Did Feds Try To Stop Calif. Emissions Law?

(AP)  As the Environmental Protection Agency deliberated on whether to allow California to implement its greenhouse gas law, another federal agency sought to mobilize state and federal lawmakers against the state's petition, documents show.

The 71 pages of Transportation Department e-mails and memos were released Friday to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who has contended that the Transportation Department's intervention with EPA was inappropriate and possibly illegal.

The Transportation Department says it did nothing wrong and was simply disseminating information.

The documents show that as EPA's June 15 comment deadline approached, Transportation Department officials compiled lists of senators, House members and governors in states with significant numbers of auto plants and employees, including Michigan, Ohio, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.

Agency employees then called the lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans, working off a script that said letting California implement its own emissions controls on automakers could create "a patchwork of regulations on vehicle emissions which would have significant impacts on the light truck and car industry."

The callers sought to gauge the lawmakers' interest in submitting comments to EPA. "If asked our position, we say we are in opposition of the waiver," the script says.

At issue is California's first-in-the-nation law that would cut greenhouse gas emissions, mostly carbon dioxide, by 25 percent from cars and 18 percent from sport utility vehicles beginning in 2009. California can't implement the law unless it gets a waiver from the EPA allowed under the Clean Air Act.

If California gets the waiver, at least 11 other states are ready to follow its lead and implement the same controls. The auto industry opposes letting California have a waiver, arguing in favor of a nationwide tailpipe emissions standard.

In one e-mail exchange released Friday, Transportation Department officials note that Rep. Joe Knollenberg, R-Mich., planned to submit comments to EPA. About a week later, Knollenberg and six Michigan Republicans urged the EPA to reject California's request, saying it would "bankrupt the domestic auto industry."

Beyond that, though, the Transportation Department's calling campaign seemed to yield limited results. Among the nearly 2,300 submissions in the EPA's docket, there don't appear to be letters from any of the other members of Congress in states targeted by the department.

The documents released Friday include a June 6 e-mail among Transportation Department aides about a planned telephone conversation between Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters and EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson.

"We should provide her with an update on any additional calls that have been made," one Transportation staffer writes. But it's not clear whether Johnson was made aware of the Transportation Department's calling campaign.

EPA spokeswoman Jessica Emond said the call between Peters and Johnson was routine and that during it, Johnson indicated he wasn't inclined to extend the comment period on the waiver request. She didn't say whether he knew of the Transportation Department's calls to lawmakers.

The Transportation Department wrote to Waxman that in addition to the documents released publicly Friday, it was providing him "an inventory of additional documents that are responsive to your request but implicate confidentiality interests of the executive branch." No details on those documents were released.

California submitted its waiver request two years ago, but EPA only began to consider it after a Supreme Court decision in April saying the agency has authority to regulate greenhouse gases. EPA has refused to say how it will rule but says it will issue a decision by the end of the year.

[toolmangler-2009]

Bush will serve out the rest of his second term, and if you don't like it, MOVE TO EUROPE! Get out of my country!
Posted by S_Temper at 09:36 PM : Jul 01, 2007


Are you Hispanic?if not go here....

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/300107Immigration.htm

Besides, my folks were here first, even before the Hispanics

[jihad_joe1]

"prior to 1994, Dems controlled both branches of Congress for 40 years and at least 1 branch for at least 30. In all of that, they also had a few monopolies where they controlled the legislative as well as Congress."

NO WONDER the country is so F**KED UP! We need to defeat liberalism and make sure the above NEVER happens again! Jihad on liberals!!!

[jihad_joe1]

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif = Air Nazi. The EPA should be abolished.....like California. They both serve no useful purpose.

Actually, that's not quite true. Everything south of San Luis Obispo serves no useful purpose.

[toldyouso21]

All of the "impeach Bush" wackos sound very silly. get over it! We won twice! You lost twice! And you people are the worst, most pitiful losers I've ever seen. Grow up and act like adults, you losers. And here's a clue, pea-brains: Bush will serve out the rest of his second term, and if you don't like it, MOVE TO EUROPE! Get out of my country!
Posted by S_Temper at 09:36 PM : Jul 01, 2007


Were there only ever 2 elections in the entire history of the US? History sort of shows us that prior to 1994, Dems controlled both branches of Congress for 40 years and at least 1 branch for at least 30. In all of that, they also had a few monopolies where they controlled the legislative as well as Congress. Now you speak of a win of 2 elections as if those are the only 2 the country ever had. I am an Independent that will probably vote Dem for the Presidency though I probably won't for Congress (can't vote for people who think they are above the law or want to reward other groups (illegal immigrants)--who think they are also above the law).

[weareone2]

Republicans didn't win twice. For sure the Supreme Court helped Bush steal the election in 2000. He might not even have won once. It is questionable whether Bush would have won in 2004 if it hadn't been for Republican election misdeeds.
It was a real relief that Democrats were able to win a majority in Congress last year, because I was truly worried that the Repubs would be able to totally subvert our democracy.
Unless you are super-rich psychopaths, "you" didn't win when the Republicans won, no matter how you voted.

[donnie900]

Dude. The reason why american auto companies can't make cars is because they don't make cars. They make healthcare. They make pensions. They make outrageous wages for unions that nobody can talk to. They don't make cars.

Other car companies make cars. Thats whats so strange about'em.

[cantshutup]

i couldn't care less if the American auto industry goes bankrupt!!!! THey can't make *** for cars and they don't care about the environment...I HOPE THEY DO GO BANKRUPT! Japan knows what people want and they make cars that are more efficient than any American cars...I'm tired of the AMerican auto industry controlling policy in this country!!!! PHF U CK THEM!!!!
IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY!!!!!!!!!!

[donnie900]

any pages in here?

[mustangusa-2009]

I Believe the Government does not want things to change for the Better. They want the money from the auto makers and Oil companies. Not a Better life for the people.

[smirk5]

More proof that Republicans love big gov't and don't think much of states' rights.