Clean Air Act

The agency’s carbon dioxide climate “endangerment finding” was a kangaroo court process.

Federal air quality rules must be based on science – not used to stifle energy and industry.

Following a directive from Christie, New Jersey’s commissioner of environmental protection, Bob Martin, wrote EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy requesting a stay of implementation and a proceeding for reconsideration of CPP.

The President will embark on a campaign to encourage Americans to embrace Climate Change – but the trip has quite the carbon footprint.

The Supreme Court determined that the EPA overstepped the boundaries of its authority when it tried to use the Clean Air Act to regulate certain hazardous chemicals without first considering the financial impact on industry.

Currently, its “Clean Power” plan is generating its latest and most duplicitous Administer, Gina McCarthy, to go around saying that it will not be costly, nor cost jobs. “Clean Power” is the name given to the EPA policy to reduce overall U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 30% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is requiring each state to cut its emissions by varying amounts using a baseline established by the EPA.

When it comes to energy, climate change, justice and transparency, the Obama Administration and its Environmental Protection Agency want it every possible way. Their only consistency is their double standards and their determination to slash hydrocarbon use, ensure that electricity prices “necessarily skyrocket,” expand federal government command and control, and “fundamentally transform” America.

Now that the dust has settled on the Supreme Court’s 2014 session, we can look at the decisions and conclude that the Administration received a serious smack down. Two big…

It falls to the voters themselves to rescue the rule of law and the Constitution from the President Obama’s lawlessness.

The Supreme Court has taken up another case based on the Environmental Protection Agency’s campaign of lies that carbon dioxide is the cause of “climate change” and claims about the quality of air in the United States. The Court is composed of lawyers, not scientists.

A turning point occurred roughly a decade after the creation of EPA. Activist groups realized the agency could be used to alter our government by coming down heavily on all human activities regardless of their impact on the environment.

The — — USEPA has a problem: the air in the United States keeps getting cleaner and cleaner. Obviously the Agency can’t justify its current level of funding if they…

In August 2010, Lisa Jackson, executive director of the EPA, delivered a speech commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Clean Air Act (CAA), crediting it with vastly improving air quality…