Wed Jul 18, 2012, 12:01 AM
alp227 (20,510 posts)
White House weakened EPA soot proposal, documents show
Source: Washington Post
The White House recently modified an Environmental Protection Agency proposal to limit soot emissions, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post, inviting public comment on a slightly weaker standard than the agency had originally sought. The behind-the-scenes tweaking of the proposed soot standards, which affect particles measuring less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, sparked criticism that the White House was interfering with science-based decisions. Fine particles, which come from oil refineries, factories and other operations, rank among the most deadly widespread air pollutants. EPA had originally wanted to tighten the annual exposure to fine-particle soot from 15 micrograms per cubic meter of air to 12 micrograms per cubic meter, according to an e-mail between Office of Management and Budget and EPA officials. But OMB directed the EPA to make the limit between 12 and 13 micrograms per cubic meter of air. Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/white-house-weakened-epa-soot-proposal-documents-show/2012/07/17/gJQANH3yrW_story.html
|
14 replies, 2074 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| alp227 | Jul 2012 | OP | |
| limpyhobbler | Jul 2012 | #1 | |
| AnotherMcIntosh | Jul 2012 | #2 | |
| Wilms | Jul 2012 | #3 | |
| intheflow | Jul 2012 | #4 | |
| progressoid | Jul 2012 | #6 | |
| woo me with science | Jul 2012 | #8 | |
| Hell Hath No Fury | Jul 2012 | #14 | |
| hay rick | Jul 2012 | #5 | |
| woo me with science | Jul 2012 | #7 | |
| emilyg | Jul 2012 | #9 | |
| PSPS | Jul 2012 | #10 | |
| bonniebgood | Jul 2012 | #13 | |
| dipsydoodle | Jul 2012 | #11 | |
| Festivito | Jul 2012 | #12 |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 12:16 AM
limpyhobbler (6,693 posts)
1. typical nt.
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 12:19 AM
AnotherMcIntosh (7,589 posts)
2. Who would have thought?
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 12:23 AM
Wilms (20,673 posts)
3. “If this had been a Bush administration move, every progressive in America would be screaming foul"
|
Frank O’Donnell, who heads the advocacy group Clean Air Watch, cited the change as “the latest in a pattern of interference by the White House in decisions that rightly belong to EPA, based on science.” Last year President Obama pulled an EPA proposal to impose stricter limits on smog-forming ozone on the grounds that it would be costly and the rules were up for review again starting in 2013.
“If this had been a Bush administration move, every progressive in America would be screaming foul,” O’Donnell added. |
Response to Wilms (Reply #3)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 12:52 AM
progressoid (27,342 posts)
6. Some of us scream foul, but then are told by much more knowledgeable DUers that we just don't
|
understand the nuances of governance. Or that the administration is playing super mega 7 dimensional chess. Or we didn't get our pony. Or that he has a 99.628% approval rating among liberal so....
etc. |
Response to Wilms (Reply #3)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 01:00 AM
woo me with science (19,692 posts)
8. We are admonished every day to believe that War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength,
|
Last edited Wed Jul 18, 2012, 01:02 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2) the chocolate ration has been increased, ...and we still have representation.
The denial has to stop. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=146626 |
Response to Wilms (Reply #3)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 11:36 AM
Hell Hath No Fury (14,276 posts)
14. Damn straight.
|
Some of us continue to scream bloody murder, regardless of the letter after the name -- I'm no hypocrite.
|
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 12:50 AM
hay rick (3,499 posts)
5. Surprise (cough), surprise (cough, cough), surprise (cough,cough, cough)...
|
cough, cough, cough, cough, cough.
|
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 12:57 AM
woo me with science (19,692 posts)
7. Every day. Every damned day there is a new one.
|
Last edited Wed Jul 18, 2012, 01:02 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 01:17 AM
emilyg (22,742 posts)
9. We're too busy focusing
|
on Bain. Shame.
|
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 01:52 AM
PSPS (4,198 posts)
10. Well, maybe Obama will turn into a democrat in his second term.
Response to PSPS (Reply #10)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 10:37 AM
bonniebgood (215 posts)
13. I Doubt it PSPS
|
There's more: Both parties work for the same corporate masters.. Our President is still appointing repigs to major position in Government.
http://www.postalreporternews.net/2011/12/03/president-obama-names-republican-tony-hammond-to-postal-regulatory-commission/ George W. "i was powerful" Bush appointments were ALL repigs. http://www.savethepostoffice.com/sites/default/files/Board%20of%20Governors%20Brief%20Background.pdf The two top pigs of the Post office Board also sits on the CCA, private prisons Board. Stock $30.29. If links don't work, take a peak at: www.savethepostoffice.com to see how the post office and all those union jobs, people lives, veterans jobs, and the Constitution are being destroyed for NO reason, has NOTHING to do with the budget or deficit. Ed and Rachel are smart, i have emailed them, they won't even mention the Postal Service "Board of REPIG Governors" thats destroying, the fabric of our Country, our Government from within to benefit the 1%. The NALC ( National Association of Letters Carriers) begged Obama not to appoint the repig, he did not listen. I believe all this Romney Drama is planned to keep the drones fighting each other, a ruse to appoint JEB at their convention. It's all a scam folks, Both parties work for the same corporate masters. My vote doesn't count where i live. If I lived in a swing State, yes I would be voting for Obama. Since I dont, I don't have to. But I WILL Vote. |
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 05:01 AM
dipsydoodle (32,691 posts)
11. K & R
|
.
|
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Wed Jul 18, 2012, 06:45 AM
Festivito (12,285 posts)
12. Article links to itself??? BESIDES the OMB is the ONLY WAY to cost it.
|
The article does not point to where it claims to point:
according to documents obtained by The Washington Post
Does not point to documents, instead points back to the same document being read! lightly weaker standard than the agency had originally sought.
Points back to the same article being read again! BESIDES, isn't the EPA under some restriction to NOT use cost of implementing, therefore having to defer that portion of its work to the OMB, Office of Management and Budget? Rather than being "behind-the-scenes" it seems even more open. I'd prefer that the EPA incorporate cost into its decision and report it, but, some bonehead in Congress passed a strange rule. Wonder which publicans, er, ah, party did that. |

