Jackson is either delusional or she’s a liar
The latest claims from the EPA indicate that EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson is either delusional, or she’s an out and out liar. Sincere apologies if this comment seems unusually abrupt, but Lisa Jackson is deliberately misleading the public on the issue of her department’s impact on jobs, and we can’t just turn a blind eye to her perfidy any longer.
There is no possible justification for her being so blithely ignorant of the impacts her regulations are having on our economy.
Every reasonable review of the impending EPA train wreck states clearly that Ms. Jackson has personally overseen the largest and most expensive expansion of regulation on power generators in the history of this country.
Two new EPA pollution regulations will slam the coal industry so hard that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost, and electric rates will skyrocket 11 percent to over 23 percent, according to a new study based on government data.
Overall, the rules aimed at making the air cleaner could cost the coal-fired power plant industry $180 billion, warns a trade group.
From the Colorado Observer:
The National Economic Research Associates found that the EPA rule and other finalized and pending EPA regulations for power plants using coal could cost 183,000 jobs annually from 2012 to 2020.
From the New York Times:
NERA analysts concluded that those new costs would lead to a 13 percent drop in coal-fired generation and a 26 percent increase for natural gas. Electricity prices would rise by an average of 11.5 percent across the country, with double-digit hikes for ratepayers in 21 states.
On balance, those increases would cause the economy to shed about 144,000 jobs for the next decade, the study says, despite claims from supporters that the rules will create construction work.
From the Washington Times:
NERA Economic Consulting studied the impact of a pair of EPA rules affecting coal and estimated the extra cost would total $184 billion through the year 2030. This includes $72 billion in capital costs that coal companies will have to pay right now to comply. Electric bills will jump 12 percent by 2016 with areas such as Kentucky and Tennessee seeing a 24 percent increase. Employment will drop by a net 1.4 million jobs.
An analysis for ACCCE by National Economic Research Associates (NERA) found that the proposed Utility MACT rule and other pending EPA regulations would destroy an average of 183,000 jobs every year from 2012- 2020 and increase electricity and other energy prices by $170 billion. The NERA analysis also found that the average American household would have $270 less to spend each year because of new EPA regulations. According to EPA’s own analysis, the Utility MACT regulation could cost more than $100 billion.
While Ms. Jackson works to downplay these very real, and very clear costs, the reality is that numerous sources have estimated the impacts of the EPA train wreck to be as high as 1.44 million jobs lost over the next several years. Her attempts to spin her actions as having a positive effect on jobs would be pathetic if it wasn’t covering over the damage she is doing to so many families and communities.
Of course, if one doesn’t believe these studies, then they can listen to Ms. Jackson’s staff. They have clearly admitted that there will be jobs lost and that there will be significant economic costs associated with their many and varied regulations.
For example, in this video EPA Assistant Administrator Mathy Stanislaus dances around the issues associated with job losses and economic impacts of EPA regulations. After repeatedly asking Mr. Stanislaus what the impacts on jobs will be, Rep. Cory Gardner finally gets him to admit that the EPA does not account for the jobs lost when they issue regulations.
Of course, the logical question to ask Ms. Jackson would be – “If your organization does not include an accounting for the job losses associated with your rule making, how can you so boldly claim that ‘there hasn’t ever been a loss of jobs blamed on the EPA?’ ”
Perhaps she believes that if regulators simply ignore these impacts, they can’t be held accountable for them? But I digress …
In this video, EPA Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation, Gina McCarthy admits that EPA regulations are having a direct impact on the ability of the coal industry to compete domestically and internationally.
In this case, Carl Spalding, Region 1 EPA Administrator, actually admits in a public speech that the EPA is moving forward with their anti-coal regulations, despite his admission that their actions will cause coal-dependent communities in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and “all those places … to just go away.”