H.R.97 - Free Industry Act

To amend the Clean Air Act to provide that greenhouse gases are not subject to the Act, and for other purposes. view all titles (3)

All Bill Titles

  • Short: Free Industry Act as introduced.
  • Official: To amend the Clean Air Act to provide that greenhouse gases are not subject to the Act, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: Free Industry Act as introduced.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

  • invient 01/13/2011 1:57pm

    They are called green house gases… because they clean the air!… that makes sense… no need to regulate /sarcasm

  • Comm_reply
    fakk2 01/22/2011 8:43am

    invient, that evil smile in your picture is such a good comparison for your sarcasm, love it!

  • kir 01/14/2011 1:16am

    People realize that the EPA includes a lot of other green house gases in their list right? If the EPA can control them all, it’s going to be pretty scary. Example: Methane(produced by cows yes, but also rice – one of the largest causes of green house gas in the word) and water vapor. Not to mention that the EPA literally said that if congress doesn’t pass the law the EPA will do it anyway. Why even have a congress anymore with organizations as powerful as the EPA, FDA, FCC, etc?

  • Comm_reply
    MichaelDSP 01/20/2011 9:25am

    Well Congress created these organizations. They created them specifically to create their own rules. The EPA for example was created by Richard Nixon, then approved by Congress. The FDA was organized under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938 passed by Congress, then amended over the years. The FCC was created under the Communications Act of 1934 passed by Congress. My point is that these organizations were created to regulate their respective fields so that Congress isn’t constantly bogged down by creating countless bills to address problems whenever they arise. It seems that modern Politicians have forgotten that and they feel they need to get their hands into every aspect of these organizations.

  • JoeMurdock 01/21/2011 12:37pm

    Science class in high school teaches you what pollutes the air… Remember, those people at the front of the classroom saying words about a specific subject for intellectual absorbing?

  • Comm_reply
    TheConservative 01/29/2011 7:10am

    You can’t believe everything you hear in a high school science class. Don’t forget, they tried to tell us that we came from Australopithecus Afarensis too. Admittedly, sometimes looking at government can lend a little credence to the belief that we came from monkeys, but you get my point.

  • Comm_reply
    bdg333 02/11/2011 2:45pm

    In fact, if we never argued against science and math, we would be learning how the sun revolves around the Earth and that the square root of 2 is a rational number (Like all numbers according to Pythagoras).

  • Comm_reply
    bdg333 02/11/2011 2:46pm

    I am not suggesting all of math and science is wrong, but you can not just ignore skeptism.

  • fakk2 01/22/2011 10:07am

    kir & MichaelDSP, completely agree with you. The federal government now has the ability to regulate ALL aspects of our lives just by creating a commission, department, agency, or bureau without elected officials running it. It’s almost taxation without representation, but can be more literally characterized as fiefdom of bureaucracy. This is why the constitution was “at will” by the states, and the states could have left at any time. No one wanted to see another king of aristocracy rise. As cliche as it is, “Power to the People!” ;P

  • futpoo 01/24/2011 9:21am

    Why even sponsor this bill? To say to the corporate sponsors “well, at least we tried.” This bill is far from the reasonable center of the debate, and there is clearly a better use of our legislative calendar. Ugh.

  • davidschreiber 01/27/2011 6:16am

    I agree wit the last comment. This bill goes against everything the supreme court said in 2007 Mass vs EPA. The endangerment finding has already been pronounced. It is shameful that our elected officials are spending their time so poorly in Congress. Clearly there was no discussion of the medical evidence documenting the human health implications of nitrous oxides, or of the relevant science that links HFC’s in destroying ozone layers or in CH4 of CO2 in perpetuating climate change.

  • saber 02/07/2011 9:29pm

    This bill makes me sick. What is wrong with clean air! Follow the money
    you will see why this bill was introduced.

  • popeyeswabby 02/09/2011 6:45am

    When they changed the clean air act in 2005 they gave big oil an exemption to it. And by doing so, paved the way for the fracking for natural gas and oil to begin. How many wells and waterways have been contaminated? And now the idea that we’re going to say greenhouse gasses are not pollutants? Are you kidding me? To ignore the science and the international community of human kind is bad enough. Now you want to amend the Clean Air Act to say that CO2 is not a pollutant? As a nation, we should be ashamed and outraged. Whomever votes for this should have their head examined.

  • thebble 06/09/2011 12:10pm

    How is Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA] on both opposing and supporting sides of the bill. Also, it doesn’t seem like the supporting side is being honest about how much they received money wise.

  • Spam Comment

  • Spam Comment

  • Spam Comment


Vote on This Bill

32% Users Support Bill

157 in favor / 335 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments