Brown Defends Vote To Block The EPA From Regulating Carbon By calling it ‘a Non-Governmental Agency"

[Mass]

Our junior senator strikes again. Not only did he decide the EPA should not regulate carbon, but details from public policy still escape him. And he does not get any better at expressing a coherent trend of thought as time passes. 2012 cannot come soon enough.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/06/11/brown-epa-government/

Brown Defends Vote To Block The EPA From Regulating Carbon By Calling It ‘A Non-Governmental Agency’
Yesterday, the Senate voted 53-47 to block Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) resolution that would have stripped the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of its power to regulate carbon emissions. Murkowski’s resolution was aimed at overturning the EPA’s scientific finding, mandated by the Supreme Court, that manmade greenhouse gases endanger the American public.

Though he’s considered a potential swing vote on future clean energy legislation and was facing pressure to help block the action, Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) voted in favor of Murkowski’s resolution. In a Cape Cod Times op-ed yesterday, Brown defended his position by claiming that “this action would give an unelected and unaccountable government agency the power to impose restrictive and damaging carbon dioxide regulations that will drive up energy prices and hurt job-creating small businesses in our country.”

Brown took a different position, however, on a local right-wing radio show, claiming that “a non-governmental agency” would be empowered:

CARR: They’ve been, they’ve been advertising, as you probably know, all over the radio and TV, you know, demanding, the liberals, the moonbats, that you vote for this thing. How do you explain your vote against it?

BROWN: Well, I’m looking out for jobs and jobs in Massachusetts and throughout the country. And to give a non-governmental agency the ability to regulate the way that they have the potential to, they can regulate churches and restaurants and drop it all the way down from the big emitters to the very smallest emitters and it’s not appropriate. And, you know, we in Congress should continue to work on this issue and have the authority to do just that. And I would encourage, certainly, the majority party to start to work on a lot of these energy issues right away.

Listen here:

Transcript:
...

[karynnj]

1. Whoa,

It sounds like his staff wrote the inaccurate, but coherent Cape Cod article and what he said was trying to repeat it - poorly. It is amazing how really bad he is unscripted. Kind of surprising that he got through Tufts and Boston College Law School.

[MBS]

2. email from League of Conservation Voters to MA members

As you know, last week the Senate struck down Senator Lisa Murkowski’s Big Oil Bailout. Fortunately, Senator Kerry voted against the resolution, but he may face significant backlash for his vote to protect public health and hold the biggest polluters accountable.

These big polluters will be targeting Senator Kerry for defeating this resolution. Don’t let them drown your voice out! Will you send an email to Senator Kerry today to say “thanks” for voting to reduce global warming pollution and protect the air we breathe?

Click here to thank Senator Kerry now!

Fortunately, the Senate rejected this bailout for Big Oil and other polluters. Unfortunately, Senator Brown voted in favor of this outrageous weakening of the Clean Air Act and stood up for Big Oil and their allies instead of energy independence and public health.

Please email Senator Brown right away to express your disappointment with his vote.

Following the defeat of this resolution, LCV will continue working to pass comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation in the Senate that transitions America to a clean energy future, makes our nation more secure, and reduces global warming pollution.

Seems to me that Sen. Kerry deserves our thanks , whether MA voter or League of Conservation Voters member or not.Don't need to go through LCV. .senate site will do. .
. . .Just saying. : )

[wisteria]

3. It doesn't appear to be a good thing to be learning on the job. n/t