States Sue the Bush Administration

The EPA has been ignoring a decision made by that uber-activist body, the Supreme Court. That decision included informing the EPA that it has the authority to limit CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. The court said that the EPA must decide whether this pollution was endangering public health and, if it was, the agency must issue regulations to control it. Since that decision, the EPA, led by Bush Crony Stephen Johnson, has been very efficient at dragging its feet on coming to the determination of a public health threat.

As a result, twelve states have decided to sue the Bush administration to force the EPA to act within 60 days to initiate the decision-making process. From the article:

Maryland Atty. Gen. Douglas F. Gansler said the EPA received all the input it needed April 2, 2007, when the Supreme Court ruled that the federal agency could regulate greenhouse gases.

“I do think the culture of the EPA under the Bush administration has been to do everything they can to delay actually protecting the environment — which makes the EPA something of an oxymoron, at least in name,” Gansler said.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the EPA “has failed to lead, it has failed to follow the states’ lead, and we are prepared to force it out of the way in order to protect the environment.”

The plaintiffs in the latest court action include Coakley and attorneys general from Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia, plus representatives of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and the cities of New York and Baltimore, and several environmental organizations.

This administration has been the worst in American history at protecting the environment. We have approximately eight months left of these clowns “running” things. If a Democrat is elected as president, it will take quite a bit of time to repair the damage done to the agencies such as the EPA. That has to happen before we can make headway in addressing the climate change crisis. When that happens, will it already be too late?

More catching up

I saw a few headlines that I wanted to capture and make comments about.

The EPA has concluded that greenhouse gases pose a threat to the nation’s health. If upheld, this would require regulations to rein in emissions. I can hear Republicans’ heads swelling at the thought of government ‘intrusion’ into business decisions. Hey, if emissions are so good for us, why don’t we have ‘tailpipe bars’? It’s just what plants inhale, after all.

Colorado’s health care commission is set to report to the legislature. What’s at stake? Hundreds of thousands of uninsured and underinsured Colorado citizens. What did citizens overwhelmingly recommend to the commission? Single-payer care. What will we get? Well, nothing this year as even Gov. Ritter seems too scared to act on one of our most pressing issues. Which tells me the Governor and others are likely receiving signals that Democrats will win even more State House and Senate seats; at the least, they seem unlikely to lose enough to switch control back to the kids (Republicans). Ritter has said he’s hesitant to implement a plan while Democrats look likely to win back the White House. He doesn’t want to burden Washington with another state health care plan with no federal infrastructure. Um, Governor? Maybe 20 different plans will drive home the necessity of implementing a federal single-payer system. Let’s do what’s good for Coloradans and let the feds work their own issues out, huh?

Finally, the energy industry in Colorado is threatening to take their ball home and not let us play with them anymore. Cry babies, the lot of them. What’s got their diapers in a twist? “Colorado’s oil and gas industry is hopping mad about new energy development regulations being written by the state…” ‘”If the rules were approved as proposed, “We would be very, very disappointed,” Collins said. “I’d feel aggrieved that our industry was not taken into account.”’

That’s correct: all the mean Democrats never let the poor, abused extractive industry put in their opinion on what the rules should be. Here’s the real problem, ya’ whiners: Gov. Owens and the previous joke of a state legislature allowed, nay invited, your industry to walk all over the interests of the citizens of this state for eight years. My opinion wasn’t taken into account to any realistic degree prior to this.

But let me put this another way: take your freaking ball home and go drill in someone else’s state. My state would be better for it. The future does not lie in your direction and I know that irritates and scares the crap out of you, but the sooner you realize it, the better off we’ll all be.  Which reminds me, the Saturday Rocky Mountain News had a good article about renewable energy yesterday I want to write about.  Next post.

Bushies interfere with states’ rights

Republicans today again demonstrated their hypocrisy regarding states’ rights.

California and 17 other states wanted to impose stricter limits on greenhouse gas emissions on cars and light trucks. The EPA, under massive pressure from the profit-riddled energy corporations, rejected that request. How did they justify this?

“…the energy bill signed into law by the president earlier that day was a “better approach” on fuel efficiency than “a confusing patchwork of state rules,” and that the Bush administration was “moving forward with a clear national solution.””

But when it comes to abortion, states’ rights have to be upheld. The difference is obvious: conservative states have enacted laws that restrict access to abortions for years while it benefits the corporations to not implement stricter emissions standards, technological capability and climate effects be damned.

I realize this is comparing Corporatecons and Theocons, and they are motivated by different things, but the end results speak for themselves. One is left wondering why Republicans are the party of states’ rights when there is ample evidence to dispute the meme.