Since its creation in 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency has done more harm than good. EPA regulations cost more than 5 percent of our annual gross domestic product – the equivalent of the costs of defense and homeland security combined. Since EPA regulations have expanded, unemployment in America has increased by 33 percent. This abuse of power by the implementation of regulations infringes upon our basic constitutional rights.

There have been too frequent reports of individual rights being violated by abusive and power-hungry EPA bureaucrats. These regulations have hampered landowners’ ability to manage their private property as they please and have impaired job creation. Americans are suffering from the overreach of regulatory agencies such as the EPA.

In Pennsylvania, take the story of John Pozsgai, an immigrant from Hungary, who worked as a mechanic and eventually saved enough money to purchase the land bordering his home in Morrisville, Pa. This land was an old auto junkyard, and Mr. Pozsgai, taking pride in his home, proceeded to clean up this landfill by removing 7,000 old tires and rusted-out automobiles. However, the EPA did not view this effort as a clean-up but rather a violation of the Clean Water Act. You see, Mr. Pozsgai’s property was a wetland, ambiguously defined by the EPA as any property that has some sort of connection to a wetland. That connection to a wetland was a small drainage ditch located on the edge of his property.

Mr. Pozsgai did not need a permit to dump topsoil on an isolated wetland. However, the Army Corps of Engineers insisted he apply for one. Next, the EPA set up surveillance cameras to capture Mr. Pozsgai filling his land with topsoil. EPA agents then arrested him for “discharging pollutants into waters of the United States.” These “pollutants” consisted of earth, topsoil and sand. The EPA openly admits that no hazardous wastes were involved in the case, yet Mr. Pozsgai was found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison and fined $202,000. Mr. Pozsgai spent 1 1/2 years in prison, 1 1/2 in a halfway house, and was under supervised probation for five years. His family went bankrupt and was unable to pay its property taxes on the land.

A similar breach of power can be studied in the case of John Rapanos. Federal officials prosecuted Mr. Rapanos for shoveling dirt around on his property in Bay County, Mich. The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers filed charges against Mr. Rapanos for “polluting” the wetlands by leveling the soil on his property. Under the “migratory molecule” rule, the Army Corps claims that any isolated wetland can fall under federal jurisdiction because there is a speculative possibility that a water molecule from one wetland may reach another navigable waterway. In Mr. Rapanos‘ case, the nearest navigable water is roughly 20 miles from his property.

The federal officials had little evidence and U.S. District Judge Lawrence Zatkoff threw out the conviction and refused to follow the unjust federal guidelines enforced by the EPA. Unfortunately, Judge Zatkoff was overruled by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Mr. Rapanos later appealed his conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court, yet the court refused to hear his case. He now faces possible jail time.

Mr. and Mrs. Michael Sackett, of Priest Lake, Idaho, also have fallen victim to the EPA’s abusive and overbearing practices. The Sackett family sought to build a house on its half-acre of land, yet after construction broke ground, the EPA interfered, claiming the family violated the Clean Water Act by placing fill materials into “wetlands.” Their property was designated as a wetland, yet their neighbors have built houses on either side of their lot and their lot already has established sewage lines. Their lot does not harbor a lake, pond or stream, yet the EPA is requiring them to obtain a building permit that would cost more than the value of their land. The Sacketts proceeded by filing suit, but the request was dismissed by a federal judge. The Supreme Court is now considering these violations.

The repeated abuse of power by the EPA has been noted across the country, infringing on the lives of all Americans. Property rights were once regarded as fundamental to the protection of liberty, and it is time that legislators restore the value of personal property and do something about governmental overreach.

On Feb. 7, I introduced the REINS Act (Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act). This act is designed to increase accountability in the federal regulatory process. By opening the regulatory process to public scrutiny, government agencies will be held accountable by all American citizens. This is a common-sense reform that will increase congressional liability, improve the regulatory process and protect citizens from restrictions being placed on their economic and private practices. The REINS Act ensures that federal agencies cannot destroy jobs, our economy or our way of life by implementing unnecessary regulations. Harmful and abusive regulations must be put to rest.

Seventy-five percent of Americans believe that the size of the federal government must be reduced and with the imposition of such regulatory abuse, it is no wonder why. Americans are being treated as subjects of an administrative state rather than citizens of a free nation. I am certain that the REINS Act will reduce the power of regulatory bureaucrats and place the power in the hands of the people, allowing them to act and operate as they please.

Unpaved rural roads are a source of pollution. Erosion of unpaved roadways occurs when soil particles are loosened and carried away from the roadway base, ditch, or road bank by water, wind, traffic, or other transport means. Exposed soils, high runoff velocities and volumes, sandy or silty soil types, and poor compaction increase the potential for erosion.

Loosened soil particles are carried from the road bed and into the roadway drainage system. Particles most often settle out where they diminish the carrying capacity of the ditch, and in turn cause roadway flooding, which subsequently leads to more roadway erosion. Most of the eroded soil, however, ultimately ends up in streams and rivers where it diminishes channel capacity, causing more frequent and severe flooding; destroys aquatic and riparian habitat; and has other adverse effects on water quality and water-related activities.

You city folk sure are funny!

American farmers have been ridiculing a proposal by U.S. regulators to reduce the amount of dust floating in rural air.

“If there’s ever been rural America, that’s what rural America is,” said Nebraska hog farmer Danny Kluthe. “You know? It’s dirt out here, and with dirt you’ve got dust.”

The Environmental Protection Agency is looking to tighten standards for the amount of harmful particles in the air, facing opposition from U.S. farming groups who call it an unrealistic attempt to regulate dust.

I’m sorry, but you just don’t control dust!  Well, unless you want to make it mud, and then it’s not dust anymore.   The complete lack of common sense within the EPA is nothing new, but I think even they have go completely over the deep end.  You have farms.  You have farm roads.  You have dirt.  Without dirt, you don’t have farms.  With no farms, there would be no need for a farm road, but you’d get mighty damn hungry!

If Congress is serious about cutting spending, the EPA should be one the first to go!  If you ever wonder why we never make any serious progress, on ANYTHING, you might want to take a real good look at the idiots who actually believe you can control DUST!

Gotta love this:

Environmental groups say these tiny elements could be harmful if not deadly for people, causing cardiovascular or respiratory problems.

More ignorant city folk! I wonder if they realize there has been dust ever since God separated the water from the dry land and called Earth! (Genesis 1:9-10)

But technically, EPA can’t use common sense if it clashes with science, as their assessments are required to be purely scientific and mindless of ramifications, said John Walke, clean air director at the National Resources Defense Council.

Well, technically, the EPA is full of idiots! Who truly believes you can’t mix science and common sense? Evidently, the environazis!

Tasers. Brand-new SUVs. A top-of-the-line iPad. A fully loaded laptop. In the year since the Gulf oil spill, officials along the coast have gone on a spending spree with BP money, dropping tens of millions of dollars on gadgets and other gear — much of which had little to do with the cleanup, an Associated Press investigation shows.

Hey…as long as it’s not their money, politicians don’t give a flip, and just LOVE to spend. The problem is….how does an iPad help clean up the mess? Can SUVs provide jobs for Gulf Coast residents?  Did they have to taze oil covered birds to get the cleaned off?

In sleepy Ocean Springs, Miss., reserve police officers got Tasers. The sewer department in nearby Gulfport bought a $300,000 vacuum truck that never sucked up a drop of oil. Biloxi, Miss., bought 14 SUVs. A parish president in Louisiana got herself a deluxe iPad, her spokesman a $3,100 laptop. And a county in Florida spent $560,000 on rock concerts to promote its oil-free beaches.

There was, and is, a lot of inefficiency going on down there. Instead rock concerts, don’t they think that $560K could have put a lot of kids to work cleaning up the beaches? Maybe it’s just me, but I’ve of the mind that these communities that wasted money on so much BS needs to give it back. Not to BP, obviously, but put it back into a fund that actually is being used for clean up, helping those who have been affected by the spill, and apologize to the public at large for being such self serving assholes!

Some officials also lavished lucrative contracts on campaign donors and others. A Florida county commissioner’s girlfriend, for instance, opened up a public relations firm a few weeks after the spill and soon landed more than $14,000 of the tiny county’s $236,000 cut of BP cash for a month’s work.

Waste and fraud. A politician’s life blood! Is it any wonder that people are totally disgusted by ALL OF THEM?

At issue is the EPA‘s designation of “greenhouse gases,” e.g., carbon dioxide, as pollutants subject to EPA regulation in accordance with the Clean Air Act. The EPA ploy is the Obama administration‘s response to Congress‘ failure to pass a broad climate bill that would include provisions such as “cap-and-trade” to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions.

Has our public school system gotten so ineffective that so many aren’t aware that BREATHING is the #1 cause of carbon dioxide?  Do they not teach that plants use carbon dioxide, and expel oxygen?  Human inhale the ‘waste product’ of the plants.  We have a symbiotic relationship.

Symbiosis is taken from the Greek words syn meaning ‘with’ and biosis that means ‘living’.

Without the carbon dioxide, there would be no plant life.  No plant life, no humans.  Or, is that their intention?  Totally depopulate the planet?

There are many reasons for Congress to resist this abomination. For one thing, the term “greenhouse gases” does not appear anywhere in the Clean Air Act, confirming that Congress never intended this legislation to be used to regulate carbon dioxide emissions and the like. Certainly, no previous administration has interpreted the Clean Air Act as a mandate to regulate such emissions. In any event, a constitutional perspective suggests that Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, should be setting U.S. policy.

The EPA has over reached it boundaries, pretty much since its inception. The original purpose was to reduce the U.S.’s dependence on foreign oil. Well, done such a peachy job of that, haven’t they. As a matter of fact, their actions have made us MORE dependent. They have prevented exploration, and innovation. They have stopped the building of nuclear power plants, that IS a clean alternative. The regulations that continuously put in place prevents our independence. Why should it take 20 years to get a freakin’ permit?

But the main reason to resist this EPA power grab is the adverse impact it will have on the U.S. economy. The new EPA regulations will raise energy costs for companies and create additional investment uncertainty, reducing their competitiveness in international markets and driving jobs overseas. They will also drive up prices for consumers. Meanwhile, there will be little if any reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions.

If you own a business, and want to expand, to provide jobs for Americans, promote economic health, would you want to do so in this climate?  Personally, I’d find a place that was more friendly to expansion.  Such regulations have sent many businesses overseas, with the aid of outrageous union demands.  Without companies, there are no jobs.  With no jobs, we become totally dependent on the government for our sustenance.  We, in effect, become slaves to the state.

The best alternative for Congress would be to deny the EPA the authority to enforce the new regulations at all. Unfortunately, such a proposal was defeated in the Senate in June. Under the circumstances, the next best approach is one that is favored by a number of Democrats, including Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia and Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, to delay implementation of the new regulations for two years.

The absolute BEST alternative for Congress is to rid our nation of ALL the unelected agencies that have taken control, starting with the EPA!

Senate Democrats have finally smelled the coffee. The recent announcement that they will scrap the energy bill that was clogging up the end of this summer’s congressional session was a breath of clean air for all of us.

Much has been made of the ‘lame duck session’ that the majority of us is hoping will be coming this November. The problem with such a session is that I’ve no doubt that the Democrats will take full advantage while they still have the majority in both Houses of Congress to push through their agenda. What is their agenda? It appears to be the mass destruction of the economy.  This bill may have been put aside for the moment, but will the Democrats honor the wishes of Americans, and NOT force feed the people anymore such bills before Congress changes hands?

Environmentalists may bemoan the step but, in this case, lawmakers demonstrated their ability to see the big picture and abandon what was a poorly timed and misguided energy bill. With unemployment still over 9 percent and families hurting from the long recession, the focus needs to be on jobs and economic development — not a new tax plan for carbon emissions.

Personally, I happen to like the environment. That said, I do not believe a mosquito, or fruit fly, or tiny fish has priority over the human race, and our ability to grow economically, and feed our nation. There is preserving a safe environment, then there is pushing an anti human agenda. The crap and tax….er….Cap and Trade is nothing more than a scheme to destroy jobs and make those who push it, rich…or, as the case may be….richer! (I thought libs hated the wealthy? Oh yeah…only the wealthy that create jobs, not the ones who destroy them. Oooops!)

Unfortunately, the smell of coffee is not permeating the halls of the White House. President Obama is insisting on changing the tax laws so the IRS can collect double the income tax on energy producers. His budget plan, if approved, would essentially give foreign oil and natural gas companies – like BP – an advantage over domestic companies because they would pay less in income taxes. The administration is pushing to remove what’s known as the dual capacity energy tax – a section of the federal tax code that allows companies to deduct the income tax they pay to foreign countries when conducting business there. If the president has his way, oil companies would pay income tax to both the foreign entity and to Uncle Sam.

I grew up believing that double taxation was illegal.  Of course, that hasn’t stopped the Federal Government.  Doesn’t allowing tax breaks for foreign oil companies seem a bit counter productive?  A LOT of products are made from oil.  I wonder if Mr Obama is aware: One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline.

More than half of that barrel is used to make items like:

Golf Bags
Toilet Seats
Dresses
Sweaters
Shower Curtains
Telephones
Basketballs
Shoes
Sunglasses

And let’s not forget all the items used in the medical field, like:

Artificial Limbs
Anesthetics
Aspirin

Try to think of how many items are made from plastic. You do know that plastic comes from oil, right? If the administration wants to punish U.S. oil companies with ever increasing taxes, can you imagine just how much the cost of EVERYTHING is going to rise? From your kids toys, to the I.V. bag used to hopefully save your life…..EVERY SINGLE ITEM! Is there anything we use that doesn’t have some connection to oil?

Many people think that America’s largest oil and natural gas companies hold considerable sway in the global energy industry. But, that’s not the case at all. Compared to their foreign competitors, our “big three” rank 17th, 21st and 23rd worldwide. And, many of the most powerful and influential oil companies are state owned — adding to their market strength. Altering the tax laws to give these companies a market advantage means America will be forced to purchase more oil from unfriendly governments in order to ensure Americans have access to affordable supplies.

Serious question: When did Americans turn their future over to foreigners?  Many American jobs are related to the oil industry, not just in the Gulf region, but all across the country.

The environmental lobby reminds us that we need greater investment into renewable energy sources. That is true. But what is often overlooked is that oil and gas companies are making significant investment in that area as well. For renewable energy to really begin making a difference, more money needs to be allocated to research and development. Our nation’s energy needs are growing. By the year 2035, experts believe that energy usage will grow by 14 percent over current figures. Keeping the power flowing is the responsibility of our energy sector. It is not reasonable to demand they increase output, increase investment in research and development and keep energy prices affordable while also demanding they double-down on their income tax payments.

How will American oil companies be able to invest in renewable energies if the administration wants to destroy them in the meantime?

Can someone please turn on the coffee maker at the White House?

And while you’re at it, remind him that the coffee maker is ALSO made from oil products!

BP says oil has stopped leaking into the Gulf of Mexico for the first time since April, touting the success of its new cap on its broken well.

BP has been slowly dialing down the flow as part of a critical pressure test on its new cap, which it now believes is fully containing the oil for the first time since the crisis began nearly three months ago.

Gee, I wonder who is going to take the credit if this is a success?   We ALL know who will be blamed if it fails.

Now, if the Obama minions would just get the hell out of the way, let the clean up go forward, listen to those who KNOW what the hell they are doing, and STFU, perhaps we could all see mass improvements in the conditions on the Gulf.  Oh, and let the companies who do NOT have almost 600 safety violations continue their work, let the rigs get back to what rigs do!  Support the economy!

As for BP?  Well, no offense to the folks on that side of the pond, but personally, I don’t want them doing anymore drilling over here.  Ignoring safety is not a real good way to stay in business.

And, don’t forget to pray that this works!  NOT to ‘Mother Earth’!  To the ONE that created her!

And then we have a few reactions:

Obama’s Oil Spill Speech: What Was The Point?

Palin Reacts to Obama’s Oval Office Address on Gulf Disaster

Stuck on stupid: Obama’s czar fetish

Obama’s Oil Spill Speech: Running On Empty

Drunkblogging Obama’s Oval Office Address

Can The One Drop the Buzzer-Beating No. 23 Act?

MSNBC Trashes Obama’s Address this evening

Obama disappoints from the beginning of his speech

From the Oval Office

What we didn’t hear from Obama last night

Weak Speech from an Indecisive Obama

Obama Asks America to Commit Suicide

Obviously, there are SO many more, but hey, you can do your own work once in a while!

My reaction after stooping to watch the video? “Whut?” Seriously? Is that the best he can do after this long? There are people seriously hurting, blocked from acting by government red tape, and what is his response? “Why yes, let’s destroy the economy even more with my irrational plan to raise everyone’s bills, that the country can NOT afford!” The man has been sitting on his thumb, spinning, for nearly two months now, and the only thing he can come up with is creating another government bureaucracy? Jeeeeez! Yeah….that’s really going to help the economic recovery. /snark

A side note: (and totally irrelevant) That teeth whistle drives me bugshit! Just sayin’.

Ooops! Almost forgot!

(source)

Nearly 31 years ago, on July 15, 1979, President Jimmy Carter told the American people from the Oval Office: “Energy will be the immediate test of our ability to unite this nation, and it can also be the standard around which we rally. On the battlefield of energy we can win for our nation a new confidence, and we can seize control again of our common destiny.” Last night the American people heard almost the exact same speech from President Barack Obama: “I’ve returned from a trip to the Gulf Coast to speak with you about the battle we’re waging against an oil spill that is assaulting our shores and our citizens. … The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now. Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash America’s innovation and seize control of our own destiny.”

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs billed the speech as an “inflection point,” where the President’s initial response would be replaced by more decisive action. But this is now day 57. Where has the decisive action been up to this point? The Obama administration has not been working in a coordinated fashion. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of the Interior, the Department of Homeland Security, and the White House, as well as the Coast Guard, have been putting out confusing and contradictory statements since the disaster began.

Federal regulatory red tape has gotten in the way of the cleanup, including: 1) missed opportunities to burn off more of the oil because of overblown air pollution concerns; 2) holdups in the use of dispersants; 3) permit delays in allowing the state of Louisiana to create artificial barriers against the encroaching oil slick; 4) failure to waive reg­ulatory prohibitions against foreign assistance; and 5) failure to approve barges and booms in time to block oil from reaching Alabama’s Magnolia River.

Instead of providing leadership and properly coordinating the response, the Obama administration has chosen to shift blame and politicize the disaster, including: 1) “not-at-all veiled shot[s] at the Bush Administration” for the state of the Minerals and Management Service; 2) vague threats of criminal prosecution from Attorney General Eric Holder; 3) a moratorium on offshore oil drilling which could kill 120,000 jobs in the Gulf alone; and 4) pushing caps on carbon dioxide emissions which have no hope of cleaning up a single drop of oil spilled.

The President spoke of “political courage and candor” last night, yet both were missing from his speech. The President asserted: “Time and again, the path forward has been blocked … by oil industry lobbyists.” But the reality is that BP lobbyists have been pushing for the President’s energy agenda from the beginning. The President claimed: “Countries like China are investing in clean energy jobs and industries that should be right here in America.” But the reality is that China will account for nearly 45% of oil demand growth in the next five years, receives 70% of its energy from coal already, and is projected to nearly triple coal capacity by 2030.

In his 1979 “malaise” speech, President Carter told the American people: “I want to talk to you right now about a fundamental threat to American democracy. … The threat is nearly invisible in ordinary ways. It is a crisis of confidence.” Carter was wrong. America was not suffering from a crisis of confidence. As the election of President Ronald Reagan would show the next year, it was the Carter administration that was suffering … from a crisis of leadership.  Today, our country is in crisis again. The Obama administration’s constant blame shifting, politicization, and lack of organization demonstrate a crisis of competence. To restore America’s faith, the White House should drop irrelevant policy priorities, refrain from making the economic damage worse, end unnecessary bureaucratic delays, and restructure the response and recovery efforts. As MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann said following the address: “It was a great speech if you’ve been on another planet for the last 57 days.”

The Obama Energy Tax Game Plan
The Foundry

In February of this year, after Sen. Scott Brown’s (R-MA) victory put Obamacare on life support, health insurer Anthem Blue Cross announced a 39% rate hike for its individual market subscribers in California. Despite the fact that the President’s health care plan will only drive health insurance rates higher, the White House seized on this story to revive the government takeover of the health insurance industry. Two months later when the President’s financial regulation plan was stalled in the Senate, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Goldman Sachs with fraud in marketing some of its subprime mortgage investment products. Again, the White House pounced on this news to get its preferred legislation through Congress.

Now that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has turned into an environmental disaster, the White House is again trying to turn public anger at one corporation into massive government intervention of an entire sector of the economy. In an email to his leftist Organizing for America activists, President Barack Obama previewed his Oval Office address tonight calling on Congress “to move forward on legislation to promote a new economy powered by green jobs, combat climate change, and end our dependence on foreign oil.” Separately, Joel Benenson, a pollster for the Democratic National Committee and Obama’s presidential campaign, circulated a memo on Capitol Hill arguing that a comprehensive energy bill “could give Democrats a potent weapon to wield against Republicans in the fall.” Politico reports that Benenson’s recommended “messaging architecture” includes the slogan “Making BP Pay Isn’t Enough” and adds: “frame the opposition” as “Big Oil and corporate polluters who have blocked energy reform for decades” and “politicians protecting the special interests that fund their campaigns.”

The irony here is that BP has been a special interest pushing for carbon pricing on Capitol Hill for years now. It was a founding member of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a corporatist entity that exists to enact “fair climate change.” And of course by “fair” they mean whatever subsidies and mandates they can extract from the federal government to best protect their bottom line. So this February, BP actually pulled out of USCAP because they thought: “We can be more effective if we show up in the discussion as BP.” As The Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney reports: “They made out particularly well in the House’s climate bill, while natural gas producers suffered.”

As far as the strategy in the Senate goes, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told The New York Times last week that Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) would use elements of the Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act, the Cantwell-Collins carbon pricing plan, and the Bingaman renewable energy standard bill. A Senate aide told Politico: “an energy deal must include some serious effort to price carbon as a way to slow climate change.” The important thing to remember is that none of this is new. As Heritage Foundation Senate Relations Deputy Dan Holler reported the day before the Deepwater Horizon explosion, Reid has been planning a bait-and-switch from the beginning: first bringing up the Kerry-Lieberman cap-and-trade bill, striking it, and then replacing it with the less well known Bingaman renewable energy standards.

The left knows that the American public has been educated about the economic harms of cap-and-trade, and they are hoping they can use the BP oil spill to pass renewable energy standards (RES) before the public wises up. Don’t be fooled: an RES is just another way for the enviro-left to inflict an economy-killing energy tax on the American public. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis has crunched the numbers and found that an RES would: 1) Raise electricity prices by 36 percent for households and 60 percent for industry; 2) Cut national income (GDP) by $5.2 trillion between 2012 and 2035; 3) Cut national income by $2,400 per year for a family of four; 4) Reduce employment by more than 1,000,000 jobs; and 5) Add more than $10,000 to a family of four’s share of the national debt by 2035.

In The Godfather, at Vito Corleone’s funeral, the family consiglieri Tom Hagan leans into the new Don Michael Corleone and whispers: “Do you know how they’re gonna come at’cha?” If the American public wants to avoid a self-inflicted economic disaster on top of the existing environmental one, they need to know how President Obama is going to come after them. Now you know.

The Senate just claimed the title of the world’s most delusional body by refusing to strip unelected EPA bureaucrats of the power to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. This was the day freedom died.

One wonders why we have a Congress at all. The 53 profiles in cowardice that could not get a cap-and-tax bill through the U.S. Senate voted Thursday to let the Environmental Protection Agency keep the unprecedented power Congress did not expressly give it. It is power that the EPA arrogated to itself through regulation to control every aspect of the American economy and our very lives.

They might as well have taken the Constitution out on the on Senate floor, and started a fire, with what little we have left of it now.

All 41 Republicans, including newbie Scott Brown of Massachusetts, voted not to shred the Constitution. The motion attracted, for various reasons, the votes of six Democrats — Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, the departing Evan Bayh and even Jay Rockefeller, who for once chose jobs over ideology.

Perhaps there is a drop or two of common sense in a few of the Dems, and the Republicans KNOW they would get shredded. The first thing the new Congress, under Republican control, needs to do is dissolve the EPA. One less bloated bureaucracy is not a bad thing. We already have laws in place that deal with environmental issues.  The arrogance of this Congress is mind boggling.  They shouldn’t be surprised when they find themselves standing in the unemployment lines with the millions of Americans they’ve put out of work!

This is a Congress full of hypocrites who complain about executive branch power under Republicans but are willing to give the EPA unprecedented power because they don’t have the votes for cap-and-trade. “Who elected the Environmental Protection Agency?” asked Wyoming Republican John Barrasso. It is a question we, and the voters, ask too.

That’s a question they better find an answer to before the ‘peasants’ come to the Capital with pitchforks, and find a way to undo the damage they’ve done.

What’s Worse Than Energy Taxes? Renewable Electricity Standards
The Foundry

On March 15th, appearing with labor and environmental leaders, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa unveiled a new alternative energy plan that he said would ensure the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power would meet his goal of securing 20% of its energy from renewable sources such as wind and solar by December 31st. At the time, he claimed it would create 16,000 jobs and only raise consumer electric bills between 8.8% and 28.4%. But less than two weeks later those energy rate hike estimates had skyrocketed with the DWP saying it needed to raise rates by 37% in order to meet the renewable energy standards. Los Angeles’ already shrinking business community revolted and by April Mayor Villaraigosa’s plan had been soundly defeated.

What played out in Los Angeles is now about to play out in Washington. Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) has been marshaling his American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACELA) through committee and is set to move it to the floor soon. The heart of Bingaman’s plan is essentially the same as Mayor Villaraigosa’s: a renewable electricity standard (RES) that mandates sellers of electricity to produce a growing percentage of their power from renewable energy sources every two years. And like Mayor Villaraigosa’s plan, Sen. Bingaman’s renewable energy standards would also mean higher electricity prices for all Americans.

The inconvenient truth is this: nearly half of America’s electricity is generated from coal. Natural gas and nuclear energy add about 20 percent each. Most of the rest is provided by renewable sources, primarily hydroelectric energy at 6 percent. Non-hydro renewables like wind, solar energy and biomass total only 3 percent. And this is after decades of existing generous renewable subsidies. If electricity created by wind and other renewables were cost competitive, consumers would use more of it without a federal law to force consumption. But renewable energy is not cost competitive, hence the need for government coercion to force the American people to buy it.

But just how much more will we have to pay for energy under renewable electricity standards? There are federal studies of the costs of an RES that conclude that it would add no more than a few percent to electric rates. But these studies do not take the full cost of wind and other renewables into account, including the additional resources needed to overcome the intermittent and unreliable nature of wind energy or the construction of new transmission lines connecting rural wind generation to urban power needs.

Taking all these additional factors into account, the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis has crunched the numbers and found that at an RES would: 1) Raise electricity prices by 36 percent for households and 60 percent for industry; 2) Cut national income (GDP) by $5.2 trillion between 2012 and 2035; 3) Cut national income by $2,400 per year for a family of four; 4) Reduce employment by more than 1,000,000 jobs; and 5) Add more than $10,000 to a family of four’s share of the national debt by 2035.

The CDA report concludes: “Electric power is one of the most critical inputs to a modern economy. Thus, it is no surprise that forcing the cost of electricity to rise dampens economic activity. The cost increase for electricity can be viewed as a particularly damaging energy tax, because a renewable mandate, unlike the case of a normal tax, provides no revenue to at least partially offset the higher cost. By way of comparison, the highway use tax on gasoline raises the price of gasoline, but it also generates revenues for building and maintaining roads and bridges. On the other hand, a renewable energy standard raises costs in the form of less efficient production, which provides no economic benefit.”

Cash for Caulkers: Another Subsidized Clunker
The Foundry

This week The House of Representatives is set to vote on a, $6.6 billion home energy efficiency bill commonly referred to as “cash for caulkers.” The plan would give rebates to homeowners willing to green their homes by installing new windows and retrofitting homes energy efficient upgrades. The legislation, H.R. 5019, is being sold as a win for the economy, the planet and consumers. Its supporters of say it will create jobs and lower both greenhouse gas emissions and electric bills through less energy usage. But the old “If it’s too good to be true” adage holds up again. Cash for caulkers is nothing more than a $6.6 billion, taxpayer-funded government program that of wealth that will be fraught with fraud and is another step in the direction in the creating a green bubble.

More Picking Winners and Losers

Cash for Caulkers. allows for a maximum of $3,000 for homeowners to weatherize their homes as they see fit. Incentives work and surely enough, if you subsidize anything enough, people will buy it. But who are the taxpayers subsidizing? Those who would have made improvements in their house without the government’s help or those who are on a tight budget in a recessionary environment – and could ostensibly default on paying for the rest of the project. If people are careful however, and make cuts in their budget elsewhere, then there is no increase in economic activity but rather a shift from one sector to another. The Wall Street Journal labels it “a federally sponsored sale at the local Home Depot or Lowe’s through 2011, at least for those products and services that the government has decided are environmentally correct.”

This program is also more of the “we know what’s best” mentality that our government has. It’s attempting to change Americans’ choices by footing a portion of the bill with taxpayer dollars. Consumers are in a much better position to determine how to be energy efficient than the government and we as a country have become a much more energy efficient over time.

Just like cash for clunkers, the auto program deemed successful by the administration, these programs can have long-term effects on consumption patterns in the United States. If consumers come to expect a handout from the government, they may hold off on buying a new product. When the government provides subsidies, whether it is to businesses or individuals, it creates a dependence that isn’t easily forgotten.

We Already Have Ineffective Cash for Caulkers

We already have a $5 billion stimulus program to weatherize homes and it is off to a shaky start. ABC News reports that at the end of 2009, only 9,100 have been weatherized to save energy through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. $522 million of the $5 billion has been spent thus far, which equates to over $57,000 per home. The goal of the program was to cover 593,000 homes from the passage of the stimulus bill through 2012, which means they’re 1.5% of the way there towards meeting the goal. Texas Watchdog detailed their state’s problem with the weatherization program two weeks ago noting that $3.7 million in taxpayer money had been spent to weatherize 47 homes – a steal at $78,000 per home. The stimulus bill also has tax credits for government-labeled ENERGY STAR appliances – 30 percent up to $1,500. Do we need another $6.6 billion on top of these programs already in place?

Potential for Fraud and Abuse

As colleague and Senior Research Fellow David Kreutzer said, “Any program that is going to run through a third party and is going to distribute billions of dollars needs to have lots of checks and balances to make sure there’s not abuse.” The government’s ENERGY STAR program is an infuriatingly perfect example of this. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report and exposed the ENERGY STAR’S flaws finding that the government had endorsed 15 fake products of 23 submitted by GAO, including a gasoline powered alarm clock and an electric hammer. Maybe it’ll be more difficult to commit fraud when it comes to greening one’s home, but if a feather duster taped to a space heater earned the ENERGY STAR seal of approval, who knows.

Seeing Bigger Picture: The Next Bubble?

Sure, it’s only another $6.6 billion added to the national debt but we could be on the verge of something much more catastrophic. The talks of cap and trade, the creation of carbon credit markets, the subsidies and mandates for renewable energy and the tax credits for energy efficiency could artificially prop up an industry at any cost to the taxpayer. Arnold Kling and Nick Schulz liken it to the housing bubble:

“The echoes of the efforts to expand home ownership are eerie. Expanding the housing supply was always justified in part because it, too, could “create jobs.” A little over ten years ago, then-HUD chief Andrew Cuomo testified before Congress that “we must work to do two key things: We must create housing, and we must create jobs.” He then asked Congress for billions of dollars of loan guarantees and millions of dollars of subsidies that would “help create jobs and leverage private investment.” President Bush was similarly enthusiastic about boosting home ownership, no matter the costs. His former economics adviser Larry Lindsey admitted one year ago that “No one wanted to stop that bubble. It would have conflicted with the president’s own policies.”

And we have now seen how those policies, promoted by both political parties, have turned out. Does anyone doubt today that if a green-energy bubble emerges, President Obama’s own advisers will stay silent, as popping such a bubble would conflict with the president’s own policies? There is no doubt that the boosters of green-energy programs have their hearts in the right place. But then, so did most of those who were pumping up the housing bubble.”

We Don’t Need the Government to Be More Energy Efficient

Motives of cost reduction and increased profits go hand-in-hand with becoming more energy efficient. If a company can find a way to reduce its energy use, it can lower costs and thus the price to consumers. For instance, Wal-Mart did this by lowering packaging and fuel costs. Overall, energy consumption per real dollar of gross domestic product has dropped dramatically over the past sixty year and will continue to do so if we allow business to innovate – not stranglehold them with regulations and mandates.

Arizona’s governor vows the state’s tough new law targeting illegal immigration will be implemented with no tolerance for racial profiling, but at least two advocacy groups were preparing legal challenges and Mexico has warned that the law could affect cross-border relations.

Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a bill that supporters said would take handcuffs off police in dealing with illegal immigration in Arizona, the nation’s busiest gateway for human and drug smuggling from Mexico and home to an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants.

The law makes it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. It also requires local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants; allows lawsuits against government agencies that hinder enforcement of immigration laws; and makes it illegal to hire illegal immigrants for day labor or knowingly transport them.

With hundreds of protesters outside the state Capitol shouting that the bill would lead to civil rights abuses, Brewer said critics were “overreacting” and that she wouldn’t tolerate racial profiling.

“We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act,” Brewer said after signing the law. “But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation.”

Let’s get this out there, right off the bat.  I’m not a racist.  Mexican is not a race.   I do not hate Mexicans.

What I have major problems with is the fact there are people, sneaking into my home, and there’s not a damn thing I can do about it.  I’m suppose to pay for their room and board, their health care, their children’s education, and get nothing in return.  Well, I’m tired of it.  I’m tired of reading about LEGAL citizens being murdered by these slime balls, while the federal government, sits on it’s thumbs and spins to the tune of their “advocates”. We see people killed by drunk drivers, no license, no right to be on the roads, with numerous offenses. We read about kidnappings in Phoenix, the “kidnap capital of the world”. We see the violence growing on the border, and that moron they call the Secretary of Homeland Defense is telling us all is well. Really? What planet is she on?

I congratulate the Governor of Arizona for having the backbone to stand up and actually do something for her state. If only there were more like her! ALL the governors of the border states should get the ball rolling with such laws. Seriously, there are laws in place, but it seems that not only states have ignored them, but we KNOW the federal government has ignored them, and have actually worked in the opposite direction, telling us just how wonderful all these ILLEGALS are, and they just want a better life. That’s nice. Let them do it legally, just like millions of others.

We’re suppose to be a land of laws. Common sense laws. When did that stop? What happened to rational thinking? Has no one figured out we can’t sustain the invasion? Is it just people from south of the border? No. There are illegal invaders from darn near every country in the world. Should they be expelled as well? Oh, damn skippy! Your visa has expired, go the hell home. You want to immigrate, get in line! I don’t care if you’re from Ireland, England, some country in Africa, Russia…..GO THE HELL HOME! If you can’t come here legally, don’t bother to come at all. If you do, the government should do it’s job and kick your ILLEGAL ASS OUT! At YOUR expense, of course!

Here is a question I have to ask:  All you asshats, protesting the law signed by Governor Brewer, do you like crime?  Are you going to be out protesting the conviction of a pedophile?  How about a murderer?  Am I equating such crimes with ILLEGAL ALIENS?  Well, in a way, YES, I AM!  If a law is broken, there should be consequences.  By being in this country illegally, the law is being broken, and there should be consequences…..like kicking your ass OUT!  If you keep coming back, perhaps a firing squad would be in order.  I’m fairly sure that after a few, people would start getting the idea that we are serious.  Right now, we are being laughed at for our lax control.  Control?  Wrong word.  There is no control!  The ILLEGALS are in control, chuckling at how stupid los gringos can be!  Prime example? The Clown in Chief!

Earlier Friday, President Barack Obama called the Arizona bill “misguided” and instructed the Justice Department to examine it to see if it’s legal. He also said the federal government must enact immigration reform at the national level — or leave the door open to “irresponsibility by others.”

What’s “misguided”, you chucklehead, is a POTUS who would put ILLEGALS above the safety of LEGAL citizens. The “irresponsibility” falls in the lap of the federal government! Starting with Ronald Reagan, in his desire to put a stop to the illegal flow, only opened the door for the flood and massive fraud!

“That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona, which threaten to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe,” Obama said.

Yes, we Americans are all for fairness, but let me ask….where is the “fairness” in demanding that we, the LEGAL residents of this country pay our hard earned tax dollars to ‘take care’ of ILLEGALS?  No, that is NOT fair!  As a matter of fact, it is completely UNfair!  The money that is being used, from OUR treasury to provide health care (not just theirs but their victims), education, etc., could very well be used to provide aid for our veterans, elderly and those among US who are in the greatest need.  How many billions have been squandered on those who have decided our laws don’t apply to them?

William Sanchez, president of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders Legal Defense Fund, said his group is preparing a federal lawsuit against Arizona to stop the law from being applied. The group represents 30,000 Evangelical churches nationwide, including 300 Latino pastors in Arizona.

“Millions of Latinos around the country are shocked,” Sanchez said.

Well now, if they are LATINOS, they are in the WRONG place! This is the United States of America! We are Americans, no matter what our ancestors were….AMERICANS! Got it?

Not far from my district the Spring Hill plant sits idle. GM pulled out of Spring Hill, once the proud home to the Saturn line, in the wake of its bankruptcy last year. Reopening the plant, either for the production of cars or anything else, will be critical to jobs growth in Middle Tennessee. At a listening session with constituents who live in the 7th district and used to commute to work in Spring Hill, the message was clear: to get the plant up and running again, Washington is going to have to do … less.

Washington, or more specifically the Environmental Protection Agency, poses a significant challenge to any new enterprise that hopes to revitalize Spring Hill and Tennessee’s economy. While Tennesseans are looking for a new owner to come in, take over the Spring Hill plant and get it producing again, the EPA has proposed a series of regulations that would require businesses to certify they have limited carbon emissions or pay steep fines. These regulations are a result of their “endangerment finding” under the Clean Air Act that carbon dioxide and other green house gasses pose a threat to human life.

The new greenhouse gas rules will require anyone who buys the Spring Hill plant and performs any modifications on it — which they will likely have to do — to analyze all the greenhouse gas emissions from the plant and from all its potential new processes. Any new owner will have to report these emissions to the EPA. All the while, Tennesseans remain jobless.

Most possible uses for the Spring Hill plant would cause the plant to exceed the 25,000 annual tons of carbon dioxide emissions the EPA proposes to allow, classifying it as a “major emitter.” Major emitters must go through additional review and permitting by the EPA, a process that could take months or years. These are years when an entrepreneur owns, maintains, and pays taxes on a non-productive facility — clearly a disincentive to anyone thinking of reopening a plant in the United States.

To add to the cost, the EPA will require major emitters to purchase and install the “best available control technology” to reduce emissions to an acceptable level. Even when that equipment is installed, the new owner isn’t done with EPA-imposed costs. Because the EPA found that the Clean Air Act applies to carbon dioxide, any new owners of the Spring Hill plant are open to being sued if the carbon capture technology fails or the plant ever exceeds the EPA emission ceiling. Such a specter of unanticipated cost would hang over the plant for its entire operational life. While potential new owners calculate the possible cost, Tennesseans go jobless.

As Washington works to balance economic impact with the need to spur energy independence, the EPA lurks on the Hill with these disastrous carbon restrictions in its briefcase, threatening to detonate them on the economy in the event that the Senate doesn’t meet its minimum standard of economy-killing carbon limits. Its actions are a clear executive overreach.

My bill, H.R. 391, would void the EPA’s endangerment finding and prohibit the agency from regulating carbon under the Clean Air Act. It would clear the way for new owners to move to Tennessee, repurpose the Spring Hill plant, and begin hiring. Without it, the prospect of job-killing bureaucratic regulation will be a persistent specter, haunting the plans of those who can help this economy grow.

This month the EPA announced a video contest to help Americans understand how their rulemaking process works. Setting aside the incredible waste associated with a $2,500 prize for a video contest about federal regulatory process, the need for such a contest is telling. As the EPA explained in announcing the contest, these “rules,” which carry the force of law, are what the EPA uses to fill in the gaps left by congressional authorization.

In those gaps, I believe that the EPA has seriously overstepped its original mandate. It has done so in pursuit ever more bureaucratic power and at the cost of our national economy. On Earth Day, Congress should take a close look at the EPA, what it has achieved and at what cost. I am taking a stand against its latest overreach with H.R. 391 and I encourage my colleagues to follow suit.