Obama Halts Controversial EPA regulation

I would have to read more about the ozone standard that is being rescinded but based on the info of that article I think this a bad move.

As the article notes the independent panel of scientist recommended these but Obama is allowing politics to drive this rather than science, something he said he wasn't going to do.

Also as the article notes while these regulations might cost billions they also might lead to billions in saving. Also implementing these regulations might actually help the economy by forcing companies to spend and hire to meet these new standards.

 

^agree. Obama the compromiser or obama the pussycat? Seems too me like obama has cashed in too many chips, why does he stay complicit in compromising with such pro buisness- extremist- non sience believing conservatives. Its money, thats all this is. corporations who pollute want to keep the status quo for whatever reason, even at the cost of the environment. Possibly they would lose big money by these new air regulations policies, as they would have to make there plants across the board more air friendly which would cost big money or "cost jobs".

To me this whole debate shows the true power of the buisness lobby in the GOP, they have successfully convinced a large portion of its followers that global warming is a liberal myth or scam that is there to make money. Kinda like organic food lol. This anti global warming sentiment happens to fall right in line with the GOPs religious conservative sects who seem reluctant to accept various fields of science- namely evolution and stem cell research.

 

I read the 1st sentence and just frowned.

"President Barack Obama on Friday scrapped his administration's controversial plans to tighten smog rules, bowing to the demands of congressional Republicans and some business leaders."

Such word usage always makes everything about a power struggle
Someone winning and someone losing
and
we wonder why our politics sucks.

It is about competition not good governance.
What is the SCORE between Obama and the Rebublicans?
Either way the public is losing

Rocket River

 

The only thing that would make sense of all this compromising, is if obama has a plan to push forth some kind of major legislation in the near future possibly after the election. Other than that it doesnt make sense, why has he given the republicans so much ground? He has to realize thst regardless of compromise, the republicans are out and have been out for blood since day 1 he stepped into office. No compromise on there part, why should he? For peanuts? A watered down healthcare bill? Republicans have simply not shown good faith.

Like i said though, unless he has some grand plan of attack to pass universal healthcare Or some other significant piece of legislation that would help the american working class i wold tell boner to shove it.

 

Ill trust my geology professor at san jac before i trust a republican politician who has sold out to big buisness lobby.

Furthermore, i dont understand what all this al gore hate is going on. I dont praise the guy or nothng, but gore has become a figure to scrutinize or arbitrarily brng into this whole "climate change"( lol )debate. Hes a ****1ng red herring, someone to point the finger at and say "look at gore and all of his hippie followers, there crazy just like he said he made the internet" its bs that he is even brought into the discussion and not the actual science.

And i say this, because i have many conservative friends who always bring him up into this debate out of no where. Trying to make US sound like the extremists.

 

I noticed you didn't bold the other "might", "..this might cost billions..."

From my understanding is that Smog is a fairly localized phenomenon, for example in LA you can often see the layer from the top of the San Gabriel mountains, so what other countries are doing isn't necessarily going to affect our local environment.

In terms of whether it helps or hurts the economy I agree there is a good case for a short term harm but as noted in the article there are potential longer term benefits. At the same time when most energy companies are sitting on a fair amount of cash prompting them to spend it might provide a short term stimulus.

 

FYI what this regulation is dealing with isn't climate change but dealing with ozone which is a major component of smog. This is a fairly well understood phenomenon.

 

translation: "oh sh** I need to get reelected, I'll bring this back in 2013"

 

I dont know a ton about this but the common complaint from those who manage the electrical grid was that the timetable to implement this was a bit too fast. Considering many states are barely meeting their electricity demands, any legislation that threatened to shut down some plants was a scary thing. Especially with the south in a terrible drought, this was really bad timing.

Does anyone know if Obama killed the regulation entirely or just added more time for plants to meet the standard? I know that the deadline was next month so we were rapidly approaching a date that states couldn't meet and consequently plants would be shut down.

 

God what a p***y.

 

Great job. One thing we need more of is pollution! Can we please just get more pollution in our air, water, and land? I've been hoping for a long time that we do less and less to protect our land, air, and water. Finally we are doing it.

 

Right but if (as alleged by multiple state governments) some power plants were going to be shut down as a result of not meeting the deadline to upgrade their plants, how is this totally wrong? Texas's electricity grid alone is on the verge of breaking and the fact that 3 or 4 plants (cant remember the specific number) were going to be shut down is enough to justify a delay in implementation. The state offices were projecting rolling blackouts in multiple states if the deadline hit.

If all of that is true (again I dont know enough) then how can you fault President Obama. Rolling blackouts would be devastating in this heat and Obama would receive much more political fallout since you could easily blame it on these regulations

 

Then they should have met the deadline. Either that or provided evidence why the deadline should have been extended earlier.

 

I'm with you there but we have to look at reality. If rolling blackouts are a possibility, then the blame game is irrelevant. You delay the bill and prevent it. I'm not ok with the threat of people dying in Texas because we overload our grid with plant shutdowns and force rolling blackouts.

 

You make a good point. There do need to be consequences for not meeting the standards, but death to the elderly or infirm due to lack of power should not be one of them.

But there definitely should be consequences.

 

There are consequences. The consequence is that plants that fail to meet the rules get shut down. The problem is that in this particular circumstance enough plants will get shut down that people will get hurt.

Additionally from my understanding, all Obama is doing is delaying the implementation dates to give states some more time to get in compliance.

The anger from Democrats here just seems to be a bit unfounded in my opinion. There are things to criticize but I'm not sure this is one of them.

 

This isn't a question that can be answered by "science" (unless you want to count economics and public policy as sciences). You have to count the cost against the health and ecological benefits. That's the role of politics. Wouldn't science tell you we're better off producing no smog at all?

Still, I don't think it's a good idea to delay this simply for worries about the economy or the grid. The grid should be fine unless a large number of Texas plants wouldn't pass. We were stressed in August, but that was a 100-year weather event (maybe more rare than that even), with extreme drought and extreme heat everywhere in Texas every day for the whole month. As long as you don't roll it out in the summer, ERCOT and the TX energy industry should be able to handle new smog rules. If it gets very bad, they can start up again mothballed plants, like they did this August.

As for the economy, I don't think we're going to get ahead by sacrificing every long-term goal for the sake of the hope of some short-term benefit. And as drags on the economy go, how does it compare to cutting trillions from the budget in the name of deficit reduction?