Senator Murkowski’s Congressional Review Act resolution would block EPA and Department of Transportation rules to decrease oil consumption for cars and light trucks. It would also block the EPA finding that greenhouse gas pollutants endanger human health, and in doing so would stop regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from Power Plants.
So which part of the resolution to Senator Brown support? Higher oil consumption? Faster global warming? Or, does he back both higher oil consumption and accelerating global warming?
His Op-Ed in today’s Cape Cod Times gives little information.
In the op-ed, Brown casts himself as a protector of restaurant owners and small farmers. Here’s Senator Brown in his own words: ” we cannot have every restaurant owner or small farmer worried about the costs of complying with new carbon dioxide emissions restrictions.” (http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100610/OPINION/6100342/-1/OPINION03)
This may sound good–the only problem: it’s completely inaccurate and Brown should know this.
The actual truth about the EPA’s rules: “the goal is the reduction of GHG emissions from the largest sources. The first phase of the Tailoring Rule, which takes effect on January 2, 2011, does not impact either small businesses or farms.” (http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e4d959f3-4e0d-445c-b4a8-7ff3d67b35de)
From the EPA itself: “Small farms, restaurants and many other types of small facilities would not be subject to these permitting programs.” (http://www.epa.gov/nsr/fs20090930action.html)
I guess Senator Brown’s description would be accurate if you owned a restaurant or small farm and erected a large power plant inside your restaurant or on your farm. Otherwise his op-ed is remarkable reversal of reality.
This distortion may stem from the fact that Senator Brown in his op-ed cannot bring himself to discuss global warming–does he accept that this is a real human-made problem that threatens Cape Cod in particular? Or is he here also operating in a virtual alternate reality?