Junkscience.com reports that:
EPA official Al Armendariz who rocketed to infamy last week because of 2010 comments about “crucifying” industry, has resigned from the agency.
Click for his resignation letter. (PDF)
Here’s the source of the uproar, this video:
Inhofe wasted no time going after this public servant turned crucifier.
In a speech on the Senate floor, Senator James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, announces that he has launched an investigation into the Obama-EPA’s apparent “crucify them” strategy targeted at American energy producers. This investigation will look into EPA’s actions towards domestic energy production specifically in light of the agency’s recent efforts relating to hydraulic fracturing.
Inhofe’s announcement today follows several questionable statements from top EPA officials, including comments released in a little-watched video from 2010, which reveals EPA Region VI Administrator Al Armendariz admitting that EPA’s “general philosophy” is to “crucify” and “make examples” of oil and gas companies.
Unfortunately, there are dozens, perhaps hundreds more just like him at the EPA, an organization that seems to be at war with the industry of the United States of America, and the people too. See:
Pseudo-Skeptic says:
April 30, 2012 at 11:59 am
“Unfortunately this pollution is still winked at by the right which doesn’t help discourage cheaters.”
If it were not for his psychological projection, PS wouldn’t have anything to say.
In an earlier part of my life, I had customers who could expect an annual visit from the fire marshall. So as to deflect deeper scrutiny, they would loosen a bulb in some emergency lights, place cardboard boxes in front of an electrical panel, and otherwise “salt” the facility with minor fire code infractions that were easily corrected. The FM would write up the violations, come back in 2 weeks to see that all was corrected, and everyone was happy.
With OSHA you might not want to try this at home. They like to fine first and ask questions later.
I can safely say the Roman Empire never crucified any Turkish villagers in Turkey as the Turks weren’t there yet.
anotherfred says:
April 30, 2012 at 1:56 pm
I can safely say the Roman Empire never crucified any Turkish villagers in Turkey as the Turks weren’t there yet.
++++++++++++
You must be mistaken. An EPA administrator said they were.
A big thanks to Senator James M. Inhofe, he really is the real thing an honest /smart man who knows what he is talking about – That’s a rare thing in Washington today.
“Sad that Inhofe and the like probably actually think that the 70′s air/ground water/water table pollution was OK.”
Yes, because anyone like Inhofe likes pollution. I love pollution too!! I sprinkle some of it on my cereal and then drive my SUV an extra 5 miles just to give the poor people some extra pollution just because I like pollution and I like to spread it around. Do you really think people are like that? Really? By the way, that was all a joke because obviously you have no sense of humor…..
But this is not a joke: Inhofe also eats pollution for breakfast and kills puppies for fun while he bbq’s them. /Sarc off You know, everytime I hear a fake sceptic post here I sometimes wonder what are you guys thinking trying to pretend to be a sceptic? Do you really think our minds are going to be changed by some remark that makes no sense? Of course…its just like me saying Dr Hansen eats puppies and expecting people to hate him for it.
That is what this is, an un-substantiated remark meant to make people hate someone with no basis in fact. Stick to facts….they are the bread and butter of what sceptics use. For all I know the above quote which I have no proof of is true, but don’t use that to judge Dr. Hansen, use his actual actions and what he actually says to judge him, not what I say about him.
I will admit one thing though: Everytime some person claims some sceptic loves pollution I just burst out laughing and imagine that this person must really believe that the sceptic really love pollution and really is so hateful that they kill kittens and puppies.
In all likelihood this EPA dude is just another “useful idiot” who has been brainwashed. There’s little doubt he thinks he’s doing the right thing. The real problem is the brainwashers continue to create more and more useful idiots. There’s no limit to the number of young, idealistic folks to take his place.
This schmuck was the one leading OPbama’s attack against Texas. He exactly stated Obama’s attitude towards states taht are actually productive and helping Americans. His resignation is a two-dimensional classless gesture: He is simply taking the dive for his boss, even as he precisely carried out Obama’s wishes and relfected his perspective.
Al Armendariz is (was?) the Administrator (the head guy) of EPA’s Region 6. This region includes the states of New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Three of those states, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana produce a lot of oil. Texas, in particular, has been at odds with the EPA. Do you suppose it was just a coincidence that they sent their “crucifier” to head up Region 6?
Excellent perspective by a former senior regulator:
Regulatory Lessons from Obama EPA Appointee’s Resignation
While this guy is clearly a menace who should resign, in a sense he has just been thrown off the EPA sled to feed the following wolves. Guys like this don’t just act in isolation – they reflect the culture of their organisation, which comes from the top.
‘Crucifying’ a few subordinates is a time honoured tactic for those at the top who are ultimately responsible for the strategy that made the excesses a norm.
I
Moderator, had a typo in E-mail address & resending
In response to numerous comments to previous post:
“Since it came to be in 1980 Ronald Reagan, George Bush I used OIRA, to slow, weaken or stop the implementation of EPA’s regulations.”
http://getenergysmartnow.com/2011/11/30/oira-white-houses-open-door-to-lobbyists-to-gut-epa-regs/
Is NOT general knowledge that the Republicans (of which Inhof is one & I said “probably”) “hate” the EPA and their regulations. Does any one have any record of any Republican support for the EPA?
An attitude of “all EPA regulations are bad” just shows a lack of historical knowledge:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa089.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPMWQAopLSo (LA smog)
http://www.aqmd.gov/news1/archives/history/marchcov.html
“When the Clean Water Act were first introduced in the 1970s, it was in response to the way in which industrial water users were using the nation’s rivers for toxic waste disposal. The event that spurred politicians into action was the June 1969 Cuyahoga River fire. It was not the first time that the river, oozing black with petrochemicals and other combustible toxins, had caught fire, but it caught the public’s imagination to the extent that the politicians became involved. The Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 and the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972 followed.”
Easy to find many other pollution abuses which were NOT accidents.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/area-5111.htm (area 51 pollution lawsuit)
http://www.tftptf.com/ ( at camp Lejeune)
NOTE: The EPA doesn’t cover the military.
Those so completely cavalier about pollutants can find cheap housing & land near any of the super fund sites and I’m sure would be happy to volunteer to help in the Area 51 burn pits.
The problem is a near hysterical attitude of being unable to sort the wheat from the chaff (commenters and EPA included).
The same attitude occurs with other goverment regulating organizations. The FDA (mostly) assures a safe food supply (before they existed it was strictly buyer beware, ahh but that’s a history lesson again). However one of the problems now is too little oversight as with pharma where drug companies are permitted to “hide” negative results and seek approval on positive results only.
And yes, the Democrats went along with Greenspan and his gang concerning derivatives and I believe I said “Congress” even though Republicans have the hands off everything philosophy. Nowadays, apparently both sides are pro-corporate and that’s where everyone misses by assuming that their politician is on their side (NOT).
It looks like ‘Hope and Change’ has become ‘Forward’…Obama’s new campaign slogan.
Why not “To Infinity and Beyond”…full of hope and an accurate description of our deficit…
Isn’t the EPA a private company? If so, does this mean that any fines collected are profit? If so, then of course its brief is to regulate to the nth degree because the more regulations the more chance of violations and the more profit.
What happened to due process? What happened to presumed innocent?
Louis says:
April 30, 2012 at 11:46 am
“So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.” — Barack Obama
Says it all really. Or does it?
[Dan Evens says:
April 30, 2012 at 6:08 pm
What happened to due process? What happened to presumed innocent?]
I will give you the benefit of doubt and presume you didn’t watch the video?
epa was spawned with good intentions much like unions were. similar results
[+emphasis]
Does the name Richard Milhous Nixon ring a bell?
Feel a bit sorry for him, this sort of attitude is surely ‘top down’. Just a young fellow programmed by ‘the cause’.
Having said that, several years ago I thought that those gunning for the EPA were out of order, but having done a lot of reading on the matter recently, I can see that the EPA and similar ‘armies’ manned by faceless bureaucrats are hugely powerful and difficult to curb organisations, which can be used to control every aspect of a society.
Joe public does not look that far, and thinks they are only about the environment, and are saving us.
Skeptic, in glorious ignorance said, “Does any one have any record of any Republican support for the EPA?”
The EPA was proposed by President Richard Nixon and began operation on December 2, 1970, after Nixon submitted a reorganization plan to Congress and it was ratified by committee hearings in the House and Senate. (Wikipedia)
The Republicans created the EPA. We happen to like clean air, water, and land. What we don’t like is what EPA has become: a mechanism to further a political agenda through the control of industry.
Mindbuilder says:
April 30, 2012 at 11:20 am
“Nowhere does it mention that what this guy was saying was that he was crucifying violators to make an example and get other violators to comply with regulations because he didn’t have the manpower to go after every violator. This is a standard and legitimate tactic of prosecutors and regulators. It’s not anti industry. There is nothing wrong with it.”
===========================================================================
I keep waiting for a WUWT denizen who is a lawyer to comment on this. My recollection from serving on Courts Martial while in the Navy was that the legal principle was that it not permissible to punish to “make an example.” Each case is to be decided on the facts of the case alone. I doubt if civilian law is that different from military law. From a legal standpoint, I don’t think it is a standard and legitimate tactic. Any lawyer care to comment?
Dan Evens says:
April 30, 2012 at 6:08 pm
What happened to due process? What happened to presumed innocent?
With the EPA it hasn’t really existed, although the people won a small victory recently
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/supreme-court-halts-epa-bullying/2012/03/22/gIQAjxVSTS_blog.html
The facts of the Sackett’s case clearly establish that the Nazis at the EPA didn’t limit their intimidation tactics to Big Oil
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/sackett-et-vir-v-environmental-protection-agency-et-al/
Letter of resignation looks like that of an executioner. Washing his masters hands.
All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The EPA has been given too much power.