- Posted byon April 20, 2009 at 10:59 AM EST
This morning I delivered a speech before the Association of American Universities, an association of 62 major public and private research universities in the United States and Canada.
- Posted byon April 18, 2009 at 8:00 AM EST
Lately, OMB has been consumed with the “B” in our title – the budget – but an equally important part of our mission is the “M” or management of the federal government.
- Posted byon April 17, 2009 at 5:09 PM EST
In addition to its other responsibilities, OMB reviews proposed regulations and coordinates an interagency review process. We have now concluded review of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) proposed finding that emissions of greenhouse gases from motor vehicles contribute to air pollution that endangers public health and welfare.In addition to its other responsibilities, OMB reviews proposed regulations and coordinates an interagency review process. We have now concluded review of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) proposed finding that emissions of greenhouse gases from motor vehicles contribute to air pollution that endangers public health and welfare. Now that review is concluded, the endangerment finding will be published in the Federal Register and subject to public comment.
EPA's proposed finding closely follows the language of the Clean Air Act, and includes two components.
First, certain greenhouse gas emissions constitute air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare.
Second, emissions from motor vehicles cause or contribute to that air pollution.
The proposed finding is carefully rooted in both law and science. In Massachusetts v. EPA (2007), the Supreme Court found that greenhouse gases count as "air pollutants" under the motor vehicle emissions provisions of the Clean Air Act, and signaled that EPA should answer the question whether greenhouse gas emissions are air pollution that endangers the public health and welfare. After an extensive analysis of the scientific evidence, and a careful process of interagency review, the EPA proposes to answer that question in the affirmative.
By itself, the EPA’s proposed finding imposes no regulation. (Indeed, by itself, it requires nothing at all.) If and when the endangerment finding is made final, the EPA will turn to the question whether and how to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new automobiles. The President has made it clear that he wants to move the nation toward clean energy, and that part of that effort involves a legislative approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions under a "cap and trade" program. Such a program would be more effective and efficient than most types of regulation. While such a program is being debated in the Congress, however, the Administration is following both the science and the law with regard to the Clean Air Act.
Learn more about the finding here.
- Posted byon April 13, 2009 at 4:30 PM EST
The National Journal blog entry on the Administration’s proposals on health care reform highlights some important issues. But is also contains some red herrings – like the idea the Administration’s proposals won’t reduce costs.
- Posted byon April 9, 2009 at 1:35 PM EST
The economic downturn imposes significant costs on families. But does it also increase crime?
- Posted byon April 8, 2009 at 12:26 PM EST
Estimates suggest that as much as $700 billion a year in health care services delivered in the United States cannot be linked to improved health outcomes – and one reason is that we have incentives for more care rather than better care.
- Posted byon April 7, 2009 at 8:22 AM EST
How much does the federal government owe? It might seem like a simple question to ask those of us wearing the green eyeshades, but there are lots of different concepts used to answer it.
- Posted byon March 30, 2009 at 6:53 PM EST
I know most of OMBlog’s readers are budget wonks – or “propellerheads” to use the now-popular White House term – but OMB also takes a very active and serious role in the management of the federal government, and that includes the regulatory agenda.
- Posted byon March 25, 2009 at 4:26 PM EST
Today is a big day in the budget world as the House and Senate Budget Committees kicked off Congressional action on the federal budget with their markups of the budget resolutions.
- Posted byon March 20, 2009 at 12:55 PM EST
CBO released its re-estimate of the President’s Budget today.
- Posted byon March 18, 2009 at 1:46 PM EST
How much does the Administration’s FY 2010 Budget increase domestic programs this coming year? If you listen to some critics, you would think that the answer is “the biggest increase ever.” But if you approach the question analytically . . .
- Posted byon March 13, 2009 at 8:27 AM EST
As I’ve blogged about before, the President’s Budget brings non-defense discretionary spending (NDD) down to its lowest level as share of GDP since 1962.
- Posted byon March 6, 2009 at 3:47 PM EST
The President is committed to responsibly winding the war down. I don’t do foreign policy, but I can tell you this: ending wars saves money – and so the Administration’s budget includes savings from ramping down overseas military operations over time.
- Posted byon March 3, 2009 at 11:29 AM EST
I am testifying today before the House Budget Committee and wanted to share my notes on the budget.
- Posted byon February 28, 2009 at 3:19 PM EST
During last Thursday’s briefing on the President’s FY 2010 Budget, CEA Chair Christina Romer was asked many questions about the economic forecast underlying the Budget – and since then some news reports have highlighted differences between the Administration’s forecast and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) forecast.
- Posted byon February 27, 2009 at 7:18 PM EST
Is our budget proposal uncharitable?
- Posted byon February 26, 2009 at 7:29 PM EST
Peter Orszag: One of the questions I received throughout the day today, as we released the Fiscal Year 2010 budget, is why we are proposing to raise taxes on high-income taxpayers during a recession. And the answer is simple: we’re not.
- Posted byon February 26, 2009 at 11:03 AM EST
Peter Orszag: I want to open up OMB even more to the public and share with you what we’re doing to address the many challenges that we face as a nation. I know that, for many people, blogs are the easiest way of receiving information – so this blog may prove to be useful even if it simply provides a convenient way of keeping up with information from OMB that is already available in other formats.
White House Blogs
- The White House Blog
- Middle Class Task Force
- Council of Economic Advisers
- Council on Environmental Quality
- Council on Women and Girls
- Office of Intergovernmental Affairs
- Office of Management and Budget
- Office of Public Engagement
- Office of Science & Tech Policy
- Office of Urban Affairs
- Open Government
- Faith and Neighborhood Partnerships
- Social Innovation and Civic Participation
- US Trade Representative
- Office National Drug Control Policy