An EPA two-fer

The EPA is seriously overstepping its original charter and needs to have its funding curtailed. First up -- from Watts Up With That:

Waxman, Markey, and Inslee�s argument
Last week the House Energy & Power Subcommittee marked up H.R. 910, the Energy Tax Prevention Act. Today, the full House Energy & Commerce Committee will mark up the bill.

Opponents, especially Reps. Waxman, Markey, and Inslee, viciously attacked the bill last Thursday. Their arguments are reviewed in detail at the blog GlobalWarming.Org.

The post concludes with this summary of the Waxman-Markey-Inslee argument as follows:

We know what is good for America and the world. It�s a future without fossil fuels. We can�t persuade the people�s representatives to support our agenda and turn it into law. Therefore, it is necessary for EPA to implement our agenda regardless of the defeat of cap-and-trade, the November 2011 elections, and the separation of powers. Our agenda is more important than any constitutional principle that might interfere with it.

The question on limiting of the breadth of power of the EPA to have control over the future of the United States energy policy is one of the most important debates of our time.

Emphasis mine -- talk about hubris... Second -- from Breitbart/Associated Press:

EPA proposes regulating mercury from coal plants
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed rules on Wednesday that would for the first time regulate toxic air emissions from coal-fired power plants, including limiting mercury, lead, arsenic and acid gas pollution.

Environmental and medical groups praised the move, which came in response to a court-ordered deadline, saying the new regulations will remove toxins from the air that contribute to respiratory illnesses, birth defects and developmental problems in children.

Some industry groups slammed the measure, however, accusing the EPA of inflating the benefits and arguing it would cost billions of dollars annually to comply.

Currently, there are no limits on how much mercury or other toxic pollutants can be released from a power plant's smoke stacks�which emit some 386,000 tons of toxic air pollution annually, by far the largest industrial source of such pollution in the United States. The new rules would require power plants to install technologies that would limit the emissions.

Well golly gee -- if we just promoted Nuclear, the coal plants would no longer be cost effective and the coal would be used for feedstock for chemical processes instead of being burned for fuel. The EPA has been in business for only 41 years and it has cost this nation billions. Yet another thing to thank President Nixon for...