Ag columnist Alan Guebert makes great fun of Congresswoman Kristi Noem's ridiculous anti-dust-regulation regulation. Guebert, who grew up on an Illinois dairy farm and has written about agriculture for three decades, sees the complete absurdity of Congress debating a bill to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from making rules that the EPA chief has said on the record and under oath multiple times are not going to be made.
In short, the House passed a one-year law to make it illegal to enforce a law EPA says it would neither propose nor enforce.
Brilliant.
With this legislative Everest — passing laws outlawing laws that aren't laws — cleared, Congress is free to spend most of this election year passing meaningless legislation against other meaningless, even non-existent, legislation.
For instance, what would be wrong with a ban on the ban against the ban on carbon credits? Or, how about a law to outlaw any tax increase law that isn't yet law?
Meaningless legislation... have fun running on that record, Rep. Noem.
(And don't forget: Rep. Noem's centerpiece legislation has not passed and likely never will.)
He laid it out very well. I don't know how she can debate this issue. Looks like the black helicopters are now flying over Racota Valley and not just Sibby's place.
Meanwhile, I got a nice letter from Kristi the other day, offering to help me with any senior issues I might have, or to help me get a flag flown at the Nation's capital if I need one flown for some reason (because, like of course I do. I'll think of something here pretty soon...). Nice of her, I thought. But then, I bet she says that to all us old fellas.
Here is more from The New York Times on that burlesque performance that cable news keeps calling a debate:
Gingrich on E.P.A. Regulating Farm Dust
Mr. Gingrich, when asked about his proposal to replace the Environmental Protection Agency with a “solutions agency,†cited an example of what he considers bureaucratic overreach by current regulators: controlling dust from farms in states like Iowa and Arizona.
The E.P.A.’s supposed effort to regulate “farm dust†has become something of an urban legend. Mr. Gingrich often says while campaigning that he learned of it from Senator Charles E. Grassley, an Iowa Republican.
The E.P.A. itself has denied that it ever considered regulating farm dust.
The agency has long had authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate “coarse particles,†soot or dust that emerges mostly from smokestacks, automobiles and demolition sites and has been shown to contribute to heart disease and other health problems.
Although “farm dust†falls under the definition of coarse particles, the E.P.A. administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, testified in March before the House Agriculture Committee that her agency did not plan to regulate dust on farms.
She said in a letter to the House in October that she would not change current standards for regulating particles. Nonetheless, Republicans in the House proposed the Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act in November. In testimony, the E.P.A.’s chief air-quality officer reaffirmed the agency’s decision not to change existing standards, adding, “I am hopeful that this announcement ends the myth that the agency has plans to tighten regulation of ‘farm dust.’ â€
– Trip Gabriel
What prevents any other agency from citing or suing after testing dust that drifts into adjacent properties or adjoining states?
Wouldn't ICC, for example, have the authority to crawl up somebody's rectum with a microscope after being told of dust laden with toxins blew into another state?
I wonder whether Rep. Noem realizes she is frying a can of worms on the sidewalk.
NIOSH could step in and force action on ag dust:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_for_Occupational_Safety_and_Health
The composition of ag dust includes radioactive particles that fall within NRC purview:
http://www.cprm.gov.br/33IGC/1342441.html
Winchester and Luther: "For the past five years in South Dakota, ethanol plants have been the leading emitters of carcinogens — toxins thought or known to cause cancer — having surpassed plastics manufacturers."
http://www.argusleader.com/article/20111218/NEWS/312180036/1001
Rep. Noem has a negative net worth. Syngenta and Monsanto paid her way to Congress.
Connect the dots.
Larry, I feel obliged to point out that your links on this post are notably on point. Thank you!
@EPA: Toxics Inventory Data for 2010 being released state by state. Expect South Dakota to look very, very bad.
Previously released data:
http://toxic-release.findthedata.org/d/d/South-Dakota/Deadwood
@WPM. Wyoming watching Sackett v.EPA:
http://wpr.drupal.publicbroadcasting.net/post/wyoming-watching-environmental-case-u-s-supreme-court#.Twr8cBQi688.twitter
Alan Guebert trusts the bureaucrats more than I do; I don't believe Ms. Jackson when she says the EPA has no plans to regulate dust. We have way, way too many bureaucrats without enough to do; they're just waiting for the political climate to become more receptive and they'll regulate dust, along with everything else.
How very Republican of you: just choose not to believe the facts that don't fit your political agenda. Yet you'll choose to believe everything Kristi Noem tells you? And you'll choose to believe that people out to make a buck are more trustworthy than public servants sworn to protect the general welfare?
Face facts: there are no big ag-killing dust regulations. Noem's bill is grandstanding and slogan-building, with no other concrete effect and not one job created or saved. And there is definitely a case for keeping the clean air regulations that Rep. Noem wants to negate in rural South Dakota.
Alan Guebert column is a great read every week. His point this past week, is that Congress does a great job attacking non issues. The premise is that Congress can generate work showing a whole lot of nothing thereby clouding focus on real and critical issues True to form, if you can not display the real stuff, you market the "fluff".
New EPA emissions widget unveiled:
http://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do