by Steve Milloy, E&E Legal Senior Policy Fellow, and Junkscience.com Founder
As appearing on Junkscience.com
My comments from today’s public testimony before EPA on its proposed cost-benefit overhaul. On a comical note, the enviro woman who testified before me criticized EPA for taking comments over the phone vs. by video… because phone testimony prevented EPA staff from seeing her tears and prevented her from seeing that EPA staff was being appropriately affected by her (stupid) testimony.
Good morning. My name is Steve Milloy. I publish JunkScience.com.
I commend EPA for trying to improve the travesty its cost-benefit analysis has become.
EPA has too often over the past 25 years justified huge and actual regulatory costs with entirely imaginary benefits.
Over the decades, corrupt EPA staff have figured out how to game cost-benefit analysis to justify ever more burdensome and pointless regulation.
The epitome of this corruption is EPA’s PM2.5 air quality regulation.
EPA staff has claimed that PM in outdoor air kills anywhere from 15,000 to as many as 560,000 people per year.