The bankruptcy of the Obama-Pelosi ‘progressive’ agenda.

2/28/13

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, leads a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington to discuss the reintroduction of the Violence Against Women Act.
Pelosi blamed Congressional Republicans for obstructing the president’s agenda and creating uncertainty. In the wake of the financial collapse, the Democrats took full control of both the Congress and the presidency in 2009 and were presented with an historic opportunity to put their ideas into practice. Unfortunately, the newly elected President Obama and then-Speaker Pelosi treated the situation as a political opportunity to build a Democratic majority rather than an obligation to fix what’s broken in the economy.
Shrewdly, President Obama cobbled together a broader Democratic coalition by delivering to women free health care services, to Hispanics amnesty for young adults, to younger folks overly generous student loans, to teachers and civil servants subsidies to protect their jobs, to labor unions a rebuke of Simpson-Bowles recommendation that the retirement age be raised, and to his political friends generous subsidies for solar panels, windmills and other whimsical projects. Meanwhile, he cut defense, raised taxes on small businesses, and imposed unproductive regulations on manufacturing. Small banks aren’t lending but instead are looking to sell out to the Wall Street barons who financed the President’s rise to power. Small businesses are not expanding, and multinational corporations are taking factories and jobs to China and other Asian venues where genuine enterprise and capitalism, paradoxically, is supported.
Early in his presidency, Mr. Obama blamed China’s undervalued currency for slow U.S. growth and warned Chinese leaders if they did not cooperate to redress the situation. The President talks tough in front of friendly audiences and to Republicans when he enjoys the high ground, but brings his kneeling pad when negotiating with Chinese leaders. In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, the President punished the entire oil industry to gain political points and appease environmentalists.
His most significant accomplishment — ObamaCare has turned into a massive subsidy for the health care industry and welfare program for working class voters he hopes to secure for the next generation. Government spending is up over a trillion dollars, the federal deficit is spinning out of control and the country faces a credit downgrade by Moody’s.
Pelosi vilifies Republicans for not embracing the President’s “balanced” approach, but he shows no interest in cutting spending and only passion for raising taxes on success.
Sources—fox news, peter morici

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE FED DOESN’T FOLLOW THE RULES

2/28/13
Nearly every piece of legislation passed by Congress and signed by the executive branch contains specific exemptions for – you guessed it – Congress and the executive branch.
But even when government forgets to include such provisions, as it apparently did with a law that requires all U.S. companies employing at least 100 people to issue warning letters 60 days in advance of any possible furlough, government still doesn’t obey the letter or spirit of the law. Everyone knew this was coming. They knew it before the election in November. But did the government send out the furlough letters 60 days in advance? No, of course not.
Just imagine if a private U.S. company had neglected to do this. There is little question it would be faced with major fines and certainly lawsuits that would cost more than the savings generated by the furloughs. So what happens when the federal government doesn’t abide by its own rules about issue furlough letters?
Nothing.
There are no penalties, because government is not accountable to anyone. And. to make it worse, the Obama administration is telling agencies that are sending out the letters late not to worry about it: The government will take care of the legal challenges that will inevitably come when those furloughed bring in their trial lawyers. So what kind of savings will actually be generated after Washington defends its clear violation of the law and pays settlements to those who were furloughed outside the rule of law? You guessed it: Probably none. In fact, it may end up costing taxpayers more to furlough federal employers than it does to allow them to keep their salaries and working conditions the same.
The government makes rules it has no intention of abiding by, They try to ban and confiscate your firearms even while they are buying up classifications of firearms already denied you by the tens of thousands.
They try to ban certain kinds of ammunition, while buying it up by the billions of rounds.

Source—between the lines, joe farah

DRONES AND THEN ARE MORE DRONES—BOMBS AWAY

2/28/13
During WWII a small number of German American fought for Nazi-Germany as members of the Waffen-SS. Does anyone think the US military would have given a second thought to whether it might kill those traitors? Today, we apparently need pages on pages of Justice Dept. legalese (“lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a US citizen who is a senior operational leader of Al-Qaeda or an Associated Force”), to justify killing Americans who have become senior jihadisst terrorist and who are trying to kill as many innocent Americans as possible. It’s no small irony that the candidate who once railed against the Bush adm, so-called war on terror now finds himself under attack by his own base for his secret program of targeted killings.
Justice dept argues that a targeted killing can only take place when the targeted person poses “an imminent threat of violent attack against the USA”, it also broadens the concept that it concludes that the government need not have “clear evidence that a specific attack on US person and interest will take place in the immediate future”, –only a pattern of plotting such attacks. This redefining of “imminent” is reasonable enough—although it can’t help but remind folks of the similar logic behind the Bush adm justification for preemptive war.
The white paper policy some claim would allow the government to kill citizens anywhere in the world—including the US—and strips those same citizens of the 5th amendment. The white paper makes it clear that when a law enforcement option is available and feasible. This is the governments required path.
While many details of the drone strikes remain secret, it can hardly be argued that congress isn’t aware of the program’s existence of the adm general legal justification for it. Nor is it possible for the adm to carry out the program without congressional authorization, either by the intelligence or the armed services committees.
When the ACLU sued the US government over an drone attack on Al-Awlaki in 2009, which subsequently killed by a drone strike on a kill list, the federal court dismissed the suit. According to the court, these were policies and decisions the constitution had left in the hands of the political branches, those best positioned and most politically accountable for making them.

Source—weekly standard, gary schmitt

GUNS, THREATS TO OWNERS, VETS, MISSOURI LAW, WILL THEY TAKE THEM

2/27/13
Obama threatening veterans’ gun rights, some American military veterans have received a letter from the Veterans Administration warning that their competency to handle their own affairs is under review, and if determined by government bureaucrats to be “incompetent,” they would be barred from possessing weapons. The United States Justice Foundation, Director Michael Connelly said his organization is pursuing a Freedom of Information Act demand to the Department of Veterans Affairs to “force them to disclose the criteria they are using to place veterans on the background check list that keeps them from exercising their Second Amendment rights.”
A letter dated Dec. 20, 2012, has been posted online at Red Flag News. The letter states that the Department of Veterans Affairs has “received” information about the veteran that “because of your disabilities you may need help in handling your Department of Affairs (VA) benefits.” However, it provides no details other that the information was “a report from Portland VA Medical Center.” “The evidence indicates that you are not able to handle your VA benefit payments because of a physical or mental condition,” the letter warns. “We propose to rate you incompetent for VA purposes. This means we must decide if you are able to handle your VA benefit payments. We will base our decision on all the evidence we already have including any other evidence you sent to us.” Completion of the incompetency determination means that a “fiduciary” would be appointed to manage the veteran’s payments.“ A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. “Request a personal hearing within 30 days from the date at the top of this letter to present evidence or argument on any important point in your claim.” But it says the VA will not pay some of the expenses of the hearing. “If we don’t hear from you within the next 60 days, we will assume you have no additional evidence and do not want a hearing. After those 60 days we will make our decision. Connelly noted the letter “provides no specifics on the reasons for the proposed finding of incompetency; just that is based on a determination by someone in the VA.” “In every state in the United States no one can be declared incompetent to administer their own affairs without due process of law and that usually requires a judicial hearing with evidence being offered to prove to a judge that the person is indeed incompetent,” he explained. “This is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that no person shall ‘be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due pushing to fulfill one of Obama’s main goals, the disarming of the American people. Janet Napolitano has already warned law enforcement that some of the most dangerous among us are America’s heroes, our veterans, and now according to this letter from the VA they can be prohibited from buying or even possessing a firearm because of a physical or mental disability,” It would also mean that everyone who has ever been depressed for any reason should be disarmed. WND previously reported on the issue of PTSD and veterans. It was after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals excoriated the Department of Veterans Affairs for its “unchecked incompetence” in dealing with a flood of PTSD, depression.
MISSOURI; House Bill 545, anti-gun legislation that would turn many law-abiding gun owners into felons. HB 545 would ban the possession, sale, transfer or manufacture of certain semi-automatic rifles and magazines that are capable of holding more than ten rounds. HB 545 contains no grandfather clauses. Therefore, under HB 545, if you are currently in possession of the semi-automatic rifles and magazines outlined in this bill, you will have 90 days from the effective date of this legislation to surrender, destroy or remove these currently lawful items from Missouri. If you fail to do so, you could be charged with a Class C felony if this legislation is passed and enacted into law. Compelling law-abiding citizens to surrender their firearms and magazines is unconstitutional.
If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight.
Dean Garrison, American author and crime fiction novelist. His research in the fields of crime scene investigation and Shooting Reconstruction are widely published in forensic journals. I feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us, because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights.
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin
Even 230+ years ago our founders were perceptive enough to realize that democracy was a dangerous form of government. How so? Because the citizens of a country can become just as corrupt as any government. Just because a majority of people may support certain ideas it does not mean that those ideas are just. In simple terms, just because most Americans love our president and voted for him, it does not mean that he has the power to go against our constitutional rights.
So when Senator Feinstein or President Obama talk about taking your guns, you need to think about something. Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution? A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. In 2008 a case of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a handgun ban in Washington D.C. was unconstitutional. The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson.
The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. -Samuel Adams. Without guns in this country, all other amendments become null and void, simply because “We the People” will lose our power of enforcement. A constitutional republic protects the rights of the individual even when their ideas are very much in the minority. Our framers were very clear on this. If my government comes to take my guns, they are violating one of my constitutional rights that is covered by the 2nd amendment. If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson ’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.” I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. Only you can choose to give up your rights.
If Feinstein or Barack have a problem with the constitution then they should be removed from office. They are not defending the constitution which they have sworn an oath to protect. You must start thinking about this because I believe that the day is coming soon and I personally believe it has already been planned. Through regulations, taxation, inflation of the money supply, trade restrictions, and tethers on private associations, government itself is nothing but a massive drain on prosperity. The situation has become deeply dangerous for the future of freedom in America, with young people unable to find jobs, opportunities being destroyed in sector after sector, banks and corporations living on the dole, and so many regulations that we are living under something nearly as egregious as Soviet-style central planning.
“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him — better take a closer look at the American Indian.” Henry Ford
Sources—hr 545, wnd, bob unruh, paul scicchitano, wikipedia

I WANT A CIVILIAN NATIONAL SECURITY FORCE—OBAMA 2008

2/27/13

New report exposes an unbelievable U.S. government purchase.
This is all on top of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition the U.S. government has already stockpiled, full-auto weapons, putting them in the hands of domestic agents who have nothing whatsoever to do with overseas wars…
2 billion rounds of ammunition round-stockpile purchased by the Department of Homeland Security and other national alphabet agencies in recent years. Moreover, as the White House and their cohorts in Congress contemplate the disarming of American
citizens, the very assault weapons purported to be so dangerous in the hands of law abiding gun owners a12-bushmaster-ruger-beretta-hk-smith-wesson-sig_01242013> are being purchased in mass quantities, by local and federal law enforcement agencies.
So what is the purpose and motivation behind the government¹s continued efforts to stockpile so much firepower?
If elected in 2008, he wanted to create a civilian national security force as big, as
strong and as well-funded as the Defense Department.
At a campaign stop in Colorado July 2, 2008: We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we¹ve set. We¹ve got to have a civilian national security force that¹s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. By 2013 and the highly unusual stockpiling of firearms and ammo by Homeland Security firearms and ammo that Obama would like to deny to ordinary citizens who are not members of his domestic army.
Department of Homeland Security need billions of rounds of ammunition? This is the agency that is responsible for policing the border. But it doesn¹t. So why does Homeland Security need so many weapons and enough hollow-point rounds to plug every American six times?
The official explanation? Target practice. As for concern about the type of bullets hollow points, which expand upon impact the statement said the type is standard issue² and is used during mandatory quarterly firearms qualifications and other training sessions. DHS is mobilizing for a significant future action against the American people.
The US military has been actively war-gaming worst-case scenarios large-scale-economic-breakdown-and-civil-unrest 11222010 that include economic collapse and civil unrest, going so far as to simulate wide-scale food riots. Just last month the military deployed gunships over Miami e-strafing-runs-troops-rappelling-from-choppers-and-road-blockades 0128201 and executed a training exercise with local police departments.
Houston, Tx., exercises also included ground forces, armored personnel carriers and tanks but-why on the streets of St. Louis. Despite overwhelming opposition, there is an overt and focused movement to disarm Americans. Those calling for this disarmament qualify their positions by claiming these weapons are not necessary for sporting, hunting, or personal defense. As if this provision of the US Constitution doesn¹t even exist, there is a total blackout on the fundamental intent of the Second Amendment .
Heavily armored vehicles have been spotted all over the country. And many local law
enforcement agencies have taken possession of these vehicles, normally reserved for military engagements, and have put them to use in neighborhoods and communities around America.
Congress has authorized the deployment of some 30,000 surveillance
drones in the skies of America-us_112011>, to be available for use by intelligence agencies by 2015 The National Security Agency is building a massive spy center
largest-spy-center-in-the-country_042012> capable of recording, aggregating and analyzing every digital interaction on the planet phones, internet, purchasing patterns, travel, and even what we say in the privacy of our own homes. In the aftermath of the September 11th attacks, has created legislation that directly targets American citizens. The Patriot Act makes it possible for anyone who is identified as attempting to subvert government legitimacy as a terrorist, and also allows for the warrantless wiretapping of everyone for any reason. Under the Patriot Act and expanded government definitions, just about anyone now qualifies as a domestic terrorist.

The National Defense Authorization Act takes the Patriot Act even further, allowing the government to detain anyone suspected of being a terrorist indefinitely and without trial this includes American citizens living in the United States. The President specifically claimed he would create a civilian national security police force as large as the US military. If he meant it, then we¹re talking about 2 million or so civilians that will be armed, deputized and backed by the government. To do what? We¹re not quite sure.
America. They have been designed for you.

Source–stumblereddit

DOES DR. CARSON WORRY THE DEMOCRATS

2/25/13
An Obama critic claims he is using his race to bolster career. TALK ABOUT THE USE OF RACISM—HANG ON. Media Matters chose to focus on the surgeon’s race.
Media Matters has posted a “research article” claiming Dr. Benjamin Carson is just “the latest in a long line of black conservatives – from Clarence Thomas to Herman Cain – relentlessly promoted and propped up by right-wing voices in the media.”
According to the Atlantic, he “voiced concern about the national debt and argued the case for a flat tax, using the Bible’s injunction to tithe a set percentage, and for health-savings accounts, a medical option that has gained currency among conservatives. The article contains clips of conservatives supportive of Carson. But it begins with a number of quotes questioning why a black would be conservative. MSNBC commentator Joy Reid said: “Right now, first of all, there is a huge boom in it there is a big career advancement in it. If you want to be Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, any brown or black person who is willing to say conservative stuff, this is your moment. You can make a lot of money, get a lot of attention, get a lot of love from the right, because they really do need brown and black faces to start saying this script. “But the problem is in order to fit in as a minority conservative, you really almost have to be even further to the right than typical conservatives. You have to mouth verbatim all of the party’s beliefs, because if you stray one bit, you are held in suspicion. So Rubio is caught in that matrix.” The Atlantic’s David A. Graham also focused on race, writing “it’s impossible to pretend there’s no racial dimension involved in a successful black conservative castigating the liberal black president.”
Tweets posted by Media Matters echo the sentiment.
Righties love them some Ben Carson now”
“Today, if you’re a racist, you’re almost certainly a Republican. Did you forget all of those “Don’t Re-Nig in 2012″ bumper stickers?”
“But in the end a man known for his medical skills and brought in to speak at a (supposedly) religious event could not resist the spotlight, but had to grasp the opportunity to bash the president. In essence, I believe he sold out his profession and his faith for the chance to become a political “hero”. I hope he enjoys it, his 15 minutes are ticking.”
“Apparently in the right-wing parallel dimension, anybody who in any possible way does anything negative towards the president is worthy of a rock star reception. It really is sad that after 8 years of insisting you couldn’t question the president, that they’ve now managed to make ‘hating on the president’ an industry in and of itself.”
When Herman Cain joined Fox News, tweets by liberals targeted his race:
“uncle tom is now a fox news contributer. makes sense. smh. did i say uncle tom? i meant herman coon. oops…cain, herman cain.”
“So the buffoon Herman Cain is over there palling around with the likes of fox news! Birds of a feather! Ole Uncle Tom acting S.O.B.”
This is not the first time Media Matters has gone after a prominent black conservative. It refers to former Congressman Allen West. Clarence Thomas is a justice on the Supreme Court has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be out of the court’s mainstream. Economist and columnist Thomas Sowell is accused of “a diatribe laden with falsehoods that mimics the tone most often employed by scores of anti-immigrant nativists. Media Matters calls out former GOP party chief Michael Steele. “If you were a reporter, and you were typing up RNC chairman Michael Steele’s call for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s resignation over a racially insensitive remark, would you maybe find room to mention that just a few days ago, Steele used the phrase ‘honest injun’”?
And, the website ran a clip of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes titled “Alan Keyes’ unhinged rant on Fox News: Obama ‘has made himself the focus of evil, the focus of child-killing policy.’”
And from his interview on Fox News—got to get away from this PC correctness as it is destroying America. We are following in Rome’s footsteps, the most powerful then the most corrupt unmoral. Rome also took money form the rich. The media is the PC police and their main job is to keep the people ignorant and uniformed, sway them. We need a tax system similar to “TITHING”. Our founding fathers thought sending debt to our kids is immoral. Suggested at birth everybody gets a medical record, an HAS account and be able to pass what is unspent to your family. Food stamps should make them responsible how and what they buy, same with Health care. We are being programmed to be “victims”. We need to educate the people, make them aware of what’s going on. 70% of birth in the black community to single mothers. And he called SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS as the 4th branch of government.
Meida matters, garth kant

SECRET ENERGY LAB COSTING MILLIONS AND THE EPA AGAIN

2/25/13
National Renewable Energy Laboratory – NREL for short. It’s the place where solar panels, windmills and corn are deemed the energy source of the future and companies who support such endeavors are courted. It’s also the place where highly paid staff decide how to spend hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars. And the public pays those decision-makers well: NREL’s top executive, Dr. Dan Arvizu, makes close to a million dollars per year. His two top lieutenants rake in more than half a million each and nine others make more than $350,000 a year. Energy expert Amy Oliver Cooke drove out to the site, which looks something like Nevada’s Area 51 with its remote location and forbidding concrete buildings. NREL had started a construction project and Cooke wanted to see for herself. She didn’t get far: a man in an SUV seemingly appeared out of nowhere, stopped her car, and told her to leave. ‘It’s top secret,’ said Cooke, director of the Energy Policy Center at the Independence Institute think tank. It was ‘top secret so we can bring Americans a better future.’” With its bloated budget and overseen by a $533 million a year government-funded management company, Cooke isn’t buying it. “NREL has given us two of the most significant boondoggles, one of them being ethanol and the other being (bankrupt) Abound Solar,” she said. “They were part of the team that pushed Abound Solar along. NREL’s taxpayer-funded management company has seen its budget more than double since 2006. REP. Ed Perlmutter CO. congressman, ties go beyond merely promoting green legislation and lobbying his colleagues for NREL funds. He has received $12,670 in campaign contributions from executives of NREL and its management company, MRIGlobal, a company that describes itself as “an independent, not-for-profit organization that performs contract research for government and industry.” Perlmuter’s father has served as a trustee for MRI and MRI Global during the past decade. Between 2003 and 2005, Perlmutter was also a trustee. Funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, NREL started in 1977 as the Solar Energy Research Institute, a Jimmy Carter-era response to the 1973 Mideast oil crisis. Its budget, then about $100 million, was slashed during the Reagan era. By the time Perlmutter was elected, NREL’s budget was $209.6 million. It increased steadily before ballooning to $536.5, a beneficiary of President Obama’s stimulus plan and a $135 million contract spread out over five years to construct a new science center. Its current $352 million budget is down slightly from last year’s $388.6 million. To handle lab management, MRIGlobal partnered with Ohio-based Battelle Memorial Institute, which describes itself as “the world’s largest nonprofit research and development organization.” The pair formed Alliance for Sustainable Energy, a separate non-profit in 2008, for the sole purpose of managing NREL and installed NREL’s top executives as its directors. Despite record federal debt, municipal bankruptcies and a nagging global recession, those executives enjoy pay packages that are out of reach of most Americans who pay their salaries,
Dan Arvizu-NREL director-$928,069; Bobi Garrett-senior VP-$524,226; Willaim Glover lab director-$557,571, Catherine Porto senior VP-$406,339 just in 2010.
Tax documents show, Alliance received $532.9 million from the Department of Energy, a whopping $189 million more than they were paid in 2008. In 2010, MRIGlobal’s tax return shows DOE funding of $104.8 million, while Battelle’s tax return reported $4.55 billion in government grants. Agency is overseen by a management company. “I have no problems with the contractors operating the lab. They would do a much more efficient job than the government,” said Nick Loris, an energy policy analyst with the Heritage Foundation. Loris doesn’t like is the entire concept of placing the government in a role of making energy affordable. That should be a job for the private sector. In fact, the billions that have been siphoned into renewable energy have yet to produce a fraction of the promised return. Solar companies have been fraught with bankruptcy.
“I’ll tell you what’s pollution,” Cooke said. “It’s solar panels and wind turbines abandoned — things with toxic chemicals in them,” she said. Despite its bloated stimulus funding, there are signs of financial trouble at NREL. The company offered to buy out 100 jobs when its budget dropped between 2011 and 2012. Perlmutter blamed Republicans for the cuts and claimed NREL generates 5,500 jobs. Its direct workforce is listed at 1,700. He spent two years trying to pass legislation to give solar companies a break with bankers before successfully adding the language to the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.
He is co-chairman of the New Democrat Coalition Energy Task Force, part of the Financial Services Committee. Perlmutter has leveraged that role to keep alive a 20-year-old energy tax credit to producers of wind technology. That credit would have expired at the end of the year. But the Financial Services Committee produced a bill to extend the credit for another year, which carries a cost of $12 billion over the next decade. The Danish wind company Vestas, which has several Colorado production sites, announced on Nov. 7 that it will shed 6,700 jobs through the end of next year. Perlmutter blamed the Tea Party. “It is clean and it is the future of energy production,” Perlmutter wrote on his website. “Until the Tea Party took over this has always been a simple, noncontroversial tax credit.”

EPA
EPA pledged to push ahead with actions to confront climate change during a wide-ranging speech Thursday. “As President Obama said, climate change is a priority — and we are going to take action,” Gina McCarthy, the EPA Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation, discussed a list of emissions rules rolled out during Obama’s first term, touting them for their public health benefits and effects on tackling climate change. Among the rules were stronger fuel economy standards for vehicles, proposed rules for new coal-fired power plants and limits on mercury and other toxic air pollutants.
The agency has said its emissions rules would benefit public health, saving billions in healthcare costs. The agency also has said the more stringent vehicle fuel efficiency standards would save consumers money at the pump.
Moving ahead with emissions rules for existing power plants could be one of the EPA’s next actions on emissions. Environmental groups want the White House to impose standards for existing power plants, contending the administration has authority to do so through the Clean Air Act. McCarthy said tackling emissions on the “front end” — at buildings, manufacturing facilities and elsewhere — would help reduce emissions and save consumers money.
To do so, she said the EPA should offer incentives through rulemaking that encourage states, manufacturers and industrial facilities to upgrade energy efficiency and incorporate renewable energy.
Sources—watchdog.org, tori Richards, earl glynn, the hill, zach colman