“Clean Air Act” on The Daily Caller

On Thursday, December 2, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) turned 40 years old — a major milestone in the life of an agency that resulted from President Richard Nixon’s vision to protect the nation’s environment. Established in 1970 by executive order, the EPA now regulates everything from pesticides, to water, to the air itself and has grown to over 18,000 full-time employees. (more)

President Barack Obama’s ‘Plan B’ for tackling global warming is under attack in the courts and on Capitol Hill. (more)

Much of the current focus on the EPA these days surrounds its move to be the largest regulator of the nation’s economy by treating carbon as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. As controversial and arduous a task as that may be, it hasn’t precluded the agency from finding time to go after the most prosperous state in the nation. After years of threatening to do so, the EPA recently announced plans to take over Texas’ air quality permitting system. (more)

With a narrow 53-47 majority, the U.S. Senate appallingly voted for American economic unilateral disarmament. They voted against American jobs and coal-related jobs, manufacturers and business, our competitiveness, and affordable electricity and for ceding legislative responsibility to unelected judges and bureaucrats. (more)

A Senate resolution to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases failed narrowly Thursday, providing a temporary respite to environmental activists hoping to enact a mandatory cap on emissions before the end of the year. (more)

On Thursday, the Senate will vote on S.J.Res.26, a resolution to block EPA from usurping powers never delegated to it by Congress. Failure means allowing EPA to go forward, apparently in flagrant violation of our constitutional traditions simply because too many in Congress desire, but can’t bear to take responsibility for, more of the Obama agenda. (more)

In a last-ditch effort to pass a global-warming bill before this year’s mid-term election drastically alters the political landscape in Congress, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) have introduced the “American Power Act.” (more)

“Overburdensome and unnecessary federal regulations can choke the life out of small businesses by imposing costly and often-ineffectual remedies to problems that may not exist.” (more)

The Environmental Protection Agency unveiled a final rule on Thursday for regulating major emitters of greenhouse gases, like coal-fired power plants, under the Clean Air Act. (more)

From health care to energy independence, Barack Obama seems determined to drive our economy and our liberties over a cliff in his effort to remain faithful to the progressive agenda.
Falling poll numbers and off-year election losses in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts appear to have been no deterrent. (more)

There has been a flurry of activity in the past few weeks over EPA’s threat to regulate green house gas emissions through the Clean Air Act. Two weeks ago, a group of eight Democratic senators lead by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) sent a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson pleading that they slow the pace on any regulatory program that would cap carbon emissions. In response, Jackson expressed little sympathy for both the senators’ concerns and the potential economic harm to their constituents by outlining an enforcement effort that she claims will begin in 2011. (more)

The Environmental Protection Agency announced plans to regulate another pollutant without congressional approval last week. (more)

 (more)

In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court legislated from the bench, authorizing and indeed pushing EPA to control emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) for climate change purposes. This is a policy decision of immense economic and political magnitude that Congress never intended or approved when it enacted and amended the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). Regulating GHGs under the CAA leads inexorably to “absurd results,” including an economically-chilling administrative quagmire. To prevent GHG regulation from overwhelming agency administrative resources and stifling economic development, EPA proposes to suspend, for six years, the “major” source applicability thresholds for the CAA pre-construction and operating permits programs. That is, EPA proposes to amend the Act. This violation of the separation of powers compounds the constitutional crisis inherent in the Court’s substitution of its will for that of the people’s elected representatives. The small-business protections proposed in the Tailoring Rule are temporary, legally dubious, and incomplete. Even if courts uphold the Tailoring Rule, despite its flouting of clear statutory language, it will not avert the most absurd result of the Court’s misreading of the CAA:  regulation of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) program. EPA runs enormous political risks leading the charge for GHG regulations not approved by Congress. It is in the Agency’s best interest not to oppose legislative action to overturn the endangerment finding and Mass. v. EPA.  Response to the Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule (more)