EPA, White House and activists
must no longer deceive America and rule by executive fiat
Paul Driessen
Last year, Congress enacted 72 new laws and federal agencies
promulgated 3,659 new rules, imposing $1.86 trillion in annual regulatory
compliance costs on American businesses and families. It’s hardly surprising
that America’s economy shrank by 1% the first quarter of 2014, our labor
participation rate is a miserable 63% and real unemployment stands at 12-23% (and even worse for blacks
and Hispanics).
It’s no wonder a recent Gallup poll found that 56% of respondents said the economy,
unemployment and dissatisfaction with government are the most serious problems
facing our nation – whereas only 3% said it is environmental issues, with
climate change only a small segment of that.
So naturally, the Environmental Protection Agency issued
another round of draconian restrictions on coal-fired power plants, once again
targeting carbon dioxide emissions. EPA rules now effectively prevent the
construction of new plants and require the closure of hundreds of older
facilities. By 2030 the regulations will cost 224,000 jobs, force US consumers
to pay $289 billion more for electricity, and lower disposable incomes for
American households by $586 billion, the US Chamber of Commerce calculates.
The House of Representatives holds hearings and
investigations, and drafts corrective legislation that the Harry Reid Senate
immediately squelches. When questions or challenges arise, the courts defer to
“agency discretion,” even when agencies ignore or rewrite statutory provisions.
Our three co-equal branches of government have become an “Executive Branch
trumps all” system – epitomized by EPA.
Some legal philosophers refer to this as “post-modernism.” President Obama’s constitutional law
professor called it “the curvature of constitutional space.” A better term might be
neo-colonialism – under which an uncompromising American ruler and his agents
control citizens by executive fiat, to slash fossil fuel use, fundamentally transform our Constitution, economy and social
structure, and redistribute wealth and political power to cronies, campaign
contributors and voting blocs that keep them in power.
Even worse, in the case of climate change, this process is
buttressed by secrecy, highly questionable research, contrived peer reviews,
outright dishonesty, and an absence of accountability.
Fewer than half of Americans believe climate change is manmade
or dangerous. Many know that China, Australia, Canada, India and even European
countries are revising policies that have pummeled families, jobs, economies
and industries with anti-hydrocarbon and renewable energy requirements. They
understand that even eliminating coal and petroleum use in the United States
will not lower atmospheric carbon dioxide levels or control a climate that has
changed repeatedly throughout Earth’s history.
Mr. Obama and EPA chief Gina McCarthy are nevertheless
determined to slash reliance on coal, even in 20 states that rely on this fuel
for half to 95% of their electricity, potentially crippling their economies. The
President has said electricity rates will “necessarily skyrocket,” coal
companies will face bankruptcy, and if Congress does not act on climate change
and cap-tax-and-trade, he will. Ms. McCarthy has similarly said she “didn’t go
to Washington to sit around and wait for congressional action.”
However, they know “pollution” and “children’s health”
resonate much better than “climate disruption” among voters. So now they mix
their climate chaos rhetoric with assertions that shutting down coal-fired power
plants will reduce asthma rates among children. It is a false, disingenuous
argument.
Steadily improving
air pollution controls have sent sulfur dioxide emissions from U.S. coal-fired
power plants tumbling by more than 40% and particulate emissions (the alleged
cause of asthma) by more than 90% since 1970, says air quality expert Joel
Schwartz, even as coal use tripled. In fact, asthma rates have increased,
while air pollution has declined – underscoring that asthma hospitalizations and
outdoor air pollution are not related. The real causes of asthma are that young children live in tightly insulated homes, spend less
time outdoors, don’t get exposed to enough allergens to reduce immune
hyperactivity and allergic hypersensitivity, and get insufficient exercise to
keep lungs robust, health experts explain.
But the American Lung Association backs up the White House and EPA
claims – vigorously promoting the phony pollution/asthma link. However, EPA’s $24.7 million in grants to the ALA over the past 15 years
should raise questions about the association’s credibility and integrity on
climate and pollution.
EPA also channels vast sums to its “independent” Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee, which likewise rubberstamps the agency’s
pollution claims and regulations: $180.8 million to 15
CASAC members since 2000. Imagine the outrage and credibility gap if Big Oil
gave that kind of money to scientists who question the “dangerous manmade
climate change” mantra.
Moreover, even EPA’s illegal studies on humans have failed to show harmful effects
from pollution levels the agency intends to impose. Other EPA rules are based on
epidemiological data that the agency now says it cannot find. (Perhaps they fell into same black hole as Lois
Lerner’s missing IRS emails.) EPA’s CO2 rulings are based on GIGO computer models that are fed simplistic assumptions about
human impacts on Earth’s climate, and on cherry-picked analyses that are faulty
and misleading.
In numerous instances, EPA’s actions completely ignore the
harmful impacts that its regulations
will have on the health and well-being of millions of Americans. EPA trumpets
wildly exaggerated benefits its anti-fossil-fuel rules will supposedly bring but
refuses to assess even obvious harm from unemployment, soaring energy costs and
reduced family incomes. And now Mr. Obama wants another $2.5 billion for FY-2015 climate change
models and “assessments” via EPA and the Global Change Research Program.
EPA’s actions routinely violate the Information Quality Act.
The IQA is intended to ensure the quality, integrity, credibility and
reliability of any science used by federal agencies to justify regulatory
actions. Office of Management and Budget
guidelines require that agencies provide for full independent peer review of all
“influential scientific information” used as the basis for regulations. The law
and OMB guidelines also direct federal agencies to provide adequate
administrative mechanisms for affected parties to review agency failures to
respond to requests for correction or reconsideration of scientific information.
Those who control carbon control our lives, livelihoods,
liberties, living standards and life spans. It is essential that EPA’s climate
and pollution data and analyses reflect the utmost in integrity, reliability,
transparency and accountability. A closed circle of EPA and IPCC reviewers –
accompanied by a massive taxpayer-funded public relations and propaganda
campaign – must no longer be allowed to rubberstamp junk science that is used to
justify federal diktats. Governors,
state and federal legislators, attorneys general, and citizen and scientific
groups must take action:
·
File FOIA and IQA legal actions, to gain access to all EPA
and other government data, computer codes, climate models and studies use to
justify pollution, climate and energy regulations;
·
Subject all such information to proper peer review by
independent scientists, including the significant numbers of experts who are
skeptical of alarmist pollution and climate change claims;
·
Demand that new members be appointed to CASAC and other
peer review groups, and that they represent a broad spectrum of viewpoints,
organizations and interests;
·
Scrutinize the $2.5 billion currently earmarked for the
USGCRP and its programs, reduce the allocation to compel a slow-down in EPA’s
excessive regulatory programs, and direct that a significant portion of that
money support research into natural
causes of climate change; and
·
Delay or suspend any implementation of EPA’s carbon dioxide
and other regulations, until all questions are fully answered, and genuine
evidence-based science is restored to the regulatory process – and used to
evaluate the honesty and validity of studies used to justify the regulations.
Only in this manner can the United States expect to see a
return to the essential separation of powers, checks and balances, economic and
employment growth – and the quality, integrity, transparency and accountability
that every American should expect in our government.
Paul
Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow
(www.CFACT.org) and author of
Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black
death.
No comments:
Post a Comment