Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
California To Sue Bush Administration Over Law To Limit Emissions
California will sue the Bush administration next week to demand action on a long-stalled request to let the state limit auto emissions of gases linked to global warming, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office said Friday.
"We've just waited too long" for a decision from the Environmental Protection Agency, said Schwarzenegger's press secretary, Aaron McLear.
The state asked the EPA in December 2005 for permission to enforce the California law, the model for statutes passed later in 11 other states. The EPA's approval is needed for California to implement a law more stringent than federal clean-air standards, and the agency has granted every such request California has made over the past 30 years.
The EPA held a public hearing in May and has promised a decision by the end of the year. But McLear said the state has run out of patience and will go to court Wednesday, the deadline that Schwarzenegger set in April.
"There's really no excuse at this point why we shouldn't be granted a waiver," McLear said. He said the state's case was strengthened in April when the U.S. Supreme Court, in a suit filed by California and other states against the EPA, "agreed with the rest of the world that greenhouse gas emissions are bad for the air."
The suit will be filed in a Washington, D.C., federal court, said state Attorney General Jerry Brown.
"The most prominent Republican governor suing the Bush administration sends a powerful message, which I hope will influence Congress" to pass global-warming legislation, Brown said in an interview.
Despite the EPA's assurances of an impending decision, he said, "they require continuous, persistent pressure."
EPA spokeswoman Jessica Emond said the agency is reviewing more than 100,000 written responses and thousands of pages of documents it received during the public comment period this spring and will act on the request by the end of the year.
The 2002 state law, the first of its kind in the nation, requires new motor vehicles sold in California to limit emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which scientists consider a major contributor to climate change. The restrictions take effect with the 2009 models and increase to a 30 percent reduction from current levels by 2016.
Auto manufacturers have sued to overturn the law, arguing that the only way to cut greenhouse gas emissions is to increase vehicle miles per gallon, a subject that is regulated exclusively by the federal government.
A federal judge in Vermont rejected that argument last month and upheld a law that is identical to California's. The judge also rebuffed the companies' claims that it would be technically arduous and financially ruinous for them to comply with the law.
The California suit is pending before a federal judge in Fresno, who has scheduled a hearing for Nov. 19.
The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt automakers a blow in April when it ruled that greenhouse gases were air pollutants, covered by federal clean-air laws, and that the EPA must limit those emissions unless scientific evidence justifies a lack of regulation. The agency has not acted in response to the ruling, and President Bush has repeated his opposition to mandatory emission limits.
Major environmental groups, which have joined the state in defense of its law, have also served notice on the EPA that they intend to sue over the agency's delay on California's application to enforce the law. The recent court rulings have heightened the importance of the federal agency's impending decision, Sierra Club attorney David Bookbinder said Friday.
"The key issue is what decision EPA makes now on a waiver to uphold California's historical right to regulate air pollution," Bookbinder said. Under standards set by the federal Clean Air Act, he said, California unquestionably qualifies for a waiver.
E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
© 2007 The San Francisco Chronicle
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


13 Comments so far
Show AllAnd I am supposed to be impressed that Arnold Schwarzenegger is "green"? His star struck supporters may be impressed, but I'm not.
Thank you Arnold.
Kudos to Arnold.
Forextrader: I hear that you're not impressed by Arnold's initiative and, really, I'm not either. But anyone who will take on Bush and his cabal, has my support. Arnold had some questionable things in his past...as I guess we all do...but let's give all the support we can to anyone who's trying to bring down the tyrrant in DC (GW BUSH, in other words). I really don't think "green" is the question here. Maybe more like if you can look your neighbor in the face and say "I'll help you through this. It's a bad time for all of us. Let's get it on, together." Let me tell you brother, green don't mean shit when it comes downn to whose mouth the food is going into. You want to be my neighbor, I'll treat you fine and I'll treat you kind. I mean, really, is there anything else that means anything is this day and time???
"And I am supposed to be impressed that Arnold Schwarzenegger is "green"? His star struck supporters may be impressed, but I'm not."
No one cares about your personal opinion of Schwarzenegger, and he is not trying to impress you. This issue is not about you personally, it's about the good of California. Who cares who the vehicle is for the delivery of what is right?
mairs,
"No one cares about your personal opinion of Schwarzenegger..."
No one cares? I care. Are you speaking for me too, Mr. mairs? You perhaps are missing the real agenda here. Perhaps it's political?
Arnie sees something coming at him in 2008, and it doesn't include a rank in file repug.
Thank you Arnold, my Governor in California!
Impeach the Bush Administration, we are on borrowed time!
Global Warming Links:
http://geocities.com/gwlinx
This is subterfuge. Bluster. Misdirection. Bread-and-Circuses.
LOL, no one said it.....the "Terminator" is exactly what this country needs!
I wonder how big of a role Manitoba Hydro plays in Arnold Schwarzenegger's green plan. Was Bill 32 important in California? Gary Doer (Premier of Manitoba) is the third speaker after Arnold.
http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/4111/
What do you know about the WESTERN CLIMATE INITIATIVE? They have agreed that States and provinces should place limits on how much new cars emit. California is the biggest market of the MCI Provinces and States which is why it needs to go first on these things. You get a smaller state like Colorado setting limits on auto emissions, the Auto makers could just ignore the market. The reason Bush is getting involved is that if California is able to enforce this on automakers, a lot of smaller States will be able to follow suit because the product would already be in production. Gas companies don't like this.
Whether you hate Arnold or like Arnold, how many of you can honestly say that you would like to spend more on gas per mile driven? Lower emission vehicles means spending less on gas to travel the same distance.
To pick up on vaudree's point: Here we have an administration that claims countering global warming is "too expensive," while at the same time it's actively blocking legislation that would save the consumer (and taxpayer) money--AND make the planet more livable.
Fairly typical of conservative "logic."
"Way to go, Arnold!" Give em' hell!
I dont like Arnold, but fighting against global warming, armed with tight regulations over carbon emissions, is a JUST fight, no matter who it comes from. If a Republican like Arnold cares about global warming and even sues the Bush administration itself, then I will concede.