What They’re Saying About EPA’s Illegal Carbon Emissions Rule
August 7, 2015
“Without a vote in Congress or even much public debate, Mr. Obama is using his last 18 months to dictate U.S. energy choices for the next 20 or 30 years. This abuse of power is regulation without representation.” – Wall Street Editorial Board
EPA’s carbon emissions rule is the politically unpopular and congressionally defeated Cap and Trade legislation.
“‘It’s clear that what they’re trying to do — without establishing a federal cap-and-trade program — is set up a plan that has a very strong likelihood of becoming a de facto federal cap-and-trade program,’ said Andre Templeman, managing director of the carbon-markets consultancy Alpha Inception LLC.” (Mark Drajem and Lynn Doan, Bloomberg Business, August 4, 2015)
“The federal plan is a little different from the national cap-and-trade system that the Senate shot down in 2010, as Bloomberg Business explains. In short, the EPA would restrict emissions from the state’s power plants but allow them to trade credits with power plants both in their own state and elsewhere in the country. The effect would be to create a national emissions trading market among power plants without any new interstate agreements, circumventing the need for buy-in from noncompliant state governments.” (Will Oremus, Slate, August 4, 2015)
EPA’s carbon emissions rule will increase electricity prices for consumers by as much as $73 billion per year.
“An October 2014 study by NERA Economic Consulting puts CPP’s overall price tag between $41 billion and $73 billion per year in higher electricity prices, with ratepayers in 43 states facing double-digit electricity rate increases under the rule.” (Ann N. Purvis, Heartland, August 3, 2015)
EPA’s carbon rule is “fundamentally flawed and illegal.”
The states, led by West Virginia, believe the rules are “fundamentally flawed and illegal” and intend to go to court to prove their case. “The final rule announced Monday blatantly disregards the rule of law and will severely harm West Virginia and the U.S. economy,” Patrick Morrisey, attorney general of West Virginia, said in a statement. “This rule represents the most far-reaching energy regulation in this nation’s history, drawn up by radical bureaucrats and based upon an obscure, rarely used provision of the Clean Air Act,” he said. “We intend to challenge it in court vigorously.” (Timothy Cama, The Hill, August 3, 2015)
EPA’s carbon emissions rule disproportionately hurts minorities and low income Americans.
“But some influential black and Hispanic leaders, including the U.S. Black Chamber of Commerce, say the administration is failing to grasp the real consequences of the proposal. They fear the Clean Power Plan could decimate poor communities and raise poverty rates, and they question whether the EPA’s energy efficiency credit program ultimately will work.” (Ben Wolfgang, Washington Times, August 5, 2015)
“‘I’m very concerned that poor people will always pay the price for people who happen to have a vision. … That goes for the EPA, for anyone who isn’t concerned about poor people. The electricity bill is going to skyrocket for poor people,’ said Charles Steele Jr., CEO of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and, aside from the carbon regulations, a staunch supporter of Mr. Obama.” (Ben Wolfgang, Washington Times, August 5, 2015)
“‘The Clean Power Plan would increase black poverty by 23 percent, Hispanic poverty by 26 percent, result in cumulative job losses of 7 million for blacks, nearly 12 million for Hispanics in 2035, and decrease black and Hispanic median household income by $455 to $550, respectively, in 2035,’ he told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, citing a study commissioned by the Black Chamber.” (Ben Wolfgang, Washington Times, August 5, 2015)
EPA’s carbon emissions rule is a political birthday gift to the President for his legacy.
“The Environmental Protection Agency ‘gave President Obama his birthday present a day early – his political legacy tied up in a bow – a bow comprised of hardworking Americans hopes and dreams for a bright economic future,’ said Laura Sheehan, senior vice president of communications for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.” (John Siciliano, Washington Examiner, August 4, 2015)
“The latest iteration of the administration’s Clean Power Plan isn’t really meant to impact the environment or produce more energy. It is fair to say that it is just another attempt by President Obama to make an ideological point. Only Obama’s most committed apologists will herald this pseudo-plan as a legitimate achievement.” (Ed Rogers, The Washington Post, August 4, 2015)
EPA’s carbon emissions rule is the work of collusion between the EPA and the environmental lobby.
“Since September 2014, the Committee’s oversight has centered on the role played by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) among other environmental activists in influencing the policy options, technical support, legal rationale, and public relations campaign for these rules.” (U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, August 4, 2015)
“It is also clear from the documents that the EPA policy makers and environmental activists involved had cozy relationships with each other on not only a personal level but through like-minded activism from years of working together. Indeed, the revolving door has swung freely between the Obama Administration and the environmental activist community.” (U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, August 4, 2015)