Breaking: Obama asks EPA to withdraw proposed ozone rule

President Barack Obama has asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the agency’s proposed toughened ozone standards, citing “the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover.” The President’s statement and EPA’s are below.

These are rules that would provide no health benefits but cost $1 trillion per year in compliance and kill 7.4 million jobs by 2020.

So this is a hugely important victory for American workers and the economy, as well as those of us who have been fighting the EPA’s proposed ozone standards.

In a separate statement, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson says the agency will “revisit” the ozone standard. But that won’t occur until at least 2013 — when, with any luck, she will be able to revisit it from an unemployment line.

President Obama’s statement:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release September 02, 2011
Statement by the President on the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Over the last two and half years, my administration, under the leadership of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, has taken some of the strongest actions since the enactment of the Clean Air Act four decades ago to protect our environment and the health of our families from air pollution. From reducing mercury and other toxic air pollution from outdated power plants to doubling the fuel efficiency of our cars and trucks, the historic steps we’ve taken will save tens of thousands of lives each year, remove over a billion tons of pollution from our air, and produce hundreds of billions of dollars in benefits for the American people.

At the same time, I have continued to underscore the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover. With that in mind, and after careful consideration, I have requested that Administrator Jackson withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time. Work is already underway to update a 2006 review of the science that will result in the reconsideration of the ozone standard in 2013. Ultimately, I did not support asking state and local governments to begin implementing a new standard that will soon be reconsidered.

I want to be clear: my commitment and the commitment of my administration to protecting public health and the environment is unwavering. I will continue to stand with the hardworking men and women at the EPA as they strive every day to hold polluters accountable and protect our families from harmful pollution. And my administration will continue to vigorously oppose efforts to weaken EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act or dismantle the progress we have made.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s statement:

Statement by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Since day one, under President Obama’s leadership, EPA has worked to ensure health protections for the American people, and has made tremendous progress to ensure that Clean Air Act standards protect all Americans by reducing our exposures to harmful air pollution like mercury, arsenic and carbon dioxide. This Administration has put in place some of the most important standards and safeguards for clean air in U.S. history: the most significant reduction of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide air pollution across state borders; a long-overdue proposal to finally cut mercury pollution from power plants; and the first-ever carbon pollution standards for cars and trucks. We will revisit the ozone standard, in compliance with the Clean Air Act.

32 thoughts on “Breaking: Obama asks EPA to withdraw proposed ozone rule”

  1. The catch is that he really wants another 4 years and knows damn well he wont get it if he continues to kill jobs. Give him 4 more years and this will be resurrected right after election.

  2. So he asked her not do to something she hasn’t done yet, but could in the future (2013) if he got re-elected. This is not serious.

  3. “From reducing mercury and other toxic air pollution from outdated power plants to doubling the fuel efficiency of our cars and trucks”

    Translation: We’re still going to shut down a bunch of power plants based on our spurious air pollution claims, and no backing down from ridiculous laws that can only go into effect if cars and trucks aren’t made as well, and thus cause more death and injury if they are in accidents.

    “withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time. Work is already underway to update a 2006 review of the science that will result in the reconsideration of the ozone standard in 2013.”

    Translation: We’ll take this unpopular rule and shelve it until after the election is over, and besides ozone is not as big an issue as it used to be.

    “I will continue to stand with the hardworking men and women at the EPA as they strive every day to hold polluters accountable and protect our families from harmful pollution.”

    Translation: The EPA will still be allowed to shut down American business through their random edicts, and harmful pollution still includes carbon dioxide.

    “And my administration will continue to vigorously oppose efforts to weaken EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act or dismantle the progress we have made.”

    Translation: Don’t even think about trying to tie the hands of people who are not accountable to America or Americans, and who are basically passing laws that do not have to be discussed or voted on.

  4. What interests me most is that he can order the EPA to do his bidding. Just how powerful is this guy? Is the Constitutional limiting of power being laughed at here?

  5. Yep. Must be getting close to election time. Many unions have been on his back about job-killing regulations issued by the EPA, including the United Mine Workers. Of course they don’t care what the regulations would cost the consumer.

  6. The catch is: It’s disingenuous. He is only trying to appear to be pro-business (aka pro-jobs). If he somehow gets re-elected, he will just revert back to his anti-business, anti-jobs policies.

  7. EPA is part of the President’s cabinet. He can tell Jackson to do whatever. That is, until Sierra Club/Green Peace/NRDC sue Jackson for inaction.

  8. EPA shenanigans will not cease until health thresholds are established, or at least approved, by Congress before a rule can be promulgated. It is high time for Senator Inhofe and other realist environmentally minded Congressman form a bipartisan committee to appoint experts on both sides of an issue to review peer-reviewed studies (I nominate Steve Milloy as the first expert) and debate publicly. This BS process of EPA developing new health threshold levels in a corner is definitely stacked in EPA’s favor. Who the hell has time to comment on the myriad rules coming out of EPA anyway? I work as an air quality consultant and I cannot keep up with the Obama regulatory blitzkrieg. The Endangerment Finding was nothing more than a rubber stamping of a now seriously and embarrassingly flawed U.N. IPCC AR. The public comment period for this move was a complete sham (and very strangely expedited I might add). Congress should demand it be reopened and include scientific and policy testimony from Milloy, Lindzen, Spencer, Morano, etal. And if EPA continues to disallow a reopening of the Endangerment Finding, then Congress needs to revisit the CAA and clearly state that EPA does not have the authority to regulate GHGs under PSD and NSPS. Hopefully we will have a one party House and Senate after 2012.

  9. If Obama wins, Lisa Jackson and the EPA will be unleashed. This is not a change of direction. It is merely tactical to help Obama win.

  10. Slick Trick ! Obama is simply practicing Saul Alinsky’s rules for radicals .
    Rule #13 .
    I might ad where he worked for 4 years in Chicago as a street Agitator .
    As of Monday Obama handed Congress 4,212 new Business regulations .
    The Farming regulations Numbers are huge as well .

  11. You’d think the government could also claim responsibility for air pollution crossing national boundaries, too. We could always declare war on China for all their coal power plants, Mexico for their sulfur dioxide from around Mexico City. Then again Canada might have a strong case against the U.S.

  12. The president has a little over a year to get the economy, or people’s perception of it, heading strongly upwards, or he can kiss re-election goodbye. This is a starting move. All politics and no conviction.

  13. Your Obama = Our Brown/Blair SOBs.

    We booted our pinko statists out. Let’s hope for the sake of the whole world the US does the same next year to your lot.

  14. Jonathan Spencer: Now that we’ve booted our pinko statists out, who is going to keep on ranting that Obama has no control over the EPA and that the EPA is only just now putting into force rules planned since the Bush era?

  15. Steve Milloy was asked about other government agencies that impose similar business killing regulations and the MMS and some other minor agencies were mentioned. CARB and the LCFS was not raised. Steve, get on it, its a job and business killer that is based on total BS.

  16. There is a contingent of the environmental activists and the PETA crowd that want to ban beef (all meat, actually), and even milk.

  17. Teleprompter alert!

    There is only a request and a promise to revisit, not exactly concrete. I am an amature student of rhetoric and I can say that these are meaningless words. Did either of these turds state:”We will end these regulations”? No, they will revisit ….. This process will take them past 2012 …. If Obuma is reelected, his minions will be at it again..

  18. On first read, I think .. oh well better than nothing.. second time it sounds like a warning/threat. as in I’ll let this one slide but beware….
    The sad thing is that however clear the insincerity of this statement is to those who post here, most people accept what they read without thinking. Transparent ploys like this could actually work and put him in the white house for another four years (shudder).

    In the interests of both lowering the deficit and giving Americans the freedom we are constitutionally promised. the EPA would at the top of y list for elimination. But hell, who asks me!

  19. Who can afford the new cars and trucks? Where are the billions that this is saving us? I’d like some of that now, please. No, Mr. President, do not revisit in 2013. There is no need to do that. Even I, clueless as I can be, can see that this is a carrot, an appeasement. Can’t he put a stop to all these regulations for a while?

Comments are closed.