iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Halts EPA Regulation On Smog Standards

JULIE PACE and DINA CAPPIELLO   09/ 2/11 09:32 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — In a dramatic reversal, President Barack Obama on Friday scrubbed a clean-air regulation that aimed to reduce health-threatening smog, yielding to bitterly protesting businesses and congressional Republicans who complained the rule would kill jobs in America's ailing economy.

Withdrawal of the proposed regulation marked the latest in a string of retreats by the president in the face of GOP opposition, and it drew quick criticism from liberals. Environmentalists, a key Obama constituency, accused him of caving to corporate polluters, and the American Lung Association threatened to restart the legal action it had begun against rules proposed by President George W. Bush.

The White House has been under heavy pressure from GOP lawmakers and major industries, which have slammed the stricter standard as an unnecessary jobs killer. The Environmental Protection Agency, whose scientific advisers favored the tighter limits, had predicted the proposed change would cost up to $90 billion a year, making it one of the most expensive environmental regulations ever imposed in the U.S.

However, the Clean Air Act bars the EPA from considering the costs of complying when setting public health standards.

Obama said his decision was made in part to reduce regulatory burdens and uncertainty at a time of rampant questions about the strength of the U.S. economy.

Underscoring the economic concerns: a new report Friday that showed the economy essentially adding no jobs in August and the unemployment rate stubbornly stuck at 9.1 percent.

The regulation would have reduced concentrations of ground-level ozone, the main ingredient in smog, a powerful lung irritant that can cause asthma and other lung ailments. Smog is created when emissions from cars, power and chemical plants, refineries and other factories mix in sunlight and heat.

Republican lawmakers, already emboldened by Obama's concessions on extending Bush-era tax cuts and his agreement to more than $1 trillion in spending reductions as the price for raising the nation's debt ceiling, had pledged to try to block the stricter smog standards as well as other EPA regulations when they returned to Washington after Labor Day.

A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, had muted praise for the White House Friday, saying that withdrawal of the smog regulation was a good first step toward removing obstacles that are blocking business growth.

"But it is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to stopping Washington Democrats' agenda of tax hikes, more government `stimulus' spending and increased regulations, which are all making it harder to create more American jobs," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel.

Thomas Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the move was "an enormous victory for America's job creators, the right decision by the president and one that will help reduce the uncertainty facing businesses."

White House officials said the president's decision was not the product of industry pressure, and they said the administration would continue to fight other efforts by Republicans to dismantle the EPA's authority.

But that was little consolation for many of the president's supporters. The group MoveOn.org issued a scathing statement, saying Obama's decision was one it would have expected from his Republican predecessor.

"Many MoveOn members are wondering today how they can ever work for President Obama's re-election, or make the case for him to their neighbors, when he does something like this, after extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich and giving in to tea party demands on the debt deal," said Justin Ruben, the group's executive director.

The American Lung Association, which had sued the EPA over Bush's smog standards, said it would resume its legal fight now that Obama was essentially endorsing the weaker limit. The group had suspended its lawsuit after the Obama administration pledged to change it.

Obama's decision, in fact, mirrors one made by Bush in 2008. After EPA scientists recommended a stricter standard to better protect public health, Bush personally intervened after hearing complaints from electric utilities and other affected industries. His EPA set a standard of 75 parts per billion, stricter than one adopted in 1997, but not as strong as federal scientists said was needed to protect public health.

In March, the EPA's independent panel of scientific advisers sent a letter to the agency's administrator, Lisa Jackson, saying it was its unanimous recommendation to make the smog standards stronger and that the evidence was "sufficiently certain" that the range proposed in January 2010 under Obama would benefit public health.

But the White House, which has pledged to base decisions on science, said Friday the science behind its initial decision needed to be updated, a process already under way at EPA. The smog standard now is to be revised until 2013.

Whether Obama still occupies the White House at that point depends on the outcome of next year's presidential election.

Cass Sunstein, the head of the White House regulatory office, said changing the smog regulation now, only to have it be reconsidered again in two years, would create unnecessary uncertainty for the private sector and local governments.

The stricter limits initially proposed by Obama would have doubled the number of counties in violation. Smoggy cities such as Los Angeles and Houston would have been joined by counties in California's Napa Valley and one in Kansas with a population of 3,000. They would have had up to 20 years to meet the new limits, once EPA settled on a final number, or would have faced federal penalties.

In his statement, the president said scrapping the stronger smog standards did not reflect a weakening of his commitment to protecting public health and the environment.

"I will continue to stand with the hardworking men and women at the EPA as they strive every day to hold polluters accountable and protect our families from harmful pollution," Obama said.

Even before Friday's decision – announced as many Americans were paying more attention to their Labor Day weekend plans than the news – the White House has faced some criticism for its record on the environment. Obama abandoned a campaign pledge to set the first-ever limits on the pollution blamed for global warming, and he announced an expansion of offshore drilling before the Gulf oil spill sidelined those plans.

However, he has successfully taken other steps to reduce air pollution, such as doubling fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks, clamping down on pollution from power plants that blows downwind and setting the first national standard for mercury, a toxic metal, from power plants, all in the face of Republican and industry opposition.

The ground-level ozone standard is closely associated with public health – something the president said he wouldn't compromise in his regulatory review.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON — In a dramatic reversal, President Barack Obama on Friday scrubbed a clean-air regulation that aimed to reduce health-threatening smog, yielding to bitterly protesting businesses and...
WASHINGTON — In a dramatic reversal, President Barack Obama on Friday scrubbed a clean-air regulation that aimed to reduce health-threatening smog, yielding to bitterly protesting businesses and...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 15,295
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (351 total)
03:46 PM on 10/03/2011
Do you people [even] know what you're talking about? Right now most plants are regulated by keeping emissions to 1 PPM (1 part per million). Which is cleaner than breathing air in the Wilderness. This means for every MILLION particles in the air, only one part in not "naturally" occurring. Since the EPA and these nut cake environmentalists can "measure" 1PPT (yes, one part per TRILLION), they want the industries to abide by this rule. This is almost impossible and is totally irrational. This will literally KILL all industry in the USA! Is that what you want?
09:10 PM on 10/19/2011
Really? Do you want a planet for your kids that isn't trashed? Do you think there will be an economy to worry about when after we've polluted to the point of no return? I believe your thought process is completely irrational and industries need to start owning up to what they have done to the environment.
05:08 PM on 09/27/2011
Im really sorry to hear of the 'inconveniences' some of you posters feel as is related to controlling pollution. Maybe you don't breathe much, but the rest of us do and kinda want clean air, and the cost is irrelevant isn't it ?

Do you want to pass on unclear air to the children of this great planet, or are you more worried about the almighty dollar. God never asked for money for his creation, yet man in their infinite wisdom feels its worth every bit of taxation and fees and money for things it can muster. I think the separation of church and state was a huge mistake, as we have clearly forgotten where we all can from. Those humble roots mean something, and it has Nothing to do with money. Capitalism needs to go away, and let us all Share the resources of this amazing planet , of which universe we are all part of; thanks to god for giving it to us , 'with no gimmicks or fancy restrictions or fees or contingencies ' . Shame on some of us for treating the planet, animals and each other with such disrespect. The air matters as do rights of animals lives, and I'm also proud to be a vegan.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rhondarenee
11:34 AM on 09/06/2011
I've called the White House to urge Pres. Obama to stand up to the Republicans. I've called my Rep, (Pastor) and Rep Harry Mitchell, even though Rep Mitchell isn't my Rep. I've called Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. I've called my Senators, McCain and Kyle, even though I knew it would do no good. I've signed many petitions and sent numerous emails. I work campaigns, I volunteer for the party and I vote.
photo
Totto
"Not 'Noise' One Round: *Music*
12:40 PM on 09/09/2011
Think about a position in the local Democratic Party. You'd be a welcome addition.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:50 PM on 09/09/2011
Not necessarily. They want your money but maybe not you. Like many organizations, they can be clique-ish.
09:29 AM on 09/05/2011
And so once again the president folds like a cheap lawnchair. So what if the air that you breath will make you sick. Besides most republicans probably don't trust air that they cannot see!!!!! Oh and don't forget the poor down trodden 'job creators". So what if the help needs to where gas masks to work . The rich will be fine at their ranches or isolated beach homes or mountaintop retreats.
09:26 AM on 09/05/2011
the biggest smog and fog the u.s. has is in the wh---obama's new motto is --hear nothing-see nothing and do nothing---IF YOU LOVE MISERY-POVERTY AND EXTREME CORRUPTION VOTE OBAMA--
07:13 AM on 09/05/2011
Indistinguishable from George W. Bush.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
busman
07:26 AM on 09/05/2011
how about worse than GWB?
08:33 PM on 09/05/2011
Lol ... except for the fact that he did a LOT to support unions and to improve the situation of the middle class, while Bush did EXACTLY the opposite. And then we're even not talking about foreign policy yet ...
08:08 AM on 09/06/2011
Obama has continued Bush's wars and his tax cuts, and apparently his attitude toward regulation.
photo
ILoveFiction
That's unbelievable!
06:56 AM on 09/05/2011
It's all based on sound science.

The smog will mask global warming so we won't notice it so much.

Clever politician.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:38 AM on 09/05/2011
Ron Paul stands up to the GOP more often than Obama does.
08:34 PM on 09/05/2011
Maybe you should start by watching the speech ... ? Here it is: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/44399771#44399771
photo
dave6686
upholder of for the people by the people
02:07 AM on 09/05/2011
Why is it that the t-Pubs always blame everything Obama proposes as a "job killer"? Yet, instead of creating jobs like they duped people into believing to vote form them. They haven't created a single job. In fact they managed to lose millions of jobs over the past 10 years with all the tax cuts to the supposed job creators who are showing record profits? Funny thing is, if your girlfriend or wife duped and used you as bad as the GOP-TP has, you'd of dumped them in a heart beat...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
busman
07:38 AM on 09/05/2011
Blaming failed leadership from any president on opposing parties is just making excuses. Even worse, it is totally ignorant, as the two major parties, including the TP faction of the Repubs, are just playing the people with meaningless partisan bickering, distracting them from the core issues and problems, while they both push the corporate agenda. Time to wake up.
08:36 PM on 09/05/2011
Fact is, as long as the Dems didn't need the GOP in Congress in order to be able to pass a bill (= in 2009), Obama passed historic job bills, and they turned a situation where we were losing 800K jobs a month into a situation where we were (and are) back to normal, pre-recession levels of monthly job growth (= an average of 150K new private sector jobs a month) in less than a year. Where are the GOP job bills? The only thing they did for the moment is to BLOCK each and every important jobs bill the Dems passed in 2010, and to refuse to start voting on bipartisan job bills in 2011. Conclusion: imho it's PERFECTLY clear who's fighting for jobs in DC for the moment, and who prefers to make the country fail in order to make Obama fail ...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
11:10 PM on 09/04/2011
I think Obama is tired of Being President and wants to step down.
08:37 PM on 09/05/2011
Lol ... just watch this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/44399771#44399771. Warning: he doesn't look very tired, nor does the crowd ... ;-)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ConsevativeUSA
10:02 PM on 09/04/2011
I would say Obama caved I would say Obama finally realized what a Destructive Regulation this would of been. $90 billion a year it cost is not chump change. That is serious money that is going to cost a serious amount of jobs and cause prices to be raised. Companies have to cover the cost of these regulation and Labor are always the first to go because it isn't that easy to sell equipment that you need. Labor can always be replaced or reduced Obama realized this just hopefully the rest of the Liberal/Progressives will follow suit. I always wondered why Liberal Cities have the biggest smog problems but they are all about being Green makes no sense to me.
08:10 AM on 09/05/2011
Regulations CREATE jobs.. unlike republicans claim. liberal cities have the biggest smog problems.. as opposed to "conservative cities"? What sense does that make?
08:54 AM on 09/05/2011
Regulations create indirect labor jobs which add to the overhead in manufacturing. Manufacturers hire welders, machine operators, assemblers etc. to make products. Where I work, we have regulator compliance people and safety administrators. These are jobs which add to the cost of our products which drives our prices up. The American consumer wants cheap and do not want to pay added costs due to OSHA, and EPA regulations. In general the American people would prefer to buy products made in countries who are heavy polluters if they can get it for a few cents less.
I want a clean environment, but as long as we continue to import from China and other countries who have no environmental controls, every new regulation creates additional burdens for U.S manufacturing which drives up their cost.
You, meaning the average consumer, buy things based on price without regard as to whether or not it was made in an environmentally friendly country. If we truly care about pollution, we should consider world pollution when purchasing anything because it does affect us all. Clean environment laws will always be difficult to pass as long as we continue to reward the heaviest polluters.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ConsevativeUSA
12:24 PM on 09/05/2011
Well let's think about it. How do regulations create jobs? They can create temporary jobs while the regulations are being met but those new costs of revamping their business is going to cost jobs at that business. For example this bill was going to cost $90billion a year and you don't think that will cost jobs? Where do you think the $90billion is coming from? Also yes the cities and states with the biggest pollution problems are blue states. California, Michigan, and Illinois are the most polluted states Michigan and Illinois have dirty water problems. Some waterways are so polluted you can't even fish or swim in them. California has one of the biggest smog problems in this country. It is just funny how the liberals don't do what they preach. How many products do you have from China in you home? If you have any you are not really green than.
08:38 PM on 09/05/2011
No, it's not YOU who say that "Obama caved", it's pundits who for months now are writing this kind of big headlines, and apparently you're simply believing them, without doing any fact checking. If you want to do some fact-checking, just watch this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/44399771#44399771
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eddy joe
welcome to the machine
10:00 PM on 09/04/2011
http://youtu.be/CRnQ65J02XA
photo
MariaTall
President Bystander knows nothzing
08:37 PM on 09/04/2011
Obama says, "To heck with the tree huggers. I need to get re-elected and I do not have time for their stinkin' clean air."
08:39 PM on 09/05/2011
No, that's not AT ALL what he said. Here's what he said: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/44399771#44399771
12:21 PM on 09/06/2011
This is a good move; we're in a tough economy, and the last thing we needed to do is hamper business from recovering. Maybe further down the road it can be addressed, but BHO correctly figures that now is not that time.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gfreshski1
Obstructing isn't leadership
08:05 PM on 09/04/2011
All these posts with Obama "caves", "gives-in", "surrenders". Please, give it a rest. He's working against an opposition who is doing everything to defeat him and a base who is holding their breath til they turn blue because they aren't getting everything they want. I wish Bush "caved" or "gave in" once or twice. Maybe we wouldn't be in the economic calamity we're in now.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
11:12 PM on 09/04/2011
but he isn't actually. why can't you see this? He thinks he can compromise his way to an election vitory when he'd do far better if he showed some backbone.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gfreshski1
Obstructing isn't leadership
10:27 PM on 09/05/2011
Not true, I disagree. He is positioning himself to win Independents. Why? Because most Republicans are not going to vote for him and spoiled lefties will not vote at all. He MUST get those Independents, and in order to do that, he has to do things that even frustrate his own base. Mark my words, when he is reelected, he will pivot left because he has no reelection to worry about. The problem is if the left and progressives can think that far beyond their own nose, or if they will cut it off first.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
busman
07:46 AM on 09/05/2011
You seem very naive.