Energy & Environment

With Earth Day upon us, I would just like to note a few of the things we have learned in the past several years – the Earth is warming, sea ice is disappearing, the glaciers are receding, the oceans are acidifying, and sea levels are rising. We know all of this from climate science.  And all of this will impact every single person on this planet.

The work being done at NASA, NOAA and other agencies is providing the crucial data that our nation will need to move forward on this critical issue, yet some would have us stop climate science research across the federal government.

Our country has a proud tradition of conservation: reaching to the very highest office in the land. It is well-known that Teddy Roosevelt was an avid outdoorsman and conservationist; his efforts set the conservation bar for subsequent presidents, indelibly shaping the character and beauty of our nation for generations to come.

Roosevelt wasn’t the only president in the early part of the 20th century to emphasize the importance of conservation. Ohio native President Warren G. Harding and his friends, including Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Harvey Firestone, and naturalist John Burroughs,camped every summer for decades. Known as the Vagabonds, their adventures were publicized by news reporters (Harding’s entourage reportedly included 10 White House photographers) and promoted the great outdoors to a national audience.

In a recent Congress Blog in The Hill, George C. Landrith, the president of the Frontiers of Freedom Institute, describes catch shares in coastal fisheries as “an innovative, market-based approach” to fisheries management. As a full-time advocate for the recreational fishing community and lifelong coastal angler, I find it difficult to understand how a group which boasts a mission of promoting “limited government, free enterprise, free markets, and traditional American values” as Frontiers of Freedom claims could be so far off base with regard to facts.

Earlier this month, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that they mistakenly released personal information of thousands of farmers to environmental groups in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. This breach of confidentiality resulted from the agency’s desire to appease environmentalists, and I am appalled that the EPA would be so careless with the personal information of these hardworking farmers.

By the end of September, Congress must reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens act, which the principal law governing the management of America’s commercial fisheries. While this may seem like a small issue, in reality commercial fishing is a multi-billion dollar industry, central to the economies of several states.

There is little doubt Magnuson-Stevens will be reauthorized. Too many states, too many jobs depend on it. It’s more a matter of what reform will look like as the current fisheries management system is just not up to the job. It is riddled with problems, including over-fishing, environmental insensitivities, and massive taxpayer subsides that hide the cost of government regulations, both to consumers and to fishermen.

It's a familiar narrative: President Obama pushes for higher taxes, while Republicans remain steadfastly opposed to bigger levies on personal income. However, recent statements from some GOPers hint at a temptation to go along with the idea of hitting the larger oil and natural gas companies with new exactions. Who wants to be seen on the side of “Big Oil”? Congressional resolve will be tested now that the White House has released its budget which, true to political form, raises taxes on a subset of the largest American oil and gas companies. Rather than offering a solid plan for across-the-board tax reform, President Obama -- in his unwavering opinion that these companies are making too much money -- is sacrificing jobs, energy production and the very government revenue he's seeking to generate.

You’re paying more for gasoline. The oil industry’s pocketing the profits. And they don’t want you to know it.
 
Complaints about biofuels this year are the latest shiny ball for the oil industry, meant to distract the public from what’s really biting into their household budgets. Refining margins this year have been at record levels. Oil companies are making more money, even as gas prices for February and March were the highest in history. If you want to know why you’re paying more at the pump, look no further than oil executives’ pockets. How they keep a straight face while espousing concern for American drivers is beyond me.

For a country that prides itself on American ingenuity and the free enterprise system to solve problems and create new products, the recent shift to a command-and-control economy is becoming increasingly troubling. 

During the past several years, self-appointed autocrats in government have been inserting themselves into our day-to-day lives in the mistaken belief that we need to be protected from ourselves. The mayor of New York City led an aborted attempt to ban large sodas because we’re powerless against carbonated calories; the government tells banks who they can lend money to despite the potential financial risk; utilities are ordered to produce a percentage of their electricity from green energy sources despite the cost to consumers; and motorists fill up with government gas and diesel concoctions designed by environmental activists and bureaucrats rather than by automotive engineers and energy experts.

As the U.S. Senate prepares for Gina McCarthy’s confirmation hearing its worth reviewing the record of the Environmental Protection Agency's to understand the agency's approach to overseeing the oil and natural gas industry. Doing so reveals a troubling trend that, if not corrected, could negatively impact an industry that supported $545 billion in economic activity and 9% of all new U.S. jobs in 2011, leading major U.S. investment banks to declare that “energy is beginning to carry America.”

That trend isn't noticeable in the agency's official actions, but rather in email correspondence released due to Freedom of Information Act requests in multiple EPA regions – including the agency's headquarters – sought by reporters attempting to piece together seemingly disjointed agency actions.

In one convincing and catastrophic stroke, Hurricane Sandy proved that it’s not simply about sand, boardwalk planks, and rich mansions being swept out to sea.
 
Television cameras always seem to capture that first, leaving a lasting, though false, impression that only businesses and wealthy beach towns need rescuing. Nothing could be further from the truth.
 
What you don’t see is the sheer magnitude of lower- and middle-class families that remain devastated after the cameras leave.
 
A March 2013 NYU Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy study showed that low-income families were hit hardest by Sandy. Fifty-four percent of New York City homeowners who applied for FEMA aid make less than $60,000 per year.
 
A February 2007 Government Accountability Office study found that Hurricanes Katrina and Rita affected some of the poorest areas of the country and that many of those affected were receiving federal assistance from social security, disability, and food stamp programs.