Obama's EPA is killing the economy with costly rules
Obama's EPA is killing the economy with costly rules
Obama's EPA is killing the economy with costly rules
Washington Examiner Editorial
Nov. 26, 2011
Anybody who wonders why the U.S. economy continues to stagger along with 9 percent unemployment and an anemic 2 percent quarterly growth rate need look no further than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Under President Obama's hand-picked administrator, Lisa Jackson, EPA is hog-tying the economy with dozens of proposed major new rules. One of them, which is aimed at coal-fired power plants that generate electricity, will add at least $18 billion in compliance costs by 2020. As Kathleen White of the Texas Public Policy Foundation told the House Energy and Commerce Committee earlier this year, "never in its 40-year history has EPA promulgated -- at the same time -- so many costly new regulatory dictates. The rules on track to go into effect in the next three years could cost more than $1 trillion and result in hundreds of thousands of jobs lost."
It's not just the raft of new rules that is killing economic growth, however. Jackson and her EPA minions have been purposefully slow-walking the agency's already hideously complex process for approving permits in a crucial sector of the energy industry. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., asked the EPA inspector general to review the agency's permitting process for surface mining permit applications in the Appalachian region over the last two years. The EPA IG found that of the 185 permit applications it identified, only 56, or less than one-third of the total, had been approved. Almost half of the 185 required at least 731 days for EPA to complete its evaluations. That compares with the 144 days EPA claims is its average evaluation period for all mining permit applications. At least a third of the 185 were simply withdrawn from consideration, presumably because the applicants despaired of ever getting a response from EPA.
The IG report confirmed Inhofe's prior suspicion that EPA has been "systematically slowing the pace of permit evaluations in Appalachia. Even more troubling is that as our nation works to find ways to cut our national debt, EPA has increased its budget and staff to evaluate these permits. Instead of spending more and more taxpayer dollars to wage this war on affordable energy, the Obama-EPA should be processing and approving these permits to spur job creation, especially in areas such as the Appalachia that have significant employment needs. Equally important is the potential domestic energy production that these permits would provide."
Because 40 percent of the electricity that Americans depend on daily is generated by power plants fueled by coal -- much of which comes from Appalachia -- sluggardly permit processing by EPA should concern everybody. And let's not forget that Jackson works for a president who before he was elected promised that his environmental policies would "necessarily cause electricity prices to skyrocket."
Washington Examiner Editorial
Nov. 26, 2011
Anybody who wonders why the U.S. economy continues to stagger along with 9 percent unemployment and an anemic 2 percent quarterly growth rate need look no further than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Under President Obama's hand-picked administrator, Lisa Jackson, EPA is hog-tying the economy with dozens of proposed major new rules. One of them, which is aimed at coal-fired power plants that generate electricity, will add at least $18 billion in compliance costs by 2020. As Kathleen White of the Texas Public Policy Foundation told the House Energy and Commerce Committee earlier this year, "never in its 40-year history has EPA promulgated -- at the same time -- so many costly new regulatory dictates. The rules on track to go into effect in the next three years could cost more than $1 trillion and result in hundreds of thousands of jobs lost."
It's not just the raft of new rules that is killing economic growth, however. Jackson and her EPA minions have been purposefully slow-walking the agency's already hideously complex process for approving permits in a crucial sector of the energy industry. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., asked the EPA inspector general to review the agency's permitting process for surface mining permit applications in the Appalachian region over the last two years. The EPA IG found that of the 185 permit applications it identified, only 56, or less than one-third of the total, had been approved. Almost half of the 185 required at least 731 days for EPA to complete its evaluations. That compares with the 144 days EPA claims is its average evaluation period for all mining permit applications. At least a third of the 185 were simply withdrawn from consideration, presumably because the applicants despaired of ever getting a response from EPA.
The IG report confirmed Inhofe's prior suspicion that EPA has been "systematically slowing the pace of permit evaluations in Appalachia. Even more troubling is that as our nation works to find ways to cut our national debt, EPA has increased its budget and staff to evaluate these permits. Instead of spending more and more taxpayer dollars to wage this war on affordable energy, the Obama-EPA should be processing and approving these permits to spur job creation, especially in areas such as the Appalachia that have significant employment needs. Equally important is the potential domestic energy production that these permits would provide."
Because 40 percent of the electricity that Americans depend on daily is generated by power plants fueled by coal -- much of which comes from Appalachia -- sluggardly permit processing by EPA should concern everybody. And let's not forget that Jackson works for a president who before he was elected promised that his environmental policies would "necessarily cause electricity prices to skyrocket."
TexasBlue
Re: Obama's EPA is killing the economy with costly rules
And let's not forget that Jackson works for a president who before he was elected promised that his environmental policies would "necessarily cause electricity prices to skyrocket."
I hate it when people like me also find an actual video proving that this was actually said.
TexasBlue
Re: Obama's EPA is killing the economy with costly rules
My wife lived for a time near Niagra Falls.
Some of the kids she went to school with lived in the Love Canal.
They understood how costly NOT having environmental rules could be.
Some of them paid with their lives.
I have no doubt Hooker Chemical Company would argue that what they did was good for the economy. They made lots of money and provided lots of jobs.
Mac
Some of the kids she went to school with lived in the Love Canal.
They understood how costly NOT having environmental rules could be.
Some of them paid with their lives.
I have no doubt Hooker Chemical Company would argue that what they did was good for the economy. They made lots of money and provided lots of jobs.
Mac
Guest- Guest
Similar topics
» A CEO explains how Obama is killing the economy
» the increasingly unpopular and costly war
» Costly gasoline clouds Obama re-election prospects
» GOP killing the message
» GOP 'Killing The American Dream'
» the increasingly unpopular and costly war
» Costly gasoline clouds Obama re-election prospects
» GOP killing the message
» GOP 'Killing The American Dream'
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum