PDA

View Full Version : Environment Obama administration prepared to contain global warming without congressional action


Stinger
12-07-2009, 11:13 AM
EPA: Greenhouse gases endanger human health

By DINA CAPPIELLO and H. JOSEF HEBERT
Associated Press Writer
Buy AP Photo Reprints

Agencies call for more aid to fight climate change

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Environmental Protection Agency has concluded greenhouse gases are endangering people's health and must be regulated, signaling that the Obama administration is prepared to contain global warming without congressional action if necessary.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson scheduled a news conference for later Monday to announce the so-called endangerment finding, officials told The Associated Press, speaking privately because the announcement had not been made.

The finding is timed to boost the administration's arguments at an international climate conference - beginning this week - that the United States is aggressively taking actions to combat global warming, even though Congress has yet to act on climate legislation.

Under a Supreme Court ruling, the so-called endangerment finding is needed before the EPA can regulate carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases released from power plants, factories and automobiles under the federal Clean Air Act.

The EPA signaled last April that it was inclined to view heat-trapping pollution as a threat to public health and welfare and began to take public comments under a formal rulemaking. The action marked a reversal from the Bush administration, which had declined to aggressively pursue the issue.

Business groups have strongly argued against tackling global warming through the regulatory process of the Clean Air Act. Any such regulations are likely to spawn lawsuits and lengthy legal fights.

The EPA and the White House have said regulations on greenhouse gases will not be imminent even after an endangerment finding, saying that the administration would prefer that Congress act to limit such pollution through an economy-wide cap on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Nevertheless, the EPA has begun the early stages of developing permit requirements on carbon dioxide pollution from large emitters such as power plants. The administration also has said it will require automobile fuel economy to increase to a fleet average of 35 miles per gallon by 2016, another push to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

The EPA's readiness to tackle climate change is expected to give a boost to U.S. arguments at the climate conference opening in Copenhagen this week that the United States is making broad commitments to reduce greenhouse gases.

While the House has approved climate legislation that would cut emissions by 17 percent by 2020 and about 80 percent by mid-century, the Senate has yet to take up the measure amid strong Republican opposition and reluctance by some centrist Democrats.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., lead author of the Senate bill, has argued that if Congress doesn't act, the EPA will require greenhouse gas emissions. He has called EPA regulation a "blunt instrument" that would pose a bigger problem for industry than legislation crafted to mitigate some of the costs of shifting away from carbon emitting fossil fuels.

The way was opened for the EPA to use the Clean Air Act to cut climate-changing emissions by the Supreme Court in 2007, when the court declared that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are pollutants under the Act. But the court said the EPA must determine if these pollutants pose a danger to public health and welfare before it can regulate them.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_EPA_CLIMATE?SITE=PAYOK&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

HonestChieffan
12-07-2009, 11:16 AM
Congress will have to act at some point to limit the scope of the EPA. Sadly, a great idea and a valuable agency is going to take on the new tactic of being activists rather than regulators who rely on good science and solid decision making.

KC Dan
12-07-2009, 11:18 AM
Congress will have to act at some point to limit the scope of the EPA. Sadly, a great idea and a valuable agency is going to take on the new tactic of being activists rather than regulators who rely on good science and solid decision making.Thank God for lawyers! Any strangling regulations from the EPA will be caught up in the courts for years as new regulations would surely cost all businesses billions and they will fight (as they should).

Brock
12-07-2009, 11:22 AM
Thank God for lawyers! Any strangling regulations from the EPA will be caught up in the courts for years as new regulations would surely cost all businesses billions and they will fight (as they should).

Meanwhile, the new regs will be applied to us, the little people, and we don't have the resources to go to battle with the government.

HonestChieffan
12-07-2009, 11:24 AM
They can enact regs and keep them in place while going to court plus there are a million different internal review appeal routs. The system worked great when it was science based but to apply it to activist goals and create chaos through radical unwarrented manipulation will test the entire sytem. Thats why congress will be forced to act to slap new defition to the role and process of the agency.

BucEyedPea
12-07-2009, 11:29 AM
It's another unConstitutional action that circumvents the checks and balances of our Republic. This is the act of a dictator.

RINGLEADER
12-07-2009, 12:33 PM
It's another unConstitutional action that circumvents the checks and balances of our Republic. This is the act of a dictator.

The sweetest justice would be for Obama and Dems to enact all these programs and have the Supreme Court rule them unconstitutional. Doubt it would happen, but boy would that be poetic justice for this group.

They feel they need to push all this stuff through this session because they'll never have another shot at doing this much damage again. What the Dems are after ignores fact and history in favor of ideology.

Donger
12-07-2009, 02:17 PM
Good for Webb:

Dear Mr. President:

I would like to express my concern regarding reports that the Administration may believe it has the unilateral power to commit the government of the United States to certain standards that may be agreed upon at the upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of Parties 15 in Copenhagen, Denmark. The phrase “politically binding” has been used.

Although details have not been made available, recent statements by Special Envoy on Climate Change Todd Stern indicate that negotiators may be intending to commit the United States to a nationwide emission reduction program. As you well know from your time in the Senate, only specific legislation agreed upon in the Congress, or a treaty ratified by the Senate, could actually create such a commitment on behalf of our country.

I would very much appreciate having this matter clarified in advance of the Copenhagen meetings.

Sincerely,

Jim Webb
United States Senator

BucEyedPea
12-07-2009, 02:18 PM
The sweetest justice would be for Obama and Dems to enact all these programs and have the Supreme Court rule them unconstitutional. Doubt it would happen, but boy would that be poetic justice for this group.

They feel they need to push all this stuff through this session because they'll never have another shot at doing this much damage again. What the Dems are after ignores fact and history in favor of ideology.

This is why I refuse to call them liberals or for the people. They're just as fascist as they claim the right to have been under Bush. I'm sure the lefties support such grabs when it's their pet issues.

Iowanian
12-07-2009, 02:21 PM
I'd think Obama would be careful about blowing so much hot air into the asses of Americans if he were truly that concerned with GW.

BucEyedPea
12-07-2009, 02:22 PM
I'd think Obama would be careful about blowing so much hot air into the asses of Americans if he were truly that concerned with GW.

You're a nutjob.

Iowanian
12-07-2009, 02:26 PM
You're a nutjob.


Go make a man some pancakes, you floppy-cooter'd Tater hog.

Baby Lee
12-07-2009, 02:32 PM
Go make a man some pancakes, you floppy-cooter'd Tater hog.

It's the Civilwonian way!!!! ROFL ROFL

Iowanian
12-07-2009, 02:34 PM
It's the Civilwonian way!!!! ROFL ROFL

That is the civilized response. I'd like to send BEP a Rusty-barbed wire dildo for Christmas and an NRA Tshirt.

Chocolate Hog
12-07-2009, 02:41 PM
Go make a man some pancakes, you floppy-cooter'd Tater hog.

Good thing you have your cousins to marry.

KCWolfman
12-07-2009, 02:45 PM
The only "fix" I've seen offered is one of taxing people who use too much of an item - how does taking money from someone fix a supposed ecological problem?
Posted via Mobile Device

Iowanian
12-07-2009, 02:45 PM
Good thing you have your cousins to marry.

I guess I'll default to the expert opinion on the product of such an arrangement.

HonestChieffan
12-07-2009, 02:53 PM
The only "fix" I've seen offered is one of taxing people who use too much of an item - how does taking money from someone fix a supposed ecological problem?
Posted via Mobile Device

Pretend its a supposed tax. Then drive by the new government offices and see the happy campers doing nothing there.

Taco John
12-07-2009, 02:54 PM
The only "fix" I've seen offered is one of taxing people who use too much of an item - how does taking money from someone fix a supposed ecological problem?
Posted via Mobile Device

It makes them raise their prices, which is good for the environment, or something.

BucEyedPea
12-07-2009, 03:45 PM
Thomas DiLorenzo on December 7, 2009 08:07 AM

Because they’re green on the outside and red on the inside, of course.

This is not just a clever joke; it’s true with regard to the professional “environmentalists,” if not most of the rank and file. All of their frauds and ruses, from acid rain to cellphone cancer scares, to global cooling, global warming, the “ozone hole,” “climate change,” etc., have one common denominator: They are used to make a case for a massive redistribution of worldwide wealth and central planning of the entire world’s economy. Communism, in other words.

When I spent a year at Washington University in St. Louis twenty some years ago my old friend Murray Weidenbaum told me of a lunchtime encounter he had with another Wash-U. faculty member, Barry Commoner, who is one of the gurus and icons of the environmentalist movement. If you look up Commoner’s books you will find that his arguments always came down to this: All of our environmental problems will disappear if only we would adopt socialism. Anyway, Murray once asked him the following at an informal lunch (paraphrasing from memory): “You environmentalists are opposed to nuclear power, hydroelectric power, coal-fired power plants, natural gas, and all other forms of energy. But energy is the lifeblood of capitalism. Without energy our capitalist economy will be destroyed.”

According to Murray Weidenbaum, who was the Chairman of President Reagan’s Council of Economic advisers in 1981, Commoner just smiled and nodded approvingly.

Says all!

FishingRod
12-07-2009, 04:04 PM
Are we going to outlaw water vapor? I really would miss poached eggs.

kcfanXIII
12-07-2009, 04:12 PM
and this is where the signing statement about not consulting with congress on international treaties comes into play. another example of the shredding of our constitution.

article 2 section 2:
"he shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, to make treaties, provided 2/3s of the senators present concur."

even if he signs this treaty, it will not be valid until two thirds of the senate approve it. he is also outside his powers granted by the constitution when it comes to imposing this gobal tax:

article 1 section 8:
"the congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises"
it says the congress shall have the power to tax, not the president. further down in section 8 (still referring to the powers of congress) it also states:

"to regulate commerce with foreign nations..."



tough luck greenies. your savior can't do what he is about to try and do. there is no argument, there is no justification. its right there in the constitution. try him for treason if he wishes to sign away our sovereignty, and tries to send our wealth overseas.

talastan
12-07-2009, 05:45 PM
So since CO2 is now a dangerous deadly gas, are we going to kill off the trees and plants? After all they take in and store this stuff to produce oxygen. Who knows how Obama's 80% proposed CO2 draw down will affect the plants and trees......Has anyone studied or released the affects of getting rid of that much CO2 will have in this situation. Come on you econuts love to hug your trees! :D

KC Dan
12-07-2009, 06:00 PM
So since CO2 is now a dangerous deadly gas, are we going to kill off the trees and plants? After all they take in and store this stuff to produce oxygen. Who knows how Obama's 80% proposed CO2 draw down will affect the plants and trees......Has anyone studied or released the affects of getting rid of that much CO2 will have in this situation. Come on you econuts love to hug your trees! :DAnother reason to put old people in nursing homes out of their misery besides saving health care costs - They emit CO2. Kill them NOW!!!! They can save us younger people!

jjjayb
12-07-2009, 06:58 PM
Another reason to put old people in nursing homes out of their misery besides saving health care costs - They emit CO2. Kill them NOW!!!! They can save us younger people!

Plus you'll look good in one of these jump suits:

http://www.famousmonstersoffilmland.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Logans-Run-Lastday.jpg

Hopefully you're old enough to get the joke.

Garcia Bronco
12-07-2009, 07:57 PM
Meanwhile, the new regs will be applied to us, the little people, and we don't have the resources to go to battle with the government.

the EPA can't regulate indivduals.

KC Dan
12-07-2009, 07:59 PM
Plus you'll look good in one of these jump suits:

http://www.famousmonstersoffilmland.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Logans-Run-Lastday.jpg

Hopefully you're old enough to get the joke.unfortunately..........I saw it in theatres...:doh!:

Brock
12-07-2009, 08:37 PM
the EPA can't regulate indivduals.

You're quite wrong about that.

Brock
12-07-2009, 10:37 PM
I literally laughed out loud at the garbage being said by the Clowns in Copenhagen. What a freaking embarrassing dog and pony show.

BigChiefFan
12-07-2009, 10:42 PM
This shit needs to be nipped in the bud. I can't believe this crap they are shoveling.

petegz28
12-07-2009, 10:45 PM
You are no longer allowed to exhale.

Brock
12-07-2009, 10:55 PM
It was all a bunch of "The time is NOW", "we can't afford to wait", "no more talking, 2012 is coming" type of bullshit. They trotted out this bitch from Fiji who was CRYING about how Fiji might be underwater in 50 years or some such with a bunch of kids from there who probably generated 500,000 tons in C02 travelling to Copenhagen. It was amateurish fearmongering that I couldn't help but laugh at.

Taco John
12-07-2009, 11:11 PM
This Copenhagen thing is going to backfire in America. I don't know how it will play around the rest of the world, but this Climategate thing has rendered it's effectiveness to nearly useless in the states.

Check this out from PEW:

http://media.oregonlive.com/environment_impact/photo/warm1jpg-70b6800b1583aaec_small.jpg


Democrats went from 91% to 75% almost overnight! And everyone else is trending hard downward.

This climate thing is over here. They're not even going to bring any new legislation to the table until the spring, and by that time, the entire movement is going to be back to 1985 levels.

All this talk is nothing but blather at this point. It will be interesting to see if Obama gets the cold shoulder at this thing, considering he'll pack no punch there whatever.

Taco John
12-07-2009, 11:17 PM
Oh wow! I just realized that I read that chart wrong. That isn't overnight... That's the last three year trend!

Now that's funny.

jjjayb
12-07-2009, 11:29 PM
The worst thing? When this global warming hoax is finally laid to rest, they will find another cause to cling to as a means of bringing in an anti-capitalist one world government.

KCWolfman
12-07-2009, 11:42 PM
the EPA can't regulate indivduals.

....yet
Posted via Mobile Device

BucEyedPea
12-08-2009, 06:47 AM
You are no longer allowed to exhale.

I was still waiting to exhale though.