Posted on 10/14/2011 12:01:15 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry outlined plans Friday to dramatically increase U.S. energy production and create 1.2 million jobs, taking aim at federal regulations he said are strangling the economy.
Perry's announcement at a U.S. Steel plant in a suburb near Pittsburgh came as the Texas governor seeks to shore up his campaign for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination after a series of shaky debate performances and distractions knocked him out of the front-runner position.
Perry said if elected in 2012 he would sign a series of executive orders in the first 100 days of his administration to roll back federal regulations and open up more areas for oil and gas exploration.
He would repeal the Environmental Protection Agency's authority over greenhouse gases blamed for global warming and eliminate all current and planned EPA programs to restrict carbon dioxide emissions.
``We are standing atop the next American economic boom -- energy,'' Perry said. ``The quickest way to give our economy a shot in the arm is to deploy American ingenuity to tap American energy. But we can only do that if environmental bureaucrats are told to stand down.''
Perry sprinkled his remarks with a harsh denunciation of Democratic President Barack Obama, who he said is responsible for ``activist regulations'' that have made it more difficult to extract energy resources. Obama has favored green technologies that are not producing as many jobs as promised, he said.
``His energy policies are driven by the concerns of activists in his party, my policies are driven by concerns of American workers without jobs,'' Perry said.
It was the first of two speeches Perry is delivering to outline proposals to bring down the 9.1% U.S. unemployment rate, the main issue in the campaign. His second speech, expected around Oct. 25, is focused on tax reform,
(Excerpt) Read more at foxbusiness.com ...
“Won’t take much of a speech to say “I’ll just adopt the 9-9-9”
Oh God I hope not!! The 999 plan includes empowerment (entitlement) zones!!
Cain does not want to kill the EPA he wants to start over with them.
That’s why he would be perfect choise to lead EPA.
I have a serious question for those on the Cain Train. Do you seriously not even attempt to find the transcript from the actual speech or do you really just swallow the MSM sound bite whole.
I really want to think I am debating with serious people here but it's becoming obvious most, at least on Perry threads are one issue bomb throwers whose whole purpose is to misinform.
I can't believe FR has become such a place.
Unfortunately Perry couldn’t do this since the Supreme Court idiots are the ones who gave the EPA this authority in Massachusetts vs. EPA.
Are there any of Republican candidates who DON’T want to vastly expand exploiting all of our domestic energy resources and who DO want the EPA regulating greenhouse gases?
Bachmann is even ready to drill the Everglades.
Where are the details of his taxing and spending plan he promised within 3 days after the debate - was there another speech today in which Perry gave us those details?
“...he would sign a series of executive orders in the first 100 days of his administration to roll back federal regulations...”
-
No president should have this kind of power or authority.
Not Obama, and not Perry, and not anyone else.
We are a republic not a kingdom.
You don’t need to vote for Perry. Oh, wait! You did not intend to in the first place.
Why would Perry do that? His plan is far better than Cain’s which is changing of the tax structure.
I believe he said some would require congressional action.
It is allowing them to pay instate tuition at colleges. Not welfare. However, you of course know that already.
The EPA can’t do much with say 5 employees can they? Cutting the funding would take care of a lot of the problems.
He also said that he would go to Congress. Try listening to the video. Oh wait, you are just causing trouble and aren’t really interested. He can overturn Zero’s EO’s Some things would certainly be done through congress. Perry is a more by the book guy and especially law and order.
I really want to think I am debating with serious people here ...
Good luck with that.
Texas, like all states, subsidizes the costs of an education at their public institutions of higher learning.
(Feel free to review the states spending on such institutions for yourself to verify this.)
The entire reason states charge non-residents much higher tuition rates is to cover the difference between real costs and subsidized costs.
Instate tuition is a form of welfare, but then you already knew that.
got it. good deal.
“...you are just causing trouble...”
-
How so?
I made a simple statement,
but you have gotten so wrapped up into defending Perry
that you now see every post as an attack on him.
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.