US Environmental Policy Fails

8/14/2019 US Environmental Policy Fails

1/27

US Environmental Policy FailuresGEN| 1 / 27Caiello/Schirmer

US Environmental Policy FailuresGENStrat Notes .....................................................................................................................................2

Endangered Species Act .............................................................................................................. 3ESA creates epic disincentives for conservation. Case in Point: Boiling Springs NC ................................................................3

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Tuang Ming-Lin faces $100,000 + jail for plowing his field ..................................................3

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Margaret Rector lost $801,000 in property value ...................................................................3

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Kern County California loses two million acre-feet of water ................................................4

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Riverside County paid $400,000 per endangered fly .............................................................4

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Private property that doesn't contain endangered species confiscated .................................4ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Utah resident fined $15,000 for no reason whatsoever ..........................................................4

Government shot itself in the foot with the ESA: Litigation ..........................................................................................................5

ESA has only de-listed 30 of its 1,260 endangered species: some of which went extinct / weren't endangered in the first place....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

ESA results in land use restrictions creating reverse incentives ...................................................................................... ...... ......5

Case in Point: Ben Cone Jr punished for creating a habitat friendly to endangered species .................................................5

Case in Point: ESA prevented people from building firebreaks which ended up killing the endangered species ........................6

Case in Point: ESA cost farmers $200 million for no good reason ..............................................................................................6

ESA has impacted the flow of water in Southern California by roughly 35% for no reason .......................................................6

Impact of ESA smelt regulations: farmers lives destroyed, environment undermined .................................................................7

EPA Fails .......................................................................................................................................8The EPA is unfair in imposing regulations: Example John Herlihy .............................................................................................8

EPA Arsenic regulations cost New Mexico $14 million but aren't needed ...................................................................................8States are forced to comply with policies that they disagree with, a situation which is costing us nearly $150 billion ..............9

Unfunded Federal mandates on environmental issues = 50 billion dollars ................................................................................9

The regulate pollution at any price mindset leads to enormous waste .....................................................................................9EPA refused to regulate mercury in disregard of a court order ................................................................................................10

Nine States and Manitoba sued EPA over failure to regulate water pollution ...........................................................................10

Twelve States sued EPA over failure to regulate oil refinery pollution ......................................................................................10

California threatening to sue EPA over failure to regulate emissions .......................................................................................11

Department of the Interior incredibly fraudulent .......................................................................................................................11

US government politicizes science ..............................................................................................................................................12

Superfund ....................................................................................................................................13EPA has cut funding for the critical super-fund program ..........................................................................................................13

Mountaintop Removal Mining ..................................................................................................14EPA has opened the way for more mountaintop removal coal mining .......................................................................................14Nuclear Waste Disposal .............................................................................................................15

Government has procrastinated terribly over nuclear waste disposal .......................................................................................15

Air Pollution ............................................................................................................................... 16EPA has allowed a huge pollution loophole for aging coal plants .............................................................................................16

EPA has loosened up Mercury emissions controls from coal plants .........................................................................................16

EPA ignores experts on air quality standards ...................................................................................................................... ......17

Chemicals/Toxic Waste ..............................................................................................................18EPA has eroded the credibility and safety of assessing dangers of toxic chemicals ..................................................... .............18

EPA drastically undermined toxic waste presentation by loosening reporting requirements ....................................................18EPA's own board disagrees with it's decision not to set safety standards on dangerous perchlorate .......................................19

DOD .............................................................................................................................................20The nation's worst polluter is the department of defense and it will not comply with the EPA ..................................................20Third World Ignored .................................................................................................................21

Americans need to shed their doomsday views on pollution and help the developing world .....................................................21

Environmental lobbyists play down dangers in third world for money ......................................................................................21

Western polluting industrial nations are pristine compared to poor nations ........................................................................21

Poverty causes more pollution and death than man made industrial pollution .........................................................................211000 children die a day because of polluted waters in India .....................................................................................................22

2 million Indians die each year from air pollution .....................................................................................................................22

India/South East Aisa pollution could kill millions .....................................................................................................................22

Indian pollution can travel around globe and has caused droughts, flooding, + cut sunlight by 15% ..................................... 22

Results of Indian pollution ..........................................................................................................................................................22


2/27


DDT .............................................................................................................................................23Environmental hype can result in millions of deaths: DDT ........................................................................................................23Case in Point: Misguided DDT regulations kill millions ............................................................................................................23

Invasive Species ..........................................................................................................................24 Invasive species are imported legally under US law ............................................................................................................ ......24

Exotic Pets industry has lobbied extensively to keep importing foreign species and Congress has failed to act ......................24

Invasive species pose number one environmental threat to America .........................................................................................24Case in Point: US allows importation of Burmese Python which is overrunning Florida .........................................................25

Case in Point: US allows importation of Iguanas which are destroying Florida plant life ......................................................25

Case in Point: Lots of other invasive species are invading Florida ...........................................................................................25Invasive species are a threat across the nation and ultimately cost the US $137 billion a year ................................................26

Example of how prolific and destructive invasive species can be .............................................................................................. 26

Miscellaneous ..............................................................................................................................27Government regulations hurt the Environment ...........................................................................................................................27

Environmental Conservation and a Good Economy are mutually dependent ............................................................................27

Strat Notes

This brief at first glance might seem rather incohesive and scattered. It's supposed to be. I intentionally tried toavoid generic cards saying X policy is bad. Instead I tried to go with specific examples of people beinghurt/threatened by some policy as much as possible. The result is what you see: an apparently randomconglomerate of policy fails. This brief is useful more as ammo for arguments than anything else. Enjoy!

~Timothy Caiello

.


3/27


Endangered Species Act

ESA creates epic disincentives for conservation. Case in Point: Boiling Springs NC

Jonathan H. Adler [Associate Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Center for Business Law andRegulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law]"The Endangered Species Act is endangeringspecies. Anti-Conservation Incentives" 2008 Case Western Reserve University (TC)http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv30n4/v30n4-6.pdf

In early 2006, landowners in Boiling Springs Lakes, N.C., began clear-cutting timber from their property afterthe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) announced that development could threaten local red-cockaded woodpecker populations. The FWSreleased a map showing clusters of the woodpecker in the area and announced plans to identify additionalhabitat for the endangered bird. That prompted landowners to grab their chainsaws to clear their property of thetrees in which the woodpeckers make their homes before their land could be designated as endangered specieshabitat. Residents of Boiling Springs Lakes are not anti-environmental or particularly hostile to endangeredbirds. Red-cockaded woodpeckers have thrived there for years. People are just afraid a bird might fly in andmake a nest and their property is worth nothing, Boiling Springs Lakes mayor Joan Kinney told local papers.It is causing a tremendous amount of clear-cutting. As one local resident told a reporter, You had to get in line to getsomebody with a chain saw. I have not a single pine tree left. Folks around here are terrified of the prospect of losingtheir property.

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Tuang Ming-Lin faces $100,000 + jail for plowing his field

Alexander F. Annett [Research Assistant in The Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at TheHeritage Foundation. ]Reforming the Endangered Species Act to Protect Species and Property RightsNovember 13, 1998 Heritage Foundation (Brackets in original) (TC)http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908

"Taung Ming-Lin, a Chinese immigrant, bought land in Kern County, California...to grow Chinese vegetablesfor sale to the southern California's Asian Community. Lin claims to have been told by the county the land wasalready zoned for farming and that no permit was needed. When Lin began farming, his tractor allegedlydisturbed the habitat of the endangered Tipton Kangaroo rat...[and] ran over some of the rats. Lin was charged

with federal civil and criminal violations of the Endangered Species Act.... The criminal charges carry penaltiesof up to a year in jail and $100,000 fine.

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Margaret Rector lost $801,000 in property value

Alexander F. Annett [Research Assistant in The Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at TheHeritage Foundation. ]Reforming the Endangered Species Act to Protect Species and Property RightsNovember 13, 1998 Heritage Foundation (TC)http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908

"In 1973 Margaret Rector bought 15 acres of land on a busy highway west of Austin, Texas. In 1990 the

golden-checkered warbler was listed as endangered, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service says herproperty is suitable habitat. The land, in the fastest-growing part of the county, is now unusable. Its assessedvalue falls from $831,000 in 1991 to $30,000 in 1992. USFWS says she might be able to get a permit todevelop, but this would require her to finance extensive studies and to mitigate any impact on the warbler."
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv30n4/v30n4-6.pdfhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv30n4/v30n4-6.pdfhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908


4/27


ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Kern County California loses two million acre-feet of water


"[T]he Central Valley of California, Kern County produces huge crops of vegetables, nuts, fruit, and cotton withwater that is brought southward from Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta through a series of natural and man-made

structures known as the California Water Project. This multi-billion-dollar water project is financed byassessments upon all of those who use the water; in turn, state law allocates the right to receive and usespecified quantities of water to farmers, rangers, cities, and industrial users. These water rights are recognizedas a property right under California State law. Beginning in 1992, the federal government started limiting theamounts of water which could be sent south to Kern County and other parts of California in order to maintainin-stream flows to protect the habitat of two endangered fish--the delta smelt and the winter run of Chinooksalmon. As much as two million acre-feet of water--enough to cover two million acres to a depth of one foot--have been held back annually from municipal and agricultural use in order to maintain certain levels in streamsand lakes which constitute the habitat of these fish. Farmers and ranchers have suffered many millions of dollarsin lost crops and, in some instances, have lost their property as it has become unproductive."

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Riverside County paid $400,000 per endangered flyAlexander F. Annett [Research Assistant in The Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at TheHeritage Foundation. ]Reforming the Endangered Species Act to Protect Species and Property RightsNovember 13, 1998 Heritage Foundation (TC)http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908

"In Southern California an endangered fly in Riverside County held up the building of a hospital.... It's a flower-loving desert sand fly, a bit larger than a common housefly, but it was an endangered fly, and they found eightof them. The cost to set aside this habitat for the fly: about $400,000 per fly.

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Private property that doesn't contain endangered species confiscated


"In August 1997, U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan issued a moratorium on logging on 94 acres of privatelyheld land near Eugene, Oregon. The two spotted owls actually make their nest about one mile away from theprivately held parcel of land that is managed by the federal government. But because the land may be part of theowls' `home range,' the judge determined that logging should be stopped...without knowing if the owls in facteven used it."

ESA hurts people. Case in Point: Utah resident fined $15,000 for no reason whatsoeverAlexander F. Annett [Research Assistant in The Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at TheHeritage Foundation. ]Reforming the Endangered Species Act to Protect Species and Property RightsNovember 13, 1998 Heritage Foundation (First brackets added to preserve context, second brackets inoriginal) (TC)http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908

The FWS [Fish and Wildlife Service] "threatened to fine a Utah man $15,000 for farming his land and allegedlyposing a risk to the prairie dog, a protected species.... [T]he USWFS told the man that he should hire an outsideexpert to determine if there are prairie dogs on his land. The expert prepared a report, which indicated that therewere no prairie dogs. The farmer proceeded to work his land. However, the USFWS has told him that they willfine him anyway."
http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/BG1234.cfm#pgfId=1014908


5/27


Government shot itself in the foot with the ESA: Litigation

Nancy Marano and Ben Lieberman [Nancy Marano is Research Assistant, and Ben Lieberman is Senior PolicyAnalyst, in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.] Improvingthe Endangered Species Act: Balancing the Needs of Landowners and Endangered Wildlife September 23,2005 Heritage Foundation (TC)http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm861.cfm

ESA has embroiled the government, as well as many landowners and conservation groups, in long-running and

expensive litigation. In its most recent budget document, FWS explains that its ESA listing-related litigationworkload includes 34 active lawsuits concerning some 48 species, 40 court orders concerning 88 species, and36 notices of intent to sue concerning 104 species.

ESA has only de-listed 30 of its 1,260 endangered species: some of which went extinct / weren't

endangered in the first place

Bonner Cohen senior fellow of The National Center for Public Policy Research.The Endangered Species Act:Bad for People, Bad for Wildlife The National Center for Public Policy Research May 2004 (TC)http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.html

In the 30 years since its enactment, the Endangered Species Act has emerged as one of the most powerful, and

ineffective, environmental statutes on the books. Of the some 1,260 species listed as "endangered" or"threatened" under the ESA, fewer than 30 have been taken off the list. And this is even worse than it looks.Some species were removed from the list because they became extinct; others, like the American alligator, weretaken off because it was determined they were never endangered in the first place.

ESA results in land use restrictions creating reverse incentives


These meager results, however, are not the worst aspect of the ESA. In rural America, far away from urban

skyscrapers and suburban malls, the ESA has imposed severe land-use restrictions on property owners. Farmers,ranchers, and other landowners who harbor endangered species on their property often lose the economic use oftheir land. In effect, they are punished for creating the very habitat endangered species need to survive.

Case in Point: Ben Cone Jr punished for creating a habitat friendly to endangered species


Typical of the havoc the ESA has wreaked in rural America is the case of Ben Cone, Jr., whose fatherpurchased 8,000 acres of timberless land on the Black River in North Carolina. Cone replanted the property

with pines, carried out prescribed burns to control undergrowth, and selectively thinned his trees every fewyears to pay his property taxes and to turn a profit on his labor. Over time, his pines grew to such a height thatthey attracted the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker, which brought him into direct conflict with the ESA.In testimony before Congress, Cone explained that "by managing [the property] in an environmentally correctway, my father and I created habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker. My reward has been the loss of$1,425,000 in value of timber I am not allowed to harvest under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act. Ifeel compelled to massively clear-cut the balance of my property to prevent additional loss."
http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm861.cfmhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm861.cfmhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm861.cfmhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.html


6/27


Case in Point: ESA prevented people from building firebreaks which ended up killing the endangered

species


In another celebrated case, residents of wildfire-prone Riverside County, Calif. were prevented by the ESAfrom clearing firebreaks on their land lest they disturb the habitat of the endangered Stephens' Kangaroo rat.

When the inevitable fires came, people's homes and the rat's habitat went up in flames.

Case in Point: ESA cost farmers $200 million for no good reason

Dr. Michael S. Coffman Ph. D. received his BS in Forestry and MS in Biology at Northern Arizona Universityat Flagstaff, Arizona and his Ph.D. in Forest Science at the University of Idaho. He taught courses andconducted research in forest ecology and forest community dynamics for ten years at Michigan TechnologicalUniversityCa leading forestry school in the Midwest. While there, he published a book on forest ecosystemclassification in Upper Michigan and Northern Wisconsin, which has become the standard for classification inthe region. He also assisted the U.S. Forest Service in developing an Ecological Land Classification System foreach of the National Forests in Region-9. THE PROBLEM WITH THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACTAugust 2, 2003 News With Views (TC)http://www.newswithviews.com/Coffman/mike2.htm

Fourteen hundred farmers owning 200,000 acres in the Klamath River Basin of southern Oregon and NorthernCalifornia were denied their water rights during the summer of 2001 because of the Endangered Species Act of1973 (ESA). Nearly $200 million of life savings and hard work were wiped out instantly as the farmers wereleft with essentially worthless land.This Author goes on to say in the same context:Secretary of Interior Gale Norton commissioned The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to investigate thescientific basis for the recovery plans of the suckerfish in the Klamath River Basin. The NAS reported in Marchof 2002 that there was no scientific justification for keeping Klamath Lake levels high by withholding its waterfrom the farmers. On the contrary, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) records reveal that the suckerpopulations increased when the Klamath Lake was low and decreased when it was high. Consequently, the

USFWS recovery plan would actually put the suckerfish in greater danger by maintaining high lake levels.

ESA has impacted the flow of water in Southern California by roughly 35% for no reason

HAROLD JOHNSON JD Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Little fish takes big bite November 15, 2009 TheOrange County Register (Newspaper) http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/water-219354-smelt-delta.html(Brackets in Original) (TC)

The Delta smelt is a pinky-size fish listed as "threatened" under the federal Endangered Species Act. In acontroversial strategy to keep the smelt's numbers from evaporating, federal officials ordered dramatic cutbacksin the pumping of water from the Delta to central and Southern California. Pumping less means upping waterrates for millions of Californians hence, a Delta smelt "tax." "The [feds'] environmental decision has impacted

the flow of water to Southern California by approximately 35 percent," Garden Grove water services manager David Entsmingertold the Register's Teri Sforza in June. Garden Grove residents' water rates went up 19.7 percent at the beginning of September. MWD has hiked water charges tomember agencies by nearly 20 percent this year. Depending on which report you go with, the pumping shutdowns account for between half and all of that price rise.

The MWD increase includes a surcharge of $69 per acre foot directly dedicated to the cost of replacing water lost to smelt regulations . But even if yourwater bill stings, can you take satisfaction from knowing you've aided a fragile species? Sorry, no. Turning offthe pumps hurts people but doesn't seem to have helped fish. State tracking finds the Delta smelt still on the edge of extinction, theSacramento Bee reported Oct. 22. "There are very few Delta smelt out there," said Randall Baxter, a senior state fisheries biologist. In fact, there has neverbeen a scientific consensus that the pumps are to blame for the Delta smelt's decline. Many contributors are atplay, including toxic runoff from urban areas and non-native species that compete with the smelt for food.
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.newswithviews.com/Coffman/mike2.htmhttp://www.newswithviews.com/Coffman/mike2.htmhttp://www.ocregister.com/opinion/water-219354-smelt-delta.htmlhttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA511.htmlhttp://www.newswithviews.com/Coffman/mike2.htmhttp://www.ocregister.com/opinion/water-219354-smelt-delta.html


7/27


Impact of ESA smelt regulations: farmers lives destroyed, environment undermined

HAROLD JOHNSON JD Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Little fish takes big bite November 15, 2009 TheOrange County Register (Newspaper) http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/water-219354-smelt-delta.html(Brackets in Original) (TC)

By far the heaviest price for the feds' fish-before-people policy is paid in the San Joaquin Valley. As vastquantities of water are withheld from irrigation and allowed to flow directly to the ocean, hundreds of thousandsof acres of farmland have been fallowed in one of America's agricultural heartlands. Stanislaus County almond

farmer Jim Jasper has seen his water allocation drop 90 percent. "If this continues, it's very likely that our 60-year-old family farming business will have to shut down," he said. Nearly 150 employees would be jobless.Already, unemployment in some San Joaquin Valley rural communities is north of 30 percent. A UC Davisstudy estimated this year's job losses from water cutbacks at 30,000. The environment is paying a price, asFresno-based federal Judge Oliver Wanger said last month while presiding at a hearing on lawsuits against thepumping restrictions. Staunching the flow of water has caused dust to rise from dry fields, possibly dirtying theair, he said, and land has sunk because more water must be drawn from below ground.
http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/water-219354-smelt-delta.htmlhttp://www.ocregister.com/opinion/water-219354-smelt-delta.html


8/27


EPA Fails

The EPA is unfair in imposing regulations: Example John Herlihy

Lynch '95(by Timothy Lynch Cato Policy anaylsis No. 223 april 20, 1995 Polluting Our Principles:Prosecutions And The Bill Of Rights) (TC)

In the summer of 1994, for example, independent oil producer John Herlihy spent $15,000 in a timely cleanupeffort when a mechanical malfunction at one of his wells resulted in a spill of 10 barrels of oil. Although stateregulatory authorities found no wrongdoing, the EPA stepped in and imposed a $37,000 fine because it foundthe firm's contingency plans "inadequate." A flabbergasted Herlihy told newspaper reporters, "I feel like I oughtto be held up as a model, not fined." Although Herlihy's fine may seem unduly harsh to most Americans, it canmake perfect sense from the point of view of a regional EPA division director. After all, "enforcementperformance" might suffer if the agency had to consider the mitigating circumstances in each and every case.

Case in Point: 500 million dollars wasted on Hudson River Clean up

Gregg Easterbrook, Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institute 2000-08) Environmental Doomsday: Bad newsgood, good news badThe Brookings Institution 2002 (TC)http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspx

EPA Administrator Christine Whitman just imposed a $500 million Hudson River-PCB dredging cleanup onGeneral Electric, which caused the river's PCB problems. She took the step although the harm from HudsonRiver PCBs is comparatively small and declining naturally anyway, and despite the fact there is no guarantee afleet-sized dredging project will even workit might make the situation worse by stirring up buried PCBs.Posit that General Electric was guilty of behavior for which $500 million is the proper penalty. The moneycould be far better spent buying land for preservation, housing the homeless, or perhaps protecting thewatershed that provides New York City's water supply. But the Clean Water Act as written does not allow suchutilitarian trade-offs. Many highly prescriptive environmental laws could sensibly be supplanted by a fewsimplified statutes that grant regulators discretion to pursue the general good.

EPA Arsenic regulations cost New Mexico $14 million but aren't neededJonathan H. Adler [Associate Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Center for Business Law andRegulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law], JURISDICTIONAL MISMATCH INENVIRONMENTAL FEDERALISM, Working Paper 05-18 Case Western Reserve University - School of Law(Research Paper Series in Legal Studies) July 2005 (TC)http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=770305

The mere existence of a federally mandated floor also preempts contrary state policies and environmental priorities. If a local community has differenthealth and environment-related regulatory priorities, it still must meet the requirements of federal law. In 2000,for example, the outgoing Clinton Administration proposed lowering the federal standard for arsenic in drinkingwaterfrom 50 to 10 parts per billion (ppb). While the leaders of national environmental groups cheered the proposed reduction in the federal arsenic standard, manycommunities faced with high compliance costs were less enthusiastic. In Los Lunas, New Mexico groundwaternaturally contains 12-19 ppb of arsenic. Local officials estimated that reducing arsenic levels to the new 10 ppbstandard would cost $14 million. Local experts also noted that while New Mexico has among the highest naturalconcentrations of arsenic in groundwater in the country, it also has among the lowest rates of bladder cancer,leading many to question whether spending millions to reduce local arsenic levels was the most cost-effectiveway to safeguard public health. There is even evidence that the federal arsenic rule will increase risks to publichealth in some communities insofar as the higher water rates necessary to pay for the change induce somefamilies opt to get water from their own wells. Yet insofar as residents of Los Lunas, or any other community, wish to adopt a different drinkingwater standard that is more in line with their environmental and public health needs, and lacks the resources to pursue every laudable public health or environmentalgoal, the federal standard precludes them from acting on their preferences.
http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspxhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=770305http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=770305http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspxhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=770305http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=770305


9/27


States are forced to comply with policies that they disagree with, a situation which is costing us nearly

$150 billion

Terry L. Anderson (During his career at Montana State University, Anderson won several outstanding teachingawards and is now professor emeritus of economics. He is also a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, and anadjunct professor at the Stanford Graduate School of Business. Anderson has been a visiting scholar at OxfordUniversity, the University of Basel, and Cornell University Law School. He received his Ph.D. in economicsfrom the University of Washington in 1972 and was awarded a Fulbright Research Fellowship to CanterburyUniversity) and Peter J. Hill (Hill graduated from Montana State University with a B.S. in agricultural science

and received his Ph.D. in economics from the University of Chicago in 1970. He is the George F. BennettProfessor of Economics at Wheaton College of Wheaton, Illinois, and a Senior Fellow of PERC), Property andEnvironment Research Center, Environmental Federalism: Thinking Smaller, December 1996 (TC)

Local government officials are outraged by unfunded mandates--regulations imposed from Washington butpaid for locally. For example, Montanans must clean up the naturally-occurring arsenic in the Madison Riverbecause arsenic levels coming from geysers in Yellowstone Park exceed national standards. Yet, according toEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates, a person would have to consume two liters of untreatedwater from the source andeat 6.5 grams of fish every day for 70 years to increase his or her risk of cancer by 1in 10,000. Towns such as Aspen, Colorado, and Triumph, Idaho, are locked in an unending battle with the EPAbecause it claims that hazardous waste sites (places that have old mine tailings) must be cleaned up even though

the communities do not feel the risks warrant the disruptions (Stroup 1996). Federal regulations to protectendangered species and wetlands have forced property owners to stop farming, logging, and building on theirproperty (Lund 1995). Costs of complying with national environmental regulations have risen from $53 billion in1980 to over $150 billion today, a figure representing 2 percent of the nation's gross domestic product.

Unfunded Federal mandates on environmental issues = 50 billion dollars

(Benjamin K.SovacoolResearch Fellow in the Energy Governance Program at the Centre on Asia andGlobalization, The Best of Both Worlds: Environmental Federalism and the Need for Federal Action onRenewable Energy and Climate Change June 2008 Stanford Environmental Law Journal)(Lexis ) (TC)

In practice, centralization also allows the federal government to pass mandates without paying for them.

Locating decision-making power in Washington, D.C., allows Congresspersons to wield their power to forcestate and local governments to do their bidding, reaping the political benefits of their actions without having to pay their costs. The mostcommon examples are unfunded mandates dealing with environmental protection and pollution, which havebecome a central concern in the past two decades. At least 400 subsections of the Code of Federal Regulationsinvolving environmental matters applied to local governments in 1994, and another 400 required them toenforce federal environmental requirements on their own without any federal support. The total cost of theseunfunded mandates is expected to reach fifty-billion dollars by 2010. Advocates for decentralization note thatlarge federal programs, because they often operate at a larger scale, are more difficult to revise or terminate.n155 They argue that the national government consistently tends to "bite off more than it can chew" and grow inits cost, jurisdiction, and bureaucracy, losing its sense of purpose and management capacity along the way.

The regulate pollution at any price mindset leads to enormous waste


Environmental law could also benefit from greater use of risk analysis and trade-off thinking. Millions ofdollars may be spent to, say, eliminate the last part per quadrillion of dioxin from the emissions of papermakingplants, even though there is no evidence such minute amounts cause harm, and there are many better ways themillions could be spent.
http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspxhttp://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspx


10/27


EPA refused to regulate mercury in disregard of a court order

Earth Justice [Earth justice works through the courts on behalf of citizen groups, scientists, and other parties toensure government agencies and private interests follow the law] EPA Do-Nothing Rule on Cement KilnMercury Pollution Ignores Court Order, Public Outcry February 20, 2007 (Tim's note on this source: thismight not be the best source, however, because this card is dealing with strict facts: EPAs refusal to follow acourt order, it is totally legitimate.) (TC)http://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/007/epa-do-nothing-rule-on-cement-kiln-mercury-pollution-ignores-

court-order-public-outcry.html

In December 2000, a federal court found that EPA's refusal to control cement kilns' mercury emissions violatedthe Clean Air Act, and ordered the agency to set the missing standards. Six years later, EPA has issued only do-nothing housekeeping requirements that will have "essentially zero" impact on the kilns' toxic pollution. Theagency estimates that approximately 118 cement kilns emit over 11,000 pounds of mercury each year, makingcement kilns one of the largest sources of mercury pollution. The nation's single largest mercury polluter of anykind is a cement kiln in southern California, which emitted over 2,500 pounds of mercury in 2004. "Once again theEPA has failed to put public health first," said Carl Pope, Sierra Club executive director. "The agency ignored the law. They have ignored thecourts and they have ignored public health for too long. It's time for the EPA to do what they should have been doing all along -- reducing the toxic mercury

pollution that is harming our health and the health of our children."

Nine States and Manitoba sued EPA over failure to regulate water pollution

The Jurist: Legal news and research published by the University of Pittsburgh School of Law [real-time legalnews service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbittsat the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.] Nine US states and Canada province sue EPA over watertransfer regulation October 2008 (Bracket in original) (TC)http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.php

Nine US states and the Canadian province of Manitoba sued the US Environmental Protection AgencyThursday, alleging that an agency regulation allows the discharge of polluted water in violation of the CleanWater Act . In a complaint filed in US District Court for the Southern District of New York , the state attorneysgeneral assert that the Water Transfer Rule promulgated in June exempts transfers from one body of water toanother without an intervening use from permitting requirements under the National Pollutant DischargeElimination System (NPDES). Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson said the regulation "jeopardize[s]both our economy and our fishing, boating, and outdoors way of life by allowing polluted water to be divertedinto Minnesota lakes and rivers." The attorneys generals' complaint claims that the regulation exceeds the EPA'sstatutory authority and is arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion.

Twelve States sued EPA over failure to regulate oil refinery pollution


The EPA has been sued in recent months by a number of states seeking either the promulgation of regulationsor effective response to petitions. In August, 12 states filed suit against the EPA for its alleged failure toenforce provisions of the Clean Air Act requiring oil refineries to adopt measures curbing the pollutioncontributing to global warming.
http://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/007/epa-do-nothing-rule-on-cement-kiln-mercury-pollution-ignores-court-order-public-outcry.htmlhttp://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/007/epa-do-nothing-rule-on-cement-kiln-mercury-pollution-ignores-court-order-public-outcry.htmlhttp://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/007/epa-do-nothing-rule-on-cement-kiln-mercury-pollution-ignores-court-order-public-outcry.htmlhttp://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/007/epa-do-nothing-rule-on-cement-kiln-mercury-pollution-ignores-court-order-public-outcry.htmlhttp://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.php


11/27


California threatening to sue EPA over failure to regulate emissions


In July, California Attorney General Jerry Brown formally notified the EPA that the state had petitioned the

EPA three times seeking a regulatory ruling and would file a lawsuit against the agency if it refused to issuerules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from various vehicles and types of machinery.

Department of the Interior incredibly fraudulent

Center for Public Integrity [nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-advocacy, organization which produces originalinvestigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent andaccountable. The Center for Public Integrity has won numerous awards including: THE KNIGHT-BATTENAWARDS FOR INNOVATIONS IN JOURNALISM, SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS,INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, SOCIETYOF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS, and THE JOAN SHORENSTEIN CENTER ON THE PRESS, POLITICSAND PUBLIC POLICY] 2008 Scandal, Incompetence at Minerals Management Service (Brackets added to

maintain context) (TC) http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1022/

An eye-opening series of reports in fall 2008 by the Department of the Interiors inspector general disclosed astunning level of corruption at the Minerals Management Service (MMS), and a coziness with industryofficials that included a culture of substance abuse and promiscuity at the agency. MMS is responsible forcollecting royalties from companies for the right to produce oil and gas from federally controlled land andwater; in 2007, MMS collected more than $9 billion in oil and gas royalties, making it one of the largest sourcesof income for the United States government. The agency also runs the Royalty-in-Kind program out of its Denveroffice, through which it takes delivery of oil and gas from energy firms in lieu of cash payments, and then sells it to refiners. The inspector general concluded thatofficials in the MMS Royalty-in-Kind program frequently consumed alcohol at industry functions, had used cocaine and marijuana, and had sexual relationships with

oil and gas company representatives. The I[spector] G[eneral] said that one-third of Royalty-in-Kind officials were takingbribes and gifts, and noted that former MMS officials received contracts from their friends still in the

department. Out of 718 bid packages awarded by MMS between 2001 and 2006, 121 were modified by theagency and all but three of the modifications benefited the oil companies. The inspector general said thatthese relationships have cost taxpayers $4.4 million in lapsed collection fees, but due to the sloppyadministration at MMS, the real cost may go undiscovered. In a separate report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found thatMMS is plagued by inefficiency in collecting royalties, and that there is no way to backtrack and figure out how much has actually been lost. Currently, oil companiessubmit their own data and MMS simply takes them at their word, rather than independently confirming that the numbers are correct what the inspector general hasreferred to in a letter to Secretary Dirk Kempthorne as a Band-Aid approach to holding together one of the federal government's largest revenue producing operations.A separate GAO report found that the United States is not collecting fair market price for royalties on public resources which may be seriously limiting the amountof money taken in by MMS, and hence, the taxpayers.
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1022/http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/nine-us-states-and-canada-province-sue.phphttp://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1022/


12/27


13/27


Superfund

EPA has cut funding for the critical super-fund program

Center for Public Integrity [nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-advocacy, organization which produces originalinvestigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent andaccountable. The Center for Public Integrity has won numerous awards including: THE KNIGHT-BATTENAWARDS FOR INNOVATIONS IN JOURNALISM, SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS,INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, SOCIETYOF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS, and THE JOAN SHORENSTEIN CENTER ON THE PRESS, POLITICSAND PUBLIC POLICY] Superfund Program Loses Funding, Momentum 2007 (TC)http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/986/

A 2007 Center for Public Integrity investigation found that the Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA)Superfund program had lost critical momentum and massive amounts of funding since the turn of the century,bringing further risk to the quarter of the nations population living within three miles of a hazardous waste site.The Center found the start rate for site cleanups from 2001 to 2006 had fallen by two-thirds from the previous six-year period, and while EPA completed constructionwork at an average of 79 sites per year from 1995 through 2000, that rate dropped to an average of 42 per year from 2001 to 2006. Officials argued this was due to theincreased complexity of newer sites after previous cleanups picked the low-hanging fruit, but that failed to explain the decline in money retrieved from industry to

reimburse EPA for cleanups from more than $300 million in 1999 to just about $60 million in 2006. When Congress created the Superfundprogram in 1980, lawmakers established a trust fund supported by a tax on petroleum products and chemicals,and enabled EPA to push responsible parties to reimburse the agency after cleanups. The Superfund taxcomprised more than two-thirds of that trust fund until 1995, when Congress allowed the tax to expire. Afterthat, the bulk of trust fund money came from Congressional appropriations, which have been declining whenadjusted for inflation. As a result, the trust fund balance declined from $4.7 billion at the start of fiscal year1997 to $173 million at the start of fiscal year 2007. Experts said the erosion of the trust fund meant the agencyno longer had the money to clean up sites first and stick industry with the bill afterward. Also, the Center reported that a

policy change in 2000 led to a rise in what are called site-specific accounts, which collect millions of dollars from polluters for exclusive rather than general fund use.That move, combined with bankruptcies and a dwindling trust fund, left hundreds of so-called orphan sites without adequate funding to clean up the mess. Somelawmakers who oppose more funding argued that soaring administrative costs were to blame for Superfunds woes, but a 2008 Government Accountability Office

(GAO) report challenged those claims, and found that total Superfund expenditures fell 29 percent since 1999. The funding fell despite the fact that114 toxic waste sites found within 10 miles of 25 million Americans were determined by EPA to be not undercontrol in 2007 with dangerous and occasionally carcinogenic substances threatening the public by

poisoning the soil, water, or air.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/986/http://projects.publicintegrity.org/superfund/http://projects.publicintegrity.org/superfund/http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/986/http://projects.publicintegrity.org/superfund/


14/27


15/27


Nuclear Waste Disposal

Government has procrastinated terribly over nuclear waste disposal

Center for Public Integrity [nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-advocacy, organization which produces originalinvestigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent andaccountable. The Center for Public Integrity has won numerous awards including: THE KNIGHT-BATTENAWARDS FOR INNOVATIONS IN JOURNALISM, SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS,INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, SOCIETYOF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS, and THE JOAN SHORENSTEIN CENTER ON THE PRESS, POLITICSAND PUBLIC POLICY] 2008 Nuclear Waste Problem Unsolved (TC)http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/956/

A cascading series of problems quality control, litigation, and cost overruns among them has delayed theopening of a viable repository for high-level nuclear waste until at least 2020, but its still not clear the projectwill ever be successfully completed. The inability to find such a permanent site has left growing amounts ofspent fuel and other high-level radioactive waste at 121 sites nationwide. The roots of the issue date back to 1982, when passage ofthe Nuclear Waste Policy Act created the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) within the Department of Energy (DOE). That office was

charged with overseeing construction of a national repository for radioactive waste by the year 1998. When President Bush took office in 2001,the most viable, if controversial site, Nevadas Yucca Mountain, was still years away from operational status.

But matters have only grown worse. By failing to use the fees long-imposed on nuclear plants to finance a facility, the government has faced dozensof breach-of-contract lawsuits from industry; many of those cases are still pending, but the government has already paid out millions of dollars in court awards or

settlements. Congress approved the Yucca site in 2002, but the DOE repeatedly failed to meet its goal to completethe next step of submitting a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The DOE has facedvigorous opposition from the state of Nevada as well as some members of Congress who control the programs purse strings, but the Government Accountability Office(GAO) found that chronic quality assurance problems have also plagued the effort. In 2005, the disclosure of e-mails from geologists indicated that environmental

documents may have been falsified, forcing the DOE to spend millions re-analyzing the science behind the project. Further slowing progress, the U.S.Court of Appeals found fault with an Environmental Protection Agency decision to plan only for 10,000 yearsof regulatory compliance at Yucca Mountain. It took until October 2005 for the DOE to enact a New Path Forward on how the project would

proceed. A new OCRWM director was able to meet a revised goal of June 30, 2008, for submitting the license application to the NRC. DOE officials recently toldCongress that under a best-case scenario, costs for the Yucca Mountain repository would reach $90 billion $19 billion above its 2007 estimate and $33 billion morethan the administration estimated in 2001. The site, moreover, would not open until 2020 at the earliest. But concerns about everything from transporting the waste toYuccas ability to store it safely could yet derail the project altogether leaving America without a central repository for growing amounts of high-level nuclear wastethat will remain deadly for thousands of years.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/956/http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/956/


16/27


Air Pollution

EPA has allowed a huge pollution loophole for aging coal plants

Center for Public Integrity [nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-advocacy, organization which produces originalinvestigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent andaccountable. The Center for Public Integrity has won numerous awards including: THE KNIGHT-BATTENAWARDS FOR INNOVATIONS IN JOURNALISM, SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS,INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, SOCIETYOF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS, and THE JOAN SHORENSTEIN CENTER ON THE PRESS, POLITICSAND PUBLIC POLICY] 2006 EPAs Free Pass for Aging Power Plant Emissions (TC)http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/948/

Ever since Vice President Cheneys Energy Task Force took up the issue in 2001, the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) has looked for ways to loosen the New Source Review (NSR) rules that require oldpower plants to meet modern pollution standards. NSR amendments to the Clean Air Act in 1977 exemptedexisting power plants, allowing them to maintain their pollution levels until they were retired, expanded, orsignificantly modified. In 1999, the EPA and the Department of Justice launched an enforcement campaignafter discovering that 70 percent of coal-fired power plants in the United States had violated this arrangementby modifying their facilities while passing it off as routine maintenance. This allowed the aging plants to emittens of millions of tons of pollutants that pose health risks such as respiratory problems and heart disease. AfterCheneys task force examined the NSR, the EPA proposed a series of rules in 2002 and 2003, which critics say undercut the NSR rules and related enforcement cases.The new rules called for power plants to be reviewed only at higher emission levels than previously established, while simultaneously widening the definition of routinemaintenance. The U.S. Court of Appeals struck down that routine maintenance rule in 2006. By then, the EPA had proposed further changes allowing power plantoperators to modify their facilities as long as maximum hourly emissions do not rise while making no requirements for annual emissions. Internal documentsrevealed the Air Enforcement Division of the EPA strongly opposed the proposal.

EPA has loosened up Mercury emissions controls from coal plants

Center for Public Integrity [nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-advocacy, organization which produces originalinvestigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent andaccountable. The Center for Public Integrity has won numerous awards including: THE KNIGHT-BATTENAWARDS FOR INNOVATIONS IN JOURNALISM, SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS,

INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, SOCIETYOF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS, and THE JOAN SHORENSTEIN CENTER ON THE PRESS, POLITICSAND PUBLIC POLICY] Toxic Mercury From Coal Plants Unregulated 2008 (TC)http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1062/

The Bush Administrations regulatory approach to toxic mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants wasstruck down by a federal court that concluded the government flouted health law in a manner reminiscent ofAlice in Wonderland. The National Academies National Research Council has found that some 60,000newborns a year are at risk for neurological problems such as impaired motor function due to mercurythelargest source of which is coal-fired power plants. The Food and Drug Administration urges pregnant women tolimit fish intake due to widespread contamination with mercury that made its way into the food chain. In its waningdays, the Clinton administration listed mercury as a toxic substance subject to strict regulation as a health threat, but

the Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA), under President Bush, proposed a rule to reclassify mercury from coal-fired plants under adifferent section of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPAs rule would have set an overall limit on mercury, while giving coal plants flexibility tomeet the goal or purchase emissions rights from other plantsknown as a cap-and-trade program. The EPA said it would have cut the mercury being released inthe air by 70 percent by 2018 an improvement, but less strenuous than the 90 percent reduction by 2008 that was hoped for under the Clinton administrationdetermination. In issuing the new rule and reclassifying coal plant mercury, the EPA used language lifted in some cases verbatim from utility industry law andlobby firm Latham & Watkins, as well as West Associates, a research and advocacy group. It was subsequently revealed that the EPAs own air policy administratorwas unaware of the private firms involvement, and that insertion of the language had actually been pushed by the White House Office of Management and Budget

and the Department of Energy. Critics, including the EPAs own Childrens Health Protection Advisory Committee, said theplan could help create hot spots around power plants that would disproportionately hurt communities living inthe shadow of smokestacks, because mercury emissions do not disperse evenly. Allowing dirtier power plants to purchaseadditional pollution credits would add to that burden. EPAs own inspector general found that the agencys approach wascompromised.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/948/http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1062/http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/948/http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1062/


17/27


EPA ignores experts on air quality standards

Center for Public Integrity [nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-advocacy, organization which produces originalinvestigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent andaccountable. The Center for Public Integrity has won numerous awards including: THE KNIGHT-BATTENAWARDS FOR INNOVATIONS IN JOURNALISM, SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS,INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, SOCIETYOF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS, and THE JOAN SHORENSTEIN CENTER ON THE PRESS, POLITICS

AND PUBLIC POLICY] 2007 EPA Ignores Advisers on Particulate Matter Standards (TC)http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1005/

The fine particle pollution that blasts into the air from diesel vehicles and power plants is a health threat well-understood by scientists causing an estimated 20,000 deaths a year and hospitalizing many more in theUnited States. But faced with this issue, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the first time inthree decades ignored the advice of its Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) on air qualitystandards. Agency administrator Stephen L. Johnson said his 2006 ruling on National Ambient Air Quality Standards for fine particulate matter was based on the

best available science, as required by the Clean Air Act. But it wasnt clear what science he was referring to. The CASACs disagreements with the parent agency wereechoed by the American Medical Association, American Thoracic Society, American Lung Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Heart Association,American Cancer Society, and American Public Health Association. EPA did issue a rule requiring that daily exposure levels to fine particulate matter be cut nearly in

half by single or multi-county areas, to fit just within the revised window recommended by CASAC. But when the committee also recommended

toughening the annual air standard for fine particulate matter, EPA disregarded the request. CASAC said thatmaintaining the current annual standard does not provide an adequate margin of safety The Union ofConcerned Scientists cites more than 2,000 peer-reviewed studies published since particulate matter standardswere last set in 1997 linking fine particle solution to strokes, heart disease, respiratory ailments, and prematuredeath. The EPA press office did not respond to a request for comment, but its fact sheet said the agency selected levels for the final standards after completing anextensive review of thousands of scientific studies, and also carefully reviewed and considered public comment.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1005/http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/case_studies_and_evidence/epa-air-pollution-decision.htmlhttp://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/case_studies_and_evidence/epa-air-pollution-decision.htmlhttp://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/case_studies_and_evidence/epa-air-pollution-decision.htmlhttp://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/case_studies_and_evidence/epa-air-pollution-decision.htmlhttp://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1005/http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/case_studies_and_evidence/epa-air-pollution-decision.htmlhttp://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/case_studies_and_evidence/epa-air-pollution-decision.html


18/27


19/27


EPA's own board disagrees with it's decision not to set safety standards on dangerous perchlorate

Center for Public Integrity [nonprofit, non-partisan, and non-advocacy, organization which produces originalinvestigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent andaccountable. The Center for Public Integrity has won numerous awards including: THE KNIGHT-BATTENAWARDS FOR INNOVATIONS IN JOURNALISM, SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS,INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND EDITORS, SOCIETYOF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS, and THE JOAN SHORENSTEIN CENTER ON THE PRESS, POLITICSAND PUBLIC POLICY] EPA Stalls on Perchlorate Regulation 2008 (TC)

http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1053/

The Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) own science advisory board has joined a host of criticsquestioning the agencys decision not to set a drinking water standard for perchlorate, a rocket fuel ingredientthat can hinder brain development. Perchlorate has shown up in more than 150 drinking water systems in 35states, and the EPA has wrestled with what to do about it for years. Critics charge that the agency has beenreluctant to act because the pollutant is released by the politically influential aerospace industry and Departmentof Defense. In 2002, EPA scientists found that perchlorate posed a danger to human health at concentrationsgreater than one part per billion (ppb), but the agency told staff members not to talk about the issue, pendingfurther study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). An NAS panel reported in 2005 that it could notfind a conclusive link between perchlorate and health hazards, but the panel acknowledged that there had been

no research examining the relationship between perchlorate exposure and highly vulnerable populations such aspregnant women and their babies. In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) published a study findingthat perchlorate exposure endangers fetal brain development in one-third of pregnant American women at levelsof 7 ppb. But the EPA announced in October 2008 that it would set no safety standard for perchlorate, arguingthat a new regulation would not present a meaningful opportunity for reducing health risks. The agencys ownadvisory board disagreed: Given perchlorates wide occurrence and well-documented toxicity to humans, the[Science Advisory Board] strongly believes that there must be a compelling scientific basis to support ascientific determination not to regulate perchlorate as a national drinking water contaminant, the board chairwrote. In response to the criticisms, an EPA official stated that the agency is committed to sound science andtransparency in decision making.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1053/http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/broken_government/articles/entry/1053/


20/27


DOD

The nation's worst polluter is the department of defense and it will not comply with the EPA

OMB Watch [OMB Watch, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization, was formed in 1983 to lift the veilof secrecy shrouding the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB oversees federalregulation, the budget, information collection and dissemination, proposed legislation, testimony by agencies,and much more.] Pentagon Refuses EPA's Pollution Cleanup Orders July 8, 2008 (TC)

http://www.ombwatch.org/node/3730

The nation's worst polluter, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), is refusing to sign enforcement agreementswith the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that require DOD to clean up polluted sites nationwide.The military bases covered by EPA's enforcement orders may endanger public drinking water supplies as aresult of the military dumping toxic pollutants at the sites. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), EPA can order

polluted facilities to be cleaned up and may back up the orders with court actions and daily fines. Both private and government property are subject to the act. Whendirected at government agencies, EPA's orders cannot become final until it confers with the targeted agencies to discuss timetables and plans for remedying the polluted

facilities. These meetings generally lead to enforcement agreements under which sites are remediated. According to a June 30 Washington Post article, DOD hasrefused to sign 12 required agreements that would cover facilities listed under the National Priorities List, betterknown as the Superfund list. Some of the chemicals dumped at the sites may cause cancer and can seep intodrinking water supplies and aquifers, one of EPA's major concerns.
http://www.ombwatch.org/node/3730http://www.ombwatch.org/node/3730http://www.ombwatch.org/node/3730


21/27


Third World Ignored

Americans need to shed their doomsday views on pollution and help the developing world


One reason Americans and Europeans need to shed the instant-doomsday misperception of their ownenvironment is so that they can turn their attention to the genuine environmental troubles of the developingworld. Americans and Europeans won't support environmental aid to the developing world if they falselybelieve their own air and water imperiled. But both citizenries are generous and might back internationalenvironmental initiatives if they understood, first, that their own environments are being protected and, second,the degree of human suffering caused by ecological problems in the impoverished world.

Environmental lobbyists play down dangers in third world for money


Western environmental lobbyists tend to downplay developing-world issues, both for fundraisingreasonspeople scared about their backyards are more likely to donateand because what's needed by thepoor who heat with indoor fires is clean electricity, while what's needed by the poor who buy water by the literis central reservoir and purification systems. Western environmentalists who would never dream of goingwithout unlimited electricity and clean water condemn such big infrastructure systems as "inappropriate" for thedeveloping world, fulminating about the evils of power generation and dams. Few views are more detachedfrom the reality of human needs.

Western polluting industrial nations are pristine compared to poor nations

Gregg Easterbrook, Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institute 2000-08) Environmental Doomsday: Bad newsgood, good news badThe Brookings Institution 2002 (TC)

http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspxThe favorable environmental trends in the West do not extend to the developing world. Increasingly the UnitedStates and the European Union approach pristine, while the impoverished parts of the world grow morepolluted.

Poverty causes more pollution and death than man made industrial pollution

Roy Spence PhD Meteorology University of Wisconsin, Former Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASAPrincipal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. Climate Confusion: How GlobalWarming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies That Hurt the Poor.Encounter Books. 2008 (TC)

Lack of wealth generation in poor countries is actually a greater risk to the environment than is man madepollution. Poor countries that have only wood and animal dung available as fuel to heat an cook with end updenuding the land. For instance from satellite photographs you can vividly see the international boundarybetween Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Haiti is extremely poor, and most of the trees have been cut downfor fuel. As a result of burning all the wood and ding in homes and huts over one million of the world's poor dieeach year from respiratory illnesses.
http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspxhttp://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_energy_easterbrook.aspx


22/27


1000 children die a day because of polluted waters in India

Economist Published by The Economist. "Up to their necks in it" Published July 17, 2008; accessed August 29,2008 [Lexis Nexis] (TC)

Most Indian rivers, from which millions of Indians draw their water, are horribly polluted. Unsurprisingly, then,despite much progress in related areas, such as availability of safe drinking-water, an estimated 1,000 Indianchildren die of diarrhoeal sickness every day."

2 million Indians die each year from air pollutionCNN, Reuters, Associated Press report Published by CNN/World. "'Asian Brown Cloud' poses global threat"Published August 1, 2002; accessed September 28, 2008 (TC)http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?related

"Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen -- one of the first scientists to identify the causes of the hole in the ozone layer andalso involved in the U.N. report -- said up to two million people in India alone were dying each year fromatmospheric pollution."

India/South East Aisa pollution could kill millions

CNN, Reuters, Associated Press report Published by CNN/World. "'Asian Brown Cloud' poses global threat"

Published August 1, 2002; accessed September 28, 2008 (TC)http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?related

"A dense blanket of pollution, dubbed the "Asian Brown Cloud," is hovering over South Asia, with scientistswarning it could kill millions of people in the region, and pose a global threat. In the biggest-ever study of thephenomenon, 200 scientists warned that the cloud, estimated to be two miles (three kilometers) thick, isresponsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths a year from respiratory disease"

Indian pollution can travel around globe and has caused droughts, flooding, + cut sunlight by 15%

CNN, Reuters, Associated Press report Published by CNN/World. "'Asian Brown Cloud' poses global threat"Published August 1, 2002; accessed September 28, 2008 (TC)

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?related

"There are also global implications, not least because a pollution parcel like this, which stretches threekilometers high, can travel half way round the globe in a week, " U.N. Environment Program chief KlausToepfer told a news conference in London on Sunday. The potent haze lying over the entire Indian subcontinent-- from Sri Lanka to Afghanistan -- has led to some erratic weather, sparking flooding in Bangladesh, Nepal andnortheastern India, but drought in Pakistan and northwestern India.""By slashing the sunlight that reaches the ground by 10 to 15 percent, the choking smog has also altered theregion's climate, cooling the ground while heating the atmosphere, scientists said"

Results of Indian pollution

CNN, Reuters, Associated Press report Published by CNN/World. "'Asian Brown Cloud' poses global threat"Published August 1, 2002; accessed September 28, 2008 (TC)http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?related "They discovered not only that the smog cut sunlight, heating the atmosphere, but also that it created acid rain, aserious threat to crops and trees, as well as contaminating oceans and hurting agriculture."It was much larger than we thought," said Mitra. The report suggested the pollution could be cutting India'swinter rice harvest by as much as 10 percent. The report calculated that the cloud -- 80 percent of which wasmade by people -- could cut rainfall over northwest Pakistan, Afghanistan, western China and western centralAsia by up to 40 percent."
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?relatedhttp://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/16/green.century.asia.haze/index.html?related


23/27


DDTEnvironmental hype can result in millions of deaths: DDT


Media hype over the global warming issue might sell magazines and increase viewership, but it has the powerto kill people.. Anytime we divert wealth to misguided policies because of public sentiment based uponmisinformation, that wealth is no longer available to address more important problems. The most infamousexample of the unintended negative consequences of environmental policies based upon exaggerated fears isDDT, a relatively safe and very effective pesticide used to stop the spread of malaria by mosquitoes. Knee jerkreactionary bans on DDT by many countries are directly responsible for up to one million malaria death inAfrica each year.

Case in Point: Misguided DDT regulations kill millions


The world's poor are already dying by the millions because of misguided environmental policies. Europeancountries have threatened trade restrictions on African countries if they use DDT, a relatively safe andextremely effective pesticide that develop countries have already used to conquer malaria. As a result of thisban, nearly one million Africans die each year from malaria. Many more are permanently disabled. Forcing theenvironmental policies of wealthy countries on the poor countries has caused, and continues to cause, death andsuffering.


24/27


Invasive Species

Invasive species are imported legally under US law

ROBERT BROWN [J.D. Candidate, 2006, Indiana University School of LawBloomington; B.S., 2002,Purdue University] Exotic Pets Invade United States Ecosystems: Legislative Failure and a ProposedSolution Indiana Law Journal 2006 (TC) http://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v81/no2/6_Brown.pdf

Most of the invasive species in southern Florida, such as the Burmese python and the Nile monitor lizard, arebelieved to be brought in legally through federal wildlife import permits.44 Pet dealers sell hundreds ofthousands of imported exotic animals at giant exotic reptile shows around the United States.45 The AmericanPet Products Manufacturers Association (APPMA) reported that American consumers spent $1.6 billion on liveanimal purchases in 2004, while eleven million reptiles are currently owned as pets.46 The booming trade inexotic animals as pets has opened the floodgates for invasive species coming into the United States, with theMiami International Airport receiving approximately seventy foreign shipments per day,47 some containingthousands of animals.48

Exotic Pets industry has lobbied extensively to keep importing foreign species and Congress has failed to

act


Powerful pet-trade industry groups do not want the government to force stringent requirements and controlsonto the industry. With total U.S. pet industry expenditures reaching $34.4 billion in 2004,52 groups such as theAPPMA, the Pet Industry Distributors Association (PIDA), and the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) wield enormous lobbying power. ThePIJAC is the industrys advocate with respect to governmental legislation and regulations that affect the survival of the pet industry, screening more thanten thousand federal, state, and local initiatives per year.53 Thus, the pet-trade industry is able to imposesignificant opposition to any type of regulation that would interfere with its ability to freely trade exotic pets.Congress has not effectively dealt with the problem of the importation and ownership of exotic animals. While

certain federal regulations may solve specific environmental issues, most fall substantially short of properlyregulating the exotic pet trade industry.

Invasive species pose number one environmental threat to America


Sneaky, slithery invaders have attacked southern Florida. The perpetrators are not drug lords, terrorists, or angryretirees; instead, the intruders are giant snakes. The Burmese python is one of thousands of non-native speciesthat has invaded the United States in the last several decades.1 These invasive creatures, which rank among the

worlds largest snakes, have overrun the Florida Everglades.2 According to the director of the United StatesFish and Wildlife Service, invasive species pose the number one environmental threat to the United States.3
http://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v81/no2/6_Brown.pdfhttp://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v81/no2/6_Brown.pdfhttp://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v81/no2/6_Brown.pdfhttp://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v81/no2/6_Brown.pdfhttp://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v81/no2/6_Brown.pdfhttp://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v81/no2/6_Brown.pdf


25/27


Case in Point: US allows importation of Burmese Python which is overrunning Florida

ROBERT BROWN [J.D

Documents

US Environmental Policy Fails