<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:xcal="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xcal" xmlns:enc="http://www.solitude.dk/syndication/enclosures/">
  <channel>
    <title>Hill Heat: Waxman, Markey Go After EPA's Supreme Court Avoidance</title>
    <link>http://www.hillheat.com/articles/2008/03/12/waxman-markey-go-after-epas-supreme-court-avoidance</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <description>Science Policy Legislation Action</description>
    <item>
      <title>Waxman, Markey Go After EPA's Supreme Court Avoidance</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Tomorrow morning, the House Select Committee on Global Warming and Energy Independence will be holding a &lt;a href="http://globalwarming.house.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases?id=0185"&gt;hearing&lt;/a&gt; on the implications of &lt;em&gt;Massachusetts v. &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt; nearly one year later. Chairman Edward Markey (D-MA) plans to question &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; Administrator Stephen Johnson on why he&amp;#8217;s delayedaction on the &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;&amp;#8217;s remand (which &lt;a href="http://warminglaw.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/03/what-supreme-co.html"&gt;might result&lt;/a&gt; in another lawsuit). Committee members will also hear from a panel that includes Kansas Secretary of Health and the Environment Roderick Bremby, who made national headlines this fall by utilizing his legal authority under state law to deny permits for two new coal-fired power plants&amp;#8212;&lt;a href="http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/mar/06/bremby_defends_coalplant_decision/?city_local"&gt;citing&lt;/a&gt; the growing scientific consensus surrounding warming-related impacts and the Court&amp;#8217;s ruling in &lt;em&gt;Mass v. &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt; to justify his landmark decision.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The hearing &lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class="caps"&gt;WILL NOT&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; be broadcast online (though it is being videotaped), but Warming Law will be in attendance and &lt;em&gt;might&lt;/em&gt; be able to liveblog the proceedings, and will report back later regardless. We&amp;#8217;ll be particularly noting whether any members decide to take up the &amp;quot;common sense questions&amp;quot; &lt;a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2008/03/12/common-sense-questions-on-the-clean-air-act/"&gt;proposed today&lt;/a&gt; as talking points by the Heritage Foundation, which hyperbolically warns that an endangerment finding for &lt;span class="caps"&gt;CO2&lt;/span&gt; would require the &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; [to] completely de-industrialize the United States.&amp;quot; Heritage and the Competitive Enterprise Institute&amp;#8212;which has &lt;a href="http://warminglaw.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/03/weak-policy-ter.html"&gt;similarly argued&lt;/a&gt; that an &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; global warming program would amount to &amp;quot;policy terrorism&amp;quot;&amp;#8212;have actively &lt;a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2008/02/29/do-not-cast-that-die/"&gt;taken credit&lt;/a&gt; for Johnson&amp;#8217;s recent decision to suddenly halt work on an endangerment finding.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Amidst such boasts of outside influence on &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;, Markey&amp;#8217;s counterpart on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the indomitable Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), has started investigating the White House&amp;#8217;s apparent interference in short-circuiting an endangerment finding. In a &lt;a href="http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20080312110250.pdf"&gt;letter&lt;/a&gt; sent to Johnson today, Waxman notes on-the-record conversations with senior &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; officials that&amp;#8212;combined with Johnson&amp;#8217;s public statements up through the last couple of weeks&amp;#8212;depict a process that was suddenly halted as it neared completion:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote dir="ltr"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Multiple senior &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; officials [cited directly in this letter] have told the Committee on the record that after the Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s landmark decision in &lt;em&gt;Massachusetts v. &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, you assembled a team of 60 to 70 &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; officials to determine whether carbon diioxide emissions endanger healt hand welfare and, if so, to develop regulations reducing &lt;span class="caps"&gt;CO2&lt;/span&gt; emissions from motor vehicles. According to these officials, you agreed with your staff&amp;#8217;s proposal that &lt;span class="caps"&gt;CO2&lt;/span&gt; emissions from motor vehicles should be reduced and in Decemer forwarded an endangerment finding to the White House and a proposed motor vehicle regulation to the Department of Transportation&amp;#8230;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The senior &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; officials who spoke with the Committee did not know what transpired inside the White House of the Department of Transportation or what directions the White House may have given to you. They do know, however, that since you sent the endangerment finding to the White House, &amp;quot;the work on vehicle efforts has stopped.&amp;quot; They reported to the committee that the career officials assigned ot the issue have ceased their efforts and have been &amp;quot;awaiting direction&amp;quot; since December.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p dir="ltr"&gt;As per &lt;a href="http://www.ombwatch.org/article/blogs/entry/4719/24"&gt;&lt;span class="caps"&gt;OMB&lt;/span&gt; Watch&lt;/a&gt;, the letter also pre-emptively rebuts the suggestion that the fuel economy standards passed by Congress in December have any legal impact on &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;&amp;#8217;s legal obligations in wake of &lt;em&gt;Mass. v. &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;. &lt;/em&gt;Waxman is demanding that &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; provide &amp;quot;copies of the documents relating to the endangerment finding and &lt;span class="caps"&gt;GHG&lt;/span&gt; vehicle rule, including copies of any communications with the White house and other federal agencies about these proposals.&amp;quot; Copies of an &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; techinical support document, the proposed endangerment finding, and the proposed vehicle &lt;span class="caps"&gt;GHG&lt;/span&gt; rule are due by &lt;strong&gt;this Friday, March 14; &lt;/strong&gt;all other documents are to be provided by March 28. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It should also be noted that Waxman previously uncovered an improper lobbying effort by the same parties in question here, &lt;span class="caps"&gt;DOT&lt;/span&gt; and the White House, against California&amp;#8217;s since-denied application for a waiver to enact its own vehicle &lt;span class="caps"&gt;GHG&lt;/span&gt; standards. Waxman&amp;#8217;s oversight into White House influence on that decision also continues, with a &lt;a href="http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20080310110952.pdf"&gt;letter&lt;/a&gt; sent to Johnson on Monday threatening to subpoena missing documents unless they were provided by close-of-business today.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:30:00 -0500</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:70aa0fd4-8df1-415f-b509-c2114f56c41f</guid>
      <author>Warming Law</author>
      <link>http://www.hillheat.com/articles/2008/03/12/waxman-markey-go-after-epas-supreme-court-avoidance</link>
      <category>Policy</category>
      <category>Legislation</category>
      <category>California waiver</category>
      <category>EPA</category>
      <category>enviros</category>
      <category>CAFE</category>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.hillheat.com/articles/trackback/1972</trackback:ping>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
