Eye On The EPA

Today's Senate vote on the Buffett Rule is behind us. Tomorrow is the the final deadline for the mailing or electronic processing of tax returns or extension requests. Also, if paying estimated tax payments, your first payment is already due. So with the cheery thought that our money has already been spent by Big Government over spending and waste, let's refocus our attention to another morbid out-of-control government bureau: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Lisa Jackson and her band of bureaucrats have been up to their old tricks, primarily focusing their energy on the systematic destruction of the coal industry and the jobs, affordable power, and economic revenue it provides.

First, Daniel Simmons of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) exposes the utter lack of any logic in the EPA’s latest cap-and-tax greenhouse gas regulations that essentially outlaw building coal-fired power plants:

If greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide "endanger public health and welfare" shouldn't the EPA do something about it? Should the agency work to actually reduce the danger? Isn't that the point of regulation—to reduce some of the alleged harm?

But the EPA isn't reducing any danger here because according to the agency (here on Page 49), "This proposed rule also will not have a direct impact on U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases under expected economic conditions."

If global warming is a problem that the EPA needs to address, then why are they working on imposing rules that the agency admits "will not have [a] direct impact of U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases?" It's tough to see how EPA regulation makes logical sense. Does the EPA not really care about global warming or are they working to end America's use of coal? Does the EPA only want to increase the price of energy by making it harder to build low-cost electricity generation? [Simmons, Daniel, “The Illogic of EPA Carbon Regulations,” U.S. News & World Report, 12-Apr-12]

Then, former U.S. Chamber official Reed Rubinstein argues that the Obama administration’s chief first-term priority has been systematically destroying the coal industry:

Nevertheless, from its first day the Administration has waged a war of attrition in Congress, the courts and the federal regulatory arena against coal. The legislative assault collapsed when Congress rejected cap and trade, and the courts have not been kind to the Administration…

But in the regulatory sphere, where bureaucrats reign at the expense of public transparency and judicial or congressional review, the EPA has run unleashed and unchecked. Since 2008, the Administration has proposed or issued thousands of pages of regulations to burden coal-generated electric power. [Rubinstein, Reed, “How the EPA aims to kill coal,” The West Virginia Record, 11-Apr-2012]

Finally, the icing on the cake is a report from the New York Times which details how the EPA is fining businesses for failing to use a type of biofuel that is not commercially available:

When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law.

But there was none to be had. Outside a handful of laboratories and workshops, the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist. [“A Fine for Not Using A Biofuel That Doesn’t Exist,” New York Times, 9-Jan-2012]

We really can’t make this stuff up! Obviously, more will follow on this out of control department which has become the equivalent of energy blackshirts carrying out the progressive agenda. If you agree, grab the following image - By an EPA endangerment finding, you are already a polluter.

---

Tags: EPA, Environmental protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, bureaucrats old tricks, systematic destruction, coal industry, jobs, affordable power, economic revenue, CO2, polluter To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!