, urged lawmakers not to cut too deeply into the agency's spending. She echoed the arguments of Administrator Lisa Jackson, who has warned that lost funding would lead to more pollution.

Republicans countered by saying that EPA cannot complain about the Republican-backed cuts when the agency's budget is about $1 billion higher than it was at the end of the George W. Bush administration -- despite the deal brokered this summer between President Obama, House Republicans and high-ranking Democrats in the Senate.

Today's hearing, the first in a planned series on cutting agency spending, was criticized by Democrats who say that EPA is the wrong place to look. They noted that the agency is responsible for 0.06 percent of the United States' national debt, 0.26 percent of the federal government's budget and 0.9 percent of the deficit.

Cutting environmental spending could actually make the problem worse, argued Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado, the top Democrat on the subcommittee. If the agency lacks the resources to enforce laws that protect public health, taxpayers will end up on the hook for more medical costs, such as emergency room visits.

"If you eliminated the EPA altogether, it wouldn't even be a blip in this nation's budget, but the price we would pay ... would be astronomical," DeGette said.

"This fixation we have is wrong, and we've got to stop it," she added.

Republicans, however, had all kinds of suggestions for finding savings at the agency.

Stearns said that EPA's budget could be cut by repurposing funding from previous years that was never spent. At one point last fiscal year, the agency had $13.3 billion in funding that had not been spent.

Bennett said those funds were appropriated but were never drawn from the Treasury. She said the money is typically meant for ongoing or delayed projects that might still need it, but EPA eventually clears the appropriations from its balance sheet.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), a former chairman of the committee, suggested a careful audit of the credit cards used by EPA employees. A past audit at a different agency found one employee had used taxpayer money to buy a Ford Mustang, said Barton, who joked that the sports car wouldn't get a very favorable fuel economy rating from EPA.

And Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) urged EPA to think twice about its use of the Title 42 program, which allows agencies to go beyond the standard federal pay scale if that is what it takes to hire elite scientists. EPA has used the program to keep some of its top researchers, such as the director of the agency's National Center for Computational Toxicology.

Given the dire state of the economy, Burgess said, "I would ask the question: Can we not find anyone who wouldn't require the additional salary?"

Grant programs in cross hairs

So far this Congress, EPA grant programs that pass money to state and tribal governments for water infrastructure projects have taken the biggest hit. They make up more than a third of EPA's total budget.

But they are typically popular with lawmakers, who see the benefits of construction jobs and better infrastructure in their districts. Among them is Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who complained today that EPA wasn't able to pay its share of an infrastructure project in her Tampa Bay congressional district.

EPA had offered to pay for about half of the project, but because it was one of the oldest ones that hadn't yet come to fruition, it was one of the first to lose its funding, Bennett said.

Republicans argue that reining in government spending is needed to heal the struggling economy. Castor said the shortfall in funding for the public works project in her district is proof that cutting government spending will also hurt.

"These jobs are just going to go away," she said.