Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Will you join my fight against the EPA?

Yesterday, I spoke on the floor of the U.S. House to tell the truth.
The fact is, the Obama Administration's EPA uses 'secret science' to force new rules on American businesses.  These "cloak and dagger" tactics are increasing our taxes and driving more of our hard-earned dollars into the federal government.
This is wrong. 
I have taken a tough stand against the Obama Administration and its invasive EPA bureaucracy for runaway government tactics.
On Monday, EPA Administrator McCarthy took aim.  McCarthy openly stated that she was out to suppress critics of Obama and the EPA.  My fear is that we have another IRS scandal in the making.  I need your help to stand up to Barack Obama and his agenda.
But, this really isn't about politics.  It is about a free society.
Americans deserve better than a government that targets critics for disagreement, or hides behind the curtain of "secret science"  like the EPA.  
Please join me and take a stand.
David Schweikert
PS:  I can't fight the EPA alone.  I'm going to need all the help I can get.  Can I count on you to join me? 
EPA chief rejects GOP lawmakers' 'secret science' claim
Published April 29, 2014,
Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy is pushing back against Republican lawmakers who claim that the agency is relying on "secret science" in its push to impose regulations on air and water pollution.
McCarthy said Monday that science is the EPA's "North Star" and has helped to reduce health risks and promote healthy communities, The Hill reported.
"If EPA is being accused of 'secret science' because we rely on real scientists to conduct research, and independent scientists to peer review it, and scientists who’ve spent a lifetime studying the science to reproduce it — then so be it," McCarthy was quoted as telling an audience at the National Academy of Sciences.
In February, Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., introduced legislation that would prohibit the agency from proposing or finalizing rules without first disclosing all "scientific and technical information" relied on to support its proposed action.  [  read more...  ]