Bad News for Breathers?

Photo by urbanfeel, via <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/30003006@N00/530910048/">Flickr</a>.


Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency quietly delayed the release of final rules on ground-level ozone pollution standards, better known as smog. One clean-air group called the delay “a potentially ominous development,” as the agency has been pressured to forgo the new standards.

The agency proposed tough new rules in January, tightening controversial Bush-era regulations that experts believe imperiled public health. But EPA has faced push-back from the industry and a group of senators, who asked the agency to hold off on the new rules. Opponents of the standards argue that it’s only been two years since the Bush administration released the last set of rules, and updates are generally issued every five years (they failed to mention, however, that the Bush rules were far weaker than the agency’s own scientists recommended).

The final rule was supposed to be released at the end of this month; now EPA says it won’t be issued for at least another two months. In a statement, EPA said it still intends to issue a new rule:

EPA remains committed to protecting public health from the dangers of ground-level ozone, a key component of smog. We are continuing to carefully consider the proposed options and the information we received during the public comment period on the January 2010 proposal. There will be a slight delay in finalizing our decision on any new ozone standards. We expect to finalize the standards towards the end of October 2010. We have spoken with the litigants and have updated the court on our status.

But Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, thinks the delay is a bad sign for the rules. “Obviously, we want EPA to make the best possible decision, using the best possible science. But this delay is bad news for breathers,” said O’Donnell. “We can only hope it is a temporary setback, and that the EPA does not bow to political pressure on an issue so significant.”

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.