"The Environmental Protection Agency is out of control, with no sense of accountability or responsibility to the American people."
"On June 25, 1997, President Bill Clinton circumvented a long-established White House regulatory review process by endorsing a controversial Environmental Protection Agency proposal that would tighten the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for the allowable levels of particulate matter and ozone," reports Angela Antonelli of the Heritage Foundation. "Since 1981," she explains, "Presidents have used executive orders to require that rules -- especially economically significant rules -- are reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)."
Antonelli points out that President Clinton made his announcement before the EPA's final rule was submitted to the OMB "as required by the President's own Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review. By ignoring his own requirement," she contends, "the President made clear his philosophy of the 'primacy of federal agencies in the regulatory decision-making process.' In the case of these new EPA standards for particulate matter and ozone, this means that the actions and policies of unelected federal regulators, even when highly questionable, can go unchallenged and unchecked."
That's bad enough. "Perhaps more disturbing is the fact that the administration would allow the power of the EPA to grow even more dramatically," says Antonelli. "As this regulatory leviathan continues to grow," she warns, "states and localities face increasingly onerous constraints on their constitutional freedom to determine for themselves what is best for their communities."
Ironically, the new standards may actually worsen air quality. "The White House apparently is willing to give the green light to ideological environmental groups and Carol Browner's EPA even when their activities might increase pollution," says Antonelli. She notes that even the EPA concedes "that changing direction in the middle of the implementation of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments may delay or impede efforts now under way to assure reasonable further progress in attaining air quality standards."
Antonelli charges that, "in deference to 17,000 EPA bureaucrats intent on expanding their budget and authority well into the 21st century, as well as a few well-financed environmental special interests, the President has ignored the concerns of an EPA science advisory committee, millions of Americans, state and local officials, and Congress." It is now up to Congress, she says, "to prevent the new EPA standards from taking effect."
Antonelli argues that the new clean-air standards lack scientific justification, will cost considerably more to implement than estimated, will have a deleterious effect on small businesses, and may endanger lives. "The EPA claims that the new standards will produce major health improvements for millions of Americans," notes Antonelli. "The reality is that they will impose real costs on Americans while their benefits remain at best uncertain."
It's time to shout, Whoa! "The EPA's actions on the particulate matter and ozone standards starkly illustrate how federal regulatory agencies operate," Antonelli observes. "Congress needs to impose discipline," she says, "and halt these new standards."
