EPA Chief to CA: We've all got problems

EPA head Stephen Johnson has finally released his official statement on why he denied California the emissions waiver needed to set tougher standards on cars. Prominent scientists at the EPA have been vocal in saying California had not only met the requirements to get the waiver, but that the law did not allow it to be blocked.

Johnson, already in the hot seat for overruling staff advice that he was legally required to grant California's requested waiver to regulate greenhouse gases, faces a litany of charges that he has also been duplicitous on an array of other scientific integrity, information suppression and workplace relations issues, said PEER.

So what was Johnson's justification for violating the law and -- for the first time in history -- not granting a waiver?  His reasoning comes down to things are bad all over.

But Johnson wrote: "While I find that the conditions related to global climate change in California are substantial, they are not sufficiently different from conditions in the nation as a whole to justify separate state standards."

In other words, because we face global warming everywhere, Johnson isn't going to allow it to be addressed anywhere, even though an internal study conducted by the EPA showed that California does suffer disproportionately from the effects of global warming. This is the same nonsense logic the Bush administration has applied to climate change in international treaties, maintaining that unless we get 100% of what we want from 100% of other nations, we won't give up 1% of our right to pollute.

To what extent did dictates from the White House convince Johnson to completely ignore the scientific and legal advice of the EPA staff?  He's not saying.

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency refused to say Wednesday whether the White House sought to influence his decision denying California a waiver needed to implement a tailpipe emissions-reduction law.

Appearing before the U.S. Senate's environment committee, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson deflected repeated questions from Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., about any White House role in the controversial decision last December blocking California and at least 16 other states from implementing the reductions.

Unlike Johnson, I think we can deduce the answer to this question by referring to the evidence, logic, and precedents. How much of his integrity did Johnson surrender for the Bush administration?  Every last ounce.