Is EPA Selling Environmental Indulgences for Votes?

EPA adds Texas to new emission rules, exempts Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia:

Unemployment is at 9.2% nationally, thanks in no small part to Obama’s failed policies, while Texas’ unemployment rate is more than a point lower than the national average. Texas has its own power grid, and was supposed to be left off the EPA’s new cross state emissions rule — but the Lone Star state got added anyway on Thursday. And Obama’s EPA administrator doesn’t care a bit about the people who are losing their jobs or will end up seeing their energy rates skyrocket because of this. She is just doing her boss’ bidding.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said those fears were exaggerated, particularly in Texas, where some already have moved to clean up their coal-fired plants.

Yes, Texas is already cleaning up its air on its own, and has been since the 1990s. So why the meddling? Politics.

“Texas has an ample range of cost-effective emission reduction options for complying with the requirements of this rule without threatening reliability or the continued operation of coal-burning units,” Jackson said.

CPS Energy last month announced it would shutter its two oldest and dirtiest coal plants by 2018, 13 years ahead of their planned retirement date, rather than spend upward of $550 million on new pollution-control equipment.

That’s going to cost jobs. This is politics disguised as science. Just take a look at the states the EPA decided to leave off the rule change.

The challenge from the new rule, known as the Cross State Air Pollution Rule, is that stricter limits take effect next year, giving power-plant owners little time to comply.

Texas was not included in the EPA’s draft rule related to sulfur dioxide cuts because EPA modeling had shown little downwind impact from Texas power plants on other states.

On Thursday, however, the EPA said Texas would be required to meet lower SO2 limits to avoid allowing the state to increase emissions.

Five states — Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, along with the District of Columbia — were dropped from the final EPA rule.

Three blue states and two swing states get left off, while Texas gets added even though the EPA’s own model shows little evidence that emissions from Texas impact other states at all. Nah, there’s no politics here.

Gov. Perry has issued a statement slamming the EPA’s decision, but it may be time to challenge Obama on these moves more directly.

Much like the exemptions to Obama care being issued to unions and companies friendly to the Obama administration. I guess onerous rules meant to clean up the environment are only meant to apply to ones political opponents, not your friends, and those you hope to court for the next election.  Whatever happened to equal protection under law, and shared sacrifice?  Sacrificed to political expediency.

More on the Cross State Emission Rules via Hot Air:

Thursday the EPA announced that they have finalized additional Clean Air Act provisions, collectively known as “The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule” to ostensibly “reduce air pollution and attain clean air standards,” by requiring coal companies in 27 states to slash emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide by 73 percent and 54 percent, respectively, from 2005 levels by 2014…

An analysis ACCCE released earlier this month by the National Economic Research Associates (NERA) used government data to examine the combined impacts of today’s rule and another EPA electricity regulation, the “Utility MACT” Rule. According to NERA’s examination, the EPA’s actions would cause a net job loss of over 1.4 million job-years by 2020.

Further, NERA found that electricity rates would increase over 23 percent in coal-reliant areas and that though the EPA might claim the regulations will create jobs, NERA predicted that for every job created four will be lost.