If there was ever a point when the drama that is freedom struggling to survive the Obama White House produced a moment when the villain laughs over his victims and does a monologue on how powerful he is, and how impotent they are, this story in Politico is about that moment:
White House counselor John Podesta said congressional attempts to trump EPA’s climate rules will fail.
“They’ll find various ways, particularly in the House, to try to stop us from using the authority we have under the Clean Air Act,” Podesta said at Monday’s White House press briefing.
“All I would say is that those have zero percent chance of working,” he said. “We’re committed to moving forward with those rules.”
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and some other Senate Republicans want to offer an amendment to bipartisan energy efficiency legislation this week that would undermine EPA’s proposed greenhouse gas rule for future power plants.
So, unless Podesta is completely wrong, the best we can hope for is that the GOP gets both House and Senate in 2014 and is able to push back. But without a veto-proof majority, I’m not sure how Congress can really pass any law that will halt the President’s pen and phone.
But notice how this is all based on insane tyranny. The laws about the environment (you can call them “regulations” all you want but they are obviously laws) come from an unelected bureaucracy—the Environmental Protection Agency. Does the Constitution establish the E.P.A. to make laws? No it does not. It refers to the House and Senate as the sole legislative body. So how does the E.P.A. get this authority? The answer is that Congress passed the Clean Air Act and “authorized” the bureaucracy to posses and use such powers.
So how is that supposed to work Constitutionally? Can Congress pass a law that authorizes a person as a dictator for life to unilaterally make all future laws? If that would not be Constitutional, how can the Clean Air Act appoint the E.P.A. as a law-making body?