They do, they really do
(The Hill) The Supreme Court’s halting of the Obama administration’s chief climate rule is a new spark in the race for the Senate.
Democrats and greens, who have long hoped to make climate change a flashpoint in November’s elections, say the court’s 5-4 stay order putting a hold on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan gives them a chance to make a strong case to voters in their push to win back the Senate this fall.
Republicans and energy industry strategists say they’re equally enthusiastic to use the case — which hinges on whether the Obama administration exerted too much authority over carbon emissions — to make a point about executive overreach and its support among Democrats.
The Senate is especially important for climate regulations. If the Supreme Court blocks the rule — a prospect for which opponents are bullish after the stay order — legislation would likely be the only way to go about instituting a carbon reduction plan.
Democrats running in key Senate races next year said they were angered by the Court’s decision to preempt the rule this early.
They can be angered all the want. It will be very amusing to see them support an executive over-reach that will increase the cost of energy, increase the cost of living, and cost people jobs. That sounds like a winning campaign slogan, does it not? Besides, all the court did was delay implementation of Obama’s plan, not scuttle it, at least till the plan has its day in court, as 27 States are suing to kill the plan.
But Frank Maisano, an energy specialist at the law and lobbying firm Bracewell, was doubtful that any development with the climate rule could change the fact that climate change consistently ranks low in voters’ priorities.
“This tends to relegate to a lower position on the spectrum,” he said. “In the grand scheme of a political campaign, this is probably not going to be a factor.”
There is that. But, hey, let Democrats tilt at windmills. Let them chase the Snip. Let them explain how it’s an excellent idea to increase the power the of the federal government, especially the Executive, all to raise the cost of living for the middle and lower classes.
Meanwhile, the NY Times Editorial Board is having sour grapes over the court decision
The Supreme Court’s extraordinary decision on Tuesday to temporarily block the Obama administration’s effort to combat global warming by regulating emissions from power plants was deeply disturbing on two fronts.
There’s nothing extraordinary about any court putting a plan on hold until any suit on the plan has its full day in court.
It raised serious questions about America’s ability to deliver on Mr. Obama’s pledge in Paris in December to sharply reduce carbon emissions, and, inevitably, about its willingness to take a leadership role on the issue.
Except, most Americans couldn’t care less about this plan, especially if it will raise our costs and eliminate jobs. Furthermore, the plan came out months prior to Obama’s Paris pledge, and, that’s his pledge, not America’s. If the plans are so great, why did he not submit them to the duly elected legislators?
And with all the Republican-appointed justices lining up in a 5-to-4 vote to halt the regulation before a federal appeals court could rule on it, the court also reinforced the belief among many Americans that the court is knee-deep in the partisan politics it claims to stand above. While the court’s action was not a ruling on the merits of the case, it will delay efforts to comply with the regulation and sends an ominous signal that Mr. Obama’s initiative, known as the Clean Power Plan, could ultimately be overturned.
What the NY Times fails to do is explain why States should have to comply with this Executive order when they are suing to stop it. They also fail to explain why they’re OK with raising the cost of living for the middle and lower classes.
Crossed at Right Wing News.