Taking the right steps

Thursday, Dec. 30, 2010 | 2:05 a.m.

The Obama administration last week made two policy announcements that should help protect public lands and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The decisions also represent a new direction for the federal government.

Under the Bush administration, regulatory agencies were muzzled, their funding was cut and long-standing policies were weakened. The Obama administration has been trying to return federal regulatory agencies to their rightful roles, and the announcements last week demonstrated that.

Public land protection

For nearly three decades, the Bureau of Land Management considered wilderness protection part of its mission in managing the 245 million acres under its purview. It considered how plans for public lands affected the wilderness and made recommendations to Congress on which areas to designate for federal protection. But in 2003, the Bush administration changed the agency’s mission, revoking the wilderness policy.

As The New York Times reported last week, commercial use on public lands increased under the Bush administration. That’s not surprising given the Bush administration’s “drill, baby, drill” mentality.

The Interior Department said details of the new policy will come out next year after a public comment period, but Bob Abbey, the BLM director, said the new wilderness policy “affirms the BLM’s authorities under the law — and our responsibility to the American people — to protect the wilderness characteristics of the lands we oversee.”

The Bush administration’s actions left sensitive public lands in jeopardy, and that’s unconscionable. America’s public lands are part of the country’s heritage, and they should be protected.

Greenhouse emissions

The Environmental Protection Agency last week announced a time line to set regulations on greenhouse gas emissions from new and refurbished power plants and oil refineries. The agency said it would have proposed rules next year, with final regulations coming by 2012. Rules for existing plants and refineries could come by 2015.

The EPA is facing significant opposition from Republicans and industry groups. Republican leaders in Congress have bashed the agency for even attempting to issue regulations, pointing to the failure of Congress to pass greenhouse emission legislation. And industry has complained about the cost of regulation.

But the agency is doing the right thing by pursuing new rules to limit emissions. It has the authority to do so, and considering the health issues involved with air pollution, it’s in the public’s interest that the EPA moves to limit emissions.

The fact is that greenhouse gases are dangerous and pose significant risks to people’s health, as well as to the environment. There are technologies that can be used to limit emissions, and the Obama administration has tried to address the concerns of its critics. Gina McCarthy, an EPA assistant administrator, said the rules would be “cost-effective,” and she said the agency would take a “sensitive and collaborative” approach in drafting the rules.

That is more than fair. Government should work with industry to find suitable regulations, but in the end the government is supposed to protect the public’s best interest, not give in to the demands of big business.

Under Bush, regulation was trashed as bad for business and there was an open disdain for science. There is a significant public interest in clean air and public lands, and it’s good to see the Obama administration take appropriate steps to protect people and the environment.