By Rebecca Beitsch
“Critics see it as a way to hamstring policy future administrations may want to implement.
‘What they’ve done is essentially manipulate and rig the cost-benefit analysis so that when EPA in the future gets back to their mission of protecting the environment and fighting climate change it will be much harder to justify their rules,’ said Amit Narang of Public Citizen, a left-leaning advocacy group.
‘This is going to have to be one of the first things the next administration and EPA will have to get rid of to get back to doing their jobs,’ Narang added.”
“But Narang said the proposal underscores the problem while relying too heavily on cost-benefit analyses.
‘We need our agencies relying less on it in future rather than more because they are so easily manipulated,’ he said.”
Read the full story here.