Tag Archives: EPA

Department of Transportation tries to sabotage CA tailpipe emissions law

We didn’t need any more evidence that the Bush Administration uses the executive branch as a political instrument.  But this latest example shows that they will use federal agencies to work to oppose legislative efforts at the state level, making a complete mockery of the entire premise of federalism itself.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Henry Waxman has received information that the Department of Transportation has been lobbying members of Congress to oppose state efforts, sought by California and others, to regulate tailpipe emissions.  California is waiting for an EPA waiver to implement their tailpipe emissions proposal.  The Governor has threatened to sue the EPA if they don’t receive that waiver.  The first roadblock that the EPA tried was to appeal to the Supreme Court by claiming that they didn’t have the ability to regulate greenhouse gases, but in a landmark decision the Supreme Court said that they did.  So plan B, apparently, is to use the DOT to threaten legislators in automobile-producing districts that their local economies would be severly impacted by any efforts to regulate.  This excerpt is from a letter by Waxman to Transportation Secretary Mary Peters:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is currently considering a request from the State of California for a waiver under the Clean Air Act (Waxman wrote the Clean Air Act -ed.) to establish state motor vehicle emissions standards for greenhouse gases…

My understanding is that the Department of Transportation and the Bush Administration have not taken an official postition on this issue.  However, the staff of a member of Congress recently received a voicemail message from Heideh Shahmoradi, special assistant for governmental affairs in the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, suggesting that the member (1) submit comments to EPA opposing California’s request and (2) “reach out to your governor’s office for them to submit comments since this would greatly impact auto facilities within your district.”

You can read the full text of the voicemail and the entire letter from Rep. Waxman to Sec. Peters at this link.

This is patently illegal.  The DOT, which is supposed to merely regulate and facilitate transportation and not advocate on behalf of automobile interests, is lobbying Congress to influence an EPA ruling that would affect state legislation.  Within the letter, there are other instances of federal agencies in the Clinton Administration distributing talking points supporting or opposing Congressional legislation.  But this goes even further, asking Congress to step in to an exceutive agency decision which will nullify state efforts to tackle global warming.  It allows the President to be supposedly neutral about the EPA ruling while getting Congress to do his dirty work for him.

For the past six years of Republican rule, Congress has done nothing while the planet has continued to warm and spew harnful greenhouse gases into the air.  States like California have stopped waiting around for the feds to get their act together, and put forward their own plan, which is completely legal under the Clean Air Act.  Now the Bush Administration is using federal agencies illegally to try and derail it.  Now that we actually have oversight in the Congress (in one branch, anyway), we are beginning to see the depth of the politicization of these federal agencies, suggesting that what has been done behind the scenes in these two terms of office has been far more destructive that what has been done out in the open.

Full-Court Press on the EPA

Not that I think Arnold Schwarzenegger is a Democrat or anything, but he, along with the full force of the statewide elected leadership, is pushing the EPA hard to allow the state’s greenhouse gas emission controls on vehicles to go forward.  The Supreme Court has already ruled that the EPA can regulate greenhouse gas emissions, yet the EPA is dragging its feet on giving permission to California and the other states lined up behind us.  Attorney General Jerry Brown was impassioned on this issue when meeting with regulators in Washington this week.

“This is more important than any issue that EPA’s going to have to face,” California Attorney General Jerry Brown told regulators who will recommend whether to give California the waiver it needs to implement its emissions law.

Brown asked the hearing panel to take a message to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson.

“We want him to speak truth to power,” said Brown. “There is a tremendous influence of the oil industry. We know (Vice President) Cheney and (President) Bush are oilmen, they think like oil folks. … We say grant the waiver.”

This would be the most sweeping law regulating vehicle emissions in our nation’s history (and it was passed in 2002, pre-Mr. Green Hummer, folks), and would lead to an 18% reduction in greenhouse gases in our atmosphere due to cars by 2020.

To his credit, Schwarzenegger (along with Brown) has vowed to sue the EPA if they don’t act on this by October.  And he and Connecticut’s Jodi Rell penned a strong op-ed in the Sunday Washington Post about the issue (on the flip):

It’s bad enough that the federal government has yet to take the threat of global warming seriously, but it borders on malfeasance for it to block the efforts of states such as California and Connecticut that are trying to protect the public’s health and welfare […]

Since transportation accounts for one-third of America’s greenhouse gas emissions, enacting these standards would be a huge step forward in our efforts to clean the environment and would show the rest of the world that our nation is serious about fighting global warming […]

By continuing to stonewall California’s request, the federal government is blocking the will of tens of millions of people in California, Connecticut and other states who want their government to take real action on global warming.

If this doesn’t happen, by the way, it’s because the President signed an executive order calling for federal agencies to “continue studying” global warming until the end of 2008 (hey, that coincides with the end of his term!), which may stall any action.  Though this is a partisan blog, I think we can all agree that this is a noble effort to get the EPA to do the job the Supreme Court told it to do just one month ago, and grant the permission under the Clean Air Act to let California regulate vehicles the way it demands.  The health of our planet is at stake, and we must see action on this soon. 

You can contact the EPA yourself here.

Sen. Barbara Boxer Smacks Down EPA In Oversight Hearing

(Cross-posted from The Courage Campaign also at DailyKos)

Today, Senator Barbara Boxer held her first oversight hearing of the administration's environmental policy since becoming chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee last month.

"EPA has gone too long without meaningful oversight," Boxer said. "I want to send a clear signal to EPA and to this administration: We are watching . . . and no longer will EPA rollbacks quietly escape scrutiny."

Her full opening statement can be found HERE.

Boxer focused her questioning on six recent changes to EPA rules and policy, which seemed to magically appear in December, right before, um, what was it…oh yeah…Democrats retook control of Congress.

More…

From the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works website, the six changes include:

1. EPA’s December 2006 decision to reverse itself by refusing to extend monitoring requirements for the toxin perchlorate, found in 20 million to more than 40 million Americans’ drinking water.

2. EPA’s December 2006 announcement that it is changing the process for setting National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), so as to reduce the role of EPA staff scientists and independent scientists, and to politicize the process.

3. EPA’s December 2006 announcement that it is considering eliminating the NAAQS for lead.

4. EPA’s December 2006 decision to reverse its policy on air toxics controls (the "once in always in" policy), so as to allow more pollution.

5. EPA’s December 2006 rule weakening the community right-to-know provisions of the Toxic Release Inventory, by substantially reducing information available to the public about many polluters’ emissions and toxics handling.

6. EPA’s recent policy of shutting down and severely restricting access to its libraries.

From Boxer:

"The pattern of these year-end actions is striking – the public interest is sacrificed, and environmental protection compromised. Who gains from these rollbacks? Just look at who asked for them, like Big Oil and the battery industry. EPA’s proposed actions make it clear who EPA is protecting. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to remind EPA who they are truly accountable to-the American people."

Thwack!

Shockingly, Republicans on the committee seemed unconcerned at best.

Republican committee members attempted to portray Boxer's concerns as trivial and the policy changes as prudent efforts at modernizing and streamlining.

"We are focusing on the wrong things," said Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, R-Mo.

To which Boxer replied:

"I appreciate that you consider these small in comparison to other things," Boxer retorted. "That's why we have two (political) parties."

Hopefully this will be up on YouTube soon. I will definitely post so we can see our great senator in action.