Paul
Driessen
Looming
Environmental Protection Agency ozone regulations personify the Obama
administration’s secrecy, collusion, fraud, and disdain for concerns about the
effects that its tsunami of regulations is having on the livelihoods, living
standards, health and welfare of millions of American families.
Virtually
every EPA announcement of new regulations asserts that they will improve human
health. Draconian carbon dioxide standards, for example, won’t just prevent climate change, even if rapidly developing countries continue
emitting vast volumes of this plant-fertilizing gas. The rules will somehow
reduce the spread of ticks and Lyme disease, and protect “our most vulnerable citizens.” It’s hogwash.
But
Americans naturally worry about pollution harming children and the poor. That
makes it easy for EPA to promulgate regulations based on false assumptions and
linkages, black-box computer models, secretive collusion with activist groups,
outright deception, and supposedly “scientific” reports whose shady data and
methodologies the agency refuses to share with industries, citizens or even
Congress.
It
was only in May 2012 that EPA decided which US counties met new 2008 ozone
standards that cut allowable ground-level ozone levels from 80 parts per
billion to 75 ppb. Now EPA wants to slash allowable levels even further: to 70
or even 60 ppb, equivalent to 70 or 60 seconds in 32 years.
The
lower limits are essential, it claims, to reduce smog, human respiratory
problems and damage to vegetation. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy says a
600-page agency staff report strongly recommends this reduction, and her Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee agrees. They all say the lower limits are
vital for protecting public health, especially “at-risk populations and life
stages.” Her decision will ultimately involve “a scientific judgment” and will
“keep people safe,” Ms. McCarthy assures us.
Under
terms of a convenient federal court settlement, EPA must issue its proposed new
standards by December 1 of this year, and make a final decision by October
2015. The process will be “open and transparent,” with “multiple opportunities”
for public hearings and comment throughout, she promised.
EPA
has offered little transparency, honesty or opportunity for fair hearings and
input by impacted parties thus far, and we should expect none here. But other
problems with this proposal are much more serious.
If
the 60 ppb standard is adopted, 85% of all US counties would likely become “non-attainment”
areas, making it difficult to establish new industrial facilities or expand
existing plants. Even in Big Sky, clean-air Wyoming, Teton County could
be out of compliance – mostly due to emissions from pine trees!
A
Manufacturers’ Alliance/MAPI study calculated that a 60 ppb ozone standard
would cost the US economy a whopping $1 trillion per
year and kill 7.3 million jobs by 2020. A Louisiana Association of Business and
Industry and National Association of Manufacturers study concluded that a 60
ppb rule would penalize the state $189 billion for compliance and $53 billion
in lost gross domestic product between 2017 and 2040. That’s $10 billion per
year in just one state.
But
the standard would save lives, EPA predictably claimed, citing 2009 research
directed by University of California-Berkeley School of Public Health Professor
Michael Jerrett. The study
purportedly tracked 448,000 people and claimed to find a connection between
long-term ozone exposure and death.
Other
researchers sharply criticized Jerrett’s work. His study made questionable
assumptions about ozone concentrations, did not rely on clinical tests, ignored the findings of other studies that found
no significant link between ground-level ozone and health effects, and failed
to gather critically important information on the subjects’ smoking patterns,
they pointed out. When they asked to examine his data, Jerrett refused.
Michael
Honeycutt, chief toxicologist for the Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality, says Jerrett and EPA exaggerate health risks
from ozone. The Texas Public Policy Foundation told EPA the agency needs
to consider “the totality of studies on this issue, rather than giving
exclusive weight to a single study,” the foundation emphasized. Unfortunately,
EPA almost always focuses on one or two analyses that support its regulatory
agenda – and ignores any that might slow or derail its onrushing freight train.
Even
worse, those lost jobs and GDP result in major
impacts on the lives, livelihoods, liberties, living standards, health, welfare
and life spans of millions of Americans. And yet, EPA steadfastly refuses
to consider these regulatory impacts: for ozone, carbon dioxide, soot, mercury
and other rules.
Then
there is the matter of outright deception, collusion and fraud at EPA, via these
and other tactics.
One
such tactic is sue-and-settle lawsuits.
Agitator groups meet with EPA officials behind closed doors and agree on new
rules or standards. The agency then conveniently misses a deadline, “forcing”
the activists to sue. That leads to a court hearing (from which impacted
parties are excluded), and a judgment “forcing” the agency to issue new
regulations – and even pay the agitators’ attorney fees! American Lung
Association, NRDC, Sierra Club and EPA sue-and-settle collusion resulted in the
new ozone proposal.
This
clever sue-and-settle tactic was devised by none other than John Beale – the con artist who’s now in prison for bilking
taxpayers out of $1 million in salary and travel expenses for his mythical second
job as a CIA agent. It defies belief to assume his fraudulent propensities did
not extend to his official EPA duties as senior policy advisor with his boss
and buddy Robert Brenner, helping Ms. McCarthy and her Office of Air and
Radiation develop and implement oppressive regulations. Indeed, his own
attorney says he had a “dysfunctional need to engage in excessively reckless,
risky behavior” and “manipulate those around him through the fabrication of
grandiose narratives.” A US Senate report details the sleazy practice.
As
to the “experts” who claim lower ozone limits are vital for protecting public
health, there’s this.
The
American Lung Association supports the EPA health claims – but
neglects to mention that EPA has given the ALA $24.7 million over the past 15 years. Overall, during this
period, the ALA received $43 million via 591 federal grants, and Big Green foundations
bankrolled it with an additional $76 million. But no one is supposed to question the ALA’s
credibility, integrity or support for EPA “science.”
EPA
also channels vast sums to its “independent” Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee, which likewise rubberstamps the agency’s pollution claims and
regulations. Fifteen CASAC members received over $181 million since 2000. CASAC excludes from its ranks
industry and other experts who might question EPA findings. Both EPA and CASAC
stonewall and slow-walk FOIA requests and deny requests for correction and
reconsideration. Even congressional committees get nowhere.
As
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Chairman of the House on Science, Space and Technology
Committee, noted in a letter, 16 of
the 20 CASAC members who “peer-reviewed” the ozone studies also helped to write
the studies. That makes it even less likely that their reviews were
“independent.”
That
Senate report, The Chains of
Environmental Command, also notes that the Obama EPA has been deliberately
packed with far-left environmental activists who work with their former Big
Green colleagues to shape policy. They give radical groups critical insider
access and also funnel millions of taxpayer dollars through grants to their
former organizations, often in violation of agency ethics rules.
These
arrogant, unelected, unaccountable, deceitful, dictatorial elites think they
have a right to impose ozone, carbon dioxide, ObamaCare and other diktats on
us, “for our own good.” They are a primary reason American businesses and
families are already paying $1.9 trillion per year to comply with mountains of
federal regulations – $353 billion of these costs from EPA alone. The damage to
jobs, livelihoods, liberties, living standards, health and welfare is incalculable.
The
next Congress should review all EPA data, documents and decisions, root out the
fraud and collusion, and defund and ultimately reverse all regulations that do
not pass muster. The principle is simple: No data, honesty, transparency or
integrity – no regulation, and no taxpayer money to impose it.
Paul
Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow
(www.CFACT.org), author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death,
and coauthor of Cracking Big Green: To
save the world from the Save-the-Earth money machine.
Editor's Note: In line with this article I thought posting this 2007 "Blast From the Past" would be worthwhile. Please enjoy $cience Mag Jumps on Global Moneywagon.
Editor's Note: In line with this article I thought posting this 2007 "Blast From the Past" would be worthwhile. Please enjoy $cience Mag Jumps on Global Moneywagon.
No comments:
Post a Comment