Destino Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GREENHOUSE_GASES?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US WASHINGTON (AP) -- In a sharp challenge to the Obama administration, House Republican leaders intend to unveil legislation to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases, officials said. They expect to advance the bill quickly.EPA chief Lisa Jackson was due on Capitol Hill on Wednesday for the first time since Republicans took over the House and gained seats in the Senate. She probably will have to defend steps by the EPA to control air pollution and water pollution to Senate Republicans, who have introduced bills of their own to delay regulations aimed at abating climate change, or to bar the government from using any environmental law to fight global warming pollution. Officials said the House bill, which was to be offered Wednesday, would nullify all of the steps the EPA has taken to date on the issue, including a finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health. In addition, it seeks to strip the agency of its authority to use the law in any future attempts to crack down on the emissions from factories, utilities and other stationary sources. Anyone surprised? Of course not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Another bill that will be vetoed if it ever gets anywhere! I wish we'd focus on what we AGREE on and stop coming up with bills that everyone knows won't be made law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 There is support in the Senate as well(even from Dems)...don't be too sure it is not something the majority agrees with. The EPA needs to be reigned in on greenhouse gas regulation with specific boundaries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 How dare the EPA try to regulate pollution?!? Have they no shame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 There is support in the Senate as well(even from Dems)...don't be too sure it is not something the majority agrees with.The EPA needs to be reigned in on greenhouse gas regulation with specific boundaries If its really a "sharp challenge to the Obama administration" then it will be vetoed, even if it passes the Senate. Am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 It is not really a challenge to O.but rather overreach by the EPA......,and yes you are,but I'll let reveal itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 It is not really a challenge to O.but rather overreach by the EPA......,and yes you are,but I'll let reveal itself. It's not really a challenge to O but another step in the war of political partisanship and special interests vs science. But then we all knew that. (That said, though, I'll point out: The Constitution says that Congress makes laws, not executive branch agencies. The reason the EPA has this authority is because Congress delegated it's own authority to the EPA. They certainly have the Constitutional authority to rescind or limit that delegation of authority. They shouldn't, in this case. But they absolutely have the authority.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 On the other hand. This is something the GOP can point to folks and say "this will happen under a GOP President". The Democratic House in 2006 and 2007 held hearings on health care reform. No one believed a bill would get passed (did they pass a bill during that session?) but they certainly laid the groundwork for Obama to tout health care reform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 It's not really a challenge to O but another step in the war of political partisanship and special interests vs science. But then we all knew that. (That said, though, I'll point out: The Constitution says that Congress makes laws, not executive branch agencies. The reason the EPA has this authority is because Congress delegated it's own authority to the EPA. They certainly have the Constitutional authority to rescind or limit that delegation of authority. They shouldn't, in this case. But they absolutely have the authority.) Nailed it! This is exactly the reason why its not a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'm so glad I joined a football board where everyone is an expert in the Constitution and over 200 years of Constitutional Law opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Nailed it! This is exactly the reason why its not a bad move. It is an evil move. It just isn't unconstitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'm so glad I joined a football board where everyone is an expert in the Constitution and over 200 years of Constitutional Law opinions. so you disagree with larrys correct point that congress ceded authority to the EPA? (btw, that was quite an arrogant post you did there big time lawyer guy.) ---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 03:52 PM ---------- It is an evil move. It just isn't unconstitutional. I dont see it as evil to follow the constitution, but to each their own I guess (still happy as heck that we agree on something!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'm so glad I joined a football board where everyone is an expert in the Constitution and over 200 years of Constitutional Law opinions. And one where people attack other people, not for their opinion, but for daring to express one at all, without in any way disagreeing with the opinion, let alone disagreeing and supporting that disagreement, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Sorry but its pretty frustrating that in nearly every single thread there is a reference to the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of something these days. Sometimes its not an issue. The EPA is not acting unconstitutionally. Its not a constituitonal issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 3, 2011 Author Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'm so glad I joined a football board where everyone is an expert in the Constitution and over 200 years of Constitutional Law opinions. It's more interesting than taking turns posting "I'm not qualified to have an opinion". And let's face it this isn't a court hearing we are here for entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 It's more interesting than taking turns posting "I'm not qualified to have an opinion". And let's face it this isn't a court hearing we are here for entertainment. I don't have a problem with people having opinions, or expressing unqualified ones. I don't think I even said Larry was unqualified or shouldn't have an opinion. I am just annoyed that in every political thread the Constitution has to be referenced. Argue about whether its the right thing to do or not. Argue about the politics of it. Argue about the effects of greenhouse gasses. And sometimes, SOMETIMES, argue about the Constitution. But this has absolutely nothing to do with the Constitution. Anyway, I'll just take my "arrogance" somewhere else and go on timeout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'll put the odds on this bill generating at least one hilarious comment from a Republican lawmaker at 3 to 1. Our reigning champion is Congressman Joe Barton, who offered this particular criticism of wind power in 2009: "Wind is God’s way of balancing heat. Wind is the way you shift heat from areas where it’s hotter to areas where it’s cooler. That’s what wind is. Wouldn’t it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go up? Now, I’m not saying that’s going to happen, Mr. Chairman, but that is definitely something on the massive scale. I mean, it does make some sense. You stop something, you can’t transfer that heat, and the heat goes up." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Just don't understand the hate towards the EPA. I don't mean the EPA personally, but the lack of respect for the environment, lack of respect for the planet and just plain destroying things for future generations. A little generalized, but it is still kind of sad. And, when things become unbalanced they have a tendency to balance themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Just don't understand the hate towards the EPA.I don't mean the EPA personally, but the lack of respect for the environment, lack of respect for the planet and just plain destroying things for future generations. A little generalized, but it is still kind of sad. And, when things become unbalanced they have a tendency to balance themselves. ... its a drag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 maybe they need to do this in an effort to halt ridiculous corporatism? http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/02/obama-issues-global-warming-rules-january-gives-ge-exemption-febr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.