In its statist, bureaucratic and “best and brightest” attempt to insert itself (without Congressional authority) into the climate change scare, the EPA declared in 2009 that carbon dioxide (what you exhale and plants absorb) is a danger to public health. This unprecedented power grab will result in the EPA governing – and draining wealth from – huge sectors of the economy…and ultimately your wallet.

Yet the Clean Air Act (which defines the EPA’s role), provides no legitimacy to the EPA’s finding. As Marlo Lewis points out in this excellent piece at MasterResource:

The Clean Air Act directs EPA to identify and regulate pollutants that damage air quality. Lead is an air quality contaminant, so it fits perfectly within the statutory framework. However, search the Clean Air Act from top to bottom, and you will not find any Title, section, or subsection on global climate change, nor will you find the terms “greenhouse gas” and “greenhouse effect.” Just because EPA has authority to regulate lead as an air quality contaminant, it does not follow that EPA has authority to regulate carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas.

This end run around Congress raises grave Constitutional concerns. The EPA is proceeding due to the contortions of logic in the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling, Massachusetts v. EPA (549 U.S. 497, 2007). Under the majority’s selective reading, Lewis observes:

[...] a thing may be an “air pollutant” even if it does not degrade air quality. As Justice Scalia quipped in dissent, given the majority’s reading, “It follows that everything airborne, from Frisbees to flatulence, qualifies as an ‘air pollutant.’” Indeed, if anything emitted into or entering the ambient air is an “air pollutant,” then even absolutely clean, pollution-free air is an “air pollutant” the moment it moves or circulates.

Yet, we have the power to stop this unbridled power grab. The power to create and define a law comes only from Congress (as representatives of we the people), not from the Supreme Court or the EPA. As Lewis points out:

Members of Congress, however, have a duty to exercise their own judgment to determine what the law means. They cannot automatically defer to the Court’s interpretation without Congress ceasing to be an independent and co-equal branch. A doctrine of judicial infallibility is as alien to our Constitution as is a doctrine of bureaucratic supremacy.

Scheduled for a June 10 vote, Senator Murkowski’s resolution asserts Congress’ authority to define the role of the EPA. Lewis sums up what’s at stake:

The importance of the vote on S.J.Res.26 is difficult to exaggerate. Nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional system of separated powers and democratic accountability hangs in the balance.

Contact Senator Webb and Senator Warner today and urge them vote to support for Murkowski and S.J.Res.26.

Ok, now is the time to let Mark Warner know how we feel about Health Control. We must insist that Senator Warner reject this Health Care abomination that skyrockets costs, interferes in your health decisions, mandates health insurance, includes taxpayer funding of abortions, and doles out billion dollar payoffs to politicians that make extortion look pretty. His calendar on his website is showing that Warner’s staff will be in Hanover this Wednesday! We called the library to confirm. This is a public meeting!!!! Let’s get a crowd out there!

Wednesday, March 17
10am-12pm
Pamunkey Regional Library
201 S. Railroad Avenue
Ashland Virginia, 23005

Up to now Mr. Warner was talking about all of the cost savings that will come from the health care legislation.  With the anger against this bill growing, it appears to us as if the good senator is looking for cover:

Five Democratic senators urged the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, on Thursday to include a “fail-safe mechanism” in the final version of major health care legislation in order to guarantee the hundreds of billions of dollars in projected government savings that are intended to help pay for the bill.

…

In a letter to Mr. Reid, the five senators urge that the legislation include some sort of fast-track and fail-safe mechanism that they said would give Congress “the tools to keep cost under control should the current savings estimates fail to materialize.”

The letter was signed by Senators Evan Bayh of Indiana, Michael Bennet of Colorado, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, and Mark Warner of Virginia.

One wonders what these “the tools to keep cost under control should the current savings estimates fail to materialize” might be. Can you say tax increase/rationing?

Read the Complete Article here

You have to love Senator Warner. While meeting with community leaders in Martinville, the Sentor talked about his ideas for jump-starting the economy.  He proposed two little ditties:

The first proposal would tap $30 billion of unused federal TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) funds to encourage community banks to make loans to existing small businesses, Warner said.

But to show is how fiscally responsible he is, the Senator was quick to add:

Because the funding is already in place, Warner said, the proposal “would not add $1 to the deficit.”

Well duh Senator – that’s because it has ALREADY added to the deficit, helped along by your vote for the TARP and Stimulus bills last year. 

Our Senator’s second proposal involves – suprise, suprise – another federal loan program:

Under a second proposal, the U.S. Department of Commerce would create and administer a federal loan program to provide incentives to overseas employers locating in the United States.

China, India and many other countries already provide incentives of up to $12,000 per job to potential employers, Warner said.

Currently, “there is no state or federal program” in place to support jobs or companies moving to the United States, and states generally compete against each other, Warner said.

Broadband and other infrastructure would enhance the chance that businesses considering locating to the United States would look at rural areas, Warner said.

Under his proposal, loans could not be used to move a job from one state to another, but to lure information/technology and manufacturing jobs to areas of high unemployment or lower income in the United States, Warner said.

Interest-free loans of up to $10,000 per job would be given to state, local or regional economic development agencies, according to a release from Warner. Then, funds would be paid out to companies in two $5,000 per-job-per-year installments.

If the company keeps eligible jobs onshore, the initial repayment installment would be forgiven after the first year, the release stated. If eligible jobs remain for the entire second year of the loan, the second installment also would be forgiven.

Warner said the sectors of manufacturing and information/technology would be targeted because they often lead to other economic development such as suppliers, vendors and other providers,

So our fiscally responsible Senator’s ideas involve throwing more money and bureaucrats at the problems of Virginia.

But take heart, it’s not like Mr. Warner is wearing rose-colored glasses:

“This is not a silver bullet. It would not solve all of our problems, but we’ve got to have tools” when competing in a global market, Warner said.

He does not know how long it might take for the measure to be approved or implemented. Nevertheless, Warner said, “I am very, very optimistic we will come out of this economic downturn.”

You gotta love that last line.  Senator Warner, we don’t know when you will be defeated, but we are very optimistic that it will be sooner rather then later.

Read the complete article here.

Former Sen. Harry F. Byrd Jr has an interesting take on Senator Mark Warner’s vote on the health care bill:

When a Virginia Democrat is elected to the Congress — Senate or House — he or she must decide whether to vote the party line or vote the Virginia tradition of financial responsibility

Senator Byrd goes on:

Hundreds of thousands of Virginians — independents and conservative Democrats who voted for Mr. Warner — must be puzzled by his votes.

Read the whole article here at the Richmond Times Dispatch.