Religion & Law

A Question for MOJ Republicans

By Michael Perry

Is there a way to understand this story such that what the the Bush Administration has done seems genuinely defensible?

New York Times
February 16, 2008

Feds Nip State Efforts to Slash Mercury

WASHINGTON (AP) -- While arguing in court that states are free to enact tougher mercury controls from power plants, the Bush administration pressured dozens of states to accept a scheme that would let some plants evade cleaning up their pollution, government documents show.

A week ago, a federal appeals court struck down that industry-friendly approach for mercury reduction. It allowed plants with excessive smokestack emissions to buy pollution rights from other plants that foul the air less.

Internal Environmental Protection Agency documents and e-mails, obtained by the advocacy group Environmental Defense, show attempts over the past two years to blunt state efforts to make their plants drastically reduce mercury pollution instead of trading for credits that would let them continue it.

An EPA official said the agency's job ''is not to pressure states.''

The federal plan capped overall mercury releases from power plants nationwide. But it allowed plants to avoid reductions by purchasing emission credits. Critics have said that creates ''hot spots'' of mercury releases harmful to communities.

Many states did not want their power plants to be able to buy their way out of having to reduce mercury pollution.

A neurotoxin linked to learning disabilities, mercury is most dangerous to fetuses, infants and small children, usually when pregnant women or children eat mercury contaminated fish. The National Academy of Sciences estimates that 60,000 newborns a year could be at risk of learning disabilities because of mercury their mothers absorbed during pregnancy.

''There was an extraordinary degree of aggressiveness by EPA in pressing states to abandon a more protective mercury program. EPA devoted enormous effort to preventing states from doing more,'' said Vickie Patton, a lawyer for Environmental Defense. The group obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act filing.

The push to rein in uncooperative states continued until the eve of the Feb. 8 appeals court decision that struck down the EPA's program. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the agency did not adequately address the health impact of its plan.

The administration was poised to take even tougher measures against maverick states. A day before the ruling, the White House Office of Management and Budget approved a draft regulation to impose a ''federal implementation plan'' for mercury reduction in states whose mercury control measures did not meet EPA approval.

It would have required power plants to comply with the national cap-and-trade provisions, even it that meant ignoring state restrictions.

Both the emissions trading approach and any further requirement on states have been put on hold after the court ruling, EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar.

[Read the rest, here.]

Full post as published by Mirror of Justice on February 16, 2008 (boomark / email).