[postlink]http://werehit.blogspot.com/2011/04/planned-parenthoods-lies-and-epas.html[/postlink]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRJd5K4TBtMendofvid
[starttext]
WE'RE HIT!!! TELEVISION
http://werehit.blogspot.com/
http://werhit-mathenyahu.blogspot.com/
April 5, 2011
Mark Matheny
Go to grassrootsaction.com and demand that CNN news tell the truth about PlanParenthood's Lies:
http://www.grassrootsaction.com/471/email_form.asp?PID=30456300&NID=1
Go to JBS.org and Help End EPA Regulatory Tyranny:
Help End EPA Regulatory Tyranny
Please act on this email alert immediately. Debate on H.R. 910 begins in the House at noon on April 5.
The EPA conveniently claims that the 1970 Clean Air Act has given the agency carte blanche in regulatory powers over all manufacturing companies and heavy industry, energy producers and commuters concerning greenhouse gases. However, The Clean Air Conference rejected adding greenhouse gases to the Clean Air Act twenty years ago. But, that seemingly strong rejection was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 2007 decision which allowed the EPA to list carbon as a pollutant.
The self-anointed and unelected regulators of the EPA would implement global warming policies that severely impact business growth and jobs especially in the areas of energy production, in turn affecting energy costs and the entire economy, by regulating carbon emissions. Every hospital, manufacturing facility, power plant, agricultural establishment, refinery, you name it, would be subjected to an endless stream of costly regulations dreamed up by EPA regulators.
The Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, H.R. 910, was introduced by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and has 95 cosponsors. H.R. 910 would counter the EPA's unconstitutional power trip. The measure would prohibit the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, plain and simple. It is quite elementary that excessive regulation always increases prices; H.R. 910 is an attempt to protect consumers and industry from high energy prices, and also returns regulation of fuel economy to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Global warmists and rabid environmentalists are labeling H.R. 910 a "rebuke" to all the scientists at the EPA and around the world who believe anthropogenic global warming to be an unequivocal truth based on consensus. Of course, other scientists in the tens of thousands disagree. The "national security" mantra has already been trotted out by environmentalists as they also claim the EPA has only the nation's health, welfare and reducing dependence on foreign oil at heart. Climate changers are trying to further discredit the bill by asserting Republicans are just carrying out the agenda of fossil fuel interests; they believe Congress has no business micro-managing regulatory issues "best left to scientific experts." Such an attitude disregards the proper role of Congress in our Constitutional system.
The bill was marked up on March 15, and approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee to be voted on before Easter. Debate in the House begins at noon tomorrow, April 5.
Manufacturing associations and organizations, and energy producers -- oil and gas to nuclear and coal -- all oppose any EPA regulation of greenhouse gases because they know and understand the impact on their products and services, and employees. The surprise has come with labor unions now entering the debate, normally huge supporters of all Democrat policies. Unions composed of utility workers, boilermakers, and mine workers are adamantly opposed to the EPA's regulatory expansion because they contend hundreds of thousands of workers' jobs may be on the line due to just a few of the new rules set forth. Even the steelworkers union is treading with caution and says the EPA needs to be "more mindful of the costs" of such regulations.
If you are in favor of reining in the unconstitutional overreach of the EPA concerning carbon emissions, contact your senators and representatives and have them support H.R. 910 and S. 482, the companion bill in the Senate sponsored by Sen. James Inofe (R-Okla.). As of April 4, H.R. 910 has 95 cosponsors and S. 482 has 43 cosponsors.
Thanks,
Your friends at The John Birch Society
[endtext]
[starttext]
WE'RE HIT!!! TELEVISION
http://werehit.blogspot.com/
http://werhit-mathenyahu.blogspot.com/
April 5, 2011
Mark Matheny
Go to grassrootsaction.com and demand that CNN news tell the truth about PlanParenthood's Lies:
http://www.grassrootsaction.com/471/email_form.asp?PID=30456300&NID=1
Go to JBS.org and Help End EPA Regulatory Tyranny:
Help End EPA Regulatory Tyranny
Please act on this email alert immediately. Debate on H.R. 910 begins in the House at noon on April 5.
The EPA conveniently claims that the 1970 Clean Air Act has given the agency carte blanche in regulatory powers over all manufacturing companies and heavy industry, energy producers and commuters concerning greenhouse gases. However, The Clean Air Conference rejected adding greenhouse gases to the Clean Air Act twenty years ago. But, that seemingly strong rejection was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 2007 decision which allowed the EPA to list carbon as a pollutant.
The self-anointed and unelected regulators of the EPA would implement global warming policies that severely impact business growth and jobs especially in the areas of energy production, in turn affecting energy costs and the entire economy, by regulating carbon emissions. Every hospital, manufacturing facility, power plant, agricultural establishment, refinery, you name it, would be subjected to an endless stream of costly regulations dreamed up by EPA regulators.
The Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, H.R. 910, was introduced by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and has 95 cosponsors. H.R. 910 would counter the EPA's unconstitutional power trip. The measure would prohibit the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, plain and simple. It is quite elementary that excessive regulation always increases prices; H.R. 910 is an attempt to protect consumers and industry from high energy prices, and also returns regulation of fuel economy to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Global warmists and rabid environmentalists are labeling H.R. 910 a "rebuke" to all the scientists at the EPA and around the world who believe anthropogenic global warming to be an unequivocal truth based on consensus. Of course, other scientists in the tens of thousands disagree. The "national security" mantra has already been trotted out by environmentalists as they also claim the EPA has only the nation's health, welfare and reducing dependence on foreign oil at heart. Climate changers are trying to further discredit the bill by asserting Republicans are just carrying out the agenda of fossil fuel interests; they believe Congress has no business micro-managing regulatory issues "best left to scientific experts." Such an attitude disregards the proper role of Congress in our Constitutional system.
The bill was marked up on March 15, and approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee to be voted on before Easter. Debate in the House begins at noon tomorrow, April 5.
Manufacturing associations and organizations, and energy producers -- oil and gas to nuclear and coal -- all oppose any EPA regulation of greenhouse gases because they know and understand the impact on their products and services, and employees. The surprise has come with labor unions now entering the debate, normally huge supporters of all Democrat policies. Unions composed of utility workers, boilermakers, and mine workers are adamantly opposed to the EPA's regulatory expansion because they contend hundreds of thousands of workers' jobs may be on the line due to just a few of the new rules set forth. Even the steelworkers union is treading with caution and says the EPA needs to be "more mindful of the costs" of such regulations.
If you are in favor of reining in the unconstitutional overreach of the EPA concerning carbon emissions, contact your senators and representatives and have them support H.R. 910 and S. 482, the companion bill in the Senate sponsored by Sen. James Inofe (R-Okla.). As of April 4, H.R. 910 has 95 cosponsors and S. 482 has 43 cosponsors.
Thanks,
Your friends at The John Birch Society
[endtext]
No comments:
Post a Comment