Global Warming

Tricky, Tricky

Paul Kiel | April 23, 2008, 4:12PM

You may remember that one of the ongoing battles between the EPA and Congress is over California's petition to institute tough limits on greenhouse gases from cars and trucks. EPA chief Stephen Johnson blocked the move, despite the unanimous recommendation of his staff, and has fought Congress' attempts to investigate. California and 17 other states have sued in response. But the administration had more than one trick up its sleeve....

From The San Francisco Chronicle:

When the Bush administration announced proposed regulations Tuesday to raise fuel economy standards for cars and trucks to 31.6 miles per gallon by 2015, even some environmentalists applauded. But then they read the fine print.

Tucked deep into a 417-page "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" was language by the Transportation Department stating that more stringent limits on tailpipe emissions embraced by California and 17 other states are "an obstacle to the accomplishment" of the new federal standards and are "expressly and impliedly preempted" by federal law.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown called it a covert assault on California's rules. Environmentalists said the language will be used by automakers in their legal challenges to two recent federal court rulings that sided with the states.

Via Dan Froomkin.

Global Warming

Survey: Half of EPA Scientists Complain of Political Interference, Waxman to Investigate

Paul Kiel | April 23, 2008, 12:40PM

From the AP:

The Union of Concerned Scientists said that more than half of the nearly 1,600 EPA staff scientists who responded online to a detailed questionnaire reported they had experienced incidents of political interference in their work....

Nearly 400 scientists said they had witnessed EPA officials misrepresenting scientific findings, 284 said they had witness the "selective or incomplete use of data to justify a specific regulatory outcome" and 224 scientists said they had been directed to "inappropriately exclude or alter technical information" in an EPA document.

Just another indication that the EPA has been possibly the most politicized agency in the Bush administration (a bold claim, I know). And what does the EPA have to say about it?

EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar attributed some of the discontent to the "passion" scientists have toward their work.

Update: You can see the report here. In response to the UCS survey, one scientist at an EPA regional office wrote: "Do not trust the Environmental Protection Agency to protect your environment."

Update: In a letter to EPA chief Stephen Johnson today, House oversight committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) warned Johnson that he can expect some questions about this when he testifies before the committee in May. That letter is below.

Update: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), calling the report "a scathing indictment of the Bush administration's repeated efforts to twist, misuse, and ignore scientific facts in favor of special interests" has also let it be known that the Senate environmental committee will be digging in on this.

Read more »

Global Warming

Again, EPA Asserts Executive Privilege against Embarrassment

Paul Kiel | April 18, 2008, 11:59AM

EPA chief Stephen Johnson has deployed a variety of methods to thwart Congressional scrutiny. There's been old fashioned stonewalling. Testimonial gobbledygook. And of course fleeing the hemisphere.

But there's another recurring method: refusing to turn over internal EPA documents because they would "confuse" the public. Back in January, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) wanted documents that show Johnson ignored his staff when he blocked California's attempt to institute tough greenhouse gas limits on cars and trucks. The EPA said no, in part because "further disclosure could result in needless public confusion about the Administrator's decision." In other words, EPA experts said one thing and Johnson had said another. You can't have that getting out (even though it did).

Staffers from the Senate environmental committee, which Boxer chairs, were finally able to see the documents, but only in EPA offices, and only then after peeling off layers of white tape which the EPA had used to redact the offending portions of the documents.

Now the House global warming committee is after Johnson for his agency's failure to comply with a Supreme Court decision that declared that the EPA had to regulate greenhouse gases. Chairman Ed Markey (D-MA) issued a subpoena for documents that show that the EPA had complied with the Court last December. EPA staff completed work on the matter (as they've told Congressional investigators), but the political leadership has been sitting on it since then.

But Johnson, who's deployed a succession of transparent delaying tactics to avoid regulating greenhouse gases, doesn't want to fork them over. His associate administrator writes:

Read more »

Global Warming

Bush to Lay out New Way Forward on Global Warming

Paul Kiel | April 15, 2008, 3:51PM

After seven years of foot dragging and stonewalling by the Environmental Protection Agency, has the administration finally seen the light? From the AP:

President Bush is giving a Rose Garden speech on Wednesday on climate change to lay out the way he thinks the U.S. can reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

White House press secretary Dana Perino says that Bush will not outline a specific proposal, but instead will spell out a strategy for long-term goals for curbing emissions....

In his remarks, he also will talk about legislative proposals on Capitol Hill that the administration has expressed opposition to, as well as regulatory issues.

So, in brief, no. The Washington Times reported on Monday that Bush would begin pushing on global warming because Bush administration officials "fear a coming regulatory nightmare."

In other words, the stonewalling and foot dragging, though masterfully executed by EPA chief Stephen Johnson, won't be able to buy much more time. The Supreme Court ruled one year ago that the EPA had the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, and that it had to act. Johnson may soon run out of string on that one. And several states are suing the EPA over his decision to block California's institution of tough emissions limits on cars and trucks.

So "regulatory nightmare" or "regulatory train wreck," as White House spokeswoman Dana Perino prefers, is a way of saying that the resulting limits would be too low for their taste.

So what will the White House support? Something that threads the needle with a solution that is not so weak that Democrats will not support it, while somehow placating conservatives who would prefer that there be no mandatory limits. Perino describes the administration's aim as a "reasonable and responsible action." Should be fun.

Global Warming

Waxman Issues Third Subpoena for EPA Documents

Paul Kiel | April 9, 2008, 12:22PM

As we've often observed before, EPA chief Stephen Johnson has a remarkable capacity for withholding information. And now he's make a strong bid to making the EPA the most subpoenaed Bush administration agency.

Today, House oversight committee Chair Henry Waxman (D-CA) issued his third subpoena to the EPA this year. Waxman's committee has been investigating Johnson's decision, made against the unanimous recommendation of his legal and technical staff, to block California's attempt to institute tough greenhouse gas limits for cars and trucks.

Waxman says that his staff "has found evidence that EPA officials met with the White House" about the rule, but that "EPA has refused to disclose the substance and extent of its communications with the White House." Waxman's subpoena seeks about 100 EPA documents involving the White House.

Johnson has thus far stonewalled Congressional attempts to get more information about those White House meetings, telling Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) that he couldn't disclose anything about them because "I value the ability to have candid discussions that are part of good government."

Global Warming

States, Enviro Orgs Sue Stonewall Johnson -- Again

Paul Kiel | April 2, 2008, 6:09PM

The lesson is clear. If you want the Bush administration's Environmental Protection Agency to do something to help fight global warming, you better sue. And if you really want it to do something, you better sue again.

Today, officials from 18 states and a number of environmental groups, filed a petition to force the EPA to do what the Supreme Court said one year ago. In the landmark ruling -- itself the result of a lawsuit against the EPA -- the court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency had the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, and that it had to act. Except it didn't.

It's become clear that EPA staff did, in fact, do the work to determine the agency's response. But EPA chief Stephen Johnson and the White House put a lid on it last December, and since then nothing has happened -- except that Johnson has deployed a succession of transparent delaying tactics.

The states and groups want the court to force the EPA to issue its "endangerment" finding within 60 days.

Now, don't confuse this lawsuit with another lawsuit by several states and environmental groups against the EPA. Earlier this year, California and 17 other states sued to reverse Johnson's decision to deny California's petition to limit greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Johnson made that decision against the unanimous recommendation of his staff.

There was another familiar development today. The House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming voted to issue a subpoena for EPA documents showing the Agency's progress in making the "endangerment" finding and proposing national emissions standards. That's the third subpoena issued this year by Congress for EPA documents.