While many people today look to the Daily Show and the Colbert Report for political commentary, the Boston Red Sox leave me with insufficient TV time, so I rely on the Borowitz Report. Whenever the press reports as news something blindingly obvious to normal Americans, Borowitz will refer to the statement as having been authored by D’Oh Magazine.
Last week, in a story that should have been reported in D’Oh Magazine, a Daily Environment Report headline stated that the “Link Between State of Environment, Agency Actions Should be Clear, EPA Told.” The story concerned advice EPA was given by its own Science Advisory Board regarding EPA’s next Report on the Environment, due to be issued in 2012. Among other recommendations, the SAB stated that:
The link between reductions in pollutants and improvements in environmental quality should be made, with the goal of answering the question, “how much reduction in emissions or environmental concentration is needed to produce environmental improvements?” The overarching conceptual model for the ROE needs to include the feedback loop of EPA regulation and policy as an action/response that affects the environment.
I don’t mean to be flip, but isn’t that precisely what EPA and other regulatory agencies are supposed to be doing 100% of the time? I understand that real-world science is messy, but if EPA and other environmental agencies aren’t sure of the link between their regulatory programs and reductions in or prevention of pollution, shouldn’t they be hesitating before they regulate?
Am I missing something?