Far West
Pursuit Driver
We all knew 0bama was using the EPA to shut down industries he did not like and transfer wealth under the pretense of climate change. Looks like Trump will roll back the tactics the EPA was using to hurt industry and go back to focus on protecting the air we breath and water we drink.
...in a recent study I reviewed the EPA's performance meeting Clean Air Act deadlines over the last eight years. Out of more than 1,100 deadlines, the agency missed 84 percent and missed them by an average of 4.3 years. For technology-forcing regulations that must be reviewed every eight years to reflect the latest science and technology, the agency was late on 93 percent of its deadlines, by an average of 7.8 years. In reviewing state implementation plans, which must occur within 18 months, the agency was late on 78 percent of its deadlines by an average of 1.9 years.
By neglecting its statutory responsibilities so it can freelance on climate change, the EPA has undermined the Clean Air Act design.
The Trump administration's newly proposed budget seeks to right the ship. A return to a sensible EPA that prioritizes clean air and water within its proper authority is a positive step for the country, and seems to be exactly what President Trump is prioritizing.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/e...o-freelance-on-climate-change/article/2617727
Judge Thwarts Obama EPA’s Lawless War on Coal
JANUARY 13, 2017
With the brazen premise that a decades-long pattern of lawlessness somehow becomes a license (i.e., that the EPA’s blithe non-compliance should be treated not as an affront but as if Congress had amended the statute), Administrator McCarthy contended that the compliance order was unrealistic. The EPA is in a hurry to transform energy as we know it, you see, and it would take a couple of years to perform the analysis called for by the statute. (Of course, the EPA is also not in a hurry to provide information about how many thousands of coal and oil jobs would disappear due to its proposed policies.)
This is a classic case of progressive mission creep (actually more like “leap” than “creep”). The imperative is just to get a law on the books, whether it is the Clean Air Act, Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, or what have you. The agency responsible for enforcement then carries out its vision of what its mission should be, not the more modest mission that Congress has actually authorized -- authorization set out in laws that usually pass because progressives swear up and down that their proposals are really just moderate, itsy-bitsy improvements, not a radical changes.
https://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2017/01/13/judge-thwarts-obama-epas-lawless-war-on-coal/
...in a recent study I reviewed the EPA's performance meeting Clean Air Act deadlines over the last eight years. Out of more than 1,100 deadlines, the agency missed 84 percent and missed them by an average of 4.3 years. For technology-forcing regulations that must be reviewed every eight years to reflect the latest science and technology, the agency was late on 93 percent of its deadlines, by an average of 7.8 years. In reviewing state implementation plans, which must occur within 18 months, the agency was late on 78 percent of its deadlines by an average of 1.9 years.
By neglecting its statutory responsibilities so it can freelance on climate change, the EPA has undermined the Clean Air Act design.
The Trump administration's newly proposed budget seeks to right the ship. A return to a sensible EPA that prioritizes clean air and water within its proper authority is a positive step for the country, and seems to be exactly what President Trump is prioritizing.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/e...o-freelance-on-climate-change/article/2617727
Judge Thwarts Obama EPA’s Lawless War on Coal
JANUARY 13, 2017
With the brazen premise that a decades-long pattern of lawlessness somehow becomes a license (i.e., that the EPA’s blithe non-compliance should be treated not as an affront but as if Congress had amended the statute), Administrator McCarthy contended that the compliance order was unrealistic. The EPA is in a hurry to transform energy as we know it, you see, and it would take a couple of years to perform the analysis called for by the statute. (Of course, the EPA is also not in a hurry to provide information about how many thousands of coal and oil jobs would disappear due to its proposed policies.)
This is a classic case of progressive mission creep (actually more like “leap” than “creep”). The imperative is just to get a law on the books, whether it is the Clean Air Act, Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, or what have you. The agency responsible for enforcement then carries out its vision of what its mission should be, not the more modest mission that Congress has actually authorized -- authorization set out in laws that usually pass because progressives swear up and down that their proposals are really just moderate, itsy-bitsy improvements, not a radical changes.
https://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2017/01/13/judge-thwarts-obama-epas-lawless-war-on-coal/
