Posted on 06/14/2010 4:51:38 AM PDT by IbJensen
WASHINGTON — In a boost for the president on global warming, the Senate on Thursday rejected a challenge to Obama administration rules aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other big polluters.
The defeated resolution would have denied the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to move ahead with the rules, crafted under the federal Clean Air Act. With President Barack Obama’s broader clean energy legislation struggling to gain a foothold in the Senate, the vote took on greater significance as a signal of where lawmakers stand on dealing with climate change.
“If ever there was a vote to find out whose side you are on, this is it,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee.
The vote was 53-47 to stop the Senate from moving forward on the Republican-led effort to restrain the EPA.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., predicted the vote would “increase momentum to adopt comprehensive energy and climate legislation this year.”
But Obama still needs 60 votes to advance his energy agenda, and Democrats don’t have them yet. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., said the vote made clear that a majority in the Senate back either a delay or an outright ban on “the Obama EPA’s job-killing, global warming agenda.”
Republicans, and the six Democrats who voted with them to advance the resolution, said Congress, not bureaucrats, should be in charge of writing climate change policy. They said the EPA rules would drive up energy costs and kill jobs.
But Democrats, referring frequently to the Gulf oil spill, said it made no sense to undermine efforts to curtail greenhouse gas emissions and reduce dependence on oil and other fossil fuels.
The effort to block the rules “is an attempt to bury our heads in the sand and ignore reality,” said Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M.
Obama said the vote was another reminder of the need to pass legislation to reduce the country’s reliance on oil. The White House had issued a veto threat this week, saying the resolution would block efforts to cut pollution that could harm people’s health and well-being.
“Today the Senate chose to move America forward, towards that clean energy economy — not backward to the same failed policies that have left our nation increasingly dependent on foreign oil,” he said.
The EPA crafted standards on greenhouse gas emissions by big polluters after the Supreme Court ruled that those emissions could be considered a danger to human health and thus could be regulated under the Clean Air Act. The rules are to go into effect next January.
The poor chances of the anti-EPA measure overcoming a veto and becoming law did not deter fierce debate.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky called the new regulations a “blatant power grab by the administration and the EPA.” With a broad energy bill unlikely to pass this year, “the administration has shifted course and is now trying to get done through the back door what they haven’t been able to get done through the front door,” he said.
But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called the blocking measure, “a great big gift to big oil” that would “increase pollution, increase our dependence on foreign oil and stall our efforts to create jobs” in clean energy.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday that he anticipated the Senate taking up a broader energy bill in the next several weeks “and hopefully we can get something done before Congress adjourns this year.”
The sponsor of Thursday’s resolution, Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of oil-rich Alaska, said her intent was to protect the authority of Congress, not the interests of the oil industry. “It should be up to us to set the policy of this country, not unelected bureaucrats within an agency,” she said.
Her Democratic allies used similar arguments. “The regulatory approach is the wrong way to promote renewable energy and clean energy jobs in Arkansas and the rest of the country,” said Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, who faces a difficult re-election campaign this summer.
Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., who opposed the resolution, agreed that Congress should not cede its authority to the executive branch but expressed concern the measure would reverse progress made in such areas as vehicle emissions. He said he supported a bill that would suspend EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gases from stationary sources for two years.
Murkowski, too, said Congress should be working harder to come up with an energy bill. The issue was whether a consensus was possible this year.
“Here’s the real rub,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who has worked with Democrats on possible energy legislation. “If we stop them (the rules), are we going to do anything?”
“This is going to be the great hypocrisy test,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., cosponsor of a major clean energy proposal. He asked whether those demanding that Congress act first would actually vote for change.
There were other disputes about the consequences of the Murkowski resolution. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and the White House said the resolution would force the EPA to rescind the standards for emissions from future-model cars and light trucks it came up with earlier this year with the Transportation Department. The result, she said, would be a need for the country to consume an extra 455 million barrels of oil.
Murkowski and others countered that Transportation has long been able to set fuel efficiency standards without the help of the EPA.
Jackson also denied the argument of critics that the EPA rules would impose devastating costs on small businesses and farmers, resulting in major job losses. The EPA added a provision that exempts small sources of pollution from the regulations for six years.
This makes the coming house election that more important. Of course the Zero can veto any legislation BUT if the house holds firm and will hold up spending bills till he capitulates we can take this back. The EPA is the worse agency to be in charge of anything and furthermore, unless I miss my point, any attempt by them to tax is illegal as they do not have that power.
The EPA couldn’t even handle a little oil spill, never mind giving them real power, like this.
Of all the terms that don’t mean anything, “greenhouse gasses” wins first prize. What “greenhouse”? What “gasses”? We know that it has some vague reference to the earth’s atmosphere, but what?
It’s such a vague term that anything can be thrown under its umbrella - even carbon dioxide, a harmless gas that’s everywhere and feeds the trees.
And the greatest quantity of greenhouse gasses is - - - water vapor. Is this what they’re keeping kids awake at night with?
Kagan said it best in her paper in the Harvard Law Review, “Presidential Administration”. The paper was basically about how the president through the bureaucracy and regulation could rule America, bludgeon the people into submission by the bureaucracy.
Tell me, why would we want an anti-America Marxist on the SC? Anyone ...
The lefties complained about Bush spying on their library cards, and now nothing is said about turning over your entire medical history to the federal government. How quaint is that. And the finance bill, turn over all your bank account information, I presume so they can TAKE the taxes right from your accounts.
Webb’s vote is a tad surprising...
The Competitive Enterprise Institute will bestow the Julian Simon Award on Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick for their efforts in debunking Mann's hockey stick at CEI's 2010 Dinner, June 17 at Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill 400 New Jersey Ave. NW Washington, DC 20001.
No fooling, just what is the EPA doing besides lining up lawyers to sue everyone in sight over the oil spill? And we fund the EPA.
Why does a pro-Marxist government continue to operate to the detriment of Americans?
They have come into TX and have attempted to take over one of our plants - based on emissions.
Of course. They are sticking it to us while they are able to.
More info: Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its efforts to take over Texas’ federally delegated, successful Title V permitting program and replace it with a less effective Washington-based, bureaucratic led, command and control mandate.
vote the bastards out
November is NOT that far away, but still a tiny blip on the horizon so-to-speak.
I pray we take control of Congress, defund everything Obama/Leftist, and work out the rest later.
Just stop him/them cold.
(Yeah, there will be elections.)
Global warming is a colossal fraud perpetrated by evil men to advance their selfish vile agendas.
Actually, aren’t these a collaboration between Obama and BP?
“Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., predicted the vote would “increase momentum to adopt comprehensive energy and climate legislation this year.”
Lieberman is a nice decent man who is storng on foreign policy - and a total idiot on everything else.
If they would get the hell out of the energy business’s business, there would not be an enery problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.