TNR BLOGS

July 04, 2009 | 8:16 AM
July 03, 2009 | 7:55 PM
July 03, 2009 | 7:37 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM
June 29, 2009 | 9:09 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
11.12.2008
Weeding Through The Controversy Over Obama's EPA Pick

Barack Obama has reportedly tapped Lisa Jackson to be his new EPA head. Jackson was previously working in New Jersey as commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection. There, she earned raves from Governor Jon Corzine, who recently told ThinkProgress, "I think Lisa has done a remarkable job of trying to move the environmental agenda forward within a constrained world." (Most notably, New Jersey has been trying to enact a plan to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions 80 percent by 2050.)

But not everyone shares that assessment. In a widely circulated and remarkably scathing press release, The Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), a non-profit group that works with whistleblowers inside various government agencies, absolutely blasted the Jackson pick. In a letter to Obama, PEER executive director Jeff Ruch claimed that Jackson took a "highly politicized approach to decision-making" in New Jersey that resembled Bush's tenure at the EPA, was cozy with lobbyists, and actually had a woeful record on climate change. Read the full press release here; it's pretty brutal.

So is PEER correct? Is Lisa Jackson a poor environmental pick? I'm not convinced. On balance, her record really does look quite green.

Earlier this afternoon, I called Jeff Tittel, who directs the Sierra Club's New Jersey chapter and has worked closely with Jackson on a number of environmental initiatives over the years. He quickly dubbed PEER's press release "total crap" and criticized PEER for having little on-the-ground presence in New Jersey. In Tittel's view, any blame for New Jersey's mixed environmental record should rest squarely on the shoulders of, ironically, Corzine himself, whom Tittel called "the worst environmental governor we've ever had." Lisa Jackson, he argues, was the biggest (maybe the only) bright spot in New Jersey.

Among other things, PEER's press release had excoriated Jackson for appointing a lobbyist from the New Jersey Builders Association to be her assistant commissioner, overseeing water quality and land-use permits. Tittel rejects this criticism, noting that Corzine basically gave Jackson two choices to fill the spot: either the New Jersey Builders Association person—who, Tittel notes, actually wrote policy papers for NJBA, not lobbying, and had previously worked in the state's environmental agency—or... a lobbyist from the Chemical Council. Jackson made the greener pick.

Indeed, Tittel argues that Jackson has frequently battled hard against both Corzine and New Jersey's business community on a number of contentious issues, from protecting 300,000 acres of environmentally sensitive lands from sewer permitting to forcing the governor to revise the notorious "Permits Extension Act," which would've extended building permits into environmentally sensitive areas. (That bill was such a galling giveaway that even Bush's EPA protested.) Although Tittel agrees that the final bill was still horrendous, he credits Jackson for standing up to her boss and taking out "75 percent of what was bad in that law." Likewise, on climate change, where New Jersey has been relatively sluggish in meeting its targets, Tittel puts most of the blame on Corzine, and credits Jackson with getting a renewable-electricity standard in place.

When I mentioned this pushback to PEER's Jeff Ruch, he wasn't impressed. "That's shaky," he says, arguing that you can't separate Jackson from Corzine so cleanly. "She was going to go work as his chief of staff [before getting tapped by Obama]." What's more, Ruch adds, "One of Jackson's big outgoing actions was to convene an industry-dominated task force that recommended rewriting the rules for building permits." But Tittel fires back at this, too: "Look, I was on that task force," he sighs. "They haven't even read the report." Tittel says that this much-maligned task force was Jackson's way of, again, curtailing Corzine's pro-builder tendencies and bringing the Department of Environmental Protection back into the permitting process—giving the agency more authority to conduct environmental impact assessments, for starters.

New Jersey is a state that's long been dominated by developers and real-estate interests, both of which have a tight grip on the Corzine administration. Last year, Corzine slashed the state's environmental budget, declaring that Jackson's agency would have to "do less with less." Jackson, for her part, appears to have fought back fiercely. Now, you could argue that that's setting expectations too low. ("This is like saying someone who did a good economic job in Bangladesh should go be head of the World Bank," says Ruch. "She's coming from an agency where there's a lot of unhappiness, and going to a bigger camp [i.e., the EPA] with even more unhappy campers.") But Jackson's green instincts do seem strong. Among other things, Tittel points out that Jackson hails from New Orlean's Ninth Ward, and her mother was badly injured in Katrina. "If you want someone who understands the effects of climate change firsthand," he says, "that's her."

--Bradford Plumer

Posted: Thursday, December 11, 2008 5:58 PM with 8 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

AMVHuck said:

"If you want someone who understands the effects of climate change firsthand," he says, "that's her."

OK, Katrina was not caused by climate change, but who's concerned about accuracy in this debate? I sure can't tell.

December 11, 2008 2:00 PM

Brad Plumer said:

AMVHuck--I see your point, and it's a fair one, but I heard that line more as shorthand for the idea that Katrina did get a lot of people worried about the possibility that climate change could lead to more powerful hurricanes and, hence, more Katrina-like incidents. Not as a definitive statement that global warming caused Katrina itself.

December 11, 2008 2:10 PM

The Stump said:

NAME: Lisa Jackson AGE: 46 NEW APPOINTMENT: Head of the Environmental Protection Agency (expected) HOW

December 11, 2008 2:48 PM

lsernoff said:

Mr. Ruch sounds like a pimple on the ass of mankind.  

December 11, 2008 3:01 PM

jwl2672 said:

Yeeech.  What a dog.

December 11, 2008 4:30 PM

Political Animal said:

THURSDAY'S MINI-REPORT.... Today's edition of quick hits: * Wall Street did not react well when the automotive rescue package ran into roadblocks in the Senate. * Senators are, however, trying to salvage the bailout plan. * CNN: "The number of...

December 11, 2008 5:31 PM

The Plank said:

Despite the banner headlines generated by Obama's big-ticket cabinet appointments, an interesting

December 12, 2008 6:24 PM

I Majorajam said:

Actually, we don't know that climate change didn't 'cause' Katrina, at least in the sense that people who allude to the two in the same breath are referring to (in the highly inane and narrow technical sense, of course, it didn't. The circumstances of our planet and laws of thermodynamics are more directly the 'cause' of storms including those that acquire the properties of cataclysmically powerful hurricanes, and these do not depend on anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions).

Ironically, AMVHuck feels he or she is in the position to say that, "Katrina was not caused by climate change", while simultaneously holding the view that saying it was is 'inaccurate', and lamenting the lack of focus on accuracy. In any case, what we do know and can say with certitude is that Katrina was made more probable by climate change. Perhaps this is the accuracy that AMVHuck and his brethren should seek out.

December 13, 2008 12:30 AM