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.

 

Obama halts controversial EPA regulation

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
finance.yahoo.com...

President Barack Obama on Friday sacked a controversial proposed regulation tightening health-based standards for smog, bowing to the demands of congressional Republicans and some business leaders.

Obama overruled the Environmental Protection Agency and directed administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the proposal, in part because of the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and uncertainty for businesses at a time of rampant uncertainty about an unsteady economy.


I think it was a good move. I'm all about regulation...it's just this is not the right time to implement a new expensive regulation. Even though corporate profits are higher than they were before the economy crash...investors don't really care...they look at new expenses as a huge negative. It also makes sense politically for Obama right now...but that is a whole other thread


Now I know a lot of Obama haters also hate the EPA and any type of regulation...so am I to assume that even the biggest Obama haters will maybe give Obama some kudos for this move?

Am I being too optimistic? Probably.




posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Woot! Go Barry, GO!

I haven't put a chicken scratch in that column in a long while...



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   
I’ll wait and see if this is a postponement of the rule, or just the beginning of the date of enforcement before I make my mind up on this decision.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


*struggles with laptop*
*forcing fingers to type*

. . . . . Obama did something right. . . . .
*gasp*

(ohmygod. . . . I think I sprained something
)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Smog me baby!
I didn't like oxygen that much anyway



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


*struggles with laptop*
*forcing fingers to type*

. . . . . Obama did something right. . . . .
*gasp*

(ohmygod. . . . I think I sprained something
)


His advisors explained the obvious to Obama. Now is kinda bad to kill jobs. Wait
until after November 2012 then kill more jobs.

----------
When the Republicans move back into the White House they should defund & abolish the
EPA. That would save us $10 Billion + a year.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   
When does money balance health?
When you get into the billions I guess.
Lets say Obama saved like 50 bucks, but it will cause your kid to get lung cancer in 20 years.
Still worth it?



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 



When the Republicans move back into the White House they should defund & abolish the
EPA. That would save us $10 Billion + a year.


Who started the EPA???

Oh right...Nixon...a REPUBLICAN!!!
edit on 2-9-2011 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I'm gonna hold back on my attaboy for Obama right now....I think it's nothing more than an election ploy. Same as he won't be pushing for higher taxes till after the election. Any EPA reg that he nixes is sure to be a temporary move, and if he wins the election, you can guarantee he will change his tune and re-establish those strict smog guidelines.

Now if he had pushed for a permanent anti-regulation move when he was first elected in 2009, well, maybe I might think he was sincere. But we've been bitten too many times by his lies. Fool me once...



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 



When the Republicans move back into the White House they should defund & abolish the
EPA. That would save us $10 Billion + a year.


Who started the EPA???

Oh right...Nixon...a REPUBLICAN!!!
edit on 2-9-2011 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



Yes, i know.
--------
We all got along just fine when JFK was in the White House. The EPA did not exist.
We just need to dial back the clock to 1962.
Hand out the pink slips as they walk out the door. Sorry, go find a job in the private
sector.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Obama is such a disappointment. The only thing that does need to be done - the regulation of smog and the protection of our health and he surrenders to the Republicans. I really hope someone will run against him for the primary. I am afraid the DNC would have a melt down though because they know he wouldn't receive the nomination.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
This year President Obama had the Federal EPA issue a waiver to DOD for the TCE (trichloroethylend) at the bottom of the water table on the island of Guam.

But yet in the "HomeLand"....there's quite a big ruckus over the TCE in the water at Camp Lejeune that's poisoned many americans over the years.

Why did Obama waiver the TCE in the bottom of the water table....those poor poor people over there in Guam...

Worse yet...those poor poor Marines, their wives, and their kids who will soon be showering and drinking it..after they move from Okinawa-to-Guam. Ahhh...Marines are stupid anyways.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Work, eat, die.

It's the circle of life.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Why prolong another set of job killing regulations now?

Americans don't need jobs, just more entitlements and unemployment benefits.




posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


It was this or 20'000 jobs lost in the coal industries, coal mines and power companys that use coal could have to closed down, read the postings on this site, on this subjuct



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Unfortunately, this gutted regulation dealing with Ozone -- as much money as it would have cost -- is only one of several that are being implemented. There is still a fairly hefty coal emissions reg the EPA is going to start enforcing. Not that I'm for pollution or anything, but coal does represent 46% of our nation's energy supply, and if this goes through, all our electricity bills will be going up, which means the price of almost everything else will be going up too, just not nearly as much as it would have with the real big Ozone reg tacked on.

The real point I want to make is that there is a ripple effect that the EPA often neglects when it's attempting to flex its regulatory muscle. The more a producer has to spend on manufacturing a product, the more we consumer have to pay for it. Cost of production (which includes the cost of electricity to keep the factories running) is tacked onto the sale price. So this gets us the tax-paying public at both ends. Not only are we spending more on regulators, we're spending more as the companies pass the costs on down to us.

Another thing, just because we shut down plants over here doesn't mean they're not going to pop up someplace else -- like Mexico, where there's far less regulation of the environment. The pollution all goes up into the same atmosphere and even though your distance from its epicenter most certainly lessens the direct health effects on you, the earth's atmosphere is interconnected and I personally think its far better keeping plants here in the states where there's at least some environmental regulations than scaring them off to Mexico and other places where there's virtually none. Does that make sense?
edit on 6-9-2011 by soma100 because: clarifying a detail



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The EPA was a good idea and still is, the problem with it today is not that the idea of it is bad but rather the people inside. But, unlike those on the anti-government right I do not believe we need to burn down the barn to chase out the rats. What we need to do is streamline it and make it cost effective, keep the ideologues and busybodies out, and hand over many of the rather excessive regulatory practices to the state governments.

We need to use our own energy but not poison ourselves at the same time. We need to invest in cleaner energy but seeing as how expensive just one job is in green versus average it should be a private sector issue. Letting business proclaim they have the right to pollute our environment should be clear that it is not their right and the people who claim they have a right to dictate your energy usage, light bulbs, should also be told controlling others is not their right.

So I applaud Richard Nixon for creating this program and Barack Obama for halting this excessive regulation.

edit on 9/6/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The EPA was a good idea and still is, the problem with it today is not that the idea of it is bad but rather than people inside. But, unlike those on the anti-government right I do not believe we need to burn down the barn to chase out the rats. What we need to do is streamline it and make it cost effective, keep the ideologues and busybodies out, and hand over many of the rather excessive regulatory practices to the state governments.

We need to use our own energy but not poison ourselves at the same time. We need to invest in cleaner energy but seeing as how expensive just one job is in green versus average it should be a private sector issue. Letting business proclaim they have the right to pollute our environment should be clear that it is not their right and the people who claim they have a right to dictate your energy usage, light bulbs, should also be told controlling others is not their right.

So I applaud Richard Nixon for creating this program and Barack Obama for halting this excessive regulation.


Even though I probably come off as one of those anti-government right types, I do strongly agree with you here, Misoir. Well said.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join