Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Will Bush's Parting Shots Help Or Hurt? Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Responds

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 02:44 PM
Original message
Will Bush's Parting Shots Help Or Hurt? Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Responds
http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2008/11/bush-final-regulations.php#1172413

Will Bush's Parting Shots Help Or Hurt?

Before leaving office, the Bush administration hopes to implement a host of wide-ranging regulations affecting the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Air Act, public lands protections and other key energy and environmental policies. Which of these rules are the most troublesome? Which are the most overdue?

-- Margaret Kriz, NationalJournal.com

snip//


Responded on November 10, 2008 8:26 AM
Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Chairman, House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming


White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolton made it clear earlier this year that the Bush administration would avoid ramming through so called “midnight regulations” as they leave office by requiring all final agency rules to be completed by November 1, “except in extraordinary circumstances.” This deadline has come and gone, yet we’re still awaiting a wave of potentially devastating environmental rules to come down from several agencies. The “extraordinary circumstances” Bolton alluded to were apparently decisive Democratic victories in last week’s national elections. Bush’s successor will not share his unwavering commitment to de-regulation and giveaways to big business at the expense of the environment. Consequently, Bush now must try to finish the job himself, in the process cementing his legacy as the most anti-environment president in our nation’s history.

The Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming that I chair recently issued a report that examines the most notable rules that the Bush administration has targeted in its final weeks. Two of the most important laws under attack in Bush’s midnight regulations are the Clean Air Act and the Endangered Species Act. These long-standing laws represent decades of bi-partisan legislative progress as well as two of the central pillars of our country’s environmental protections.

The Clean Air Act’s New Source Review (NSR), a program that forces power plants to install pollution control technologies when making updates to facilities that increase their emissions, could be completely gutted in the next few weeks. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plans to finalize an NSR rule before the end of the administration that would essentially exempt all existing power plants from having to install new pollution control technology when these plants are updated. If put in place, the effect of the rule will be to allow old, dirty power plants to continue to increase emissions without having to install emissions control technologies. These proposed changes in pollution control follow the same faulty methodology Duke Power used in arguing its challenge to current NSR rules, which it ultimately lost in the Supreme Court in Duke v. EPA – decided the same day as the global warming case Massachusetts v. EPA. The responses to these two cases demonstrate perfectly the Bush administration’s approach to the environmental protection: new rules to allow more pollution in one case while totally ignoring EPA’s responsibility to regulate greenhouse gases in the other.

The Department of the Interior has already indicated its intention to gut the Endangered Species Act by rushing through 300,000 comments on proposed rules in 32 hours, then providing a mere 10-day public comment period on the Environmental Assessment of the proposed rules change. The proposed rules would take expert scientific review out of many Endangered Species Act processes, and could exempt consideration of the effects of global warming.

Perhaps no other step taken by the Bush administration demonstrates its disregard for global warming as the recent reports that Interior intends to finalize new regulations governing commercial development of oil shale on more than 2 million acres of public lands in the American West. At present, fundamental uncertainty remains about the technology that could ultimately be used for large-scale extraction, as well as the larger cost and environmental implications. Oil shale’s low energy content combined with its complex, expensive, and energy- and water-intensive extraction and refining requirements make it an extremely problematic energy option. Large-scale tar shale processing is estimated to produce five times the pre-combustion greenhouse gas emissions of conventional petroleum.

By reneging on his commitment to avoid midnight regulations, Bush will be turning his back on the environment a final time while giving one last gift to his polluting pals. With so much other work to be done on the economy, energy, and health care, it is unfortunate that the Democratic-controlled Congress and President Obama will have to invest time and energy trying to undo Bush’s final radical missteps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
prole_for_peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. I hate those bastards...
Sorry to all the bastards (of which i am one) i didn't mean to insult you guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
navarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. pardon the ignorance....can't Barack cancel all that shit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stellabella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Apparently if the chimp signs these with more than 60 days until
the new administration there are all kinds of steps to go through, including public comment, before they can be overturned.

What I don't understand is why the Democratic congress couldn't just change that law, expanding it to 90 days or 120 days or whatever is needed to undo the chimp's destruction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caraher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. well, guess who would have to sign such a law?
Could a veto be overidden?

It's probably simpler just to let Barack handle it after whatever procedures are required
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stellabella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. That's what I mean - change the law next year after January 20th
when President Obama is sworn in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. The automatic response that sprang to my mind: "What do YOU think?"
Edited on Mon Nov-10-08 04:28 PM by KCabotDullesMarxIII
Used capitals because can't seem to do italics in the headers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
7. Lawsuits may be in order
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC