In The News
Inhofe, Heartland Institute Present More than 15,000 Petitions Demanding Congress Rein in a ‘Rogue’ EPA
Media Advisory
Monday November 26, 2012
Washington DC
The Heartland Institute has collected more than 15,000 signatures on a petition demanding Congress rein in a “rogue” Environmental Protection Agency. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and The Heartland Institute will present the petitions to Congress at a public event in the Capitol Visitors Center in Washington, DC on Tuesday, November 27 at 11 a.m.WHAT: “Rein in the EPA” Petition Presentation and Press Conference
WHEN: Tuesday, November 27, 11 a.m. EST
WHERE: Capitol Visitors Center, SVC 215, Washington, DC
WHO: Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) and The Heartland Institute
MEDIA: Open to the public and all press
WSJ Editorial: Here Comes the Regulatory Flood
Costly rules held up for the election are about to roll over the economy.
Monday November 26, 2012
Washington DC
President Obama's hyperactive regulators went on hiatus in 2011 to get through Election Day. Now with his second term secure, they're about to make up for lost time and then some.The government defines "economically significant" rules as those that impose annual costs of $100 million or more, and the Bush, Clinton and Bush Administrations each ended up finalizing about 45 major rules per year. The average over Mr. Obama's first two years was 63 but then plunged to 44 for 2011 and 2012 so far. The bureaucracies didn't slow down. They merely postponed and built up a backlog that is about to hit the Federal Register.
We'd report the costs of the major-rule pipeline if we had current data. But the White House budget office document known as the unified agenda that reveals the regulations under development hasn't been published since fall 2011. The delay violates multiple federal laws and executive orders that require an agenda every six months, so we thought readers might like a rough guide to the regulatory flood that is about to roll through the economy.
Inhofe vows to stay top climate skeptic, despite committee shuffle
In the News...
Thursday November 15, 2012
Washington DC
Sen. James Inhofe said last night in a Web-based interview that he would still be "in charge" of climate skepticism on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, despite ceding his ranking membership to Sen. David Vitter (R-La.)."Senator Vitter has said publicly that I will still be in charge on this issue," the Oklahoma Republican said in an interview hosted by climate skeptic Anthony Watts. Inhofe noted that he has spent 10 years as the most vocal man-made climate change disbeliever in the Senate and said he would remain so as a senior member of the EPW Committee.
Inhofe has reached his term limit as the top Republican on the panel.
Earlier in the day, Inhofe told E&E; Daily that he was better prepared than any of his colleagues to push back against the science of man-made climate change, which he has famously called "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people."
"Right now, you can't ignore the highest tax increase in history because of the outcome of the election, and I'm probably a little better-equipped to talk about it than any of the rest of them are," he said.
That largest tax increase in history, he said, would come as President Obama's U.S. EPA rolls out its regulatory regime for carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act. A rule has already been proposed for new power plants and is expected to be finalized by the end of this year. Rules for existing power plants and refineries are expected to follow, and greens have begun to push for restrictions for other sectors, including hydraulic fracturing.
Growing Media Attention on Obama Administration Violating the Law By Failing to Publish Regulatory Agenda
November surprise: EPA planning major post-election anti-coal regulation
Monday November 5, 2012
Washington DC
Posted by Matt Dempsey matt_dempsey@epw.senate.gov
Growing Media Attention on Obama Administration Violating the Law By Failing to Publish Regulatory Agenda
"Many Expect Avalanche of New Major Rules" After Election - November surprise: EPA planning major post-election anti-coal regulation - Obama EPA second term agenda revealed
Watch Inhofe Interview on Fox News Discussing Obama Punting on EPA Regulations Until After Election
More and more in the media are following Senator Inhofe's lead and putting the spotlight on the Obama administration's failure to comply with the law by refusing to publish its regulatory agenda. The latest to join the scrutiny is the National Journal, who published an online story Friday night noting, "The administration has also failed to release a required regulatory outlook document, describing its regulatory agenda. Such documents are supposed to be published every six months; the most recent one was published in January, making this the longest lag between outlooks since the deadline schedule was created in 1994." The article further notes that, "Sources in regular contact with agencies say they've been told that new rules won't resume until after the election, and many expect an avalanche of new major rules shortly afterward." As has been the case with every publication tracking this growing story, the Obama administration refused to comment.
The following articles are the latest from the media over the weekend examining the failure of the administration to meet its obligation under the law, as well as speculation on what a second term agenda might look like:
National Journal: "Many Expect Avalanche of New Major Rules" After Election: The Obama administration roared into office four years ago with an openly ambitious regulatory agenda, releasing a higher-than-usual number of major regulations in the first two years. In 2012, the number of new regulations has plummeted in a year in which the president's regulatory policies have emerged as a major campaign theme. Federal agencies are sitting on a pile of major health, environmental, and financial regulations that lobbyists, congressional staffers, and former administration officials say are being held back to avoid providing ammunition to Mitt Romney and other Republican critics... The administration has also failed to release a required regulatory outlook document, describing its regulatory agenda. Such documents are supposed to be published every six months; the most recent one was published in January, making this the longest lag between outlooks since the deadline schedule was created in 1994. The slowdown comes in an election year in which government regulation has exploded as a hot campaign theme. Romney has assailed the president for costly overregulation, often slamming specific rules: He describes EPA regulations of power-plant pollution as a "war on coal," and a rule requiring employers to cover contraception in their health insurance plans triggered a firestorm over a "war on women." Sources in regular contact with agencies say they've been told that new rules won't resume until after the election, and many expect an avalanche of new major rules shortly afterward..."There are at least a half-dozen other examples like that throughout the agency," said William Becker, executive director for the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. "And that's why administrations will do everything they can to avoid putting these rules out during an election year. But all that ends after the election. Then it's a mad rush to see who gets the rules out the door first." http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/obama-administration-sits-on-key-regulations-20121101?page=1
Washington Examiner - Conn Carroll - November surprise: EPA planning major post-election anti-coal regulation: President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency has devoted an unprecedented number of bureaucrats to finalizing new anti-coal regulations that are set to be released at the end of November, according to a source inside the EPA. More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non-partisan Manhattan Institute estimates that the EPA's greenhouse gas coal regulation will cost the U.S. economy $700 billion. The rush is a major sign of panic by environmentalists inside the Obama administration. If Obama wins, the EPA would have another four full years to implement their anti-fossil fuel agenda. But if Romney wins, regulators will have a very narrow window to enact a select few costly regulations that would then be very hard for a President Romney to undo. Environmentalists at the EPA pulled this trick before in 2000 when the Clinton administration rushed out a finding that Mercury emissions from power plants were a growing public health threat pursuant to the Clean Air Act. That finding did not regulate power plants itself, but it did force the Bush administration to begin a lengthy regulatory process. The Obama EPA has estimated that this regulation alone will cost the U.S. economy $10.9 billion a year. http://washingtonexaminer.com/november-surprise-epa-planning-major-post-election-anti-coal-regulation/article/2512538#.UJfbYWe1V5o
PoliticoPro: EPA Rushing To Finalize New Power Plant Rule, Report Says: EPA has dedicated a remarkable 50 staff members to finalize the new greenhouse gas emissions rule for new power plants - the one critics say will stop all new coal plants from being built, Conn Carroll, a columnist at the conservative Washington Examiner, writes, citing "a source inside the EPA." Carroll adds: "The rush is a major sign of panic by environmentalists inside the Obama administration. If Obama wins, the EPA would have another four full years to implement their anti-fossil fuel agenda. But if Romney wins, regulators will have a very narrow window to enact a select few costly regulations that would then be very hard for a President Romney to undo." ME reached out to EPA for comment but didn't hear back as of deadline. Washington Examiner: http://bit.ly/UtcURb
Hot Air: Obama EPA second term agenda revealed: Coal miners and coal powered plants already have a big problem, as we have pointed out repeatedly. But it looks like those problems may grow by several orders of magnitude in the coming months if the current White House occupant remains in office. The President has already been seen to bristle at criticism from his own Left flank over how he hasn't done enough for the environmentalists who can't understand why the oil companies are still in business four years later. Unrestrained by the need to win another election - having a lot more "flexibility," as you might hear from Vladimir - these folks can really run amok. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/04/obama-epa-second-term-agenda-revealed/
CNSNEWS: Business Owners Warn Of 4,100 New Regs And The Administration's Secrecy About Them: The nation's small business owners are warning of the effects of 4,100 new regulations and the administration's refusal to produce a legally-required report explaining them. Every administration is legally required to publish a report each April and Octoberin the Federal Register to inform Congress and the public of the administration's regulatory agenda and its potential economic impact. The requirement is part of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980. The Obama administration has missed its second straight legal deadline for disclosing its regulatory plans and their economic impact to Congress and the American public. No previous administration has ever failed to produce the report even once. The National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB), a 350,000 member trade group expressed concern, warning of the dangers of the Obama administration's "lack of transparency" and failure to comply with a law requiring it to disclose its plans to burden them with 4,100 new regulations. NFIB's Manager, Regulatory Policy Dan Bosch tells the "Right Views": "It is concerning that the Obama administration has failed to produce its regulatory plan as required. We know from its previous plan in January that there are more than 4,100 regulations in the pipeline. "Failing to publish a plan adds considerable uncertainty to small business owners worried that this lack of transparency could indicate significantly more regulations are poised to follow in the months and years ahead." http://cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/business-owners-warn-4100-new-regs-and-administrations-secrecy-about-them
FoxNews: Inhofe: Obama won't release regulatory agenda because of 'terrible' impact on jobs: President Obama will not comply with a federal law requiring him to release his regulatory agenda because he doesn't want Americans voters to know the "terrible cost" it would have on the economy should he win re-election -- include the loss an estimated 887,000 jobs annually, says Sen. James Inhofe, ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Inhofe cites the Regulatory Flexibility Act that requires federal agencies to assess the impact of their regulations on small businesses. He says Obama failed to comply with the law twice over the past year -specifically the April and October deadlines. "President Obama is refusing to comply with the law that requires him to publish forthcoming regulations because he doesn't want the American public to know the terrible cost of the regulatory barrage he plans to unleash in a second term," Inhofe said. "So instead of being honest with the American people about what's in store if he wins, he's been trying to hide the fact that he intends to move forward with a slew of rules that will destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs and dramatically raise the cost of energy on American families." The Oklahoma senator sent a letter to the president Sunday asking him to publish the administration's agenda before Oct. 31. "Businesses and communities need to understand the future regulatory landscape," he wrote. The projected loss of 887,000 jobs annually is from a National Economic Research Associates report last month. The international economic firm in its 129-page report that states the coal industry would be hit hard and the job losses would continue through 2034. Inhofe, also last month, released a report stating the Environmental Protection Agency has delayed action or "punted" on numerous regulations while Obama tries to "earn votes" for a second term. The 14-page report states when the agency approves the roughly one dozen regulations next year in 2013, they will "spell doom" for jobs and economic growth. The report cites pending regulations on a wide range of environmental-economic issues including those on power plant emissions and hydraulic fracturing and concludes pending, overall regulations on greenhouse gases if enacted would cost $300 billion to $400 billion annual and significantly increase the price of gasoline and home heating. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/03/inhofe-obama-wont-release-regulator-agenda-because-terrible-impact-as-job/
CNS NEWS - Phil Kerpen - Obama's secret (and illegal) regulatory bomb: Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) last week politely asked President Obama to follow the law: "I request you comply with the law and publish the federal government's regulatory calendar this month. Businesses and communities need to understand the future regulatory landscape in order to properly plan and invest in the economy." The reply? None. October came and went with no response and no legally required regulatory agenda report. That's because complying with the law would tell the American people how much economic pain the Obama administration has stored up for a potential second term. We don't know exactly how big the regulatory bomb is going to be because of Obama's illegal secrecy, but an estimate from the National Federation of Independent Business of some of the known rules clocks in at over $515 billion in economic costs. That estimate doesn't even include an expected ban on coal-fired power plants whose costs could run into the trillions. That rule is slippery because it would purport to effectively ban new coal-fired plants, with a stated cost of zero because natural gas is presently so cheap that new coal capacity isn't being built. But it would also create the predicate for litigation that would shut down existing coal plants, cementing as Obama's legacy his promise to bankrupt coal and make electricity prices skyrocket. http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/02/obamas-secret-and-illegal-regulatory-bomb/?print=1
Forbes - Larry Bell - EPA's Insanely Ambitious Agenda If Obama Is Reelected: If you think the Obama administration's Enterprise Prevention Agenda has been wildly aggressive during the past four years, believe me, we really ain't seen nothin' yet. A new report released by the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Minority Committee enumerates a slew of planned EPA regulations that have been delayed or punted on until after the election that will destroy millions of American jobs and cause energy prices to skyrocket even more. Titled "A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013: Numerous Obama EPA Rules Placed on Hold Until After the Election Spell Doom For Jobs and Economic Growth", it lists and describes new rules concocted over the past year ranging from additional restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions, tougher water guidelines and tightening of the ozone standard. Taken together, they will further drive up pump prices, impose construction bans on local communities, and cripple oil, natural gas and coal production. http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/11/04/epas-insanely-ambitious-agenda-if-obama-is-reelected/
Read More About Senator Inhofe's Efforts To Expose President Obama's Regulatory Agenda:
Media Round Up from Week of October 28
Inhofe Blasts Obama Administration For Failing To Comply with Law, Hiding Costly Regulatory Agenda
WATCH: Inhofe on Fox News: Obama Failing to Comply With Law on Regulation Transparency
EPA Silent on Inhofe Senate Report Showing EPA Punted on Costly Regs Past Election
Where's the Transparency, Mr. President?
Obama Administration Ignores the Law
Friday November 2, 2012
Washington DC
Posted by Matt Dempsey matt_dempsey@epw.senate.gov
Where's the Transparency, Mr. President? - Whatever happened to a 'government of laws, not of men'? – Administration Ignores Law, Delays Exposing New Regulations
Inhofe Blasts Obama Administration For Failing To Comply with Law, Hiding Costly Regulatory Agenda
WATCH: Inhofe on Fox News: Obama Failing to Comply With Law on Regulation Transparency
EPA Silent on Inhofe Senate Report Showing EPA Punted on Costly Regs Past Election
Wall Street Journal: Where's the Transparency, Mr. President? One of the mores striking aspects of this presidential campaign is how little President Obama is saying on the stump about his plans for a second-term agenda. So keen is the president to keep his ideas from leaking to the public, that his administration is now trying to hide its regulatory agenda. Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe has spent the past week noting that the Obama administration as of today will be missing a statutory deadline on regulatory transparency. The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires federal agencies to publish in the Federal Register descriptions of economically significant regulations they expect to propose. These agendas are required to be published on a semi-annual basis, in both April and October. The Obama administration has now failed to meet this legal requirement since the fall of 2011.That is no doubt because to comply with this law, the Obama administration would have to confess to its plans to continue with more than a dozen wildly unpopular and hugely expensive environmental regulations. As the election has heated up over the past year, the Environmental Protection Agency has quietly "delayed" or put aside many of these rules, to keep the president from catching heat. As Sen. Inhofe detailed in a recent report, titled "A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013," they include the agency's greenhouse gas regulations, its crushing ozone rule, a drastic rewrite of the Clean Water Act, and punitive new restrictions on everything from storm water systems, to sulfur in gasoline, to coal ash, to emissions from industrial boilers. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204712904578091212726537432.html
Washington Examiner: Whatever happened to a 'government of laws, not of men'?: So why do we allow Washington politicians not only to get away with ignoring the law but with continually replacing it with the will of one man called "Mr. President" or a few men called "bureaucrats"? President Obama isn't unique among recent chief executives in ignoring laws, but he has been the most blatant. To cite just one example, the law requires executive branch agencies to make public their proposed regulatory agendas every six months. As of Wednesday this week, the EPA was thumbing its regulatory nose at the law for the third time in two years. The delay helps Obama avoid giving voters more reasons to boot him out of the Oval Office next Tuesday, since the EPA's expected agenda would likely destroy millions of jobs and pile immense new costs on businesses and consumers. Sen. Jim Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who has dogged Obama on this issue for months, correctly points out that "it's bad enough that he's hiding his second-term agenda -- it's even worse that he's violating the law to do it."
Heritage Foundation: Administration Ignores Law, Delays Exposing New Regulations: After three years of hyper-regulation, the Obama Administration has noticeably slowed its rulemaking in recent months. A variety of major rules have been parked in prolonged “review” by the White House, while the regulatory agenda required by statute has failed to materialize—twice. This flouting of the law is disturbing enough, but it’s made worse by the mounting regulatory uncertainty that has ensued. Congress mandated a regulatory agenda from each agency in 1980, under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The statute calls for release every April and October of a summary of all rules likely to have a “significant economic impact” on a substantial number of small firms. Subsequent executive orders extended the requirements to all regulations under development or review by some 60 departments, agencies, and commissions. President Obama has ignored both the April 2012 and October 2012 agenda deadlines. The last agenda from the Administration, with 2,676 regulations, was published in fall 2011. The President’s neglect of the law contradicts his promise of an “unprecedented level of openness in government transparency.” Notice of upcoming regulatory actions is an essential tool of government transparency and accountability. The agenda enables citizens to participate in the rulemaking process, businesses to plan, and Congress to engage in oversight. The stakes are especially high now because of the hundreds of rules yet to be finalized relating to the Dodd-Frank financial regulation statute and Obamacare. The Administration has postponed action of late on some of its most ambitious regulations. For example, stricter standards on ozone emissions have been shelved until 2013. The original proposal by the Environmental Protection Agency would cost $90 billion or more annually and, potentially, jeopardize millions of jobs. http://blog.heritage.org/2012/11/01/morning-bell-administration-ignores-law-delays-exposing-new-regulations/
CNSNEWS: Obama Admin. Ignores Legal Deadline To Disclose Regulatory Plans, Economic Impact – Again: As of today, the Obama administration has missed its second straight legal deadline for disclosing its regulatory plans and their economic impact to Congress and the American public. No previous administration has ever failed to produce the report even once. Every administration is legally required to publish a report each April and October in the Federal Register to inform Congress and the public of the administration’s regulatory agenda and its potential economic impact. The requirement is part of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980. Other administrations have been late, but have never failed to issue the legally required report and Pres. Clinton even issued an Executive Order on compliance. After the administration failed to produce its April 2012 report, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) wrote to Pres. Obama asking for compliance with the October deadline – to no avail. Other congressmen and House committee members have also written to the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Administrator asking that the law be followed and the report produced. The last time the Obama administration complied with this law was when it published its fall 2011 report (due in October). http://cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/obama-admin-ignores-legal-deadline-disclose-regulatory-plans-economic-impact
Inhofe EPW Press Blog | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook | Podcast
###
Washington DC
One of the mores striking aspects of this presidential campaign is how little President Obama is saying on the stump about his plans for a second-term agenda. So keen is the president to keep his ideas from leaking to the public, that his administration is now trying to hide its regulatory agenda.Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe has spent the past week noting that the Obama administration as of today will be missing a statutory deadline on regulatory transparency. The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires federal agencies to publish in the Federal Register descriptions of economically significant regulations they expect to propose. These agendas are required to be published on a semi-annual basis, in both April and October. The Obama administration has now failed to meet this legal requirement since the fall of 2011.
Roger Pielke Jr Op-Ed WSJ: Hurricanes and Human Choice
Sandy was terrible, but we're currently in a relative hurricane 'drought.' Connecting energy policy and disasters makes little scientific sense.
Thursday November 1, 2012
Washington DC
Posted by Matt Dempsey matt_dempsey@epw.senate.gov
In Case You Missed It...
Wall Street Journal
Roger Pielke Jr: Hurricanes and Human Choice
Sandy was terrible, but we're currently in a relative hurricane 'drought.' Connecting energy policy and disasters makes little scientific sense.
By ROGER PIELKE JR.
Hurricane Sandy left in its path some impressive statistics. Its central pressure was the lowest ever recorded for a storm north of North Carolina, breaking a record set by the devastating "Long Island Express" hurricane of 1938. Along the East Coast, Sandy led to more than 50 deaths, left millions without power and caused an estimated $20 billion or more in damage.
But to call Sandy a harbinger of a "new normal," in which unprecedented weather events cause unprecedented destruction, would be wrong. This historic storm should remind us that planet Earth is a dangerous place, where extreme events are commonplace and disasters are to be expected. In the proper context, Sandy is less an example of how bad things can get than a reminder that they could be much worse.
In studying hurricanes, we can make rough comparisons over time by adjusting past losses to account for inflation and the growth of coastal communities. If Sandy causes $20 billion in damage (in 2012 dollars), it would rank as the 17th most damaging hurricane or tropical storm (out of 242) to hit the U.S. since 1900-a significant event, but not close to the top 10. The Great Miami Hurricane of 1926 tops the list (according to estimates by the catastrophe-insurance provider ICAT), as it would cause $180 billion in damage if it were to strike today. Hurricane Katrina ranks fourth at $85 billion.
To put things into even starker perspective, consider that from August 1954 through August 1955, the East Coast saw three different storms make landfall-Carol, Hazel and Diane-that in 2012 each would have caused about twice as much damage as Sandy.
While it's hardly mentioned in the media, the U.S. is currently in an extended and intense hurricane "drought." The last Category 3 or stronger storm to make landfall was Wilma in 2005. The more than seven years since then is the longest such span in over a century.
Flood damage has decreased as a proportion of the economy since reliable records were first kept by the National Weather Service in the 1930s, and there is no evidence of increasing extreme river floods. Historic tornado damage (adjusted for changing levels of development) has decreased since 1950, paralleling a dramatic reduction in casualties. Although the tragic impacts of tornadoes in 2011 (including 553 confirmed deaths) were comparable only to those of 1953 and 1964, such tornado impacts were far more common in the first half of the 20th century.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that drought in America's central plains has decreased in recent decades. And even when extensive drought occurs, we fare better. For example, the widespread 2012 drought was about 10% as costly to the U.S. economy as the multiyear 1988-89 drought, indicating greater resiliency of American agriculture.
There is therefore reason to believe we are living in an extended period of relatively good fortune with respect to disasters. A recurrence of the 1908 San Francisco earthquake today, for example, could cause more than $300 billion in damage and thousands of lives, according to a study I co-published in 2009.
So how can today's disasters, even if less physically powerful than previous ones, have such staggering financial costs? One reason: There are more people and more wealth in harm's way. Partly this is due to local land-use policies, partly to incentives such as government-subsidized insurance, but mostly to the simple fact that people like being on the coast and near rivers.
Even so, with respect to disasters we really do make our own luck. The relatively low number of casualties caused by Sandy is a testament to the success story that is the U.S. National Weather Service and parallel efforts of those who emphasize preparedness and emergency response in the public and private sectors. Everyone in the disaster-management community deserves thanks; the mitigation of the impacts from natural disasters has been a true national success story of the past century.
But continued success isn't guaranteed. The bungled response and tragic consequences associated with Hurricane Katrina tell us what can happen when we let our guard down.
And there are indications that we are setting the stage for making future disasters worse. For instance, a U.S. polar-satellite program crucial to weather forecasting has been described by the administrator of the federal agency that oversees it-the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-as a "dysfunctional program that had become a national embarrassment due to chronic management problems." The lack of effective presidential and congressional oversight of this program over more than a decade can be blamed on both Republicans and Democrats. The program's mishandling may mean a gap in satellite coverage and a possible degradation in forecasts.
Another danger: Public discussion of disasters risks being taken over by the climate lobby and its allies, who exploit every extreme event to argue for action on energy policy. In New York this week, Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared: "I think at this point it is undeniable but that we have a higher frequency of these extreme weather situations and we're going to have to deal with it." New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg spoke similarly.
Humans do affect the climate system, and it is indeed important to take action on energy policy-but to connect energy policy and disasters makes little scientific or policy sense. There are no signs that human-caused climate change has increased the toll of recent disasters, as even the most recent extreme-event report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change finds. And even under the assumptions of the IPCC, changes to energy policies wouldn't have a discernible impact on future disasters for the better part of a century or more.
The only strategies that will help us effectively prepare for future disasters are those that have succeeded in the past: strategic land use, structural protection, and effective forecasts, warnings and evacuations. That is the real lesson of Sandy.
Mr. Pielke is a professor of environmental studies and a fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado.
EPA SILENT ON INHOFE-EPW REPORT SHOWING EPA PUNTING ON COSTLY REGS PAST ELECTION
Inhofe: EPA 'punting' regs until after election that 'spell doom' for jobs, economy
Monday October 22, 2012
Washington DC
FOXNEWS: Inhofe: EPA 'punting' regs until after election that 'spell doom' for jobs, economy: Republican Sen. James Inhofe says the Environmental Protection Agency has delayed action or “punted” on numerous regulations while President Obama tries to “earn votes” for a second term. The Oklahoma senator and ranking Republican on the chamber’s Committee on Environment and Public Works has released a report stating that when the agency approves the roughly one dozen regulations next year in 2013, they will “spell doom” for jobs and economic growth… Obama's campaign referred a request for comment to the administration. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/21/inhofe-epa-punting-regs-until-after-election-that-pell-doom-for-jobs-economy/#ixzz29z9ai9GWGREENWIRE: Inhofe says Obama plans post-election 'regulatory onslaught': It's a somewhat new angle from Republicans, who have spent the past few years criticizing Obama for issuing too many expensive regulations that they say kill jobs. Environmental groups, on the other hand, have accused the White House of holding up important rules in the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. But in the report, Republicans characterize the Obama administration as a vehicle for the "radical environmental left," with EPA officials waiting to fully pursue their anti-fossil-fuel agenda until after the election. Among the report's list of upcoming regulations, the agency's boiler MACT makes the cut, as does the federal government's efforts to regulate hydraulic fracturing. Such rules would create a "regulatory onslaught that will drive up energy prices, destroy millions of jobs, and further weaken the economy," the report states. An EPA spokeswoman declined to comment. http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2012/10/18/archive/2?terms=Inhofe
INSIDEEPA: Inhofe Says Post-Election EPA Rules Will Shutter Fossil Fuel Production: The report also cites promises allegedly made by former White House climate and energy czar Carol Browner to environmental supporters on a recent call telling them not to worry about the unfinished agenda because Obama is committed to the cause in a second term. “This report is a wake-up call on the economic pain that the 'abusive' Obama EPA plans to inflict next year,” Inhofe says. “It reveals a president who is more concerned about saving his own job than the millions of Americans who are looking for one today.” Inside EPA reported in July that EPA completed most of its controversial work early this year while killing or delaying other regulations until after the election. “I think we all understand there are political windows that are better and others that are worse,” one environmentalist said…EPA did not respond to a request for comment. http://insideepa.com/201210182413318/EPA-Daily-News/Daily-News/inhofe-says-post-election-epa-rules-will-shutter-fossil-fuel-production/menu-id-95.html
DAILYCALLER: Sen. Inhofe warns of unfettered EPA in second Obama term: According to the senator, Obama has moved more to the center with his rhetoric on environmental regulations and away from the far left environmental movement to appeal to voters who are concerned about the economy and their pocketbooks. But during a “second term, he’s made the commitment” to moving his environmental policy back to the left, Inhofe said. “They are all jumping on him. All the Al Gore people, the elites, the MoveOn.orgs, saying, ‘You had control of the House and the Senate you still didn’t do it.’ And he says ‘wait until I get past this election and then I’ll do it.’” http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/18/sen-inhofe-warns-of-unfettered-epa-in-second-obama-term/#ixzz29zFgUrY4
WASHINGTONEXAMINER: Obama Washington Wink-Winking like crazy at EPA: This week, the Columbia Journalism Review and Pro Publica released a report stating that Obama has proved more secretive in some respects than his immediate predecessor in the Oval Office, George W. Bush. One of those quoted by CJR/PP is Society of Environmental Journalists President Ken Ward Jr., a staff reporter for the Charleston (W.Va.) Gazette, who tweeted this yesterday: "The Obama EPA is the most difficult to get information and answers out of that I've covered in 20 years." That's the kind of transparency we get from politicians who do the Washington Wink-Wink. http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-washington-wink-winking-like-crazy-at-epa/article/2511132#.UISiyBwqURg
HERITAGE: Report: EPA Delaying Job-Killing Regulations to Aid Obama Re-Election: The decision to delay implementation of these rules is part of what the New York Times called a “new calculus on political and policy shifts as the White House sharpens its focus on the president’s re-election.” Tensions between the White House and top environmental regulators flared when the president announced he would delay an EPA rule on ozone emissions until after the election. EPA chief Lisa Jackson was livid, but the president assured her that he would move forward with the rule after the election. Inhofe’s report presents that decision as part of a coordinated strategy to achieve punitive environmental regulations without suffering significant setbacks at the ballot box. http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/18/report-epa-delaying-job-killing-regulations-to-aid-obama-re-election/
CNSNEWS: Report: 'EPA Rules Placed On Hold until after the Election Spell Doom for Jobs and Economic Growth': A new EPW Minority Report provides “A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013: Numerous Obama EPA Rules Placed On Hold until after the Election Spell Doom for Jobs and Economic Growth.” The report enumerates the slew of environmental regulations that the report says the Obama-Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delayed or punted before the election while President Obama is trying to earn votes; but the Obama-EPA plans to move full speed ahead to implement this agenda if President Obama wins a second term. The report concludes that these rules taken together will inevitably result in the elimination of millions of American jobs, drive up the price of gas at the pump even more, impose construction bans on local communities, and essentially shut down American oil, natural gas, and coal production. http://cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/report-epa-rules-placed-hold-until-after-election-spell-doom-jobs-and-economic
Suit casts spotlight on EPA's human soot experiments
Opponents of EPA soot science are asking the agency to pick a side: evil or inept.
Tuesday October 2, 2012
Washington DC
Opponents of EPA soot science are asking the agency to pick a side: evil or inept.A lawsuit being trumpeted by Sen. Jim Inhofe makes the most lurid of accusations against the agency's long-running experiments on the health effects of particulate matter, explicitly likening them to Nazi atrocities.
The suit, by website publisher Steve Milloy, offers the EPA two unattractive options: either admit that the agency deliberately exposed the sick and elderly to dangerous air pollution, or admit that soot isn't that hazardous after all - undermining the agency's regulations.
Agency lawyers will probably look to defend the agency with a third option: arguing that the studies use carefully calibrated short-term exposure to air pollution, similar to what many people experience in cities such as Los Angeles and Beijing.
The EPA didn't respond to questions about the lawsuit Monday.
Milloy, who filed the federal suit last week in Alexandria, Va., runs JunkScience.com, a website dedicated to taking down bad science - and the EPA. He also wrote the book "Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them."
Upton and Inhofe in POLITICO: Fighting off the war on coal
Friday September 21, 2012
This is a situation that has sadly become all too familiar under the Obama administration's war on coal. Alpha Natural Resources Tuesday announced it will be scaling back its coal production, eliminating 1,200 jobs and closing eight mines in Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Alpha's chief executive officer, Kevin Crutchfield, lamented "a regulatory environment that's aggressively aimed at constraining the use of coal."
The House on Friday plans to launch a counterattack to the administration's relentless efforts to regulate coal into oblivion, by voting on the Stop the War on Coal Act to prevent more job losses and plant closures. This is a series of bills that aim to stop the Environmental Protection Agency's regulatory assault on the U.S. coal power sector.
