[SeMissourian.com] Mostly Cloudy ~ 77°F  
River stage: 20.88 ft. Falling
Thursday, July 31, 2014

Editorial: Making rules

Monday, February 15, 2010

Federal cap-and-trade legislation is stalled. The House has passed a bill that would allow companies to trade credits for the emission of greenhouse gases. But the Senate is more reluctant to pass the bill. So the Environmental Protection Agency has decided to impose its own rules. Two U.S. representatives from large rural districts in Missouri, Jo Ann Emerson from Cape Girardeau and Ike Skelton from Lexington, say the EPA's move is unfair to the affected businesses, including the nation's largest power plants, and usurps the decision-making authority of elected members of Congress.

The proposed EPA rules are being pushed by the Obama administration. President Obama has said Congress is dragging its feet and the EPA should go ahead with "commonsense" rules instead of waiting for legislative action.

With all due deference to division of powers, as the president is prone to say, imposing greenhouse gas standards is something for members of Congress -- elected by and answerable to their constituents -- to decide, not appointed EPA bureaucrats.

The fact that Emerson, a Republican, and Skelton, a Democrat, have joined forces to oppose these rules speaks volumes about the deep-seated feelings of the legislative branch and its lawmaking obligation.

Fact Check
See inaccurate information in this story?

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on semissourian.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Thank God for Jo Ann Emerson. This is what Washington needs more of. I've never commented before on these but I just needed to say how much I appreciate this.

-- Posted by northside8 on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 8:23 AM

The EPA is simply enforcing the Clean Air Act of 1990. Bill Emerson voted for that legislation. Irony is so ironic.

-- Posted by Lumpy on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 8:38 AM

I pointed out this was a good move by Jo Ann Emerson in a previous article.

Another good move is the initiative the Obama administration took to support two new nuclear power plants in Georgia.

The stimulus legislation contains tax credits for personal home energy improvements. Adding another layer of insulation in your attic (normally less than $1,000.00)is money well spent. Increased insulation reduces electric and gas bills.



Larry Bill, Independent Conservative Candidate for Congress, 8th District

-- Posted by nolimitsonthought on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 9:00 AM

Jo Ann has been on our side more times than not. I am very appreciative to her for this move and believe she has seen how deepseated our convictions are about fiscal conservativism and will vote accordingly in the term to come.

There are some wolves in sheeps clothing out there trying to make us believe they can perform better but one is a typical Pelosi-Reid clone and the other is a self absorbed hot head.

Think I will stand with Jo Ann.

-- Posted by bionicrotor on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 9:01 AM

Who is available to protect us from these elected and appointed idiots?

-- Posted by Rocket_Surgeon on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 9:09 AM

This is pandering, pure and simply and Emerson and Skelton know it. He's trying to make up for voting for cap and trade and she knows there's no meat to this. It's appalling. Why not propose real legislation that actually does something for the environment and protects ou farmers? These are two ineffective legislators and one is my representative (FOR NOW).

-- Posted by cassiebell on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 9:25 AM

Fiscal conservative in action: (Don't forget, we have to borrow this money from China)

Trip to Scotland to do State Department's job:


$3 million earmark for Emerson Leland Hunger Fund based in Washington, D.C.:


$500,000 earmark for Girl Scouts in New York city:


$1.47 million earmark for "essential" air service so our neighbors can have $50 air tickets to St. Louis:


No caps on agricultural subsidies to corporate farms:


$1.6 million for a bicycle bridge in Cape Girardeau:


$62 million federal courthouse that has no room for Social Security, IRS, or FBI but holds a five story terrarium:


Please judge for yourself.

Larry Bill, Independent Conservative for Congress, 8th District

-- Posted by nolimitsonthought on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 9:41 AM

We must insist that our elected officials stop spending and stop earmarks. Are any of them committed to this? He11 no. That's why our country is in the shape that it's in. Where's the common sense?

-- Posted by Rocket_Surgeon on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 10:06 AM

What Obama is proposing goes far beyond Clean Air Act enforcement. Otherwise, Clinton would have done it. Her Democratic opponent won't tell us where he stands until after the election. Why? Because he knows its bad for the district, but he also knows that if he opposes Cap and Trade his big bucks from San Francisco Libs will dry up. So he won't tell us he's for Cap and Trade until after the election. Tommy Sowers--too slick for the 8th.

-- Posted by VIKED on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 10:08 AM

Lumpy - The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 bill amended the targeted at acid rain and other pollutants that were discharged into the atmosphere by factories and other sources. People were worried about having their faces melted off by acid rain, not the bad joke that is global warming. The EPA's plan now is going after CO2, which we all discharge. And by discharging, I mean breathing! CO2 is not a pollutant, I don't care what the elite environmentalists and their data manipulation try to tell us. No one in 1990, probablby even Ike Skelton, thought the EPA would be filled with extreme environmentalists like we got when we elected Obama. Cap and Trade is a liberal money-making venture.

-- Posted by ResAdjudicata on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 10:45 AM

I agree with Cassiebell.....All some politicians wanna do is say "No!" The Republican Party is the Party Of No. I'd like the opponents of this rule to give us better health through a cleaner environment by coming up with an alternative, rather than just say no.

But that takes thinking.....reasoning.....common sense.

-- Posted by JoJax on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 11:54 AM

Suggest the climate change advocates have two points to address in their burden of proof -

1) The climate is changing unfavorably (be it warming, cooling, raining, or whatever) against historical trends, and

2) Mankind is a major player causing the change.

At this point, the arguments-to-date have not persuaded many to accept either, much less both, of the points. Going one step farther, comparing the climate change opponents' current views to those of an awkward, comical bird with its head buried in the sand does little towards encouraging future cooperation or willingness to listen.

Scientific credibility has been damaged, and data without accepted validation are just numbers that can be extrapolated and interpreted into pretty much whatever one wants to believe. In short and IMO, just not a good job by the climate change advocates towards selling their perspective to the masses.

The ramifications of a cap-n-trade, or any carbon penalty-type, program are huge, and would significantly impact households, businesses, and jobs. Suggest the need is to be doggone sure beyond the shadows of any doubts that this is where we want to go, and that we are prepared to pay for it. Further suggest that this decision is well above any given government agency's "pay grade".

-- Posted by fxpwt on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 1:09 PM

I like the Republicans because they are stopping us from doing terrible things, such as the Democrat Healthcare bill and Cap and Trade. By the way, global warming is sooooo bad that it has cancled a lot of activities today... WITH SNOW!!!!! HELP ME PLEASE, it's soooo hot in Cape today. I need to find someplace with AC!

-- Posted by Sgt Sausage on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 1:18 PM

You all are not seeing the big picture.

Congress passes regulatory legislation that does just that - regulates, only to return to bemoan the regulatory legislation at a politically expediant future date.

Case in point: I read last week where Emerson is now calling for certain TARP funds to be returned. She voted for TARP. Twice!

Folks, we are being played for a bunch of fools by these politicans.

-- Posted by Lumpy on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 3:43 PM


One of the first official acts of the EPA was to ban DDT in 1972. That was nine months after the agency was founded. The EPA was filled with environmental extremists from the word "go".

-- Posted by Lumpy on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 3:46 PM

As a Dem, thanks for reaching across the aisle. Common sense still works. I'm tired of the "gotcha" of some of these folks. And by your approval ratings, so are most other folks. Keep up the good work.

-- Posted by VIKED on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 6:00 PM


Can you help me see the big picture?

Larry Bill

-- Posted by nolimitsonthought on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 8:36 PM

Larry - Looks like we found the limit of your thoughts.

-- Posted by ResAdjudicata on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 8:49 PM


Yeah, I owe you a few signatures. I will contact you by the end of the week. Sorry, it's been chaos around here.

Rumor is that there may be another SO regular throwing their hat in the ring.

-- Posted by Lumpy on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 9:02 PM

I so love watching these blogs. There are those that enter thoughts just to watch others sqirm. There are those that put in things that are only entered to cover their own lack of reason, and there are those that say things with reality and pragmatism. In the most generous viewpoint of this election, no matter your viewpoint, there is really only two candidates in this race. One is representing the leftwing, and the other is right of center. One is proabortion, one is prolife. One is pro-big-government, one is pro small government. One accepts campaign funds from board members of planned parenthood and one that does not. The pragmatic, realistic, and educated voter has to chose between these two. The rest are just window dressing and pipe dreams.

-- Posted by bionicrotor on Mon, Feb 22, 2010, at 10:36 PM

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account on seMissourian.com or semoball.com, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.


Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.