The New York Times has the report:
The Obama administration is retreating on long-delayed environmental regulations — new rules governing smog and toxic emissions from industrial boilers — as it adjusts to a changed political dynamic in Washington with a more muscular Republican opposition.
Nice word, that: retreating.
The move to delay the rules, announced this week by the Environmental Protection Agency, will leave in place policies set by President George W. Bush. President Obama ran for office promising tougher standards, and the new rules were set to take effect over the next several weeks.
Nice framing, that: leaving in place policies set by Bush.
The EPA says it needs more time to make its decision. Again. Environmentalists are angry, but the administration seems to have made some people happy.
But in a striking turnabout, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute — which have been anything but friendly to Mr. Obama — are praising his administration.
Joshua Freed of the Third Way says this is a good thing, because "environmental zealots"-- some might even say purists-- forget the importance of business interests. Someone perhaps should ask Freed how well business interests will do with a 5-20% loss of global GDP, which is the estimated cost of failing to address the climate crisis.
The Associated Press:
"It is hard to avoid the impression that EPA is running scared from the incoming Congress," said Frank O'Donnell, president of the advocacy group Clean Air Watch.
Nice phrasing, that: running scared.
Democratic Senator Tom Carper of Delaware, who chairs the Senate clean air subcommittee, explains the impact:
The delay leaves millions of Americans "unprotected from harmful ozone air pollution under an outdated, ineffective ozone standard," Carper said. "This decision also keeps states in limbo about what standards they need to meet, forcing them to continue to postpone significant decisions today to clean our air tomorrow."
But the EPA certainly will get it right, next time, right? The administration's budding new fan base at the American Petroleum Institute hopes not.
"We also hope EPA will now reconsider other costly and unworkable proposals," such as a planned rule to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, said Howard Feldman, API's director of regulatory and scientific affairs.
We will see. Whatever the EPA does is going to upset someone. It would be nice if the EPA bases its decisions on the opinions of the scientists. Who might also be called the realists. Stay tuned.