Matt Dempsey (202) 224-9797


Administrator Refers Senators To Source ‘Independent of Political Appointees’ 

Washington, D.C. – In a letter to Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio), EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson summarily denied the Senators’ request for economic analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill and how it would affect families, small businesses, and farmers.  In her response, Jackson implied that EPA’s analysis is politically biased by referring the Senators to a separate analysis by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), which, she said, “operates independently of any political appointees.” 

Senator Inhofe released the following statement:  

Sen. Inhofe: “In effect, EPA has refused to provide members of Congress, as they prepare for meetings and events with their constituents over the August recess, with critical information on the Waxman-Markey energy tax and how it will affect jobs in the Midwest, South, and Great Plains, as well as food, gasoline, and electricity prices for all American consumers.   

“In the letter, Administrator Jackson incorrectly states that the recent analysis by EIA of the Waxman-Markey bill sufficiently covers our request.  EIA’s analysis, while helpful, does not address several of the key issues we raised, including, among others, the availability of international offsets and the disproportionate impacts of the bill on states such as Ohio, which rely on manufacturing for jobs and coal for electricity.    

“House Agriculture Committee Chairman Colin Peterson (D-Minn.) was among many members of Congress from rural districts who questioned whether EPA would implement a cap-and-trade bill with fairness, openness, and objectivity.  I should say that their fears were justified, as EPA has denied our request for a comprehensive, real-world analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill, and how it would affect, among many others, America’s farmers and ranchers.” 

“Moreover, in her letter, Administrator Jackson stated that providing additional analysis is unnecessary because Sen. Boxer will introduce legislation in September, and that Sen. Boxer “has asked that EPA prepare to perform an economic analysis of her bill.”  That, frankly, is irrelevant.  We asked for an analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill, which would be the House position in a potential conference committee.  Thus the economic consequences of the bill are critical for senators to understand.  Also, Sen. Boxer has indicated that her legislation could have “placeholders” for key issues, such as the allocation formula, which throws into doubt when a complete analysis of a finished bill could be conducted (see link to letter on this issue from Senate EPW Republicans).”




Copy of the Senators’ letter 

Copy of EPA response