Many of the last-minute Bush rules are already in effect
(Photo courtesy of the Obama transition team)
The Obama administration would like to stop some new Bush regulations from going into effect. Lester Graham reports some can be stopped, but many more cannot:
Transcript
The Obama administration would like to stop some new Bush regulations from going into effect. Lester Graham reports some can be stopped, but many more cannot:
A memo from Obama’s chief of staff stopped several rules.
But, a lot more of these last-minute Bush rules are already in effect.
Patti Goldman is with the environmental group Earthjustice. She says the Obama team can avoid enforcing the new rules if the new administration thinks they’re not lawful.
“That they are legally doubtful. That’s the language. And that in court the may need to confess error rather than defend the rule.”
But many of the rules passed by the Bush White House are legally solid, and Goldman says there’s not a thing the Obama administration can do about that.
“Because we live in a country that has the rule of law you can’t just undo everything as soon as there’s a change of administration.”
But groups such as Goldman’s can challenge them in court. And they are.
Earlier this summer, a state agency gave a refinery permission to increase pollution in
the Great Lakes. Commentator Cameron Davis takes a look at lessons learned and
what they mean for the future of the nation’s waterways:
Transcript
Earlier this summer, a state agency gave a refinery permission to increase pollution in
the Great Lakes. Commentator Cameron Davis takes a look at lessons learned and
what they mean for the future of the nation’s waterways:
When the Indiana Department of Environmental Management gave approval for BP’s
refinery to pollute more in Lake Michigan, who would have guessed that within weeks
more than 100,000 people would sign petitions against the proposal?
The people of the region seemed to instinctively know that more pollution had to be
stopped. After all, millions of us rely on Lake Michigan for drinking water and recreation.
Of course, coverage of the pollution proposal took off, with the Chicago Sun-
Times calling for a boycott of BP gasoline. The New York Times and CBS
Evening News ran national pieces about the pollution increases. A bi-partisan coalition
of politicians from neighboring states cried foul, including Chicago Mayor Richard Daley,
U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Barack Obama, Representatives Rahm Emanuel, Mark Kirk, Jan
Schakowsky, Vern Ehlers and the entire Michigan Congressional delegation, among
others.
But while the media, elected officials, and even those of us in the conservation
community talked about the permit, the real story wasn’t about the permit. It wasn’t
about its allowance for 54 percent more ammonia and 35 percent more suspended
solids from treated sludge to be discharged.
It wasn’t even an argument about jobs versus the environment. That debate was discounted long
ago by the many businesses that decided or were mandated to pollute less and then
still prospered.
The real story was what you, the public, said and what you are saying now: how we
treat the Great Lakes is emblematic of how we treat our waterways all around the
country. You’re saying that you want a new standard of care for the nation’s waters. You
don’t want the standard to be “to keep things from getting worse.” You don’t want the
status quo. You want our waters to be proactively restored. You want it better.
Like those of us who used to be in the cub scouts, inspired to leave our campsites
better than the way we found them, you want the standard for our waters to be: leave
things better for the next generation.
HOST TAG: Cameron Davis is the president of the Alliance for the Great Lakes.
Many of the last-minute Bush rules are already in effect (Photo courtesy of the Obama transition team)