Why Cantor’s Downfall Is Bad News for EPA

U.S. House Majority Whip Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) speaks during a media availability after a Republican Conference meeting December 13, 2011 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The House is scheduled to vote on a bill today that combines the Keystone XL oil pipeline, year-end payroll tax holiday and unemployment insurance in the final passage, which President Barack Obama has threatened that he will veto. 
National Journal
Jason Plautz
Add to Briefcase
Jason Plautz
June 18, 2014, 1:05 a.m.

The En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency is already fa­cing a war on mul­tiple fronts as it works to re­view its smog stand­ards this year. En­vir­on­ment­al­ists have vowed to fight to get the stand­ards as low as pos­sible to get max­im­um health be­ne­fits, while in­dustry groups have been lin­ing up to fight what they say is the most costly en­vir­on­ment­al reg­u­la­tion to come out of the ad­min­is­tra­tion.

And now Eric Can­tor’s up­set loss has put one of the ozone rule’s con­gres­sion­al crit­ics — House Whip and pre­sumed next Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Kev­in Mc­Carthy — in po­s­i­tion to keep fight­ing it from the top.

EPA by Decem­ber will pro­pose a re­vi­sion to its reg­u­la­tion for ground-level ozone — or smog — that is linked to asthma and oth­er res­pir­at­ory prob­lems. It’s part of the reg­u­lar re­view of its air-qual­ity stand­ards re­quired un­der the Clean Air Act, and the agency is ex­pec­ted to lower the stand­ard from the 75 parts-per-bil­lion level set un­der the George W. Bush ad­min­is­tra­tion.

The crit­ics have fa­mil­i­ar talk­ing points: Com­pli­ance will re­quire costly pol­lu­tion con­trols and lim­its on trans­port­a­tion, and a state or re­gion in vi­ol­a­tion can face heavy fines. En­vir­on­ment­al­ists, mean­while, are par­tic­u­larly sens­it­ive to this rule since EPA’s last at­tempt to lower the stand­ard was squashed by the White House in 2011.

Mc­Carthy’s con­cerns are closer to home. His Bakersfield dis­trict is loc­ated in Cali­for­nia’s Cent­ral Val­ley, home to some of the worst air in the coun­try. How bad? In the Amer­ic­an Lung As­so­ci­ation’s 2014 State of the Air re­port, four cit­ies in the val­ley ranked two through five for the worst ozone qual­ity (the low­est-ranked city, Los Angeles, is just south).

That’s largely due to to­po­graphy. The re­gion is sur­roun­ded on three sides by moun­tains that al­lows pol­lut­ants to pool and get trapped by an in­ver­sion lay­er of hot air. Heavy traffic in the re­gion, coupled with re­cent eco­nom­ic de­vel­op­ment and tra­di­tion­al ag­ri­cul­ture, means lots of emis­sions. Dur­ing hot sum­mer months, the con­di­tions are ideal for dan­ger­ous levels of smog.

State of­fi­cials have worked to mit­ig­ate the pol­lu­tion by pla­cing re­stric­tions on sta­tion­ary sources, clean­ing of dies­el fuel, and reg­u­lat­ing ag­ri­cul­ture, among oth­er ef­forts. The num­ber of days vi­ol­at­ing the ozone lim­its has dropped stead­ily since 2000. But it’s still been an up­hill climb for the re­gion to meet fed­er­al stand­ards, and Mc­Carthy, along with oth­er rep­res­ent­at­ives of the re­gion, have said a tight­er stand­ard will only open the state up to heavy pen­al­ties.

In 2011, his first year as whip, Mc­Carthy in­tro­duced a bill that would have delayed im­ple­ment­a­tion of new ozone stand­ards un­til a loc­al ad­vis­ory com­mit­tee stud­ied the feas­ib­il­ity of com­pli­ance and would have re­pealed a fine im­posed on the Cent­ral Val­ley (the bill was rendered moot when the stand­ard was pulled).

Mc­Carthy also leads the House En­ergy Ac­tion Team, the part­ner­ship that pro­motes GOP en­ergy pri­or­it­ies and works against EPA reg­u­la­tions. The team’s mis­sion has in­cluded work on the air-qual­ity stand­ards. As a hint of its agenda this term, the group will host a brief­ing Wed­nes­day on air-qual­ity rules fea­tur­ing former EPA air chief Jeff Holmstead.

Mc­Carthy also last week — co­in­cid­ent­ally the same day as Can­tor’s de­feat — wrote to the EPA about a sep­ar­ate Cent­ral Val­ley air is­sue. He and five oth­er Cent­ral Val­ley rep­res­ent­at­ives asked the agency to de­clare an “ex­cep­tion­al event” and spare the state from fines for vi­ol­at­ing par­tic­u­late-mat­ter stand­ards be­cause of a months-long drought. The stand­ard is sep­ar­ate from the ozone rule, but speaks to the re­gion’s chal­lenges; state reg­u­lat­ors had pre­dicted the par­tic­u­late stand­ards would be met were it not for the drought’s im­pact.

The con­cern about back­ground ozone — the nat­ur­ally oc­cur­ring levels — has grown as a talk­ing point among op­pon­ents of a new stand­ard. The Amer­ic­an Pet­ro­leum In­sti­tute, for ex­ample, has cir­cu­lated a map warn­ing that a stand­ard of 60 ppb — likely be­low what the EPA will pro­pose — would put 94 per­cent of the coun­try in vi­ol­a­tion (that map in­cludes wide swaths of rur­al areas that aren’t mon­itored by EPA).

But en­vir­on­ment­al­ists have said that those con­cerns are un­foun­ded and that the pub­lic-health be­ne­fits will out­weigh the costs. Ac­cord­ing to EPA, the stand­ards could avert between 4,000 and 12,000 pre­ma­ture deaths and as many as 111,000 cases of res­pir­at­ory dis­ease by 2020.

It’s too early to know where EPA will go with the ozone stand­ard. The agency’s sci­entif­ic ad­vis­ory coun­cil said in a con­fer­ence call that it would re­com­mend a lim­it between 60 and 70 ppb, but cau­tioned that the up­per lim­it would have a “lim­ited mar­gin of safety” (they have yet to is­sue a form­al let­ter of re­com­mend­a­tion). That’s the same range that the ad­vis­ory board gave EPA in 2010, when the EPA pro­posed a stand­ard of 70 ppb un­til the White House stalled the ac­tion.

En­vir­on­ment­al­ists want to see a num­ber lower than 70 — in fact some have said that the start­ing point should be 60 ppb to get the max­im­um health be­ne­fits.

EPA is un­der a court or­der to pro­pose a stand­ard by Decem­ber and fi­nal­ize it by Oc­to­ber 2015, al­though the agency has said its fi­nal ac­tion won’t be un­til Novem­ber of that year. All of which gives Mc­Carthy plenty of time to settle in­to his of­fice be­fore the stand­ards come across his desk.

What We're Following See More »
Chef Jose Andres Campaigns With Clinton
5 hours ago
White House Weighs in Against Non-Compete Contracts
6 hours ago

"The Obama administration on Tuesday called on U.S. states to ban agreements prohibiting many workers from moving to their employers’ rivals, saying it would lead to a more competitive labor market and faster wage growth. The administration said so-called non-compete agreements interfere with worker mobility and states should consider barring companies from requiring low-wage workers and other employees who are not privy to trade secrets or other special circumstances to sign them."

House Investigators Already Sharpening Their Spears for Clinton
7 hours ago

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz plans to spend "years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton." Chaffetz told the Washington Post: “It’s a target-rich environment. Even before we get to Day One, we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain’t good.”

No Lobbying Clinton’s Transition Team
10 hours ago

Hillary Clinton's transition team has in place strict rules to limit the influence that lobbyists could have "in crafting the nominee’s policy agenda." The move makes it unlikely, at least for now, that Clinton would overturn Obama's executive order limiting the role that lobbyists play in government

Federal Government Employees Giving Money to Clinton
10 hours ago

Federal employees from 14 agencies have given nearly $2 million in campaign donations in the presidential race thus far, and 95 percent of the donations, totaling $1.9 million, have been to the Clinton campaign. Employees at the State Department, which Clinton lead for four years, has given 99 percent of its donations to the Democratic nominee.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.