Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Rabin

I’d have to study the law to be sure, but I bet there’s a legal waiver process in it. In other words, Congress probably wanted the EPA to have discretion so that true hardship cases and emergencies could be dealt with. Nothing really prevents the executive branch from using such waivers to reward friends and punish foes. That’s a big problem. The laws were written for presidents who would use their powers judiciously, but as we’ve seen, the current administration uses them to punish political foes, even entire states (Texas), and it’s entirely legal.


10 posted on 09/12/2011 9:12:44 PM PDT by CitizenUSA (What's special about bad? Bad is easy. Anyone can do bad. I prefer good!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: CitizenUSA

Citi “Congress probably wanted the EPA to have discretion.”

Rab may be willing to also wager that EPA could care less about what the Cong wanted. Running for the moment sorta on what O team staggers around with.

O is losing it. Keep an eye on the prize. In the interim, let the folks eat cake.

Stroke of the pen…

Thanks for the comeback. Rab


16 posted on 09/12/2011 10:02:24 PM PDT by Rabin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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