"I’m sure it was very inconvenient for the EPA to consider a study that contradicted the findings it wanted to reach," Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the senior Republican on the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, said in a statement. "But the EPA is supposed to reach its findings based on evidence, not on political goals. The repression of this important study casts doubts on the EPA’s finding, and frankly, on other analysis the EPA has conducted on climate issues."
The revelations could prove embarrassing to Jackson, the EPA administrator, who said in January: "I will ensure the EPA’s efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and programs, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency." Similarly, President Barack Obama claimed that "the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over… To undermine scientific integrity is to undermine our democracy. It is contrary to our way of life."
"All this talk from the president and (EPA administrator) Lisa Jackson about integrity, transparency, and increased EPA protection for whistleblowers–you’ve got a bouquet of ironies here," said Kazman, the CEI attorney.
E-mails indicate EPA suppressed report skeptical of global warming | Politics and Law – CNET News
I am amused at how the firing of the AmeriCorps Inspector General and this story seem to have “legs”. You would think it would be in the administration’s best interest to have someone looking over their shoulders and so that they can keep the minor scandals from becoming major scandals. The greatest threat to the Democratic party and the administration is the Democratic party shooting itself in the foot. If the mayor of Sacramento misused AmeriCorps to the tune of $800,000 for personal use, the tax payers want to see that AmeriCorps gets paid back in full. This should be a fairly simple trade off for the administration to prevent future spending abuses. Firing the Inspector General says a very loud message that no one will be watching the hen house. With all of this federal money floating around and no safe guards, it looks like 2010 will remind us of the scandal years in the Clinton administration.
I find myself increasingly cynical about the public benefits of these issues. It is a given that I am going to pay more taxes but for the life of me I cannot tell you what the TARP bill and the stimulus bill have accomplished. It is pretty easy to see that most businesses are looking at much lower sales. It is not surprising that these businesses have laid off people and not going to rehire them until sales improves. The administration seems oblivious to this simple economic principal. So far the TARP bill and the stimulus bill have created a recovery so mediocre that many people wonder whether the stimulus bills were worth the effort. The economic predictions used to justify the stimulus bill were way off the mark and the economic predictions for 2010 continue to deteriorate. The people understand the deficit created by these bills and are scared. What are we paying for? Considering how poorly the administration has done with the managing the economy, why should anyone expect the Waxman-Markley bill will be a modest impact on the economy as claimed by the administration. Over the last six months I gradually accepted the position that these bills are politically motivated and unnecessary. While the country looks at double digit unemployment, higher taxes, and an astronomical deficit, some friend of a congressman will be doing pretty good selling something “green” to the government. With the unwillingness of the EPA to entertain opposing view points on crucial issues, it is difficult to temper my pessimism about these issues. I have lost all faith that this administration can do anything right except kill flies. The Waxman-Markley bill looks like another scandal waiting in the wings.