Bush Intervened For Weaker Smog Rule
Documents Show EPA Lessened Smog Restrictions At President's Request
-
Environmentalists and ecologists have argued that the EPA's smog standard should be more stringent than the human health ozone standard. (AP Photo/Fresno Bee)
-
Play CBS Video Video EPA's Chief Criticized Environmental Protection Agency head Stephen Johnson took heat from Democrats who accused him of stalling on environmental regulations and loosening pollution laws. Wyatt Andrews reports.
-
Interactive Air Pollution Explore air pollution throughout the US and and find out which cities have the worst air quality.
-
Interactive Global Warming The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
They show tense exchanges between the EPA and the White House Office of Management and Budget in the days before the smog air quality standard was announced Wednesday.
Changes directed by the White House were made only hours before the agency issued the regulation. The late activity forced the EPA to delay the announcement for five hours.
The disagreement concerned the amount of protection from ozone, or smog, that should be afforded wildlife, farmlands, parks and open spaces.
This "public welfare" or "secondary" smog standard is separate from a decision to tighten the smog requirements for human health, which the EPA decided to do by reducing the allowable concentrations of ozone in the air from 80 parts per billion to 75 parts per billion.
The revised human health standard has gotten all the attention. But the most contentious fighting involved the public welfare standard, according to papers inserted in the EPA regulatory docket Thursday.
The memos and documents indicate that EPA officials had wanted to make the public welfare standard more stringent than the health standard, although still not as protective as some scientists had recommended.
But the White House insisted on making both standards identical, according to the documents. When EPA officials balked, the issue went to Mr. Bush, who sided with his budget office.
The White House defended Mr. Bush's action.
"This is not a weakening of regs (regulations) or standards," White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said Friday. "But it was an effort to make the standards consistent. There's no question we have an interest in how federal regs impact communities."
Fratto said the new standards are the "most stringent smog standards in history" and that communities will have a hard time meeting them. He described the area where Bush intervened as 'a technical matter' and said he acted on the advice of the Justice Department.
The White House's involvement was first reported by The Washington Post.
Susan Dudley, head of OMB's Information and Regulatory Affairs, alluded to Mr. Bush's involvement in a last- minute memo to EPA chief Stephen Johnson.
"The president has concluded that consistent with administration policy, added protection should be afford to public welfare by strengthening the secondary ozone standard and setting it to be identical to the new primary standard," she wrote. It should not be weaker or more stronger than the human health standard, the OMB insisted.
Although the memo was dated Thursday, it was faxed to the EPA on Wednesday, hours before the agency announced the rule. Parts of the memo were included in the rule's preamble posted on the EPA Web site.
"Never before has a president personally intervened at the 11th hour, exercising political power at the expense of the law and science, to force EPA to accept weaker air quality standards than the agency chief's expert scientific judgment had led him to adopt," said John Walke, clean air director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private advocacy group. "It is unprecedented and an unlawful act of political interference."
Dudley, in a March 6 memo, had questioned the EPA's justification for have a stronger smog requirement for public welfare than for human health.
The "public welfare" - or secondary - standard is fashioned in a way to protect against long-term harm to the environment. The limits on ozone under this standard are likely to have more impact on rural areas than urban centers.
Environmentalists and ecologists have argued that the standard should be more stringent than the human health ozone standard.
©MMVIII, The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
- Spoken like a true NAZI, veteran71. (or was that a true Stalinist?)
- Reply to this comment
- Why don,t they go after the indians for cutting tree,s down that produce the oxygen and building tee-pees.
- Reply to this comment
- D*mn Richard Nixon and his EPA.
- Reply to this comment
- topglock, if you don''t like liberals, you probably wouldn''t have liked George Washington and the people that fought against what was, at the time, the anti-liberal british government, you probably would have been against those who opposed slavery and those who opposed hitler and were labeled that country''s "libs" in the 30''s. typical regressive.
- Reply to this comment
- topglock45 probably thinks the chinese leaders are also doing a good job protecting the environment, typical commie.
- Reply to this comment
- To: rickstas- What you meant to say was one of America''s best presidents. Liberal Democrat''s like yourself just don''t get it..... and remember when voting Democrat- Vote early and often !!!
- Reply to this comment
- He told us, way back in 2000. Very emphatically.
"I won''t do anything that will hurt business, I just won''t".
Those were his words.
Now, are we gonna listen to those people who listened to him....back then... - Reply to this comment
- Not too many guesses as to what industries paid off Bush to lipsync what the storyline was.
- Reply to this comment
- PAPABC - and encourage walking. It''s nice to have stores 1 mile away... mind you, blind gerbils could drive better than many humans; a hapless person would be turned into a crow''s roadkill dinner, intestines and all, at just the wrong time...
- Reply to this comment
- RandyNason....you are SO RIGHT!!!!
- Reply to this comment
- A very predictable response from the worst president in the history of the United States. Would you ever expect this prickk to do something for any environment other than his ranch in Texas?
- Reply to this comment
- RandyNason:
You watch too much TV - old movies at that. - Reply to this comment
- Gas Tax and Prices High
Economy not the hottest.
Public Transportation not so good.
FIX Transportation problems,
Remove some of the additives from the fuel
Lower the cost
Improve the MPG for ALL Train, Planes and Automobiles.
Drill for Oil Plus Build Processing Facilities
This is a congress failing - they should be ashamed of themselves. - Reply to this comment
- He is like a spoiled, willful child. The best part of him ran down his mother''s leg.
- Reply to this comment
- Bush says:
"The air looks clean enough to me."
And that''s good enough for the useless EPA = Environmental Pillaging Agency. - Reply to this comment
Bush did the same thing as the governor of Texas. He just repeated what he did in Texas on a larger scale.- Reply to this comment
- It is hard to imagine a worse president than Bush.
- Reply to this comment
- Bush certainly is a poor leader. Bush''s continued weakening of air pollution standards is one way Bush is proving that. There is no doubt that air pollution affects human health. Sometimes respiratory diseases and conditions don''t show up until years after continued exposure. And then people are shocked as to why these diseases happen. Wake up to the fact that Bush is putting business interests well ahead of promoting any common sense views about keeping air clean for children and adults. The next time someone in your family dies of respiratory disease, think about the politicians making these decisions about air quality standards. Because we ultimately know that what we breathe, eat, and the chemicals to which we expose ourselves can determine your state of health. If you don''t believe that, I hope you have good health insurance.
- Reply to this comment
- Bush is the worst President in this nations history.
Posted by singingrick at 03:25 PM : Mar 14, 2008
Actually, he''s arguably the worst leader that any nation has ever seen in the history of the world. When you couple his total incompetence, ignorance and stupidity with his disgregard for the rule of law and his tendency toward corruption, and then you add to that the power of the U.S. Presidency, you end up with a complete nightmare of epic proportions. I really wonder if we aren''t just left waiting now, to watch this ship go down. - Reply to this comment
- scottyusa;
too bad we can''t find a way to pump it to crawford texas, than maybe the clown would notice that something needs to be done about smog and air pollution;
bush is a criminal thats all, he did this to protect the coal and oil industry, he wants them to buy him another baseball team, after which he will force the taxpayers to fund , just like he did last time
McBushCain four more - Reply to this comment




