Showing posts with label Abolish the EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abolish the EPA. Show all posts

April 30, 2012

SandBoxBlogs: Fox News "Top EPA official resigns after 'crucify' comment"

"A top EPA official has resigned after coming under scrutiny for 2010 remarks in which he compared the agency's enforcement strategy to Roman crucifixion.

Al Armendariz, the top environmental official in the oil-rich South and Southwest region, resigned in a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson on Sunday, saying he did not want to be a distraction for the agency. The resignation is effective Monday.

"As I have expressed publicly, and to you directly, I regret comments I made several years ago that do not in any way reflect my work as regional administrator. As importantly, they do not represent the work you have overseen as EPA administrator," he wrote. "I take great pride in having built a career based on integrity and hard work. These are the principles that guide me personally as well. While I feel there is much work that remains to be done for the people of this country in the region that I serve, after a  great deal of thought and careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that my continued service will distract you and the agency from its important work."...."(Read more?  Click title)

"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
 

April 23, 2012

SandBoxBlogs: Town Hall "Rationally Green"

Paul Jacob:
"Environmental laws are very human constructs. They are not examples of divine intervention set to doing one thing and one thing only, “saving the environment.” (Indeed, it's a truism of ecology: “You cannot do just one thing.”) There’s been a problem with the laws that came into being right around the first “Earth Day” in 1970. And this original “sin” is getting more and more obvious.

The trouble with environmental legislation in the U.S. has been the will to micromanage. Instead of setting standards (cleaner water, cleaner air) or procedures (property rights, tort rules, standing in pollution cases) the federal government, along with the bulk of the states that piled on, has prohibited some activity or technologies, and mandated others.

This cleaned up some of the worst abuses. But it did so at great cost, and it set up bureaucratic rules doomed to obsolescence. As economist Bruce Yandle puts it,
Students of regulation know there are three types of regulatory instruments that may be used when governments choose to regulate: performance standards that set limits or goals without mandating how the outcomes must be achieved, technology standards that specify how the goal will be achieved, and incentives such as fees, prices, and taxes that put a price on the activity to be limited. . . . Any one of the three can generate a desired outcome, but it is generally agreed that technology standards — the approach mandated by our basic environmental statutes — are the most costly and therefore least effective regulatory choice."
(Read more?  Click title)

"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."

March 31, 2012

SandBoxBlogs: Town Hall "You are Invited to Occupy the Job-Killing, Wealth-Robbing EPA Mafia"

John Ransom:
"Regular readers have been able to follow along as I chronicle the 17,384-employee wrecking crew that is the EPA. This week the racket put the coal industry out of business, helped raise electricty prices for everyone, and did it all for the low, low price of $9,000,000,000 per year.

Underpinning the confidence game is deceptive science that manufactures evidence of climate change/global warming by pointing out people's natural curosity about natural weather events.       

A New York Times story that ran in the Environment section on March 28, 2012 is a textbook example of all that is wrong with the supposed “scientific” method liberals are employing to bolster climate change arguments.

It’s not so much that they argue for bad science, but that they argue for no science by postulating only theories that fall within their preconceived notions that every weather event can be tied to global climate change. And if it can’t, by God, it will be when we get through!...."  (Read more?  Click title)

"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."