NOT IN EPA'S JOB DESCRIPTION

This year's biggest issue!! Step #1 of Cap&Trade.

This week, the U.S. Senate is expected to vote on a “resolution of disapproval,” sponsored by Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, to stop the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from “enacting” controversial global warming policies through the regulatory back door.

The importance of this vote is difficult to exaggerate. Nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional system of separated powers and democratic accountability hangs in the balance.

The Murkowski resolution would overturn the EPA’s “endangerment finding,” a December 2009 rulemaking in which the agency concluded that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and welfare. The endangerment finding is both trigger and precedent for sweeping policy changes that Congress never approved. America could end up with a regulatory regime more costly and intrusive than any climate bill or treaty the Senate has declined to pass or ratify, yet without people’s representatives ever voting on it.

Unless stopped, the EPA will be in a position to determine the stringency of fuel economy standards for the auto industry, set climate policy for the nation, and even amend the Clean Air Act — powers never delegated to the agency by Congress.

The Murkowski resolution puts a simple question squarely before the Senate: Who shall make climate policy? Her position is simply that climate policy is too important to be made by non-elected bureaucrats.

By issuing an endangerment finding, the EPA will deal itself into a position to control the economy — both mobile and stationary sources — for climate change purposes. Yet the Clean Air Act gives the EPA no such authority. Congress enacted the Clean Air Act in 1970, decades before global warming was even a topic of congressional debate. That is why phrases like “greenhouse gas,” “greenhouse effect,” and “global climate change” appear nowhere in the statute.

Liberals know that regulatory zealotry has a long history of trampling on constitutional principle, and many lawmakers would simply prefer to let the non-elected bureaucrats at the EPA take the heat for “enacting” costly climate policies.

Who shall make climate policy — lawmakers who must answer to the people at the ballot box OR politically unaccountable bureaucrats, trial lawyers, and activist judges appointed for life?



-The Senate is expected to vote on the Murkowski resolution this week. Nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional system of separated powers and democratic accountability hangs in the balance.-

When 'GREEN' just isn't funny!

A disturbing Super Bowl commercial...in humor, but sure drives the point of the intentions of the 'Eco-Extremists". This is a window into their perfect world thinking.



My commercial would show the financial rape of the economy these treehugging extremists inflict on People and their wallets.

I would show dust bowl conditions they created in the most fertile productive land in Calif because of a fish. I would show the timber industry cranking out lumber that now costs you triple the sq ft to build a home that also has to be 'green' and because additional housing regulations imposed, keeps you from ever moving out of your old house. I would show how stimulus tax dollars used to build roads with bridges for turtles while existing bridges in the USA crumble. I would show how every infrastructure project takes years to become 'shovel ready' due to impact studies. How 'permits' are the current police that stunt any innovation and creative frugalism. I would show how 'credit bureaus' have become the economy police with more control than your banks. I would show the nutrition police, education police, communication police,and the list goes on.

The green police are not little men with clipboards, ticket pads or handcuffs.....the satire of this commercial is the police are actually all the Regulations and Laws imposed with so-called good intentions that have crippled the American Dream.

Most assume the Green Police are focused on ‘protecting and conserving the Earth’ and are now a 'part of modern life' and I say,
"Real Americans are not pro-dirty water. We don't like pollution. Real conservatives would rather recycle than throw things away needlessly. We love a clean environment, too. But those of us who still value liberty and freedom are wary because radical environmentalists appear to embrace the "green police" concept and are sucking the 'Life' out of those humans that inhabit this earth....they suck the life out of true Americanism.

Government will be taking over 70% of our Economy

Michelle BAchman reporting on a bill that Barney Frank introduced after everyone left DC last week. It will be voted on today, I think. It will rework the entire financial industry and how everyone gets credit. Please watch. PLEASE send to other groups you are part of. PLEASE send to everyone you know via e-mail. The House is likely to pass this. We will have to head it off in the Senate. PLEASE act on this.

This is a Bigger deal than cap&trade or the horrible healthcare fiasco!!

http://www.breitbart.tv/bachmann-on-the-b-cast-a-conservative-call-to-action/

Wood Stoves, School Buses & the AMISH

"SENATE PULLS ANOTHER FAST ONE BY ATTACHING AMENDMENT TO INTERIOR APPROPRIATIONS BILL...THEY ARE COMING AFTER WOOD-BURNING STOVES NOW.

...they will force Crap and Trade down our throats and then take away any and all other choices for energy. We will have no choice but to enter their newest Ponzi Scheme. This Congress and the Greens are out of control.


*******************
Washington, D.C. - The U.S. Senate has approved legislation that included an amendment by Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del) directing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to study the environmental impact of black carbon, and to find the most cost-effective ways to reduce its emissions to improve public health and reduce global warming.
Carper’s amendment, similar to his original bipartisan bill S. 849, was included in the Senate Interior Appropriations Bill (H.R. 2996), which passed the Senate by a vote of 77-21 late last week.

The amendment directs the EPA to do a four-phase study that identifies global and domestic black carbon sources and cost-effective reduction technologies; the public health, economic and climate impacts of black carbon; opportunities for current and possible international funding for mitigation and opportunities for future research and development.

"We must act to reduce black carbon - a dangerous pollutant emitted by old, dirty diesel engines like those in some school buses and thought to be the second largest contributor to global warming after carbon dioxide," Carper said in a prepared statement.
While black carbon in the United States comes mainly from old, dirty diesel engines, internationally, black carbon comes from old cook stoves, inefficient industrial process and from dirty diesel engines.

The black carbon study will be due to the Congress one year after this legislation is enacted into law later this year. A final version of the Interior appropriations bill will be sent to President Obama later this year, once it has been reconciled with a House version of the bill.

Cap-and-Trade Impact on Jobs

Cap and trade is an environmental measure that looks to cut down on pollution from U.S. companies. It would meet that goal by putting a "cap" on how much carbon businesses can emit. (And the 'trade' part is where companies that produce more than others can 'trade' the difference and the impact on the environment will be the SAME...the only difference will be in the money that brokers will charge to create a new commodity and we get to pay their wages by increased prices.)

Proponents say it needs to be done to protect the environment, but those against the measure say it will be far too expensive. A big concern is that the bill could result in job losses. (...for the little people, but not WallStreet types or the Al Gores that have been gearing up for this.)

The idea is to have a positive impact on greenhouse gas pollution, but many say government regulations would have a negative impact on the country. "It does control the carbon, but in effect people are going to end up paying for it. It's going to cost people somewhere. It's not free," said University of Nebraska-Lincoln agricultural economist Matt Stockton.

Changing to greener practices or paying the price to pollute would cost these corporations. Those costs could be handed down. "Really to consumers in general. It's a deliberate attempt to increase the cost of energy with the objective of coercing people into using less energy," said Representative Adrian Smith.

Using less energy drives demand down, something proponents of cap and trade say isn't a bad thing. "We need energy reform. We need to end our dependence on foreign oil," said Brad Johnson, climatologist at the Center for American Progress. (That being the case, than why not take stimulus money and build oil refineries and develop new oil fields here. OIL is the only commodity we rely on OTHER countries for. Don't mess with power plants and natural gas.)

But, becoming more efficient means some may lose their jobs. "There's less demand and there will be less growth in that industry. There's going to be loss of jobs," said Stockton. (Less growth period = domino effect)

Another concern is those jobs going to other countries. Countries that don't have restrictions. "If you put enough costs on production then production goes to another country. It goes to another place where it's cheaper," Stockton said.

Supporters say these companies are aleady employing less people as they find ways to do business at a lower cost. They also believe this plan would create jobs. Stockton isn't buying it. "I don't know if you create any new jobs. You just change where they work."

It's impossible to predict the number of jobs that could be lost. It's also impossible to predict if that number would equal the amount of new employment established. It comes down to personal conviction and deciding what price you're willing to pay. (and how much added expense going to that job makes it a loose-loose scenario)

CAP AND TRADE BIGGEST WELFARE PROGRAM IN HISTORY

Well, It Passed!
No Republicans voted for it plus 30 Dems with 11 not bothering to show up and vote. (8D&3R's) But then without READING the bill before voting...all the votes should have been no. Who does that?? Would you sign your name to anything without reading it first, let alone the most controversial piece of legislation in history?!

"CAP AND TRADE BIGGEST WELFARE PROGRAM IN HISTORY!

Looky what I found buried in the HR 2454...

Energy Refund Program and Entitlements-the Largest Welfare Program in History
The bill provides for the Secretary of HHS, in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture to provide monthly cash payments ("energy stamps") to reimburse certain low-income households for the estimated loss in their purchasing power resulting from H.R. 2454. The bill establishes uniform national standards of eligibility to ensure that States may "seamlessly" administer the "energy-stamps" program with the Food Stamp program. The bill establishes eligibility for individuals at 150 percent of poverty, and phased out thereafter. The energy stamps program would reach approximately 65 million individuals making it a larger program than TANF, food stamps, or even Medicaid. Despite its massive scope, over 200 million Americans would receive no benefits under this program. The bill would also require the EIA to estimate the annual total loss in purchasing power that would result from this bill for households of each size with gross income equal to 150 percent of poverty based on the projected total market value of all compliance costs (including cost of emission allowances) for determination of monthly energy refund amount. The bill provides that cash should be delivered by direct deposit into individual accounts, the State's electronic benefit transfer system, or another Federal or State mechanism approved by the HHS Secretary. The bill provides that the value of the refund shall not be considered income or resources for purposes of Federal, State or local laws.

http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr2454

then, all the heals of all the voting.....

"RED ALERT!!! EPA SUPRESSES INTERNAL GLOBAL WARMING STUDY!!!

Washington, D.C., June 24, 2009—The Competitive Enterprise Institute today charged that a senior official of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency actively suppressed a scientific analysis of climate change because of political pressure to support the Administration’s policy agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.

http://cei.org/news-release/2009/06/24/epa-suppresses-internal-global-warming-study

Are you pissed yet? Be resolved!

The more "bad" legislation that is passed, the easier it will be in 2010 to use the voting record to hold our representatives accountable.

Has anyone ever thought about the fact that other countries would have to do the same thing they want us to do in order to help so-called global warming. The US is only 1 country in a very large world and these stupid people in D.C. think it would do any good if only we did it! And at what COST do we need be the ones to set example for the rest of the world to follow suit? Either they are very dumb or they think we are! ....and soon the rest of the world will think we are all dumb too.

Call Now! Cap and Trade Nightmare!

TODAY, Congress will vote on the destructive cap-and-tax legislation. You know it's horrible. You know it will destroy prosperity. You know it will enable the government to transform the economy—which is never a good idea. You know it will cause energy prices to soar.

And you know what to do. If you have the time, please contact to your Representatives as this debate unfolds. The Capitol Switchboard number is (202) 224-3121.

Also, here is a list of key votes that, based on this morning's key procedural vote, need to be focused on. Please help! The nation's future prosperity depends on it: http://www.therightmovement.com/index.php?option=com_idoblog&task=viewpost&id=309&Itemid=224

Please, this just may be one of the most important calls you could make in your life. I AM NOT JOKING! The passing of this bill will sink the US deeper into recession and may ultimately destroy us. If this sounds like a scare tactic, GOOD! Make the call. Tell your representative that if they vote on this bill they will never again see see a vote from you, so long as you live.


President Barack Obama has made the measure a top priority of his first year in office. The president, along with White House aides and House Democratic leaders scrambled for the votes to assure passage. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has pledged to pass the bill passed before lawmakers leave on their July 4 vacation.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D992ETLG0&show_article=1

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Another LONG video...but, well worth the watch.
The BBC guys say it like it is and their top scientists don't have an agenda!


.

Glenn Beck: Save the planet...don't grow food

Do you Notice with all the talk in todays politics, that not much gets said about AGRICULTURE? I do remember a time when farmers drove their big tractors and combines into DC and circled the White House...but generally the Voice of farmers and ranchers is seldom heard. We are by nature just too damn busy!! So when Glenn Beck brought up ag related commentary two days in a row, one on Beef and the other on Crops, generally on food production...it got my attention!

Here's the jist of what he said on his program....

During the Great Depression, millions were hungry, but crop and livestock prices were so low that producers could not live off the land, so FDR adjusted supply by paying farmers to destroy ten million acres of crops and kill six million farm animals. Tim Geithner talks about that same market today, "The market can't solve this problem. Only government can." Cap and Trade is his solution and here is an example.

Rex Woollen grows corn and soybeans. In 2007, the Wilcox, Nebraska farmer started cultivating a new commodity: Carbon. By not tilling 800 acres, Woollen by some estimates keeps 470 tons of carbon per year in the ground and out of the atmosphere and because of that, Woollen gets carbon credits that he can then sell to the Chicago Climate Exchange. Do you see what's happening here? By not growing crops, he saves carbon and he gets paid for it. Woollen gets $3,000 a year, while it's not much to Woollen, it hints at a bigger potential profit as congress considers mandatory nationwide greenhouse gas limits. For now he's only getting paid a little for not growing crops, but should that go up once the government gets involved, he's thinking there could be a lot of money here. Some state farm lawmakers want to let farmers create separate sources of carbon allowances. Farmers who plant trees would earn offsets to sell alongside government permits on carbon markets. So not only can you earn cash as a farmer by not farming, you can also get more if you plant things that aren't crops. And people say that common sense is dead. You know that Barack Obama wants a cap and trade bill and you know that farm states would be key votes to getting it passed so you can expect a lot more of this kind of nonsense on the horizon. But what about the Chicago Climate Exchange itself?

Well, guess who was on the board of the charity that gave over a million dollars in crucial funds to the Chicago Climate Exchange during its infancy? Yeah, Barack Obama. In fact, even some environmentalists are admitting they worry a little bit about cap and trade, noticing what it actually is, a brand new giant derivatives market. But what could possibly happen with a derivatives market going bad? I mean, that's not like that could derail our entire economy or anything, right?

In defense of farmers and ranchers, who happen to be a group of people with the most 'Common Sense', will do whatever they are forced to do to preserve and protect the Land and to Survive and keep their operation viable in any market. Farms and Ranches are generally FAMILY businesses, passed from prior generations, maintained to be passed on to future generations. It will be the new Corporate farms and ranches that will jump on this 'Carbon Train'!

Story on Glenn Beck's Show

Beware of Cap and Trade

Obama's espousal of cap-and-trade, a system that is intended, among other things, to increase the price of fossil fuels and force their replacement by energy sources that produce less greenhouse gases, has drawn fire from many economists as a huge energy tax that will weigh heavily on an economy that is already in steep recession. The price tag has been put high as $2 trillion dollars over eight years. That figure, nearly three times higher than originally projected, was given in a White House briefing to Senate staffers last week and reported by US News and World Report and the Washington Times.

The basic idea: “Companies that produce emissions below a mandatory cap earn carbon credits — which they can then sell to companies that don’t meet the cap. This rewards those who invest in ways of reducing pollution and penalizing those who don’t.”

These measures would set a limit, or cap, on carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel use. The effect of such a cap would be to impose rationing of coal, oil, and natural gas on the American economy. Each covered utility, oil company, and manufacturing facility would be given allowances based on past emissions or some other formula. Those companies that emit less carbon dioxide than permitted by their allowances could sell the excess to those that do not; this is the trade part of cap and trade. Over time, the cap would be ratcheted down, requiring greater cuts in emissions.

By limiting the supply of fossil fuels, Cap and Trade would raise the cost of energy.
For consumers, this means more expensive gasoline and electricity as well as net job losses in energy-dependent sectors. Senator Lieberman himself concedes costs into the hundreds of billions of dollars. And as the Congressional Budget Office has noted, such energy cost increases act as a regressive tax on the poor and working class.

Carbon dioxide is the unavoidable byproduct of fossil fuel combustion, which currently provides 85 percent of America's energy. Thus, it will be very costly to move away from this preferred energy source. Methane is another gas being targeted in an effort to also grab some money from the Agriculture sector. They want to impose 175.00 per cow, 87.50 for beef cows and feeder cattle and 20.00 per pig in confinement. That will make a huge impact on an already fluctuating livestock industry that will increase all dairy and meat prices to the consumer and close many family businesses. Landfills and sewage plants will have to raise their prices too.

While the costs of aggressive cap and trade proposals are substantial, the environmental benefits are suspect .... even if one fully accepts the claim of man-made global warming.
It is a near certainty that the first climate bill enacted will not be the last one. Cap and trade bills are nothing short of a government re-engineering of the American economy. It would put the nation on a path of serious economic harm not justified by any benefits, adding to the already depressed economy. Heck, all the cutbacks and lack of production and consumption will make a bigger impact on the greenhouse effect than Cap and Trade will, only difference is the $$$ going in the governments pockets. Makes you want to fart, don't it!!

President Obama talked about his Cap & Trade Policies and what this policy would do …



Until the other industrialized countries start to clean up after they pollute, there would be no point in cleaning up anything here...China, India, Japan, middle east, Pakistan...all huge polluters, so why should America be the only one to blame? Our emission standard are already higher than nearly any other country...The world has to work together...until then, lets just try to SAVE our economy instead of adding fuel to the fire!
.

Here is the latest from the EPA.

Up to now, they have been restricted to what we normally consider pollutants: toxic chemicals, particulate matter and even toxic dust and dirt from open pit mines. Essentially they have been regulating mechanical things, but their ability to regulate products naturally produced by animals and even humans, opens new doors to our faceless, non-elected bureaucrats. Would bureaucracies like the EPA want to enlarge their jurisdiction three or fourfold? You betcha!

It is causing a major stir in the cattle industry which sees the potential costs of a cap and trade “cow tax” at $175 per dairy cow and $87.50 per beef cow.

Flatulence of cattle has been a subject of both concern and amusement. Government funded studies are often treated with derision and conjure up mental pictures of methane sensors placed at the exhaust end of a cow, with PhD types copying the sensor data to their notebooks. In reality the multi-stomach, cud chewing cows emit most of their GHGs from the front end, not the rear.

Which brings me to Beano. I consider Beano to be one of the top 25 inventions of the 20th century, right alongside of television, nuclear fission, radar and the Veg-O-Matic. And it works. The active ingredient, the enzyme alpha-galactosidase, affects digestion by prematurely breaking down certain legume sugars before they reach the large intestine where they would normally ferment and produce gas.

Knowing that, about two years ago I decided I would save the planet. I went to Beano’s website where I found a “contact us” box. Had more to do with customers’ problems with Beano, but I asked that my message be forwarded to the appropriate department. In it, I pointed out the problem with bovine flatulence, that perhaps Beano could provide a breakthrough solution, that Beano could be sold by the ton around the world rather than in little bottles, and that they (GlaxoSmithKline) might make a gazillion dollars. But..... I waited and waited for a response. Finally after three weeks, my answer came. They informed me that they did not make Beano for veterinary use and because of that, my request was denied.

So much for thinking outside the box (or bottle) at GlaxoSmithKline.

(Visit The Blog Prof to read more..when you get the chance!)
.