Stop The Power Grab

at the EPA. Especially if you live in Virginia.

[Update a few minutes later]

Yes, that’s exactly what it’s like:

Senator Boxer lost any credibility she might have had left when she said that the Murkowski Resolution would be like Congress “saying the Earth is flat.”

I’ve got two idiots for senators in California, but only one of them is blithering.

[mid-afternoon update]

The amendment failed:

I don’t want to hear a liberal bemoan executive supremacy ever again. This is Congress abdicating its own authority because the Democrats know they can’t get the votes to pass cap-and-trade.

Yup.

11 thoughts on “Stop The Power Grab”

  1. I disagree Rand. Betty Crocker aka “Turn them all in America.” is a blithering idiot too.

  2. My head is spining. Left MA for NH in ’04, and now Brown (MA) is correctly against EPA regulatory authority while one of my NH Senators will vote for govt expansion as Harry Reid dictates. That 2008 election rout by the Ds really has consequences.

  3. I’m with you on this issue, but I can’t help but see a double-standard here, Rand. In the thread below you appear to agree with those who claim JSC is “in rebellion” because they’re doing what Congress says instead of obeying their Executive masters, but at the EPA you want them to follow Congress instead of doing what their Executive masters dictate.

    Can’t have it both ways, dude.

  4. If it’s an issue of the role of the Executive and its ability to regulate vs the role of the Legislative and its ability to legislate…?

    If NASA as part of the executive has the purvue to decide when to throttle down Cx without deference to the Congresssionally passed budget, how is that not the same sort of Executive power grab as the EPA regulating CO2 beyond the spirit of their mandate from Congress?

    To me, the problem is an overreaching executive in both cases.

  5. tx, I would hazard a guess that it’s not a legalistic question of to which authority the EPA should submit, but a far simpler question of right and wrong, or perhaps sensible and moronic.

    What the EPA wants to do is stupid and destructive. That’s kind of the point. It should be opposed whether or not it fits anyone’s ideal theory of government. We get good government by insisting on the right results, not the right method.

  6. Carl, I think you underestimate the importance of method. Ends don’t justify means in constitutional republic, that’s what got us into the mess we’re in today.

    I don’t see a very big distinction between regulation and contract management, when in both cases it’s an executive agency exercising authority over its area of policy versus simply carrying out (executing, hence “executive”) the mandates of the Congress. I think there is an important question here as to where the line should be drawn between executive and legislative and how strong the checks and balances between them are intended to be. Case in point: the State of the Union speech. it was intended to be the President reporting back to the Congress. It has become the President giving marching orders to the Congress.

  7. I don’t see a very big distinction between regulation and contract management, when in both cases it’s an executive agency exercising authority over its area of policy versus simply carrying out (executing, hence “executive”) the mandates of the Congress.

    Well, whether you see one or not, there is. If Congress takes away an agency’s statutory authority to regulate something, it cannot do it. All regulatory actions derive from legislation.

    …the State of the Union speech. it was intended to be the President reporting back to the Congress. It has become the President giving marching orders to the Congress.

    It has become nothing of the kind. It’s certainly not “marching orders” that they’re bound to follow. The fact remains that the White House proposes, and the Congress disposes.

  8. Oh no. Quite the contrary, tx. It’s an overemphasis on method and drawing legal lines that has gotten us into this mess of furious pointing of fingers at finger-pointers and speculative asskickery. Too much focus on rules, not enough on results. Too much on clever community organizing, not enough on leadership. Too much on the right attitude and the well-turned speech, not enough on getting stuff done.

Comments are closed.