For Jackson, it’s not easy being green

Lisa Jackson is facing uncharted political terrain following President Obama’s decision to shelve smog regulations that she had said were vital to protecting the public’s health.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator is appearing before Congress for the first time on Thursday since Obama’s Sept. 2 move to undercut her effort to toughen George W. Bush-era ozone rules. Obama has opted to punt the issue until after the 2012 election.

{mosads}She is certain to face questions about the ozone standard, as well as GOP attacks on other EPA rules that Republicans call “job killers.” 

Her testimony also comes as the Obama and White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley are attempting to repair ties to the business community. The administration this year launched a highly publicized effort to eliminate some government regulations, irritating organized labor and environmentalists.

Daley’s influence in the West Wing has sparked many questions about Jackson’s clout. 

House Republicans on Thursday will attempt to make Jackson squirm, seeking to divide Obama and the EPA chief.

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations subcommittee holding the hearing about EPA regulations, will zero in on the smog rule withdrawal.

“We would like to explain our point of view in why the president was right, and we would like to hear her [explain] why she thinks either her boss is wrong or why she was so strong in the first place,” he said.

“I think her credibility, considering how strongly she advocated for the ozone [rule], is diminished a bit,” Stearns added.

Jackson has sought to quash speculation that she’s preparing to resign. 

“This administration has a tremendous record on the environment and a lot more work left to do. Administrator Jackson said she’s not going anywhere, and she isn’t,” said EPA spokeswoman Betsaida Alcantara.

Jackson signaled last week that she’s not holding Obama’s ozone decision against him.

“It was a tough call. The president made a tough call and I respect it,” Jackson told San Francisco radio station KQED on Thursday.

The White House’s rebuke of the EPA smog rule has environmentalists wondering whether Jackson can secure the White House’s backing on other controversial environmental regulations.

One thing is clear: the political winds have shifted significantly over the last couple of years.

In 2009, Jackson and then-White House energy adviser Carol Browner were on offense, working to convince Congress to pass a comprehensive climate change bill. 

The measure narrowly cleared the House, died in the Senate and became campaign fodder for Republicans in 2010.

Now, Browner has departed, the House is in GOP hands and the environmental movement is playing defense.

“Obviously we feel like we’ve been singed. I don’t think anyone takes the White House support for granted,” said Frank O’Donnell of the group Clean Air Watch.

Rep. Henry Waxman (Calif.), the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, publicly warned the White House not to back down on other pending standards.

In an interview with The Hill earlier this month, a frustrated Waxman said: “I think that they could have gone forward with a regulation, based on the science, that would set an ozone standard that would protect the public health. But now that they have done it, I just hope that they understand that they are going to have to hold the line on everything else and not give anything more away on the environment.”

The White House argues the ozone decision was made amid a unique set of circumstances, and the administration has been on a charm offensive with environmentalists since Obama killed the rule. 

Administration officials have repeatedly said in recent weeks that they will stand up to the industry and GOP assault on rules including upcoming EPA regulations to cut mercury and other toxic emissions from power plants.

“The White House took her back and stuck a knife in it, but after the ozone decision it looks as if, by all appearances, the White House is trying to at least change the appearance of its relationship and say that it is once again supporting EPA,” O’Donnell said.

That signal was loud and clear when the White House issued a strongly worded veto threat Wednesday against pending House legislation that would delay — perhaps indefinitely —air toxics standards and recently finalized EPA rules on interstate power plant pollution.

The White House statement slammed efforts to block “landmark” public health protections.

Regardless, some Democrats say talk is cheap, adding that the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) must follow though by greenlighting EPA rules. 

The White House commitment to defend upcoming regulations nonetheless leaves room for plenty of jousting ahead between EPA and OMB on the substance of the rules. 

Many environmentalists deeply distrust Cass Sunstein, who heads OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs; one former OMB staffer told The Hill Wednesday that Obama’s unusual decision to personally announce that the ozone rules would be shelved is a boost to the OMB office. 

Bill Snape of the Center for Biological Diversity said Jackson’s challenge will now be to effectively make the case for science- and health-based protections amid GOP efforts to scale-back or block several regulations.

“I think it is pretty clear that the White House twists in the polling winds on these issues. To the extent that she can show that the American public does want these strong clean air protections, which I believe they do, that only strengthens her hand,” he said.

{mossecondads}Green groups’ collective antennae were up last week when Jackson said that EPA would not meet a Sept. 30 deadline to propose greenhouse gas standards for power plants. 

And, perhaps tellingly, it was Obama who received a letter Tuesday from 19 groups — including the National Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club — expressing concern about the missed deadline and asking Obama to “reaffirm the administration’s commitment to issue strong standards that significantly reduce carbon emissions.”

EPA officials are cautioning against reading anything into the delay and say they will announce a schedule soon. Jackson told a California radio station last week that EPA will “absolutely” move ahead with the standards and said the delay wasn’t political.

“It was our decision to propose a new schedule due to the complexity of the rules,” said Alcantara, the EPA spokeswoman. “We just needed more time.”

Jackson, in her prepared remarks for Thursday’s hearing, steers clear of the ozone decision but strongly makes the case for Clean Air Act protections, and notes more broadly that “regulations can and do improve the lives of people.”

“We need these rules to hold polluters accountable and keep us safe. For more than 40 years, since the Nixon administration, the Agency has carried out its mission and established a proven track record that a healthy environment and economic growth are not mutually exclusive,” she plans to say.

Conservative Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu (La.), who like Jackson is a New Orleans native, clashed with EPA over the ozone rule and said she was glad to see it shelved. But she disagrees with Stearns that Jackson has been politically wounded.

“I do not think it diminishes her stature,” Landrieu said. “She has got to do her job, the president has got a job to do to balance broader interests than she has, and I hope she will stay there.”