EPA CO2 Rule a Huge Move Toward Totalitarian Control
The Environmental Protection Agency issued a CO2 “endangerment finding” Monday, formally declaring that CO2 poses a threat to human health and welfare, a designation that sets the federal government on the path toward regulating CO2 emissions from power plants, factories, automobiles and other major and minor sources [here].
Today we received the following e-mail from an expert environmental scientist
Mike,
The headlines in our paper today were as frightening for this country as anything I have seen in a long time. EPA has claimed control of the economy by usurping power over atmospheric composition as a health mattter. It would be funny if not so scary, but the EPA has a history of grabbing authority nowhere guaranteed by the constitution.
In 1979, Dow Chemical sued EPA for arbitrary and capricious action in canceling the registration of a herbicide that had a very good safety record. In court, Dow argued that all the environmental and toxicological data were favorable, hence the action was arbitrary. The judge agreed with Dow, and indicated that he would not have made the decision to cancel on the basis of the data, both pro and con.
But the judge went on to say that he did not have the power to overturn the decision by the Administrator of EPA, a presidential appointee not constrained by being a member of the Cabinet. So the decision has stood for 30 years. I was an expert witness in that case, saw all the data, and was appalled at the unbridled power grab altogether unsupported by evidence. And that was a far smaller issue than what goes on today.
I hate to think how EPA Admin Lisa Jackson’s and Czar Carol Browner’s decision to take authority for atmospheric composition because climate altering gases represent “a toxic hazard” also gives them unlimited power to assist our president in almost any direction he wants to jump. The kaleidoscope of directions he moves on will be extremely hard to check with such authority in the bag. I wonder if our general public recognizes this as a huge move toward totalitarian control.
This issue is so scary that I surmize that it makes the Climategate issue child’s play simply because the president and his lackeys cannot be challenged on the CO2 endangerment finding. Health is the perfect button to bring on a perfect storm. Really scary.
A public outcry is essential, and right now if closer examination of what Jackson and Browner did is what I think it is. It will take some careful analysis, but I hope to God someone who knows how to do this is as concerned as I am about what is happening. Time is short, Barack is in Copenhagen, and Browner has taken charge. Couldn’t be worse.
Best, XXXXXXX
We have been tracking the EPA CO2 deal since 2007 when the Supreme Court ruled they could declare CO2 a pollutant. Here are some posts from 2009:
Climate Follies: Chapter 54,873 (12/08) [here]
EPA CO2 Comment Deadline Approaching (11/25) [here]
Walden, Barton: House Should Investigate EPA (6/26) [here]
EPA Suppresses Internal Report Questioning Regulation of CO2 (6/25) [here]
Opening Pandora’s Box: Classifying CO2 as a “Pollutant” (6/25) [here]
EPA Proposes Nutzoid CO2 Rule (4/17) [here]
EPA Proposes Mandatory Reporting on CO2 Emissions (3/11) [here]
Scientist Discovers Fundamental Nutrient of Life (1/26) [here]
Many other websites have been following the story, too. I agree with all that you say. So do millions of people, and that’s no exaggeration. I don’t know what to do about it, either. Sue the bastards is my general feeling, but as you point out, there is little chance that would have any effect.
There is definitely a groundswell of opposition, however, and it is growing and will continue to grow as the impacts of the new regs are felt.
There is a public outcry — about this issue and about many aspects of the Obama Admin. The Main Stream Media is not reporting it very well, and would rather not report anti-Obama dissent at all if they could avoid it, but impassioned dissent is on the rise nonetheless, like magma beneath an active volcano.
by Ned
This move by EPA is frightning but not unexpected. It amounts to the Obama Adminstration blackmailing Congress. “If Congress does not pass the Cap and Trade legislation, EPA will implement control over CO2 and it will be even worse than the legislation.” What EPA would do will destroy our already weak economy.
To understand the command and control power that EPA has you need to have lived through their power since the birthday of EPA on December 2, 1970 and the events that resulted in EPA.
It all started in 1962 when Rachel Carson published “Silent Spring”. A book that caught foresters by surprise. Events after the book led to President Nixon’s Reorganization Plan #3 submitted to Congress on July 9, 1970. Nixon called for “a strong, independent agency” with Cabinet level power. Nixon got what he wanted: a command and control agency to implement the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. Using the acts EPA destroyed the timber industry in SE Alaska in the 1990s.
With CO2 declared an air pollutant EPA has the power to destroy any industry that produces CO2. Their track record shows they would have no problem doing that. The economic uncertainty alone has the power to dramatically affect the nation’s economy. EPA has issued an ultimatum to Congress “either pass the legislation or we will destroy the economy.”
EPA’S Endangerment Finding is the Wrong Way to Regulate Carbon Emissions
AF&PA Media Room, Release Date: 12-08-2009 [here]
WASHINGTON - Today the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its finding under the Clean Air Act that greenhouse gas emissions endanger the environment and public health.
The American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) believes the Clean Air Act is the wrong tool to regulate a global problem like climate change. The Clean Air Act is an inflexible approach to regulating greenhouse gases and won’t help either the environment or the economy.
The U.S. should adopt climate change policies that strengthen the competitiveness of the U.S. economy and the forest products industry. U.S. climate change policies should recognize the principle of carbon neutrality of biomass combustion and the contributions of working forests and forest products to sequester carbon and reduce greenhouse gases. Our industry produces products from renewable and recyclable raw materials, is the largest producer and user of renewable energy, and is committed to sustaining the environment that is essential to our future success.
“The Clean Air Act is not the right vehicle for regulating greenhouse gases. Piecemeal regulations will harm efforts to reduce greenhouse gases and could discourage investment in new technology that is needed for a lower carbon economy,” said AF&PA President and CEO Donna Harman. “Making CO2 an official air pollutant will trigger a cascade of regulatory programs that will stifle good energy efficiency and renewable energy projects. Legislation that preserves U.S. competitiveness is a far better way to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.”