You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
White House in climate change "cover up"
2008-07-09
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A leading U.S. Senate Democrat accused the Bush administration on Tuesday of a "cover-up" aimed at stopping the Environmental Protection Agency from tackling greenhouse emissions.

"This cover-up is being directed from the White House and the office of the vice president," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, the California Democrat who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

At issue is a preliminary finding by the EPA last December that "greenhouse gases may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public welfare," according to Jason Burnett, the agency's former associate deputy administrator who appeared at a news conference with Boxer.

Such a finding would be an early step toward government regulation aimed at protecting public health.

Boxer said that unless EPA documents were released, it was likely that within the next two weeks her committee would try to subpoena the material. She did not know whether Republicans on the panel would block the effort.

Burnett, who resigned on June 9, told Boxer's committee the White House tried pressuring him to retract an e-mail in which he detailed the finding. Burnett said he refused.

Democrats say that since then, the EPA finding has been left "in limbo."

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said many federal agencies, departments and offices normally review any initiatives being developed to check for "factual inaccuracies" or "discordant" policies.

Without getting into specifics, Fratto said "views are frequently discussed and worked out in ways that make sense."

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, asked about the administration's actions, said, "I don't know if that is criminal. I doubt it. OK. But I know it is immoral."

"The health of my grandchildren, my children and me are affected by this head-in-the-sand that global warming doesn't exist," Reid told reporters. Harry, get with it, the new buzzwords are 'Climate Change'. What about the baby ducks, kittens and fluffy bunnies?

Boxer acknowledged she wanted to gather information so that the next administration could get a jump on global warming initiatives quickly after it takes office on January 20, 2009. You too, Babs, it's Climate Change.

She has been trying since last October to obtain related documents to show that planned congressional testimony on global warming by Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was censored by the Bush administration.

Boxer said Gerberding's testimony would have detailed the direct impact of rising global temperatures on human health, including mortality and the spread of disease.

Burnett told the congressional committee the administration's Council on Environmental Quality "and the office of the vice president were seeking deletions to the CDC testimony." He refused to say who in Vice President Richard Cheney's office was involved.

Responding to Burnett's charges, Fratto said, "Jason Burnett is not the EPA administrator" and that it was up to EPA chief Stephen Johnson to oversee environmental policy.

Asked at Tuesday's news conference about his support for Democratic candidates and whether he was trying to embarrass the Republican administration, Burnett said, "Following the law and responding to the Supreme Court is not a partisan issue."

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Clean Air Act gives EPA the authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

In October, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Gerberding's draft testimony to Congress "did not comport" with science contained in an International Panel on Climate Change report and that "a number of agencies had some concerns with the draft."

On Tuesday, Boxer said Gerberding's planned testimony, which has since been detailed in media reports, and the IPCC report "matched identically."
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#10  Note: I've never voted for Ms "Dumb as a bag of hammers". As a Californian, I apologize for my fellow 'Fornians sending this dumb POS to the Senate. What can I say?
Posted by: Frank G   2008-07-09 20:53  

#9  Iff one believes that a POTUS OBAMA Admin will rsult in SOCIALISM IN AMERICA 2008-2012, as many Netters believe, ITS ALL THE MORE REASON FOR THE SO-CALLED ISLAMIST "HIDDEN-IMAM-MAHDI" TO APPEAR AND DEFEAT OR DESTROY THE US MIL PRESENCE + AGENDA IN THE ME.

Nothing can scare Amer Politicians and mainstream Amer voters like a HIGH-PROFILE, MAJOR AMER MIL DEFEAT + OTHER CATASTROPHE.

ADD TO NEWSVINE > FUTURE HEAT WAVE TEMPERATURES TO RISE + TOPIX > LATE SUNSPOT CYCLE ["24"] MAY MEAN STRONGER SOLAR FLARES LATER.

D *** NG IT, PEOPLE, EVEN THE SUN IS DOING ITS PART/WANTS ISLAMIST NUKES-APOCALYPSE + AMERIKAN SOCIALISM 2008-2012 - LETS GET WID THE PROGRAM! DON'T FORCE ME TO TELL BARRY "SUPERMAN" BOSTWICK TO YANK OFF HIS EYEGLASSES, OR MICHELLE TO UNSHEATH HER LECTURE FINGER, D *** YOU!
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2008-07-09 20:11  

#8  If fossil fuels indeed are (fossil, that is) where did all this carbon come from in the first place, if not the air?

Several hundred million years ago. Since then it's been continuously cycled into rocks and back into the air by volcanos.

BTW, its looking like water vapour from dams and irrigation is the biggest manmade influence on climate.
Posted by: phil_b   2008-07-09 19:08  

#7  Well tu - while you would have to bleach the toilet afterwards.... it would be entertaining to watch......
Posted by: CrazyFool   2008-07-09 15:48  

#6  I wouldn't trust Barbara Boxer to clean my friggin toilets. Using Harry Reid's face.
Posted by: tu3031   2008-07-09 15:23  

#5  Dammit, can't believe the White House didn't tell me last week it would be 75 and rainy this morning. I demand an emergency meeting at the golf course to consider inbeechwood procedings at once!
Posted by: swksvolFF   2008-07-09 15:14  

#4  Well, it certainly didn't all happen in the last eight years so it makes me wonder where all these alarmists were when Clinton was in the White House. It makes me wonder if the real problem is they just can't stand George Bush. I mean, why didn't Al Gore ever say anything about it until after that mean, old George Bush stole the election?
Posted by: Vinegar Flomonter3636   2008-07-09 11:50  

#3  If fossil fuels indeed are (fossil, that is) where did all this carbon come from in the first place, if not the air?
Posted by: Grenter, Protector of the Geats   2008-07-09 10:31  

#2  It should be clearly stated that MMGW is not based in science, or even anecdotal reality, but in philosophy and religion.

Like science fiction, it began with an unproven theory. But unlike scientific theories, the theory was built upon before it had any basis in proven fact. To make matters intolerable, the theory had to accept greater and greater assumptions that were nonsensically improbable.

The big one being that a trace amount, of a trace gas, could leverage a truly immense system. The mite could force the mouse to direct the course of the elephant.

That is, a fraction of the CO2 in the atmosphere is created by man, but that it would somehow strongly impact the far greater amount of natural atmospheric CO2, which in turn is still only found in trace amounts in the truly immense atmosphere full of water vapor in various forms.

The only way this could be supported was through the use of "feedback loops", of which a dozen have been proposed.

But none of these feedback loops have ever been proven.

And the models used to predict the future are insane, as with the previous illustration, they do not take into account the elephant, only the mite and the mouse.

Cloud cover which dictates over 90% of heat reflection or retention ignored, because it is too complicated to figure out.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2008-07-09 09:12  

#1  Calling CO2, pollution is quite the most bizzare nonsense of my lifetime.

The good news, apart from the fact global warming isn't happening (which is good news only to the extent global cooling is seriously bad news), is that GW is a sure fire election loser for the Left, once people see how much it is going to cost them.
Posted by: phil_b   2008-07-09 08:03  

00:00