Would you make decisions about your future based on 20-year old information? Well, the EPA regulations are based on 20-year old data when determining what effects their mandates will have on employment.
Twenty years ago, the economy was still good, jobs were plentiful, housing prices were solid, and regulations weren’t anywhere near what they are now. The government adds a new regulation every 2 hours and 30 minutes. Under Obama, the government has added 11,327 pages of regulations.
The analysis of the impact regulations have on jobs is critical when passing EPA regulations. The EPA has passed onerous regulations that businesses have warned are killing jobs and they’ve claimed it’s not true. We now know how they do it and still quote the research as if their regulations were a good thing.
In 1995, the economy was still good, housing was solid, jobs were available. It was a very different world.
The GAO released a report last week that showed the EPA used 20-year old, unrelated and misleading data to make it seem as if the damage of regulations would be less damaging or not damaging at all. How many times has EPA head Gina McCarthy, pictured above, quoted this research? The answer is “non-stop.”
The GAO report stated that the EPA “estimated effects of its regulations on employment, in part, using a study that… was based on data that were more than 20 years old and may not have represented the regulated entities addressed” in its regulatory impact analyses (RIAs).
The EPA lied when they said they are using the best information available. We have data that is more recent than 20 years old from private and government entities but they chose not to use that.
When questioned by the GAO, the EPA officials told them that the 20-year-old data “represented the best reasonably obtainable data” and that “they are exploring new approaches for analyzing these effects but were uncertain about when such results would be available.”
The EPA said they will re-examine their approach and suspend regulatory implementations until better approaches are found.
The GAO also criticized the methods used by the EPA and suggested they were useless and nothing more than propaganda.
The GAO reported that the agency “did not monetize certain benefits and costs related to the primary purposes or key impacts” of rules they reviewed. They reported that rules such as those involving “reducing hazardous air pollutants and water quality effects” lacked monetary costs and benefits.
This government likes to pass rules without knowing the costs. They did it repeatedly with Obamacare and when they didn’t fudge the data, they simply made it up out of whole cloth.
This is how climate change is sold to Americans – on false data. There is plenty of reason to believe the scientific data itself is greatly exaggerated and, in fact, we don’t have a clue as to whether we could effectuate any change whatsoever no matter what we do.
It’s incredible that they were able to sell carbon, a necessary element of life, as a poison and a pollutant. Their lies with the media’s help made it all possible. They like to talk about the “social” cost when “social” cost is an imaginary cost conjured up on computers using best-guess imaginations of biased scientists. It’s not objective data.
Remember when Gina McCarthy said climate change is holding back Blacks and she wanted them to all become climate justice advocates? She’s nuts, she’s deceitful, she’s powerful, and she’s Obama’s puppet.