Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: TonyInOhio

“There’s only one remedy for this otherwise inevitable regulatory nightmare. The Congress must pass H. R. 391, legislation offered by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) that prohibits the EPA from using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions.”

Even if they manage to pass the regulations they want, “regulations” can be litigated, and will be. As with any so called, “climate treaty”, we will never allow them to go into effect.

July 2, 2009
Senate May Pass U.S. Climate Bill, Reject Treaty, Kerry Says
By Jim Efstathiou Jr. and Daniel Whitten

....”Passing __ domestic __ climate-change legislation remains __ the most crucial step, Purvis said.


Ironically, The “EPA” came out and said “There are no findings that Co2 is dangerous to the environment...” Funny.... 6

Internal Memo Confirms EPA Regulation of CO2 Will Hurt Economy!
by Patriot-in-Chief on May 12, 2009 ·

ABC News Correspondent Jake Tapper is reporting on an internal Obama administration memo to the EPA. The memo is warning that regulation under the clean air act will damage the economy, especially small business and communities.

“That nine-page memo voices “a concern that EPA is making a finding based on (1) ‘harm’ from substances that have no demonstrated direct health effects, such as respiratory or toxic effects, (2) available scientific data that purports to conclusively establish the nature and extent of the adverse public health and welfare impacts are almost exclusively from non-EPA sources, and (3) applying a dramatically expanded precautionary principle.”
If the EPA goes forward with a finding of endangerment for all six greenhouse gases, the document warns, “it could be establishing a relaxed and expansive new standard for endangerment. Subsequently, EPA would be petitioned to find endangerment and regulate many other ‘pollutants’ for the sake of the precautionary principle (e.g., electromagnetic fields, perchlorates, endocrine disruptors, and noise).”

This is of course directly the opposite of the Obama administrations message to the public that Cap-and-Trade would be an economic boon to our country. Read the orignial memo here: EPA memo

More information on this whole ongoing scam can be found here.

Update: Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) blogs on the “Smoking Gun” memo at

Read it here.

Guest Blog: Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) Uncovers EPA Deception

Posted May 12th, 2009 at 3.39pm in Energy and Environment, Ongoing Priorities.
EPA Holds ‘Smoking Gun’ Memo from the White House
VIDEO at link
Today I exposed a “smoking gun” White House memo to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The memo warns that regulation of small CO2 emitters will have “serious economic consequences” for businesses and the overall economy. I was questioning EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson during the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee budget hearing.

I received the memo this morning, that’s marked ‘Deliberative: Attorney-Client Privilege’. In this memo Counsel for the White House repeatedly, repeatedly suggests a lack of scientific support for this proposed finding. This is a smoking gun, saying that the EPA findings were political and not scientific.

The EPA has failed to release the memo and has ignored the advice.

The nine-page White House memo undermines the EPA’s reasoning for a proposed finding that greenhouse gases are a danger to public health.

This misuse of the Clean Air Act will be a trigger for overwhelming regulation and lawsuits based on gases emitted from cars, schools, hospitals and small business. This will affect any number of other sources, including lawn mowers, snowmobiles and farms. This will be a disaster for the small businesses that drive America.

To quote from the memo to the EPA, “making the decision to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act for the first time is likely to have serious economic consequences for regulated entities throughout the US economy, including small businesses and small communities.”

The memo is an amalgamation of findings from government agencies’ sent from the Office of Management and Budget to the EPA.

This smoking gun memo is in stark contrast to the official position presented by the Administration and the EPA Administrator.

Despite the findings in the memo, the White House has given the EPA the green light to move ahead with regulation under the Clean Air Act.

According to government records, the document was submitted by the OMB as comment on the EPA’s April proposed finding that greenhouse gases are a danger to public health and welfare.

The memo - marked as “Deliberative-Attorney Client Privilege” - doesn’t have a date or a named author. But an OMB spokesman confirmed to news agencies that it was prepared by Obama administration staff.

BACKGROUND: The White House brief questions the link between the EPA’s scientific technical endangerment proposal and the EPA’s political summary. Administrator Jackson said in the endangerment summary that “scientific findings in totality point to compelling evidence of human-induced climate change, and that serious risks and potential impacts to public health and welfare have been clearly identified…”

The White House memo notes, the EPA endangerment technical document points out there are several areas where essential behaviors of greenhouse gases are “not well determined” and “not well understood.”

It warns about the adequacy of the EPA finding that the gases are a harm to the public when there is “no demonstrated direct health effects,” and the scientific data on which the agency relies are “almost exclusively from non-EPA sources.”

The memo contends that the endangerment finding, if finalized by the administration, could make agencies vulnerable to litigation alleging inadequate environmental permitting reviews, adding that the proposal could unintentionally trigger a cascade of regulations.

The views expressed by guest bloggers on the Foundry do not necessarily reflect the views of the Heritage Foundation.

9 posted on 12/07/2009 10:21:57 AM PST by Matchett-PI ("The Role of Government is to Secure Our Liberty, Not to Seize It" ~ Rush 6/26/09)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Matchett-PI

“There’s only one remedy for this otherwise inevitable regulatory nightmare.”


I can think of a few more Remedies.

16 posted on 12/07/2009 10:32:39 AM PST by myself6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson