Henry Raymond
Fairfax News => Political Issues/Comments => Topic started by: Chris Santee on April 06, 2011, 03:31:15 PM
-
On House floor, Welch fights bill to ban EPA from regulating greenhouse gasses
WASHINGTON, DC – Rep. Peter Welch took to the House floor Wednesday to fight legislation that would bar the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating greenhouse gases. The measure would overturn scientific findings about the risks posed to humans and the environment by such gases.
The bill, officially known as the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 (H.R. 910), would prohibit the EPA from considering greenhouse gasses as air pollutants, thereby exempting them from regulation under the Clean Air Act. The legislation would negate a 2007 Supreme Court decision which found that the EPA has the authority to regulate such gases under the Clean Air Act. H.R. 910 also undermines the EPA’s authority to enforce existing greenhouse gas reporting requirements and motor vehicle emission standards.
“The authors of this bill have come to the conclusion that global warming is a hoax,” Welch said. “Give them credit, getting there was not an easy task and flies in the face of the unanimous conclusion of American scientists. Supporters of this legislation are following the long-established tradition we humans have, the ability to disregard the obvious and proven when that conflicts with our ideology.”
At a Capitol Hill news conference earlier in the day, Welch spoke about the negative effect that H.R. 910 would have on efforts to reduce America’s reliance on foreign oil and bring down gas prices for consumers.
Yesterday, Welch offered two amendments to the bill in the House Rules Committee that would have repealed tax breaks for oil companies and protected the EPA’s energy efficiency program Energy Star. Both of Welch’s amendments were rejected by the Republican leadership.
A vote on H.R. 910 is expected later this afternoon. The President has vowed to veto the legislation.
-
Seems to me that Welch should take a good hard look at his own statement.... “Give them credit, getting there was not an easy task and flies in the face of the unanimous conclusion of American scientists. Supporters of this legislation are following the long-established tradition we humans have, the ability to disregard the obvious and proven when that conflicts with our ideology.” Appears that he and his group are the ones that have their established idealogies and agenda. The Obama, Pelosi, Reid trio are the ones who initiated the legislation to ban incandescent bulbs in our homes in order to "save the environment". I wonder how many CFL bulbs would be found in Al Gores' mansion.
I would take a chance that for every scientist that Welch could produce claiming global warming is occuring, the folks on the other side of the aisle could find one who disagrees.
-
I'm sure there are more scientist who agree global warming is happening. It has been happening since the last ice age. It is what the planet does: warms, cools, warms, cools. I think the warming vs cooling is less contestable than the CAUSE of the warming. I speculate that CO2 emmission from human activities contribute a VERY small portion of the warming cycle.
IF we as a society and a species are worried about the long term effects of global warming, we should be developing ways to deal with the inevitable effects. We should be pushing populations centers to move AWAY from ocean fronts and low lands. We should continue to develop more versatile crops (that are more drought and drown resistant - NOT resistent to specific scientifically formulated herbicides).
We should continue to develop renewable resources (ethanol based fuels are NOT the way to go UNLESS the ethanol is derived from digested garbage. Ethanol from crops just drives up the cost of food both locally and globally).
I think ultimately that the "human caused global warming" is a fabricated crisis with the purpose of creating a reason for people to welcome renewable energy. After all, crisis / tragedy are the biggest drivers of change.
IF VT really wanted to adopt and promote renewable energy, especially small scale renewable energy, they would mandate that power companies buy excess power produced by home owners. NOT just net metering to balance home owners use, but allow home owners to actually have a $0 power bill, or actually receive a little money by investing their own money into renewable power generation.
-
The energy bill that supposedly bans incandescent bulbs was signed into law by Bush in 2007 not Obama. And it doesn't ban the bulbs it just sets standards for the energy used by a bulb. There are already incandescent bulbs out there that meet this standard.
-
Understood Kevin, but the bill was generated by the 110th congress, which was controlled by Pelosi. Not all of the repubs wanted this in there, and now are trying to repeal this ban. Even one of the co sponsors of the original bill Upton (R- Mich) has changed his tune after seeing the impact of the ban. The point is now, they want to reverse it and they are struggling to get it done.