Issue: Motion to Proceed to S.J. Res. 27; A joint resolution disapproving a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the mitigation by States of cross-border air pollution under the Clean Air Act.
Result: Rejected 41 to 56, 3 not voting. Democrats scored.
Bill Summary (per the Congressional Research Service): Disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on July 11, 2011, entitled “Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals,” relating to the mitigation by states of cross-border air pollution under the Clean Air Act.
Get the latest news and updates from Freedom First Society.
Analysis: President Richard Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 by executive order. The ostensible purpose of the EPA was to protect human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress. Beneath that cover, however, the EPA was designed to support a totalitarian agenda.
Unknown to most Americans, Establishment Insiders provided the early funding to establish the powerful radical environmentalist movement. Under the pretense of protecting the environment, the EPA and its promoters sought to restrict America’s access to domestic energy supplies (as well as to its natural resources), as a means to further federal control of business and industry and make the people dependent on government for another basic necessity. (See, for example, Steve Milloy, Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them (Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2009.)
The rule submitted by the EPA on July 11, 2011 would tighten costly emission standards on the fossil fuel generating plants in 27 states that the EPA alleged were making it difficult for downwind states to comply with its rules. Relying on politically motivated “science” for support, this and many other EPA regulations serve to raise the cost of electricity in the United States and undermine our economy.
S.J. Res. 27, sponsored by GOP Senator Rand Paul, would have prevented the EPA rule from taking effect, if Congress and the president had approved it. Of course, there was no chance at that time that either Congress or the president would go along. So we ignore the GOP votes on this posturing roll call. However, those 48 Democrats who voted to retain the EPA regulation should be castigated, while the two Senate Democrats (Manchin of West Virginia and Nelson of Nebraska) who stood against their party’s leaders can be applauded.
We have assigned (good vote) to the Yeas and (bad vote) to the Nays. (P = voted present; ? = not voting; blank = not listed on roll call.)