Representative Edward Markey has a graph showing the increase of domestic gas and oil in the USA under the Obama Administration. Eight years of Bush can't compare.
The House is ramming through HR 4480 to open more public lands to exploitation by the petroleum industry. Title II of this bill seeks to gut the Clean Air Act.
Not one Republican speaks to the increase of costs to the American Consumer by the petroleum industry. That isn't going to change the cost of oil and gas. The costs will continue to increase substantially by 2022. That was reported by the IMF this year. The higher the energy costs to any nation, the less consumers can expand their quality of life and purchase products they want, but, that isn't important to the House Republicans.
This is a report about childhood asthma in the USA as of 2006 with a change in methodology in reporting incidents. It is most notable emergency room visits are vital to children with these problems. Asthma challenges the child's body to deliver oxygen on the hemoglobin to the rest of the body. If pollutants increase so will the incidence of asthma attacks and the interrupted growth and development of the child.
Link: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad381.pdf
This is Title II of HR 4480.
A BILL (click here)
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for an investment tax credit related to the production of electricity from offshore wind.
The House is ramming through HR 4480 to open more public lands to exploitation by the petroleum industry. Title II of this bill seeks to gut the Clean Air Act.
Not one Republican speaks to the increase of costs to the American Consumer by the petroleum industry. That isn't going to change the cost of oil and gas. The costs will continue to increase substantially by 2022. That was reported by the IMF this year. The higher the energy costs to any nation, the less consumers can expand their quality of life and purchase products they want, but, that isn't important to the House Republicans.
This is a report about childhood asthma in the USA as of 2006 with a change in methodology in reporting incidents. It is most notable emergency room visits are vital to children with these problems. Asthma challenges the child's body to deliver oxygen on the hemoglobin to the rest of the body. If pollutants increase so will the incidence of asthma attacks and the interrupted growth and development of the child.
Link: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad381.pdf
This is Title II of HR 4480.
Title II of H.R. 4480 eliminates a core principle of the Clean Air Act with respect to ozone pollution, which is also known as smog. For over 40 years, EPA has set health-based air quality standards using scientific and medical evidence to identify the maximum safe levels of air pollution for humans to breathe. EPA and the states then adopt requirements to reduce air pollution to achieve those air quality standards, taking costs into account. This approach was unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court in an opinion written by Justice Scalia.[1] The health-based standards in the Act are especially important for protecting children, the elderly and others who are particularly susceptible to harm from air pollution.
HR 4480 puts the emphasis on oil and gas rather than the future. It will ultimately cost the USA jobs as the cost of USA energy will continue to rise along with the cost of products hence limiting the growth of the USA economy and increase in demand for labor. Adding jobs to the petroleum industry is not the answer to growing the USA economy. It is grossly misguided and completely disregards the citizen, children and the future of the USA.
I thought this was an interesting bill:
- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
- This Act may be cited as the `Incentivizing Offshore Wind Power Act'.
SEC. 2. QUALIFYING OFFSHORE WIND FACILITY CREDIT.
- (a) In General- Section 46 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking `and' at the end of paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6), and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
- `(7) the qualifying offshore wind facility credit.'.
- (b) Amount of Credit- Subpart E of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after section 48D the following new section:...
Bills creating incentives for wind power will not cause increased pollution or harbor dangers for childhood asthma. If wind power were provided the type of tax incentives as the petroleum industry it would immediately, NOT TEN YEARS FROM NOW, but immediately add 17,000 jobs to the USA economy in addition to what already exists today.
Drilling oil and gas will not lower the costs. It is set on a global market and the products produced from the USA and Canada will not stay within the USA borders. The House Republicans are seeking to reward their cronies, back Romney's energy adviser whom knows nothing about anything except oil and gas and to play to their base. This legislation has no relevance to the future of the USA. In ten years, there will be more alternative energy sites, more electric cars as well as Flex Fuel trucks including those running on biodiesel because it will be cheaper than any petroleum product on the market.
Perhaps the US Senate needs to pass a bill to insure the guarantees of the First Amendment and Freedom of Speech to the USA House. I am sure it will receive good coverage and will probably pass in the House. I am sure the President will sign it. I sincerely believe the House Democrats have a right to sue the majority Republicans imposing gag orders on them. It is unconstitutional and the rule needs to be removed. I doubt even the current Supreme Court would support that mess.
HR 4480 can be litigated. Besides the harm this bill will bring to the people of the USA, the integrity of the bill was not insured by open and free debate will all facts coming to bear. I do believe the Gag Order on those opposing the bill will result in an unconstitutional status and should be included in any legal challenge if the bill ever makes it's way into law, which is realistic by today's standards. I believe the House is engaged in a political stunt and nothing else. To deny the Constitutional rights of debate on the House Floor is an assault against any legislative process to creating law.
...The Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Arctic Field Office (click here) recently completed a management plan and environmental Assessment (EA) for the Colville River Special Area. The plan provides future direction for 2.4 million acres of BLM-managed public lands within the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska. The lands to be covered by the plan were designated as a special area in 1977, with additional lands added in 1999.
Land use within the special area provides maximum protection for Arctic peregrine falcons that nest on cliffs along the Colville River and its major tributaries. Although protections for Arctic peregrine falcons have been provided in previous Federal Register notices and NEPA documents, this is the first plan providing consistent management direction throughout the NPR-A’s three major planning units (South, Northwest, and Northeast) for BLM-managed public lands along the Colville River Special Area....
It is a protected area for a specific reason and pipelines, roads and bridges in the area will compromise that status. This is another topic of litigation if the amendment passes under House vote. The USA House is seeking to dismantle laws of the land in the USA. They are seeking a coupe in many ways and should be viewed, even if not stated, as same.
Every aspect of the law is under question and the purpose behind this bill highly questionable. The USA EPA has been working with the petroleum industry to reduce the risks to human health by this industry. Representative Hinchey of New York could not be more correct in his concerns with this industry.
If one recalls, school buildings of coal mining towns are covered with coal dust compromising the lungs of the children that attend there. The coal industry could not care less about the people in the region of their industry and have no compassion for children. The development of hydraulic fracturing has the same dynamic. Complete disregard to the public, their federal lands and free use of them for recreational purpose, the protections of the wildlife on those lands and the protections of their clean water and air.
Cisterns provide a somewhat effective filtering system to contaminated water supplies, but, there is no going back. Once an aquifer is contaminated it is contaminated forever.
The petroleum industry is destroying the lands and aquifers of generations of our children. If they don't care about the air they breath or the water they drink today, why would they in the future? It is a huge folly to believe the petroleum industry is responsible, even to human life today, yet to expect them to appreciate those yet to be a part of this nation in the future.
Pro-Life are Republicans, but, that life doesn't have to have any quality to it, especially the air and water that completes that life.
Rep. Waxman is correct about adding additional layers of government to EPA activities. It is duplicity of purpose as the House Committee already exerts oversight to the laws of the USA. It would add expense to the Energy Department while the Republican's Budget seeks to cut the budget. The amendments requiring an additional government structure to do the work of the EPA are unconstitutional because it seeks to impinge the oversight responsibilities of the House Committee. The Legislative Branch is autonomous and does not need additional government committees to conduct their work, unless want to go golfing instead. The House Committees have the right to implement hearings if laws arise as a problem. That law is legislative statute and cannot be transferred to exterior committees or other government structures.
If anyone wants to try to understand why there is more oil drilling in the USA under the Obama Administration; check the reinfusion of monies into the departments funding under this administration. The Department of Energy has more employees to handle the necessary paperwork to allow drilling to proceed. That is not a President or administration interested in oppressing an industry.
The Bush administration and its Republican Congress cut budgets and impeded the processing of paperwork for permits to drill in the USA and it is why the petroleum industry didn't increase their activity in the USA during that time. Don't tell me the Republicans are 'Drill, Babe, Drill" or "Drill Here, Drill Now." They lie. It is easy for elected representatives to pass laws for political volleys, it is quite something different to actually provide the funding to have it happen.
Small government? Really?
The Terry Amendment is unconstitutional as a way to by pass the laws of the USA. Emergencies of any kind are declared by Governors and acknowledged by the President of the USA. The House Republicans did nothing to validate rapid 3 day processing of waivers to USA law. The EPA has to be asked, or Secretary Jackson could provide without asking, the time frame needed by the EPA to supply a waiver to law. Any waiver would have to have limits to its duration for reassessing otherwise why have USA federal law at all. The House Republicans again are seeking to bypass federal law. If the Republicans want to undermine the very laws they pass, we don't need a House of Representatives and simply need anarchy.
This provision of HR 4480 directly places cost into the equation of regulations of air quality for the country. Clean Air Standards under the Clean Air Act cannot be redefined based on cost. If the cost of clean air to this country doesn't cost a thing. It is the pollution and the interruption of pollution effecting lives is what costs monies to insure the clean air standard is upheld. Representative Gardner is wrong. He does not put health and environmental standards ahead of profits.
Secretary Jackson can speak to this, but, the EPA and most universities embarking on protections of our environment already do cost assessments and seek if reasonable options exist. Here again, the House Republicans have not done due diligence before they legislate.
The EPA under President Obama have already rolled back regulations that would lower the cost of gas at the pump. The Republican House is not performing due diligence before they seek superfluous law to tie the hands of the Executive Branch. The regulations the Obama EPA removed did NOT compromise the safety of the environment or human health.
The Hasting Amendment places $5000 fee in the redress of grievances of drilling activities. Adding the cost to opposition of any law is prohibitive. Mr. Hastings is empathetic to the needs of the petroleum industry to proceed to reduce their costs. This is an industry receiving billions of subsides from the taxpayer and has record profits to date. There is no hardship in the petroleum industry, it does cause hardship to the citizen.
The Markey Amendment preserves natural resources for other generations of the USA. The USA should only exploit its own natural resources for its citizens. Do you know a gallon of gas in Saudi Arabia is 98 cents US today? Saudi Arabia processes its own natural resources for its citizens. They also export, but, the Saudi generation today coming into their adulthood are questioning the wisdom in those policies.
The idea the USA natural resources are actually used against the best costs to its citizens and dictated by global prices is ridiculous to me, except, it provides realistic decision making regarding those resources and moving to alternative fuels. Price gouging of Americans is allowed through speculation. The Saudis don't have that problem and why it was a revelation to them when it was occurring and the King made it clear they had no influence in those prices and production was never cut to increase the costs to Americans. It is on the blog.
The USA bases its economy in capitalism as if it is the law of the land. In the case of using its natural resources it is gaming against its best outcomes to continue in this manner. Additionally, the Republican House is more than willing to deplete their children's natural resources for crony profits today by exporting them. In the amendment 'all oil and gas' is not the issue as Mr. Hastings wants to pretend. The Markey Amendment does not covet petroleum products like plastics. Hastings is manipulating the language without regret.
I think that rounds out the shenanigans within the House. Anything goes with language construction without any hearings to fact finding. The House Republicans rely on satisfying their constituents and not much else.
Drilling oil and gas will not lower the costs. It is set on a global market and the products produced from the USA and Canada will not stay within the USA borders. The House Republicans are seeking to reward their cronies, back Romney's energy adviser whom knows nothing about anything except oil and gas and to play to their base. This legislation has no relevance to the future of the USA. In ten years, there will be more alternative energy sites, more electric cars as well as Flex Fuel trucks including those running on biodiesel because it will be cheaper than any petroleum product on the market.
Perhaps the US Senate needs to pass a bill to insure the guarantees of the First Amendment and Freedom of Speech to the USA House. I am sure it will receive good coverage and will probably pass in the House. I am sure the President will sign it. I sincerely believe the House Democrats have a right to sue the majority Republicans imposing gag orders on them. It is unconstitutional and the rule needs to be removed. I doubt even the current Supreme Court would support that mess.
HR 4480 can be litigated. Besides the harm this bill will bring to the people of the USA, the integrity of the bill was not insured by open and free debate will all facts coming to bear. I do believe the Gag Order on those opposing the bill will result in an unconstitutional status and should be included in any legal challenge if the bill ever makes it's way into law, which is realistic by today's standards. I believe the House is engaged in a political stunt and nothing else. To deny the Constitutional rights of debate on the House Floor is an assault against any legislative process to creating law.
...The Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Arctic Field Office (click here) recently completed a management plan and environmental Assessment (EA) for the Colville River Special Area. The plan provides future direction for 2.4 million acres of BLM-managed public lands within the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska. The lands to be covered by the plan were designated as a special area in 1977, with additional lands added in 1999.
Land use within the special area provides maximum protection for Arctic peregrine falcons that nest on cliffs along the Colville River and its major tributaries. Although protections for Arctic peregrine falcons have been provided in previous Federal Register notices and NEPA documents, this is the first plan providing consistent management direction throughout the NPR-A’s three major planning units (South, Northwest, and Northeast) for BLM-managed public lands along the Colville River Special Area....
It is a protected area for a specific reason and pipelines, roads and bridges in the area will compromise that status. This is another topic of litigation if the amendment passes under House vote. The USA House is seeking to dismantle laws of the land in the USA. They are seeking a coupe in many ways and should be viewed, even if not stated, as same.
Every aspect of the law is under question and the purpose behind this bill highly questionable. The USA EPA has been working with the petroleum industry to reduce the risks to human health by this industry. Representative Hinchey of New York could not be more correct in his concerns with this industry.
If one recalls, school buildings of coal mining towns are covered with coal dust compromising the lungs of the children that attend there. The coal industry could not care less about the people in the region of their industry and have no compassion for children. The development of hydraulic fracturing has the same dynamic. Complete disregard to the public, their federal lands and free use of them for recreational purpose, the protections of the wildlife on those lands and the protections of their clean water and air.
Cisterns provide a somewhat effective filtering system to contaminated water supplies, but, there is no going back. Once an aquifer is contaminated it is contaminated forever.
The petroleum industry is destroying the lands and aquifers of generations of our children. If they don't care about the air they breath or the water they drink today, why would they in the future? It is a huge folly to believe the petroleum industry is responsible, even to human life today, yet to expect them to appreciate those yet to be a part of this nation in the future.
Pro-Life are Republicans, but, that life doesn't have to have any quality to it, especially the air and water that completes that life.
Rep. Waxman is correct about adding additional layers of government to EPA activities. It is duplicity of purpose as the House Committee already exerts oversight to the laws of the USA. It would add expense to the Energy Department while the Republican's Budget seeks to cut the budget. The amendments requiring an additional government structure to do the work of the EPA are unconstitutional because it seeks to impinge the oversight responsibilities of the House Committee. The Legislative Branch is autonomous and does not need additional government committees to conduct their work, unless want to go golfing instead. The House Committees have the right to implement hearings if laws arise as a problem. That law is legislative statute and cannot be transferred to exterior committees or other government structures.
If anyone wants to try to understand why there is more oil drilling in the USA under the Obama Administration; check the reinfusion of monies into the departments funding under this administration. The Department of Energy has more employees to handle the necessary paperwork to allow drilling to proceed. That is not a President or administration interested in oppressing an industry.
The Bush administration and its Republican Congress cut budgets and impeded the processing of paperwork for permits to drill in the USA and it is why the petroleum industry didn't increase their activity in the USA during that time. Don't tell me the Republicans are 'Drill, Babe, Drill" or "Drill Here, Drill Now." They lie. It is easy for elected representatives to pass laws for political volleys, it is quite something different to actually provide the funding to have it happen.
Small government? Really?
The Terry Amendment is unconstitutional as a way to by pass the laws of the USA. Emergencies of any kind are declared by Governors and acknowledged by the President of the USA. The House Republicans did nothing to validate rapid 3 day processing of waivers to USA law. The EPA has to be asked, or Secretary Jackson could provide without asking, the time frame needed by the EPA to supply a waiver to law. Any waiver would have to have limits to its duration for reassessing otherwise why have USA federal law at all. The House Republicans again are seeking to bypass federal law. If the Republicans want to undermine the very laws they pass, we don't need a House of Representatives and simply need anarchy.
In revising or supplementing any national primary or secondary ambient air quality standards for ozone under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409), the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall take into consideration feasibility and cost.
Secretary Jackson can speak to this, but, the EPA and most universities embarking on protections of our environment already do cost assessments and seek if reasonable options exist. Here again, the House Republicans have not done due diligence before they legislate.
The EPA under President Obama have already rolled back regulations that would lower the cost of gas at the pump. The Republican House is not performing due diligence before they seek superfluous law to tie the hands of the Executive Branch. The regulations the Obama EPA removed did NOT compromise the safety of the environment or human health.
The Hasting Amendment places $5000 fee in the redress of grievances of drilling activities. Adding the cost to opposition of any law is prohibitive. Mr. Hastings is empathetic to the needs of the petroleum industry to proceed to reduce their costs. This is an industry receiving billions of subsides from the taxpayer and has record profits to date. There is no hardship in the petroleum industry, it does cause hardship to the citizen.
The Markey Amendment preserves natural resources for other generations of the USA. The USA should only exploit its own natural resources for its citizens. Do you know a gallon of gas in Saudi Arabia is 98 cents US today? Saudi Arabia processes its own natural resources for its citizens. They also export, but, the Saudi generation today coming into their adulthood are questioning the wisdom in those policies.
The idea the USA natural resources are actually used against the best costs to its citizens and dictated by global prices is ridiculous to me, except, it provides realistic decision making regarding those resources and moving to alternative fuels. Price gouging of Americans is allowed through speculation. The Saudis don't have that problem and why it was a revelation to them when it was occurring and the King made it clear they had no influence in those prices and production was never cut to increase the costs to Americans. It is on the blog.
The USA bases its economy in capitalism as if it is the law of the land. In the case of using its natural resources it is gaming against its best outcomes to continue in this manner. Additionally, the Republican House is more than willing to deplete their children's natural resources for crony profits today by exporting them. In the amendment 'all oil and gas' is not the issue as Mr. Hastings wants to pretend. The Markey Amendment does not covet petroleum products like plastics. Hastings is manipulating the language without regret.
I think that rounds out the shenanigans within the House. Anything goes with language construction without any hearings to fact finding. The House Republicans rely on satisfying their constituents and not much else.
