Did the EPA deliberately keep information from congress ahead of vote?

July 1, 3:42 PMLaw and Politics ExaminerD. Christian Moore

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Law and Politics Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Michelle Obama visits EPA employees (AP Photo/Pablo Monsivais)

CBS news is reporting the Environmental Protection Agency may have suppressed a report critical of anthropogenic global warming theory ahead of the House of Representatives vote on the Cap and Trade bill. The bill, which passed the House and now goes to the Senate, is intended to raise energy prices in order to fight global warming. If these allegations are true, it would represent a gross violation of the agency’s duties and a severe politicization of the agency, and its research, in order to push an agenda. That this occurred in advance of the EPA’s recently announced intention to grant itself broad powers to regulation carbon dioxide only deepens such concerns.

The analyst who wrote the report in question claims he was told by superiors the report contradicted the agency’s official position on climate change and the report was therefore not to be distributed. The full text of the report in question can be found here.

Senator James Inhofe is now calling for an investigation and discusses the bill and the controversy in depth in this YouTube posting.

I have written previous articles examining some of the details of the cap and trade bill. I have also pointed out that many countries which had adopted cap and trade schemes are now rolling them back and questioning the veracity of anthropogenic global warming theory. As I have stated before, even supporters of this bill concede it will raise prices, drag down economic growth and increase unemployment.

This issue is still developing and it remains to be seen if these allegations will prove to be true. Given the stakes, it is unforgivable for an EPA bureaucrat to suppress information which does not support his, or the agency’s, policy preferences. If true, this would represent an egregious violation of the public trust, and an indelible mark on the EPA’s reputation.