It appears that the Judiciary branch of government may indeed be the achilles heel of the Bush administration with regards to environmental policy. In particular, the EPA has been hit especially hard lately. Aproximately a week ago the EPA was dealt a
lawsuit by nine states that have had enough of the Government's reluctancy to address mercury levels in the air. Just days ago at the challenge of Barbara Boxer and Bill Nelson, the nominee for the EPA pulled the plug on the controversial
pesticide program.
Now the EPA has been dealt another blow in the form of a
lawsuit brought by twelve states challenging the EPA to take a tougher stance on carbon dioxide emissions:
Phil Clapp, president of the National Environment Trust, said: "There is a very strong basis for this case. The Environmental Protection Agency has regulated pollutants that are not just localised health pollutants, as it has regulated CFCs, which destroy the ozone layer. The law was written in such a way that it sets out standards for what should be classed as a pollutant, and carbon dioxide has an impact on public welfare."
The EPA has said that the Clean Air Act should not be used to regulate carbon dioxide. The administration has opposed mandatory curbs on greenhouse gases, and early in his first term President George W. Bush rejected the United Nations-brokered Kyoto protocol on climate change, which binds developed countries to reductions in carbon dioxide output. Last year, California became the first state to impose limits on the emissions of greenhouse gases.
It appears that Bush cannot hide from his environmental policy. Despite the fact that the suit won't produce any immediate relief from carbon dioxide emissions, it still serves as a reminder that people are noticing.