In case you are tracking today's debate and vote on the Murkowski resolution of disapproval with respect to the EPA endangerment rule, I thought you'd be interested in ongoing commentary from energy policy experts at CEI. Let me know if you would like to interview a CEI expert on this important vote.
On Openmarket.org, Marlo Lewis:
Boxer ignores — and conceals — the simple fact that the Murkowski resolution would overturn the “legal force and effect” of the endangerment finding, not its scientific reasoning or conclusions.
The resolution is a referendum not on climate science but on who shall make climate policy: Elected lawmakers who must answer to the people at the ballot box or politically unaccountable bureaucrats, trial lawyers, and activist judges appointed for life?
Durbin claims that EPA made its endangerment rule after consulting with “scientists across America.” In fact, as the endangerment rule acknowledges, EPA largely based the rule on the IPCC reports. As the Climategate scandal reveals, the IPCC reports do not meet U.S. Government transparency and accountability standards.
EPA’s breathtaking Power Grab raises questions critical to our form of governance. The powers EPA has claimed for itself include staking out national policy on the contentious “climate” issue, and even amending the Clean Air Act on its own initiative and authority.