- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- West Virginia
Energy & Environment Legislative Alerts
by Phil Kerpen & Steve Lonegan
While President Obama is trying futilely to convince the American people he supports an “all of the above” energy policy, he has remained stubbornly committed to vast subsidies for unproven, expensive technologies like wind.
Obama has repeatedly described his intention to increase wind subsidies “doubling down,” an appropriate use of gambling terminology.
The U.S. Senate will likely be put on record soon on amendment votes to extend wasteful, expensive subsidies for windmills and to create vast new subsidies for natural gas vehicles. These votes will tell us which senators, like the president, want to double down on a losing hand and which think it might be time to try a free market energy policy.
The Senate is currently considering amendments to a transportation bill that would further inject flawed government planning into America's energy markets.
If history has shown us anything, it's that when government tries to pick favored energy sources and prop them up we're all left to suffer. Just look at ethanol, which for decades has gotten favored treatment with special tax breaks, consumption mandates and protectionist tariffs. All we have to show for it is higher food prices and no real change in our energy supplies.
Dear Senator Paul,
On behalf of more than 1.9 million Americans for Prosperity activists in all 50 states, I applaud your introduction of S. 2122, the Defense of Environment and Property Act. Your bill would rein in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) and put a stop to their attempt to impose costly environmental regulations on all the land and all the water in the United States.
The Clean Water Act (CWA) was enacted in 1972 as a broad new federal effort to control water pollution in our country. However, since the States have only empowered Congress to regulate interstate commerce, the Act’s new regulatory authorities were intended to be limited to “navigable waters” of the United States – waters that could conceivably be involved in interstate commerce through activities such as boat traffic.
In recent years, however, the EPA and the Army Corps have attempted to expand their jurisdiction to impose stringent new regulations on isolated wetlands, ephemeral streams, farm runoff and drainage, and other “waters” in the U.S. that are arguably not at all connected to navigable waters nor interstate commerce. A recent guidance document, for example, tries to circumvent both Congress and multiple Supreme Court rulings on wetlands regulation.
Dear Senator Inhofe,
On behalf of more than 1.9 million Americans for Prosperity activists in all 50 states, I write in strong support of your recently introduced S.J.Res. 37. Your resolution would stop the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from imposing what could be the most costly federal regulations in history, the onerous “Utility MACT” rules.
Under the 1996 Congressional Review Act, Congress has the authority to disapprove of overly-burdensome regulations and, as your resolution does, order that “such rule shall have no force or effect.” There is no more appropriate time to exercise this power than now, as this administration continues to pile costly rule after costly rule onto our still-struggling economy.