West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller today is introducing legislation seeking to delay — for two years — any federal limits on greenhouse gas emissions.
Rockefeller says his bill aims to give Congress:
… The time it needs to address an issue as complicated and expansive as our energy future … Congress, not the EPA, must be the ideal decision-maker on such a challenging issue.
West Virginia’s senator previously joined the charge against any effort by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse emissions, something the U.S. Supreme Court has said EPA clearly has the authority (the obligation, actually, if you bother to read EPA’s endangerment finding) to do.
Rockefeller’s legislation is available online here, as is a previous letter from the senator to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and Jackson’s reply. Rockefeller said:
Two weeks ago, I sent a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson challenging EPA’s potential regulation of greenhouse gases. Administrator Jackson responded quickly and showed some willingness to move the agency’s timetable for regulation to the end of 2010. This is a positive change and good progress, but I am concerned it may not be enough time. We must set this delay in stone and give Congress enough time to consider a comprehensive energy bill to develop the clean coal technologies we need. At a time when so many people are hurting, we need to put decisions about clean coal and our energy future into the hands of the people and their elected representatives, not a federal environmental agency.
Of course, the problem with what Rockefeller is doing is that the House of Representatives has already passed climate change legislation — a bill that the United Mine Workers of America union said provides a “remarkable” amount of “clean coal” money and ensures “the future of coal will be intact.”
But that hasn’t stopped Reps. Nick J. Rahall and Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., and Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., from introducing companion legislation in the House of Representatives.
Politically, many progressive voices in the coal industry — including American Electric Power and the United Mine Workers — have pointed to the threat of EPA action on greenhouse gases as a strong reason for Congress itself to act. Without that threat of EPA rules hanging over its head, will Congress step up and do something?
Odd, isn’t it, that the background materials issued by Rockefeller’s office on this legislation didn’t include any draft of the senator’s own plan to actually do something about climate change, rather than just delay for the sake of the coal industry?
Subscribe to the Coal Tattoo
Obviously, Rockefeller believes regulation will be much more lenient if he can get his and others’ hands on it in Congress. He knows that EPA is rigorously science-driven, rather than a tool of Big Coal.
EPA “science-driven”? Did the “science” magically change when Obama was elected? You’ve got to be kidding!
It’s not just the coal industry at risk, its our entire economy. We need to pursue continuous improvements, with a careful eye on all of the various ramifications. Fortunately, our legislators understand this.
Without the threat of EPA action, or without that threat of EPA rules hanging over its head ? Sounds like Congress is irrelevant on ths issue. Does this mean the EPA now wields more power than or is sidesteping the Congressional process ?
Altough Sen Rockefeller does not control the EPA or have any real say on its policy. He can and does have a say in its budget. Thats where brave congressmen like Sen Rockefeller can throw his weight around. One more thing. Ken, why is it that when I call people in the South Central Jail, Criminals, Im told to calm it down. When you call Sen Rockefeller “Rocky IV” its just fine. Why dont you call him that in the print newspaper?
Scott14,
Thanks for your comment and your question. I’ll try to answer it.
Long before I came to the Gazette, there was a policy in place to refer to Sen. Rockefeller as “Jay” in headlines … my understanding was that was because “Rockefeller” doesn’t fit in most headline configurations.
I don’t decide headline policy for the print paper, so I can’t speak to why they do or don’t use Rocky IV.
I can say that I don’t use it in my headlines as any gesture of disrespect for Sen. Rockefeller. I’ve known him for many years, and even if I didn’t respect him (I do) I would respect his position as one of our two U.S. Senators.
On the other hand, I believe that you’ve used “criminals” to refer to folks who haven’t yet been convicted of anything — they were in jail CHARGED with crimes, but had not been convicted. Therefore, your terminology was factually incorrect.
I will continue to insist Scott14 that you and all other Coal Tattoo readers try to treat other readers and those you comment about with at least some basic amount of common courtesy and respect. If you don’t want to do that, then please by all means start your own blog and write whatever you want.
Thanks again for reading and commenting, Ken.
This is nothing more than posturing himself to prevent being thrown out of the Senate by the people of the Great State of WV. He and his comrade Senator Byrd both need to go. They don’t represent the people of WV they represent their party and protect their jobs. They go anyway the political wind blows.
[...] in seeking a delay in potential EPA regulation of greenhouse gases, Rockefeller took a more moderate step than Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, whose bill would have [...]