“‘When Congress resists action on pressing environmental issues, regulation provides a way forward,’ said Thomas E. Lovejoy, University Professor in Science and Public Policy at George Mason University.”
So sayeth environmental sage if constitutional naïf Thomas E. Lovejoy at George Mason in today’s WaPo piece “EPA vows to enforce curbs on emissions”. Possibly you are wondering what curbs on emissions they will ‘enforce’, what with the legislation proposing them having been rejected in Congress after the public got wind of things?
Whatever. Surely you remember this dynamic from civics class, or even some more advanced inquiry into our system: Congress only decides major domestic policy issues until unelected bureaucrats and political appointees decide they can no longer wait for our elected representatives.
Like (as the article also notes) the Department of Interior is for locking up land when Congress resists doing so, the FCC is for when Congress resists action on the Progressives’ view of the internet, and so on through the alphabet soup of government. This must be what the media is praising as Obama’s move to the center, his moderation, his version of triangulation recognizing the new political reality. Or something.
Oblivious to the system our Founders created as this, and Mr. Lovejoy, may be, one cannot say the activist academic hasn’t noticed the reality in the courts, and what administrative law has become. So, sadly, he has a point. If one calling for long-overdue outrage.
It is assertions like Lovejoy’s, and Obama’s ‘there are other ways to skin that cat’ of the global warming agenda, than just going through Congress with the doomed cap-n-trade, that beg to serve as this year’s ‘necessarily skyrocket.’
Let’s hope the new oversight sheriffs take their task seriously.