Posted on 12/04/2013 1:41:47 PM PST by markomalley
Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter said that while most Americans were dining on their Thanksgiving turkey, the Obama administration was cooking up a regulatory stew of its own.
“While most of America was enjoying their turkey and stuffing, the administration was stuffing our economy with burdensome and expensive regulations,” Vitter said.
Last week, the Obama administration revealed its Unified Regulatory Agenda for the fall of 2013. It included 134 pending regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency alone. The EPA is working to finalize rules to limit carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, lower sulfur emissions from fuels, set ambient air quality standards, expand its regulatory authority over waterways and much more.
“These new rules listed in the Unified Agenda will have a substantial impact on the future of this country’s energy production and independence,” said Vitter. “At this point, the federal government should be doing everything it possibly can to encourage and support economic growth, especially in the industries that have proven to be successful – instead they’re slapping a mountain of new rules and regulations on our job creators.”
Republicans have become increasingly critical of the Obama administration’s timing in how the regulatory agenda was released. In January, Vitter sent a letter to former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson asking why the agency had opted to release its agenda six months after it was scheduled to — a suspicious move during an election year.
Federal law requires that agencies release their regulatory agenda biannually, in the spring and again in the fall. The EPA said it would issue its 2012 spring agenda last April or May, but the agenda was not published by the White House regulatory affairs office until late December of that year.
This year’s fall agenda includes contentious carbon dioxide regulations that effectively ban the construction of new coal-fired power plants unless they use carbon-capture and control technology. The coal industry says such technology is not commercially proven, meaning that no new coal plants will be built until the technology becomes economical.
Ahead of her trip to China, current EPA administrator Gina McCarthy expressed excitement about the pending regulations on new and existing coal plants. She said that the agency has engaged in the most comprehensive outreach program “that you can imagine” in hearing from stakeholders on pending coal regulations.
The coal industry lambasted McCarthy as the EPA held no field hearings in coal country — the region that would be hardest hit by the emissions limits.
“Ms. McCarthy’s assertion that EPA’s recent listening session tour was ‘vigorous, robust and comprehensive’ could only be seen through her rose-colored glasses, as her agency failed to solicit input from those stakeholders who stand to lose the most,” said Laura Sheehan, spokeswoman for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.
Just keep voting. All will be well.
We are close to the point everyone just ignores the Pretender and challenges the Feds to come for us.
Bump
Congress should have veto power over each and every ukase issued by any Federal Agency since the statutory authority under which they operate issues from Congress.
Congress should also have veto power over any ukase issued by the President as sole legislative pwoer is vested in the Congress, not the Executive.
One of the four witnesses at the Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday kept referring to the regulatory agencies as the fourth branch of government.
If the Republicans ever retake the House, Senate, and White House they need to pass a sunset law for federal regulations. All federal government regulations should have a 3 year maximum life unless renewed by a Congressional vote for another 3 years. All votes on renewing regulations must be individual clean bills for each regulation (no riders or other issues attached).
If a regulation is rejected for renewal, the bureaucracy cannot arbitrarily reissue it. Once a regulation is sunset, for a new replacement regulation to be issued, a law must be passed by Congress enabling the regulation.
Congress should also slash the bureaucracy with a 20% headcount reduction across the board. Fewer bureaucrats, less time to develop and issue regulations.
>>It included 134 pending regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency alone.<<
Congress has the power to strip the EPA of it’s funding and essentially rendering this agency impotent.
>> Congress has the power to strip the EPA of it’s funding and essentially rendering this agency impotent.
Peter King disagrees because Cruz is a crazy traitor or something like that.
A great American Tradition has just started... If the President and the AG can ignore Laws that they disagree with ... so can we.
TT
Back to Lurk mode
not just government regulations but all government laws at all levels of government should have an expiration date of 3 to 4 years . if this law or regulation is so damn needed then surely they can pass it again. this is the flaw in the Constitution and should have been in place from the beginning. but not sure if anything could have been done since the democrats have controlled the media( all information that gets to the people and only recently did we get the Internet)
although if they get amnesty this will not work cause then they (democrats) have enough votes to pass anything at will anytime. time is running out for freedom
the democrats had the media (control of all information that gets to the people for 100 years) . so they grew government then ( the roomfuls of laws and regulations is what they have imprisoned us with ). and now they have their 3rd world socialist immigrants to render our votes useless( or they are close to that point and with Amnesty it's over for us , freedom and for capitalism in the USA)
the 1965 immigration act was the death blow to the Repulic and freedom. it's why we have 10’s of millions of 3rd world immigrants that vote for socialism/democrats
“Congress has the power to strip the EPA of it’s funding and essentially rendering this agency impotent.”.
WHICH “Congress” do you propose will actually do that? Certainly not the one in place right now.
Maybe 20 years ago, my economist BIL and I were discussing the increasing bureaucracy that was gaining hold under Clinton. In true academic form, he said, "well, we could wind up with the Italian model."
In other words, a situation where there are so many laws that everyone works outside the books and the law; and legal enforcement is either accidental, due to some personal issues with someone in power, or ginned up because someone has become too big. In other words, like tax law coming down on Al Capone. Otherwise, life goes on around the government and despite the government, and every one knows it.
“the 1965 immigration act was the death blow to the Repulic and freedom. it’s why we have 10’s of millions of 3rd world immigrants that vote for socialism/democrats”
I agree with you on the 1965 immigration act. At the time of passage the bill had broad bipartisan support. It is interesting that 85% of Republicans in the House and 74% of Democrats in the House voted for the bill. In the Senate only 3 Republicans voted against and 14 Democrats voted no. Most of the no votes came from southern Democrats.
By passing the bill the nation’s culture changed from a uniquely American “melting pot” to an increasingly fragmented multicultural society with ethnic polarization. At the time the supporters of the bill insisted the demographic mix and culture of the nation would not be affected.
There has to be a breaking point. There has to be.
“the 1965 immigration act was the death blow to the Repulic and freedom. it’s why we have 10’s of millions of 3rd world immigrants that vote for socialism/democrats”
I agree with you on the 1965 immigration act. At the time of passage the bill had broad bipartisan support. It is interesting that 85% of Republicans in the House and 74% of Democrats in the House voted for the bill. In the Senate only 3 Republicans voted against and 14 Democrats voted no. Most of the no votes came from southern Democrats.
By passing the bill the nation’s culture changed from a uniquely American “melting pot” to an increasingly fragmented multicultural society with ethnic polarization. At the time the supporters of the bill insisted the demographic mix and culture of the nation would not be affected.
Prepare for CW II and a whole new Government—one that follows the Founders.
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.