Global Take on Warming

Related Content

Energy & the Environment policy briefing

Print

E-Mail

Reprints

Text Size

Latest News

• Pelosi Defends Handling of Massa Scandal
• GOP Picks Burns as Nominee in Murtha Special
• Emanuel: Progress Being Made in Negotiations
• Graham: Health Care Reconciliation Could Stall Immigration Reform
• Obama to Press for Bipartisan Immigration Bill

When confirmed in May 2005, Stephen Johnson became the first professional scientist to head the Environmental Protection Agency with its 18,000 employees and annual budget of almost $8 billion. For more than 25 years he has worked at the agency and dealt with a wide range of issues before ultimately rising to the role of administrator.

Today, Johnson is at the center of the debate over how to deal with what many scientists believe is the grave threat posed by global climate change. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision on the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

As Johnson, and the Bush administration, consider their next steps, Roll Call Executive Editor Morton M. Kondracke sat down last week with Johnson at EPA headquarters to discuss where the agency goes from here.

ROLL CALL EXECUTIVE EDITOR MORTON M. KONDRACKE: What is the Bush administration’s attitude toward global warming? Is man responsible and is it a dire threat to the planet or not?

EPA ADMINISTRATOR STEPHEN JOHNSON: Well, global climate change is a serious issue and from the president certainly and as administrator, we believe that it is a serious problem for our globe, for our nation, and that is why we’ve had really an unparalleled commitment and effort to try to address it.

ROLL CALL: Your critics don’t think you’ve had an unparalleled effort at all. I mean, [Sen.] John McCain [R-Ariz.] says that your record is terrible and [former EPA Administrator] Christie Todd Whitman says that you are letting the Chinese call the shots. How do you respond to that?

JOHNSON: Well, when I look at how much we as a nation have invested in the science and the technology as well as even tax incentives, we as a nation from 2001 through today have invested $35 billion in science, technology and even some tax incentives. ... There is no other nation in the world that has invested that kind of money, that level of money, in an effort in trying to understand the science and actually develop technologies that can solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions.

ROLL CALL: Was the administration initially skeptical about the science?

JOHNSON: Well, I think when you look at the history of the climate change issue it actually goes way back all the way to the late 1970s, and in fact if you read the Supreme Court decision of just a few weeks ago they do an excellent job of characterizing, in fact, going through that history. And it goes back to the 1970s, 1978 in fact. And through these years, through multiple administrations, there has been a concern raised, but there has also been a lot of uncertainty associated with the science. And then, also, not only uncertainty with the science but the uncertainty associated with who is going to take on the challenge. Is it just going to be the developed nations? Is it going to be the developing nations? Or is it going to be truly global? So when you look at the history you see a steady progression of investment in the science, a steady better understanding of what the impacts may or may not be, a steady rise in level of concern and a steady engagement of both developed nations as well as developing nations. So it is something that has been certainly on the president’s radar screen from Day One and that, because of investment in the science, we are now seeing even greater concern.

ROLL CALL: What is the level of federal investment in the science?

JOHNSON: In the federal investment in the science we are spending approximately $2 billion this year. We are spending around $3 billion investment in technology. As I said, the total ...

ROLL CALL: That sounds like a rather small fraction of the total investment by private sector plus ...

JOHNSON: These are federal funds. Of course, I would like to put it in perspective. The total EPA budget, the president’s budget request for 2008 is $7.2 billion. Our total budget dealing with hazardous waste sites, clean water, all of these issues. So when I make the comparison of what we as a nation are investing in global climate change and compare it to the total EPA budget, it is a significant amount.