This Emissions Law Is Just Too Confusing

Dennis McLerran, head of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency is "pissed." Governor Schwarzenegger is suing federal regulators. According to more than 500 news articles, The Environmental Protection Agency denied California’s bill to place limitations on vehicle emissions, which would have cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 30 percent in the next 10 years. McLerran claims in a Seattle Times article the EPA’s decision is purely political, not factual.

Washington was one of the 18 states that supported California’s petition. Killing the bill lessens Washington and many other state’s chances at following California in an aggressive attempt to protect our environment. This is the first bill in the 37-year history of California’s Clean Air Act to be vetoed by the federal government.

EPA administrator, Stephen Johnson, said President Bush’s renewable-fuel energy law signed into law Wednesday is just better and easier to understand. Well, that last part may be our words. Here is what Johnson really said.

The higher fuel-economy standards and increased renewable-fuel requirements in the energy bill President Bush signed into law Wednesday will do more to address global warming than imposing tailpipe rules in individual states. The Bush administration is moving forward with a clear national solution, not a confusing patchwork of state rules, to reduce America's climate footprint from vehicles.

Requiring stricter emission levels is just so darn hard to comprehend. We don’t want to be "confusing." God forbid. Normally, we can see both sides of a story. But with Johnson’s quote and several EPA lawyers and advisers on record stating that the EPA has no legal ground to overturn the petition, we suspect alternative motives.

Enough said: Against legal and political counsel, the EPA overturned a state-wide attempt to reduce global warming.