December, 08 2008, 09:19am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Email:,info@peer.org
Why Lisa Jackson Should Not Run EPA
Disastrous Record in New Jersey Bodes Ill for Reforming EPA
WASHINGTON
The track record compiled by Lisa P. Jackson as Commissioner of the
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection should disqualify her
from serving as the next head of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, says Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
In many instances, Jackson embraced policies at DEP echoing the very
practices at the Bush EPA which Senator Barack Obama condemned during
the presidential campaign.
DEP employees describe Ms. Jackson as employing a highly politicized
approach to decision-making that resulted in suppression of scientific
information, issuance of gag orders and threats against professional
staff members who dared to voice concerns. These reports raise
troubling questions about her fitness to run an agency of much greater
size and complexity. Among concerns PEER points to are -
- Cases in which public health was endangered due to DEP
malfeasance, including one case involving a day-care center in a former
thermometer factory in which DEP failed to warn parents or workers for
months about mercury contamination; - Rising levels of water
pollution, contamination of drinking water supplies and poisoning of
wildlife with no cogent state response; and - The state
hazardous waste clean-up program under Ms. Jackson was so mismanaged
that the Bush EPA had to step in and assume control of several
Superfund sites.
"While Ms. Jackson has a compelling biography, little of what
occurred during her 31-month tenure commends her for promotion," stated
PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. "Under her watch, New Jersey's
environment only got dirtier, incredible as that may seem."
In one of her first acts, Jackson appointed the lobbyist for the New
Jersey Builders Association as her Assistant Commissioner to oversee
critical water quality and land use permits. Jackson later convened an
industry-dominated task force to rewrite DEP policies and relaxed
pollution enforcement through policies more business-friendly than
those under Gov. Christie Whitman. Relying on closed-door deal-making
with regulated industry executives and lobbyists, Ms. Jackson produced
decisions, such as -
- Invoking "executive privilege" to block a request filed by
PEER under the state Open Public Records Act for a copy of her schedule
and sign-in logs; - Pushing to privatize pollution control through outsourcing of toxic clean-ups to industry;
- Abolishing
the DEP Division of Science & Research after it produced damning
reports on continuing contamination following state-supervised
clean-ups.
"In our experience, Lisa Jackson is cut out of the same professional
cloth as the current administrator, Stephen Johnson - a pliant
technocrat who will follow orders," Ruch added. "If past is prologue,
one cannot reasonably expect meaningful change if she is appointed to
lead EPA."
The one area where Ms. Jackson claims national leadership is the
state climate change program but PEER contends that examination of her
record yields paltry results -
- DEP failed to meet its first major statutory milestone in
implementing the emission reduction goals of the highly touted Global
Warming Response Act. A June 30th legal deadline for producing a plan
identifying the legislative and regulatory "measures necessary to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions" still has not been met. At the same
time, Ms. Jackson supported and Gov. Jon Corzine signed "The Permit
Extension Act" which exempts thousands of projects from any new energy
conservation, efficiency or requirements for solar heating or renewable
energy; - New Jersey missed the historic first auction of
greenhouse gas pollution allowances under the Regional Greenhouse Gas
Initiative, or RGGI, this September because DEP was unable to adopt
regulations to implement the pollution trading program that underpinned
the auction; and - Jackson proposed a cap-and-trade program to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions that will do little to combat global
warming because it sets emissions caps above current levels and
contains numerous complex offsets and loopholes that undercut its
effectiveness.
"Given what actually transpired in New Jersey, putting Ms. Jackson
in a key position for guiding a national global warming effort would be
imprudent," Ruch concluded. "The Obama transition should take a little
more time to find the right choice for this critical job."
###
Read the PEER letter to President-elect Obama opposing Jackson
Look at a menu of eco-fiascos under Ms. Jackson
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is a national alliance of local state and federal resource professionals. PEER's environmental work is solely directed by the needs of its members. As a consequence, we have the distinct honor of serving resource professionals who daily cast profiles in courage in cubicles across the country.
LATEST NEWS
Senate Tosses 'Dangerous Provision' Preventing State-Level AI Regulation From GOP Megabill
"From the start, this provision had Big Tech's money and lobbyists all over it. This is a major victory for the American people over the AI industry," said one advocate.
Jul 01, 2025
With a 99-1 vote early Tuesday, the Republican-controlled Senate decided to remove a controversial provision that would have prevented state-level regulation on artificial intelligence for 10 years from U.S. President Donald Trump's massive tax and spending bill that is currently being debated in Congress.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) was the lone lawmaker who voted to keep the moratorium in the bill.
While far from the only controversial part of the reconciliation package, the provision drew opposition from an ideologically diverse group that included Democratic and Republican state attorneys general; over 140 groups working to support children's online safety, consumer protections, and responsible innovation; and faith leaders.
Senators struck Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) AI measure from the megabill by adopting an amendment introduced by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.). They voted on Blackburn's amendment during a session known as a vote-a-rama. Blackburn introduced the amendment after considering an agreement that would have watered down the provision.
According to The Verge, the measure that was rejected on Tuesday required states to avoid regulation AI and "automated decision systems" if they wanted to get funding for their broadband programs.
The provision would have been a major win for Big Tech, which has made the case that state laws around AI are obstructing their ability to do business.
Advocates and Democratic lawmakers cheered the decision to strip the provision.
"From the start, this provision had Big Tech's money and lobbyists all over it. This is a major victory for the American people over the AI industry. It shows that Americans are aware of the proliferation of AI harms in real time," said J.B. Branch, Big Tech accountability advocate at the watchdog group Public Citizen.
Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said Tuesday that "early this morning, the Senate overwhelmingly voted to reject a dangerous provision to block states from regulating artificial intelligence, including protecting kids online. This 99-1 vote sent a clear message that Congress will not sell out our kids and local communities in order to pad the pockets of Big Tech billionaires."
In addition to concerns focused on Big Tech, experts recently told The Guardian that in the absence of state-level AI regulation, untrammeled growth of AI would take a toll on the world's "dangerously overheating climate."
Sacha Haworth, the executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, credited the "massive" defeat of Cruz's provision to the "incredible mobilizing by advocates to beat back Big Tech lobbying and last-minute bullying."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Shred JD Vance as He Shrugs Off Millions of Americans Losing Medicaid as 'Minutiae'
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Jul 01, 2025
Vice President J.D. Vance took heat from critics this week when he downplayed legislation that would result in millions of Americans losing Medicaid coverage as mere "minutiae."
Writing on X, Vance defended the budget megabill that's currently being pushed through the United States Senate by arguing that it will massively increase funding to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which he deemed to be a necessary component of carrying out the Trump administration's mass deportation operation.
"The thing that will bankrupt this country more than any other policy is flooding the country with illegal immigration and then giving those migrants generous benefits," wrote Vance. "The [One Big Beautiful Bill] fixes this problem. And therefore it must pass."
He then added that "everything else—the CBO score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy—is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions."
It was this line that drew the ire of many critics, as the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Senate version of the budget bill would slash spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program by more than $1 trillion over a ten-year-period, which would result in more than 10 million people losing their coverage. Additionally, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) has proposed an amendment that would roll back the expansion of Medicaid under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which would likely kick millions more off of the program.
Many congressional Democrats were quick to pounce on Vance for what they said were callous comments about a vital government program.
"So if the only thing that matters is immigration... why didn't you support the bipartisan Lankford-Murphy bill that tackled immigration far better than your Ugly Bill?" asked Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.). "And it didn't have 'minutiae' that will kick 12m+ Americans off healthcare or raise the debt by $4tn."
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Veteran healthcare reporter Jonathan Cohn put some numbers behind the policies that are being minimized by the vice president.
"11.8M projected to lose health insurance," he wrote. "Clinics and hospitals taking a hit, especially in rural areas. Low-income seniors facing higher costs. 'Minutiae.'"
Activist Leah Greenberg, the co-chair of progressive organizing group Indivisible, zeroed in on Vance's emphasis on ramping up ICE's funding as particularly problematic.
"They are just coming right out and saying they want an exponential increase in $$$ so they can build their own personal Gestapo," she warned.
Washington Post global affairs columnist Ishaan Tharoor also found himself disturbed by the sheer size of the funding increase for ICE that Vance is demanding and he observed that "nothing matters more apparently than giving ICE a bigger budget than the militaries of virtually every European country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Heinrich Should Be Ashamed': Lone Senate Dem Helps GOP Deliver Big Pharma Win
The provision, part of the Senate budget bill, was described as "a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars."
Jul 01, 2025
The deep-pocketed and powerful pharmaceutical industry notched a significant victory on Monday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a bill described by critics as a handout to drug corporations can be included in the Republican reconciliation package, which could become law as soon as this week.
The legislation, titled the Optimizing Research Progress Hope and New (ORPHAN) Cures Act, would exempt drugs that treat more than one rare disease from Medicare's drug-price negotiation program, allowing pharmaceutical companies to charge exorbitant prices for life-saving medications in a purported effort to encourage innovation. (Medications developed to treat rare diseases are known as "orphan drugs.")
The consumer advocacy group Public Citizen observed that if the legislation were already in effect, Medicare "would have been barred from negotiating lower prices for important treatments like cancer drugs Imbruvica, Calquence, and Pomalyst."
Among the bill's leading supporters is Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), whose spokesperson announced the parliamentarian's decision to allow the measure in the reconciliation package after previously advising that it be excluded. Heinrich is listed as the legislation's only co-sponsor in the Senate, alongside lead sponsor Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
"Sen. Heinrich should be ashamed of prioritizing drug corporation profits over lower medicine prices for seniors and people with disabilities," Steve Knievel, access to medicines advocate at Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday. "Patients and consumers breathed a sigh of relief when the Senate parliamentarian stripped the proposal from Republicans' Big Ugly Betrayal, so it comes as a gut punch to hear that Sen. Heinrich welcomed the reversal and continued to champion a proposal that will transfer billions from taxpayers to Big Pharma."
"People across the country are demanding lower drug prices and for Medicare drug price negotiations to be expanded, not restricted," Knievel added. "Sen. Heinrich should apologize to his constituents and start listening to them instead of drug corporation lobbyists."
The Biotechnology Innovation Organization, a lobbying group whose members include pharmaceutical companies, has publicly endorsed and promoted the legislation, urging lawmakers to pass it "as soon as possible."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients."
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the ORPHAN Cures Act would cost U.S. taxpayers around $5 billion over the next decade.
Merith Basey, executive director of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now, said that "patients are infuriated to see the Senate cave to Big Pharma by reviving the ORPHAN Cures Act at the eleventh hour."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars," said Basey. "We call on lawmakers to remove this unnecessary provision immediately and stand with an overwhelming majority of Americans who want the Medicare Negotiation program to go further. Medicare negotiation will deliver huge savings for seniors and taxpayers; this bill would undermine that progress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular