WASHINGTON, July 10, 2008
Life Not Worth As Much, Says Gov't Agency
EPA Says Americans Worth $900,000 Less Than They Were 5 Years Ago
-
Photo
(CBS/AP)
The "value of a statistical life" is $6.9 million in today's dollars, the Environmental Protection Agency reckoned in May - a drop of nearly $1 million from just five years ago.
The Associated Press discovered the change after a review of cost-benefit analyses over more than a dozen years.
Though it may seem like a harmless bureaucratic recalculation, the devaluation has real consequences.
When drawing up regulations, government agencies put a value on human life and then weigh the costs versus the lifesaving benefits of a proposed rule. The less a life is worth to the government, the less the need for a regulation, such as tighter restrictions on pollution.
Consider, for example, a hypothetical regulation that costs $18 billion to enforce but will prevent 2,500 deaths. At $7.8 million per person (the old figure), the lifesaving benefits outweigh the costs. But at $6.9 million per person, the rule costs more than the lives it saves, so it may not be adopted.
Some environmentalists accuse the Bush administration of changing the value to avoid tougher rules - a charge the EPA denies.
"It appears that they're cooking the books in regards to the value of life," said S. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, which represents state and local air pollution regulators. "Those decisions are literally a matter of life and death."
Dan Esty, a senior EPA policy official in the administration of the first President Bush and now director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, said: "It's hard to imagine that it has other than a political motivation."
Agency officials say they were just following what the science told them.
The EPA figure is not based on people's earning capacity, or their potential contributions to society, or how much they are loved and needed by their friends and family - some of the factors used in insurance claims and wrongful-death lawsuits.
Instead, economists calculate the value based on what people are willing to pay to avoid certain risks, and on how much extra employers pay their workers to take on additional risks. Most of the data is drawn from payroll statistics; some comes from opinion surveys. According to the EPA, people shouldn't think of the number as a price tag on a life.
The EPA made the changes in two steps. First, in 2004, the agency cut the estimated value of a life by 8 percent. Then, in a rule governing train and boat air pollution this May, the agency took away the normal adjustment for one year's inflation. Between the two changes, the value of a life fell 11 percent, based on today's dollar.
EPA officials say the adjustment was not significant and was based on better economic studies. The reduction reflects consumer preferences, said Al McGartland, director of EPA's office of policy, economics and innovation.
"It's our best estimate of what consumers are willing to pay to reduce similar risks to their own lives," McGartland said.
But EPA's cut "doesn't make sense," said Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi. EPA partly based its reduction on his work. "As people become more affluent, the value of statistical lives go up as well. It has to." Viscusi also said no study has shown that Americans are less willing to pay to reduce risks.
At the same time that EPA was trimming the value of life, the Department of Transportation twice raised its life value figure. But its number is still lower than the EPA's.
EPA traditionally has put the highest value on life of any government agency and still does, despite efforts by administrations to bring uniformity to that figure among all departments.
Not all of EPA uses the reduced value. The agency's water division never adopted the change and in 2006 used $8.7 million in current dollars.
From 1996 to 2003, EPA kept the value of a statistical life generally around $7.8 million to $7.96 million in current dollars, according to reports analyzed by The AP. In 2004, for a major air pollution rule, the agency lowered the value to $7.15 million in current dollars.
Just how the EPA came up with that figure is complicated and involves two dueling analyses.
Viscusi wrote one of those big studies, coming up with a value of $8.8 million in current dollars. The other study put the number between $2 million and $3.3 million. The co-author of that study, Laura Taylor of North Carolina State University, said her figure was lower because it emphasized differences in pay for various risky jobs, not just risky industries as a whole.
EPA took portions of each study and essentially split the difference - a decision two of the agency's advisory boards faulted or questioned.
"This sort of number-crunching is basically numerology," said Granger Morgan, chairman of EPA's Science Advisory Board and an engineering and public policy professor at Carnegie Mellon University. "This is not a scientific issue."
Other, similar calculations by the Bush administration have proved politically explosive. In 2002, the EPA decided the value of elderly people was 38 percent less than that of people under 70. After the move became public, the agency reversed itself.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 102 CommentsAbsolutely people shouldn''t. Its the price tag the GOVERNMENT puts on a life! Big difference!
Also, according to the Fed, people shouldn''t think of this as a recession. That''s just what the GOVERNMENT thinks it is! Go out and shop till ya drop!!
The administration has cooked the books on everything else, so why not the value of human life? The Bush administration is evil and corruption personified. May it and all concerned rot in hel*.
Of course life is worth less after nearly eight years of Republican rule. Conservatives think that the little people only exist to be exploited and robbed.
he less a life is worth to the government, the less the need for a regulation, such as tighter restrictions on pollution
----
AKA profit human lives
This is just one more glaring example of Republicons protecting the profits of corporations while they ignore public safety.
The oligarchs and so called monarchies of Europe view all human beings beyond themselves as inferior.
Therefore we are nothing but Serfs to these people. And they managed to brainwash people to believe that we must find ways to commit mass suicide in effort to help the planet from over population.
This the nastiest most evil people bent on empire that have ever existed.
It''s disgusting.
This is truly sick...Who are these people and who them this right??? You know I was thinking earlier how it seems everyday there is some new unethical or criminal or devestating thing that happens in America everyday, but I was wrong today, the break down is happening hourly...I keep asking how can we take much more? We have a duty to uphold and we aren''t doing it...Our government as we know it is broken and we need to try something else. Where are the wise and humane leaders? Should we consider ourselves "on our own?" ***??!! enough talk...it''s time to take action
So this implies that because of Bush''s following of the Reagan "trickle down theory", you are not worth the government serving you to the best of its'' ability.
Now the EPA makes this official.
Posted by cantshutup
You are of course correct, but we first need to make an action plan, if we all attack various problems without coordination, we will defeat ourselves.
My opinion is that the first order of business is to hold the Bush administration responsible for their war crimes and treasons. This will serve two purposes, first it will re-establish the rule of law and the constitution, second it will serve notice to the fascists backing him that they can no longer commit corruption with impunity.
Next rotating boycotts of the banks, then the auto companies, then the food conglomerates. Pick one firm, and drive it into bankruptcy, as a "shot over the bow" to the others.
We must organize community help banks, to assist the workers displaced by our actions, and coordinate with local law enforcement, to make sure the police aren''t used as a hostile military force against us.
These are general ideas, which must be discussed and refined, so as to have the maximum effect. "Taking it to the streets" without an organized strategy will fail. Perhaps we should start a topic site where ideas for concrete action can be gathered and discussed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by cantshutup at 01:00 AM : Jul 11, 2008-
They gave it to themselves because we were told that it''s cute to worship these clowns, and it''s "like Disneyland".
People who have power don''t want to lose it even our most trusted leaders.
Folks it''s going to be like the movie "Children of Men" very soon once Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac are declared bankrupt and explode the whole financial system and the war in Iran is kicked off to justify the impending higher oil prices.
Posted by brianbwb at 01:22 AM : Jul 11, 2008"
KOOL-AID DROWNING VICTIM ALERT! BREAK OUT THE RUBBER RAFT AND PREPARE THE PADDED CELL!
You are one poor, brainwashed soul.
1. IF The Bush Administration HAD committed war crimes, do you think the Dems controlling Congress would have sat on their fat arses since Jan 2007 and NOT brought him to trial? Answer: NO WAR CRIMES. The Dems know it and you need to learn to live with it.
2. Fascists? Look up the term and see whom it REALLY applies to. The Dems in Congress are the ones calling for nationalization of the oil industry. Fascists want to limit religion, freedom of speech, and the right to bear arms. The Dems are open about their desire to limit or eliminate weapons. They are a little more sly about freedom of speech restrictions, but just look at the Fairness Doctrine and it will speak for itself what their goals are. Religion they let slide as long as they can use it as a political tool.
Do everyone a favor and educate yourself before spouting your talking-point drivel.
The environment is fast eroding. Bush & business people know this. It will continue to do so. And become more evident to the public. They will demand action be taken to fix it. Bush''s time is almost up. He can only protect corporate polluters for six more months.
SO---we''ve seen the actions Bush and Cheney have taken to protect polluters. Pressuring scientists to re-write reports, not make public statements, and not attend meetings; deleting parts of reports; failing to release information under FOIA, having agencies redefine the value of a human life (lower) as a rationale not to implement a regulation or law, GOP friendly judges have reversed or lessened damages against polluters, and my favorite, allowing business to write the law and submit it to Congress for passage. As they did with the oil industry.
And, they couldn''t have done it without the Democratic leadership''s approval! Pelosi and others have stood by and let Bush/Cheney damage the environment. They want to get as much non-interference with business rules and laws passed before their term ends! Legalize it.
If you want to help, vote your incumbent Republican or Democrat out of office, if they''ve done a lousy job! Put an end to Nancy Pelosi''s game, of non-opposition to criminal tyranny! Send her back to California to choke on the smoke from wildfires! It''s symbolically fitting!
Morons.
I''m not too sure about this inflation thing. Currency be damned, I''ll barter corn if I have to. This is just indication of indicators.
Commercial: Read Adam Smith.
In court, one officer had about 8 Spanish speaking men (requiring an interpreter) up for charges of driving without a license. This is one county in the US, one day. While the issue was not brought up, as it was traffic court, why do you think all these people don''t have licenses? Because they are illegally here, I am quite sure.
No amnesty for them, none. They are ruining the lives of legal citizens by stealing jobs and taxes from us.
Yes, because many of them are complicit. There were no WMDs, Bush knew it even while he was lying about it. No "clear and present danger" + 4,100 US dead = treason. Torture = violation of the Geneva convention. War crimes. Funneling money to war profiteers without proper accounting = corruption.
"2. Fascists? Look up the term and see whom it REALLY applies to." Posted by DemWatcher
fas7cism (fshzm)
n.
1. often Fascism
a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
Case closed, another ignorant neocon-derthal''s post reduced to the methane generator it came from..
I LIKE IT!!!!
...YOU GO DEMONGIRL!
I think 10 mil is more like it, then you simply can bank it, and live very well off the interest for the rest of your life. No need to take the gamble of investing with the criminals on Wall Street.
Want some more? Here''s some more.
Since Mussolini, there have been many conflicting definitions of the term fascism. Former Columbia University Professor Robert O. Paxton has written that:
Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."
Paxton further defines fascism''s essence as:
...a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond reach of traditional solutions; 2. belief one%u2019s group is the victim, justifying any action without legal or moral limits; 3. need for authority by a natural leader above the law, relying on the superiority of his instincts; 4. right of the chosen people to dominate others without legal or moral restraint; 5. fear of foreign `contamination."
You are in over your head, son, next time, don''t bring butter knives to a gunfight.
And from the pen of the "father" of modern fascism,
"In 1932 Mussolini wrote (with the help of Giovanni Gentile) and entry for the Italian Encyclopedia on the definition of fascism.
Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism -- born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision -- the alternative of life or death..."
Hmm, butter knife, ok ... POW!
and you''ll have to pay to Gov''t to stay alive...
er...ahhh...wait, it allready works like that.
yes we all know that some kooky members in congress also have this idea ...
To take my families hard earned money and give it to some pitiful family that keeps popping out kids because they cant seem to keep thier legs closed and the men who are inseminating these women refuse to accept financial responsibility for thier indiscretions is ludicrous and just wrong.
Its not my fault they cant be responsible and live within thier means ... nor is it anyone elses fault ...
We have become a blame society that seems to want to blame anyone or anything except the parties that actually are at fault ...
Sad Sad ..
...How much for the women? The little girl, how much?
...We want to buy your women!
[with apologies to John Belushi]
The goal is not to take your family''s hard earned money, it is to prevent the theft of unearned money, such as overpaid CEOs who get millions even when the companies they run go belly up, I wouldn''t call that hard earned money at all. Or the companies who take subsidies even though they don''t need it, or corporate bailouts from public monies, or collusionary practices by predatory cartels in oil, Pharmaceuticals, or insurance, or exponential mark-up practices by government suppliers and the military, or groups who collect copyright royalties, like the RIAA, who have collected almost half a billion dollars suing people for "illegal" downloads, but have yet to pay a single cent of it to the artists they claim to defend.
If you are any of these, then you deserve to have your wealth "redistributed", as you did not earn it.
You sure have.
"For example:
# $48,000 in a cash award and retention bonus went to an associate commissioner whose plan to overhaul FDA field labs was rejected by Congress as poorly thought-out.
# $41,000 went to the director of the office of criminal investigations, pushing his total income to enforce one statute to $208,000 - more than the director of the FBI makes.
"The kicker of course is the person who was hired to reform the bonus system received the biggest bonus," Stupak said. "$58,000."
On average, those 28 top executives received, on average, an extra $37,000 in 2007. CBS News asked the head of the FDA why."
You call this hard earned money?
If one''s life or loved one''s life was destroyed by some penny pinching plan of government, is revenge ever justified? Would that be up to a jury?
Fuzzy what will we discuss today ?
I would like to discuss livestock, more specifically,
dumb jackasses (edited for the general public), slipping around on thin ice.
Fanny Mays, well no actually, MITS, and Hawvards, and NASSA''s (which kinda rimes with dumb jackasses).
I couldn`t help but admire the big G-8 leaders planting little pine trees in Kyoto, Japan in an effort to stop global warming.
50 years too late, remember 50 years ago when Munich warned the world of global warming !
the big jackasses at MIT, told the dumb Jackasses at Hawvard, that the little jackasses at NASA, that they didn`t need to worry about global warming.
now yesterday the argentine goverment expressed fear because the such and such glacier had never melted before in winter, and the ross ice shelf is ice melting away.
the one time that the dumb jackasses at MIT and Hawvard needed to get it right and they were WRONG.
so
so
why would we expect anything else this goverment does to be right?
sincerely your drowning Bear
Fuzzy
LOL
If one''s life or loved one''s life was destroyed by some penny pinching plan of government, is revenge ever justified? Would that be up to a jury?
Why, that''s a drop in the bucket! Forge onward, da*n the torpedoes, full speed ahead, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
The troops are just a number on a tally sheet to this administration, cannon fodder with a firm price tag. How many funerals of fallen soldiers has Bush attended? ZERO!
Prove you''re insane, vote for McCain.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 102 Comments