The EPA Versus the USA ... Alan Caruba

The EPA Versus the USA
By Alan Caruba

It seems almost beyond reason that a single U.S. agency could so hate America that it was prepared to ignore the Constitution, distort a Supreme Court decision, and impose its will on the nation in the name of totally discredited science.

That, however, is what the Environmental Protection Agency is seeking to do while Americans are distracted by the Christmas celebrations.

The agency’s objective is to regulate so-called greenhouse gases (GHG) on January 2, 2011. More specifically, it would regulate emissions from power plants and other large emitters, but in reality it would end the role of coal as the provider of 50% of the electricity Americans require.

It is essential to understand that the primary GHG is carbon dioxide (CO2) and it was this gas, naturally produced by the Earth and vital to all vegetation and life on Earth, that was falsely identified as the “cause” of “global warming.” Humans individually exhale some six pounds of CO2 every day.

First, there was no “global warming”; only the normal and natural warming that had been in effect since around 1850 when a 500-year “little ice age” ended in the northern hemisphere.

Second, the Earth is now in a normal and natural cooling cycle, though with the added concern that it is also at the end of an 11,500 year interglacial cycle between the last major ice age and the next.

Third, the data put forth by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been almost entirely discredited, based as it was on rigged research by corrupted university centers and governmental agencies. Some people need to go to jail, but it is unlikely because the fraud was so vast in its extent.

On November 22nd, The Wall Street Journal published a lengthy editorial, “The EPA Permitorium” noting that “The scale of the EPA’s current assault is unprecedented, yet it has received almost no public scrutiny. Since Mr. Obama took office, the agency has proposed or finalized 29 major regulations and 172 major policy rules.”

It can be said that, in terms of its original mission, cleaning the nation’s air and water, that the EPA succeeded, but like any government agency, the EPA has also sought to constantly expand its powers and has, from its beginning, also seen as part of its mission the restriction of virtually all chemicals—invariably called toxic—with a particular emphasis on pesticides that protect human health and property.

Too much exposure to any chemical is inherently toxic. The proper use of any chemical is beneficial.

The reason there is a nationwide infestation of bed bugs after a half century or more in which this insect had been virtually eliminated is that the EPA has restricted the use of almost every pesticide that might exterminate bed bugs. Now multiply that against EPA restrictions on a host of chemicals vital to the manufacture of thousands of products.

The effort of the EPA to regulate CO2 and other GHG gases has no basis in science and none in law. The Clean Air Act does not authorize it.

Moreover, by its own admission, restricting GHGs would only reduce global temperatures—if that were even possible—by 15 ten-thousandths of a degree Celsius in the next century.

The EPA has also proposed new rules calling for a reduction in the national ambient air-quality standard for ground-level ozone, a precursor of smog, from 75 parts per billion to between 60 and 70 parts per billion, a cut of up to 20%.

To most people that means nothing, but the reality is that hundreds of U.S. cities and counties don’t meet the current standard and compliance would destroy what is left of an ailing U.S. economy. If you think unemployment is bad now, it would increase as so-called “emitters” of GHG either undertook costly measures to reduce their emissions or just closed their doors.

Along with those who tried to impose a Cap-and-Trade Act on the nation in order to limit so-called GHGs and profit from it by creating a bogus exchange for the sale of “carbon credits”, the EPA is seeking to exercise a totalitarian control over every aspect of the provision and use of energy in America and it is all based on lies.

Congress can put an end to this nightmare by overturning the EPA’s “Endangerment Rule” and with it the GHG regulations. A new Congress can and should defund as much of the EPA as possible.

The use of fossil fuels---coal, oil, and natural gas---accounts for 85% of America’s energy sources. The EPA proposes to limit or end their use. As such it is an enemy of the people and Congress must act to stop this insane agency before it destroys the nation.

**********************

Alan Caruba blogs daily at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/. An author, business and science writer, he is the founder of The National Anxiety Center.

© Alan Caruba, 2010

Alan Caruba's commentaries are also posted daily at "Warning Signs" his popular blog and thereafter on dozens of other websites and blogs. If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. To visit his Facebook page, click here For information on his professional skills, Caruba.com is the place to visit.

Change the 14th Amendment! No More Anchor Babies!

Change the 14th Amendment! No More Anchor Babies!
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

*****************

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told “The Hill” on Monday that Congress “ought to take a look at” changing the 14th Amendment, which gives the children of illegal immigrants a right to U.S. citizenship.

There is growing support within the GOP for the controversial idea, which has also recently been touted by Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Senator McConnell said: “I think we ought to take a look at it — hold hearings, listen to the experts on it,” McConnell said. “I haven’t made a final decision about it, but that’s something that we clearly need to look at. Regardless of how you feel about the various aspects of immigration reform, I don’t think anybody thinks that’s something they’re comfortable with.”

Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) has said: “There is a constitutional provision in the 14th Amendment that has been interpreted to provide that, if you are born in the United States, you are a citizen no matter what. … And so the question is, if both parents are here illegally, should there be a reward for their illegal behavior?” Kyl went on to say: “We should hold some hearings and hear first from the constitutional experts to at least tell us what the state of the law on that proposition is.” Kyl’s Remarks were made on CBS’s “Face the Nation” last Sunday.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has said: “birthright citizenship is a mistake.” We should change our Constitution and say if you come illegally and you have a child, that child is automatically not a citizen.” Read the entire article here:("THE HILL")

If you are a regular reader of our rants, then you know we have been calling for an end to the practice of “Anchor Babies” for a good long while now.

Anchor babies are children born in the United States to illegal alien parents. “These children may instantly qualify for welfare and other state and local benefit programs. Additionally with the passage of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, the child may sponsor other family members for entry into the United States when he or she reaches the age of twenty-one (See also Chain Migration). The sheer numbers are staggering. In Stockton, California (2003), 70 percent of the 2,300 babies, born in San Joaquin General Hospital’s maternity ward were anchor babies.” (From FAIR The Federation for American Immigration reform. You may read the entire article here: SOURCE)

Section one, of the 14th amendment, was written to ensure that former slaves would enjoy full citizenship in the US. But, it has been stretched to encompass the babies of those who have entered this country illegally. Once that baby is born, they have their “anchor” here and, at age 21 that now “grown” baby, can petition the government to bring his family into the US as well.

It is estimated that 300,000, or more, anchor babies are born each year in the United States. The US is now the only country, which allows this practice. Ireland did, for a while, but quickly changed the law when it became obvious that pregnant immigrants from Africa were flooding their country every year. The Anchor Babies instantly quality for a host of federal, state, and even local benefit programs. All of this happens as a result of the way the courts decided to interpret the 14th amendment to the US Constitution.

One must remember that at the time the 14th amendment was passed, the United States had no immigration policy at all. The amendment was added to our Constitution as part of the reforms (after the Civil War), which were intended to address injustices to African Americans. It states: "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States." It was worded in that manner to stop any state government from denying citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

Look closely at the wording of the amendment. Notice the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The intention of that phrase was to exclude from automatic citizenship American-born persons whose allegiance to the United States was not complete.

It is the belief of many in the US, today, that illegal aliens (who are in the US unlawfully, remember) have little, if any, allegiance to the US. At the very least that allegiance is “incomplete. Therefore, it logically follows that any children born of them, within the US, are NOT automatically United States citizens.

Action by Congress is needed, and needed desperately, to make clear, once and for all, that the 14th Amendment did not intend for children of illegal aliens, born in the US, to automatically become citizens.

It is time to lean on our Congresspersons and Senators and let them know how you feel about "Anchor Babies." Let them know you want it stopped. Let them know you want the US borders sealed, and secured, and the illegal aliens already within the US deported – and -- you want the 14th Amendment changed to put a stop to Anchor Babies once and for all.

J. D. Longstreet