Freedom Bulwark | Evil triumphs when good people do nothing

In the past several weeks, The Clean Air Act has come under heavy fire by House Republicans. The House GOP has proposed a legislation that is aiming to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency’s flagship regulatory standard.  Along with the ban, the EPA is facing a potential budget cut of nearly one third of its total funds. If the proposed legislation becomes law, the EPA will be decimated, and the general public’s health will be put at risk.

While the GOP has been receiving the most attention regarding their proposal to block EPA climate regulations, the Senate is going to have the final say. Three amendments that are aiming to strip the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions are to be deliberated on the Senate floor this week.  In fact, this Monday, top lawmakers will be considering a Republican proposal that wishes to permanently remove the EPA’s authority over the regulation of power plant’s and refinery’s greenhouse gas emission levels.

The potential impact this bill will have could jeopardize the air, water, and public land quality to decades to come. Without The Clean Air Act, polluters are free to spew mercury into the air we breathe, arsenic into the water we drink, and asbestos and other waste into the reserves that feed our land. Crippling the Environmental Protection Agency will allow toxins to permeate through the environment and silently ravage the ecosystem.

The associated health threat of this legislation is alarming. Increasing pollution will increase the number of children diagnosed with asthma, brain cancer, mesothelioma, and other serious health issues. Asthma alone stands as one of the biggest contributors to school and work absenteeism. The condition winds up causing nearly 15 million lost workdays each year. Moreover, mesothelioma symptoms are often mistaken for the more common illness of asthma. When left diagnosed, the mesothelioma life expectancy is not very long, failing to go beyond 14 months.

Republican lawmakers that proposed the bill contend that limiting the EPA’s budget and lifting The Clean Air Act will promote business, create jobs, and stimulate the economy. There is some truth behind such reasoning; with gas prices skyrocketing and unemployment levels at extreme levels. But still, it seems like there is a different motive for the proposed cuts, considering the EPA’s budget constitutes such a minimal portion of federal expenditures.

“To put the proposed cuts in perspective, consider that the EPA's budget today is about one-tenth of one percent of federal expenditures. That makes it hard to take seriously the claim that the cut is about reducing the deficit. That aside, it's important to understand how poorly funded EPA has been historically, how its present budget is working out and the likely effect of cutbacks.”

 Additionally, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson has stated that the health and environmental improvements from regulations would save over $100 billion dollars annually by preventing collateral costs from hospital bills and insurance payments. It begs the question as to why lawmakers would want to ban initiatives that are set forth in order to protect public health. There seems to be a deliberateness that is calculatingly cold. One can only hope that these amendments are not part of a partisan agenda.