This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2014, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
There is an ongoing uproar about the recent rules made by the EPA about greenhouse gas emissions. While these new rules have some flexibility on a state-by-state basis, most informed observers see the "rules" approach as the least effective of three basic approaches. The other two are "cap and trade" and a tax on carbon emissions. Both "cap and trade" and a carbon tax are deemed to be more effective and efficient. Congress has worked on bills that address these two approaches but have failed to pass them.
This situation reminds me of my experience as a junior high counselor. When addressing students with a problem, my goal was to try to help the students solve it themselves. I would point out my saying on the wall that read, "If you do not solve a problem, someone else will, and you may not like the way they do it!"
Congress can still pass relevant, efficient and effective legislation, but, just like some of my students, they would rather blame the problem solver than solve the problem.
David Hart
Torrey