EPA Chief Won't Explain Climate Choices

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

DINA CAPPIELLO | July 24, 2008 06:19 PM EST | AP



WASHINGTON — Environmental Protection Agency chief Stephen Johnson has declined to explain before Congress how a conclusion he made last year that global warming put the public in danger could lead to a decision not to regulate greenhouse gases.

In a 28-page document the White House and EPA have refused to release, the agency last December said global warming could endanger public welfare, according to excerpts released Thursday by a Senate committee. The hearing, which was going to examine the role of the White House in EPA decisions, particularly on global warming, was canceled.

The White House allowed the Senate Environment Committee's staff to examine the draft findings Wednesday night. The panel's chairwoman, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., released brief excerpts from it Thursday.

"Given the stated vulnerabilities, risks and impacts from climate change on air quality, agriculture, forestry, water resources, ecosystems, coastal areas, the energy sector, infrastructure ..., the administrator is proposing to find that elevated levels of greenhouse gas concentrations may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public welfare," the senator's office quoted the document as saying.

A Supreme Court ruled last year that such a finding would compel the agency to begin regulating greenhouse gases from motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The Bush administration never officially published the document, and in December, according to accounts from a former top official, the White House Budget Office refused to open it when it was sent over in an e-mail.

Boxer said the document confirmed that Johnson had concluded that greenhouse gases posed a threat to the public and that EPA should act. "It is clear. It is chilling. It is detailed," she said in a statement.

Johnson made no determination on global warming's risks in a formal notice earlier this month. The notice laid out a range of options that could be taken under the Clean Air Act but concluded that the 1970 law was not the right way to regulate greenhouse gases. Days later, EPA released scientific evidence compiled by its staff outlining the dangers.

White House Deputy Secretary Tony Fratto said Thursday that Johnson decided that an energy bill Congress was concluding would curb greenhouse gas emissions by raising fuel economy requirements in new cars and light trucks.

Story continues below
advertisement

"He made a determination, as he is authorized to do, that there was a better way to move forward," said Fratto.

Fratto, as well as Johnson's office, refused a request by The Associated Press for a copy of the entire document, saying it was an internal draft.

The Senate committee's staff viewed the document for about three hours Wednesday night, under the supervision of three White House aides. The conditions: they couldn't copy it or take copious notes. Boxer and Democratic Sens. Benjamin Cardin of Maryland and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota reviewed a copy Thursday morning.

When asked why the administrator refused to appear before Congress, EPA Press Secretary Jonathan Shradar said that he was busy. He also added that the administrator had testified before this session of Congress 17 times.

Republican aides on the committee's staff also examined the document but would not comment on its contents.

Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, the senior Republican on the committee and a global warming skeptic, called the dispute a "non-issue" and a "political exercise."

"The president acting through the entire executive branch is fully entitled to express his policy judgments to the EPA administrator, and to expect his subordinate to carry out the judgment of what the law requires and permits," Inhofe said.

___

On the Net:

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee: http://epw.senate.gov

Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov

WASHINGTON — Environmental Protection Agency chief Stephen Johnson has declined to explain before Congress how a conclusion he made last year that global warming put the public in danger could l...
WASHINGTON — Environmental Protection Agency chief Stephen Johnson has declined to explain before Congress how a conclusion he made last year that global warming put the public in danger could l...
 
Comments
17
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
photo

Why isn't this getting more coverage in the MSM?

Sounds like another "Brownie" moment with Repubs.

Is he a surrogate for McSame?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:25 AM on 07/27/2008

This is what happens when you let Republicans run the government. What did you expect?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:33 AM on 07/26/2008


My father helped found the EPA in the early '70s. Were he alive today, he'd be ashamed and disgusted to see what W has done to it - not that it got through the years of Reagan and both Bushes unscathed, and even the Clinton era wasn't terribly friendly to the EPA...

We must find ways to protect the EPA from political mischief.
.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:19 PM on 07/25/2008


"refused to appear before Congress, [...snip...] he was busy."

Sounds like contempt to me.

Yeah, in a certain sense the politicization of this vital science IS treason - to life, to the people, to the values ascribed in the constitution. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite meet the definition described in the Constitution. Darn.

We need new laws that prohibit the politicization of the administration of our government. That is, making agencies lie, such as the EPA, must be against the law.
.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:19 PM on 07/25/2008

I think that contempt requires a subpoena rather than an invitation. Maybe they can do that. Maybe monkey's will fly out of my ...

As for a Constitutional Convention,,, it's due. I think we should start with a parlimentary format, wherein the leaders of the party are selected by the representatives that are elected and if they don't perform, they don't get to last out their term. Plus VOTERS should be able to self initiate a recall election for every elected office.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:24 PM on 07/25/2008

Perhaps he won't explain his conclusion because he can't. When it comes to understanding science, the law and the many complex issues of facing our government, most of the Bushies are dumb as a stump, loyal as a dog, but dumb.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:32 PM on 07/25/2008

If "climate change" is a crisis... how do we accomplish a "static climate" - more to the point, when has the climate ever NOT been changing?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:20 PM on 07/25/2008

The rate of change, combined with the likelihood that the change will continue in its present direction unless there is intervention, is the problem. The rate of global warming and the consequences if it is not stopped threaten our very existence on the planet. Fortuneately we have scientists who are warning us, and suggesting ways to act.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:32 PM on 07/26/2008

This is a favorite tactic. Change the debate. The debate is not that climates change in cyclical patterns. Climates are supposed to. The fact is it is changing in one direction (hotter) far beyond what is safe for us as a species living within that climate, let alone for what the world can sustain without damaging all forms of life.

Do not let these debate strategies move us beyond what the real point is. We have more CO2 and methane in our atmosphere than we have seen in the last 800 thousand years. This is a fact from arctic ice cores that trap the gasses of previous periods. CO2 is from cars and industry and methane is from the various animals we have to have in abundance to keep the human population going. Those two facts are no longer in dispute among scientific circles.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 AM on 07/27/2008
photo

as long as the corruptor-in-chief and his green-weenie henchman heading the scientifically-discredited epa feel as they do - well then, for god's sake - lets just let the environment continue to degrade at an alarming rate and further diminish prospects for a healthy, sustainable planet and its life-forms. there is still plenty of fossil-fuel money to be made, doncha know?

seems sufficiently sensible to me...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:13 PM on 07/25/2008

I see a tie in with the recent announcement that the administration lowered the value of a human American by a couple million dollars. The findings of the EPA must have been the reason we are worth less, even with inflation etc.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:11 PM on 07/25/2008

Hey, when did these people not elect agency heads with the political mission to destroy the agency they are supposed to lead? Ever?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:15 AM on 07/25/2008

Despicable

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 07/25/2008

Putting the interest of business before the interest of the public's health is treason.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:18 AM on 07/25/2008

It is GOP SOP.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:49 PM on 07/25/2008

Environmental Postponement and Alibi Agency

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:53 AM on 07/25/2008

The P in EPA appearantly does NOT stand for Protection. The Bushies keeping secrets to thent of national security...nothing new here...not of interest to the American public...move along.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:55 AM on 07/25/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect

 
Right Now on HuffPost
MAYHEM IN HONDURAS

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Ousted President Manuel...

Biden: "We Misread How Bad The Economy Was"

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration "misread" the depth...