The Soviet Union was eventually crushed by the inability of its statist rulers to accomplish the myriad tasks that controlling everyone in a large nation requires. At one point, for example, Moscow’s apparatchiks were trying to control 2 million prices daily. How is that possible, ask you? It’s not. answer I. The communists must start with the premise that they “do not actually need ‘a plan.’ That’s not how it’s done.” The parallelism with what you will read below is astonishing.
My thanks to HP for sending this to me. It was testimony by the head of the Environmental Protection Agency before Congress.
EPA ADMITS CLIMATE REGULATIONS WON’T HELP CLIMATE
In testimony before the House Science Committee on July 9, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy made some telling admissions. Under questioning from Committee Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), McCarthy continued to refuse to provide the committee the raw data and research used to develop its Clean Power Plan. McCarthy said she cannot provide the data because EPA “doesn’t actually need the raw data in order to develop science. That’s not how it’s done.” Rather McCarthy stated EPA used existing research rather than conducting its own research or contracting with others to conduct original research or test existing research to justify the rules. McCarthy claimed releasing the research would violate the confidentiality of those who participated in it.
Really? I recently published my 506th scientific research paper. Anyone with access to a medical library can read any one of them. Publishing a scientific paper is the antithesis of “confidential.” I “violate” my own confidentiality. Perhaps if my research was on how to build a missile defense system it would be secret and confidential, but research on pollution or climate change… get serious!
Smith pointed out other agencies routinely comply with Congressional requests for basic research used to justify expensive regulations and the committee has no difficulty keeping personal information confidential.
McCarthy also admitted she did not know much about carbon dioxide, including what percentage of the atmosphere it makes up or what share humans have contributed. Arguably McCarthy’s most telling admission was her acknowledgment, in a series of exchanges with Smith, the Clean Power Plan may reduce global temperature by a barely measurable amount. Smith stated,
On the Clean Power Plan, former Obama Administration Assistant Secretary Charles McConnell said at best [it] will reduce global temperature by only one one-hundredth of a degree Celsius. At the same time it’s going to increase the cost of electricity. That’s going to hurt the lowest income Americans the most. How do you justify such an expensive, burdensome, onerous rule that’s really not going to do much good …
McCarthy replied, “The value of this rule is not measured in that way [by the amount of warming it prevents] … I’m not disagreeing that this action in and of itself will not make all the difference we need to address climate action, but what I’m saying is that if we don’t take action domestically we will never get started …”
See some of her testimony below (footnote).
Did I read that correctly? “If we don’t take action we will never get started.” Do we really allow logicians of this caliber to run one of our most expensive and intrusive agencies?