PDA

View Full Version : FOXNews misses real story on EPA’s carbon dioxide ruling!




johnwk
12-07-2009, 09:36 PM
SEE: EPA Issues Greenhouse Gas Warning Despite Concerns Over Leaked E-Mails (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/07/republicans-slam-epa-decision-declare-public-health-danger/)

“In the face of GOP opposition, the EPA on Monday declared greenhouse gases a danger to public health in a move that could pave the way for future regulation.……. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in a written statement that the finding, which declares carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases a threat to public health, marks the start of a U.S. campaign to tackle greenhouse gas emissions.”

“Could pave the way for future regulation“? What FOXNews has failed to report is that the people of the United States have not debated and then given their consent to Congress via Article V of our Constitution a regulatory power over carbon dioxide or any other “greenhouse gases”. There simply has never been any public debate by We the People to grant such power to Congress, nor has there been the delegation of such a regulatory power via the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as is required under our Constitution prior to Congress exercising such regulatory power. And so, Congress is without constitutional power to delegate any authority to Lisa Jackson to impose any regulations within the various united States whatsoever with regard to “greenhouse gases” or any gases asserted to be a danger to public health.

As a matter of fact Federalist No 45 documents the regulatory power in question is one recognized as falling under those powers reserved by the various States:

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State“.

And the intentions of the States to reserve the above powers mentioned were given force and effect by the adoption of the Tenth Amendment which reads:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people“

It should further be noted that the Supreme Court, less than 20 years after the adoption of the Constitution, confirmed the defined and limited powers of Congress:


The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts pro- [5 U.S. 137, 177] hibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.

Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.

If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.

Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void. ____ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)


So why do our Republican Party members in Congress argue irrelevant arguments such as the EPA is rushing to a decision that may not be based on sound science? Why does the Republican Party leadership ignore the irrefutable fact that We the People have not granted constitutional authority to Congress to regulate the subject matter in question?

I am convinced the majority of Republicans in Congress have been working very closely with the Democrat progressive leadership over the years to continually enlarge the iron fist of the federal government!

Seems quite clear that the sleazy job of the Republican Party leadership in this, as in other grabs for power, is to create a number of diversionary arguments against the proposal while the primary argument that We the People of the united States have not given our consent to such a regulatory power is totally ignored! And in the end, the objective with this particular grab for power is to have Congress assume an iron fisted authority over every aspect of our nation’s manufactures and industries under the guise of controlling “greenhouse gases“.

Why do Republicans in Congress not address the primary argument which challenges the attempt to legislate over a subject matter not entrusted to Congress?

The sad truth seems to be self evident; that we have a Republican and Democrat controlled Congress acting in rebellion to our written Constitution, and that We the People must deal with tyrants who have seized political power. The one thing on the side of loyal Americans, which must be taken into account by every freedom loving person is, we have a written Constitution, and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted are historically proven, and thus, the people’s retaliation against public servants who work to subvert that written Constitution can not only be justified, but would be expected from all those who support and defend our constitutionally limited system of government.

JWK



"On every question of construction [of the Constitution], carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322.

Immortal Technique
12-07-2009, 11:27 PM
is it green house gases? or just co2 that was declared?
Because the biggest green house gas is water vapour, how they plan on taxing us and regulating that is something id like to see, or should i say not see

BucksforPaul
12-07-2009, 11:33 PM
Shouldn't the thread title read "FOXNews omits real story on EPA's carbon dioxide ruling!"

tangent4ronpaul
12-08-2009, 10:29 AM
They are going after cars...

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html

Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act

Action

On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:

* Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases-- carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) --in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.
* Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare.

These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action is a prerequisite to finalizing the EPA’s proposed greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty vehicles, which were jointly proposed by EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Safety Administration on September 15, 2009.

[...]

-t