Regulation: Ever wonder if anyone in government gives a thought to costs when one of its labyrinthine laws is put into effect? Turns out at least one federal agency says it’s prohibited from doing so. Which explains a lot. (Investors.com)
Market Speaks: Impacts of EPA Train Wreck Will Be Much Higher Than Anticipated
by MARLO LEWIS on JUNE 2, 2011
PJM Interconnection is a regional transmission organization (RTO) that coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in all or parts of 13 states and the District of Columbia. My colleage, Troutman Sanders attorney Peter Glaser, just sent around a memo on the impacts of EPA’s regulatory surge on electricity prices. The memo is based on PJM auction reports (here and here).
Peter’s memo is too juicy not to share with a wider audience. I reproduce it below with his permission. — Marlo (Cooler Heads)
On April 27, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a Clean Water Act jurisdictional guidance document that would drastically expand the EPA’s ability to regulate private land and water. Just as the EPA used regulation to get around Congress’s rejection of cap-and-trade legislation to tax carbon dioxide, the agency is again ignoring Congress after policymakers failed to move legislation forward. (The Foundry)
Anti-growth and pro-environment, John Bryson should fit right into the president’s Cabinet. AP View Enlarged Image
Post: The nominee for commerce secretary founded an anti-energy group and believes in redistribution of wealth to help poorer nations. At this rate, we’ll be one of them.
If personnel is policy, there can be no better choice to help implement President Obama’s anti-growth energy policy and redistribution of wealth plans than his choice to be the next secretary of commerce, John Bryson. (Investors.com)
Terence Corcoran: Green Jobs Agenda Is A Threat To Economic Recovery
Thursday, 02 June 2011 07:40 Terence Corcoran, Financial Post
The G8 economic model of government spending and intervention across the economies of the developed world may well be the reason that banks and others are holding on to their assets and wealth.
If you want to know why the U.S. economy and much of the developed world appeared Wednesday to be sliding sideways or even declining — weak job markets, slow growth, sagging production, falling housing markets, soaring commodity prices, plunging stock values — a reasonable starting point would be the economic policy musings in the final declaration from last week’s G8 Summit in Deauville, France. (GWPF)
Painting all buildings green would boost jobs too — at a cost
The latest trendy justification for higher government spending is “Green Growth.” Last month, the OECD put out a major report heralding a big, new Green Growth initiative. Last week, the G8 devoted a section of its communiqué to the subject. The table at right, borrowed from an earlier column by Financial Post Editor Terence Corcoran, suggests we’ve already skipped ourselves pretty far down this green-brick road.
The strategy behind Green Growth is obvious. Green for Green’s sake hasn’t worked very well, especially during a world recession. Given a choice between Green and the Economy, people choose the Economy. But what if it could be shown that Green is good for the Economy? Maybe then all the new spending plans that gleam in the eyes of bureaucrats the world round would grow on taxpayers and voters.
The trouble is, Green just doesn’t do anything special for the economy. Except when it hurts it. (Financial Post)
Here’s another set of proposals being made under the green banner that might give decent liberal-minded people a few sleepless nights: a new crime of “ecocide”.
Among the ideas currently gaining currency is adding a crime of ecocide to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). If this idea is accepted, ecocide would join war crimes, aggression, crimes against humanity and genocide as a fifth crime against peace.
The rationale behind the campaign for a crime of ecocide is similar to that of other ecological legal initiatives; namely, that addressing environmental imperatives requires a seismic shift in attitudes, practices and culture, in both the corporate and political spheres. Catastrophes such as Deepwater Horizon highlight the failure of existing mechanisms to ensure that the commercial world’s financial and economic prowess is matched by a duty of care for the planet on which it operates, and the rights of both its current inhabitants and those yet to come.
I think we can safely file 1 Crown Office Row Chambers under “rent-seekers”. (Bishop Hill)
Sounds daft? I can think of a good example…
More cartoons by Josh here (Bishop Hill)