Obama’s EPA, Friend or Foe?

Under the Obama Administration, the EPA has become quite controversial. Is this agency, under this Administration, truly a “friend” to the earth, or just another arm of the government being used to further a political agenda and intimidate it’s enemies?

Obama has instituted regulations on the coal industry that will result in the closure of over 200 power plants and the loss of countless American jobs.  In Kentucky alone, more than 6000 miners have lost their jobs. For every mining job that is eliminated,  there are at least 3 related jobs that are also lost. An Obama administration official said that these regulations for new coal plants will increase electricity prices by as much as 80%  for American consumers.

Can the fragile American economy afford such a disruption in jobs and another power grabbing attempt by the United States Government? Do these new regulations really have a heavier impact on the environment or the American people?  Could these regulations be eased into law so the American people are not effected so quickly and negatively in an already weak economy? Emails, forced to the surface by The Freedom of Information Act, found that The Sierra Club, a green group, was involved in questionably ethical  communications with the EPA to adopt regulations for the coal industry that would be impossible for power plants to meet.  Can we afford the shut down of so many coal plants who currently generate over 40% of the nation’s electricity, contribute over $100 billion to the economy and support millions of jobs?

Obama’s EPA is also trying to stop the United States from signing off on the Keystone Pipeline. The Pipeline is a 1,664 mile project that would transport 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day, while creating up to 100,000 new jobs and contribute $3.4 billion to the US economy. Could approving this pipeline also have  positive effects on the United States’ standing as a world power?  Currently Russia has been using their control over Ukraine’s energy supply against them.  Who, in this explosive war on power around the world, should we be scared of? The Middle East or the Canadians? If Middle Eastern oil no longer mattered to the U.S., how would it change or influence US foreign policy around the world?

Obama’s EPA’s newest enemy to the environment is the proposed Pebble Mine in Alaska that is estimated to yield 107 million ounces of gold, 80 billion pounds of copper and 5.6 billion pounds of molybdenum, which is used to make steel alloys. The Pebble Partnership has spent $107 million and five years monitoring the soil, water and air to ensure it can mine without hurting the environment. The EPA and it’s green supporters, are, as expected, against this venture. Meanwhile, Democrats are calling on the EPA to use the “Clean Water Act” to block ANY large development projects.

The question for Americans now is how could these 3 projects effect us? Does it help or hurt our future energy use, our economy, the job market or our standing as a Nation in the world? Future environmental benefits are questionable and basically unknown, but job loss and the negative effects on our economy and the job market is a reality now!

So, is Obama’s EPA a friend or a foe?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

3 thoughts on “Obama’s EPA, Friend or Foe?

  1. David Altschul says:

    The EPA is congruent with Dark Evader’s nested agendas: increased centralized control, and destruction of the sustainable economy. The coal-industry regulations, making it impossible for mines to stay in business, mirror the restrictions through which the PPACA will starve the private-health-insurance industry to death. The XL pipeline, when constructed, will decrease the profits of Warren Buffett’s railroad, which now does heavy business in moving fuel. As Henry Hazlitt points out in ECONOMICS IN ONE LESSON, nearly all government manipulations create waste, kill jobs, cause scarcity, and decrease the value of the dollar (impoverishing everyone on fixed incomes).

    • Leigh says:

      So true David…so true. the 64,000 question is at what point will current Democrats see the damage that is being done? At what point will those receiving freebies recognize that a handout is actually a chain of bondage and only allows the government to rule their lives? At what point will we reach the “no turning back” point of more handouts than workers?

      • David Altschul says:

        You highlight some age-old questions: 1) How long is democracy sustainable when the number of noses at the trough exceeds the number of shoulders at the plow? 2) When our education-industry has, for more than a century, focused on producing unthinking and obedient passive and emasculated drones, what can be done to keep us from ruin? 3) Can any of us who are fiscally literate, long-term-thinking, liberty-and-sustainability-loving patriots afford the self-indulgence of apathy? (and for myself, I know the ironclad answer to only 1 of those 3).

Comments are closed.