Energy Tax Prevention Act Would Put the Reins on EPA Power Grab
Freedom Action Supports Quick Passage
Washington, D.C., March 10, 2011 —A House subcommittee on Thursday is expected to mark up a bill, the Energy Tax Prevention Act, sponsored by Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) that would block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions using the Clean Air Act. Freedom Action supports enactment of their critical legislation.
“The Energy Tax Prevention Act is one of the most important bills that Congress will vote on this year. We applaud Chairmen Upton and Whitfield for their efforts to move it quickly to the House floor. The future economic prosperity of America is at stake,” said Myron Ebell, Director of Freedom Action.
Under the Obama administration, EPA has been moving forward with new Clean Air Act regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The new regulations will do nothing to reduce global levels of the gases alleged to cause global warming, but will raise energy prices, make consumers poorer, and destroy jobs in manufacturing and other energy-intensive industries.
“The Obama Administration’s EPA is trying to implement cap-and-trade, which was defeated in Congress and overwhelmingly rejected by the American people, through the regulatory back door. And as President Obama promised during the 2008 campaign, under his plan ‘electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,’” Ebell concluded.
“The debate on EPA’s greenhouse gas regulations boils down to a very simple issue. Who shall determine the content and direction of national policy — elected representatives accountable to the people at the ballot box, or non-elected bureaucrats, trial lawyers, and activist judges appointed for life? The Constitution permits only one answer to that question,” said Marlo Lewis, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, an affiliate organization to Freedom Action.
h/t to Bob Ferguson SPPI
“The debate on EPA’s greenhouse gas regulations boils down to a very simple issue. Who shall determine the content and direction of national policy[?]”
Let’s hope a deliberative body takes the lead.
“block” the EPA? How about KILL the EPA? (Or would that be … uncivil?)
Absolutely! Energy taxes are job killers! Government intrusion on incentives to create private business must be absolutely curtailed. Let’s hope this drive to reduce governmental intrusions into controlling how US citizens wish to conduct business extends to other areas of private life.
Well, I’m glad to see this come to a vote, but it won’t survive a veto. At least, we’ll have people on record as to yea and nay.
on issues we all care about,could this site have links to proper reps to contact for support? we are all busy and this would save time on research.
Will this get the 60 votes needed to get a senate vote? Will it get the 51 votes needed to get senate approval? Will the president veto it?
Hurdle #1, getting house approval, is likely, but the remaining three hurdles are quite iffy.
There appears to be some support from coal and rust belt democrats in the senate, but that so far looks only capable providing enough votes for the second senate vote, but not enough to get a floor vote on the bill itself.
Even if it can get senate passage, it may still require reconciliation with the house and then finally it must get signed by Obama to become law.
Sorry about the wet blanket, but it needs to be understood that the US system is not as simple as the unicameral parliamentary systems used elsewhere.
Johnboy. Just go to this site and input your Zip – that will send you to your various representatives and give you an e-mail link to contact them. You may beable to get to other representatives.
Johnboy, here is the gov’t contact site.
Rhoda R says:
March 9, 2011 at 6:25 pm
Johnboy. Just go to this site and input your Zip – that will send you to your various representatives and give you an e-mail link to contact them. You may beable to get to other representatives.
===============================================
Oops, missed an anchor!
Rhoda was probably referring to this site………. it may be useful to book mark it. But, that’s only for the House.
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
Here’s another useful site….. http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Bookmark that one also.
Unlikely to get enough senate votes to survive a veto.
It’s a “win” regardless. It the Senate blocks it, then everyone will know who did what when it comes time to vote for the next Senate. If Obama vetoes it, then everyone knows where he stands – and this time he won’t be able to to claim he is only taxing foreigners like he has done with the new “inspection fee” that is assessed to those entering the United States – just another hidden tax but paid by non-US citizens. Clever. But a veto that increases taxation of the American public. That is a different kettle of fish.
These warmists want power at any price. In Australia, the opposition that won 700,000 more votes , opposes the carbon tax. The government opposed before the election but is going for it 6 months later. One of the opposition’s members, who worked for Goldman Sachs , is having private meetings with independents that hold the balance of power to white ant the leader of the opposition, it would seem. Despite the fact, his warmists policy was soundly defeated and he was deposed as leader before the election, he continues to seek a carbon tax or ETS.
So power by any means seems to go with the alarmists. One of the things he supported in the government’s ETS was for carbon police to have powers to enter your house at any time with or without a warrant or your permission. Further, the right to silence was abolished and you could only be found guilty.
This has nothing to do with CO2. It is about power. In Australia, the Greens received 13% of the vote but they are dictating policy to our Prime Minister, who is a thirsty horse being led to the tax trough.
I love the idea! But all of the bills like this are just dress rehearsals for 2 years from now, when we’ll have a new Senate and a new President.
till then, nothing good can happen.
Soon there could be thousands of Australians, Brits, Americans (and if it ever gets warm enough) Canadians in the streets reminding the politicians and the bureaucrats where the power really lies … with the people.
I suppose if I were an anti-fossil fuel person, I might be on the edge of panic right now with so much gas being available that it is selling below $4 thousand cubic feet and the Australians, Chinese and other countries are buying into North American plays and experimenting with turning natural gas into gasoline; and looking at Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) plants to export it out of North America where natural gas has a higher price.
Increase the local taxes on use of fossil fuels, and watch the resource migrate to a zone of lesser taxes or higher profitability for the suppliers. I have watched it cycle many times in my 65 years. Workers and equipment are highly mobile.
http://247wallst.com/2009/03/12/natural-gas-prices-driven-by-lng-imports-dvn-chk/
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/global/lngmarket.html
http://www.nytimes.com/info/natural-gas/
If Earth’s atmosphere and oceans cool more while the EPA and the President are delayed by the House of Representatives – so much the better. Dr. Christy’s site suggests the atmosphere is still cooling if you go there and run the program the ‘unadjusted’ number for the 14,000 ft Ch#5 data. Just now the most recent date is March 7 and the temperature is below average and 0.73 deg C cooler than this day last year.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/01/daily-monitoring-of-global-average-temperatures/
Nino 3.4 is still about -1 and the maps still show a lot of cool SST
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.gif
Bob Tisdale did an update Monday, 3/7.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/
EPA is not allowed to assess fees or taxes beyond those already authorized. These nut cases are going the kamikaze route.
This is a really good thing for them to do.
Next they need to rescind the RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD.
With this mandate still in place and in effect, states are compelled to meet stupid, expensive, and unworkable renewable energy percentages by certain dates. These are the standards that the cap and trade bill was planned to impose. so, the bottom line is that the administration is still situated to kill our economy and create a forever recession.
RPS has to be cancelled!
John H.
I think so also. Serious cooling. And fast.
Is it not the House which can over-ride a presidential veto?
The House Repubs have said they’ll attach restrictions to every funding bill they put through, so the Senate and WH will be forced to reject everything if they want the EPA and HC etc. to carry on carrying on. That’s where the House’s funding authority rubber meets the road.
No, Steve, both, with a 2/3 majority required.
Mark
If this bill were to get through both houses, the question arises of whether Obama will exercise his power of veto on it. Currently all his green inititives are stalled and indeed he’s not done much to get them back on track; in effect, he’s abandoned them.
The EPA, for reasons best known to themselves, took the risk of trying to implement them through the back door. The risk looks to have crystalised and one way or another, they’re going to get hammered by the legislature.
In the run up to next years presidential election, why should Obama take a bullet for the EPA?
Pointman
What seems interesting is the effect of taxing CO2 in Australia. This will have the effect of raising the price of energy intensive industries in Australia as compared to neighboring China and India. Over time, these industries will leave Australia for India and China, resulting in less CO2 production in Australia. However, as India and China produce more CO2 per unit of energy than does Australia, there will actually be a net increase in CO2 worldwide. Because CO2 is well mixed, the net effect of CO2 taxes on Australia will be a net increase in CO2 over Australia, largely imported from China and India on the wind. The Law of Unintended Consequences at work, also known as “why climate scientists should not design national energy programs”.
I hope there are a few Brit MPs watching what’s going on in the US. With few notable exceptions (who are ignored) they haven’t shown ony kind of backbone to stand up to this alarmist stupidity because they have bought into it in the worst possible way. In Scotland 3.7 jobs are lost for every “green” one created and, like the rest of Britain, is facing a chronic energy crisis yet still the barmy political army are pressing ahead with wind farms.
Absolute madness…
Crippling taxes on energy via the EPA are one of the few areas the President actually has his mind made up on.
“Necessarily skyrocket” are hard words, and leave little to the imagination.