{"id":294883,"date":"2024-01-14T11:41:18","date_gmt":"2024-01-14T10:41:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=294883"},"modified":"2024-01-14T11:41:21","modified_gmt":"2024-01-14T10:41:21","slug":"why-the-u-s-senate-must-reject-joe-goffman-for-the-epa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=294883","title":{"rendered":"Why the U.S. Senate Must Reject Joe Goffman for the EPA"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Chris Horner<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

January 10, 2024<\/p>\n\n\n\n

News reports<\/a> indicate that the U.S. Senate is likely to soon hold a floor vote on the nomination of former Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) \u201cclimate\u201d guru Joe Goffman to be Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation at the Biden EPA. Illustrating his importance in the administration\u2019s push to impose that agenda which Congress still has never approved, Goffman immediately joined the Biden transition team in late 2020 and has served in an acting capacity or otherwise in-waiting since.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

His advancement faced serial postponements. The 2023 confirmation hearing before the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee was a missed opportunity to explore questions about not just Mr. Goffman\u2019s fitness for the position, but whether he even can legally and ethically serve. It is now up to individual senators to air the many problems raised by this nomination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Goffman\u2019s agenda is clear even if his methods are obscured by the trait for which he has been hailed of \u201cLaw Whispering,\u201d orteaching old laws new tricks<\/em>. Critically, during Goffman\u2019s tenure the U.S. Supreme Court specifically proscribed<\/a> that very idea in the landmark decision West Virginia v. EPA<\/em><\/a>, declaring as unconstitutional this administrative \u201cre-imagining\u201d of authorities to claim the ability to do things Congress never tasked agencies with doing. In fact, SCOTUS ruled specifically in the context of using the Clean Air Act to impose a climate agenda (indeed, a plan crafted by Mr. Goffman).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Early manifestation of the problem is laid out in a March 17, 2021 Wall Street Journal<\/em> editorial<\/a>. That in turn pithily summarized a February 2021 amicus brief<\/a> filed on behalf of Energy Policy Advocates in State of New York v. EPA<\/em>, the progressive state attorneys general effort to orchestrate a sue-and-settle<\/a> to impose stronger ozone standards as a means of forcing the \u2018climate\u2019 agenda of greenhouse gas reductions<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The specific objective, of a \u201cclimate\u201d National Ambient Air Quality Standards or NAAQS (which can be both direct and indirect under the Clean Air Act), was rejected<\/a> not only by Obama\u2019s EPA and most green-group activists as being too extreme but one prominent green attorney, attempting to dismiss the prospect of a climate NAAQS, said<\/a> \u201chell will freeze over\u201d before the Agency attempted that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Baby, it\u2019s cold outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Who else would the attorneys general (AGs) have turned to for such \u201claw whispering?\u201d As the brief and the editorial explain, the AGs \u2014 specifically through the lead plaintiff, New York \u2014consulted with Goffman on how to impose through the backdoor what Congress and the courts kept denying them through the front. It sets forth emails and attachments reflecting that the AGs and activists acknowledged that this agenda is simply unattainable through normal processes. They instead developed a lawsuit filed the day before Donald Trump left office, ensuring it would be responded to by friends. That is, it suggests the plan was a sweetheart, \u201csue-and-settle\u201d consent decree. You\u2019ll never guess who then assumed authority for that decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this progression of  discussions<\/a> \u2014 the \u201cpretextual pas de deux<\/a>\u201d \u2014 preceding the January 20, 2021 filing this suit,<\/em>Goffman ultimately referred the plaintiffs to a network of former EPA employees who had retired to become out-in-the-open activists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Goffman did not<\/a> disclose<\/a> his role consulting with New York or other plaintiff AGs in his ethics onboarding process<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After re-joining EPA to run the Office whose work he advised litigants on how to question, that same Air Office dragged out the proceeding, insisting for years that it simply didn\u2019t know what it ought to do: retain the Trump decision to not tighten ozone regs, or conclude that the AGs and Goffman were right all along.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Joe Goffman should have recused himself from these deliberations. Just ask The Washington Post<\/a><\/em>, unless the paper has changed its standards with the change of administrations. He did not, but instead has brazenly affirmed<\/a> in a sworn declaration to the D.C. Circuit that this is indeed what\u2019s going on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That was all before West Virginia v. EPA in which the Supreme Court called a halt to \u201claw whispering.\u201d Still, as this<\/a> PowerPoint obtained from USEPA in FOIA litigation also brought by Energy Policy Advocates makes quite clear, Mr. Goffman came into the administration raring to go with the whole teach the Clean Air Act new tricks thing<\/em>, as surely was the point. Administrator Regan clumsily confessed<\/a> to this as well just over two months before the Court handed down its opinion in West Virginia<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As I detailed<\/a> in an August piece in The Wall Street Journal<\/em>, neither EPA nor Goffman have been deterred by the Court\u2019s admonition. This alone should put an end to his tenure, as the official directing this lawlessness. However, other key questions arising from his failure<\/a> to disclose certain work prior to re-joining EPA have long cast doubt on Goffman\u2019s nomination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

West Virginia v. EPA<\/em> seems to have removed the rationale for bringing Mr. Goffman in, which was to craft \u201cBiden\u2019s BackDoor Climate Plan<\/a>.\u201d Which while not a bar to his confirmation, certainly is something to press him on and be wary of (the failure to recuse seems to be a different kettle of fish). The Senate must ask, is this attorney chastened by SCOTUS declaring as unconstitutional his signature move, in a historic smackdown? Or has the activist ideologue won out?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Congress, of all institutions, ought to embrace SCOTUS\u2019s restoration of congressional primacy in lawmaking, slamming Goffman\u2019s signature approach of claiming to find elephants in mouse holes<\/a>, as Justice Scalia first put it, so to conjure an ideological agenda into place regardless of actual congressional grants of authority. Which embrace might reasonably begin with asking why in the world Mr. Goffman never disclosed or recused from these matters in the first place, starting with State of New York<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is incumbent upon the Senate to finally assess Mr. Goffman\u2019s record before re-joining the agency, what he did and did not disclose about that record, and how it is possible he has remained involved in a key item for which he served as a critical advisor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chris Horner is an attorney in Washington, D.C.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

News\u00a0reports\u00a0indicate that the U.S. Senate is likely to soon hold a floor vote on the nomination of former Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) \u201cclimate\u201d guru Joe Goffman to be Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation at the Biden EPA.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":294885,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"News\u00a0reports\u00a0indicate that the U.S. Senate is likely to soon hold a floor vote on the nomination of former Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) \u201cclimate\u201d guru Joe Goffman to be Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation at the Bide","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691826253,691821464,691826252,691821934],"class_list":{"0":"post-294883","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-aganda","9":"tag-environmental-protection-agency-epa","10":"tag-joe-goffman","11":"tag-unconstitutional","13":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/image-240.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1eIb","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":247042,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=247042","url_meta":{"origin":294883,"position":0},"title":"Law Whispering is Dead, Long Live Law Whispering!","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"06\/03\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Scotus opinions?\u00a0We don\u2019 need no stinking SCOTUS opinions!","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-238.png?fit=1200%2C689&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-238.png?fit=1200%2C689&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-238.png?fit=1200%2C689&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-238.png?fit=1200%2C689&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-238.png?fit=1200%2C689&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":207918,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=207918","url_meta":{"origin":294883,"position":1},"title":"The Administrative State Moves to Show Who\u2019s Boss on Energy Policy","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/07\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"From the MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN Francis Menton Last Thursday, June 30, the Supreme Court issued its decision in\u00a0West Virginia v. EPA, holding that, absent a further explicit statute from the Congress, the EPA did not have the authority to orchestrate its planned fundamental restructuring of the electric power generation sector of\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/image-63.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/image-63.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/image-63.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/image-63.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":367900,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367900","url_meta":{"origin":294883,"position":2},"title":"Like dropping napalm on the whole Climate Blob: US EPA recommends dropping \u201cendangerment finding\u201d","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"27\/02\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Most of the climate policies of the United States depend on \u201cthe Endangerment Finding\u201d\u2013 so President Trump asked the new EPA head to look closely at it. This is the \u201cfinding\u201d in 2009 that CO2 endangers the public, and that in turn means the EPA must regulate this \u201cpollutant\u201d. Thereby\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Gkvo29NaoAEvCpD.jpg?fit=1200%2C802&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Gkvo29NaoAEvCpD.jpg?fit=1200%2C802&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Gkvo29NaoAEvCpD.jpg?fit=1200%2C802&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Gkvo29NaoAEvCpD.jpg?fit=1200%2C802&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0Gkvo29NaoAEvCpD.jpg?fit=1200%2C802&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":294210,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=294210","url_meta":{"origin":294883,"position":3},"title":"Biden\u2019s EPA Massively Stepped Up Its \u2018Environmental Justice\u2019 Agenda In 2023","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/01\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) intensified its \u201cenvironmental justice\u201d agenda in 2023 in terms of enforcement and grantmaking.","rel":"","context":"In \"climate agenda\"","block_context":{"text":"climate agenda","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-agenda"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/OIP-2.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/OIP-2.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/OIP-2.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/OIP-2.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/OIP-2.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":206528,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=206528","url_meta":{"origin":294883,"position":4},"title":"All Eyes on SCOTUS: Supreme Court to Issue Climate Endangerment Finding Ruling \u2013 To Decide if EPA, or Congress, has authority to regulate CO2","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"30\/06\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"From Climate Depot The case before the U.S. Supreme Court is West Virginia vs. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).The primary plaintiff of the case is West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey; he is joined by attorney generals from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-122.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-122.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-122.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/image-122.png?fit=1024%2C512&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":366682,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=366682","url_meta":{"origin":294883,"position":5},"title":"Due This Week: EPA Plan for GHG Endangerment\u00a0Finding","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"18\/02\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"As promised, Trump on day 1 (January 20, 2025) issued an Executive Order challenging the presumption \u201cgreenhouse gases\u201d (GHGs) endanger public health and safety.\u00a0","rel":"","context":"In \"EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)\"","block_context":{"text":"EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=epa-environmental-protection-agency"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0eyJ3IjoxMDgyLCJmIjoid2VicCIsImsiOiIxMTdkMDEzN2YxMWFhY2RhMjI4NDVmZmJjNTdhZTVjZCIsImNyb3AiOlswLDMsMTYwMCwxMDYyXSwiciI6MS41LCJvIjoiZ2xvYmFsIn0.webp?fit=1082%2C718&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0eyJ3IjoxMDgyLCJmIjoid2VicCIsImsiOiIxMTdkMDEzN2YxMWFhY2RhMjI4NDVmZmJjNTdhZTVjZCIsImNyb3AiOlswLDMsMTYwMCwxMDYyXSwiciI6MS41LCJvIjoiZ2xvYmFsIn0.webp?fit=1082%2C718&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0eyJ3IjoxMDgyLCJmIjoid2VicCIsImsiOiIxMTdkMDEzN2YxMWFhY2RhMjI4NDVmZmJjNTdhZTVjZCIsImNyb3AiOlswLDMsMTYwMCwxMDYyXSwiciI6MS41LCJvIjoiZ2xvYmFsIn0.webp?fit=1082%2C718&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0eyJ3IjoxMDgyLCJmIjoid2VicCIsImsiOiIxMTdkMDEzN2YxMWFhY2RhMjI4NDVmZmJjNTdhZTVjZCIsImNyb3AiOlswLDMsMTYwMCwxMDYyXSwiciI6MS41LCJvIjoiZ2xvYmFsIn0.webp?fit=1082%2C718&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0eyJ3IjoxMDgyLCJmIjoid2VicCIsImsiOiIxMTdkMDEzN2YxMWFhY2RhMjI4NDVmZmJjNTdhZTVjZCIsImNyb3AiOlswLDMsMTYwMCwxMDYyXSwiciI6MS41LCJvIjoiZ2xvYmFsIn0.webp?fit=1082%2C718&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/294883","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=294883"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/294883\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":294886,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/294883\/revisions\/294886"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/294885"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=294883"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=294883"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=294883"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}