4 ms·
Why did congress consider (and then not pass) a bill that would have done all the things (such as cap and trade) that the EPA then went on to do? Clearly Cong
by hackeraccount 4y ago
Why did congress consider (and then not pass) a bill that would have done all the things (such as cap and trade) that the EPA then went on to do?
Clearly Congress itself thought there was a law needed - that the EPA didn't have the authority to do what it went on to try and do.
- vidanay 4y ago> Clearly Congress itself thought there was a law needed Since Congress only considered the law and didn't actually pass it, I would say that they did not think there was a law needed.
- woodruffw 4y agoFor a litany of reasons: * Congress's priorities are not my priorities, your priorities, or even particularly reasonable. * Congress's ability to efficiently pass laws (at least ones that don't involve funding the military or lowering taxes) has consistently declined over the last 30 years. The last 15 years, in particular, have seen incredibly ugly political brinkmanship over basic legislative responsibilities. In other words: there may be abstract votes in favor of new EPA laws but they're difficult (impossible?) to materialize. * Congress may feel it has no particular input to provide to the EPA's administrative interpretation of the law. This is the explanation that strikes me as most salient (even if all others happen to be correct): it's entirely possible that a majority of Congress sees no particular problem with the EPA's policies, and would much prefer to pass the buck and play political games around the EPA rather than actually changing legislation.
- Gibbon1 4y agoIf congress was really unhappy with the EPA's rules they have the power to reign them in. So in this the Supreme court is intruding.