Photo: Sebastiano Pitruzzello

Minnesota Reps. taking heat for moves to block EPA

By Andy Birkey
Friday, March 04, 2011 at 2:15 pm

Environmental groups are going after Minnesota members of Congress who have voted to block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas pollution. A recent poll shows that votes by Republican Reps. Michele Bachmann and Chip Cravaack aren’t popular in their districts, and Rep. Collin Peterson, a Democrat, is getting attacked from both sides — the GOP says his stance against EPA regulation is “wishy washy,” while interest groups say he’s siding with foreign oil producers.

In late February, the U.S. House voted to bar the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gasses as air pollution in an amendment to the government spending bill. That bill would be valid for the rest of 2011. Voting for the ban were Republican Reps. Erik Paulsen, John Kline, Bachmann and Cravaack who were joined by DFLer Peterson.

Peterson has backed up his opposition to the EPA Thursday by signing on to a bill that would permanently bar the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases.

The Truman National Security Project (TNSP), a national security nonprofit that views dependence on foreign oil to be a national security concern, criticized Peterson in an email to the Minnesota Independent. The group has created a campaign called Operation Free: Secure America with Clean Energy.

“Representative Peterson has said we need to rein in the EPA, but what really needs to be reined in is this Congress’s addiction to oil,” wrote TNSP press secretary Laura Britton. “In light of the unanimous agreement of our military and security leadership that oil money funds terrorism and puts our troops in unnecessary danger, we are surprised and disappointed in Peterson’s decision to support this shortsighted proposal. We urge Peterson to stand up with our veterans, military leaders, and security experts in defending the EPA’s efforts to protect America through clean energy policies.”

Peterson also took heat from the Republican Party of Minnesota which called him “wish washy.”

“Collin Peterson once again proves that Minnesota deserves better leadership than he can offer,” GOP chair Tony Sutton said in a statement on Thursday. “After voting for the job killing cap and trade bill in 2009, Peterson now says ‘the EPA needs to be reined in’ and blocked from reducing the gases that are blamed for global warming. Minnesota deserves more than a wishy washy leader who is unwilling to take a firm stand. There is no telling how long Peterson will stand against the EPA before he changes his mind again.”

Shortly after the vote to block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases in the continuing resolution, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) commissioned a poll by Public Policy Poling that found voters in Bachmann’s and Cravaack’s districts opposed that vote.

In the 6th Congressional District, 64 percent of voters said they opposed Bachmann’s late-February vote to “block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution.” That sample included 60 percent of independents and 35 percent of Republicans opposing the vote. The poll also found that 69 percent of voters wanted the EPA to “reduce carbon pollution without delay,” with 65 percent of independents and 47 percent of Republicans agreeing.

“Americans are clearly persuaded that their health needs should take priority over the profits of polluters” said Tom Jensen, director of Public Policy Polling. “Political affiliation doesn’t appear to count for much when constituents are asked whether their representatives in Congress should be siding with the public’s health or the political clout of polluters.”

The poll also found that 73 percent – including a majority of Republicans – think “EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed” and 78 percent agreed that the United States should be “protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment.”

The poll was conducted from February 18 to 19 and had a sample size of 956 with a margin of error of 3.2 percent.

“The message is as clear here as clean air: People in Rep. Bachmann’s district want Rep. Bachmann to let the EPA do its job instead of putting the profit-driven agenda of big polluters ahead of the health of their children,” said Samantha Chadwick of Environment Minnesota.

In Cravaack’s district, the poll showed similar numbers: 67 percent of voters, which included 58 percent of independents and 36 percent of Republicans, opposed efforts to “block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution.”

In the poll, 73 percent of voters said they thought that “EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.” That included 53 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents.

The poll has a sample size of 1,022 and a margin of error of 3.1 percent.

Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter


Comments

9 Comments

Carl
Comment posted March 4, 2011 @ 3:13 pm

This is ridiculous Michele, Chip and Collin. Environmental policies should be fact driven not faith based. The very notion that God won’t let us damage/destroy the environment is bizarre, half-witted and dangerous. Religious fundamentalists and their rhetoric are being used as tools by industrialists for their own short term profits at the expense of humanity’s long term future. Let’s not sink back into the dark ages. Please open your eyes and see the light of Truth.

Praise Jebus, God hates the environment, Amen.


Dennis
Comment posted March 4, 2011 @ 3:26 pm

Having lost congress, for good reason, the Obama administration is now attempting to pass its agenda via regulations administered through government agencies.

Having the EPA try to regulate CO2 is no different than little Al Franken’s attempt to get the FCC to regulate the internet.

Sorry, that’s not how it’s supposed to work. Congress is delegated that authority and they can give or remove regulatory authority to government agencies as they see fit.


Nancy H
Comment posted March 4, 2011 @ 6:07 pm

What a ridiculous artice.

The ONLY poll cited was sponsored by the Natural Resources Defense Council! .How would one expect the typical person–uninformed on the full scientific research and on the constitutional role of congress vs administrative agencies –to respond to a statement worded in the following way: “EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed”? Might as well have been written: “Scientists, not politicians, understand science”. They probably sampled the crowd at the MN capitol rally the other week supporting WI public unions.

As for the statements made by MN GOP chair Tony Sutton—–he’s a partisan hack. Unbiased and informed peole will applaud Collin Peterson (D) for standing up to pressure from his party to do the right thing for his country and constituents.


Robbie-baba
Comment posted March 4, 2011 @ 8:13 pm

The corruption here needs to be understood. Congress has been bought and sold legally through corporate campaign donations. People like Colin Peterson should be exposed for what they are, paid agents of the corporate aristocracy. What they are doing to the future of our children and our planet is an absolute outrage.


Dennis
Comment posted March 5, 2011 @ 9:34 pm

I agree that congress has jeopardized the future of my children, but it’s not your planet, Robbie.


Hondo
Comment posted March 5, 2011 @ 11:38 pm

Andy Birkey:

This is article is filled with half-truths, some of which commenter Dennis mentioned.

The power to make laws rests with Congress. The EPA is part of the executive branch, tasked with enforcing the laws. So Bachmann and Cravaack are right to insist that the Constitutional description of responsibilities be followed.

Scientific proof that carbon is at harmful levels has been hard to come by, particularly with recent scandals over falsified and conveniently ignored data. At the very least, prove the harm in a court of law — but the global warming supporters can’t even get to “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Read Michael Crichton’s “State of Fear” for this meme.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus has it right when he says the real risk is not the climate, but human freedom. Link:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f65e71aa-1a14-11dc-99c5-000b5df10621.html#axzz1FnKgMbL8


Lane
Comment posted March 6, 2011 @ 10:56 am

Why am I all of a sudden reminded of Yuri Karpov and his twin sons in the 2009 sci-fi film “2012″? Except I am not sure the ultimate fatherly sacrifice would be made in this case …


ghfisher
Comment posted March 7, 2011 @ 1:53 pm

Some people making comments do not remember or do not know that in April, 2007 the Supreme Court determined that greenhouse gases were a polutant and ordered the EPA to determine if they caused human harm.

The EPA obeyed the ordered of the Court and did in fact determine that some gases did in fact cause human harm.

Since that time the EPA has ‘nearly begged’ Congress to pass a law that would get the EPA ‘off the hook.’

Congress has not and the EPA is now required by the Supreme Court to act.

If some of the persons making comments have a hard time with President Obama or the EPA obeying the Supreme Court’s direction then they, if honest, should direct their ire to Congress …. or, dare I suggest, the person who was President at the time of the decision.


Headlines: Tuesday, 8 March, 2011 – The Tea Bagger Nation looks like “Lord of the Flies” « reality-based world
Pingback posted March 8, 2011 @ 12:38 am

[...] Michele Bachmann and other Republican Congressional delegation members are planning to defund the EPA [...]


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.