Lawmakers Criticizing Bush EPA Budget Proposal

Lawmakers Criticizing Bush EPA Budget Proposal



March 2007 - The Bush 
administration's plan to cut some $500 million from the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency's budget shortchanges vital 
environmental programs and is unacceptable, members of the 
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee told the agency 
chief on Wednesday. 
EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson endured a litany of 
criticism during the budget hearing, with committee chair 
Barbara Boxer leading the charge. 
Boxer, a California Democrat, called the budget proposal 
"shocking," highlighting a $400 million cut to wastewater 
treatment projects, a $35 million cut to air pollution 
monitoring and a $7 million cut for the toxic waste cleanup 
program. 
"This budget sends an unmistakable message to people who are 
concerned about our health and a clean environment - you are 
not a high priority," said Boxer, who questioned Johnson's 
commitment to the agency's mission to protect public health 
and the environment. 
"I don't think an EPA administrator should sit back and take 
the kind of cuts to programs that you are taking and you in 
essence are endorsing," Boxer said. "Your job is to fight for 
the environment." 
Johnson defended the $7.2 billion spending plan and said it 
provided the agency with ample resources to meet it goals. 
EPA Adminstrator Stephen Johnson's defense of his agency's 
budget failed to assure lawmakers that the cuts would not 
adversely impact communities across the nation. 
"Our air water and land are cleaner than they were a 
generation ago and with this budget that progress will 
continue," Johnson told the committee. 
The EPA chief highlighted increased spending for enforcement 
activities and for water security and decontamination 
programs. 
The budget reflects "EPA's evolving role from guardians of the 
environment to also guardians of our homeland," Johnson said. 
Johnson's remarks did little to convince Boxer or other 
members of the committee. 
"I am really enraged by this budget," said Senator George 
Voinovich, an Ohio Republican. 
Voinovich honed in on the $400 million cut to the Clean Water 
State Revolving Fund, which provides states low-interest loans 
to pay for sewage treatment plant upgrades. 
Federal studies estimate needed upgrades and repairs to the 
nation's wastewater infrastructure of more than $300 billion 
over the next 20 years. 
The budget plan is "woefully inadequate," Voinovich said, as 
it fails to give local communities the help they need to 
upgrade infrastructure and meet stricter federal clean water 
standards. 
"What we have is a ticking time bomb ready to blow up if we 
continue to ignore these nationwide needs," Voinovich said. 
"Either you have to back off with these orders ... or we have 
to come up with the money to help these people pay for this. 
You can't have it both ways." 
Johnson said the level of the loan fund is more than $3 
billion, "the highest it has ever been," adding that the 
"infrastructure challenge is everyone's challenge." 
Ranking member James Inhofe and committe chair Barbara Boxer 
shared moments of rare agreement duirng the hearing, 
criticizing the administration's cut to clean water programs. 

Senator James Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican, criticized the 
administration for repeatedly proposing reductions to programs 
- like the water loan fund - knowing that Congress will 
reinsert the money. 
EPA continues to use "these budgetary tricks to create the 
appearance of fiscal responsibility," Inhofe said. 
Democrats on the panel pressed Johnson on several other 
issues, including reductions for EPA programs on environmental 
justice, climate change and brownfields, as well as to EPA's 
Energy Star program. 
"When something is working you don't tend to cut back on it," 
said Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat in reference 
to the reduction in funding for the Energy Star program, which 
encourages the purchase and use of energy efficient products 
and practices. 
Throughout the hearing Johnson repeatedly defended the plan as 
adequate for meeting the agency's responsibilities and as part 
of the administration's broader goal of reducing the federal 
deficit. 
"This budget does continue to deliver environmental results 
while meeting a balanced budget for our nation," Johnson told 
the committee. 
Senator Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, asked if the 
Department of Defense was also "committed to balancing the 
budget." 
"We are being told that cutting this budget is good for 
Americans and I don't believe it," Lautenberg said. 
New Jersey Democrat Frank Lautenberg said more money is needed 
to clean up toxic waste sites. 
Boxer and Johnson engaged in a heated exchange regarding the 
administration's plan to combine EPA's children's health 
office with its environmental education office. The proposal 
also calls for eliminating $8 million in funding for 
environmental education 
"This undermines the mission of the children's health office, 
which is to single out children's health because of the 
particular threat to children posed by environmental 
pollutants," Boxer said. 
Boxer noted the administration's controversial plan in 2005 to 
allow pesticide testing on children, adding, "I understand why 
you might not want an office of children's health." 
"Senator, we still have an office of children's health," 
Johnson said, interrupting the California Democrat. "I have to 
correct the record." 
Johnson said the children's health office was not being 
undermined, adding that "our entire agency is continuing to 
work to make sure we are protecting our nation's most 
vulnerable populations." 
Boxer said Johnson was missing her point. 
"The fact is that we wanted an office of children's health 
where the only thing done in the office was worrying about 
children's health," she said. "You've combined it. Period. End 
of quote. That's a fact." 
"It is still an office - that is a fact, senator," Johnson 
replied, drawing a rebuke from the committee chair. 
"I don't need you to talk now because I'll give you your 
chance in many other hearings," said Boxer, who closed the 
hearing by scolding Johnson for not admitting that the 
proposal cuts EPA's budget. 
"When you testify you don't even admit to that," Boxer said. 
"This is the second time you have done this in a hearing and 
it is disingenuous." 





 

---