A battle between the House of Representatives and a federal agency is raising the central issue of the balance of power within Washington, as well as the scientific basis of the numerous dire claims of man-made climate change that are increasingly being used by the White House to increase its power and alter much of the way Americans do business, grow food, and obtain energy.
Civil libertarians have grown increasingly wary of the extent to which unelected agency personnel are exercising legislative-like powers with very significant and wide-ranging effects on everyday life within the nation.
The conflict between Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chair of the House Science Committee, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is bringing the issue to a head. The Hill , which reported the issue, noted that the agency has refused to give Congress the detailed information requested on a controversial climate change study. Highlighting the argument is a study that concluded there has not been a 15-year “pause” in global warming, prepared with NOAA assistance.
NOAA’s excuse of “confidentiality” and “protecting the integrity of the scientific process” appears to be little more than a smokescreen to prevent the legislative branch from fully reviewing the data, which may prove embarrassing to the Obama Administration’s quest for increased economic and regulatory authority based on an extreme view of climate change. NOAA’s argument also fails to address the right of the legislative branch to review any studies performed by an agency, barring extraordinary circumstances.
Rep. Smith was forced to issue a subpoena, which NOAA has yet to fully comply with. This is the latest duel between the Texas Republican and Obama Administration officials. In 2014, Rep. Smith stated that the EPA was not being candid about climate change. In a letter to the EPA sent on August 13, he wrote:
“For too long the Environmental Protection Agency has hidden the truth from the American people. In order to regain public trust, the agency should rely on robust, objective and well-grounded technical analysis of its climate regulations. Flaws in recent EPA analyses amplify concerns about the real impacts of these regulations. Americans deserve an opportunity to see the facts.”
He stressed the findings of the Government Accountability Office, which released a report highlighting a pattern of shoddy EPA analysis. It was revealed that EPA relied on decades old data and ignored important factors. The independent watchdog warned that “EPA cannot ensure that it’s [analysis] provide the public with a clear understanding of its decision making.” Chairman Smith wrote that “Credible analysis is critical to a well-informed debate concerning climate change and energy policy choices now before American people. EPA’s incomplete modeling disregards a number of technical, regulatory, and economic realities. Americans deserve the bottom line: what does it cost and what will we get for the money?” The letter calls on EPA to provide comprehensive analysis that takes real-world contingencies into account rather than rely on models and science that are hidden from the public.
Rep. Smith is not alone in his criticism of the EPA. A watchdog site, EPAFACTS.org, noted in 2014 that:
“The National Academies, a primarily government funded 6,300 member organization of the country’s top scientists, published a report … denouncing the EPA for its use of bad science to justify its conclusions. The National Research Council (NRC), one of four organizations that makes up theNational Academies (the other three being the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine), found a litany of deficiencies across multiple offices that undermines EPA’s claims of scientific integrity.
It is viagra pfizer canada mandatory to follow the dosage pattern given by the doctor. Ginseng is find that page purchase cheap cialis believed to restore and enhance normal well-being within an individual. Silagra and india online viagra are taken only for sexual pleasure. Don’t just wait for a miracle to improve the sex power, so now male physiques are getting ready to have robust and continuing penile erection to do well in the sexual act.This is a cost effective product i.e. very affordable and the medications being offered have all been approved by the FDA. cialis 40mg According to the report, EPA science suffers from:
Lack of transparency – “The lack of transparency and the inconsistencies raise questions about the quality of the approaches used.”
Lack of consistency – “Inconsistencies were found in the methods used to identify studies for consideration.”
Insufficient documentation – “EPA’s evaluation provided insufficient documentation of the analyses that led to the conclusions.”
Failure to justify conclusions – “EPA’s conclusions are not well supported… A higher standard of evaluation is required.”
Improper use of scientific method – “No clear description of a strategy or criteria for assessing the studies used in the evaluation… Methods that provide a more systematic approach and greater transparency are necessary.”
The fight on Capitol Hill comes as 26 states file suit against the EPA’s new power plant regulations, which would affect the coal industry particularly hard. Those opposing the measures cite the major cost increases that would result, as well as the important questions of where alternate sources of energy would come from if coal is eventually driven out of the U.S. power equation.
Some environmentalists are concerned that increased use of solar and wind, even though they could replace only a small fraction of the power coal provides, brings other detrimental effects. The Save the Eagles organization 1.4 million birds annually could be killed by expanded use of wind turbines.
The Union of Concerned Scientists notes that “larger utility-scale solar facilities can raise concerns about land degradation and habitat loss… The PV cell manufacturing process includes a number of hazardous materials, most of which are used to clean and purify the semiconductor surface. These chemicals, similar to those used in the general semiconductor industry, include hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, hydrogen fluoride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and acetone…”