House GOP threatens utilities for not toeing climate-change line

From Politico:

“GOP lawmakers and industry lobbyists are talking about legislation aimed at reining in power companies after some utilities were seen as being less than friendly to their efforts to block Obama administration climate change rules.

Several House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans and industry lobbyists are pushing for a “Ratepayer Protection Act,” a measure that would limit utilities’ ability to pass along costs to consumers, according to lobbyists close to the committee.

The discussions come after POLITICO last week reported that several top utility CEOs weren’t thrilled with a draft bill from Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) to preempt the EPA on climate change.

CEOs from American Electric Power, NextEra Energy, Southern Co. and Dominion Resources said to varying degrees that they support allowing the EPA to proceed on a “reasonable” time frame on greenhouse gas rules for power plants, petroleum refiners and other major stationary sources.”

In other words, Republicans in Congress want to use the power of government to punish utilities for being insufficiently opposed to greenhouse gas regulation. Lovely use of limited government there, folks.

Oh, and I just have to ask: What provision of the Constitution empowers Congress to interfere in the decisions of state Public Service Commissions in their regulation of state-chartered utilities?

– Jay Bookman

2,155 comments Add your comment

Jay

March 10th, 2011
5:35 am

FYI, I’ll be traveling the next couple of days, so posting will be lighter than usual. Stay classy, San Diego.

Gandalf, The White

March 10th, 2011
5:36 am

Moring Jay! 2nd, but really first… ;-)

DeborahinAthens

March 10th, 2011
6:36 am

As I say to anyone that listens, the Republican hypocrites are only strict Constitutionalists when it fits their Obama busting agenda. They are bought and paid for by corporations such as Koch, various mining/coal industries, etc. etc. etc. They were paid billions in campaign money, and now they must earn their keep. Forget about global warming for a moment. Why is it not better to have the utilities clean up their act, thereby cleaning up our air, and maybe, just maybe we can all breathe better? Athens, where I live, has worse air quality than Atlanta with all its traffic. Why is there so much particulate matter in the air here? We live downwind from one of Southern Company’s old power plants. Since SoCo is a very profitable company, what is wrong with them updating their plants? Cleaner air, more efficiency, jobs would be created….win, win all around. But NOT for the Repugs, since any success in this area would be considered one more win for Obama and that cannot be tolerated.

Independent

March 10th, 2011
6:38 am

Or maybe the Republicans are just protecting the ratepayers from rate increases due to conforming to regulations to limit the emissions of a non-toxic gas that you, I and every human being on the planet emits. A gas that has no direct negative actions on any plant or animal. A gas that has not been proven to cause disastrous results due to global warming – and one that, even if the US cuts its emmissions to zero, will still be emitted in extremely large quantities by China and India. A gas that is currently consumed by vegetation in the Amazon rain forest, but due to slash-and-burn farming practices, is not being consumed as much. Do we want the US utilities to limit their CO2 emissions, at a very large cost to each and every one of us (the utility doesn’t care, because they are guaranteed their profit)? All this to not make a dent in global CO2 levels and gambling on whether it will make a difference in the future?

Independent

March 10th, 2011
6:45 am

Deborah in Athens – even if you live downwind of a Southern Company power station, you will not feel any effects of its CO2 (the “greenhouse gas”) because it is colorless, odorless, and, in the levels emitted, totally harmless. If you want to talk about real pollution, such as Sulfur Dioxide, nitrogen oxides, etc., that is fine, but that is not what we are talking about. We can work on cleaning up the real pollutants, but CO2 is a natural byproduct of any burning process of organic matter, including in your own body. The EPA is talking about regulating CO2 based on its still unproven side effects caled “global climate change”.

Jack

March 10th, 2011
6:57 am

Companies large and small can’t expect to pass along all new operating expenses to their customers. Some internal expenses have to be cut or they’ll eventually price themselves out of business.

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 10th, 2011
7:01 am

Sounds like the GOP wants to usurp the 10th Amendment. I’ll await the 10thers to come here and castigate those GOP Congressmen for doing that. I just won’t hold my breath.

Vinny

March 10th, 2011
7:02 am

It’s obvious that they are just trying to protect the American consumer against some left wing b.s. that causes energy prices to increase. Anyone with a brain can figure that one out.

Jay, I think your blind hatred of everything Republican is killing brain cells.

Normal

March 10th, 2011
7:10 am

josef nix

March 10th, 2011
7:12 am

“FYI, I’ll be traveling the next couple of days, so posting will be lighter than usual. Stay classy, San Diego.”

Your postings may be, but with topics like this, you can bet your count will stay up there where it belongs! Be safe. Travelling abroad is dangerous these days… :-)

Normal

March 10th, 2011
7:14 am

By the way, This topic is just a lot of hot air…

The main cause of global warming is Congress.

MC

March 10th, 2011
7:15 am

Some of you seem to have forgotten all the rate increases already foisted on the public with no gain to the public. At least for the first time there just might be a real benefit. Nice try though morons.

Normal

March 10th, 2011
7:18 am

Jay,
If you get around Fifth and Main there used to be a bar called The Gay Cabrillio (not sure of the spelling anymore). If it’s still there, stop in and say “howdy” to Dave and George for me. Thanks!

MC

March 10th, 2011
7:19 am

And by the way. When is the last time any republican protected the public form rate increases that did absolutely nothing but generate increased revenues on the backs of consumers? Never is the obvious answer.

Normal

March 10th, 2011
7:20 am

12 posts in and at 0715 the first name called. What a world….

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 10th, 2011
7:24 am

Some of you seem to have forgotten all the rate increases already foisted on the public with no gain to the public.

Whaaa??? Here in GA??? The public did gain from Ga Power’s increases. You just have to own shares of Southern Co’s stock to gain. Shareholders and CEO’s are the first ones that benefit. The rest trickles down like golden showers from the great beyond.

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
7:27 am

It sounds like perhaps the Koch brothers have already made up their minds on what their little Republican puppets shall demand of power companies that prefer to move toward a cleaner, safer planet. It could be that the Koch brother with cancer has decided that if he has to die then why help make a better world for others. I wonder if the Kochs have Kids. The Kochs — A Classic case of too much money and power in the hands of the crazed.

Haywood Jablome

March 10th, 2011
7:31 am

The power companies have no power.

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
7:32 am

Independent needs to stick his mouth on a fossil fuel burning engine’s tailpipe and demonstrate his claim that you just cannot get too much CO2.

Haywood Jablome

March 10th, 2011
7:32 am

Anyone who can’t see the Koch brothers work here is a real Koch sucker.

Ragnar Dandouchebag

March 10th, 2011
7:38 am

Good morning all.

Now after my pretentious opening and obviously-I’m-smarter-than-you-and-I-read-a-thick-book-for-tools screen name, I will pontificate. Please note my brilliance.

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
7:44 am

Give a Hoot. Pollute.

This message brought to you by your Republican Party — the party that cares about you, the voter.

jasper

March 10th, 2011
7:45 am

Who cares! Scott Walker for President!!!

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
7:45 am

“Please note my brilliance.”

Hmmm…still looks dark. Try again. Maybe your light bulb is burnt out.

@@

March 10th, 2011
7:47 am

AmVet:

From downstairs:

The con men never manup about their bigotry, but at least their women admit it

Just trying to provide you with what you need…a man UP.

I’ve never encountered anyone as desperate as you.

Stay classy, San Diego.

There’s someone here named San Diego?

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 10th, 2011
7:53 am

Normal

I can guarantee you that bear didn’t run across somebody from Alabama. If so, he’d be a rug instead. :)

Peadawg

March 10th, 2011
7:56 am

So it the fuss on this one about whether or not it’s a good bill(it is by the way) or about limited gov’t?

Independent

March 10th, 2011
8:00 am

I did not say that CO2 could not be toxic, i said “at levels emitted”. See the article clip below for toxicity:

Outdoors the typical carbon dioxide CO2 level in air is 300 ppm to 400 ppm. 400 ppm is a 0.04% concentration of a gas in air.

A comparison with even a relatively low level of indoor CO2 (600 ppm and higher) may indicate a lack of adequate fresh air entering a building.

Basic Information about Concentrations of CO2 in Air
1,000,000 ppm of a gas = 100 % concentration of the gas, and 10,000 ppm of a gas in air = a 1% concentration.
At 1% concentration of carbon dioxide CO2 (10,000 parts per million or ppm) and under continuous exposure at that level, such as in an auditorium filled with occupants and poor fresh air ventilation, some occupants are likely to feel drowsy.
The concentration of carbon dioxide must be over about 2% (20,000 ppm) before most people are aware of its presence unless the odor of an associated material (auto exhaust or fermenting yeast, for instance) is present at lower concentrations.
Above 2%, carbon dioxide may cause a feeling of heaviness in the chest and/or more frequent and deeper respirations.
If exposure continues at that level for several hours, minimal “acidosis” (an acid condition of the blood) may occur but more frequently is absent.
Breathing rate doubles at 3% CO2 and is four times the normal rate at 5% CO2.
Toxic levels of carbon dioxide: at levels above 5%, concentration CO2 is directly toxic. [At lower levels we may be seeing effects of a reduction in the relative amount of oxygen rather than direct toxicity of CO2.]
Symptoms of high or prolonged exposure to carbon dioxide include headache, increased heart rate, dizziness, fatigue, rapid breathing, visual and hearing dysfunctions. Exposure to higher levels may cause unconsciousness or death within minutes of exposure.

Distinguishing between high carbon dioxide levels CO2 and low oxygen levels O2 in air
What may be unclear in some cases is whether the sub-acute (sub-toxic) effects at modestly-elevated levels of CO2 in air stem from more from exposure to higher levels of carbon dioxide or whether they are due to reduced levels of oxygen. In an enclosed space such as a tight home or an enclosed basement or work space, increasing the level of CO2 is likely to simultaneously reduce the proportion of Oxygen (O2) in that same breathing air.

Some experts opine that complaints that seem to be associated with high CO2 problem in many if not most circumstances are likely to be actually due to the corresponding reduction in available oxygen in air rather than high toxicity levels of CO2 in the air. As carbon dioxide levels climb above a few percent the relative proportions of gases making up that air change: the concentration of oxygen in the air inhaled is reduced as the amount of CO2 is increased.

Note the difference between normal air – .04% CO2 and the lowest level of noticing any effects – 1%, that is 25 times normal levels.

Also note the last paragraph – it is not known if CO2 toxicity is directly related to the buildup of CO2 or the depletion of oxygen. In other words, if you have an atmosphere of 20.8% oxygen (normal) 5% CO2 and the rest nitrogen, will the CO2 then be toxic? I don’t know and apparently there is disagreements from the experts. But we are a long way from even being at the 1% atmospheric CO2 that would cause any direct effects on humans.

the watch dog

March 10th, 2011
8:01 am

The planet can be saved from global warming by wind power. Electricity produced from the endlessly nenewable source, the wind. One wind turbine[the Nacelle] can generate 2 gigawatts of electricity, enough to supply all the energy needs for 750,000 homes for pennies a kilowatt hour. Now, it does have a large foot print requiring 100 acres. Taxes on this source of energy could pay the expenses of all the schools in the area. All of the land that is being used for agriculture that uses illegal immigrants could be used to generate income in a new clean industrial way. It just does not get any better than that.
. Clemson received a 88 million dollar grant to study wind power, U of Georgia could get some of those grants. Needless to say, co2 gas generated by coal and all other fossil fuels has contributed and will continue to contribute to respitory disease, unless alternative fuel[clean] like wind energy is used. “When you can’t breathe nothing else matters”.

Normal

March 10th, 2011
8:02 am

SoCo,
I don’t think anyone from Alabama would be in P.E.T.A….Nope, sure don’t…

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:04 am

“I don’t think anyone from Alabama would be in P.E.T.A….Nope, sure don’t…

Sure they are! PETA = People Eating Tasty Animals

Normal

March 10th, 2011
8:07 am

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

March 10th, 2011
8:09 am

Jay, Jay, Jay:

“Oh, and I just have to ask: What provision of the Constitution empowers Congress to interfere in the decisions of state Public Service Commissions in their regulation of state-chartered utilities?”

Why the 10th Amendment of course …………. some of their supplies, employees, equipment, the vehicles to transport same and even the air the management and employees breathe comes from “out of state”. The SCOTUS has used such judicial stupidity to justify Congressional actions in the past so why not now?

However, based on your feelings on this I assume you support Montana’s effort to regulate their own firearms laws( with no federal interference) for weapons made solely in that state ??

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

March 10th, 2011
8:10 am

Does anyone know if Cynthia is sick, alive, on vacation or has been taken up to the mother ship?

Peadawg

March 10th, 2011
8:13 am

It seems like, being a liberal who likes regulating businesses, Jay would be all over this like a fat kid on a cupcake. But since it’s Republicans who are going this, it’s bad. Talk about hypocrisy…

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
8:14 am

Bad green power. Bad. Go forth and burn thine coal for it is in abundance within mine stores, for a fair market price. We also have large quantities of coal ash available at a very good price. Mine little Republican puppets will tell you what to do. If you don’t like it, go frack yourselves.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

March 10th, 2011
8:17 am

Four little words that mean so much !

“UNIONS LOSE IN WI”

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
8:17 am

Republicans must step in at times like these and impose regulations that are for the good of the few — increased pollution is good. Trust me. We have generated numerous studies that prove it.

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
8:20 am

Georgia’s state workers win a major victory in the latest rounds of healthcare insurance premiums. They will only see a small 20% increase while giving up minor bits of past coverage along with a few other little changes hardly worth mentioning.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

March 10th, 2011
8:22 am

“Wis. Dems say AWOL lawmakers will return”

Lock them out !

Normal

March 10th, 2011
8:22 am

“UNIONS LOSE IN WI”

Better wait for all of the court time ends…

md

March 10th, 2011
8:26 am

I see the classy folks are out early this morning……….

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
8:27 am

Georgia’s Republicans have scored another major success in the struggle to eliminate socialism by further cutting away Medicaid funding for the worthless amongst us and shifting that money to the hardly worthy state employees to help offset the cost to the tax payer of their luxury healthcare. Good job, Republicans. Keep up the good work.

carlosgvv

March 10th, 2011
8:27 am

Jay, the two key words in your post are “industry lobbyists”. The energy industry as a whole is opposed to any climate change rules because this will cost them money. Their priorities are strictly short-term gain and they could not possibly care less if their pollution is permanently damaging the future environment.

Jimmy62

March 10th, 2011
8:27 am

Umm… Funny time to raise objections to federal meddling in state utilities, considering if anything this could simply be seen as a rollback of Democrats at the federal level meddling. But that would be too honest for you to point out, huh? Honesty and full disclosure isn’t really in your playbook, is it?

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
8:28 am

Lock them out !

That would be against the law, loser.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

March 10th, 2011
8:29 am

Well, you can still breathe the air and far as I’m concerned I won’t be around when the CO2 levels get so high they’re poison. By that time people will have gills or something. Just keep my taxes low. And how’s my share of the new GA Power nuculer power plants doing?

Have a good day everybody.

Keep up the good fight!

March 10th, 2011
8:29 am

Anyone seen a Fat Lady? Because I dont hear no singing yet…..nothing is over until we decide it is. Governor Wormer’s days are numbered.

Lock them out! — yes, that is the ticket, lock out elected officials….. what flag do you waive for a coup?

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 10th, 2011
8:31 am

Sure they are! PETA = People Eating Tasty Animals

I am a lifetime member, too!!!!!

Of course, I see the people advocating for more regulation from the Fed’s have shown up this morning….

Peadawg

March 10th, 2011
8:32 am

“Wis. Dems say AWOL lawmakers will return” – Fire their arses and send them packing. I can only imagine if I was AWOL at my job for this long…

md

March 10th, 2011
8:32 am

“The discussions come after POLITICO last week reported that several top utility CEOs weren’t thrilled with a draft bill from Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) to preempt the EPA on climate change.”

And this is the paragraph that really tells what’s happening…………..Congress (good or bad) is doing what it was designed to do vs an administration trying to circumvent the system by implementing policy directly through the EPA.

big un

March 10th, 2011
8:35 am

When changing the oil in my tractor, do you think it would be better to let the oil return to nature through the soil or would a trout stream be better? You know, earth to earth…

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
8:36 am

Our extensive studies prove that ash from coal burning can be “safely” used to construct blocks for use in affordable housing, as a “safe” and cost effective extender in foods such as peanut butter and cheese, and even as garden fertilizer for the home gardener or asphalt extender for paved roads as well as a replacement for costly gravel on unpaved roads. The heavy metal content actually has been proven to improve the products resistance to redistribution in heavy winds. We like to think of it as the anti-socialist miracle material.

godless heathen

March 10th, 2011
8:36 am

“The planet can be saved from global warming by wind power. Electricity produced from the endlessly nenewable source, the wind. One wind turbine[the Nacelle] can generate 2 gigawatts of electricity, enough to supply all the energy needs for 750,000 homes for pennies a kilowatt hour.”

Well nothing is free. Taking energy out of the wind and using that energy in Ipods could have a detrimental effect that has not been completely evaluated. What happens to the earth when we interrupt the free flow of air about its surface?

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:38 am

“I can only imagine if I was AWOL at my job for this long”

They ARE doing their jobs…and I once refused to enter a room to do my work for a week and didn’t get fired for it, because there were toxic fumes in there. Toxic bill = toxic fumes

Keep up the good fight!

March 10th, 2011
8:38 am

Oh great….The Anti-Sailing crowd is here. Ban the Sails!

Koch Classics

March 10th, 2011
8:42 am

EPA! Who needs those commie socialists. They’re a bunch of overpaid fracking idiots and a burden on hard working tax payers like each of you and me. That clean water act did nothing to improve our earnings. Nothing! It’s criminal, I tell you!

Peadawg

March 10th, 2011
8:42 am

“They ARE doing their jobs – I didn’t know running away for doing their job. Good example they are setting!!!!! :roll:

“Toxic bill = toxic fumes” – Here’s your sign.

md

March 10th, 2011
8:43 am

“What happens to the earth when we interrupt the free flow of air about its surface?”

I think the theory is that the planet would stop turning and would then be subject to the gravitational pull of Alpha Centauri and it wouldn’t be a pretty sight……….the studies have shown that man made wind stoppage would also decimate the sail boat industry, which would increase the necessity for feul powered boats around the globe……….back to square one.

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 10th, 2011
8:44 am

“Wis. Dems say AWOL lawmakers will return” – Fire their arses and send them packing. I can only imagine if I was AWOL at my job for this long…

Elected officials can’t be fired without an election, which will probably send a few GOPers packing once the recall signatures are done being collected. If you want a job that you can be AWOL like that, run for office.

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:44 am

“Congress (good or bad) is doing what it was designed to do vs an administration trying to circumvent the system by implementing policy directly through the EPA”

What part of PREEMPT did you not understand?

“preempt the EPA on climate change”

“CEOs from American Electric Power, NextEra Energy, Southern Co. and Dominion Resources said to varying degrees that they support allowing the EPA to proceed on a “reasonable” time frame on greenhouse gas rules for power plants, petroleum refiners and other major stationary sources.”

They PREFER the EPA plan. You REALLY need to work on your reading comprehension.

md

March 10th, 2011
8:46 am

“Toxic bill = toxic fumes”

Hmmmm…….the way I see it, toxic fumes would be harmful to everybody……that bill, not so much.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

March 10th, 2011
8:49 am

Good morning all. A bizarre argument, Mr. Bookman. Because a handful of large utilities manipulated the leftist government into writing rules that favor them, it is inappropriate for the Congress to rescind the restrictions. Why do leftists always favor higher costs for consumers?

md

March 10th, 2011
8:49 am

“What part of PREEMPT did you not understand? ”

My reading comprehension??

Really??

Yes, preempt the administration from implementing policy through the epa vs through congress…….

Yes, one of us certainly does need to work on reading comprehension, but it isn’t me.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

March 10th, 2011
8:49 am

First choice, They abandoned their jobs. Lock them out for this term and let the courts decide.

Second choice, arrest them all, put them in jail and let the courts work it out.

Third choice, give all their offices to your Republican staff and let them have the basement.

In other words ……………. payback !

Paul

March 10th, 2011
8:49 am

Republican lawmakers draft a proposal opposed by corporate supporters.

I think I woke up in the Twilight Zone.

Jay,

Have a great trip. Real Mexican food at a hole-in-the wall. Balboa Park and the museums. The San Diego Zoo. Hope it’s not all work and no play for you.

md

“vs an administration trying to circumvent the system by implementing policy directly through the EPA.”

I believe the stated purpose of agencies is to implement policy. It’s why Congress created’em.

Regarding the Wisconsin Democrats: did you not hear the news from late yesterday? Republicans finally read the rules and found they don’t need a quorum for nonfiscal issues, so they stripped the spending part from the proposal, a special committee voted to pass it and they went home. Turn out the lights, the party’s over.

Oh, and those who considered the Democrats’ out of state move to be a good political move to meet their goal…. you can’t acknowledge that and criticize Republicans for pulling a clever political move to meet their goal.

Well, you could, I suppose. Just wouldn’t be consistent.

JKL2

March 10th, 2011
8:50 am

I’ll agree somewhat with congress overstepping it’s bounds. On the other hand, I’ll take passing legislation over just letting an agency pass regulations that affect us all without oversite any day of the week.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

March 10th, 2011
8:50 am

P.S.

I hope they cut off their pay checks and health insurance while they were gone.

md

March 10th, 2011
8:50 am

“They PREFER the EPA plan. You REALLY need to work on your reading comprehension.”

And if you could comprehend, you would realize that what they prefer has no bearing on the actual process itself…………………..

Peadawg

March 10th, 2011
8:51 am

“I hope they cut off their pay checks and health insurance while they were gone.” – AMEN!!!!

Ragnar Danneskjöld

March 10th, 2011
8:51 am

Why is the Federal government in this issue at all? The pollution in Atlanta does not come from Alabama or South Carolina or Tennessee or Florida. The more rational course would be to allow each state to set its own standards.

WOW

March 10th, 2011
8:51 am

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:52 am

“Elected officials can’t be fired without an election”

They will be in Michigan if that state passes it’s “budget” bill

Paul

March 10th, 2011
8:52 am

Left wing management

March 10th, 2011
8:52 am

0311/0317 – 1811/1801 “UNIONS LOSE IN WI”

Does the word Pyrrhic mean anything to you?

WOW

March 10th, 2011
8:52 am

“In other words, Republicans in Congress want to use the power of government to punish utilities for being insufficiently opposed to greenhouse gas regulation.”

Guess governments gotta be good for something!

Hey, where is Al Gore these days?

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:54 am

“Yes, preempt the administration from implementing policy through the epa vs through congress”

Nope. Read it again, then read it again until you understand it. The energy companies PREFER THE EPA PLAN:
“Resources said to varying degrees that they support allowing the EPA to proceed “

md

March 10th, 2011
8:54 am

“I believe the stated purpose of agencies is to implement policy. It’s why Congress created’em.”

Yes, policy already agreed upon through Congress………not pro-active policy and regulations that bypass congress……..

This is all about Congress NOT passing an energy bill to the liking of the administration………

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:55 am

“Republican lawmakers draft a proposal opposed by corporate supporters.”

Think you can explain that to md?

Dave R.

March 10th, 2011
8:55 am

“Oh, and I just have to ask: What provision of the Constitution empowers Congress to interfere in the decisions of state Public Service Commissions in their regulation of state-chartered utilities?”

Jay, Jay, Jay. Why all this sudden concern for the Constitution? It’s not as if you didn’t feel like trampling all over it when it suited YOUR agenda, did ya?

As I stated when your concern for the Constitution was so great during attempts to repeal Obamacare, if you kiddies on the left hadn’t overreached so much in your attempts to Federalize everything, the adults now in charge wouldn’t have to use the power of the Fed to fix your problems.

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 10th, 2011
8:56 am

that bill, not so much.

Government employee money spends just like private sector employee money. What may seem logical and a good idea could end up adding to the economic death spiral in the long run.

Paul

March 10th, 2011
8:56 am

JKL2

“On the other hand, I’ll take passing legislation over just letting an agency pass regulations that affect us all without oversite any day of the week.”

Congress has oversight.

Take Wikipedia with a grain of salt, but this extract is pretty good:

“The day-to-day enforcement and administration of federal laws is in the hands of the various federal executive departments, created by Congress to deal with specific areas of national and international affairs. The heads of the 15 departments, chosen by the President and approved with the “advice and consent” of the U.S. Senate, form a council of advisers generally known as the President’s “Cabinet”. In addition to departments, there are a number of staff organizations grouped into the Executive Office of the President. These include the White House staff, the National Security Council, the Office of Management and Budget, the Council of Economic Advisers, the Council on Environmental Quality, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the Office of National Drug Control Policy and the Office of Science and Technology Policy. The employees in these United States government agencies are called federal civil servants.

There are also independent agencies such as the United States Postal Service, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Environmental Protection Agency, and the United States Agency for International Development. In addition, there are government-owned corporations such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.”

See, Congress sets them up and provides oversight. If Congress feels they’re overstepping, they intervene. But to say they’re going off on their own merry way without oversight and they aren’t ‘Constitutional’ is not correct.

WOW

March 10th, 2011
8:56 am

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:57 am

“you can’t acknowledge that and criticize Republicans for pulling a clever political move to meet their goal.”

No, maybe not…but we CAN criticise them for claiming for 22 days that it was all about the BUDGET…and now, all of a sudden it isn’t. Which is EXACTLY what the Democratic legistlators have been claiming all along: it’s NOTHING TO DO with the budget. It’s all about union stripping and the R’s have just made it plain and clear that it IS exactly that.

WOW

March 10th, 2011
8:57 am

“What provision of the Constitution empowers Congress to interfere in the decisions of state Public Service Commissions in their regulation of state-chartered utilities?’

Better question: What provision of the Constitution gives the government the right to mandate health care?

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
8:58 am

“you would realize that what they prefer has no bearing on the actual process itself”

I accept your apology

Road Scholar

March 10th, 2011
8:58 am

How do these republicans address their infringement on a private/public company doing business? Isn’t this against thir mantra, ” Businesses are good, no matter what; let’s give them a tax break!”?

Haven’t they raled about the Demo’s trying to influence private business decisions by legislating outcomes?

Paul

March 10th, 2011
8:59 am

Doggone/GA

“Think you can explain that to md?

Are you kidding? I’m still trying to get my mind around it!!!

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 10th, 2011
8:59 am

I’ll agree somewhat with congress overstepping it’s bounds. On the other hand, I’ll take passing legislation over just letting an agency pass regulations that affect us all without oversite any day of the week.

Agencies can only pass regulations that follow legislation in effect. Agency regulations are nothing more than rules for them to follow to implement legislation already in effect. They do not “create” new legislation. Only Congress can do that.

Paul

I think both sides pulled bad moves, but the truth will eventually be known to all.

Doggone/GA

March 10th, 2011
9:00 am

“Are you kidding? I’m still trying to get my mind around it!!!”

Yeah, it’s off the wall – no doubt!

Paul

March 10th, 2011
9:01 am

Dave R

“Jay, Jay, Jay. Why all this sudden concern for the Constitution?”

Don’t think that was Jay’s point. I think he was referring to Republican efforts to have every proposal cite the part of the Constitution that authorizes it. So, in this case, Republicans are proposing something and Jay is merely asking Republicans to follow their own rules and cite the appropriate Constitutional provision.

md

March 10th, 2011
9:02 am

“Nope. Read it again, then read it again until you understand it. The energy companies PREFER THE EPA PLAN:
“Resources said to varying degrees that they support allowing the EPA to proceed “”

To understand it doggone, one needs to know what is going on in the big picture………..

I’ll say it again, it matters not what those CEO’s prefer…….this whole scenario is about legislating through agencies………and in doing so, bypassing Congress………

So if you had any idea of what was going on, you would understand that the GOP is writing legislation to control the EPA, thus PREEMPTING what the EPA is trying to implement on it’s own…..or in this case, what the administration has told it to do.

Road Scholar

March 10th, 2011
9:03 am

WOW: When you get one of the untreatable virus or infection (which are on the increase), or get infected by an epidemic, re-ask your question. Hopefully you will live long enough to get an answer.

WOW

March 10th, 2011
9:04 am

Libs,

The American people couldn’t care less about global warming/climate change/weather patters or whatever you guys are calling it these days. Why, because unemployment is sky high, jobs are hard to come by and the president of the US has vindicated George W. Bush.

james

March 10th, 2011
9:04 am

So us liberal thinkers fully believe in evolution but what should be the ultimate evolver- ol’ mother nature- needs DC to save her from mankind.

WOW

March 10th, 2011
9:06 am

Road Scholar

Nice of you to divert and try and change the subject.

md

March 10th, 2011
9:06 am

“Agencies can only pass regulations that follow legislation in effect. Agency regulations are nothing more than rules for them to follow to implement legislation already in effect. They do not “create” new legislation. Only Congress can do that.”

Thank You soco………at least one other person here understands what this is all about………

WOW

March 10th, 2011
9:06 am

“needs DC to save her from mankind.”

You’ll always have Al Gore but then again, he is in court right now.

Normal

March 10th, 2011
9:07 am

Peadawg, Scout,
You guys sound like you want the Republicans to act like the Gestapo.
“arrest their arses, throw them in jail, Fire them”!

You guys are really funny today! :lol:

WOW

March 10th, 2011
9:07 am