50,000 Letter's Strong: CFIF Activists Urge EPA Not to Open Liability "Floodgates" on Small Business

We received this on June 22nd, so we're a bit late in posting. We've been revamping our sites and lost track of the news for a while...

Last Friday, the Center for Individual Freedom ("CFIF") submitted a public comment to the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") urging it to reconsider its proposal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, and requesting that the agency extend the period for public comment on the issue.

CFIF's comment reinforces the voices of its activists, who, over the past two weeks, have sent more than 50,000 letters to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, President Obama and Congress objecting to the proposed regulation. A version of the letter they sent, along with the names of each person who sent letters, was attached to CFIF’s official comment.

If enacted, the proposed ruling by the EPA would classify greenhouse gas emissions as an endangerment to public health and welfare. Using such a precedent-shattering finding, Administrator Jackson could regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and other so called "greenhouse gasses" using the same strict standards EPA currently applies to lead, mercury and other poisonous substances.

"If unelected bureaucrats at the EPA get their way, every sector of the U.S. economy could be blamed for a wide range of health problems," said Timothy Lee, CFIF's Director of Legal and Public Affairs. "The new regulation would open a floodgate of unfair and costly litigation aimed at small businesses, farmers, public utilities, and nearly every other sector of our economy. Opportunistic plaintiffs' lawyers would come out of the woodwork and pounce on the opportunity to pad their already deep pockets."

With only a few days left before the scheduled close of public comments on EPA's proposed ruling, CFIF is also urging Administrator Jackson to allow the American people to be heard on this important issue. Specifically, it is requesting that the comment period be extended to 120 days - the typical time allotted for public comment on EPA's work – rather than the shortened period of 60 days the Agency is allowing for this issue.

"Extending the public comment period an additional 60 days will ensure that the concerns of tens of thousands of average citizens from across the country are given the careful consideration they deserve," said Lee.

"Our leaders in Washington need to understand that EPA's public health ruling will only further the economic hardship small businesses and hard working American's are currently facing," Lee concluded.