Reducing climate pollution through regulation with the Clean Air Act is not the preferred method of the Obama administration. Both Jackson and President Obama have stated that legislation is less cumbersome and would harness market forces. Last fall (27 Oct. 2009), in testimony before the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works regarding the climate and energy bill (S. 1733, Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act), Jackson stated in the Q&A of the hearing that, “There is only one way to get economy-wide market incentives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and that is through new legislation.”

Without legislation, EPA is forging ahead on regulation because it is required to by law. A 2007 Supreme Court decision determined that global warming pollution is covered under the Clean Air Act, ordering the EPA to assess whether these pollutants pose a threat to the health and welfare of Americans.

In December 2009, EPA completed its analysis and found that climate pollution indeed poses such a threat (see, U.S. EPA: Greenhouse Gases "Threaten the Public Health and Welfare of the American People"). The conclusion of this analysis is commonly referred to as the endangerment finding. Due to the result of this analysis, EPA is now required to take further steps under the Clean Air Act to protect Americans from dangerous climate change.

Currently, there are proposals in Congress to limit EPA's authority to regulate climate pollutants. This proposal is led primarily by Senator Lisa Murkowski along with a few others (see, As Weather Extremes Hammer Arkansas Farms, Senator Lincoln Endorses Veto of Finding that Climate Change Threatens Farmers), which, if it were to pass, would essentially overturn the endangerment finding and strip the EPA of its regulatory powers.

Jackson also addressed in this week's Congressional letter the potential impact of the proposal. She stated that voting for the proposal would be a “vote to reject the scientific work of the thirteen U.S. government departments that contribute to the U.S. Global Change Research Program. It also would be viewed by many as a vote to move the United States to a position behind that of China on the issue of climate change, and more in line with the position of Saudi Arabia.”  

Yesterday, in testimony before the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works regarding President's Proposed EPA Budget for FY 2011, Administrator Jackson said one of the key aspects of the FY 2011 budget is taking action on climate change. These efforts are aimed at additional regulatory efforts, including new emission standards for mobile sources such as passenger cars and light-duty trucks, and providing state grants focused on developing technological capacity for addressing climate emissions.

Jackson also answered questions about the EPA endangerment finding and the science behind the analysis. When asked by Senator Inhofe (widely known to believe that "climate change is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people") if recent errors in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4th Assessment report merited a review of the EPA endangerment finding, Jackson reiterated the multiple scientific sources used in the EPA analysis -- not just the IPCC; and stated the following:

"It is incumbent on me as Administrator to review any new information as it comes out and if anything changes [from] the multiple lines of evidence from many many sources, not just the IPCC. [If there are changes], then I would call for a review of the findings. But I have not seen that. "

Jackson further reiterated the science by stating, "The science behind climate change is settled, and human activity is responsible for global warming...That conclusion is not a partisan one."

For more on the science & IPCC see, Statement from WWF Regarding the IPCC and the Strength of Our Science (10 Feb 2010).