Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-19-2010, 07:29 PM
 
1,472 posts, read 2,639,856 times
Reputation: 565

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
Once again, please post the exact text from the bill that says that the owner of a residential building will be required to do anything to that building as a result of this bill.

[Hint: you can't, because the bill doesn't]

[Hint 2: the text you quoted and bolded above is NOT the exact text from the bill]
well, actually it IS the actual exact quote from the 'summary' on the bill website that I originally posted. see for yourself. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454 and click 'summary'.

as for the bill not saying it is 'required', right I didn't see that either under 202, but I what I also did NOT see (which janet keeps quoting) is the word 'voluntary'.

so can you or janet post a quote where it says the section 202 verbage is just that.....'voluntary' and NOT 'required'?

so, we keep going back and forth here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-19-2010, 08:48 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,893 posts, read 18,517,115 times
Reputation: 6465
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady View Post
Wasn't that a scene ripped from the film Idiocracy? The library they're using seems to be confused- fiction from non fiction, who authored what? Just tear out pages of random books and call it history.

That's the story how Joe DiMaggio became our 30th president after the fact. Someone ought to wake the man in his grave and let him know.


Someone forgot to tell ya.................with this current President we have, Joe DiMaggio has woken up!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2010, 09:12 PM
 
7,331 posts, read 15,456,615 times
Reputation: 3801
Quote:
Originally Posted by california-jewel View Post
Someone forgot to tell ya.................with this current President we have, Joe DiMaggio has woken up!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, that's not fair.

Barack Obama has no idea who Joe DiMaggio is.









(.... you know... because he's not a baseball guy?)

Sigh.

Anyway, I don't even know what your post is supposed to mean, C-J....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2010, 03:37 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,975,810 times
Reputation: 4459
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentropa View Post
You want someone to deny that something that hasn't happened isn't going to happen? Do I have that right?
i want people to think about something BEFORE it actually happens, but the bill is halfway done and only needs to be passed by the senate now.

i understand that these are very stressful times for everyone. what people have to remember is that ONLY government can take away your rights. as bad as big business gets, it can't take your rights.

only government can regulate you, force you to buy insurance, prohibit or grant licenses, force you to do/ not do things, and tax you. we have already seen the damage to the private sector from big government and it will get worse if these big government bills pass. all of this retrofitting and carbon credits represents a way for government to control and manipulate businesses and wall street, and also control the people.

homes are generally a person's biggest investment and there should be NO WAY that the government can force them to take on any additional financial burden in regards to these homes. the fact that the government has chosen to try and artificially prop up the price of homes has already represented unnatural INTERFERENCE in normal market levels.

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". (and that means everybody)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2010, 05:16 AM
 
Location: Baltimore
1,802 posts, read 8,185,807 times
Reputation: 1976
Quote:
Originally Posted by twowolves View Post
well, actually it IS the actual exact quote from the 'summary' on the bill website that I originally posted. see for yourself. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454 and click 'summary'.

as for the bill not saying it is 'required', right I didn't see that either under 202, but I what I also did NOT see (which janet keeps quoting) is the word 'voluntary'.

so can you or janet post a quote where it says the section 202 verbage is just that.....'voluntary' and NOT 'required'?

so, we keep going back and forth here.

You have to read the bill as a whole and not read bits and pieces of it and attempt to apply them out of context. Section 202 of the bill develops the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) program. Under this program, if the owner of the building — residential or commercial — seeks financial assistance from REEP, the property must pass the energy audit. The goal of REEP is to support direct incentives for efficiency improvements in residential and commercial buildings, compared to the building’s previous energy use. The program will provide federal financial assistance to state and local agencies for direct cash incentives and for the management of this program.

Energy savings for residential properties are determined by the Home Energy Ratings System (HERS) Index, and the final score is selected by an objective third party, according to the bill.

After the audit is conducted, state and local REEP programs may grant funds to owners for retrofit improvements on energy efficiency.

Unless the owner is seeking financial assistance from the program, there is no energy audit and none of Section 202 applies. And there is nothing in the bill that mandates that an owner is required to be part of the program.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2010, 05:36 AM
 
Location: Central Maine
4,697 posts, read 6,477,054 times
Reputation: 5047
Quote:
Originally Posted by twowolves View Post
well, actually it IS the actual exact quote from the 'summary' on the bill website that I originally posted. see for yourself. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454 and click 'summary'.

as for the bill not saying it is 'required', right I didn't see that either under 202, but I what I also did NOT see (which janet keeps quoting) is the word 'voluntary'.

so can you or janet post a quote where it says the section 202 verbage is just that.....'voluntary' and NOT 'required'?

so, we keep going back and forth here.
OK - fine - going with a summary is the lazy way, but apparently for the purposes of this discussion, the only way. So be it. Here's the full summary of section 202, with some selected bolding and underlining.
Section 202 -

Requires the EPA Administrator: (1) in consultation with the Secretary, to develop and implement standards for a national energy and environmental building retrofit policy for single-family and multi-family residences; and (2) in consultation with the Secretary and the Director of Commercial High-Performance Green Buildings, to develop and implement standards for a national energy and environmental building retrofit policy for nonresidential programs. Declares that: (1) programs to implement such standards shall together be known as the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) program; and (2) the purpose of REEP is to facilitate the retrofitting of existing buildings to achieve maximum cost-effective energy efficiency improvements and significant improvements in water use and other environmental attributes. Requires the EPA Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary, to establish goals, guidelines, practices, standards, and specified program elements for accomplishing such purpose. Requires the EPA Administrator to: (1) consult with and coordinate with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in implementing the REEP program with regard to retrofitting of public housing and assisted housing; and (2) establish standards to ensure that retrofits of public housing and assisted housing funded are cost-effective. Requires the EPA Administrator and the Secretary to provide assistance to state and local agencies for the establishment of revolving loan funds, loan guarantees, or other forms of financial assistance for REEP. Provides for the administration of REEP by state and local governments. Requires emission allowances to the states' SEED accounts to support the implementation through state REEP programs of alternative means of creating incentives for, or reducing financial barriers to, improved energy and environmental performance in buildings. Establishes eligible uses of such support. Requires nonresidential buildings receiving support to satisfy minimum indoor air quality standards. Requires the EPA Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary, to the EPA Administrator to report annually on REEP's achievements in each state and on recommendations for program modifications. Authorizes appropriations for FY2010-FY2013 to the EPA Administrator and to the Secretary for REEP program costs.
I see many instances of "requires", but nothing that states that the owner of a residential building is required to do anything. If you believe that the bill does, in fact, require the owner of a residential building to take some action, it should be easy enough to find such words in the bill. I've looked, and I can't find any such thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2010, 05:36 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,975,810 times
Reputation: 4459
this "financial assistance" comes from the citizens.

the government doesn't have any money to give away!

hang onto your wallets everyone, because this government is out of control.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2010, 06:36 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,828 posts, read 15,267,562 times
Reputation: 5240

I shall not pay it, and if I want to sell my home will do it privately, not through a real estate agent or bank.

if the feds dont like it, they can go bark at the moon!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2010, 10:22 AM
 
1,472 posts, read 2,639,856 times
Reputation: 565
Hi all,
I have emailed my real estate attorney brother on this issue.
Waiting for a reply from him as to the exact deal here....is 'retrofitting' going to be required pre-home sale or not?
Will get back to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2010, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Central Maine
4,697 posts, read 6,477,054 times
Reputation: 5047
Quote:
Originally Posted by twowolves View Post
Hi all,
I have emailed my real estate attorney brother on this issue.
Waiting for a reply from him as to the exact deal here....is 'retrofitting' going to be required pre-home sale or not?
Will get back to you.
And if his answer is yes, perhaps he could tell us exactly where in the bill this provision can be found? Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top