How many jobs will the EPA regulation rollbacks create? Inhoffe (et al) must be loving this.

[Stinky The Clown]

"We don't need no stinkin' EPA."

[TwilightGardener]

1. Can you explain what specifically was "rolled back"?

[CreekDog]

2. if nothing was rolled back, then how will it help the economy?

:shrug:

[TwilightGardener]

3. I'm waiting for someone to tell me exactly what was weakened within the EPA.

See--this is how memes get started. A proposal that isn't implemented becomes Obama ROLLING BACK already-instituted regulations. It's bullshit.

[Divernan]

4. Have you been hiding in a pardon-the-expression cave all day?

Check out lead stories in the New York Times, Huffington Post & on DU's home page.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/obama-halts-epa-regulation-smog-standards_n_94

OBAMA CAVES ON SMOG!

PRESIDENT HALTS EPA REGULATION UNDER PRESSURE FROM BUSINESS, GOP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Friday scrapped his administration's controversial plans to tighten smog rules, bowing to the demands of congressional Republicans and some business leaders.

Obama overruled the Environmental Protection Agency – and the unanimous opinion of its independent panel of scientific advisers – and directed administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the proposed regulation to reduce concentrations of ground-level ozone, smog's main ingredient. The decision rests in part on reducing regulatory burdens and uncertainty for businesses at a time of rampant uncertainty about an unsteady economy.

The withdrawal of the proposed regulation marks the latest in a string of retreats by Obama in the face of Republican opposition. Last December, he shelved, at least until the end of 2012, his insistence that Bush-era tax cuts should no longer apply to the wealthy. Earlier this year he avoided a government shutdown by agreeing to Republican demands for budget cuts. And this summer he acceded to more than a $1 trillion in spending reductions, with more to come, as the price for an agreement to raise the nation's debt ceiling.

Obama had initially set out to correct a weaker standard set by President George W. Bush. Jackson had said in July that the standard would not survive a legal challenge because it did not follow the recommendations of the agency's scientific advisers.

In March, the independent panel said in a letter to Jackson that it was unanimous in its recommendation to make the smog standard stronger and that the evidence was "sufficiently certain" that a range proposed in January 2010 under Obama would benefit public health. The White House, which has pledged to base decisions on science, said Friday that the science behind its initial decision needed to be updated, and a new standard would be issued in 2013.

[TwilightGardener]

5. See above. Nothing was weakened or rolled back.

Edit to add: Spin is spin. I deal in fact.

[Divernan]

6. You count coup on your List for future promises, doncha!?!?

Major industry groups had lobbied hard for the White House to abandon the smog regulation, and applauded Friday's decision.

The withdrawal of the proposed EPA rule comes three days after the White House identified seven such regulations that it said would cost private business at least $1 billion each. The proposed smog standard was estimated to cost anywhere between $19 billion and $90 billion, depending on how strict it would be.

But perhaps more than some of the other regulations under attack, the ground-level ozone standard is most closely associated with public health – something the president said he wouldn't compromise in his regulatory review. Ozone is the main ingredient in smog, which is a powerful lung irritant that occasionally forces cancellation of school recesses, and causes asthma and other lung ailments.

A stronger standard, while it would cost billions, would also save billions in avoided health care costs and hospital visits.

Fact: Specific proposals from the EPA, based on scientific findings, and (temporarily) endorsed by Obama.

Spin: Your incredibly weak attempt to defend Obama.

[Divernan]

7. Beep! Beep! Move out of the way. Obama's backing up again!

But perhaps more than some of the other regulations under attack, the ground-level ozone standard is most closely associated with public health – something the president said he wouldn't compromise in his regulatory review. Ozone is the main ingredient in smog, which is a powerful lung irritant that occasionally forces cancellation of school recesses, and causes asthma and other lung ailments.

Criticism from environmentalists, a core Obama constituency already battling him over a planned oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast, was swift following the White House announcement.

"The Obama administration is caving to big polluters at the expense of protecting the air we breathe," said Gene Karpinski, the president of the League of Conservation Voters. "This is a huge win for corporate polluters and huge loss for public health."


The American Lung Association, which sued the EPA over the Bush standard, said it would continue its legal fight now that Obama is essentially endorsing the weaker limit. The group had suspended its lawsuit after the Obama administration vowed to correct it.

___

[TwilightGardener]

8. He proposed a new rule--he didn't go through with it, for probably several reasons.

I guess it was his bad for making the proposal to begin with? Whomever is made happy by this halt to the proposal isn't that important to me right now. But regardless, that isn't the same as a "rollback" or a weakening of current law, and you know it and I know it.

[Divernan]

11. No I do not know it, and neither does the White House website

which touts all future improvements to the Clean Air, even those scheduled for 2020, as if they'd already been activated.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/02/cleaner-air-and-stronger-economy-record-success.

Obama wants credit for what he promises to do in the future, but when push comes to shove, he C-A-V-E-S.

You know it and I know it. Read the comments on the Huff Po coverage.

[TwilightGardener]

12. I give him credit for the proposal, I'm sorry he feels that now (two years in advance of

new standards) was not the time to push it. Beyond that, everything else is just whatever people want to make of it.

[Johonny]

10. so instead of forcing businesses to spend 1 billion

to make our air cleaner, they can give that billion on CEO pay checks. Jobs get created when spending occurs, how does not spending on clean air lose jobs?

[blkmusclmachine]

9. Depends on how many ppl. die early from this.

n/t