View Single Post
Old 05-17-2011, 02:31 PM   #28 (permalink)
dc_dux
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
That as a given, there are those who do not want the EPA to have that power.

Do you have any concerns regarding the EPA exercising that power in a manner inconsistent with what is in the best interest of the environment and the country?

What if the next President appointed me as the head of the EPA, would you want me to have the power?

Assuming your answer is no to the last question, how would you want to control the EPA?

Perhaps a more narrow mandate from Congress, with defined minimum and maximum expectations?
ace....you refuse to acknowledge the facts and persist with the same old fallacious arguments and "what ifs".

The EPA has the sole authority and obligation to implement the intent of the Clean Air Act by developing and implementing regulations, including as the Supreme Court made clear, regulating CO2 as a greenhouse gas.

If you or the Republicans in Congress or the Koch brothers or any interested party believe that EPA has exceeded its legal authority, the proper remedy is through the federal judiciary, not through bogus legislation to nullify the Court's '07 decision by rejecting any science with which you disagree.

In much the same manner as interested parties successfully took the Bush EPA to court for willfully ignoring the intent of the Clean Air Act by not developing regulations.

Its called checks and balances, ace, through the judiciary, just as the framers of the Constitution intended. That is how you address the excessive use of power if it exists.

And that is how the system works, not by saying "Fuck You" to the EPA and the US Supreme Court with bogus legislation if you disagree with their actions.

---------- Post added at 06:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:22 PM ----------

It is a growing tactic of Republicans to attempt to circumvent or nullify court rulings they don't like though any means necessary rather than through the proper means to address an "alleged" excessive use of power by the executive branch.

In extreme cases, we are seeing Republicans calling for impeachment of judges, not for malfeasance, but simply because they disagree with a court's decision.

An appalling and willful ignorance of the rule of law.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 05-17-2011 at 02:35 PM..
dc_dux is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360