The Obama administration has given itself an extraordinarily powerful
tool that could help the president achieve all three of his top domestic
goals at once--but only if he has the political moxie to deploy it to
its full extent.
That tool is the proposed Endangerment Finding--a formal declaration by
the Environmental Protection Agency that global warming indeed threatens
human health and welfare. Once the administration issues the final
declaration, the Clean Air Act is triggered, giving the administration
sweeping authority to decide how to reduce global warming pollution from
power plants, vehicles, and other sources, how much, and how fast.
According to a groundbreaking new analysis from New York University, the administration
could even unilaterally establish a cap-and-trade system very similar to
what Congress is considering.
Obama's landmark proposal means that the administration no longer has to
go through Congress to make the green economy a reality. No
horse-trading with hostile Republicans. No need to throw tens of
billions of dollars at the oil and coal industries to win the votes of
polluter-friendly members of Congress. No need for sixty votes in the
Senate (or even, for that matter, fifty). It will be the EPA looking at
the science, listening to public comment and deciding how best to
protect the planet, public health and the economy.
With this authority, the administration can do what has been widely
dismissed as politically infeasible, but what scientists and others warn
is environmentally and economically essential: reducing US global
warming pollution from 25 percent to 40
percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
Doing this raises the possibility of giving our children a green and
bountiful planet to grow up in and spur the creation of millions of new,
high-paying green jobs; it would also go a long way toward achieving
Obama's goal of cutting healthcare costs to pay for his $50 billion to $65
billion healthcare plan.
How? Pollution from fossil fuel power plants (mostly coal) adds $167 billion to America's annual healthcare bill, as a result of
increased asthma attacks, respiratory diseases, heart attacks, lung
cancers, mercury poisoning and other impacts that come with coal's soot
and smog. Acting against global-warming pollution would cut other kinds
of toxic pollution too, as businesses invest in energy efficiency and
clean energy and move away from polluting sources of energy. Add the
tens of billions of dollars of additional healthcare costs from auto
tailpipe pollution, and the savings are even higher--potentially paying
for the entire additional cost of President Obama's healthcare plan.
Despite these benefits, the administration has suggested it might
slow-walk its way to climate regulation, in hopes that Congress will
produce a bill more precisely suited to greenhouse gas regulation than
the Clean Air Act Authority.
We've seen the consequences of this kind of caution and delay
before--and they're not pretty. During the Clinton administration,
Greenpeace and other environmental groups sued the EPA to require it to
issue the endangerment finding. Under pressure from industry, the
Clinton administration did nothing and punted the decision to Bush. It
took until 2007 for the Supreme Court to decide that the government had
to make a decision about the finding and until last week for the
government to actually do it. In the meantime, the United States has put
a decade's worth of avoidable pollution into the atmosphere.
Furthermore, there's a real risk that Congressional action, even if it
comes, will be inadequate. Although the House of Representatives may be
moving (slowly) toward passing a climate bill that constitutes a good
first step, it still falls somewhat short of what scientists say is
necessary. And it's difficult to imagine this Senate, overstuffed as it
is with polluter sympathizers, getting sixty votes for anything that
reduces emissions to a level even close to what climatologists say gives
us a real shot of avoiding a planetary emergency.
But if President Obama learns from the mistakes of his predecessors and
quickly establishes aggressive targets, he will set the bar for Congress
to meet. If senators want to lower costs for polluters by passing a more
efficient system specifically tailored to global warming, they can do
so. But to persuade President Obama to sign it, they'll have to make it
strong enough so that it at least equals what he does through executive
Make no mistake: this is hardball. But for better or worse, hardball is
what it's going to take to solve the climate crisis, create a green
economy and meet the president's healthcare goals. At the end of the
day, President Obama can't afford to let Congress set the schedule--or
unilaterally decide the fate of the planet.
© 2023 The Nation
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.