epa

New Obama Expensive Gas rule could hike gas prices by $0.25 a gallon

Posted on February 28, 2012 by Donald Ferguson

A new study by the independent consulting firm Baker & O’Brien finds a new Obama Expensive Gas Rule that Barack Obama is pushing through the EPA, which demanding the use of low-sulfur gasoline, would send gas prices skyrocketing, shut down as many as seven refineries, significantly decrease U.S. gasoline production and double reliance on foreign imports.

Along with the thousand of workers who would lose their jobs under the Obama rule, the study also finds gas prices could increase by as much as $0.25 a gallon, on top of the 200% increase in gas prices seen under the Obama administration.

“Obama’s Expensive Gas Rule is a nuclear weapon in his ongoing war on your pocketbook,” said American Tradition Partnership Executive Director Donald Ferguson.  “Obama is pushing this through his EPA cronies, instead of through Congress, because he knows accountable lawmakers would never let him get away with exploding the price of gas.”

“This is why American Tradition Partnership has made passing the REINS Act a top priority,” said Ferguson. “Under REINS, any proposed rule with an impact greater than $100 million would need to be voted on by Congress.  The idea of having laws voted on my lawmakers instead of imposed by royal decree makes Obama and Gang Green explode with rage, but it’s what the Constitution requires.  There would be no Obama Expensive Gas Rule under the REINS Act.”

Go here to chip in $10 or more to support ATP’s efforts to stop the Obama Expensive Gas Rule.

SCOTUS to hear case challenging unconstitutional EPA power abuse

Posted on January 9, 2012 by Donald Ferguson

The Supreme Court will hear today a case challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s unchecked powers to stop human activity on private property without due process.

“Based on ‘any information’—even a newspaper article or an anonymous tip—the Environmental Protection Agency can issue an administrative compliance order directing a property owner to stop discharging pollutants or restore a damaged wetland. The government says such directives, similar to stop-work orders by local zoning inspectors, allow it to respond rapidly to prevent environmental damage,” Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal reports.

Bravin reports the Court “agreed to hear an appeal…from an Idaho couple, Mike and Chantell Sackett, over their plans to build a 2,400-square-foot vacation home on Priest Lake.

“Mr. Sackett, 45 years old, says the 0.63-acre property was a gift from his wife, who bought it from a friend for $23,000. In May 2007, three days after workers started clearing the property, officials from the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers showed up to ask if the Sacketts had a permit to fill in wetlands. The officials said they were acting on an anonymous tip. Nearly seven months later, the agency sent the couple a compliance order directing them to restore the property to its original condition.  The Sacketts, who run an excavation company, disputed that the property was a wetland, noting that it is in a subdivision.”

The case centers on the EPA’s unchecked power to issue compliance orders without allowing the property owner to contest it in court, which is violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process.

Inspector general report reveals Obama EPA killing thousands of mining jobs

Posted on November 29, 2011 by Donald Ferguson

“The Obama administration’s crackdown on mountaintop removal has delayed 138 permit reviews beyond the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s average processing time, according to a new EPA Inspector General review,” Ken Ward of the Charleston (W.V.) Gazette reports Monday.

“IG investigators examined 185 applications for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers “dredge-and-fill” Clean Water Act permits and found that about a third have been issued, a third have been withdrawn by mine operators and another third remain pending.”

“…more than half of the 66 pending applications have been under review for more than two years, according to the report released last week.”

“Instead of spending more and more taxpayer dollars to wage this war on affordable energy, the Obama EPA should be processing and approving these permits to spur job creation, especially in areas such as Appalachia that have significant employment needs,” said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.)

Obama attacks Rand Paul’s effort to block green power grabs

Posted on November 8, 2011 by Donald Ferguson

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is the target of White House attacks after announcing he will force a Senate vote this week on a resolution overturning the Environmental Protection Agency’s so-called “Cross-State Air Pollution Rule.”

The rule is nebulous government regulation Barack Obama is using to target power plants for closure.  In his 2008 campaign Obama vowed to “bankrupt” coal employers.

“Paul plans to use the Congressional Review Act, an obscure law that allows Congress to overturn federal regulations, to block the EPA rule, which reduces smog and particulate-forming pollution from power plants in 27 Eastern states,” The Hill reports.

NYT: Appalachian Dems Seek Distance From Obama on Coal, Climate

Posted on August 30, 2010 by Quallurce

This morning’s New York Times reports on the popular uprising against the Obama administration’s radical green policies.  As the nation’s leading citizens’ lobby for responsible resource development, WTP reminds lawmakers they represent working families, not radical green activists.

Democrats in Appalachia are running away from the Obama administration’s coal record like their political lives depend on it…

…Along with the president’s push for limits on greenhouse gas emissions — a proposal panned by most U.S. coal companies — U.S. EPA in April singled out the six states for special restrictions on mountaintop removal coal mining. EPA also stopped the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from issuing permits for 79 surface and mountaintop mines in the region, saying they would have violated the Clean Water Act. To date, six of those permits have been approved.

“I think there is a danger for Democrats that being seen as a Democrat means being seen as being a supporter of Obama’s EPA,” said Phil Smith, a spokesman for the United Mine Workers of America.

You may read the entire article at The New York Times website.

Obama EPA: We’ll make up our own far-reaching carbon regulations

Posted on by Quallurce

The Washington Times’ Kerry Picket reports on disturbing comments made by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, in an interview with NPR (emphasis is hers.)

NPR: I’d like to return to a conversation we had last October when you were hopeful that Congress would pass a climate change bill and didn’t. Now your agency is issuing new rules and regulations doing some of the things you hoped Congress would do: limiting emissions from cars and trucks, requiring some companies to install new technologies to reduce pollution, but how do you respond to the critics who say that the EPA is overstepping its authority?

JACKSON: You know, Liane, in some ways we haven’t changed our posture. We still call for and believe that legislation is a more comprehensive, better, more efficient way to make low carbon emissions part of our economic fiber—part of our sort of fiber as a country as we grow. That hasn’t changed. And the other thing that hasn’t changed is my belief that I have a legal obligation and an obligation under the Clean Air Act to move forward with regulatory steps. Now I’ve said all along that this isn’t either or. You can’t pick legislation or regulation entirely. You have to move in a way where those two, if you have them, are consistent. So what we’ll continue to do is take regulatory steps, but they’ll be modest…each and every one, because the economy…business needs time to understand the regulations that are coming at them,  and so there won’t be any huge shocks to the system.

Picket points out the law cited by Jackson requires the EPA to regulate all sources that emit more than 250 tons of carbon a year — and with the average American emitting 20 tons of carbon himself, Jackson would be regulating from Washington virtually all apartment buildings and small businesses.  Perhaps that’s what Jackson meant when she cryptically referred to “huge shocks to the system.”

Not only is WTP leading the fight against Cap and Tax in Congress, but we’re also fighting for common sense “no regulation without representation” legislation stripping the EPA of their unchecked, unchallenged authority to destroy jobs by simply making up their own rules.

« Older Entries