A fresh political squabble is abrew in the US over emissions from greenhouse gases. President Obama was unsuccessful pushing his legislation past Congress. So now he would like the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) to take over emissions regulations.
There are also counter-measures Congress is being asked to address that strip the authority from the EPA in this matter. Lisa Jackson, EPA Chief, testified before a committee for Congress that scientific evidence, along with a Supreme Court decision in 2007, both contradict the bill.
This will impact deeply the UN climate negotiations. Many developing nations see the US as the pace setter, since the US represents the largest economy in the world.
Those who drafted the new bill refer to national interests as its purpose. Specifically, they say that making these regulations work by curtailing power stations emissions would damage the economy. This committee might go down in history as the one who ruled against scientists on scientific matters.
Joe Barton, a Texas Republican Congressman, argued, “Both the administration and the EPA have made up their minds to strangle the economy of the US, send millions more to the unemployment line and ridding us of hundreds of billions of dollars each year.”
“They were denied success in the legislator, so they are forcing their will by regulating. We won’t let it go.”
Fred Upton, a chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee and a Michigan Congressman, agreed it would destroy jobs and damage the economy.
“85% of our energy comes from the use of oil, coal, and natural gas. The regulations they want to enact would attack exactly these products, since they naturally produce carbon dioxide,” he continued. “President Reagan had something to say on this, ‘The solution to the problems is not government, but, in fact, government is exactly the problem itself.’ He couldn’t have foreseen that his words would be appropriate regarding the EPA and its attempt to consolidate its power over the people.”