State of Denial

News & Analysis
In the News Gristmill Blog Muckraker Features

Columns
Ask Umbra Victual Reality Weekly Recipes The Bottom Line From A to Green The Grist List

Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.

ADVERTISING POLICY

[Advanced]

Tools: print | email | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS

EPA staff supported California auto-emissions waiver, documents show

Posted at 4:48 AM on 24 Jan 2008

As suspected, U.S. EPA employees last year told agency Administrator Stephen Johnson that California had "compelling and extraordinary conditions" that would justify a federal waiver allowing the state to limit greenhouse-gas emissions from autos, according to EPA documents reviewed by Senate staffers this week. Nonetheless, Johnson denied the state that waiver in December. The EPA wanted to keep the incriminating documents out of the public sphere, but staffers for California Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) released the information. Boxer has a Senate hearing on the matter scheduled for today, at which Johnson is expected to testify -- and be roasted.

sources: Associated Press, The Detroit Free Press

ADVERTISING POLICY

< Previous | Next >

Comments: (1 comment)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hmmm, interesting logic

So, at the hearings today, there were reports that Michigan's politicos are against tough emissions laws because it would cost Michigan jobs. I guess that they're sort of admitting, then, that automakers in Michigan don't know how to build energy efficient transportation. And to think we used to be so smart. And, indirectly, it sounds like they're saying that the damage of global warming is less important than the jobs of folks in Michigan. Maybe the population there should demand that the automakers start building cars that meet the planet's needs instead of just the lining the pocketbooks of their investors.

Also, you gotta love the logic of the EPA chief. He says the law allows him the flexibility to make these decisions, even if it means he's going against the recommendations of his own staff, who make it clear that if EPA gets sued on this, they will lose. More taxpayer money down the drain. So, I guess, no matter how idiotic his decisions might be, the law says it's ok. Well, we had a disaster management chief who knew nothing about disaster management, I guess it's ok to have an EPA chief who doesn't know what the letters of his department stand for, especially the "Protection" part.

by rong at 1:33 PM on 24 Jan 2008

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?