Rep David Schweikert (R-Ariz) Introduces “Secret Science Reform Act”
What is it? It’s a way of forcing the Environmental Protection Agency, which has seemingly forgotten what their actual mission is, to end their secrecy in rule making
(Fox News) Republican lawmakers in the House are pushing legislation that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing new regulations based on science that is not transparent or not reproducible.
The Secret Science Reform Act, introduced Thursday by Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., would bar the agency from proposing or finalizing rules without first disclosing all “scientific and technical information” relied on to support its proposed action.
“Public policy should come from public data, not based on the whims of far-left environmental groups,” Schweikert said in a statement. “For far too long, the EPA has approved regulations that have placed a crippling financial burden on economic growth in this country with no public evidence to justify their actions.”
This is primarily aimed at the EPA’s junk science rules regarding “climate change”, but could certainly affect rule making for other issues.
Smith said the proposal “prohibits EPA from using secret science to justify new regulations.”
“The American people foot the bill for EPA’s costly regulations, and they have a right to see the underlying science. Costly environmental regulations should be based upon publicly available data so that independent scientists can verify the EPA’s claims,” Smith said in a statement.
This should easily pass the House once it makes it to the floor on what will be a virtually 100% partisan vote, since Democrats will not be happy with the EPA being forced to be transparent. After that, it will be shelved in the Democrat controlled Senate, with only a few Democrats, such as West Virginian Joe Manchin, wanting a vote. This is another important reason for the GOP to regain the Senate.
The legislation is H.R. 4012, which can be found via the new Congress.gov website, which is replacing the older Thomas. It was just introduced on 2/6/14, so there is no text available. It’s purpose is “To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regulations or assessments based upon science that is not transparent or reproducible.”
After his 20-year old son overdosed on drugs, Mike Stollings decided to post a photo of his body at the funeral home on Facebook out of grief and guilt. The...Read More
It’s terrible, really, really, really terrible. I’m not quite sure why it’s terrible, the story doesn’t say what the problem
All in the name of climate change, of course (CNN) Have you ever thrown away a banana peel or dumped
Of course it does. And, of course, the media itself has shifted into Dooooom! mode. Here’s the NY Times’ resident