A copy of the LETTER that President Obama asked Sunstein to send to the EPA

[Tx4obama]

http://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/USEOPWHPO/2011/09/02/file_attachments/56091/Letter.pdf

The letter on the above link explains WHY President Obama had the rule sent back to the EPA for reconsideration.


Edited to fix typo.

[Rex]

1. Long story short...he is worried more about money then the

environment. For those that don't want to read all the details.

[Tx4obama]

2. That is NOT true. If you had read the letter you'd know the TRUTH. n/t

[Rex]

3. That is the truth, sorry if you cannot see it for what it is.

Let us wait and see what other posters think.

[Ineeda]

7. Okay then. I agree with Tx.

Because I read the letter and I don't have a comprehension problem.

[Rex]

8. So then what is the gist of the letter?

Since you get it, please summarize what you know now after reading it.

[FLAprogressive]

16. +1

[Rex]

21. *Crickets*

Pretty sad ain't it!?

[Creideiki]

45. The new standards would be bad because of "uncertainty".

So it's about money.

[Angry Dragon]

4. In your opinion what is the truth contained within the letter??

[FLAprogressive]

6. "Obama is right. As always."

Bet on it.

[Rex]

9. *Crickets*

Chirp.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tx4obama]

53. The word "uncertainty" comes from an executive order that is being followed.

Excerpt from the letter, point #1

Executive Order 13563 state that our regulatory system "must promote predictability and reduce uncertainty" ...

SNIP


p.s. I appreciate the fact the President tries to follow rules and laws - unlike Bush.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FLAprogressive]

5. All I see is a bunch of lame excuses....

[xxqqqzme]

19. Agree.

Why not put it off until 2030? We will have even better scientific knowledge for reconsideration then. Oh wait, just wait until 2100. Do it once a century, no reason to be more vigilant than that.

Lame? You better believe it!

[Better Believe It]

10. Or you can read what President Obama actually said in his official statement.

President Obama's Full Statement:

"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."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/02/statement-president-ozone-national-ambient-air-quality-standards

Bold is my emphasis. BBI

[Rex]

13. In short money trumps environment.

No surprise here.

[Tx4obama]

17. The bolded part in your comment is EXPLAINED in the LETTER.

Read the LETTER - I am assuming you haven't yet.

The 'Act' states that any changes can NOT bring about regulatory uncertainty.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. Because science and reviews are ongoing, we should not take a stand

Marvelous.

By the way, not implementing this rule will kill many jobs, per Krugman.

[dkf]

12. Changing the rules every other year is ridiculous. Thank goodness Obama has enough brains to see

This would drive people crazy.

[Tx4obama]

20. Thank goodness you have enough brains to understand that :)

I wish EVERYONE would read the letter instead of jumping to false conclusions due to media headlines.

[Rex]

25. You must live in some fantasy world

because people are reacting to the LETTER. Are you really that blind in your own thread? :eyes:

[girl gone mad]

39. She also wants to end Social Security..

and thinks our economy is bad because the government spends too much.

Birds of a feather flock together.. furiously flapping their right wings..

[Tx4obama]

43. Who/what are you talking about? n/t

[Mr Deltoid]

14. It states that Obama does not trust regulations

He uses the GOP 'uncertainty' meme to defend it.

[Rex]

15. Some pretty bad weasel words in that 'letter'.

IMO.

[Tx4obama]

18. It does NOT. n/t

[CakeGrrl]

22. Instead of having this roundly ignored in the blogosphere

...because the passengers on the "Corrupt/Manchurian/Stealth Republican/Worse than Bush" train are not ABOUT to disembark, send it to the Professional Lefties like Olbermann, Benen, Maddow, etc. and see if they'll give this honest consideration - not that THEY can be trusted to do it either.

[Tx4obama]

35. I did.

I sent it to Maddow, Olbermann, CNN, MSNBC, ThinkProgrss, etc :)

[Fearless]

23. Pure contradictory bull shit and I will go over it point by point...

1. The president believes that people will be confused if regulations come out now instead of waiting until the next expected date of new regulations (2013)

I call this bull shit. People are not stupid. He is grasping at straws. There is no evidence to believe that people essentially can't handle new regulations now and again in two years. Its not two days apart... it's more like 700 days apart!

2. The Act requires that the newest available scientific data be used to determine how regulations are made. Therefore, we should wait until new data comes about before making new regulations.

I call this bull shit. The law requires the newEST data to be used. The newest data (from 2006) would be used now and in 2013 whatever is the newest data then will be used then. The data we have now is by definition the NEWEST data. That is the law. It would be followed. The idea that "it is not new enough" holds NO legal weight. The letter of the law has been followed by using the 2006 data.

3. "We've done enough already." (Quotes are my own for effect.)

I call mega bull shit on this. We're talking about levels HIGHER than the Bush Administration wanted. The Administration ADMITS that lowering pollution has saved lives AND has been good for the economy, yet STILL they don't want to do it THIS TIME.


------

In short, this is all bullshit. The administration's entire argument is based on logical fallacies. My best guess is the reason they're not strengthening pollution laws... corporations don't want them to. End of story.


Edit: SP.

[Rex]

27. No, no...you must have not read the LETTER!

:eyes:

[Fearless]

28. Damn I knew I forgot the in-text citiations!

:banghead:

[Rex]

32. LOL!

I am glad he posted the LETTER! I doubt he is.

[QC]

33. Will THE LETTER now join THE LIST in the canon of Holy Scripture?

All signs point to yes!

[markpkessinger]

46. LOL! Pefect! n/t

[Rex]

50. As long as it is all down in blue and hyperlinked to The Codex of Truth(tm)

Hello AT&T, we have a plan! A service plan!

[Tx4obama]

34. Obama is following the stipulations set forth in The Clean Air Act.

Sorry if you don't like it but that is the way it is.

[Fearless]

37. Nowhere does it say that regulations can't be reviewed at any time.

[Tx4obama]

38. Related point #1 in the letter covers that issue n/t

[Fearless]

42. His excuse is bull crap as I already mentioned.

There is no reason they can't do it now and again in 2013. People aren't going to be confused by it. People are not stupid.

[KT2000]

24. Some have taken this letter

literally and found room to agree - so be it.
Others have read this letter within a context: EPA was trying to improve upon the weak rules that the Bush administration left for us. That was stopped by Obama.

"Out-dated science" is a meaningless phrase that is used by industries and corporations to interject doubt no matter what the topic may be - tort claims, health effects, compensation etc. There will NEVER be science that is current enough or free of objections by industries.

That the rule was stopped because it was "interim" means that the damage done by Bush will not be fixed. Industries are pretty sure they will have a republican to deal with in 2013 so the rules will kept weak. Mission accomplished - industry got what they wanted. And Lisa Jackson was told to cool it.

You can choose to take the letter at face value but please do not criticize those who are looking at the bigger picture.

[Rex]

26. Or even worse, be insincere about them NOT reading the letter.

That's just sad on so many levels...

[dkf]

30. So will you be happier if they tighten it now and loosen it 2 years from now?

Then what is the point? They will probably give them years to implement it anyway.

[KT2000]

36. there is a huge

new industry opening up across this country - biofuel incinerators. They are being planned and built right now. Industry has managed to forestall the new regulations that would have forced them to build cleaner plants. They are allowed to build dirtier plants because of actions like this and others that have taken place in the recent past. Then, they will likely be grandfathered in, if and when new regs take effect.
This results in true health costs - financial as well as physical. More asthma is just one problem.

No - this was not a wise decision on Obama's part. It is a lost opportunity that will result in real damage to real people.

[dkf]

47. Or if the regulations are added they will stop building the plants until they can get

The regulations they desire since you think it is highly possible Obama will lose.

[KT2000]

48. No - these are being

built with federal grants. They can't just wait.

[Fumesucker]

29. Clearly, once the science is finished then we can make regulations..

It's a good thing that science is something that makes adamantine conclusions that are never changed..

[Rex]

31. I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today!

[FLAprogressive]

40. JUST READ THE GODDAMN LETTER.

:crazy:

[Fumesucker]

41. I think you forgot these.... !!!11!one!!1!1!!!1

:evilgrin:

[Octafish]

49. Sunstein is the guy who wants to "cognitively infiltrate' conspiracy theorists.

Obama Confidant's Spine-Chilling Proposal

Nice. And Sunstein's slated for a spot on the Supreme Court.

[Rex]

51. No. Fucking. Way.

:banghead:

[Historic NY]

52. So it doesn't have to be done until 2013....okay....

sounds like someone wanted to stir the shitpot.