Posted on 12/17/2013 4:34:49 AM PST by IbJensen
How’s your heating bill? If you feel like you’re not paying enough, you’re in luck.
President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is pushing new regulations on power plants—regulations that will kill jobs, jack up your energy costs, and even end up reducing families’ income because of the impact on the prices of everything you buy.
As Heritage experts Nicolas Loris, Kevin Dayaratna, and David Kreutzer explain:
These regulations will act as a major energy tax that would negatively impact American households. Americans will suffer through higher energy bills, but also through higher prices for goods and services, slowing the economy and crippling the manufacturing sector.
…It will cost more to heat, cool, and light homes, and to cook meals. These higher energy prices will also have rippling effects throughout the economy. As energy prices increase, the cost of making products rises.
The EPA’s war is against coal, which is the main source of electricity for 21 states. In their research, Heritage experts analyzed a phase-out of coal (thanks to the EPA’s regulations) between 2015 and 2038.
Here are their dire warnings. By the end of 2023, they project: •Employment falls by nearly 600,000 jobs (270,000 in manufacturing). •Coal-mining jobs drop 30 percent. •A family of four’s annual income drops more than $1,200 per year, and its total income drops by nearly $24,400 over the entire period of analysis.
And for what?
Certainly not helping the environment. The authors sum it up: “President Obama’s climate plan would have a chilling effect on the economy, not the climate.”
They explain that “regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions will have no meaningful effect on global climate change. The EPA admitted this in its own proposed rule.”
So—hundreds of thousands of lost jobs, thousands in lost income, higher prices across the board—and “no noticeable climate impact.” That’s what these regulations mean.
It’s important to remember that these rules are being developed by unelected bureaucrats at the whim of the Obama Administration. We’ve already learned that the Administration delayed a number of controversial regulations, including energy-related ones, conveniently until after the 2012 election. Why? Because they’re harmful to Americans.
The authority to make such sweeping changes doesn’t belong to these unelected bureaucrats, the Heritage experts say. Congress should take back its power and prevent these rules from inflicting harm on the economy—and our wallets.
Once again we ask ourselves: 'What is our Congress doing to protect us by removing or emasculating this evil arm of the central socialist government?
More importantly, what is our useless Congress doing to emasculate (shouldn't be difficult given his past) the rotten cretin crouching in the White Hut, when he isn't being whisked away for yet another vacation.
Congress did not create the EPA, and it’s not clear that Congress could abolish it.
EPA expert on global warming is going to prison.
EPA is BO’s SS. They need to go. Leave up to the States.
.
Bonner and Can’tner will fight for lower taxes and smaller government in 4,3,2,1!
All spending must go through House of Reps.
Try running a government program without money.
It can be abolished one way or the other.
EPA regs caused my local coal fired power generation plant to close, presumably to save us from global warming. Word is that they are disassembling the PERFECTLY MAINTAINED AND OPERATIONAL structure and are shipping it to South America or elsewhere. So the end result is the destruction of an operational facility and its infrastructure, the loss of local jobs, the loss of control over local energy production, the loss of suppliers jobs, etc. and the globe will still “suffer” from the operation of the plant [if you believe that drivel], just somwhere else. What the hay is going on?
The purpose of the EPA has always been to kill jobs and reduce income. The precious "environment" was just the excuse.
Stalin’s Soviet government starved the Ukrainians to death while our humane central socialist government plans to freeze as many of us to death as Obama deems necessary.
I would like to see an honest analysis of how much of our true cost of living is artificial, that is, how much of that cost does not contribute to anyone else’s livelihood. Just pure overhead cost without benefitting anything other than lost opportunities.
Then I’d like to see it taken a step further and see what that lost opportunity cost would do if it were applied to our economy and what it would do to helping our national productivity, employment, and standard of living.
I’m of the opinion that the results would surprise all of us.
Take that a step further and see what it could do to better fund our under funded military and those public servants who actually voluntarily do something for the rest of us.
Don't be so sure. The EPA was created by executive order (Nixon) to administer laws enacted by Congress between 1955 and 1971, including but not limited to the Air Pollution Control Act, the Clean Air Act, the Water Quality Act, the Clean Waters Restoration Act, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and the Endangered Species Act, among others.
The budget authority upon which the EPA relies is diffused among these various pieces of legislation, and a lot of it comes from fees and indirect (use) taxes.
I was very interested in how to structure a repeal Bill (I know, fat chance), but after careful study I realized that the EPA and its (alleged) powers are probably immune to Congressional interference, unless a future Congress repeals all the enabling legislation or a future Supreme Court rules that delegation of legislative power in an open-ended fashion is unconstitutional.
The EPA is a prototype of a post-constitutional governmental agency, seemingly created in a proper way but not really subject to control by elected officials.
Needless to say, it won't be the last without a major, major change - and I do not mean by "electing more Republicans".
He wants as many on gov. assistance as possible.
Congress can defund the EPA and voila’ its gone. The President can shut down the EPA if we can get the right guy in there.
Actually, I'm not sure they can. I don't think the EPA is funded by Congress, at least not directly.
The President can shut down the EPA if we can get the right guy in there.
He could, but he still has to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.
the underlying laws are the problem, not the EPA.
The Congress in the past several years has partly defunded the EPA for various things. The EPA issues regulations not laws. I believe regulations can be rolled back anytime.
Frankly I think the states should just tell the EPA to stick it and tell them we will see you in court. GA is supposed to close down two coal fired plants this next year. I wish Nathan DEal our governor would just tell them no.
The way things are going we will start to see rolling black outs in the next summer or two. Wait till folks can’t use their AC. The hue and cry to kill the EPA will be deafening. This issue will finally take care of itself.
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.