Waterloo Region Record

Trump begins his biggest assault yet on the environmen­t

- ANN CARLSON AND CARA HOROWITZ Ann Carlson is the Shirley Shapiro Professor of Environmen­tal Law at the UCLA School of Law. Cara Horowitz is co-executive director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environmen­t at the UCLA School of Law.

The Environmen­tal Protection Agency’s proposed repeal of stringent vehicle emissions standards is the agency’s biggest assault on public health and the environmen­t yet. The proposal would worsen climate change — a problem that many in the Trump administra­tion don’t even acknowledg­e — and eviscerate the most effective tool Americans have to fight air pollution: California’s special authority to cut tailpipe emissions from cars.

The EPA’s proposal would revoke California’s permission to continue an ambitious clean-cars program that regulates not just greenhouse gases but also the pollutants that create smog and cause asthma, heart and respirator­y disease, and cancer. The program also accelerate­s the adoption of zero-emission vehicles. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia have signed on to California’s standards in whole or in part. The administra­tion is proposing to eliminate the heart of the program.

California’s leadership on auto pollution began in the 1940s and ’50s when a haze of toxic smog regularly hovered over schools, homes and workplaces. Mountains trapped vehicle emissions in the state’s desert basins. California was the first state to regulate emissions from cars, beginning in the 1960s.

In 1967, Congress prohibited other states from regulating auto pollution but let California continue. There was one hitch: The state’s standards had to be tougher than the federal ones. This arrangemen­t has produced one of the country’s greatest environmen­tal accomplish­ments: cleaning up polluted air. California has led the United States in setting tough standards, with the federal government usually following the state’s lead a year or two later.

Progress in Los Angeles, long infamous for its smog, shows just how well this arrangemen­t has worked. In 1977, Southern California experience­d 121 Stage 1 smog alerts for violating federal ozone standards. The region hasn’t had a Stage 1 smog alert since 2003. Los Angeles used to violate carbon monoxide standards more than 100 times a year. The Southern California basin no longer violates the standard, nor does any other air district in the country.

The work to clean up the country’s air quality, though, is not done. Cars and trucks are still the biggest culprits for ozone and particulat­e pollution. In California and around the country, many urban areas continue to violate federal ozone standards. Millions of Americans breathe unhealthy air. People who live near highways and heavily trafficked roads — often low-income communitie­s and communitie­s of colour — breathe the worst air.

Climate change is making air pollution worse. As average temperatur­es increase, so does ozone pollution. In the West, more frequent and intense wildfires increase particulat­e pollution. We need all of the tools at our disposal to keep the country from backslidin­g on air quality, let alone to improve it.

The EPA’s move to revoke California’s waiver is unpreceden­ted in agency history and legally indefensib­le. Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA must approve California’s tailpipe regulation­s as long as California can show that its circumstan­ces are “compelling and extraordin­ary,” which the agency has done more than 100 times for California. Only one waiver has ever been denied, but the EPA ultimately changed its mind and let California regulate.

President Donald Trump’s EPA has said that one of its core principles in “reforming” environmen­tal regulation is to restore power to the states. This proposal to yank authority from California violates this principle. The administra­tion says that California is imposing its standards on the rest of the country. But this is just wrong: Each state gets to choose for itself whether to follow California or federal standards.

The EPA’s proposal is hypocritic­al, and the administra­tion’s argument in its favour is incorrect. If the proposal is finalized and California sues, even a conservati­ve Supreme Court would likely reject it as indefensib­le and wrong-headed.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada