Carbon Pipelines Negative T
AT: Econ Advantage – No Regs
Download 0.92 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Courts and states won’t follow EPA regulations
AT: Econ Advantage – No RegsThe GOP will crush congressional legislationHargreaves, 10 – staff writer, CNN News and CNN Money (Steve, “GOP ready to fight over global warming”, CNN News, November 22, 2010, http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/22/news/economy/epa_global_warming_republicans/index.htm)//JK NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- It's no secret that many Republicans are deeply skeptical of global warming. "The earth will end only when God decides it's time to be over," Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., said while quoting the Bible in a House hearing last year. "This earth will not be destroyed by a flood." Shimkus is now one of four contenders to head the House Committee on Energy and Commerce when the Republicans take the reins in January. Also vying for the leadership post: Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, who apologized to BP for what he called a White House "shakedown" when it agreed to establishing the $20 billion Gulf oil spill trust fund; Rep. Cliff Stearns of Florida, who wants to open up Alaska's wildlife refuge to drilling; and Michigan's Fred Upton. Upton is considered the front-runner and probably the most moderate of the bunch. He has vowed to eliminate an offshoot of the committee, the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. "The American people do not need Congress to spend millions of dollars to write reports and fly around the world," Upton wrote in a recent editorial. "We must terminate this wasteful committee." The new Congress is not expected to do much on the energy front. A broad plan to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and use the revenue to fund alternative energy -- known as cap-and-trade -- is dead. A spokesman for presumed Speaker of the House John Boehner said Republicans support all forms of energy development, includingrenewables and nuclear power. But he said any money for them must come from expanded domestic oil and gas drilling -- a prospect that also looks dim given the concerns raised by the BP spill. Target: EPA But there is one thing the newly empowered Republicans are sure to go after: the Environmental Protection Agency. When Obama was pushing his cap-and-trade plan last year, the EPA was quietly working on the sidelines to draft up rules to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Heavily targeted would be power plants, refineries, and heavy industries such as steel and concrete. The EPA was under court order to do so, having lost a Supreme Court challenge by the state of Massachusetts under the Bush administration. The high court said that if EPA classified greenhouse gases as a public health threat, which it did, then it must regulate them. Obama and his advisers claimed they didn't want EPA to regulate greenhouse gases, preferring instead to get the job done with a Congress-approved cap-and-trade plan. But many analysts saw EPA's moves as an implicit threat to lawmakers: pass cap-and-trade or else deal with EPA. But cap-and-trade failed. Now the Republicans -- along with many coal-state Democrats -- are scrambling to stop the "or else" part of that equation. "Unquestionably, there will be more oversight of the EPA," said Roger Patrick, an environmental lawyer at Mayer Brown. "The president might even sign a bill to limit EPA's authority." Republican lawmakers have made their intent clear. "The EPA is working on a regulatory train wreck," wrote Upton. "If the EPA continues unabated, jobs will be shipped to China and India as energy costs skyrocket." Obama has been a bit more ambiguous. In a speech following the big Democratic losses this past election day, the president said, "I think EPA wants help from the legislature on this. I don't think that, you know, the desire is to somehow be protective of their powers here." Congress will keep the EPA from regulating Kerpen ’11-vice president for policy at Americans for Prosperity (Phil, “Hooray for the U.S. House for Standing Up to Regulatory Tyranny on Cap-and-Trade and Net Neutrality”, Fox news, 3/14/11, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/14/phil-kerpen-house-stands-regulatory-tyrrany/) With the Republican House putting the brakes on Obama's continued pursuit of a "fundamental transformation" of America through the legitimate legislative process, action has shifted to the regulatory realm, where this administration is aggressively pursuing its agenda. Unelected regulators are usurping the legislative power that the people, in the Constitution, granted to Congress. Just as judicial tyranny (judges usurping legislative power) has been a major and well-founded concern of activists for decades, Congress must step in and stop this regulatory tyranny. Fortunately, the House Energy and Commerce Committee will begin action today to stop two of the most egregious regulatory power grabs of this administration. As documented at www.ObamaChart.com, the EPA's global warming regulations and the FCC's Internet regulations. President Obama is now pursuing his entire failed global warming agenda - decisively rejected as the cap-and-tax bill and in the 2010 election. In Obama's words: "Cap-and-trade was just one way of skinning the cat; it was not the only way." Indeed, the EPA is actively pursuing a bizarre legal theory that the 1970 Clean Air Act was designed as a global warming law, and that pursuant to it they can regulate just about everything that moves, as well as most industrial facilities. When it's fully phased in, their plans include over 18,000 pages of appendices that would regulate every industry in the U.S., cause electricity prices to skyrocket, and greatly diminish our freedom and prosperity. On the FCC side, President Obama's close friend Julius Genachowski has been running the supposedly independent agency as an extension of the White House, pursuing so-called "net neutrality" regulations to give the FCC a toehold over regulating broadband Internet access despite the fact those regulations were rejected by Congress (where they had almost no support), the American people, and the courts. In the 2010 election, there were 95 candidates who campaigned on supporting net neutrality, and all 95 lost. --Yet the FCC insisted on moving forward anyway, on a 3-to-2 party-line vote on December 21, 2010. Both of these regulatory power grabs are now in Congress's sights for overturning, starting today in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which is marking up two measures: H.R. 910 to stop the EPA and H.J. Res. 37 to stop the FCC. H.R. 910 is a good and important bill that stops the misuse of the Clean Air Act as a global warming law, but the greens have many other angles on skipping Congress to force global warming regulations - including the absurd claim that the polar bear, now at a record high population, is endangered. Congress should therefore go further than H.R. 910 and also enact H.R. 750, Tim Walberg's bill that blocks any regulator from acting on global warming unless, and until, Congress expressly gives them that authority. Both of these EPA pre-emption vehicles will face an uphill fight in the Senate, but there are enough in-cycle Democrats - including many from energy states - who need to stand up for their constituents, even in the face of political pressure from the White House and the green pressure groups. The 60 votes needed in the Senate will not be impossible, and a strong push now in the House will set the stage. On the FCC side, the prospects for H.J. Res. 37 and its companion S.J. Res. 6 in the Senate are much brighter, because it requires only 51 votes, not 60, to pass the Senate. As a Congressional Review Act resolution, the overturn of the FCC's Internet regulations will not be subject to filibuster. That means if just four Senate Democrats join all 47 Republicans they can put Obama to the test, and see if he is so blindly committed to regulating the Internet - without regard for the legitimate legislative process - that he will use his veto to force the regulations to stand. These House votes in committee - and later on the floor - will tell us which members of Congress are serious about listening to the voters and taking their constitutional responsibility to write the laws seriously. Voting no on these measures indicates not just support for these misguided big government policies, but a complete disregard for the legitimate legislative process. That disregard begs a question - if we elect legislators who sit on their hands while unelected regulators usurp their power and make all of the real decisions, don't we need to demand better as citizens and voters? Congress is blocking EPA regulation ICIS 6/19-(“US House leaders seek to Rollback Greenhouse Gas Rules”, ICIS news, 6/19/2012, http://www.icis.com/searchresults/?key=US%20house%20leaders%20seek%20to%20rollback%20greenhouse&filter=16&page=1&searchType=Free%20Text%20Search/) WASHINGTON (ICIS)--House committee leaders on Tuesday charged that Obama administration efforts to regulate greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions constitute overreach and a violation of congressional intent that will undermine US manufacturing and raise electricity costs. In a hearing on various ongoing efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to restrict US emissions of greenhouse gases, Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (Republican-Michigan) said those policies are “acting as one more roadblock to economic recovery and job growth”. “It’s a sad irony that the very job creating activities this struggling economy screams out for – things like building a new factory or expanding an existing one, or boosting electric generating capacity to meet demand – are precisely what is being targeted by EPA with these burdensome GHG permit requirements,” Upton said. Upton was referring to a series of EPA regulations issued since 2009 that limit emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases from automobiles and trucks and, more recently, impose strict limits on releases of GHGs by power plants, chemical facilities and other manufacturing industries. Congressman Ed Whitfield (Republican-Kentucky), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power, said EPA’s greenhouse gases restrictions “are a backdoor cap and tax policy that Congress has already rejected”. The US House passed a cap-and-trade climate bill in late 2009 on a one-vote majority when the chamber was under Democrat control. But a companion bill died in the Senate the following year, and in the 2010 congressional elections Republicans won a majority in the House. “Any action regarding climate change should rest with Congress and not unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at EPA,” said Whifield. The US chemicals sector, along with a broad spectrum of other manufacturers, opposed congressional efforts to pass a cap-and-trade GHG emissions control bill, arguing that such a law would force still more US manufacturers overseas. “At a time of chronically high unemployment, the last thing job creating industries need is more red tape,” said Whitfield. “But that is precisely what EPA is imposing on the economy with its greenhouse gas regulations,” he said. Since 2009, when President Barack Obama took office, he said, “EPA has already published ... more than 1,800 pages of final rules relating to greenhouse gases, and more than 700 pages of proposed rules are pending”, he added. Whitfield noted that EPA was invited to attend the hearing of his subcommittee, but the agency did not send a representative. Upton said he hoped testimony heard at Tuesday’s hearing would help build support for a House-approved bill, HR-910, that would roll-back the bulk of EPA’s greenhouse gases initiatives. That bill would essentially revoke EPA’s authority to regulate GHG, rescind those GHG-related actions already taken, and bar the agency from regulating carbon-dioxide in the future. The measure passed in the House in April 255 to 172 – largely in a party-line vote but with help from 19 Democrats – and is now pending in the Senate. Advocates of the legislation say it is not likely to pass in the Democrat-majority Senate but that it might have a better chance if the upcoming November US general elections should shift the balance of power in the White House and Senate. Courts are blocking EPA regulation Associated Press 6/23 (“Court Blocks EPA Rules for Oklahoma Power Plants”, Business Week, 6/23/2012, http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-06-23/court-blocks-epa-rules-for-oklahoma-power-plants) OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A federal appeals court has blocked enforcement of an Environmental Protection Agency plan that would reduce pollution from Oklahoma's coal-fired power plants. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday granted a request by the Attorney General Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. and others for a stay pending a review of the EPA's rule requiring the reduction of sulfur dioxide emissions at four electric generating units. The EPA's plan is designed to reduce pollution from coal-fired power plants and industrial sources to improve visibility at federally managed wilderness areas, including the 59,000-acre Wichita Mountain Wildlife Refuge near Lawton. It would affect plants operated by OG&E at Red Rock and Muskogee and another operated by Public Service Co. of Oklahoma at Oologah. Those three facilities, built more than 30 years ago, are responsible for more than one-third of the sulfur dioxide pollution emitted by all industrial and utility sources in the state, according to the EPA. The EPA accepted most of Oklahoma's plan for targeting the haze, but it also wanted the utilities to retrofit power plants with technology to reduce pollution. Pruitt, citing data from the utilities, has said the cost of installing that technology could cause consumer electricity rates to rise more than 13 percent over the next three years. On Friday, he called the appeals decision "a significant victory" for Oklahoma. "The EPA exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act, and we will continue to challenge that decision to preserve the ability of Oklahoma stakeholders to create an Oklahoma solution," Pruitt said in a statement. Courts and states won’t follow EPA regulationsNYT, 10 (E.P.A. Limit on Gases to Pose Risk to Obama and Congress”, The New York Times, December 30, 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/31/science/earth/31epa.html?pagewanted=all)//JK But the reaction in Congress and industry has been outsized, with some likening the E.P.A. to terrorists and others vowing to choke off the agency's financing for all air-quality regulation. A dozen states have filed suit to halt the new greenhouse gas rules, with one, Texas, flatly refusing to comply with any new orders from Washington. Two federal courts, including one this week in Louisiana, have refused to issue restraining orders halting the implementation of the new rules. But late Thursday, a federal appeals court in Washington temporarily blocked the the E.P.A. from enforcing its rules in Texas while the courts consider whether the federal agency has the right to take over the Texas program. The courts have not yet ruled on the legality of the broader federal program. Representative Fred Upton, the Michigan Republican who is set to become chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, said he was not convinced that greenhouse gases needed to be controlled or that the E.P.A. had the authority to do so. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.92 Mb. Share with your friends:
|