PDA

View Full Version : Bush Deep Sixed EPA findings



Gayle in MD
10-14-2009, 12:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> By Dina Cappiello

WASHINGTON -- A controversial e-mail message buried by the Bush administration because of its conclusions on global warming surfaced Tuesday, nearly two years after it was first sent to the White House and never opened.

The e-mail and the 28-page document attached to it, released Tuesday by the Environmental Protection Agency, show that back in December 2007 the agency concluded that six gases linked to global warming pose dangers to public welfare and that the agency wanted to take steps to regulate their release from automobiles and the burning of gasoline.

The document specifically cites global warming's effects on air quality, agriculture, forestry, water resources and coastal areas as endangering public welfare.

That finding was rejected by the Bush White House, which strongly opposed using the Clean Air Act to address climate change and stalled on producing a so-called "endangerment finding" that had been ordered by the Supreme Court in 2007.

As a result, the Dec. 5 e-mail sent by the agency to Susan Dudley, who headed the regulatory division at the Office of Management and Budget, was never opened, according to Jason Burnett, the former EPA official who wrote it.

The Bush administration, and then-EPA administrator Stephen Johnson, also refused to release the document, which is labeled "deliberative, do not distribute," to Democratic lawmakers. The White House instead allowed three senators to review it last summer, when excerpts were released.

The Obama administration in April made a similar determination but also concluded that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The EPA is currently drafting the first greenhouse gas standards for automobiles and recently signaled it would attempt to reduce climate-altering pollution from refineries, factories and other large industrial sources.

In response, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Republican lawmakers have criticized the EPA's reasoning and called for a more thorough vetting of the science. An internal review by a dozen federal agencies released in May also raised questions about the EPA's conclusion, saying the agency could have been more balanced and raising questions about the difficulty in linking global warming to health effects.

Adora Andy, a spokeswoman for EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, said Tuesday that the science in 2007 was as clear as it is today.

"The conclusions reached then by the EPA scientists should have been made public and should have been considered," she said.

</div></div>

Bobbyrx
10-14-2009, 01:38 PM
from your own post:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">An internal review by a dozen federal agencies released in May <span style="color: #CC0000">(therefore under the Obama administration) </span> also raised questions about the EPA's conclusion, saying the agency could have been more balanced and raising questions about the difficulty in linking global warming to health effects.
</div></div>

Gayle in MD
10-14-2009, 01:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but also concluded that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The EPA is currently drafting the first greenhouse gas standards for automobiles and recently signaled it would attempt to reduce climate-altering pollution from refineries, factories and other large industrial sources.
</div></div>

wolfdancer
10-14-2009, 02:43 PM
while he attempted to discredit it with his Obama mention....the report was published, well not allowed to be published, in 2007.
I think the real crime is withholding the report....more of GW's
special "Ministry of Truth"

Bobbyrx
10-14-2009, 03:30 PM
[quote=Gayle in MD] <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but also concluded that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The EPA is currently drafting the first greenhouse gas standards for automobiles and recently signaled it would attempt to reduce climate-altering pollution from refineries, factories and other large industrial sources.
</div></div>


the entire paragraph:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="color: #CC0000"> The Obama administration in April made a similar determination </span>but also concluded that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The EPA is currently drafting the first greenhouse gas standards for automobiles and recently signaled it would attempt to reduce climate-altering pollution from refineries, factories and other large industrial sources.
</div></div>
similar determination.....as...Bush...

Bobbyrx
10-14-2009, 05:15 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Obama administration in April made a similar determination </div></div>
The article mentioned it, I was just pointing it out.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">An internal review by a dozen federal agencies released in May also raised questions about the EPA's conclusion</div></div>

A DOZEN federal agencies??? Doesn't sound like the EPA's conclusion was exactly iron clad.

Gayle in MD
10-16-2009, 07:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">while he attempted to discredit it with his Obama mention....the report was published, well not allowed to be published, in 2007.
I think the real crime is withholding the report....more of GW's
special "Ministry of Truth" </div></div>

Absolutely! Bobby likes to nit pick on occasion, during a recent administration, it was called "Cherry Picking" but atleast he doesn't add personal insults to everything.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Gayle in MD
10-16-2009, 07:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Gayle in MD] <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but also concluded that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The EPA is currently drafting the first greenhouse gas standards for automobiles and recently signaled it would attempt to reduce climate-altering pollution from refineries, factories and other large industrial sources.
</div></div>


the entire paragraph:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="color: #CC0000"> The Obama administration in April made a similar determination </span>but also concluded that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The EPA is currently drafting the first greenhouse gas standards for automobiles and recently signaled it would attempt to reduce climate-altering pollution from refineries, factories and other large industrial sources.
</div></div>
similar determination.....as...Bush... </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">This Administration didn't deep six the study. They looked at it, and:

</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but also concluded that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The EPA is currently drafting the first greenhouse gas standards for automobiles and recently signaled it would attempt to reduce climate-altering pollution from refineries, factories and other large industrial sources.
</div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">As you can see, the M.O. was completely different, and hence, this administration took action on the findings, after acknoweldgement of the difficulties involved.

Two completely different responses.

Gayle</span>