Gotta Love WaPo

[T]he agency ought to have asked itself years ago whether it really needed to hassle a couple seeking to build a home in an existing subdivision, helping to justify every negative caricature of the EPA that Republican presidential hopefuls peddled during the primary race. Perhaps the agency would have been able to keep more of its regulatory power if it had been more judicious.

The lesson for Ms. Jackson and her boss, President Obama, from these two episodes is clear: The agency’s officers must have a clear sense when to deploy its mighty power and when to exercise discretion.

The Washington Post Editorial Board on the EPA’s abuse of power.

The saddest part of this isn’t that they believe that the EPA shouldn’t have all this regulatory power, they just want them to use it more discreetly so the republicans can’t bash them with it come election time:

The justices sided with the Sacketts, granting them — and others in their situation — legal review of the EPA’s judgments. Yet the agency ought to have asked itself years ago whether it really needed to hassle a couple seeking to build a home in an existing subdivision, helping to justify every negative caricature of the EPA that Republican presidential hopefuls peddled during the primary race. Perhaps the agency would have been able to keep more of its regulatory power if it had been more judicious.

I was just about to write unbelievable.  Then I realized it is believable coming from them.  They, like Obama, have never met a regulation that they don’t like.

About these ads