Court Puts Cross State Air Pollution Rule on Hold

Pollution rule impeded by federal court

On Dec. 30, an Obama administration regulation aimed at cutting power plant pollution was put on hold by a federal court, reported the Huffington Post.

The regulation is intended to reduce, in 27 states, pollution that plays a large factor in unhealthy air downwind. However, over a dozen electric power companies, municipal power plant operators, and states had opted to delay this new development until litigation plays out. A Washington federal appeals court approved their request.

Congress Republicans have previously attempted to block this rule, their excuse being that it would stunt the growth of coal-fired power plants and kill jobs. The GOP's efforts succeeded in the House, but in November, the Senate foiled their attempt to halt the regulation.

The author of this piece seems genuinely upset that the implementation of the rule until the courts decide whether the rule is legal.  Do you think he was equally upset when the the EPA exempted several states from the rule, mostly states like Connecticut and Massachusetts that coincidentally seem to have been strongly in the Obama administrations corners, while specifically adding back states not on the administrations favorable list, like Texas?  Somehow, I doubt it.  But what do you expect from a guy who writes for "People's World."

And he falsely states Republicans main objection to the rule, which is that it will probably require the shut down of many older plants, and could possibly set off state wide brown outs.

The Environmental Protection Agency, which defends the regulation, said it was confident that the rule would ultimately be upheld, though it was disappointed by the delay. The EPA is confident that the regulation would save lives and draw in hundreds of billions of dollars in health care savings from cleaner air.

This is the opposite of George Will's Law of Dispersed Costs and Concentrated Benefits."  In this case the costs are concentrated on the utilities, and a few states,while the alleged health benefits are entirely statistical, and if true (and I have my doubts), are spread widely over a population of 300 million or so.  Of course the utilities are going to resist.