<?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: House Republicans Ask Waxman to Investigate EPA (Staff) </title>
    <link>http://www.hillheat.com/articles/2008/04/09/house-republicans-ask-waxman-to-investigate-epa-staff</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <description>Science Policy Legislation Action</description>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans Ask Waxman to Investigate EPA (Staff) </title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;&lt;span class="caps"&gt;WSJ&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&amp;#8217;s Dana Mattioli &lt;a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/04/08/epa-ruckus-republicans-accuse-agency-staff-of-improper-lobbying-on-greenhouse-gases/?mod=WSJBlog"&gt;reported&lt;/a&gt; yesterday afternoon on the latest development in congressional oversight of the &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;&amp;#8217;s California waiver decision:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote dir="ltr"&gt;  &lt;p&gt;In a &lt;a href="http://republicans.oversight.house.gov/Media/PDFs/20080408LettertoWaxman.pdf"&gt;&lt;span style="color: #006666;"&gt;letter&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; today, two senior Republicans on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform asked the panel&#8217;s chairman, Henry Waxman (D., Calif.), to investigate whether top &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; staffers either violated federal rules that restrict regulators from lobbying, or &#8220;misused their positions to surreptitiously influence&#8221; &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt;&#8217;s decision on whether to allow California to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions from vehicles.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p dir="ltr"&gt;Reps. Tom Davis (R-VA) and Darrell Issa (R-CA) are mad at Margo Oge and Christopher Grundler, the senior &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; officials tasked with evaluating California&amp;#8217;s waiver request and (unsuccessfully) telling Administrator Stephen Johnson that he &lt;a href="http://warminglaw.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/04/eviscerating-no.html"&gt;had no choice&lt;/a&gt; but to grant it. Congressional oversight of that decision revealed that the pair &lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/us/27epa.html?scp=1&amp;amp;sq=%22Reilly%22&amp;amp;st=nyt"&gt;subsequently provided&lt;/a&gt; former &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; Administrator William Reilly&amp;#8212;at Reilly&amp;#8217;s request&amp;#8212;talking points with which to argue the waiver&amp;#8217;s merits to Johnson. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;p dir="ltr"&gt;Davis and Issa argue that this deserves the same level of scrutiny that Waxman devoted to a &lt;a href="http://warminglaw.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/11/another-questio.html"&gt;surreptitious plan&lt;/a&gt; to lobby Congress and governors against the waiver&amp;#8212;Johnson may have also been a target, but he &lt;a href="http://warminglaw.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/11/waxman-v-johnso.html#more"&gt;could not recall&lt;/a&gt; whether that was the case&amp;#8212;deployed last summer by Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters, White House officials, and industry lobbyists.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p dir="ltr"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;This actually isn&amp;#8217;t the first time that congressional Republicans have gone after Oge and Grundler.&lt;/strong&gt; During a hearing that followed the revelation of the Reilly memo and other &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; documents, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) asked Administrator Johnson whether his employees had violated the Hatch Act. Johnson &lt;a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/27/BAJ1V9LR9.DTL"&gt;defended their actions&lt;/a&gt;, saying that he has &amp;quot;always encouraged my staff to give me candid and open advice&amp;quot; (he just reserves the right to ignore it, even when phrased as a clear mandate and not simply advice, and the resulting fallout &lt;a href="http://warminglaw.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/03/dont-mess-with.html"&gt;severely alienates&lt;/a&gt; staff unions). &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p dir="ltr"&gt;Rep. Waxman responded to the letter by pledging to give it &amp;quot;careful consideration,&amp;quot; while noting that the Committee had &amp;quot;found no evidence that &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; career staff lobbied members of Congress with respect to [California&#8217;s request]&amp;quot; (translation: the Davis-Issa analogy to his previous investigation is bunk). For his part, Reilly, who ran &lt;span class="caps"&gt;EPA&lt;/span&gt; under the first President Bush and granted California several waivers, has said that his communications with career staff who &lt;a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-na-waiver27feb27,1,5787867.story?ctrack=1&amp;amp;cset=true"&gt;served under him&lt;/a&gt; were not unprecedented, let alone improper or illegal.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 12:14:00 -0500</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:26234224-1cc8-4121-822d-7e3bed938c47</guid>
      <author>Warming Law</author>
      <link>http://www.hillheat.com/articles/2008/04/09/house-republicans-ask-waxman-to-investigate-epa-staff</link>
      <category>Policy</category>
      <category>Legislation</category>
      <category>California</category>
      <category>waiver</category>
      <category>EPA</category>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.hillheat.com/articles/trackback/2034</trackback:ping>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
