It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
(AP)An EPA proposal regulating the gases blamed for global warming will be costly for factories, small businesses and others, according to a White House document.
(“EPA to Declare 6 Gases Harmful”
www.abovetopsecret.com...)
The document says that with the EPA regulations, factories, businesses and institutions would be subject to costly regulation.
"The decision to regulate CO2 ... is likely to have serious consequences for the U.S. economy."
"It really appears to me that the decision was based more on political calculation than on scientific ones," said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., who called the document "a smoking gun" during a hearing Tuesday on the Obama administration's proposed budget for EPA.
"The counsel in this administration repeatedly questions the lack of scientific support that you have for this proposed finding," he said.
"I have said over and over, as has the president, that we do understand that there are costs to the economy of addressing global warming emissions, and that the best way to address them is through a gradual move to a market-based program like cap and trade," Jackson said.
The nine-page memo, released Tuesday by Republican senators, is a compilation of opinions made by numerous federal agencies prior to the EPA determining in April that greenhouse gases pose dangers to public health and welfare.
The administration has said it prefers a new law that would limit greenhouse gases and put a price on climate-altering pollution.
I doubt you will get much acknowledgment from the Democrats and Obama supporters on ATS regarding this document. If it's genuine, it just underscores what a lot of us already knew
... it just underscores what a lot of us already knew - that even though Obama claims to side with Al Gore on global warming, he never had any intention of doing anything serious to combat the "perceived problem". That means either:
1. He sides with economics and business over the environment, which doesn't sound very Democrat-like. That sounds more like a move a Republican would make.
OR
2. He doesn't really believe in global earming
I read this article this morning and was thoroughly confused. The title leads you to believe the memo came from the White House, giving the reader the impression that Obama's administration is against the EPA's proposals ... .
Released by Republican Senators? Opinions by Federal Agencies?
In fact the only time the White House is referred to is in the first line of the story except from one small excerpt near the end which states the White House IS for Carbon Taxes and Carbon Regulations.
how can Republican Senators release a "White House Memo?"
Why does the article make it seem that the White House released the memo ... ?
Why is the article titled "White House Memo Challenges EPA Finding on Warming" when it is Republican Senators doing the challenging.
Is it because most people will not read to the end of the article where it says :
"The administration has said it prefers a new law that would limit greenhouse gases and put a price on climate-altering pollution." and only base their misguided opinion on the misleading title?
The title leads you to believe the memo came from the White House, giving the reader the impression that Obama's administration is against the EPA's proposals ... .
Released by Republican Senators? Opinions by Federal Agencies? Are Republican Senators working from the White House now? Maybe I missed the memo.
In fact the only time the White House is referred to is in the first line of the story except from one small excerpt near the end ... .