Thanks to all who helped make this happen.  Please realize this isn't a done
deal, we still need to put pressure on Senator Grassley to get him to help
support the Durbin amendment. 

Eric Uram
Regional Representative
Sierra Club Midwest Office
===========================================================
From Inside EPA:
Tuesday, December 09, 2003 Click here for the InsideEPA.com Main Page

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Measure Barring 'Senior Discount' Marks Defeat For OMB's Graham

Senate passage of an amendment preventing EPA from using a controversial
benefits analysis method that places a lower value on senior citizens' lives
marks the first time Congress has publicly rejected contentious regulatory
reforms advocated by White House regulatory chief John Graham, EPA and other
sources say.

Environmentalists are applauding the vote as a victory for senior citizens
and public health protections but the amendment, which the House approved
last July, is drawing a mixed reaction from agency economists because some
EPA economists say Congress should stay away from technical debates best
addressed through research and peer review.

However, final congressional approval of the measure, as well as the rest of
EPA's fiscal year 2004 funding, is in doubt as a key Democratic senator last
week vowed to block a Republican plan to approve remaining FY04
appropriations bills -- that have been compiled into a single omnibus bill
-- without a recorded vote.

Sen. Robert Byrd (WV), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Appropriations
Committee, objectst to a plan by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to
quickly approve an omnibus appropriations bill -- that includes funding for
EPA and a host of other federal agencies -- by unanimous consent this week.
Byrd said in a statement that the conference report on the omnibus bill
includes changes insisted on by the Bush administration to measures already
approved by Congress.

"Instead of sending thirteen fiscally responsible appropriations bills to
the president, we are being force-fed a bad piece of legislation dictated to
the Congress by the Bush administration. That is no way to govern. That is
no way to serve the American people," Byrd said in a statement.

Included in the VA-HUD portion of the omnibus bill is an amendment offered
by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) preventing the agency from using lower values
for seniors' lives in regulatory analysis. The measure passed by voice vote
Nov. 17.

The amendment prohibits the agency from spending money on any benefits
analysis that includes "monetary values for adult premature mortality that
differ based on the age of the adult."

The amendments were drafted last summer in response to an alternative EPA
analysis to provide a second set of benefits estimates for the Bush
administration's proposed Clear Skies legislation and several high-profile
rules that "discounted" the value of seniors by 37 percent.
Environmentalists and seniors' groups like the AARP criticized White House
regulatory chief John Graham, who supported the discounts, claiming he
pressured the agency to use the so-called senior death discount. These
groups say that using lower values for seniors results in lower benefits
estimates for strict regulatory standards and allows opponents of strict EPA
rules to argue they are too expensive.

Since the controversy, Bush administration officials have emphasized that
they will not use the senior discount for "decisional" purposes, but only
for analytic purposes.

An OMB spokesperson says that the rider will not have a significant impact
on OMB's practice. "Although OMB has concerns about efforts to legislate
analytic practice, the House and Senate riders appear to do nothing more
than reiterate what OMB has already adopted as analytic guidance for
regulatory analysis at federal agencies."

Nevertheless, environmentalists say the amendment represents one of the
first times they have successfully fought one of Graham's proposals to
change regulatory cost-benefit analysis. "Before the 37 percent senior death
discount, it was hard to make a bumper sticker about what Graham is doing,"
according to one environmentalist.

But some EPA economists believe Congress should not make policy
determinations about technical issues related to cost-benefit analysis. One
regulatory specialist says, "The environmentalists have painted this as a
good-versus-evil issue but it's a technical matter. The consensus on the
economic literature is that there is no basis for a senior discount and the
genesis of what we do is the literature." This source adds that the issue
has "fixed itself. It's a non-problem."

However, other EPA economic experts are applauding the Senate vote. "Now
Graham will have to back off. Sure, there are other, more indirect ways OMB
will be able to deflate benefits estimates, but they will no longer be able
to directly discount seniors in proposed rules," according to this source.

"This will prevent the White House from playing a shell-game with age when
EPA is justifying protections," according to another EPA official.

Industry sources also say Congress should not intervene in technical debates
that economists should resolve. "Congress should be careful not to tread
into technical areas well beyond its expertise," one source says.

But one environmentalist says framing the debate in technocratic terms
ignores the political devaluation of "some of our most valuable citizens.
This is a clear signal to the White House. Everyone deserves equal
treatment."


Date: December 9, 2003

C Inside Washington Publishers

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp