Obama: 7 proposed regs would exceed $1 billion

[The Northerner]

President Barack Obama says his administration is considering seven regulations that would cost the U.S. economy more than $1 billion a year. In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, Obama says his administration is also trying to reduce the burden of government rules.

In the letter dated Tuesday, Obama lists four proposed Environmental Protection Agency rules and three Department of Transportation rules estimated to cost in excess of $1 billion. One proposed EPA regulation on air quality standards is estimated to cost the economy between $19 billion and $90 billion.

Obama said the proposals are not final and that his administration will "give careful consideration" to cost-savings. He said his administration has made changes that have saved more than $10 billion in regulatory costs over the next five years.

Source: http://www.salon.com/wires/politics/08/30/D9PEGGGG0_us_obama_regulations/index.html

[msongs]

1. cost saving 101 - no US invasion of other nations w/out a congressional declaration of war. That

oughta save a few trillion.

[SheilaT]

2. And of course non-regulation of

business costs us nothing.

Dirty air, filthy water, unsafe workplaces are all free.

Yeah, right.

[n2doc]

4. well, once all healthcare is eliminated

Then people dying of industrial diseases won't cost the taxpayer a thing! :sarcasm:

[Shagbark Hickory]

3. He might be on to something. Get rid of the regs that are keeping efficient diesel cars

from being sold here.

[saras]

5. If he doesn't tell us what they protect and what it's worth, then he's full of shit - no less

"One of the proposed EPA rules -- an update to the health-based standard for smog..."
Okay, how much money do we spend in America on smog-related illness? Property damage? Without those numbers against the "cost", it's an irredeemably stupid bit of political "logic".

"The four environmental regulations, which target air pollution and coal residue primarily from coal-fired power plants..."
Same thing here. We know that there is real, severe damage caused by this pollution, and that's why the regulations exist. It took a lot of hard science to sell these to a business-friendly world, but they've paid off hugely.

Why aren't the benefits of these laws mentioned by Obama in the discussion? Does he think there aren't any? Does he think they are trivial numerically compared to his savings? Or does he just not give a shit about the people harmed by pollution? After all, the rich can usually buy their way out of it.

"In 2009 and 2010, the benefits of such rules -- including not only monetary savings but also lives saved and illnesses prevented -- exceeded the costs by tens of billions of dollars," Obama wrote."

Okay, so he does understand the value of them - it seems, then, to be a matter of who gets thrown under the bus this time.