What could possibly go wrong?

Even though the Gulf oil spill is still occurring, clean-up efforts are already underway. Now if there was one phrase you wanted to hear about this massive environmental undertaking, what would it be? Well, if you were hoping for "Hey, let's dump millions of gallons of this dangerous toxic oil dispersant into the water" have I got some good news for you.

British Petroleum and government disaster-relief agencies are using a toxic chemical to disperse oil in the Gulf of Mexico, even though a better alternative appears to be available.

As the Deepwater Horizon oil spill spreads, BP and the U.S. Coast Guard have conducted tests with Corexit 9500, a chemical designed to break oil slicks into globules that are more quickly consumed by bacteria or sink into the water column before hitting shore.

The decision has been a controversial one. A few scientists think dispersants are mostly useful as public relations strategy, as they make the oil slick invisible, even though oil particles continue to do damage. Others consider Corexit the lesser of two evils: It’s known to be highly toxic, adding to the harm caused by oil, but at least it will concentrate damage at sea, sparing sensitive and highly productive coastal areas. Better to sacrifice the deep sea than the shorelines.

But even as these arguments continue, with 230,000 gallons of Corexit on tap and more commissioned by BP, a superior alternative could be left on the shelf.

Ooh, they even referenced a decision to avoid using a superior alternative. That's the happy cousin to "let's dump millions of gallons of this dangerous toxic oil dispersant into the water". What is this superior alternative? It's called Dispersit and is EPA approved. In testing, Corexit was 54.7 percent effective at breaking down crude oil from the Gulf and Dispersit was 100 percent effective. In addition, Corexit is three times as lethal to silverfish and two times as lethal to shrimp. Good thing those aren't important things to the Gulf ecosystem or Gulf economy.

On the other hand -as I'm sure we'll find out- the makers of Corexit probably gave more money to our elected betters than the makers of Dispersit did. Scientists agree that money to politicians is the most effective measure of effectiveness in an oil dispersal product. Plus, Corexit is a more deftly handled oil clean-up related pun than Dispersit.

So if the only environmental and ecological hope you were clinging on to was "Well, at least we probably aren't making things worse", well.... we'll get back to you. But it doesn't look good.

Don't drink the water

Hey, Americans like drinking poison, swimming in chemicals, and living near large flowing collections of carcinogens, right? Of course we do. Hell, that's why we all hate the Clean Water Act so much. Who wants old man government sticking his nose into the business of corporations and telling them that they can't tell us how much sewage we get to gloriously consume in our water?

You'll be happy to hear the great news then.

Thousands of the nation’s largest water polluters are outside the Clean Water Act’s reach because the Supreme Court has left uncertain which waterways are protected by that law, according to interviews with regulators.
...
Companies that have spilled oil, carcinogens and dangerous bacteria into lakes, rivers and other waters are not being prosecuted, according to Environmental Protection Agency regulators working on those cases, who estimate that more than 1,500 major pollution investigations have been discontinued or shelved in the last four years.

The Clean Water Act was intended to end dangerous water pollution by regulating every major polluter. But today, regulators may be unable to prosecute as many as half of the nation’s largest known polluters because officials lack jurisdiction or because proving jurisdiction would be overwhelmingly difficult or time consuming, according to midlevel officials.

See there's a little dispute over language. When lawmakers originally wrote the law they used the phrase "navigable waters" to define the scope of government jurisdiction. What they meant and what regulators meant is everything from wetlands to streams to rivers. I believe the legal language was "shit you can get a fuckin' canoe into."

On the other hand the Supreme Court, in what I'm going to guess was a 5-4 ruling, thinks "navigable waters" means only a large river or a particularly big ass lake, and so help you God if that river or lake doesn't place it's ass in at least two states. Or, in other words, the Supreme Court doesn't think the Clean Water Act applies to most water. As such, regulators have had to end investigations, pull out of some states entirely, and, in what is a shocking surprise, somehow water pollution and contamination has risen because dumping poison into a stream that leads into a river is now legal. Essentially the Clean Water Act is now pretty much useless.

But don't worry, the Senate is going to pass a law that removes the "navigable" part from the law and... you know what I'm not even going to finish that sentence. They're going to attempt it, big business will shriek, Glen Beck will rant about the government stealing everyone's water, and the Democrats won't be able to get 60 votes for it.

So.... hope you like drinking soda. That's pretty much going to be the consumable beverage for a lot of areas of the country soon. On the other hand: invest in Brita water filters. I have a feeling that's going to be a boom stock. Isn't this a great country?

Things you should read

I have some demands. Why? Because I like the mental fiction of having a supposed willing audience with which I can makes orders and demands that are carried out with brutal efficiency. What are these commands? Well, I was going to ask that someone fly a plane into an IRS building, but since someone already did that, it's just going to be reading related.

Content and demands, on a Sunday. I'm too good to you. How is this different from the Cheap Blogging Crutch? Well, it's on a weekend and this comprises articles I couldn't find a way to tack cheap dick jokes onto. More serious stuff, I guess. Onward.

For Scots, a Scourge Unleashed by a Bottle
A story of Scotland, “Wreck the Hoose Juice”, and a nation trying to come to grips with entrenched alcoholism and the specific beverage that they seem to want to blame for it: Buckfast. It may not have made me feel sympathy for Scotland, but I do want to buy a case of Buckfast.

The Substitute
Brad Plumer looks at the fading possibilities for climate change reform and how successful the EPA can be trying to regulate pollution and emissions now that it is likely to be the only entity capable of doing so, what with the Senate deciding to become irrelevant. Now you know what those lawsuits from Texas and Virginia are meant to do: pretty much make sure we don't do anything to avoid catching our death of heat and flooding.

Sticker Shock
John Cohn looks at the methods and madness of health insurance companies and why they jack rates. In addition he lays out why this means reform needs to be passed (as if you already didn't understand that) and further explains why piecemeal legislation will not work to reform the problem and stop the rate jacking.

After Summer Olympics, Empty Shells in Beijing
The New York Times looks at Beijing and the massive Olympic structures they built for the 2008 games. The verdict? They pretty much got used that week and haven't been touched since. Most striking is the status of the Bird's Nest stadium. It has no tenant, no real future events scheduled, and is right now a de facto gift shop and is packed with snow so children can sled down the aisles. The 2004 Athens games probably bankrupted Greece. I'm sure that bodes well for Vancouver, London, Sochi, and Rio.

How Christian Were the Founders?
The New York Times explores the radical, purely politically motivated attempts that the Texas education board is taking up in an attempt to rewrite textbooks to push Christianity and conservatism at the expense of science, known verifiable history, and common sense, and how they're decisions will likely affect the textbooks of around 40+ states. I bet you didn't know that Phyllis Schlafly, the Moral Majority, and the Contract With America were some of the most integral events in American history. Well now they are. Just one of the great ways in which this country is being destroyed from the inside in the name of cheap politics.

Roger Ebert: The Essential Man
Esquire magazine's story about the life of film critic Roger Ebert now that he has lost most of his jaw, the ability to eat, the ability to speak thanks to cancer, and how his outlook and life have changed since. One of the best profile pieces you're likely to read this year.

Roger Ebert's Last Words, con't.
Roger Ebert responds to the article on his own blog, musing on the tone, the shock of seeing the photo they used, how he doesn't want people to get the idea that he's dying, and what he wants people to take away from the article.

McDonald's Has a Chef?
TIME follows around McDonald's head chef, Daniel Coudreaut, and looks at just what exactly it is he does in a job that most people expect is an attempt at irony. It's an interesting portrait at just what a man who graduated from the Culinary Institute of America and ran the kitchen at the Four Seasons does at McDonald's and the arduous, creatively crushing nature, and logistical nightmare coming up with food ideas for Mickey D's is when the sheer size and food production timetables, schedules, and production lines of an organization with as many restaurants as McDonald's has have to be taken into account.

Wall Street's Bailout Hustle
Matt Taibbi comes back for one more shot at Wall Street and the financial wizards who destroyed the economy. This time he focuses on all the various cons, grifts, scams, and outright thefts the financial and banking sector has engaged in since the global meltdown and how they haven't really learned anything.

Messing with Texas

One must marvel at the gusto with which Texas Governor Rick Perry attempts to pander to the fringe tea party activists he evidently think pack his state. From secessions threats, to his criminal negligence and collusion in covering up death penalty and legal issues, and his complete rejection and denunciation of Washington... except for all those times when he goes to them begging hat in hand for money. He's a real class act.

So that's why it's nice to see him double down on the crazy in an attempt to win the GOP nomination for Governor. What's he up to this time? Chuck Norris as a border guard and Secretary of Kicking Ass? Sovereign Texas money with Jesus on it? Cheap anti-science, pro-corporate stunts? Set another fire at the Governor's mansion? Decrying the stimulus while at an event touting money for and jobs saved by a stimulus project he's taking credit for? It was the science one. But it has a secessionist bent too. State's rights!

Gov. Rick Perry of Texas is suing the Environmental Protection Agency in a bid to stop it from regulating global warming pollution. The centerpiece of his argument? Those leaked "Climate-Gate" emails.
...
Flanked by his attorney general, Greg Abbott, Perry declared at a press conference that the lawsuit was intended to "defend Texas' environmental successes against federal overreach." And he slammed the Obama administration for "using sweeping mandates and draconian punishments to force a square peg of their vision into the round whole of reality."

Abbott cited the emails to charge that the EPA was using "tainted data" when it ruled in December that heat-trapping gases are a threat to human health and can be regulated by the federal government.

Now, we all know where this one is going. Of course the hacked e-mails don't say anything near what Perry and Abbot say they do. Or even if e-mails from two scientists about their own research proved that their numbers were wrong or faked, that it doesn't invalidate all the multitudinous data from thousands of scientists in hundreds of disparate fields, across various disciplines, stationed everywhere across the globe that show what everyone knows the planetary scientific consensus is: planet warming, bad for humans. Or that if your position about climate change being a hoax was so strong you wouldn't have to lie about leaked e-mails. But that's not going to stop Perry. No, he's got two strong primary challengers, needs to rally the base, and most of his money and support comes from energy interests. Priorities people, priorities.

So big ups to Perry and Texas (ooh, and Virginia too, who has an attorney general with lots of ties to energy interests as well). You aren't going to let a little thing like science stand in the way of political grandstanding, primary politics, corporate whoring, and placing short term electoral and economic goals over long term economic and environmental ones. But I guess you've got a big state and can afford to see some of it under water. Plus, who is going to notice a couple degree increase in temperature when it's already hot as hell? Well done. I hope they make you double governor.

The new good idea you aren't allowed to have

As new financial regulations bills make their way through the long and torturous process of the Senate, there is one surprising thing about most of them: they contain a surprising number of good ideas. Hell, even John McCain came up with a pretty good set of proposals, namely reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act. But one of the really good ideas that has really gained traction among Democrats is the creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, an independent organization with independent authority to craft, set, and enforce a set of rules on the finance and banking industries in order to protect the American public.

This, of course, is a dangerous idea. As such, Republicans have vowed to gut it. I'm not sure they're making the right argument though.

"From the Republican point of view, the idea of a separate agency is still anathema," said Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah, a senior Republican on the banking committee. An independent agency, he said, can go too far in the direction of tight regulation without taking into account the effect of the rules it creates on business and the economy. He said he's seen it happen before.

"Can you say EPA?" he asked, lifting his eyebrows. The Republican Party has regretted for years that President Richard Nixon made the EPA independent.

There's been some movement: Republicans who once pushed for total elimination of the CFPA are now ready to back a compromise solution that would make the CFPA subservient to a larger financial regulatory agency, whose leadership could modify or eliminate any protections deemed hurtful to business.

A new EPA? I'm sure that's meant to sound ominous, but I rather like the sound of that. Maybe make it tougher and more independent than the EPA so that an administration can't turn over control of the agency to the industry it's supposed to cover... like Bush did with the EPA.

Still, it's nice to see the old familiar battle cry of "it's harmful to business" carted out for it's ten millionth consecutive appearance in a debate surrounding business. What's that make it... every single law or regulation ever proposed that would subject anything to any iota increase in regulation or scrutiny is harmful to business? What are the odds?

Glad to see that a compromise option is still on the table. That compromise being the same compromise that is always floated: keep the name of the oversight agency you want to create, but completely mangle the idea to the point where it isn't recognizable and all the things it was supposed to do are removed or neutered to the point of ineffectiveness.

So let's see, we have the creation of an agency whose goals make sense, is popular among the masses and the elites, sounds like a good idea, is meant to protect the American people, puts the sectors that destroyed our economy under more scrutiny, and has the support of a large number of progressive Democrats. I think we know where this is headed: Joe Lieberman or Ben Nelson getting it taken out at the last moment. That's a shame, it sounded like a great idea. Ah well, it's all for the best. I hear that CFPA would have been exactly like the EPA and would have harmed business.

Climate action?

The climate talks in Copenhagen are underway and after months of buildup, what I'm sure will be hundreds of speeches from scientists presenting information and begging action, and consensus that something needs to be done, I'm sure the elected betters of the world will agree....then walk away with no concrete goals or action before returning home to give some speech to their country about buying better lightbulbs.

But with the conference happening, scientists and research organizations have taken the time to release finding after finding in the hopes that facts and figures can spur our world leaders to action the way seemingly only war and bailouts to billion dollar corporations can. Like the report from the World Meteorological Organization that confirmed, yup, that climate change is still a problem. To that end, our own EPA announced that they were going to take the initiative to regulate the emissions of greenhouse gases. This decision to meet a universally recognized problem with clear action from a regulatory agency with the power to do something was, of course, met with bitching and complaining from our elected betters.

"The stick approach isn't going to work. In fact, Congress may retaliate," said Mark Helmke, a senior adviser to Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.). "They could stop the funding, and they could change the law."
...
Some senators who environmental groups hope might vote for a climate bill also said they were unhappy. Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) called the move "regrettable." And Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said in a statement that she is concerned that the move "will create burdens on American industry without providing any significant environmental benefits."

"I strongly urge EPA to wait for Congress to find a solution," Lincoln said.

Which is to say, Blanche Lincoln wants the EPA to wait until the sun burns out, or perhaps until our great grandchildren are treading water in our new global ocean, wondering how it was all those people in the movie Waterworld were able to build atolls to live on.

Of course the announcement was riddled with statements from the EPA saying how this was a measure of last resort and how they really preferred Congressional action over doing it themselves. I'm not so sure about that one, EPA. The House is the best chance for good legislation and even their bill, Waxman-Markey, is littered with loopholes and bad compromises. Just imagine what the Senate will do. No, their hearts lie with the Chamber of Commerce, who is shrieking about "top down command and control regimes", and the American Petroleum Institute, who declared this action a threat to every American family and business.

But thank you EPA for taking a necessary step to actually do something. I know it'll end up with the Senate attempting to pass some terrible, industry beholden half-measure, but hopefully this will allow for progressive Demcorats to negotiate with the position that "Hey, we don't care what you want, we'll block this bullshit and let the EPA take care of it". Of course they probably won't do that and this whole process will be driven by the whims of Ben Nelson and coal state Democrats, but it's nice that I can dream about a scenario where some good might occur. That possibility is usually ruled out before things ever start.

Cheap Blogging Crutch 10.01

E.P.A. Moves to Curtail Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Tired of waiting for Congress to get off its fat asses and make an attempt to bungle climate legislation while it's bungling health care legislation, President Obama decided that "Hey, maybe I should use the agencies and laws I already have to do it." Brilliant stroke of genius, Barry. And so he did, enabling the EPA to menace free enterprise and business with the application of its dirty laws and legally mandated oversight. Hopefully soon, Congress will come up with a terrible climate change bill so that we can circumvent all this nastiness and get back to what's important: letting industry pollute without any enforcement of actual laws.

Reality Check: Trying to Turn a Point of Pride into a Moment of Shame
Ahh, the White House has finally snapped and started using its web-based blog bully pulpit to go after professional liars like Glenn Beck. What was it that set the White House off? Death panels? FEMA re-education camps? Was Beck trying to blame his 1990 rape and murder of a young girl on the Administration? No....*sighs*, Beck complained about efforts to win the Olympics for the US. And he used lies so minor, they basically count as Beck attempting to tell the truth. Yeah, this was the one you really needed to combat, White House.

Credit Rating Agency Analysts Covering AIG, Lehman Brothers Never Disciplined
Oh my star and garters. You're telling me that the concept of accountability that doesn't exist in banks or financial markets, doesn't exist in the businesses that rate them? But really, one does have to be shocked that the Government is mad at the A and AA ratings that Moody's Standard and Poor's, and Fitch's handed out. I mean an A or AA rating, in the fantasy financial world where everything is rated AAA, is the equivalent of a D- or F+ in the real world. Why should anyone be fired over not seeing the imminent collapse of some of the the largest financial institutions in the world? That's why pencils have trillion dollar erasers.

Tamiflu in Rivers Could Breed Drug-Resistant Flu Strains
OK, want to make sure that flu carrying animals aren't exposed to anti-virals flu medications and drug resistant flu strains aren't created? One simple step: if you take Tamiflu, afterward...never urinate. And especially don't urinate into a river. Tamiflu is expelled by urine, it gets into the water through sewage treatment plants, then into the rivers, then exposed to birds, then Captain Trips is created, then we're all caught up in an apocalyptic morality play as Boulder, Colorado and Las Vegas engage in the final battle of good and evil after a superflu wipes out 99.9% of the world's population. Is this what you want? No? Good, don't pee.

Iran Meets U.S. and Allies for Nuclear Talks in Geneva
And so begins the long process in which the world tells Iran that it shouldn't try to make nukes "Because" and Iran looks at open threats of destruction coming at it from large and influential sectors of the US political establishment, threats of preemptive strikes from Israel, continued Middle Eastern conflict, the fact that it just suppressed it's own population and rigged an election, and the fact that back water shit states with deep terrorist ties, like Pakistan for instance, are immediately treated with respect, dignity, and showered with billions just because they developed a nuke, and says "Wait, why should I listen to you guys?" It'll be great.

The Terminator controls all your emissions

The Governor on his zero emissions horse. Get to the chopper!

Obama To Allow States To Curb Auto Emissions

President Barack Obama is pushing stronger curbs on greenhouse gases, saying he wants to make it easier for states such as California to adopt tougher fuel-efficiency rules than the federal standard.

Obama told a White House gathering that "America will not be held hostage to dwindling resources." He said the government must work with the states _ not against them _ on tougher fuel standards for cars and trucks.
...
Obama said Monday that he now wants the Environmental Protection Agency to take a second look at decisions denying permission for states to have the higher standards.

See because California had pollution regulations before the US government did, so as such they can set guidelines if a waiver is granted by the government, whereupon states can choose to follow the Cali or Feddy Gov guidelines. In things such as emissions standards, which affects the types of cars being manufactured, this essentially sets the regulation for the entire country. Last time around the Bush Administration didn't grant the waiver and *gasp* some even suggested that it was for political and not scientific means.

The California regulations would force automakers to cut emissions in their cars and light trucks by 30% by 2016 and 13 states (Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington) have already agreed to adopt the Cali regs as soon as they're legal.

Legally Obama has to have the EPA review this, but it is a mere formality (because of the science~!) that they'll side with California and we'll be swimming in a sea of new standards soon. Barry is also expected to raise fuel economy standards to 35 mpg by 2020, a 40 % increase. How do we know this is a great set of ideas? Because John Boehner is pissed off about it. He declared that this attempt to make Detroit modernize it's standards to succeed in the 21st century will hurt Detroit's attempts...to modernize and create jobs in the 21st century. It has something to do with fractions and complex math. Take note America, the government might actually be a force for good again. At least in limited areas and segmented sections of influence.

Broken News: Persistent, violent weather patterns declared temporary, mild

WASHINGTON—After what has been deemed a "thorough review," today the Bush Administration released a joint review from the National Weather Service, Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Office of the White House Chief of Staff stating that the increasingly bizarre, violent, strange, and unpredictable weather patterns of the last few years to be a temporary condition that in no way related to global warming in any way.

“Listen, this is all part of the natural cycle of things,” observed EPA Undersecretary and Liberty University Chair Jason Slattery. “Frankly I think the earth has decided ‘enough tropical hurricanes in the north’ and has decided to send them much more frequently to the colder waters of South America where they never used to hit. The fact these disasters are now a weekly occurrence now is Mother Earth just balancing things out after eons of hurricanes and cyclones happening one way and one way only. Fair is fair.”

Furthermore the report stresses that the increase in the level of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes also had nothing to do with increased CO2 levels warming the waters on the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. In fact the report goes so far to stress that man made actions have had no effect on climate that a separate GAO study revealed that this report used the most bolded statements, underlined sentences, exclamation points, and uses of the phrases “because we said so”, “trust us”, and “listen, we know what we’re talking about” in the history of US Government.

“People are so quick to lump everything in with global warming,” noted government spokesman Eric Frost. “All we’re saying is ‘No, it isn’t and if you ever mention it we’ll fire you and pull your funding.’ But these Al Gore types don’t want to hear it. It’s all climate change this, hurricanes that, New Orleans this, global catastrophe that. Maybe they just don’t want to face the real facts here: the hurricanes have been testing our defenses for years and now that they know our weaknesses, they’re attacking them at full strength. Where’s the slideshow about that?”

He continued “Plus, I read on a message board that some scientists in the seventies once thought the globe was cooling or something and that totally didn’t happen. So, I think we see how all science is invalid as a result.”

But it isn’t just limited to hurricanes. In the last year climate scientists have reported the rise of 8.0 magnitude earthquakes, an increase in the frequency and intensity of tornadoes, exploding mountains, rivers of acid, the existence of marauding clouds of pure electricity, and an under-reported story from last month: a cyclone made of fire, flaming hail, and sulfur that ravaged the southern coast of Africa.

When asked to explain the Infernocane, the Bush Administration attributed the fire storm to biblical end times prophecy and “…clearly not the result of decades of unchecked industrial emissions and flammable substances” and denied any connection to the napalm factory that it commissioned and opened in Johannesburg last year.

When asked for any scientific proof to back these assertions the Administration just handed out copies of the Left Behind book series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins with a not that we should “…prepare to have our fuckin’ minds blown.” When further pressed for a better explanation during today’s announcement press conference Mr. Frost simply said “Uhhhhh…sun…spots? More of them? Sun…fire…wind. That sounds…plausible.” before abruptly ending the session.

Slattery offered another perspective “When balanced against, say, the fires of creation, the forging of the planet, the meteor/alien conspiracy that killed the dinosaurs, Vesuvius, the sinking of the continent of Atlantis, the crucifixion of Jesus, every nuke in the world simultaneously being launched and detonating, I think you’ll find things like massive, constant lightning attacks, five mile high tornados, mud slides in areas with no mud or hills for it to slide on, the evaporation of 70% of the world’s drinkable water, and the incineration of the lower half of Africa by means of a fire storm to be relatively mild when compared side to side.”

It was the final conclusion of the report that there was “nothing to see here” and that everyone should just “move along now.” The government hopes that these completely placid and common weather patterns will run their course, but have advised citizens that they might need to endure a few thousand years of sweltering heat, destroyed coasts, and the desertification of all crop land before there is a noticeable improvement.

Fetuses love rocket fuel

Noticing a delightful tang in your water of late? Do you feel like you've got some extra pep? Like your thyroid is being slowly liquidated? You've probably just been reaping the rewards of a water supply contaminated with rocket fuel. As you've no doubt developed a taste for ground water and perchlorate you'll be happy to hear the EPA is going to do jack shit.

The Environmental Protection Agency has decided there's no need to rid drinking water of a toxic rocket fuel ingredient that has fouled public water supplies around the country.

EPA reached the conclusion in a draft regulatory document not yet made public but reviewed Monday by The Associated Press.

The ingredient, perchlorate, has been found in at least 395 sites in 35 states at levels high enough to interfere with thyroid function and pose developmental health risks, particularly for babies and fetuses, according to some scientists.

The EPA document says that mandating a clean-up level for perchlorate would not result in a "meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public-water systems."

What caused most of this percolate? The Defense Department's use of it in missile testing, defense and aerospace activities. That means if there's a cleanup the Pentagon faces liability issues. We can't have that, so thus the EPA squashes this and you South Westerners get flipper babies.

The Bush EPA: Looking out for you numero uno.

EPA to twiddle thumbs, shuffle feet.

Seems as if earlier skepticism was right. I know, I know, I'm great. You can stop applauding me for foreseeing an obvious turn of events. Simply put, despite Bush agreeing to a vague and non-specific goal of cutting emissions at the G8 meeting, the EPA isn't going to implement anything new this year.

On one level this is good. We won't have the Bush Administration making up ludicrous policies with no benefit to the country or the environment. They might just decide we need to be exposed to more arsenic in the air, or that 1 out of 3 homes need a coal strip-mine in their backyard. On another level, it's bad that nothing will get done for yet another year, and we do another year's worth of damage from the already slashed and gutted EPA regulations and almost non-existent enforcement.

But the article is worth reading just to see how far the Bush EPA is willing to go to deny science, mangle facts and figures to their liking, bury reports, and mangle future projections. For instance they estimate that oil will cost 1/3 of it's current price so that they can claim a lower benefit for enacting stricter fuel standards. Or how the EPA is not allowed to admit that global warming harms stuff because that would legally trigger regulatory requirements. Or as Ed Markey (D-Mass) puts it "If this administration spent the same effort fighting global warming as they do editing and censoring global warming documents, the planet might not be in such dire straits." Not to mention that Bush Administration officials like Chase Hutto were more worried about greenhouse gas controls doing away with large American automobiles instead of the damage to the environment which his agency is supposed to protect (hence the clever EPA name). Did I mention his grandfather was a Ford bigwig? You probably guessed it anyway.

This is just the exact same pattern and attitude that has permeated every Bush fiasco. Ignore the career experts cause we know better. Suppress fact that don't say what we want. Ignore trends that don't show what we want. If the experts don't say what we want, change the experts. When in doubt, lie with every breath. When the inevitable failure occurs, claim "No one could have foreseen this." Eye up the next victim. Salt the earth on your way out.

Life is cheap(er)

Have you been feeling like you aren't worth as much lately? Not financially, but the value of your life as a human. Well, turns out you were right. The EPA has done the cost benefit analysis. Weighed the facts and figures. Your life is only worth $6.9 million dollars, a drop of $1 million from five years ago. But what does that mean, other than yet another revelation that you aren't as good as you used to be?

When drawing up regulations, government agencies put a value on human life and then weigh the costs versus the lifesaving benefits of a proposed rule. The less a life is worth to the government, the less the need for a regulation, such as tighter restrictions on pollution.

Consider, for example, a hypothetical regulation that costs $18 billion to enforce but will prevent 2,500 deaths. At $7.8 million per person (the old figure), the lifesaving benefits outweigh the costs. But at $6.9 million per person, the rule costs more than the lives it saves, so it may not be adopted.

Surely the Bush Administration couldn't be as cynical as to cheapen the lives of Americans (statistically this time instead of the typical moral, social, financial, and ethical cheapening) just to get out of the way of some environmental regulations.?

Some environmentalists accuse the Bush administration of changing the value to avoid tougher rules, a charge the EPA denies.

"It appears that they're cooking the books in regards to the value of life," said S. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, which represents state and local air pollution regulators. "Those decisions are literally a matter of life and death."

Dan Esty, a senior EPA policy official in the administration of the first President Bush and now director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, said: "It's hard to imagine that it has other than a political motivation."

The administration has yet to release the exchange statistics for the value of the life from another country. If current market trends stay true, one American will be worth 1.76 French and 1.96 British standard citizens. To get real value for the American life, one has to go to Iraq where one American life is expected to be worth nearly 10,000 Iraqis. But exact facts and figures will not be released until the opening of the Human Commodities Market in Bern, Switzerland next year.