New Rules Would Limit CO2 emissions.
The White House energy and climate czar, Carol Browner, has just given the clearest indications to date that the Obama Administration plans to press ahead on both regulating CO2 emissions under the Clean Air Act and on developing a stronger program for reducing emissions from cars and light trucks.
Speaking to reporters during a National Governors Association meeting over the weekend, Browner said that the Environmental Protection Agency is in the process of reevaluating its obligations about whether or not to treat CO2 and other global warming gases as official “pollutants” that would trigger regulatory action. Quoted in a Dow Jones Newswire story as saying that EPA “will make an endangerment finding,” Browner’s statements have sweeping implications for not only the auto sector, but also for power plants and any other industry that emits greenhouse gases.
While such a regulatory undertaking would be enormous, EPA already started the process, issuing a comprehensive advance notice of proposed rulemaking (“ANPR”) last July. That ANPR outlined ways to use the Clean Air Act to cut global warming pollutants, including the option of having EPA issue tailpipe GHG standards designed in a manner similar to the approach California has taken with its “Pavley” standards for reducing CO2 from tailpipes.
These latest statements from Browner amplify the signal that Obama himself gave on his first Monday in office, when he instructed EPA administrator Lisa Jackson to revisit the agency’s previous denial of permission for California to press ahead with its own automobile GHG standards.
However, Browner also said that the White House wants EPA and DOT (the traditional overseer of CAFE standards) to coordinate on a national policy for auto emissions. That offers some hope that car makers won’t be faced with conflicting requirements coming from multiple agencies. Addressing the governors meeting, Browner said, “We need a unified national policy when it comes to clean vehicles,” and her remarks indicated that the administration is evaluating regulatory proposals in the context of the restructuring challenges faced by General Motors and Chrysler.
Thus, the White House seems to be hearing the industry’s plea for a single national approach on the issue. Although the remarks gave no indication of exactly how and when new standards might be set, two themes came through.
One is a sensitivity to costs and challenges, as she remarked “we are looking at how do we get to a unified approach in terms of the next generation of cars.”
The other is a clear focus on clamping down on tailpipe. “We take it very seriously, the impact of cars … in terms of greenhouse gas emissions,” Browner was quoted as saying, also remarking that “we’re just trying to figure out how do you do it in a way that the car companies have a clear [obligation].”
The sense that a national program might seek the greatest common denominator rather than a least common denominator in terms of stringency came through in remarks by Washington state governor Christine Gregoire. Washington is among the states that want to opt in to the California tailpipe GHG program. Refering to the California standards during the governors’ meeting, Gregoire was quoted as saying, “This ought to be the policy of the country if we’re going to move forward with alternatives for the automobile.”
In short, it’s not lost on anyone that the California approach provides the clearest mandate on CO2 emissions, or that one option for a single national standard is that California sets the goal while EPA and DOT coordinate in spelling out the regulatory details of how automakers are required to meet it.
Irrespective of Browner’s inside knowledge of the President’s policies, it is clear that Carol Browner is still directly in the chain of command between the White House and the Environmental Protection Agency she left in disgrace. Browner’s presence can only send a chilling message throughout the Agency that the person who tolerated a hostile work environment is back in command. Carol Browner’s history of discrimination and retaliation at EPA is well documented.
In 2000, a jury found that the EPA, under then-administrator Carol Browner, was guilty of race, sex, and color-based discrimination, and that Ms. Browner tolerated a hostile work environment. During subsequent oversight hearings of the Congressional Science Committee, the Chairman instructed Browner to clean up the working conditions at EPA so the next administrator wouldn’t get handed “a garbage can.”
Despite promising to do so under oath, Ms. Browner never accepted the jury’s findings as EPA Administrator. She never disciplined any of the senior managers under her supervision at EPA who were implicated in Coleman-Adebayo v. Carol Browner. She never stopped the appeal process in the case. It was her successor, Christine Todd Whitman, in her 1st act as EPA Administrator, who announced that the verdict in Coleman-Adebayo would not be appealed, and that the Agency would accept the jury’s findings.
Congress was so outraged by the conditions within EPA, that it passed unanimously in both houses the NoFEAR Act (Notification of Federal Employees Anti-discrimination and Retaliation) 2001 and mandated that all Federal new hires be instructed in Coleman-Adebayo v Browner within 90 days, and that all Federal workers receive the instruction every 2 years.
Apparently, being found guilty of discrimination by a jury of her peers, having Congress enact legislation to outlaw her administrative behavior, and mandate that all Federal workers be instructed in Coleman-Adebayo v Browner was not enough to derail Ms.Browner’s career, or to prevent the retaliation against Dr. Coleman-Adebayo from the EPA that continues to this day.
These are not “allegations,” they are matters of public record.
The core of the case in Coleman-Adebayo v Carol Browner was Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. President Obama is a civil rights attorney. The question of justice in this matter has not been adequately addressed, with Ms. Browner’s ascension back into the heights of power, while Dr. Coleman-Adebayo, who stood up for civil rights for all Federal employees was thrown under the bus where Rosa Parks, a generation before her, took her stand.
The media need to start asking the president, Ms. Browner, and new EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson, what the public is to make of this regrettable case of a courageous whistleblower, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, being vilified, while her tormentors, Carol M. Browner — and the staff Browner left behind at EPA — are still retaliating, still discriminating against whistleblowers (who may be able to prevent poisonous peanuts from killing people), and still thriving within the EPA.
Has anyone ever considered CO2 as being the main gas exhaled by six billion plus people in the world – not to mention all the animal life? Global Warming has been exposed as being fraudulent and a myth?
The present administration is no friend to the auto industry. Greater still, it is no friend to the American People. Let’s cheer for the “whistle blowers” of the world. We need more of them!
Steven,
Former Pres. Reagan also blamed cow flatulence, but that doesn’t mean that the global warming issue has, by any means “been exposed,” except by those who choose not to believe in the concept. Yes, there’ve been some questionable actions by supporters, but while I personally maintain an open ear and mind, I still find the bulk of evidence favoring the likelihood of the earth warming and that man-made gases are contributing to this. If anything, the fact that the Earth has to accommodate everything from the breathing to the transportation and the feeding of 6 billion souls is only evidence of more strain.
As for the current president, I am flummoxed by the seeming contradications offered by his opponents. He is at fault for bailing out the industry, but he’s also at fault for putting new demands on industry — a large number of those, ie tougher safety, emissions and fuel economy regs, being supported heavily by public polls. You may have personal political differences, and I can respect that, but it is hard to fault Obama on the auto industry from a more politically neutral position. One only has to consider the total lack of support by the former White House Administration — which waited until well into its second term before even agreeing to meet with the CEOs of the Detroit Big Three.
Paul A. Eisenstein
Publisher, TheDetroitBureau.com