Opinion

Bush's Puppets

»

by: Bill Becker, Climate Progress

photo
According to Bill Becker of the Presidential Climate Action Project, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson has neglected his federal oath to "well and faithfully discharge the duties" of his office by repeatedly allowing the Bush White House to manipulate environmental decisions and undermine action necessary to address climate change. (Photo: Getty Images)

    EPA administrator Stephen Johnson neglects his federal oath.

    Some of us had high hopes for Stephen Johnson when President Bush appointed him in March 2005 as administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

    Johnson was not a former oil-industry lobbyist or Halliburton executive. He was a career civil servant who had been with the federal government for 24 years. He was a scientist, not a political hack, and he had served under both Democrat and Republican presidents.

    I could relate, although my federal career was the reverse of Johnson's.

    I started as a political appointee under President George H.W. Bush, then served the next 15 years as a careerist at the Department of Energy. During that time, I learned that there are a lot of good feds out there - people who work hard and take risks for what they believe is in the public's best interest. It requires backbone at times to resist improper political pressures and to carry out the oath of office that federal employees take, promising to "well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

    It now appears that Johnson is not fulfilling that oath. There's new evidence that he has allowed the White House to usurp his duty to enforce one of the nation's most important environmental laws, the Clean Air Act. Under the Act, it is the Administrator of EPA, not the president, who is the decider on enforcement issues. The president does not have the legal authority to dictate what those decisions will be.

    But that's not the way the game is played in this Administration. From time to time, we get a glimpse back stage to see that President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their deputies are pulling the strings in a show of raw petro-politics, the law and the contrary advice of experts notwithstanding.

    One such glimpse came this week from former EPA official Jason Burnett -- an admitted and unrepentant Democrat. Burnett told Congress that Johnson allowed the White House to overrule him on California's request for a waiver under the Clean Air Act. The waiver would have allowed the state to implement its own standards for greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, in excess of those set by the federal government.

    The Clean Air Act specifically allows California to be more aggressive than the federal government on matters like this, so long as the Administrator grants a waiver. Once California is given the go-ahead, other states are allowed to adopt its standards. Seventeen states indicated they would adopt the California standard for vehicle emissions once Johnson signed the waiver.

    Instead, Johnson denied the request in February 2008 after sitting on it for nearly three years, an unusual outcome given that EPA had approved all 50 of California's previous waiver applications over the last 40 years.

    The denial was Johnson's right under the law, assuming it was his decision and was based soundly on the criteria established by the Act. But Burnett says that Johnson originally intended to grant the waiver, believing it was justified until he was overruled by the White House.

    As Robert Sussman of the Center for American Progress has pointed out, this is not the first time that Johnson has pushed key environmental decisions into EPA's black hole or has overruled the recommendations of his former colleagues among the agency's scientists and professional staff. Sussman documents other decisions by Johnson that raise "disturbing questions about his ability to carry out the spirit and letter of the nation's environmental laws and his acquiescence in a White House political agenda seemingly bent on blocking the agency from taking action compelled by court decisions and long-standing Clean Air Act precedents."

    The most significant of these has been EPA and White House stalling tactics on climate action since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling last year that the agency has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. To trigger the regulatory process, all Johnson has to do is to declare that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare - an obvious conclusion based both on the Court's decision and on an overwhelming body of scientific evidence.

    Nevertheless, 16 months after the Supreme Court ruling, EPA announced earlier this month that it would not proceed with regulation while Bush is still in office.

    But back to the California waiver: Last January, Johnson told a congressional committee under oath that "I made the decision" to deny California's request. Burnett's latest testimony indicates otherwise. When a House subcommittee asked Johnson for the real story last May, he refused to talk about his conversations with the White House, claiming executive privilege.

    In case there has been any doubt, Burnett's testimony supports the case that public officials such as Johnson (along with the parade of other Administration officials who have recently declared executive privilege or acute amnesia) are merely puppets of the West Wing, even when Congress has delegated them direct responsibility to administer the law.

    And in case there has been any doubt, the plot of the puppet-show was made transparent by other Administration decisions in recent days. One lifted the ban imposed by Bush's father on offshore oil production. In another, just announced, the Department of Interior released draft rules to pave the way for oil shale production on public lands in the West. Congress has placed a moratorium on final oil-shale rules, but the moratorium is scheduled to expire on Oct. 1. Interior Secretary Dick Kempthorne is quoted as saying he'll move swiftly to make the rules final when the moratorium expires.

    Oil shale production would be a disaster of several dimensions. It is extremely energy and water intensive, and its use would be another major setback to the goal of reducing the nation's carbon emissions. Oil shale production would divert precious water from Western cities and farms, creating another fuel-or-food problem, and sink more money and time into another questionable carbon-intensive resource that will make meaningful climate action more difficult and expensive, if not impossible.

    There's no mystery here. The White House is blocking action on climate change while setting the stage for the oil industry to feed America's addiction to that carbon-intensive fuel for many years to come.

    With only six months left on stage, the puppet masters are hard at work. It's a disappointment that someone like Johnson, who has made public service his career, is allowing his integrity to be destroyed by a president who shows little regard for him, the nation's long-term welfare, or the law.

    --------

    Bill Becker is executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project, an initiative to help the next President of the United States take decisive action on global warming and energy security in his or her first 100 days in office.

»


IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live.

Mel Smith, we only wish it

Mel Smith, we only wish it were that plain - your statement implies that the leaders of Amerika are somehow innocent in this whole mess and they are most certainly not. They have been in on this for the last ten years if not more.

Sadly, I was prompted by

Sadly, I was prompted by mid-level EPA personel to modify my environmental instruction to American Indian Tribes concerning the petrochemical industry. He threarened my grant funding.

This administration removed

This administration removed all civil service protections from everyone serving under Homeland Security, which consolidated several federal agencies. Each employee can be fired without offering any reason for that action. High level military officers have accepted reductions of rank and/or "early retirement" when they disagreed with the fanciful wishes of the Executive Branch. I doubt Stephen Johnson rose to the level of EPA Administrator lacking ambition. He also had years of government service experience behind him which he would imperil by disagreeing with the Executive Branch. How heavy a burden is jeopardizing your retirement and professional reputation? Our federal government now rules using strong-arm tactics against its own.

These super-rich cretins --

These super-rich cretins -- when they finally succeed in wrecking the planet's environment, they will drink designer water, price no object. But what will they do for designer air to breathe? They are so damned greedy that they won't do anything to preserve the lives of their own kids and grandkids, etc. They are also so damned stupid that they think they can escape the effects of their greed. Maybe we need a new requirement for prospective presidents and veeps, a minimum IQ. I suggest a value of 50 -- that would be a significant improvement over the current pair.

I can't believe that so many

I can't believe that so many otherwise dedicated public servants and scientists dissolve into spineless goo at any conflict with this administration. Surely we are better than that? It seems to me much more likely that such cowardice is induced by a combination of pressures: threat of loss of livelihood, threat of punishment to themselves and their family, threat of exposure of whatever personal secret they might wish to hide, and threat of a campaign of invented rumor and ad hominem insinuation (swiftboating). The Bushies have exercised a take-no-prisoners and scorched-earth approach to leadership. The message is follow our wishes or we will make life so not worth living that you will pray for death. Those whom they cannot intimidate, they destroy (e.g., Plame). As all tyrants discover, to rule by blackmail and fear you must create a nation of the fearful and make all others vulnerable. A few well-placed examples, and you no longer need to enforce your wishes in every instance: the fearful and vulnerable will be eager to accommodate you, unasked. God help anyone gay, adulterous, addicted, or not independently wealthy who serves in this administration. Such a plan cannot have become so universally applied by accident. Somewhere, someone must have written it up or discussed it by e-mail. Anything less than an obviously smoking-gun e-mail will be dismissed as paranoid ravings of conspiracy fetishists. And the administration's response when the truth is pointed out? Milosevic, Bush, and all other tyrants know it: deny and suppress.

someone publish their street

someone publish their street addresses and office address so they can be invited to go fishing, for free

It's pretty obvious that

It's pretty obvious that Corporate America has the White House and all of Bush crony Dept heads by the balls and are running this country with complete disregard to the environment or the American public health It is profit generated Greed at full throttle and it will get worse in the next 6 months. The Empire strikes again!

It is a war against clean

It is a war against clean air and water. It is costing us trillions and our health. Who will win?

It is truly sad that

It is truly sad that scientists can sell their souls for so little. Johnson is one. Another is Seitz, a well-known solid-state physicist, President of the National Academy of Sciences - who in later life became the leader of a scientific disinformation campaign to discredit the connection between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. Later, he graduated to doing disinformation for the issue of global warming. How do these people look in the mirror?