Senate votes down Rand Paul move to curb EPA regs

posted at 9:50 am on November 11, 2011 by Jazz Shaw

Yesterday, the United States Senate took up a proposal brought forward by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul which would have rolled back the implementation of new EPA “cross-state air pollution rule.” We’ve written about this impending disaster more times than I can count, and by this time I think everyone is aware of the number of jobs this is going to cost, on top of the additional strain on the nation’s power grid and the increased energy costs to consumers which will result. Senator Paul’s measure looked like a good first step.

The Senate votes today on a measure that would put the breaks on one of the Obama EPA’s most destructive proposed rules, and bring a measure of accountability to the regulatory agency that has greatly overstepped its boundaries under EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.

If passed, the bill, proposed by Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, will register Congress’ disapproval of the EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution rule and, if the EPA goes ahead with the rule as planned, allow Congress to overturn it by a simple majority vote.

Both John Boehner and Eric Cantor have listed the cross-state regulations on their top ten list of regulations which will hinder job growth and blow up the deficit. So this one should have been a walk in the park, right? Let’s see how that worked out for us.

The Senate on Thursday blocked Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-Ky.) bid to kill new EPA power plant pollution rules.

In a 41-56 vote, lawmakers thwarted Paul’s resolution to overturn the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which requires curbs in smog and particulate-forming pollution from plants in 27 states in the eastern half of the country.

Six Republicans voted with Democrats against the resolution. Centrist Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.) joined Republicans in voting to overturn the rule.

There were originally a small group of Republicans lining up against Paul’s bill, described by the New Hampshire Journal as “The Jackson Five.” (In honor of EPA chief Lisa Jackson.) They were Maine’s two senators, Sens. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Scott Brown of Massachusetts. At the eleventh hour another name joined the list… Mark Kirk. (R-Illinois) So I suppose now it’s the Jackson Six? Doesn’t have the same ring to it.

This is bad news for those concerned with domestic energy independence and job creation, of course, but it may also force President Obama into yet another uncomfortable position. He has slowly but surely been caving in on allowing any big regulatory or environmental headlines to hit the news before the next election. He already pulled back on the mercury emissions guidelines implementation, and this week he bailed out on any decision on the Keystone XL pipeline. Can he afford to allow the cross-state emission rules to go into effect before the election and allow the nation’s voters to read one headline after another as energy plants in the Southwest go offline, lay off their workers, and jack up energy prices to consumers in the middle of the winter?

There may still be a Christmas present in the offing, here. And it could be in the form of Obama retreating and pulling the plug on this before New Years.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Centrist Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.) joined Republicans in voting to overturn the rule.

Ha!!

SouthernGent on November 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Did the republicians voting against this bill give any reason why they did so?

Skandia Recluse on November 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Keep at them, Rand. Give them their own routine, bringing it back for a vote until the “desired” outcome.

maverick muse on November 11, 2011 at 9:57 AM

There were originally a small group of Republicans lining up against Paul’s bill, described by the New Hampshire Journal as “The Jackson Five.” (In honor of EPA chief Lisa Jackson.) They were Maine’s two senators, Sens. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Scott Brown of Massachusetts. At the eleventh hour another name joined the list… Mark Kirk. (R-Illinois) So I suppose now it’s the Jackson Six? Doesn’t have the same ring to it.

WTF?! Ok, the Maine sisters I understand. Same with Scottie 2 Hotty. But Ayotte? What’s her excuse? I guess she figures she’s not up for reelection anytime soon. Alexander? Why? Mark Kirk doesn’t surprise me since he was one of the Cap & Tax 8. But he also promised he’d vote differently on environmental issues as a Senator. Guess we can chalk him up as another political opportunist(i.e. liar).

Doughboy on November 11, 2011 at 9:58 AM

Skandia, vested interests, political donors, lobbyists, propagandists influencing voters…

maverick muse on November 11, 2011 at 9:58 AM

Did the republicians voting against this bill give any reason why they did so?

Skandia Recluse on November 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM

They said it was in their nature.

myrenovations on November 11, 2011 at 9:59 AM

So what if this throws people outa work and lengthens the recession, Obooba practically can’t lose. Just ask Larry Sabato.

Akzed on November 11, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Once again, I apologize for Illinois’ part in all of this.

D@mmit!

Fallon on November 11, 2011 at 10:00 AM

Six Republicans Traitors voted with Democrats against the resolution.

FIFY!

TugboatPhil on November 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Brown’s vote was totally political. Elizabeth Warren has been running adds up here linking him to big oil and killing the environment. He can now use this to nullify her attacks. Problem s the folks who voted him in last time could care less about what Warren says.

DLEW on November 11, 2011 at 10:02 AM

Once again, I apologize for Illinois’ part in all of this.

D@mmit!

Fallon on November 11, 2011 at 10:00 AM

We knew what we were getting with Mark Kirk. It’s what we would’ve gotten with Mike Castle had we sold out our conservative principles and given him the nomination. That’s the problem with electing Republicans in deep blue states. You have to settle for garbage like this.

Doughboy on November 11, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Skandia Recluse on November 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM

They appear to all be big government progressives.

chemman on November 11, 2011 at 10:05 AM

Separating the sheep from the goats far enough in advance to launch and vet new candidates: CONSERVATIVE voters want national energy independent strong economy jobs, and a government that upholds the Constitutional Rights of US citizens over all else.

We want separation of religion Corporation and State.

maverick muse on November 11, 2011 at 10:05 AM

So it sounds like we need a 51 seat majority, plus 6, in 2012.

stefanite on November 11, 2011 at 10:05 AM

They were Maine’s two senators, Sens. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

Wait…what? Snowe, Collins, and Brown? Man, I didn’t see that coming.

Mike Castle 2012

Bishop on November 11, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Jazz. Why only part of the story? What is the reason the Republicans voted against this law?

Vince on November 11, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Given what we see here anyone still believe we can get rid of major Cabinet level departments?

chemman on November 11, 2011 at 10:07 AM

NO WAY Obama pulls this rule now. He has gone all-in for the enviros. he is down to his base now and won’t do anything that alienates any of his base constituencies. His people still think he can win this way.

Let’s focus on defeating the Democrats who voted against this resolution.

rockmom on November 11, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Mark Kirk……Soooo glad I didn’t vote for him.

tencole on November 11, 2011 at 10:09 AM

Jazz. Why only part of the story? What is the reason the Republicans voted against this law?

Vince on November 11, 2011 at 10:07 AM

They are afraid of the enviro groups and all the money they are able to pour in to campaigns. These groups are nasty, and they will demagogue every vote and issue. It’s also an easy vote for them against the “extremist” Rand Paul. It was a mistake for the GOP to have Paul carrying this bill.

rockmom on November 11, 2011 at 10:10 AM

Mark Kirk and Scott Brown….the “best we can do” twins. I always hated that rationalization.

tencole on November 11, 2011 at 10:11 AM

Cripe, wasn’t expecting ayotte
, everyone else not so much

cmsinaz on November 11, 2011 at 10:12 AM

Mark Kirk……Soooo glad I didn’t vote for him.

tencole on November 11, 2011 at 10:09 AM

Why? What difference does it make? I don’t understand the Rs who voted this down. They are either stupid about the consequences of the EPA regulation or unethical politicos. Either way, they need to be voted out of office if they are not going to vote for what’s good for their constituents.

Vince on November 11, 2011 at 10:13 AM

They must be DEFEATED… there is no other way

golfmann on November 11, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Mark Kirk and Scott Brown….the “best we can do” twins. I always hated that rationalization.

tencole on November 11, 2011 at 10:11 AM

You think we can do better than Scott Brown in MassachusettEs? Maybe in a governor’s race, but the US Senate? The same place that saw the likes of the Swimmer and John Kerry(where did he serve again?) get reelected over and over again? The same state that has a self-avowed socialist like Liz Warren running neck-and-neck with Brown?

Doughboy on November 11, 2011 at 10:15 AM

Pull the plug? No way Jose!

All Barry has left is OWS class warfare Tiny Tim vs Scrooge. Look for hardening and encamping. Crossing the aisle is a no-go, he’ll lose what votes he has remaining.

Limerick on November 11, 2011 at 10:16 AM

rockmom on November 11, 2011 at 10:10 AM

I understand the Maine politicians and Brown voting against this but it still makes them people you can’t trust. They have no character and only think about themselves.

Why would Ayotte and Alexander vote against this? Although I have seen a few queer votes by Alexander.

Vince on November 11, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Yep, great fiscal Conservatives.

hawkdriver on November 11, 2011 at 10:25 AM

Another step along the road to self-destruction.

petefrt on November 11, 2011 at 10:26 AM

Kelly Ayotte surprised me. I’m going to have to have a few words with her next town meeting.

evilned on November 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Gosh, that BIG TENT is such a great idea! I’m glad that on important votes we can count on these great Republicans to stand with the other side every time.

search4truth on November 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Mark Kirk and Scott Brown….the “best we can do” twins. I always hated that rationalization.

tencole on November 11, 2011 at 10:11 AM

You think we can do better than Scott Brown in MassachusettEs? Maybe in a governor’s race, but the US Senate? The same place that saw the likes of the Swimmer and John Kerry(where did he serve again?) get reelected over and over again? The same state that has a self-avowed socialist like Liz Warren running neck-and-neck with Brown?

Doughboy on November 11, 2011 at 10:15 AM

I don’t think Scott Brown is a “we”. He may have an “R” after his name, but that’s it….he should just change it to a “D” and be done with it.
Actually it’s almost better when you have a true democrat….at least you know where he/she stands and how they’re going to vote. Doughboy, we can’t depend on Brown or Kirk to vote that the sky is blue.

tencole on November 11, 2011 at 10:30 AM

DLEW on November 11, 2011 at 10:02 AM

if he has to vote liberal to keep his seat than we just need to give that one up. it just gives ammo to make other repubs look extreme. better to have a dem voting in that seat if that is what the people of mass. want.

chasdal on November 11, 2011 at 10:31 AM

search4truth on November 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM

That tent hasn’t been big enough for real Conservatives for a long time.

hawkdriver on November 11, 2011 at 10:33 AM

Kelly Ayotte surprised me. I’m going to have to have a few words with her next town meeting.

evilned on November 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM

If you would, ask her what her reason was for this vote and tell her to be specific. There are a lot of cofused conservatives out here regarding her ideology.

Vince on November 11, 2011 at 10:39 AM

Still getting emails from the Scott Brown to give money. Remember how exciting it was when he got elected, think Hotair even blew up that night from all the traffic.

Yeah, I’m not sending him a dime this time around.

Hongqi on November 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM

They were Maine’s two senators, Sens. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Scott Brown of Massachusetts. At the eleventh hour another name joined the list… Mark Kirk. (R-Illinois)

No Murkowski? What happened? She’s always a reliable knife in the back.

rrpjr on November 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM

Hongqi on November 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Same here. When I got that request I sent the envelope back to them with a note telling him how disappointed I was in his votes. Haven’t heard a word since.

BetseyRoss on November 11, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Hongqi on November 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM

there was a lot of political capital and money wasted on that seat. he was gonna be the vote that blocked obamacare. well, the dems managed an end run and since he’s been more reliable for them than us. all excused because “if he doesnt vote that way we lose the seat” screw it, we’ll get control of the senate this next cycle and he needs to be brought under control or given a major cold shoulder.

chasdal on November 11, 2011 at 10:55 AM

There have to be more than 2 vunerable dems here. It’s not like the resolution was really going to accomplish anything.

Use this for what it is: An opportunity to expose vulnerable democratic senators in the 2012 elections.

EconomicNeocon on November 11, 2011 at 10:59 AM

Are the Repubs trying to teach that Tea Party upstart Rand a lesson?

If so, it’s lost on me. They should not have blocked this bill.

PattyJ on November 11, 2011 at 11:00 AM

No Murkowski? What happened? She’s always a reliable knife in the back.

rrpjr on November 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM

Alaska isn’t exactly fossil fuel unfriendly territory. A cap and trade type vote would be very bad for her. Murkowski is more of a blow with the wind, keep my seat of power character than an outright liberal mole.

Conan on November 11, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Kelly Ayotte surprised me. I’m going to have to have a few words with her next town meeting.

evilned on November 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM

I remember that Mitt got that global warming question at a NH townhall and went with it because Mitt being Mitt thought it would play in NH. Apprently the polling must be that NH is a global warming friendly hotspot. It does expose Ayotte as another BSer on being a straight conservative and not just another flaky NE Republican.

Conan on November 11, 2011 at 11:25 AM

I think we need to understand electoral politics. As someone said “we can’t trust blue state Republicans” but seriously, aren’t the blue state Democrats worse? These 6 probably voted the way they did because that’s what their consituents wanted them to do. They are all elected by voters in their states, and are supposed to represent their state’s interest. I’m not making excuses for them (even though it sounds like I am) I just wish the people they represent would wisen up.

ConservativeinCO on November 11, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Well this ought to please the blazes out of those folks here who keep screaming that our only principle of value is to get the indie vote!

Yup, they also think that the word Mercedes on a Yugo it becomes more valuable…

Don L on November 11, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Ok wonks… Get a clue here… This is all about timing, and apparently Rand and others still have some evolution to do here.

This sort of bill is never going to get signed by Obama, but votes for it will be used by Obama in 2012 to claim the GOP is all about dirty air and water — jobs be damned. He can get away with this nonsense because he’ll never be taken to task to put lost jobs and EPA regulations in the same speech, let alone same sentence, by the PRESSSSidential media.

On the glass is 60% empty side, the GOP can use this as an example of how Obama is against main street jobs and just for Blue Green jobs, and offer an example of how the GOP might create lots of new jobs…

The problem here is don’t hold your breath on the GOP LOSERship to help here — they’re mostly about the battle in the trenches, not what the battle is all about. The LOSERship decided to give a few yards here and not fight for this rule change, in hopes that later that lost ground can be gained back. Again, it’s not the message or principle, but the battle that matters to the LOSERship. That’s why they are the LOSERship — no one knows exactly what they stand for… Go figure why that is…

droofus on November 11, 2011 at 12:23 PM

I despise politicians that put their career ahead of the American people.

sadatoni on November 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM

No surprise to see our butt-fuc*ing nitwit RINO Senator Kirk join the other DemoGOPers. Enjoy the great advantage we are getting from having another Republican (from Illinois!) in the Senate, while it lasts. He’ll get slaughtered by the next self-declared Democrat with statewide name recognition.

Jaibones on November 11, 2011 at 7:24 PM

People here at HA are really inconsistent.

When it comes to specific policy matter, they comment based on their core beliefs and principles.

But when it comes to actual election of candidates, THEY ARE ALMOST 99% PERSONALITY-BASED.

That’s the reason why the next 2012 Election will most likely endf up to Obama’s 2nd term.

Sigh!

TheAlamos on November 12, 2011 at 4:47 AM