EPA’s Johnson claims ‘ongoing back issues’ prevent him from testifying before Congress.
EPA’s Johnson claims ‘ongoing back issues’ prevent him from testifying before Congress.
Last month, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson was unable to testify before Congress because he went on a trip to Australia. Rep. Henry Waxman’s (D-CA) Oversight and Government Reform Committee had scheduled a hearing for tomorrow with Johnson to testify on White House interference with ozone standards. Today, Washington Post’s Al Kamen reports that the hearing has been postponed because Johnson refused to appear:
EPA officials say Johnson had a “recurrence of ongoing back issues stemming from a car accident years ago.”
The Wonk Room has a chart of the many ongoing scandals Johnson should be ready to address before Congress once he recovers.
Sen. Whitehouse On EPA Politicization: ‘It Looks Like Déjà Vu All Over Again’
Sen. Whitehouse On EPA Politicization: ‘It Looks Like Déjà Vu All Over Again’
The Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson noted recently that the Environmental Protection Agency under current Administrator Stephen Johnson has been operating a lot like the Department of Justice under former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. The EPA’s willingness to place loyalty to Bush above country has resulted in widespread political interference throughout the Agency.
Yesterday – in an event that bears stunning similarities to the U.S. Attorney scandal – a top EPA regional administrator, Mary Gade, revealed that she was fired after political appointees at the EPA disagreed with her push to regulate dioxin contamination in the Midwest. Former EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Sussman called Gade’s firing “unprecedented and highly irregular.”
In 2000, Gade said, “I’m a Republican and a supporter of Texas Governor George W. Bush.” Moreover, when she was appointed in 2006, the EPA Administrator praised her qualifications; Michigan Environmental Council President Lana Pollack called Gade a “woman of unquestioned credentials.”
Today on the Senate floor, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) – who aggressively pursued the politicization at the DoJ under Gonzales – said he sees a recurring pattern:
Well, here we go again, perhaps. … We do not yet know all the details of Ms. Gade’s firing, or everything that may have gone on between her office and Dow Chemical. But from everything that we’ve heard and seen so far, it looks like déjà vu all over again.
Watch it:
Sen. Whitehouse will be leading an oversight hearing into the politicization of the EPA and the circumstances surrounding Gade’s dismissal next Wednesday.
Even after the sordid revelations of cronyism and corruption unraveled the Department of Justice, the White House appears undeterred in its efforts to politicize the entire federal government.
EPA political appointees force out top Midwest regulator.
EPA political appointees force out top Midwest regulator.
The Chicago Tribune reports that the Bush administration has forced Mary Gade — the EPA’s regulator for the Midwest — to resign today, “after months of internal bickering about dioxin contamination downstream from Dow Chemical’s world headquarters in Michigan.” In January, the Tribune says, “Dow officials urged officials at the EPA’s headquarters to intervene” and oust Gade; she said that EPA officials, including EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, “repeatedly questioned her aggressive action against Dow.” The EPA forced Wade out despite giving her glowing reviews in the past:
Gade, who led the Illinois EPA under Republican Gov. Jim Edgar, previously had earned high marks from Bush administration officials and won praise from environmental groups that often are at odds with the federal agency. … When Johnson announced that the president had appointed Gade to the regional job in Chicago, he touted her “impressive environmental career” that began at the agency two decades earlier.
The Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson notes that Gade’s ouster resembles the U.S. attorney scandal: “It seems the EPA is following the Department of Justice’s efforts to rid itself of staffers who are not ‘loyal Bushies.’”
CNN’s Velshi: I’m not even as ‘clean’ as coal when I ‘get out of the shower.’
CNN’s Velshi: I’m not even as ‘clean’ as coal when I ‘get out of the shower.’
Previewing his interview with the CEO of Sasol, a South African company that produces coal-based liquid fuels, chief business correspondent Ali Velshi on Friday admitted that there “are issues with coal,” but minimized its problems:
There are issues with coal. It’s not the cleanest thing in the world. You see the signs for clean coal, 99 percent clean. I’m not 99 percent clean when I get out of the shower. . . I just look clean.
Watch it:
The Wonk Room explains how far Velshi is from the truth when he talks about “99 percent clean” coal.
Jeb Bush is a climate change skeptic: I’m ‘light green.’
Jeb Bush is a climate change skeptic: I’m ‘light green.’
Yesterday at a speech in Dallas, former Florida governor Jeb Bush said that he is skeptical humans are causing global warming, stating he is “light green” on the environment. According to the AP, Bush said that global warming activists “are acting out of something like religious zeal.” “I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science,” said Bush. Recognizing that some of his remarks were controversial, Bush later remarked, “Is this open to the press?”
Administration’s New Fuel Economy Rules Quietly Smack Down States’ Emissions Reduction Efforts
Administration’s New Fuel Economy Rules Quietly Smack Down States’ Emissions Reduction Efforts
Today, The New York Times reports that the administration has proposed raising “car and truck fuel economy standards substantially faster than required” by Congress. But what appears to be a positive development will sharply reduce states’ efforts to regulate greenhouse gases.
Tucked away in the 417-page report, as the San Francisco Chronicle notes, the Department of Transportation (DOT) declares that more stringent limits on emissions from states are an “obstacle to the accomplishment” of federal standards and conflicts with federal law:
(b) As a state regulation related to fuel economy standards, any state regulation regulating tailpipe
carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles is expressly preempted under 49 U.S.C. 32919.(c) A state regulation regulating tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles, particularly a regulation that is not attribute-based and does not separately regulate passenger cars and light trucks, conflicts with:
1. The fuel economy standards in this Part
2. The judgments made by the agency in establishing those standards, and
3. The achievement of the objectives of the statute (49 U.S.C. Chapter 329)
But Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) won assurances that the energy legislation passed in December “would be neutral on whether California and other states could proceed with their own rules.” Pelosi reiterated yesterday that Congress has already decided to “reject the Administration’s position.”
The assault from the administration comes despite a federal judge in Vermont ruling in September that the state rules do not conflict with federal mileage standards, and a Fresno court in December saying California and the EPA can set limits on vehicle emissions. In the document, DOT said an appeal has been filed by carmakers, adding:
We respectfully disagree with the two district court rulings.
California lawmakers are outraged by the decision. State Attorney General Jerry Brown, for example, called it a “covert assault” on California’s greenhouse gas reduction efforts. Pelosi also condemned it as “completely unjustified.”
60 Percent Of EPA Staff Have ‘Personally Experienced’ ‘Political Interference’
60 Percent Of EPA Staff Have ‘Personally Experienced’ ‘Political Interference’
Today, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released a report detailing the increasing politicization of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Of the nearly 1,600 EPA staff scientists surveyed, 889 of them — 60 percent — “said they had personally experienced at least one instance of political interference in their work over the last five years.” Other key findings from the report:
– 394 scientists (31 percent) personally experienced frequent or occasional “statements by EPA officials that misrepresent scientists’ findings.”
– 285 scientists (22 percent) said they frequently or occasionally personally experienced “selective or incomplete use of data to justify a specific regulatory outcome.”
– 224 scientists (17 percent) said they had been “directed to inappropriately exclude or alter technical information from an EPA scientific document.”
– Hundreds of scientists reported being unable to openly express concerns about the EPA’s work without fear of retaliation; 492 (31 percent) felt they could not speak candidly within the agency and 382 (24 percent) felt they could not do so outside the agency.
What’s more, among the various offices and divisions of the EPA, the National Center for Environmental Assessment — “where scientists conduct risk assessments that could lead to strengthened regulations” — had the highest percentage of scientists reporting interferences, at 84 percent. This is unsurprising, considering that some of the highest profile examples of prioritizing ideology over science have occurred when the White House wants to weaken environmental regulation:
– Bush intervened at the 11th hour to weaken or kill scientifically-recommended standards on ozone protection. [3/18/08]
– Johnson ignored EPA staffers to reject California’s waiver to strengthen greenhouse gas emissions standards. [12/21/07]
– The EPA concealed a scientific study that “would have forced the agency to consider more stringent controls” on acceptable mercury levels. [3/22/05]
Chairman of the House Oversight Committee Henry Waxman (D-CA) wrote a letter today to Johnson, warning him that, when Johnson testifies in May, he should “expect members of the Committee to ask about these survey results and other evidence of political interference with science at EPA.”
McCain Adviser Says McCain Is The One To ‘Stand Up’ To Big Oil
McCain Adviser Says McCain Is The One To ‘Stand Up’ To Big Oil
In a Washington Post discussion yesterday, Eric Burgeson, environmental and energy adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), was asked if McCain will “stand up” and support the elimination of “subsidies” to oil companies. Burgeson responded that McCain isn’t afraid to “stand up” to big business:
Q: While I support ethanol and believe that it is a valuable first step, I do not believe that the criticism of subsidies for ethanol is fair. I gladly would support no subsidies or tax breaks for ethanol if the same were done for the oil industry. I cannot believe anyone is strong enough to stand up to the oil industry. Does Sen. McCain believe that this is possible?
BURGESON: You are right, powerful interests in Washington, DC are difficult to stand up to. But if there is anyone in Washington who can do it, it is Senator McCain who has built his career and reputation standing up to special interests. As for subsidies, Senator McCain has a clear position that he opposes subsidies, not just ethanol subsidies, but all subsidies.
McCain has long delivered empty rhetoric about oil companies. In 2007, he said he would end “rifle-shot tax breaks for big oil.” But his proposals are giveaways for Big Oil and big businesses. McCain’s signature tax cut plan would deliver $3.8 billion to the five largest American oil companies, according to a Center for American Progress Action Fund analysis:
Since first running for the Senate in 1986, McCain has received at least $549,712 from the oil and gas industry, with over half coming in the last two years alone. His senior adviser, Charlie Black, is a registered lobbyist for two Russian oil companies and his former lobbying firm was hired in 2005 by the China National Off-Shore Oil Corporation.
Burgeson claimed McCain opposes “all subsidies,” but as the Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson explained on Monday, this conveniently leaves out McCain’s long support of the nuclear power industry.
By Burgeson’s definition, the definition of “standing up” to the “special interests” is giving them money.
Gore: Climate situation ‘has not improved’ since 2006 film.
Gore: Climate situation ‘has not improved’ since 2006 film.
In a new interview with The Sun, former vice president Al Gore says that not enough has been done to combat global warming since his 2006 documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth“:
I have to say the situation has not improved since I made the movie in 2006. Sure, awareness has grown and more people are concerned since scientists said we had just ten years to take action to halt rising sea levels.
But the situation has got worse. The entire North Polar ice cap is melting and could be gone in some areas in as little as five years.
You have to ask what would it take to set off the alarm bells to make this a top-of-mind priority in the body politic. If you had told me a few years ago that we would be facing a situation where the entire North Polar ice cap was going to imminently disappear, I might have thought we’d certainly get people’s attention, and yet only to a limited degree.
Gore also criticized the Bush administration’s inaction on the issue, adding that “while it’s important to change lightbulbs, it’s far more important to change laws.”
Scientists are trained to be unemotional, and most are. Politicians, on the other hand, are not."