(Invoking Executive Privilege) EPA turns over limited documents (regarding CA's greenhouse gas reg)

Source: Associated Press

SACRAMENTO - Invoking executive privilege, the Environmental Protection Agency on Friday refused to provide lawmakers with a full explanation of why it rejected California's greenhouse gas regulations.

The EPA informed Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., that many of the documents she had requested contained internal deliberations or attorney-client communications that would not be shared now with Congress.

"EPA is concerned about the chilling effect that would occur if agency employees believed their frank and honest opinions and analysis expressed as part of assessing California's waiver request were to be disclosed in a broad setting," EPA's associate administrator Christopher P. Bliley wrote.

More than a week after a deadline set by Boxer, the agency gave her environmental committee a box of documents with numerous pages left almost entirely blank and others with key information redacted, Boxer said.

The documents provided Friday by the EPA omitted key details, including a presentation that Senate aides said predicted EPA would lose a lawsuit if it went to court for denying California's waiver.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080119/ap_on_bi_ge/california_greenhouse_gases

because the head people (bush appointed douche bags) don't believe in global warming they are not going to fulffill the request of the people of california? that is the most f'd up shit ever. YOU WORK FOR US NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

outside advisors--like many that Cheney had. But my memory is weak on this.

"EPA is concerned about the chilling effect that would occur if agency employees believed their frank and honest opinions and analysis expressed as part of assessing California's waiver request were to be disclosed in a broad setting," EPA's associate administrator Christopher P. Bliley wrote.

For instance, their suppression of scientific research we've paid for because it contradicts their dogma on climate. That's what's truly "chilling!"

Most of the "opinions" issued by the EPA these days are coming straight out of a four-person sub-office at the American Chemistry Council. Used to be the ACC sent the opinion that the nation's largest polluters wanted to Karl Rove, and he'd forward it to the EPA. I'm sure someone--probably Cheney--is still doing it.

That Global Warming might be reversed??

Internal communications would show that they were overruled, right?

What would be interesting to see is the recommendation Stephen Johnson (EPA Administrator) received from EPA staff as well as what he was told by the White House. I think that contrast would be particularly informative because according to all press reports, he ignored what staff said and apparently made a different decision.

WTF? That is outrageous!

They answer to no one.....Why should you have a problem with that when the Democratic Representatives in Congress do not? Accountability is "Off the Table"

is that it seems to work pretty well for them. We the people have not been able to penetrate EP in any significant way. The anger begins to affect my life if I let it. I have to detach from the constant stream of bullshit.

I'd love to see some of our candidates commit to rolling back the worst excesses of *'s implementation of the "unitary executive" theory. But I'm afraid that most potential presidents feel they know best - it's just human nature - and are therefore loath to cede any power back to the courts and Congress.

Since the Supreme Court is stacked with Republicans, we really need Congress to reassert its Constitutional powers. (Especially the power to declare war; no more bullshit resolutions "authorizing use of force." The US military has become the president's plaything, and that's just wrong.)

Completely and totally unacceptable. This is a false answer.

"EPA is concerned about the chilling effect that would occur if agency employees believed their frank and honest opinions and analysis expressed as part of assessing California's waiver request were to be disclosed in a broad setting," EPA's associate administrator Christopher P. Bliley wrote."

Then do what government agencies have been doing for years...omit the names of the persons submitting information in reports. Omitting the names of employees will prevent any endangerment of "frank and honest opinions and analysis" and has been commonplace in government long enough to make this a non issue.

After all, were looking for stats and numbers...and that certainly has nothing to do with naming people.

Any discussions or materials not DIRECTLY involving the verbal or written communication, signed approval, or other direct person contact WILL NOT fall under the executive privilege clause. And, no, the Vice President IS part of the executive branch and is NOT independently covered under the amendment to the executive privilege clause. That is all...oh, and by the way...FUCK YOU BUSH AND YOUR SCUM SUCKING FASCIST BRETHREN. DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL.

J

the last sentence was the best.

One long year.

If we let it go, who's to stop the next one from doing the same. These people are our employees. If they are that ashamed of their opinions, they shouldn't write them. We pay them, we should be allowed to know what they do and say in our names, supposedly for our benefit.

Hell Does the EPA even have an executive wash room Key any more under the Republicans?

The string of face slaps that come from this administration makes the Three Stooges look like angels! O8)

administration obey the law? There are no consequences or enforcement.

The senate deserves what it gets, but we don't.

Not too long ago, I would have added that this is grounds for impeachment, but appearently the House Democratic leadership doesn't think there is any such thing as grounds for impeachment.

that would occur if agency employees were restricted to logical and scientific analysis of the situation that would appear reasonable to outsiders. Unreasonable, unscientific biased reasoning and the "screw California" attitude might not be fully understood by the rest of us.

Jeesh!

It can not stand the light of public review and discussion. The actions of these criminals and traitors cause the suffering and deaths of thousands. Jail is too kind a response for the likes of these.

and some think we need to work with these entities?

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

...(for an executive level agency) I remember whenever congress said JUMP, the agency execs eagerly replied, HOW HIGH? Whenever congress asked for anything, heaven and earth were moved to provide the answer. Reason? Congress held the purse strings. But then, I retired shortly after the first W inauguration. Boy, things have changed.

Would that the current congressional regime had the balls to say to EPA, if you won't provide the information we seek, we'll sit on your next appropriations request.

(Which might not have been that long ago)

But now the Congress is the one asking the President -- how high!

More funds for Iraq? How many needed, Sir? How soon! And are there some more fancy bumberstickers for our limos, Sir? The ones that read "Surge is working"

if they believed their frank and honest opinions etc. etc. etc."

You gotta be kidding me. THIS IS THE FRIGGIN EPA!

I'm invoking executive privilege next time I get pulled over for a speeding ticket.

under oath and with immunity...solves that problem...