Posted by Matt Dempsey Matt_Dempsey@epw.senate.gov

In Case You Missed It...

The Oklahoman

Editorial: GOP will need to save some ammo to fight proposed EPA rules

Published: January 7, 2011

Link to Editorial 

Somewhat lost in congressional Republicans' plan to head off Obamacare at the pass is the Environmental Protection Agency's move to tackle greenhouse gas emissions through rule-making. Essentially, the Obama administration is trying to accomplish via regulation what it couldn't legislate in Congress.

Right before Christmas - when most of Washington no doubt was occupied with visions of sugar plums - EPA announced that by July it would issue new standards for greenhouse gases emitted by power plants, with a final rule expected by May 2012. A draft for refineries is due in December, to be finalized by November 2012.

This comes after the administration's climate change legislation, cap and trade, fizzled in the Democrat-heavy 111th Congress. Because cap and trade is considered as dead as Rover (all over) in the more Republican 112th, EPA has taken the point against emissions that it and environmentalists believe is contributing to global warming.

Administration officials say the proposed rules are completely different from cap and trade. "This is basically business as usual," EPA's Gina McCarthy said last month. "It's flexible. It's cost-effective."

Business as usual? Really? "There is no off-the-shelf technology to address reductions in carbon," Scott Segal, an attorney who represents utilities and refineries, told The Wall Street Journal. "This is high-stakes poker that the agency is playing with a very inadequate database upon which to base their actions."

Cost-effective? Tell that to states that depend on coal-fired electricity generation. Actually, tell it to all Americans, because the costs from regulations ushering out coal-fired facilities most likely will be shared. "This rule will add to the EPA's enormous regulatory burden on the economy and will inevitably make consumers pay more for gasoline and electricity," said Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Tulsa.

To put a fine point on it, American businesses and consumers will pay for radical environmental policies that got nowhere in Congress. The approach is slightly different from cap and trade, but the goal is the same: Force a societal shift from fossil fuels, while driving up costs all across the economy, to advance the global warming agenda.

Here's another point: Even if you believe greenhouse gases from human activity are dangerously warming the planet - and a lot of smart people don't - what's the use in curbing this country's emissions, hamstringing the economy and killing jobs along the way, while China increases its emissions?

That an administration would try via regulation to advance policies clearly rejected by Congress is simply breathtaking. Congressional Republicans, rightly spoiling for a big fight over Obamacare, better save some ammo to battle the EPA as well.

###