Monday, December 13, 2010
Obama’s EPA Goes After Coal Fired Energy
Do you remember Obama’s pledge back in 2008 when he was running for the Oval Office, a pledge to bankrupt the coal industry? At the time he threatened to make it too expensive to operate coal fired electrical plants via Cap & Trade legislation mandates in order to force Americans into “green” forms of energy production.
“Under my plan of cap and trade system electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Businesses would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that cost onto consumers.” (January 17, 2008 speaking on Cap and Trade, San Francisco Chronicle as recorded by Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit )
Cap and Trade legislation never made it past the floor of the House or Senate after Climategate brought about public outcry; the shady dealings and lies which are “man made global warming” had been exposed. Has that stopped the EPA from imposing their rules, rules built upon false and misleading data? Maybe I should have asked a different question; if you fail to pay income taxes the IRS won't come after you, right? Same answer and neither one is very pretty.
Jim Hoft continued documenting the administration’s assault on coal on October 15, 2010 when Obama’s EPA shut down one of the largest coal mining operations in West Virgina; their permit was cancelled.
“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took courageous action today to protect the people and waterways of Appalachia when Shawn Garvin, the agency’s Region 3 Administrator, recommended the withdrawal of the mining permit for America’s largest proposed mountaintop removal coal mine site, the Spruce No. 1 Mine in Logan County, West Virginia.”
You might wonder why I keep referring to the Environmental Protection Agency as “Obama’s EPA”; a worthwhile consideration. The EPA was created under the Nixon administration, a tool to be used by the executive branch of government. Each president has implemented various policies through enforcement, or lack of enforcement of EPA rules and regulations in order to bring about “change” or keep the status quo.
Obama’s administration has gone for American’s free market system’s jugular vein by plotting to destroy the energy sources most commonly used, oil and coal. Obama’s moratorium on oil drilling is no fluke as it follows an agenda. It won’t be long before the masses riot in the streets as industry grinds slowly to its death, the price of basics commodities skyrocket or become unavailable entirely. At that moment in time “change” can be implemented; the last bricks of the free market system will have tumbled and the new socialist/Marxist/totalitarian/utopian (call it what ever you want; but it won’t resemble anything constitutional) restoration of order can take its place.
One of the lies Obama told was he was for “clean coal” as a source of energy; however, that claim doesn’t match up with statements made by Vice President Joe Bidden as recorded on a transcript of the Rush Limbaugh talk show.
“…back on September 17th during a rope line visit, he’s shaking hands with people, there’s an environmentalist wacko in the line, Carolyn Auwater, and she says, “Wind and solar are flourishing here in Ohio so why are you supporting clean coal?” and old Biden goes, “We’re not supporting clean coal! We don’t want clean coal. Let the Chinese build clean coal.” The Obama campaign has done its best to hide its intent from everybody.”
The State of Texas recently challenged the EPA’s expansion of rules and regulations forced on coal burning electric plants which go into effect January 2, 2011; but lost a temporary bid holding off implementation until the case had run through the courts.
“…the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied the request to freeze the new regulations while the lawsuit is pending, ruling that the challengers failed to show that the harms they allege are certain, rather than speculative.”
“The decision of the three-judge panel clears the way for the rules to take effect Jan. 2, as planned. The federal rules require new controls on emissions from vehicles and industrial sources, such as power plants and refineries.”
Did you catch that, “the challengers failed to show that the harms they allege are certain, rather than speculative”, as if the whole global climate warming scam was a certainty. Shopping for judges must be an art; find the right judges and the earth could be ruled flat because a computer generated model proves we’re all living on the edge.
“Scott Segal, a lobbyist at Bracewell & Giuliani, which represents utilities, refiners and manufacturers, said the court ruling is “unfortunate” because regulators will not be ready in time to impose the new permit requirements.”
‘“The court may have ensured an effective construction moratorium for industrial and power projects," Segal said. “Given the state of the economy, the decision is certainly not a welcome holiday present.”’
William L. Anderson, an associate professor of economics at Frostburg State University, recently wrote an article, Is the EPA Necessary , where he covered some of the deplorable practices used by the EPA in order to impose their will on industry. He then offered a pondering question:
“One wonders how much economic growth would have taken place had the EPA not existed. Obviously, that is a calculation no one is able to perform, but I suspect that some readers of this site who have had to deal with EPA bureaucrats can tell a few horror tales.”
The EPA’s goal isn’t to help the economy; no, just the opposite. The Obama administration is using the EPA to collapse industry, intentionally putting folks on unemployment in order to bring about “change”. When enough financial strain has been put on America’s suffering free market system those on the left “hope” it will snap and provide them with the opportunity denied them for so long; to usher in the new socialist/Marxist/totalitarian/utopian (call it what ever you want; but it won’t resemble anything constitutional) restoration of order can take its place. To answer William Anderson’s question, Is the EPA necessary; those following the Cloward/Piven strategy to destroy our economy would have a resounding, “Yes!”.
This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.
Posted by T. F. Stern at 10:49 AM