Search
  • AIM Team

NAM: President’s Plan – As EPA regulations increase, jobs decline

In a press release, the National Association of Manufacturers (6/26) released excerpts of a speech President and CEO Jay Timmons will delivered at the Independent Petroleum Association of America’s midyear meeting about President Obama’s plan to impose more regulations on energy producers through the Environmental Protection Agency.

“President Obama today revealed his most ambitious regulatory agenda yet, one that would remake the entire US economy. During the campaign, the President regularly touted increasing manufacturing jobs, and he rightly recognized that a strong and vibrant manufacturing sector is key to robust and sustained economic growth and job creation.” Timmons said, “Unfortunately, under his watch, he seems intent on taking actions that would put manufacturing in the United States out of business. The President’s plan puts our country on a path toward the elimination of fossil fuels from our energy mix that is wholly inconsistent with his promotion of an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy plan just a few months ago.”

The AP (6/25, Lederman) reports, “The National Association of Manufacturers claimed Obama’s proposals would drive up costs.”

The Business Journals (6/25, Hoover) also reports, “Business groups such as the National Association of Manufacturers said this will increase energy prices and make US businesses less competitive with their global counterparts.”

Obama Details Climate Policies. ABC World News (6/25, story 5, 0:20, Sawyer) reported that “for the first time” the President “call[ed] for regulations on carbon dioxide from power plants.”

CBS Evening News (6/25, story 5, 0:25, Pelley) reported that the President “ordered” the EPA “to reduce pollution from power plants.”

NBC Nightly News (6/25, 6:42 p.m. EDT) reported that the President is “bypass[ing] Congress” and ordering the EPA to “limit the carbon pollution that comes from power plants that burn coal and natural gas, just like it does mercury or arsenic.”

The New York Times (6/26, Landler, Broder, Subscription Publication) reports Speaker of the United States House of Representatives John Boehner released a statement reading, “These policies, rejected even by the last Democratic-controlled Congress, will shutter power plants, destroy good-paying American jobs and raise electricity bills for families that can scarcely afford it.”

The Los Angeles Times (6/25, Banerjee) reports that the President directed the EPA to “develop by next June the first US regulations designed to cut carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants,” which “would probably require the closing of some coal-fired plants” and “boost electricity costs in some parts of the country.” The Times says the President is willing to incur those costs “because power plants emit 40% of the country’s carbon dioxide” and reducing “their emissions is the biggest-single way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

McClatchy (6/26, Cockerham, Bolstad), in an article titled, “Obama’s Climate Plan Aims Straight At Coal,” says the President intends to deliver a “blow to the coal-fired power plants that supply much of the nation’s electricity.” According to McClatchy, the regulations proposed by the President on Tuesday “could increase utility costs for American consumers and harm regional economies tied to coal.” McClatchy notes that criticism of the President’s plan was bipartisan and quotes Sen. Joe Manchin as saying, “These policies punish American businesses by putting them at a competitive disadvantage with our global competitors.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said the President was “declaring a ‘war on coal,’” which is “tantamount to declaring a ‘war on jobs.’”

Also covering the story are Wall Street Journal (6/26, Tracy, Subscription Publication), USA Today (6/25, Koch), theWashington Post (6/26, Eilperin) and other media sources.

Keystone Pipeline Comments Leave Both Sides Guessing About Obama’s Intentions. The AP (6/26, Lederman) reports that on Tuesday, the President “offered a rare insight into his deliberations” regarding the Keystone XL pipeline when he “deem[ed] it in America’s interests only if it doesn’t worsen carbon pollution.”

The Washington Post (6/26, Eilperin) notes that the State Department is “still conducting an environmental review of the massive pipeline that would ship crude oil from Canada to Gulf Coast refineries.” The Post reports that an anonymous “senior administration official” says the Administration is still “examin[ing] whether vetoing the project – which would mean the oil would likely be shipped by rail – would translate into higher emissions than building it.” On Tuesday, the President said, “The net effects of climate impact will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project will go forward. It is relevant.”

The Los Angeles Times (6/25, Banerjee), in an article titled, “Obama Sets Strict Test For Keystone XL Pipeline,” reports that the President “set a high bar for approval of the controversial…pipeline.”

The Wall Street Journal (6/26, Tracy, Subscription Publication) also reports that the President did not make it clear whether he is leaning towards approving the project or rejecting it, but Ben Wolfgang, in a piece for the Washington Times(6/26, Wolfgang), reports that “with a wink and a nod” the President suggested that he is “likely to approve the controversial…pipeline.” Wolfgang calls the President’s comments “perhaps the clearest sign to date that he’s willing to risk the wrath of environmentalists” opposed to the project.

According to the New York Times (6/26, Landler, Broder, Subscription Publication), the Administration’s final decision on the pipeline project is “still months away.”

1 view