Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Again, I think you mis-characterize the bill and its intent. An administrator in the EPA, given the ability to regulate CO2 through regulation could impose regulations on how much you can exhale or impose costs upon you and others as individuals. That is too much power. It is power that would be used selectively. It is power that I think would have political implications more so than true environmental implications. For example, would a favorite industry, i.e., automotive industry, get favored treatment? Why? Again, we need to first have a national policy agreed upon with well defined parameters for regulators.
|
No, ace.
It is more you like mis-characterizing the legislation and demonstrating a lack of understanding of the difference between legislation (setting general goals) and regulation (setting specific standards).
Beyond that, what the EPA is doing is its job of implementing the Clean Air Act...the law that the US Supreme Court ruled in 07 that the Bush Administration willfully ignored.
Quote:
In a decision that amounts to a rebuke of the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide from automobile emissions and that it has shirked its duty in not doing so.
In a 5-to-4 decision, the court found that the Clean Air Act expressly authorizes the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, contrary to the agency's contention, and that if the agency still insists that it does not want to regulate those emissions, it must give better reasons than the "laundry list" of invalid considerations it has offered so far.
Supreme Court backs states on Clean Air Act and greenhouse gasses - The New York Times
|
---------- Post added at 05:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:26 PM ----------
Unlike legislation, regulations are developed through a process of public engagement and public comment prior to implementation, so that even ideological voices like yours can have their say.
You should really try to understand the process better before falsely characterizing or misrepresenting it.