It's a wonderful example of an over-reaching, clueless government. Is the administration worried that hunters will give deer lead poisoning? Note that the EPA did not even have jurisdiction over the issue, which means it will probably end up in court.
Forcing hunters to use non-lead bullets will raise the cost of ammunition exponentially. Given Election Day's proximity to various hunting seasons, this was a politically tone deaf move by an administration that has shown complete contempt for the sort of people who buy ammunition. Oh, and fishermen -- the ban would apply to lead sinkers, sort of a metaphor for the president's approval ratings.
Here's the release from the Paul campaign:
The EPA is considering a petition by environmentalists to ban ammunition containing lead. It may sound outlandish, but with Obama's EPA you never know what they may decide to regulate next.
The EPA is already out to get Kentucky's coal industry through the back-door with climate legislation like Cap and Trade. This would cost Kentucky families dearly in lost jobs and wages in this bad economy.
Rand Paul will work to stop the EPA from killing Kentucky jobs, and stop the Obama administration from trying to regulate away our freedoms. Dr. Paul wants to sunset all wrongheaded regulations by the EPA. That's why Kentucky needs to send Rand Paul to the Senate; he is the only one who will stand up against the out of control feds.
Does Jack Conway stand with the Obama administration and the EPA on banning ammunition?
3 comments:
You refer to the "EPA's proposed ban," but there is no such thing. A coalition of conservation groups has petitioned the EPA to ban the use of lead in ammunition. The EPA, as required by law, is reviewing this petition. As part of this review, the public is invited to comment. The comment period runs until October 31. Weigh in at the EPA website! Meanwhile, FOX has a pretty good story that presents the case for and the case against.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/27/conservationists-target-lead-ammunition-fishing-tackle/
You are correct that the proposed ban is in the notice and comment stage of rulemaking. But the EPA could have dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, and chose not to -- therefore, it seems to me that the EPA owns this.
I agree with with Bridget. The EPA didn't close the door on this, so this tells me they are open to it even though they lack jurisdiction. It could be an election year red herring...not sure.
Post a Comment