Memo to Hal Rogers: 'Hope' is not a strategy for dealing with EPA

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) said that the proposed 18 cut in the FY2012 budget for EPA “sends a very strong message” to rein in EPA’s actions. Rogers then added, “I am hopeful that these provisions are sufficient to prod EPA in the right direction.”

But we’ve been down this path before. The EPA doesn’t generally respond to such “messages.” The EPA knows that the Democrat-controlled Senate will reject the House budget cuts and the Republicans will then fold like a cheap suit. If Rogers wants to get the EPA’s attention, he’ll need to turn the agency’s lights off for awhile — that will require an Alamo-like stand to deep cuts in the EPA budget.

Rogers may view the proposed 18% budget cuts as deep, but we view them as approving of 82% of what the EPA does.

Shortchanged: House GOP proposes mere 18% cut in EPA budget

It’s really shocking that the Tea Party-flavored, REPUBLICAN-controlled House is apparently OK with 82% of what the EPA does. Continue reading Shortchanged: House GOP proposes mere 18% cut in EPA budget

Detroit News: Stop EPA from killing coal

The Detroit News editorializes: “The Environmental Protection Agency’s crusade against coal-fired power plants is on a fast track to raise electricity bills in Michigan by as much as 20 percent and restrict the state’s economic growth… In Michigan, DTE estimates installing scrubbers on its coal plants will cost $2 billion, which will be passed on to consumers in higher monthly bills… But the real impact is on jobs and economic growth. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers forecasts 50,000 of its members will lose their jobs within three years, and 200,000 additional jobs down the supply line. In addition, coal-dependent states such as Michigan would risk losing business to states — and countries — that can now produce electricity cheaper. President Barack Obama made a big deal out of promising to put the kibosh on regulations that threaten jobs and growth. And yet he allows Lisa Jackson, the EPA administrator, to continue to impose rules that put growth at risk… [Emphasis added]”

Read the full editorial.

Junk in EPA's trunk: Faux analysis

“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency soft-pedals rigorous analysis showing its policies kill growth and jobs while trumpeting as truth junk analysis portraying burdensome regulations as economically beneficial,” says the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Continue reading Junk in EPA's trunk: Faux analysis

Ohio Congressman: EPA Administrator Jackson is the Biggest Stumbling Block to American Job Creation

Congressman Bob Gibbs (R-OH) released the following statement regarding EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s comments yesterday about the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Air Transport Rule (CATR) and Utility Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) proposals: Continue reading Ohio Congressman: EPA Administrator Jackson is the Biggest Stumbling Block to American Job Creation

AEP: New EPA power plant rules to raise electricity rates up to 35%

American Electric Power (AEP), one of the largest electric utility companies in the U.S., took bold aim (for a utility, that is) at the EPA’s impending rules for electric utility emissions:

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed several new rules that will significantly increase the cost of electricity for AEP customers. AEP supports improving the environment by reducing power plant emissions, but believes that the nation can achieve the exact same air and water quality standards at much less expense.

Click to read AEP’s release.

Click to read “EPA’s Clean Air Act: Pretending air pollution is worse than it is”, the report on why these rules will produce no public health benefits.

Environmental Protection (Or Propaganda?) Agency friends Paul Driessen and Willie Soon nail the EPA in today’s Investor’s Business Daily:

If Federal Register notices, press releases and activist campaigns assured progress, the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed rules for 84 power plant pollutants would usher in vastly improved environmental quality and human health.

Unfortunately, the opposite is likelier…

Read more…

EPA chief called on to retract inflammatory falsehood made on Daily Show is calling on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson to publicly retract her false and inflammatory statement regarding mercury made on national TV last week. —>

Promotion or demotion for the EPA?

Sen. Richard Burr has proposed to merge the EPA with the Department of Energy.

We oppose this move because it would essentially elevate the EPA to cabinet status, extend the life of the useless Department of Energy and encourage the left-tilting environmental bureaucracy to pollute energy policy even more.

The radical greens oppose the bill because it would “abolish” the EPA.

What do you think?

Senate aide: Phony amendments saved EPA from wobbly Obama in budget deal

Although EPA’s allies are trying to sell the message that last week’s failure to rein in the EPA (through the McConnell amendment and budget deal riders) is some sort of validation of what the agency is doing, the reality is much different. Continue reading Senate aide: Phony amendments saved EPA from wobbly Obama in budget deal

Tims of the day: House frosh oppose budget deal because EPA riders removed

Hats off to Reps. Tim Scott (R-South Carolina) and Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) for voting against last Friday’s budget deal because the riders blocking EPA from regulating greenhouse gases were dropped. According to Climatewire, Scott, Huelskamp and probably others among the 28 House GOP who voted against the deal believed that restricting EPA was a “critical” component of the budget effort.