Posted on 12/27/2010 12:41:21 PM PST by SeekAndFind
And so it begins, and on the most fertile red-state territory in the nation. Texas, which got four more seats in the House through the 2010 Census reapportionment, has had its air-quality rules superceded by the EPA as part of its aggressive new action on carbon emissions. Governor Rick Perry promises a fight:
The federal Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday effectively declared Texas unfit to regulate its owngreenhouse gas emissions and took over carbon dioxide permitting of any new or expanding industrial facilities starting Jan. 2.
The EPA also set up a framework for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in seven other states: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Oregon and Wyoming. In addition, the agency set a timetable on establishing regulated levels of greenhouse gas emissions.
The action will give the EPA permitting authority over refineries, power plants and cement facilities in Texas, the agency said, but will not affect small pollution source facilities, such as restaurants and farms.
Well, perhaps not directly, but the increase in energy prices and shortages created by the EPA imposition of what will essentially be carbon taxes will impact businesses throughout the Texas economy, as well as consumers who ultimately pay the costs of the regulatory regime. Rick Perry has signaled a court fight to stop the EPA and the Obama administration:
Texas is the only state that has refused to implement the new rules. President Barack Obama is pressing ahead with the regulations after Congress failed to pass legislation capping carbon emissions. Perry, a Republican, calls the rules overreaching by the federal government that will cripple his state’s economy.
“The EPA’s misguided plan paints a huge target on the backs of Texas agriculture and energy producers by implementing unnecessary, burdensome mandates on our state’s energy sector, threatening hundreds of thousands of Texas jobs and imposing increased living costs on Texas families,” Katherine Cesinger, a Perry spokeswoman, said in an e-mailed statement.
The timing is certainly interesting. The EPA made this move two days before Christmas, when most people had stopped paying attention to political news. The EPA’s move thus got missed by most of the national media, even though it demonstrates well the Obama strategy in 2011 to win through regulation what it could not win through legislation. And by focusing on Texas, where Republicans have a chance to redistrict with practically no interference from Democrats, the move will certainly incentivize the GOP to limit as much as possible the representation of Democrats in their Congressional delegation as the Republican-controlled House attempts to stymie the EPA’s regulatory innovation.
This also will vault Rick Perry to the highest level of national politics, even as he continues to insist that he won’t run for President. With a third term as governor in hand and a perfect political battle opening in front of him, though, the opportunity may be too much to resist for a man who could possibly unite conservatives and the GOP for a big run against a stumbling Obama in 2012.
Don't mess with Texas. God bless Texas.
The the battle begin, one way or the other.
Kick those two Democrat centers out and we’ll think about it.
Will it stand and Fight the Texas National guard?
Thats the real problem - The National grip on the Guard’s alligence.
And it should also be pointed out that the Mexicans thought the same thing in 1836... Do you remember how that worked out for them? :P
They could reduce the cabinet to half a dozen departments and nothing that really needs doing would be affected.
Most of the others could easily be devolved back to the states, or privatized, or simply abolished.
Total Military Recruits: Army, Navy, Air Force (most recent) by state
See here :
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/mil_tot_mil_rec_arm_nav_air_for-recruits-army-navy-air-force
TEXAS TOPS THEM ALL !!
Most likely is that the Texas National Guard will refuse to respond to either side in such a matter. There’s enough Texas loyalists in the TxNG to make whether trying to put units in the field an open question as to how good an idea it would be.
And yes, I can see the State Guard holding the Capitol steps against the National Guard.
It might come to that, and the outcome would be unpredictable (no, I don't predict violence or secession... quite the opposite). The governor could come out of such a confrontation as the next president of the US.
Damn, they only have it in XXX-LG.
Seriously, can you imagine the political fallout of a president arresting a governor over an unconstitutional carbon law? Not voting rights, or education rights, but carbon law?
The governor should allow himself to be arrested, play it for all its worth, and by the time its over the president would be repudiated even by his own party. It just takes guts, which as you say is typically in short supply. So it probably wouldn’t happen.
But a governor with a little guts and a flair for the theatrical could easily win such a confrontation and make the president look like the fool he is.
That leaves room for you IIIa threat vest and *both* shoulder holsters inside the shirt.
Defund the EPA then drive a stake through it and don’t obey rules that were put into place illegally.
If Gov Slick Hair can’t do it; import the Gov from New Jersey.
“The EPA’s misguided plan paints a huge target on the backs of Texas agriculture and energy producers by implementing unnecessary, burdensome mandates on our state’s energy sector, threatening hundreds of thousands of Texas jobs and imposing increased living costs on Texas families,” Katherine Cesinger, a Perry spokeswoman, said in an e-mailed statement.”
I’d state it more simpler than this. AGW is total bullsh** and therefore the EPA’s regulations on carbon emissions are based on the same bullsh**.
With a big ol’ *FU Barry* on their foreheads.
Good Article, but to my point they are not Co-Equal, but rather checks on each other.
“But, although separated, Madison believed it essential that the three branches be connected so that each could place a check on the power of the other:
and
“[i]t is equally evident, that none of them ought to possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others, “
So to my point none can override the other and cannot/should not usurp the powers of the other branch. IE the Judicatory cannot make a Law (yet we see this all to often), The Congress cannot enforce the Laws...
To the point, and this I say, they are not equal. Article One is the first and longest (Congress) well defined powers where are Article 3 (Judicatory) is the smallest and limited in many ways IE they cannot control themselves. For example whom determines what Courts are needed and how large they are? As we seen in the past by the example of stacking the Supreme court Congress can manipulate when “We the People” are not paying attention to get the results they want.
So, I still say they are checked on each other, but by no way equal in all aspects.
TX AG Greg Abbott is all over this and has been for a while now.
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.