400 North Capitol Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
- Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
- Local 202.783.3870
McCaskill Sides with EPA Rather Than Economic Growth
While the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation waves are stirring up in Washington, America is begging for a life saver. However, with politicians like Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) aboard the good ship S.S. Big Government, the life savers are all made of stone.
In April 2011, Senator McCaskill voted against a bill that would prohibit the EPA from issuing harmful taxes on greenhouse gas (i.e. carbon dioxide) emissions. These taxes harm healthy competition between businesses, which would drive down prices, encourage expansion, and promote job creation. Whether there is even a need to restrict such emissions is controversial, yet Sen. McCaskill sided with those who are determined to plunge ahead with costly new taxes.
The argument for voting no on the bill is stated thus:
Sen. Lautenberg, D-NJ: “We hear the message that has been going around: Let's get rid of the EPA's ability to regulate. Who are they to tell us what businesses can do? Thank goodness that in this democratic society in which we live, there are rules and regulations to keep us as a civilized nation. The Supreme Court and scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency agreed that the Clean Air Act is a tool we must use to stop dangerous pollution. This amendment, it is very clear, favors one group--the business community. The Republican tea party politicians say: ‘Just ignore the Supreme Court. Ignore the scientists. We know better.’ They want to reward the polluters by crippling EPA's ability to enforce the Clean Air Act.”
Regardless what scientists, courts, or politicians say, America’s economy is floundering in a massive sea of debt and red tape. With 14 million people out of work, is it really America’s number one priority to regulate the amount of carbon dioxide in the air?