Slashdot Mirror
Congress Votes to Scrap Obama's Clean Power Plan (sciencemag.org)
sciencehabit writes with news that the House voted 242-180 to repeal the EPA's Clean Power Plan, and 235-188 to block EPA rules governing emissions from new power plants. Science reports: "Congress has voted, largely along party lines, to block a centerpiece of President Barack Obama's climate change agenda. The votes are largely symbolic, however, because Obama plans to veto the bills. Still, Congressional Republicans, and a few Democrats, say they want to send a message to global leaders who are meeting this week to negotiate a new climate agreement that the majority of U.S. lawmakers may not agree with any deal."
"The votes are largely symbolic..." of what? How pigheaded and stupid people can be when they put their "minds" to it?
Nothing unconstitutional about exercising his veto power.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
No. What we see is a majority of elected legislators unable to stop unelected buearocrats(EPA) from imposing rules that are the equivalent of laws. Any federal rule, regulation, policy, etc that applies outside of the Executive branch should have to get legislative approval. SCOTUS should have stopped congress from abdicating its responsibility a long time ago.
India is moving away from coal and oil???? citation please. They have said they plan to TRIPLE emmisions as they invest heavily in coal and oil as they need cheap power to fuel their economic growth.
This did get legislative approval, and executive approval, and has not met with judicial disapproval.
More than just "not disapproval"-- it met with a decision by the Supreme Court that the EPA had to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency 2007.
So, yes: all three branches.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Congress through the acts that created the EPA and in the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, etc. have set out general principles for the EPA to follow and delegating the details of implementing those principles to the Executive Branch and EPA. It's completely constitutional to delegate rule making such as this.
SCOTUS has said that the EPA has authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the acts of Congress. If Congress wants to change things they have to pass a new act and get the President to not veto it.
Because they hate us and want us to die.
No, they don't. They believe that the world is going to come to an end, and God is going to come down and take them all Home, and nothing we did here will really matter; the Earth is just here for us to use up and who cares what happens to it afterwards? So far as they're all concerned the sooner it all comes to an End the better, they think there's a Heaven waiting for them where everything will be wonderful. Of course they're all idiots and will destroy our REAL home unless we reign them in.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
This is kind of important, does anyone want rolling brownouts/blackouts because we have to decommission coal plants before the replacement plants are online?
The last time such a thing happened in the US, it was blamed on environmental regulation in "California" but it turned out the real problem was in Houston at a company called Enron.
Who was out for profits.
So you can worry about the EPA if you want, but my eyes will be on the money leeches. They actually did cause the problem you fear.
The EPA? Yeah, OK, they shouldn't shut down plants capriciously, but that kind of problem is something they already know about.