- Article
- Comments ()
- Videos
A memo released Tuesday shows an agency within the Obama administration objected to a landmark Environmental Protection Agency ruling on global warming, arguing that it was not based on sound science and could prove costly to businesses.
The dispute concerns the EPA's so-called "endangerment finding," in which the agency has tentatively found carbon dioxide is dangerous enough as a greenhouse gas to warrant regulation under the Clean Air Act - a ruling that could force federal action to address climate change even if Congress fails to act.
Critics, including some within the administration, argue that the Clean Air Act is not an appropriate vehicle to deal with climate change and say the finding sets the stage for harmful regulations on businesses and industry.
Republicans seized upon the memo as evidence that President Obama has broken his pledge to follow science rather than politics in making policy. But an administration official said the objection came from a single office that is headed by a Bush administration holdover.
Sen. John Barrasso, Wyoming Republican, revealed the memo at a Senate hearing where he waving a copy at EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. "It's here, nine pages. This is a smoking gun," he said.
The memo has comments from several federal agencies that reviewed the EPA's decision. It includes a complaint that the EPA's finding "rests heavily on the precautionary principle, but the amount of acknowledged lack of understanding about basic facts surrounding [greenhouse gases] seem to stretch the precautionary principle to providing for regulation in the face of unprecedented uncertainty."
The White House defended the science EPA used and denied there was a policy split within the administration. The comments were compiled by the White House Office of Management and Budget as part of a standard interagency review process, and OMB Director Peter R. Orszag said that OMB agreed with EPA's initial finding.
"The bottom line is that OMB would have not concluded [the] review, which allows the finding to move forward, if we had concerns about whether EPA's finding was consistent with either the law or the underlying science," he wrote.
An administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the internal review process, said the comments challenging the science came from a single office, the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy.
The office, an independent arm of the administration whose current chief was named by President George W. Bush, is charged with looking out for small-business interests as the federal government writes rules and regulations.








Post a comment
There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!
Please login or register to post a comment