The regulatory dictatorship

Posted by: Phineas on November 20, 2010 at 8:37 pm

Back when I took Civics (and back when they still taught it), I was told that the role of making laws was assigned to the legislatures, as their members were democratically elected by the people. In fact, Article I, Section 1 of the US Constitution states:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Near as I can recall, “all” means “every darned bit of it,” including the authority to rewrite laws.

So where does the Environmental Protection Agency get off rewriting the Clean Air Act to include things never intended, such as carbon dioxide emissions from stationary sources?

This video from Energy Tomorrow talks about this and other examples of EPA’s regulatory power grab. Did you know EPA is proposing ozone standards so stringent that even Yellowstone National Park can’t meet them? Watch, there’s more:

Be sure to read my Twitter-buddy Jazz Shaw’s post on this for other examples of how our EPA is turning into Leviathan, and a link to a paper by Energy Tomorrow that provides an extensive list of EPA’s questionable activities.

You might recall the Left screaming about how the Bush Administration was “politicizing science.” Perhaps, but I suspect it is much worse under the Obama administration. The Progressive Left sees the environmental laws as a way to take control of the economy via regulation, well-beyond the laudable goal of protecting the environment. And we shouldn’t be surprised that this new regulatory imperialism has taken place after Obama came to office; his “Climate Czar,” Carole Browner, is a former EPA chief and was at least closely affiliated with, if not a member of, the Socialist International.

What an odd coincidence.

In any event, EPA’s “reimagining” of its authorizing laws are clearly unconstitutional and the agency needs to be reined in. The new Republican majority will have a lot on its plate when the 112th Congress convenes next year, but, given the damage these new initiatives can do both to the economy and our constitutional order, they should make holding the agency accountable a priority.

NOTE: If you don’t see the video (or any videos on this site), it may be a Firefox problem. They aren’t appearing in my copy of Firefox, but show up just fine in IE, Opera, and Chrome.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

3 Responses to “The regulatory dictatorship”


  1. Carlos says:

    “…well-beyond the laudable goal of protecting the environment…”

    I don’t give a rat’s patootie how “laudable” any goal in the world is. If it ain’t individually demanded by Congress and signed into law by the sitting president, it ain’t legal.

    Which also brings with it decades of illegal fines which the United States government owes thousands of companies and individuals for over-reaching their constitutional authority.

    But will it happen? Not with an insipidly stupid electorate that thinks Duh-1’s promises were what the country really needed.

  2. Jo says:

    If you want the hair on the back of your neck to stand up, read more about the scope of the so-called ‘Safe Foods’ bill which is a thinly veiled disguise of ‘making our foods safe for consumption’ but it really will force small farmers, local produce markets and farmers markets and possibly even home gardens out of existence. I would love to know how much major food production corporations like Monsanto is paying Dick Durbin and his ilk to make sure they get a monopoly on produce and food production in this nation. And where have the foodborn illnesses come from? Local farmers? No–the big guys. I am frantic over this and have written both Graham and DeMint and sent e-mails urging people to fight it. This is scary.

  3. Carlos says:

    I’ve told this before, but it bears repeating: Once I was dealing with a local government planner, and that person had the gall to tell me outright that all land is the government’s, it’s only their beneficence that allows us to us it (if we follow the rules).

    Disallowing all departmental rules and regulations by non-legislative bodies from the feds to municipalities would be a great first step in restoring freedom to the people.