text:
Social Security number
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
A Social Security card issued by the Railroad Retirement Board in 1943 to a now deceased person.
In the United States, a Social Security number (SSN) is a nine-digit number issued to U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and temporary (working) residents under section 205(c)(2) of the Social Security Act, codified as 42 U.S.C. § 405(c)(2). The number is issued to an individual by the Social Security Administration, an independent agency of the United States government. Although its primary purpose is to track individuals for Social Security purposes,[1] the Social Security number has become a de facto national identification number for taxation and other purposes.[2]
A Social Security number may be obtained by applying on Form SS-5, application for A Social Security Number Card.[3]
Contents
1 History
2 Purpose and use
2.1 Non-universal status
2.2 Use required for federal tax purposes
3 Types of Social Security cards
4 Identity theft
5 Replacement numbers
6 Structure
6.1 Historical structure
6.2 Valid SSNs
6.3 Exhaustion and re-use
7 SSNs used in advertising
8 List of Social Security Area Numbers
9 See also
10 References
11 External links
History[edit]
Social Security numbers were first issued by the Social Security Administration in November 1935 as part of the New Deal Social Security program. Within three months, 25 million numbers were issued.[4]
On November 24, 1936, 1,074 of the nation's 45,000 post offices were designated "typing centers" to type up Social Security cards that were then sent to Washington, D.C. On December 1, 1936, as part of the publicity campaign for the new program, Joseph L. Fay of the Social Security Administration selected a record from the top of the first stack of 1,000 records and announced that the first Social Security number in history was assigned to John David Sweeney, Jr., of New Rochelle, New York.[5][6]
Before 1986, people often did not obtain a Social Security number until the age of about 14,[7] since the numbers were used for income tracking purposes, and those under that age seldom had substantial income.[8] The Tax Reform Act of 1986 required parents to list Social Security numbers for each dependent over the age of 5 for whom the parent wanted to claim a tax deduction.[9] Before this act, parents claiming tax deductions were simply trusted not to lie about the number of children they supported. During the first year of the Tax Reform Act, this anti-fraud change resulted in seven million fewer minor dependents being claimed. The disappearance of these dependents is believed to have involved either children who never existed or tax deductions improperly claimed by non-custodial parents.[10] In 1988, the threshold was lowered to 2 years old, and in 1990, the threshold was lowered yet again to 1 year old.[11] Today, an SSN is required regardless of the child's age to receive an exemption.[citation needed] Since then, parents have often applied for Social Security numbers for their children soon after birth; today, it can be done on the application for a birth certificate.[12]
Purpose and use[edit]
The original purpose of this number was to track individuals' accounts within the Social Security program. It has since come to be used as an identifier for individuals within the United States, although rare errors occur where duplicates do exist. As numbers are now assigned by the central issuing office of the SSA, it is unlikely that duplication will ever occur again. A few duplications did occur when prenumbered cards were sent out to regional SSA offices and (originally) Post Offices.
Employee, patient, student, and credit records are sometimes indexed by Social Security number.
The U.S. Armed Forces has used the Social Security number as an identification number for Army and Air Force personnel since July 1, 1969, the Navy and Marine Corps for their personnel since January 1, 1972, and the Coast Guard for their personnel since October 1, 1974.[13] Previously, the United States military used a much more complicated system of service numbers that varied by service.
Beginning in June 2011, DOD began removing the Social Security number from military identification cards. It is replaced by a unique DOD identification number, formerly known as the EDIPI.[14]
Non-universal status[edit]
An old Social Security card with the "not for identification" message
Social Security was originally a universal tax, but when Medicare was passed in 1965, objecting religious groups in existence prior to 1951 were allowed to opt out of the system.[15] Because of this, not every American is part of the Social Security program, and not everyone has a number. However, a social security number is required for parents to claim their children as dependents for federal income tax purposes,[12] and the Internal Revenue Service requires all corporations to obtain SSNs (or alternative identifying numbers) from their employees, as described below. The Old Order Amish have fought to prevent universal Social Security by overturning rules such as a requirement to provide a Social Security number for a hunting license.[16]
Social Security cards printed from January 1946 until January 1972 expressly stated that people should not use the number and card for identification.[17] Since nearly everyone in the United States now has an SSN, it became convenient to use it anyway and the message was removed.[18]
Since then, Social Security numbers have become de facto national identification numbers.[2] Although some people do not have an SSN assigned to them, it is becoming increasingly difficult to engage in legitimate financial activities such as applying for a loan or a bank account without one.[19] While the government cannot require an individual to disclose their SSN without a legal basis, companies may refuse to provide service to an individual who does not provide an SSN.[20][21] The card on which an SSN is issued is still not suitable for primary identification as it has no photograph, no physical description and no birth date. All it does is confirm that a particular number has been issued to a particular name. Instead, a driver's license or state ID card is used as an identification for adults.
Use required for federal tax purposes[edit]
Internal Revenue Code section 6109(d) provides: "The social security account number issued to an individual for purposes of section 205(c)(2)(A) of the Social Security Act [codified as 42 U.S.C. § 405(c)(2)(A)] shall, except as shall otherwise be specified under regulations of the Secretary [of the Treasury or his delegate], be used as the identifying number for such individual for purposes of this title [the Internal Revenue Code, title 26 of the United States Code]."[22]
The Internal Revenue Code also provides, when required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary [of the Treasury or his delegate]:
Inclusion in returns: Any person required under the authority of this title to make a return, statement, or other document shall include in such return, statement, or other document such identifying number as may be prescribed for securing proper identification of such person.
Furnishing number to other persons: Any person with respect to whom a return, statement, or other document is required under the authority of this title to be made by another person or whose identifying number is required to be shown on a return of another person shall furnish to such other person such identifying number as may be prescribed for securing his proper identification.[23]
According to U.S. Treasury regulations, any person who, after October 31, 1962, works as an employee for wages subject to Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, or U.S. federal income tax withholdings is required to apply for "an account number" using "Form SS-5."[24]
A taxpayer who is not eligible to have a Social Security number must obtain an alternative Taxpayer Identification Number.
Types of Social Security cards[edit]
Three different types of Social Security cards are issued. The most common type contains the cardholder's name and number. Such cards are issued to U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents. There are also two restricted types of Social Security cards:
One reads "not valid for employment." Such cards cannot be used as proof of work authorization, and are not acceptable as a List C document on the I-9 form.
The other reads "valid for work only with DHS authorization", or the older, "valid for work only with INS authorization." These cards are issued to people who have temporary work authorization in the U.S. They can satisfy the I-9 requirement, if they are accompanied by a work authorization card.
In 2004 Congress passed The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act; parts of which mandated that the Social Security Administration redesign the Social Security Number (SSN) Card to prevent forgery. From April 2006 through August 2007, Social Security Administration (SSA) and Government Printing Office (GPO) employees were assigned to redesign the Social Security Number Card to the specifications of the Interagency Task Force created by the Commissioner of Social Security in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security.
The new SSN card design utilizes both covert and overt security features created by the SSA and GPO design teams.
Identity theft[edit]
Dog tag from World War II (possibly Army-Air Corps), labeled "P" for Protestant.
Many citizens and privacy advocates are concerned about the disclosure and processing of Social Security numbers. Furthermore, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University have demonstrated an algorithm that uses publicly available personal information to reconstruct a given SSN.[25]
The SSN is frequently used by those involved in identity theft, since it is interconnected with many other forms of identification, and because people asking for it treat it as an authenticator. Financial institutions generally require an SSN to set up bank accounts, credit cards, and loans—partly because they assume that no one except the person it was issued to knows it.
Exacerbating the problem of using the Social Security number as an identifier is the fact that the Social Security card contains no biometric identifiers of any sort, making it essentially impossible to tell whether a person using a certain SSN truly belongs to someone without relying on other documentation (which may itself have been falsely procured through use of the fraudulent SSN). Congress has proposed federal laws that restrict the use of SSNs for identification and bans their use for a number of commercial purposes—e.g., rental applications.[26]
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) offers alternatives to SSNs in some places where providing untrusted parties with identification numbers is essential. Tax return preparers must obtain and use a Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN) to include on their client's tax returns (as part of signature requirements). Day care services have tax benefits, and even a sole proprietor should give parents an EIN (employer identification number) to use on their tax return.
The Social Security Administration has suggested that, if asked to provide his or her Social Security number, a citizen should ask which law requires its use.[27] In accordance with §7213 of the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004 and 20 C.F.R. 422.103(e)(2), the number of replacement Social Security cards per person is generally limited to three per calendar year and ten in a lifetime.[27]
Identity confusion has also occurred because of the use of local Social Security numbers by the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau, whose numbers overlap with those of residents of New Hampshire and Maine.[28]
Replacement numbers[edit]
A person can request a new Social Security number, but only under certain conditions;[29]
Where sequential numbers assigned to members of the same family are causing problems.
In the event of duplicates having been issued.
In cases where the person has been a victim of domestic violence or harassment, and there is a clear need to change their number for their personal safety.[30]
When a person has been a victim of identity theft, and their Social Security number continues to be problematic.
Where a person has a demonstrable religious objection to a number (such as certain Christians being averse to the number 666).
For all of these conditions, credible third-party evidence such as a restraining order or police report, is required.
Structure[edit]
The Social Security number is a nine-digit number in the format "AAA-GG-SSSS".[31] The number is divided into three parts: the first three digits, known as the area number because they were formerly assigned by geographical region; the middle two digits, known as the group number; and the final four digits, known as the serial number.
On June 25, 2011, the SSA changed the SSN assignment process to "SSN randomization".[32] SSN randomization affected the SSN assignment process in the following ways:
It eliminated the geographical significance of the first three digits of the SSN, referred to as the area number, by no longer allocating specific numbers by state for assignment to individuals.
It eliminated the significance of the highest group number assigned for each area number, and, as a result, the High Group List is frozen in time and can be used for validation of only those SSNs issued prior to the randomization implementation date (see section "Valid SSNs").
Previously unassigned area numbers have been introduced for assignment, excluding area numbers 000, 666 and 900–99.
Because Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) are issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), they were not affected by this SSA change.
Historical structure[edit]
Prior to the 2011 randomization process, the first three digits or area number were assigned by geographical region. Prior to 1973, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the area number represented the office code where the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be in the area where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Beginning in 1973, when the SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number was assigned based on the ZIP Code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant's mailing address did not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the area number did not necessarily represent the state of residence of the applicant regardless of whether the card was issued prior to, or after, 1973.
Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving south and westward, so that people applying from addresses on the east coast had the lowest numbers and those on the west coast had the highest numbers. As the areas assigned to a locality were exhausted, new areas from the pool were assigned, so some states had noncontiguous groups of numbers.
The middle two digits or group number range from 01 to 99. Even before SSN randomization, the group numbers were not assigned consecutively within an area. Instead, for administrative reasons, group numbers were issued in the following order:[33]
odd numbers from 01 through 09.
even numbers from 10 through 98.
even numbers from 02 through 08.
odd numbers from 11 through 99.
As an example, group number 98 would be issued before 11.
The last four digits are serial numbers. Before SSN randomization took effect, they represented a straight numerical sequence of digits from 0001 to 9999 within the group.
Valid SSNs[edit]
Prior to June 25, 2011, a valid SSN could not have an area number between 734 and 749, or above 772, the highest area number the Social Security Administration had allocated. Effective June 25, 2011, the SSA assigns SSNs randomly and allows for the assignment of area numbers between 734 and 749 and above 772 through the 800s.[34] This should not be confused with Tax Identification Numbers (TINs), which include additional area numbers.[35]
Some special numbers are never allocated:
Numbers with all zeros in any digit group (000-##-####, ###-00-####, ###-##-0000).[36][37]
Numbers with 666 or 900–999 (Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) in the first digit group.[36]
Until 2011, the SSA published the last group number used for each area number.[38] Since group numbers were allocated in a regular pattern, it was possible to identify an unissued SSN that contained an invalid group number. Now numbers are assigned randomly, and fraudulent SSNs are not easily detectable with publicly available information. Many online services, however, provide SSN validation.
Unlike many similar numbers, no check digit is included.
Exhaustion and re-use[edit]
The Social Security Administration does not reuse Social Security numbers. It has issued over 450 million since the start of the program, and at a use rate of about 5.5 million per year. It says it has enough to last several generations without reuse or changing the number of digits.[39] However, there have been instances where multiple individuals have been inadvertently assigned the same Social Security number.[40]
SSNs used in advertising[edit]
The promotional Social Security card as distributed by the F.W. Woolworth Company
Some SSNs used in advertising have rendered those numbers invalid. One famous instance of this occurred in 1938 when the E. H. Ferree Company in Lockport, New York, decided to promote its product by showing how a Social Security card would fit into its wallets. A sample card, used for display purposes, was placed in each wallet, which was sold by Woolworth and other department stores across the country; the wallet manufacturer's vice president and treasurer Douglas Patterson used the actual SSN of his secretary, Hilda Schrader Whitcher.
Even though the card was printed in red (the real card is printed in blue) and had "Specimen" printed across the front, many people used Whitcher's SSN as their own. The Social Security Administration's account of the incident also claims that the fake card was half the size of a real card, despite a miniature card's being useless for its purpose and despite Whitcher's holding two cards of apparently identical size in the accompanying photograph. Over time, the number that appeared (078-05-1120) has been claimed by a total of over 40,000 people as their own.[41] The SSA initiated an advertising campaign stating that it was incorrect to use the number (Hilda Whitcher was issued a new SSN). However, the number was found to be in use by 12 individuals as late as 1977.[41]
More recently, Todd Davis distributed his SSN in advertisements for his company's LifeLock identity theft protection service, which allowed his identity to be stolen over a dozen times.[42][43]
List of Social Security Area Numbers[edit]
List showing the geographical location of the first three digits of the social security numbers assigned in the United States and its territories since 1973. Repeated numbers indicate that they've been transferred to another location or they're shared by more than one location.
SSN Area Number
Location[44]
001–003 New Hampshire
004–007 Maine
008–009 Vermont
010–034 Massachusetts
035–039 Rhode Island
040–049 Connecticut
050–134 New York
135–158 New Jersey
159–211 Pennsylvania
212–220 Maryland
221–222 Delaware
223–231 Virginia
232–236 West Virginia
232 North Carolina
237–246 North Carolina
247–251 South Carolina
252–260 Georgia
261–267 Florida
268–302 Ohio
303–317 Indiana
318–361 Illinois
362–386 Michigan
387–399 Wisconsin
400–407 Kentucky
408–415 Tennessee
416–424 Alabama
425–428 Mississippi
429–432 Arkansas
433–439 Louisiana
440–448 Oklahoma
449–467 Texas
468–477 Minnesota
478–485 Iowa
486–500 Missouri
501–502 North Dakota
503–504 South Dakota
505–508 Nebraska
509–515 Kansas
516–517 Montana
518–519 Idaho
520 Wyoming
521–524 Colorado
525,585 New Mexico
526–527 Arizona
528–529 Utah
530,680 Nevada
531–539 Washington
540–544 Oregon
545–573 California
574 Alaska
575–576 Hawaii
577–579 District of Columbia
580 Virgin Islands
580–584 Puerto Rico
586 Pacific Islands
Guam
American Samoa
Philippine Islands
Northern Mariana Islands
587–665 California (Southern California, presumably)'
667–679 Not Issued
681–699 Not Issued
700–728 Railroad Board (discontinued July 1, 1963)
729–730 Enumeration at Entry
750–772 Not Issued
The above table is only valid for SSN issued before June 2011. On June 25, 2011, the SSA changed the SSN assignment process to "SSN randomization".[45] SSN randomization affects the SSN assignment process. Among its changes, it eliminates the geographical significance of the first three digits of the SSN, previously referred to as the Area Number, by no longer allocating the Area Numbers for assignment to individuals in specific states. The table above is based on out-of-date information. Numbers in the range of 650-699 most certainly have been issued (see related comment on the Talk page).
See also[edit]
Cadastro de Pessoas Físicas
Death Master File
Feature creep
INSEE code
Italian fiscal code card
Kennitala
National Insurance number
National Registration Identity Card
NHI Number
NIE Number
Permanent account number
Personally identifiable information
PESEL
PPS number
Social Insurance Number
Tax file number
Uniform civil number
Unique Population Registry Code
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "The Story of the Social Security Number". Ssa.gov. Retrieved 2012-08-20.
^ Jump up to: a b Kouri, Jim (March 9, 2005). "Social Security Cards: De Facto National Identification". American Chronicle. Archived from the original on June 29, 2012.
Jump up ^ 20 C.F.R. 422.103(b)
Jump up ^ "Social Security Online". Ssa.gov. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
Jump up ^ "The First Social Security Number and the Lowest Number". Social Security History. United States Social Security Administration. Retrieved July 27, 2015.
Jump up ^ "First Applicant on Pension List". Ogden Standard Examiner. Ogden, Utah. December 2, 1936. p. 8.
Jump up ^ Long, Wayne S. (Spring 1993). "Social Security Numbers Issued: A 20-Year Review" (PDF). Social Security Journal. 56 (1): 82. Retrieved 23 July 2017.
Jump up ^ Goldberg, Jack (1993). "A strategy for assembling samples of adult twin pairs in the United States". Statistics in Medicine. 12 (18): 1693–1702. doi:10.1002/sim.4780121805. Retrieved 23 July 2017.
Jump up ^ "Tax Reform Act of 1986". Social Security History. United States Social Security Administration. Retrieved July 27, 2015. ("Unlike the PIN the SSN is not universally assigned, nor is it issued at birth. In the U.S., assignment of the SSN occurs traditionally when an individual joins the workforce, usually as a teenager. The age at SSN issuance, however, has been declining for decades" and recent changes in the tax law now require that all infants claimed as dependants must have an SSN by one year of age.")
Jump up ^ Jeffrey B. Liebman (December 2000). "Who Are the Ineligible EITC Recipients?". National Tax Journal. 53: 1165–1186.
Jump up ^ "Social Security Number Chronology". Social Security Administration.
^ Jump up to: a b "Social Security Numbers For Children". Social Security Administration.
Jump up ^ "National Personnel Records Center". National Archives.
Jump up ^ "DOD removes SSAN from ID cards".
Jump up ^ "The Amish & Social Security". Amishnews.com. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
Jump up ^ "Amish reject giving Social Security numbers to get licenses". The Chippewa Herald. August 30, 1999. Retrieved August 23, 2012.
Jump up ^ "Version History". Social Security History. United States Social Security Administration. Archived from the original on June 29, 2012. Retrieved July 27, 2015.
Jump up ^ Pear, Robert (July 26, 1998). "The Nation; Not for Identification Purposes (Just Kidding)". The New York Times. Retrieved May 23, 2010.
Jump up ^ "Social Security Number Not Required". Scribd.com. 2008-04-29. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
Jump up ^ Charles H. Mullen, Associate Commissioner (March 18, 1998), Letter to Mr. Scott McDonald (PDF), Office of Public Enquiries, Social Security Administration, retrieved July 27, 2015
Jump up ^ "Can I refuse to give my Social Security number to a private business?". Frequently Asked Questions. United States Social Security Administration. May 18, 2018.
Jump up ^ 26 U.S.C. § 6109(d).
Jump up ^ See 26 U.S.C. § 6109(a).
Jump up ^ See 26 C.F.R. sec. 31.6011(b)-2(a)(1)(ii).
Jump up ^ "New algorithm guesses SSNs using date and place of birth". Ars Technica. July 2009.
Jump up ^ Broache, Anne. "Congress may slap restrictions on SSN use - CNET News". News.cnet.com. Archived from the original on 2012-07-11. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
^ Jump up to: a b "Your Social Security Number And Card, "How can I protect my Social Security number?"". Social Security Administration.
Jump up ^ Meyer, Bill (August 2009). "How many Americans' Social Security numbers were officially duplicated for Pacific islanders?". The Plain Dealer. Retrieved 2012-08-20.
Jump up ^ "Social Security: Frequently Asked Questions - Can I change my Social Security number?". Social Security Administration. Retrieved 22 May 2017.
Jump up ^ "New Numbers for Domestic Violence Victims" (PDF). Social Security Administration. Retrieved 22 May 2017.
Jump up ^ Social Security Administration. "The SSN Numbering Scheme". Retrieved December 25, 2010.
Jump up ^ "Social Security Number Randomization". Socialsecurity.gov. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
Jump up ^ "The SSN Numbering Scheme". Socialsecurity.gov. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
Jump up ^ "List of valid area numbers". Social Security Administration. Retrieved October 14, 2015.
Jump up ^ "Taxpayer Identification Numbers (TIN)". Internal Revenue Service.
^ Jump up to: a b "Which Social Security numbers are invalid?". Social Security Administration. Retrieved October 14, 2015.
Jump up ^ "RM 10201.035 Invalid Social Security Numbers (SSNs)". Program Operations Manual System (POMS). United States Social Security Administration. June 23, 2011. Retrieved October 14, 2015.
Jump up ^ "List currently allocated group numbers for each area number". Social Security Administration. Retrieved October 14, 2015.
Jump up ^ "Q20: Are Social Security numbers reused after a person dies?". Frequently Asked Questions. United States Social Security Administration. Retrieved July 27, 2015.
Jump up ^ "A tale of two women: same birthday, same Social Security number, same big-data mess". PC World. Retrieved November 12, 2015.
^ Jump up to: a b "The story of the most misused number of all time..." Social Security Administration.
Jump up ^ Zetter, Kim (May 18, 2010). "LifeLock CEO's Identity Stolen 13 Times". Wired.
Jump up ^ Vijayan, Jaikumar (May 19, 2010). "LifeLock CEO said to be victim of identity theft 13 times". ComputerWorld.
Jump up ^ https://www.ssa.gov/employer/stateweb.htm
Jump up ^ "Social Security Number Randomization". Socialsecurity.gov. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
External links[edit]
Social Security Administration
Social Security Death Index Database listing over 85 million SSNs, all of which entered the public domain upon the death of their owners
Replacing a Lost or Stolen Social Security Card
The Woolworth Card: The SSN 078-05-1120 has been claimed by thousands of people since the late 1930s
Social Security Cards Issued by Woolworth: "The story of the most misused number of all time"
Complete list of area number groups from the Social Security Administration
Social Security Administration's FAQ for Social Security Numbers
Social Security card application
Hearing on Removing Social Security Numbers from Medicare Cards: Joint Hearing before the Subcommittee on Social Security and Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, August 1, 2012
Look up public information about Social Security Numbers derived from the SSN enumeration pattern prior to 2011
Carolyn Puckett (2009). "The Story of the Social Security Number". Social Security Bulletin. 69 (2). (PDF version)
show
v
t
e
Social Security (United States)
Key articles
History of Social Security
Social Security Administration
Social Security number
Assistance programs
Disability Determination Services
Retirement Insurance Benefits
Social Security Disability Insurance
Supplemental Security Income
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
Ticket to Work
Unemployment benefits
Health care
Medicaid
Medicare
SCHIP
Law
Disability fraud
FICA
Revenue Act of 1942
Social Security Act
Social Security Amendments of 1965
Social Security Death Index
Social Security Trust Fund
Windfall Elimination Provision
Other
Legacy debt
Numident
Office of the Chief Actuary
Primary Insurance Amount
Social Security debate (United States)
Social Security Wage Base
Years of coverage
show
v
t
e
National identification numbers by country
Australia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazil (RG • CPF • CNPJ)
Bulgaria
Canada
China
Croatia
Denmark
France
Ghana
Hong Kong
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Ireland
Italy
Macedonia
Malaysia
Mexico
Montenegro
Netherlands
New Zealand
Poland
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Serbia
Singapore
Slovenia
South Korea
Spain (DNI • NIE)
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Taiwan
Turkey
United Kingdom
United States
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Social_Security_number&oldid=854768724"
Categories:
National identification numbers
Social Security (United States)
Taxation in the United States
Unique identifiers
Hidden categories:
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from April 2016
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Čeština
Deutsch
فارسی
Français
한국어
Italiano
עברית
日本語
Polski
Română
Русский
ᏣᎳᎩ
中文
4 more
Edit links
This page was last edited on 13 August 2018, at 17:00 (UTC).
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: mw-jump-link #mw-head

values: mw-jump-link #p-search

attrs: class style

value: b

attrs: rel class href

value: span

values: Independent agencies of the United States government

values: checkbox button toctogglecheckbox toctogglecheckbox display:none

values: Without a legal reference, like the rest, this stands out as being the most questionable. (April 2016)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Military_of_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Military of the United States

values:
/wiki/Service_number_(United_States)
mw-redirect
Service number (United States)

values: Edit section: Use required for federal tax purposes

values: Edit section: Types of Social Security cards

values: United States Government Publishing Office

values: Title 20 of the Code of Federal Regulations

values:
/wiki/Social_Security_card
mw-redirect
Social Security card

values:
/wiki/F.W._Woolworth_Company
mw-redirect
F.W. Woolworth Company

values: E. H. Ferree Company (page does not exist)

values: Edit section: List of Social Security Area Numbers

values:
/wiki/Social_security_number
mw-redirect
Social security number

values:
/wiki/Uniform_civil_number
mw-redirect
Uniform civil number

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.ssa.gov/history/1930.html

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780121805

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/
external text

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ss-5.pdf

values:
nofollow
external text
https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo37107

values:
nofollow
https://www.ssn-check.org/verify/
external text

values: History of Social Security in the United States

values: State Children's Health Insurance Program

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible mw-collapsed

values: Template talk:National identification numbers

values:
/wiki/Registro_Geral
mw-redirect
Registro Geral

values: Personal identification number (Croatia)

values: Personal identification number (Denmark)

values:
/wiki/Hong_Kong_Identity_Card
mw-redirect
Hong Kong Identity Card

values: National identification numbering in Iceland

values:
/wiki/Saudi_Arabian_National_ID_Card
mw-redirect
Saudi Arabian National ID Card

values: Category:Social Security (United States)

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from April 2016

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Social_Security_number
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-cs
display: none;

values: شماره تأمین اجتماعی – Persian

values: 사회 보장 번호 – Korean

values: מספר ביטוח לאומי – Hebrew

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-he
display: none;

values: Numer ubezpieczenia społecznego w Stanach Zjednoczonych – Polish

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ro
display: none;

values: Номер социального страхования – Russian

values: ᏩᏥᏂ ᏗᏟᏁᎸ ᏗᏎᏍᏗ – Cherokee

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-chr
display: none;

values: 社會安全號碼 – Chinese

values: All languages (initial selection from common choices by you and others)

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Social_Security_number rootpage-Social_Security_number skin-vector action-view


text:
Environmental policy of the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The environmental policy of the United States is a federal governmental action to regulate activities that have an environmental impact in the United States. The goal of environmental policy is to protect the environment for future generations while interfering as little as possible with the efficiency of commerce or the liberty of the people and to limit inequity in who is burdened with environmental costs. As his first official act bringing in the 1970s, President Richard Nixon signed the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) into law on New Years Day, 1970. Also in the same year, American starts to celebrate the first earth day, which is "the big bang of U.S. environmental politics, launching the country on a sweeping social learning curve about ecological management never before experienced or attempted in any other nation"(RosenBaum, 2016, p. 9)[1]. NEPA established a comprehensive US national environmental policy and created the requirement to prepare an environmental impact statement for “major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment.” Eccleston has called NEPA, the world's “environmental Magna Carta”.[2]
As a result of the environmental movement in the United States, it continued to mature in the 1970s during which several environmental laws were passed, regulating air and water pollution and forming the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Partially due to the high costs associated with these regulations, there has been a backlash from business and politically conservative interests, limiting increases to environmental regulatory budgets and slowing efforts to protect the environment. Since the 1970s, despite frequent legislative gridlock, there have been significant achievements in environmental regulation, including increases in air and water quality and, to a lesser degree, control of hazardous waste. Due to increasing scientific consensus on global warming and political pressure from environmental groups, modifications to the United States energy policy and limits on greenhouse gas have been suggested.
As established under NEPA, the US was the first nation in the world to introduce the concept of preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate the alternatives and impacts of proposed federal actions.[3] The EIS is designed to forge federal policies, programs, projects, and plans.[4] A large percentage of nations around the world have adopted provisions that emulate the American EIS process.
Contents
[hide]
1 Policy tools
2 Power delegation and policy jurisdiction
2.1 Executive branch
2.2 Legislative branch
3 History
3.1 Origins of the environmental movement[5]
3.2 The Nixon Administration and beginning of the Environmental Decade (1970–1980)
3.3 The Reagan Administration (1981–1989)
3.4 The George H. W. Bush Administration (1989–1993)
3.5 The Clinton Administration (1993–2001)
3.6 The George W. Bush Administration (2001–2009)
3.6.1 The President’s Initiative
3.6.2 Global environmental policy
3.6.3 Campaign promise on the environment
3.6.4 Environmental regulation
3.6.5 Reducing air pollution
3.6.6 Bush environmental legacy
3.7 The Obama Administration (2009–2017)
3.8 The Trump Administration (2017–present)
4 Issues
4.1 Acid deposition
4.2 Ozone depletion
4.3 Hazardous wastes
4.4 Risk control policy
5 Impact
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
9 External links
Policy tools[edit]
The two major policy tools for protecting the environment are rules and inducements. The United States has chosen to use rules, primarily through regulation. Such regulations can come in the form of design standards and performance standards. Performance standards specify emission levels and let those covered by the rules decide how those levels will be met. Design standards specify exactly how performance standards will be met.
Alternatively, the government can use inducements, or "market reform". Inducements are rewards and punishments used to influence people or groups. The two major types of market reforms are charge systems, such as emissions taxes, and "tradable permit systems". One type of tradable permit system is an "auction of pollution rights" in which the amount of allowed pollution is set and divided into units, which are then auctioned, giving environmental organizations the opportunity to buy the units to create a cleaner environment than originally planned. Such a plan was implemented for SO2 emissions in the 1990 Acid Rain Program and has been undertaken for greenhouse gases on a regional scale as a way to mitigate global warming.
Power delegation and policy jurisdiction[edit]
Executive branch[edit]
Governmental authority on environmental issues in the United States is highly fragmented. While the EPA is the most comprehensive environmental agency, its authority on these matters is not absolute. Virtually all of the executive branch's departments have some area of environmental authority. This contributes somewhat to the cost and questionable efficacy of the United States' environmental regulation.
Federal Agency Environmental Responsibilities
White House Office Overall policy, Agency coordination
Office of Management and Budget Budget, Agency coordination and management
Council on Environmental Quality Environmental policy, Agency coordination, Environmental impact statements
Department of Health and Human Services Health
Environmental Protection Agency Air and water pollution, Solid waste, Radiation, Pesticides, Noise, Toxic substances
Department of Justice Environmental litigation
Department of the Interior Public lands, Energy, Minerals, National parks
Department of Agriculture Forestry, Soil, Conservation
Department of Defense Civil works construction, Dredge and fill permits, Pollution control from defense facilities
Nuclear Regulatory Commission License and regulate nuclear power
Department of State International environment
Department of Commerce Oceanic and atmospheric monitoring and research
Department of Labor Occupational health
Department of Housing and Urban Development Housing, Urban parks, Urban planning
Department of Transportation Mass transit, Roads, Aircraft noise, Oil pollution
Department of Energy Energy policy coordination, Petroleum allocation research and development
Tennessee Valley Authority Electric power generation
Federal Emergency Management Agency Cleaning up the natural disasters caused by climate change
Department of Homeland Security|United States Coast Guard Maritime and environmental stewardship, National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC)
Legislative branch[edit]
Fragmentation within the executive branch is duplicated in Congress and within the states. The EPA is the concern of almost two-thirds of the House of Representatives' standing committees and subcommittees and a similar percentage in the Senate. Some seventy committees and subcommittees control water quality policy, for example. Such fragmentation creates both opportunities and problems. While such a variety of committees provide enormous access for environmentalist and industry groups to lobby, the division of tasks means that no one committee or agency looks at environmental problems as a whole.
Senate and House committee jurisdictions
Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Pesticides
Committee on Appropriations Appropriations
Committee on the Budget Budget
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Oceans, Research and Development, Radiation, Toxics
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Synthetic fuels, Conservation oversight, Energy budget, Mines, Oil shale, Outer continental shelf, Strip mining
Committee on Environment and Public Works Air, Drinking water, Noise, Nuclear energy, Ocean dumping, Outer continental shelf, Research and development, Solid waste, Toxics, Water
Committee on Foreign Relations International environment
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Interagency subject area
Committee on Labor and Human Resources Public health
Committee on Small Business Impact of environmental regulations on small business
House
Committee on Agriculture Pesticides
Committee on Appropriations Appropriations
Committee on the Budget Budget
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Interagency subject area
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs Synthetic fuels, Conservation oversight, Energy budget, Mines, Oil shale, Outer continental shelf, Radiation (Nuclear Regulatory Commission oversight), Strip mining
Committee on Energy and Commerce Air, Drinking water, Noise, Radiation, Solid waste, Toxics
Committee on Natural Resources Ocean dumping
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Noise, Water pollution, Water resources
Committee on Science and Technology Research and Development
Committee on Small Business Impact of environmental regulations on small business
History[edit]
See also: Timeline of major U.S. environmental and occupational health regulation
Major Environmental Legislation
Year Law Year Law
1899 Refuse Act 1975 Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 1976 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
1948 Federal Water Pollution Control Act 1976 Solid Waste Disposal Act
1955 Air Pollution Control Act 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act
1963 Clean Air Act (1963) 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments
1965 Solid Waste Disposal Act 1977 Clean Water Act Amendments
1965 Water Quality Act 1980 CERCLA (Superfund)
1967 Air Quality Act 1984 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Amendments
1969 National Environmental Policy Act 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
1970 Clean Air Act (1970) 1986 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act
1972 Consumer Product Safety Act 1987 Clean Water Act Reauthorization
1972 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 1990 Oil Pollution Act
1972 Clean Water Act 1990 Clean Air Act (1990)
1972 Noise Control Act 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement
1973 Endangered Species Act 2003 Healthy Forests Initiative
1974 Safe Drinking Water Act
There are many more environmental laws in the United States, both at the federal and state levels. The common law of property and takings also play an important role in environmental issues. In addition, the law of standing, relating to who has a right to bring a lawsuit, is an important issue in environmental law in the United States.
Origins of the environmental movement[5][edit]
Main article: Environmental movement in the United States
The history of environmental law in the United States can be traced back to early roots in common law doctrines, for example, the law of nuisance and the public trust doctrine. The first statutory environmental law was the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, which has been largely superseded by the Clean Water Act. However, most current major environmental statutes, such as the federal statutes listed above, were passed during the modern environmental movement spanning the late 1960s through the early 1980s. Prior to the passage of these statutes, most federal environmental laws were not nearly as comprehensive.
The precursor of the modern environmental movement in the United States was the early 20th century conservation movement, associated with President Theodore Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot. During this period, the U.S. Forest Service was formed and public concern for consumer protection began, epitomized by the publication of The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. The origins of the modern environmental movement were in the publication of Rachel Carson's controversial Silent Spring, which pointed out the perils of pesticide use and rallied concern for the environment in general. Carson argued that nature deserved human protection and referred to pesticides as the atomic bomb for insects. She stated that these pesticides would cycle through the environment hurting humans and nature and thought they should be used wisely. Carson played a big role in environment activism that was later to come.[5] Along with critiques of the misuse of technology from figures such as William Ophuls, Barry Commoner and Garrett Hardin, the ineffectiveness and criticism of the 1960s Clean Air and Clean Water acts gave a burgeoning momentum to the environmental movement.[6]
In addition to growing public support, structural changes such as Congressional reform and new access to the courts gave environmentalists new power to enact change. The movement that formed held three key values: ecology, health, and sustainability. These values- that we depend and are interconnected with the environment, that insults to the environment can affect our health, and that we should limit our dependence on non-renewable resources- along with a uniquely sympathetic president and Congress, led to great environmental policy change in the 1970s. In 1972 the Club of Rome report came out which was a scholarly effort to gauge the severity of the environmental problem. A team of researchers concluded with one of the most alarming appraisals of the time and set off widespread debates over the findings, it's methods, and policy implications. The model was built mainly to investigate major trends of global concerns such as accelerating industrialization, rapid population growth, widespread malnutrition, depletion of nonrenewable resources and a deteriorating environment. They concluded that if the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion remains unchanged than the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years.[5]
One lawsuit that has been widely recognized as one of the earliest environmental cases is Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission, decided in 1965 by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, prior to passage of the major federal environmental statutes.[7] The case helped halt the construction of a power plant on Storm King Mountain in New York State. The case has been described as giving birth to environmental litigation and helping create the legal doctrine of standing to bring environmental claims.[8] The Scenic Hudson case also is said to have helped inspire the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act, and the creation of such environmental advocacy groups as the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The Nixon Administration and beginning of the Environmental Decade (1970–1980)[edit]
On January 1, 1970, President Richard Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), beginning the 1970s as the environmental decade. NEPA created the Council on Environmental Quality which oversaw the environmental impact of federal actions. Later in the year, Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which consolidated environmental programs from other agencies into a single entity. The legislation during this period concerned primarily first-generation pollutants in the air, surface water, groundwater, and solid waste disposal. Air pollutants such as particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and ozone were put under regulation, and issues such as acid rain, visibility, and global warming were also concerns. In surface water, the contaminants of concern were dissolved oxygen, bacteria, suspended and dissolved solids, nutrients, and toxic substances such as metals. For groundwater, the pollutants included biological contaminants, inorganic and organic substances, and radionuclides. Finally, solid waste contaminants from agriculture, industry, mining, municipalities, and others were put under control.
The Clean Air Act amendments of 1970 and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act amendments of 1972 moved environmental concerns in a new direction. The standards that they put in place were unattainable with existing technology — they were technology forcing. The standards that the EPA put into place called mainly for state implementation. Each state prepared state implementation plans (SIPs), requiring EPA approval, and each state had to request permits from the EPA to emit pollution into any surface water. Congress also provided for a massive public works program to assist in the construction of water and waste treatment plants for municipalities. The 1970 Clean Air Act also enacted deadlines and penalties for automobile emission standards in new cars, resulting in the development and adoption of catalytic converters and greatly reducing automobile pollution.
The Reagan Administration (1981–1989)[edit]
Ronald Reagan entered office skeptical of environmental protection laws and campaigned against harsh government regulation with the environmental arena in mind. As Reagan entered office, he was given two transition reports – one called "Mandate for Leadership" from the Heritage Foundation and one called "Avoiding a GOP Economic Dunkirk" from conservative Congressman David Stockman(R-MI) – that called for drastic changes in environmental regulation, primarily through administrative changes. In pursuit of this strategy, Reagan gradually reduced the EPA's budget by 30% through the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, cut the number of EPA employees, and appointed people at key agency positions who would enthusiastically follow the administration line. Appointees such as Anne Burford at the EPA and James G. Watt at the Department of the Interior were overtly hostile to environmental protection. Through his appointments, Reagan changed the operations of environmental protection from stiff regulation to "cooperative regulation."
Under this administrative strategy of regulatory relief, environmental laws were written and interpreted more favorably for industry interests. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was also given new powers to write regulations. During the first Reagan administration, the OMB was given the power to require a favorable cost-benefit analysis of any regulation before it could be implemented. This was used to delay new regulations, and changes that resulted in regulatory relief often had this requirement waived. At the beginning of the second Reagan administration, the OMB was given more power- all regulatory agencies were required to submit proposals each year for all major environmental regulation- allowing it to reduce regulatory efforts before such proposed regulations became public.
Within few months from entering the White House, Reagan removed the solar panels that his predecessor Carter had installed on the roof of the White House’s West Wing. "Reagan's political philosophy viewed the free market as the best arbiter of what was good for the country. Corporate self-interest, he felt, would steer the country in the right direction," the author Natalie Goldstein wrote in "Global Warming.".[9] In October 2010, president Obama planned to reintroduce the solar panels on the White House roofs, after 31 years.[10]
The George H. W. Bush Administration (1989–1993)[edit]
Environmental policy during the first Bush administration contained a mixture of innovation and restriction. George H. W. Bush appointed the first environmentalist, William Reilly, to head the EPA, along with others with strong environmental inclinations. Before accepting the appointment, Reilly secured the president’s agreement to support his pro-environment agenda and his access to the White House, but competing interests ensured conflicts.[11] In other departments with environmental responsibilities and in White House offices, however, he appointed people who were more developmentally oriented, such as John H. Sununu, Richard Darman, and Dan Quayle. While considerable regulation was initially passed, during his last two years in office he severely restricted regulation, and in 1992, a total freeze was put on new regulations.
President H.W Bush, on July 21, 1989, sent a draft bill to congress proposing amendments to the Clean Air Act [12]. The core of the amendments were meant to reduce acid rain by limiting sulfur dioxide emissions from coal burning plants, to bring eighty urban areas up to current air quality standards and to lower emissions from over two- hundred airborne toxic chemicals[13]. Bush originally supported a cap and trade system to reduce chemical emissions but eventually adopted a more Republican stance [14].
The private-sector Council on Competitiveness (distinct from the federal Competitiveness Policy Council) was formed in 1989 to play the same role as the previous Task Force on Regulatory Relief that Bush had served on in the Reagan administration, which was to negotiate on behalf of the president for regulatory relief with the heads of federal agencies.[15] This executive branch agency negotiated with EPA director Reilly, leading to industry-favorable rulings such as the redefinition of wetlands and the allowance of untreated toxic chemicals in local landfills (this was later reversed). While previous regulatory-relief efforts, such as Reagan's use of the Office of Budget Management, were subject to congressional oversight, the Council on Competitiveness was independent and wasn't required to keep records of its proceedings. The Council on Competitiveness received its authority from a White House memoranda and its members included; Vice President Dan Quayle, Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady, Commerce Secretary Robert Mosbacher, and White House Chief of Staff John Sununu[16].
In 1992, Bush opposed international efforts at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil by refusing to sign the biodiversity treaty and lobbying to remove all binding targets from the proposal on limiting global carbon dioxide emissions.[17]
The Clinton Administration (1993–2001)[edit]
The Clinton Administration promised a change in the direction of environmental policy. Al Gore, the vice president, and appointees such as Carol Browner in EPA and Bruce Babbitt were all encouraging from an environmental standpoint. Clinton eliminated the Council on Competitiveness, returning regulatory authority to agency heads, and Clinton and Gore argued that environmental protection and economic growth were not incompatible.[18]
Clinton's record as the governor of Arkansas however, suggested that Clinton would be willing to make compromises. Through a number of middle-of-the-road positions, on issues such as grazing fees in the West and clean-up of the Everglades, and through his support of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993 and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1994, Clinton dissatisfied some environmentalists. Specifically, the Green Party and its candidate Ralph Nader were outspoken in their criticism of Clinton's environmental record.
Despite criticism from environmental purists, the Clinton administration had several notable environmental accomplishments. Clinton created the President's Council on Sustainable Development, signed the Kyoto Protocol [19] (although he did not submit the treaty to the Senate), and stood firm against Republican attempts after the 1994 elections to roll back environmental laws and regulations through the appropriations process. During the Clinton administration, the EPA's budget was increased, and much of the country's natural resources were put under greater protection, such as the restoration of the Everglades and the increase in size of the Everglades National Park. Important U.S. Supreme Court cases from this period included United States v. Weitzenhoff, et al.
The George W. Bush Administration (2001–2009)[edit]
See also: Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration § Environment
The President’s Initiative[edit]
In 2002 President George W. Bush announced an environment legislative initiative titled Clear Skies.[20] The Clear Skies proposal's stated goals were to reduce three pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and mercury. Clear Skies was to use a market based system [21] by allowing energy companies to buy and trade pollution credits. The president argued that since Clear Skies would use a market based system, millions of tons of pollution would be eliminated when compared to the Clean Air Act. However, the president’s critics argued that the Clear Skies policy would weaken provisions in the Clean Air Act.[22][23]
The Clean Air Act was enacted by the United States Congress and signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970. The main provisions of the Clean Air Act were to control air pollution on a national level and an initiative program called New Source Review (NSR). The NSR initiative would require power plants to upgrade to anti-pollution technologies before they can expand existing facilities and add new technologies.[23] The Clear Skies initiative proposed by the Bush administration main intention was to remove the New Source Review provision and deregulate some of the standards that the Clean Air Act required energy facilities to meet.[24] The proposed removal of the NSR prompted nine northeastern states to file suit in federal court to prevent the new ruling. Advocates against Clear Skies viewed the removal of NSR as a weakening of existing laws and an “assault on the Clean Air Act”. Environmental advocates and their political allies would eventually prevail in defeating the Clear Skies initiative.
Global environmental policy[edit]
President Bush refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol, citing fears of negative consequences for the U.S. economy. Bush also cited the fact that developing countries like India and China were exempt from Kyoto's requirements as a reason for his opposition.[25] When President Bush withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, many of his critics alleged that he made his decision on ideology rather than on science. Suzanne Goldenberg from the Guardian wrote the Bush years are seen “as concerted assault, from the administration's undermining of the science”.[26] Bush’s own Environmental Protection Agency head Christine Todd Whitman said the decision to walk away from Kyoto was "the equivalent to 'flipping the bird,' frankly, to the rest of the world". And Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change said the idea of a head of state putting the science question on the table was horrifying. Bush’s critics included Jonathon Dorm, Earth Policy Institute and NASA scientist James Hansen. Dorm contended that the administration made a “covert attempt to silence the science” while Hansen alleged the administration was “trying to block data showing an acceleration in global warming”.
President Bush’s refusal to seek ratification from the Senate was widely criticized by his opponents in the United States Congress and in the media. Some of President Bush’s harshest critics claim his decision taken on the Kyoto Protocol was due to his close relationship with big oil companies. Greenpeace obtained briefing papers that revealed the administration thanked Exxon for their “active involvement” on climate change. The Guardian reported documents revealed Under-secretary Paula Dobriansky “sound out Exxon executives and other anti-Kyoto business groups on potential alternatives to Kyoto”.[27] However, in 2003, Exxon head of public affairs Nick Thomas denied taking any position on Kyoto.
Campaign promise on the environment[edit]
In 2001, President Bush broke a campaign environment promise by reversing a promise he had made during his presidential campaign to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from coal-burning power plants. Governor Bush pledged power plants would have to meet clean-air standards while promising to enact tougher policies to protect the environment.[28] The broken campaign promise was seen as a betrayal by environmental groups. The president’s reversal on regulating carbon dioxide emissions was one of a series of controversial stands on environmental issues. For example, the Bush administration ruled that factory farms can claim they do not discharge animal waste to avoid oversight from the Clean Air Act.
Environmental regulation[edit]
The actions taken during the Bush administration were seen by environmentalists as ideological rather than scientifically based. The criticism stemmed from the president’s shifting views while he was a candidate for president and executive action taken as president. The Bush presidency was viewed as being weak on the environment due to ideology and close ties with big oil. However, Eli Lehrer from the Competitive Enterprise Institute contended that the Bush administration issued more regulations than any other administration in U.S. history.
Reducing air pollution[edit]
During President Bush’s eight years in office he utilized his executive powers for a number of issues. In an effort to bypass NSR requirements, the president took executive action to “curb plant-by-plant permit reviews”.[29] He also ordered the EPA to develop a regional regulation using a market-based system. The EPA came-up with the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). CAIR was aimed at reducing 70 percent of pollution from coal burning plants. However, CAIR would later be struck down by U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 2008. Additionally, The Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) was also introduced. CAMR was created for the purpose of establishing a permanent national cap on mercury emissions.
Bush environmental legacy[edit]
In the later years of the Bush administration, the president engaged in a series of environmental proposals. He called on countries with the largest greenhouse gases to establish a global goal to control emissions [30] and in 2008 initiated the U.S to join the United Nations to negotiate a post-2012 global climate plan after Kyoto expires. The plan calls for inclusion of both developed and developing nations to address greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, during the later years, President Bush’s position on climate changed. The president had taken steps in the later years of his presidency to address environmental criticism of his broken campaign promises, and argued that the Kyoto protocol was a plan to cripple the US economy. This stern position caused him serious credibility challenges on environmental issues both nationally and globally.
The Obama Administration (2009–2017)[edit]
Environmental issues were prominent in the 2008 presidential election, and Barack Obama obtained a clear lead above his rival, John McCain, on the environment, winning the backing of 'all mainstream environmental groups'[31] and public confidence on the issue. Upon election, appointments such as that of the Nobel prize-winning physicist Steven Chu were seen as a confirmation that his presidency was serious about environmental issues.[32]
One example of a new initiative by the Obama Administration is the America's Great Outdoors Initiative, which preserves and highlights numerous natural features, and also raises public awareness.
The Trump Administration (2017–present)[edit]
Main article: Environmental policy of the Donald Trump administration
The environmental policy of the Donald Trump administration represents a shift from the policy priorities and goals of his predecessor, Barack Obama. While Obama's environmental agenda prioritized the reduction of carbon emissions through the use of clean renewable energy,[33] the Trump administration has sought to increase fossil fuel use and scrap environmental regulations, which he has often referred to as an impediment to business.[34] Trump has announced plans to pull the United States out of the 191 nation Paris agreement.[35] At a presidential debate in March 2016, Trump said he would eliminate the EPA as a part of his plan to balance the budget.[36]
Trump's "America First Energy Plan", focuses on increasing the use of fossil fuels without mentioning renewable energy. It would repeal many Obama policies including the Climate Action Plan and the Clean Water Rule, and limit the EPA's mission to protecting air and water quality. Within days of taking office he signed executive orders to approve two controversial oil pipelines and to require federal review of the Clean Water Rule and the Clean Power Plan. He also invited American manufacturers to suggest which regulations should be eliminated; industry leaders submitted 168 comments, of which nearly half targeted Environmental Protection Agency rules.[37] Trump's appointments to key agencies dealing in energy and environmental policy reflected his commitment to deregulation, particularly of the fossil fuel industry. Several of his cabinet picks, such as Rick Perry as Secretary of Energy and Scott Pruitt as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, were people with a history of opposition to the agency they were named to head.[38]
Issues[edit]
Since the environmental movement of the 1970s, the nature of environmental issues has changed. While the initial emphasis was on conventional air and water pollutants, which were the most obvious and easily measurable problems, newer issues are long-term problems that are not easily discernible and can be surrounded by controversy.
Acid deposition[edit]
Acid deposition, in the form of acid rain and dry deposition, is the result of sulfur and nitrogen dioxide being emitted into the air, traveling and landing in a different place, and changing the acidity of the water or land on which the chemicals fall. Acid deposition in the Northeast United States from the burning of coal and in the West United States from utilities and motor vehicles caused a number of problems, and was partially exacerbated by the Clean Air Act, which forced coal power plants to use taller smoke stacks, resulting in farther transmission of sulfur dioxide in the air.
During the Carter administration, the United States undertook a risk-averse policy, acting through the EPA and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to research and control the pollutants suspected to cause acid deposition even in the face of scientific uncertainty. The Reagan administration was more risk tolerant. It argued that, given the scientific uncertainties about harm and exposure levels, new expenditures should not be undertaken that would curtail energy security and economic growth. During George H. W. Bush's presidential campaign, he called for new Clean Air Act legislation to curtail sulfur- and nitrogen-dioxide emissions. In 1990, after he was elected, amendments to the Clean Air Act were finally passed that cut emissions by over 12 million tons per year, set up a market-like system of emissions trading, and set a cap on emissions for the year 2000. These goals were achieved to some degree by the installation of industrial scrubbers.
While the initial costs in cutting emissions levels were expected to be over $4.6 billion for utilities and a 40% rise in electricity costs, the impact ended up being only about $1 billion and a 2–4% rise in electricity costs. Part of the reason for the relatively low costs is the availability of low-sulfur coal.
Ozone depletion[edit]
Ozone depletion is the reduced concentration of ozone in the Earth's stratosphere (called the ozone layer), where it serves to block much of the ultraviolet radiation from the sun. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which were used beginning in the 1930s in a number of important areas, were determined in 1974 to be responsible for much of the depletion of the ozone layer. Four years later, the EPA and FDA banned CFCs in aerosol cans. As research in the 1980s indicated that the problem was worse than before, and revealed a controversial massive hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica, three international agreements were made to reduce the ozone-damaging substances- the Vienna Convention, the 1987 Montreal Protocol, and a third agreement in 1990 in London. In the United States, the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments phased out production of CFCs and required recycling of CFC products.
Although the phase-out of CFCs took almost two decades, the policy is generally seen as a success. While a crisis seems to be averted, due to the longevity of CFC particles in the atmosphere, the ozone layer is only expected to start showing sign of recovery by 2024.[39]
Hazardous wastes[edit]
Main article: Hazardous waste in the United States
Hazardous waste regulations began in the United States in 1976 with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to govern hazardous waste from its initial generation to final disposition (cradle-to-grave regulation) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to anticipate possible hazards from chemicals. Following the events at Love Canal, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, or Superfund) was enacted in 1980 to assist in the cleanup of abandoned hazardous waste disposal sites. In the mid-1980s, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (1984) and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (1986) were passed.
The aim of hazardous waste regulation is to prevent harm from occurring due to hazardous waste and to pass the burdens of cleanup of hazardous waste on to the original producers of the waste. Some of the problems of hazardous waste regulation are that the negative effects of hazardous waste can be difficult to detect and controversial and that, due mainly to the large amount of hazardous waste that is generated (214 million tons in 1995), regulation can be difficult and costly.
Implementation has been difficult, with years sometimes passing between legislation passage and initial regulations. Superfund was passed in December 1980, just before Reagan took office. The first administrator of Superfund was Rita Lavelle who had worked for a major hazardous waste generator. The result was that her implementation of Superfund was designed mainly to delay regulation, and the subsequent controversy resulted in the resignation of Lavelle, EPA administrator Anne Burford, and several other top EPA personnel. In 1986, Congress passed the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, increasing funding to $9 billion and providing for studies and new technologies. By 1995, Superfund cleanup still took an average of twelve years per site, and costs for each site can range in the billions of dollars. Superfund, while showing improvements, has been probably the most criticized of environmental programs based on costs of remediation, implementation problems, and the questionable seriousness of the problems it addresses.
Risk control policy[edit]
Underlying the policy decisions made by the United States is the concept of risk control, consisting of two parts: risk assessment and risk management. The science behind risk assessment varies greatly in uncertainty and tends to be the focus of political controversy. For example, animal testing is often used to determine the toxicity of various substances for humans. But assumptions made about expected dosage and exposure to chemicals are often disputed, and the dosage given to animals is typically much larger than what humans normally consume. While industry groups tend to take a risk-tolerant position, environmentalists take a risk-averse position, following the precautionary principle.
Another issue is the effect that chemicals can have relative to lifestyle choices. Cancer, for example, typically surface decades after first exposure to a carcinogen, and lifestyle choices are frequently more important in causing cancer than exposure to chemicals. While the governmental role in mitigating lifestyle-choice risks can be very controversial (see Smoking in the United States), chemical exposure through lifestyle choices can also occur involuntarily if the public is not properly educated (see Endocrine disruptors).
Finally, the way that threats are presented to the public plays a large role in how those threats are addressed. The threat of nuclear power and the environmental effects of pesticides are overstated, some have claimed, while many high-priority threats go unpublicized. In order to combat this discrepancy, the EPA published a Relative Risk Report in 1987, and a follow-up report published by the Relative Risk Reduction Strategies Committee in 1990 suggested that the EPA should adopt a more pro-active posture, educating the public and assigning budgetary priorities for objectively assessed high-risk threats.
Impact[edit]
Since the major environmental legislation of the 1970s was enacted, great progress has been made in some areas, but the environmental protection has come at a high price. Between 1970 and 1996, air pollutants dropped 32% while the population grew by 29%. Other pollutants have been more difficult to track, especially water pollutants. While air and water standards have been slowly improving, in 1996 70 million people still lived in counties that didn't meet EPA ozone standards. 36% of rivers and 39% of lakes didn't meet minimum standards for all uses (swimming, fishing, drinking, supporting aquatic life). In the same period, the size of the National Park Service grew from 26,000,000 acres (110,000 km2) to 83,000,000 acres (340,000 km2), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service expanded by over three times to manage over 92,000,000 acres (370,000 km2). In 1995, 41% of the 960 endangered species were stable or improving.
Critics of environmental legislation argue that the gains made in environmental protection come at too great a cost. The overall cost of environmental regulation in the United States is estimated to be about 2% of the gross domestic product-similar to many other countries, but calculating the cost is challenging both conceptually (deciding what costs are included) and practically (with data from a broad range of sources).[40] In 1994, almost $122 billion was spent on pollution abatement and control. $35 billion of that has been in direct government spending, $65 billion was spent by business, and $22 billion was spent by individuals.
See also[edit]
Climate change policy of the United States
C. Arden Pope
Foreign policy of the Obama administration regarding Climate change
List of environmental agencies in the United States
List of United States federal environmental statutes
U.S. Climate Change Science Program
Watershed central
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Rosenbaum, Walter (2016). Environmental Politics and Policy 10ed. CQ Press. p. 9. ISBN 9781506345376.
Jump up ^ Eccleston, Charles (2010). Global Environmental Policy: Concepts, Principles, and Practice. ISBN 978-1439847664.
Jump up ^ Eccleston C. H., The EIS Book: Managing and Preparing Environmental Impact Statements. CRC Press. (2010).
Jump up ^ 40 CFR 1500-1508.
^ Jump up to: a b c Hunt, Michael (2014). The World Transformed: 1945 to the present. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 215–216. ISBN 978-0-19-937102-0.
Jump up ^ Dye, Thomas (2011). Understanding Public Policy. Boston: Longman. p. 227. ISBN 978-0-205-75742-8.
Jump up ^ Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission, 354 F.2d 608, December 29, 1965.
Jump up ^ Scenic Hudson, Inc. "Scenic Hudson Collection: Records Relating to the Storm King Case, 1963–1981." Archived 2005-12-18 at the Wayback Machine. Archives and Special Collections, Marist College, Poughkeepsie, NY.
Jump up ^ [1]
Jump up ^ Chipman, Kim (5 October 2010). "Solar Panels on White House Roof, Removed by Reagan, to Return Under Obama". Bloomberg.
Jump up ^ EPA Alumni Association: EPA Administrator William K. Reilly describes his relationship with President Bush and their mutual understanding before Reilly accepted the appointment. Reflections on US Environmental Policy: An Interview with William K. Reilly Video, Transcript (see p3).
Jump up ^ Vig and Kraft, Environmental Policy
Jump up ^ Vig and Kraft, Environmental Policy
Jump up ^ Vig and Kraft, Environmental Policy
Jump up ^ Center for Regulatory Effectiveness
Jump up ^ Duffy, 1996, www.jstor.org/stable/3235378.
Jump up ^ A CLOSER LOOK; Ecology, the Economy, and Bush
Jump up ^ Paul Rauber "Does he deserve your vote? – Bill Clinton's environmental record". Sierra. FindArticles.com. 08 Feb, 2011. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1525/is_n5_v81/ai_18646401/
Jump up ^ "United States signs Kyoto Protocol on climate change". Issues in Science and Technology. FindArticles.com. 08 Feb, 2011. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3622/is_199801/ai_n8763527/ /
Jump up ^ The White House Archives. "President's Clear Skies Initiative Submitted to Congress". Retrieved November 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ Marquis, Christopher (30 July 2012). "Bush Energy Proposal Seeks to 'Clear Skies' 2018". The New York Times. Retrieved 12 November 2011.
Jump up ^ Valtin, Tom. "Bush Chips Away at Clean Air Act". The Sierra Club. Archived from the original on 29 October 2011. Retrieved 12 November 2011.
^ Jump up to: a b Vedantam (10 March 2005). "Senate panel hangs dark cloud over Bush's "Clear Skies" plan". The Seattle Times. Retrieved November 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ Barcott, Bruce. "Changing All the Rules." The New York Times April 2004.
Jump up ^ Sanger, David E. "Bush Will Continue to Oppose Kyoto Pact on Global Warming." The New York Times June 2001. Print
Jump up ^ Goldenberg, Suzanne. "The Worst of Times: Bush's Environmental Legacy Examined." The Guardian [London] Friday Jan. 2009. Print.
Jump up ^ Vidal, John. "Revealed: How Oil Giant Influenced Bush." The Guardian [London] Wednesday June 2005. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/jun/08/usnews.climatechange>.
Jump up ^ Graham, John. "Bush: On the Home Front." Graham, John. Cleaner Air, Warmer Climate. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010. 194-196.
Jump up ^ Graham, John. "Bush: On the Home Front." Graham, John. Cleaner Air, Warmer Climate. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010. pg 201.
Jump up ^ Fletcher, Michael and Juliet Eilperin. Bush Proposes Talks on Warming. 31 May 2007. 12 November 2011 <https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/31/AR2007053100934.html>.
Jump up ^ Peele et al, Development in American Politics 6, p. 181.
Jump up ^ Mufson, Steven; Rucker, Philip (December 11, 2008). "Nobel Physicist Chosen To Be Energy Secretary". The Washington Post.
Jump up ^ "Promises about Environment on The Obameter". Politifact. Retrieved December 8, 2017.
Jump up ^ Popovich, Nadja; Albeck-Ripka, Livia. "52 Environmental Rules on the Way Out Under Trump". New York Times. Retrieved December 8, 2017.
Jump up ^ http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/nicaragua-paris-climate-accord-us-syria/index.html
Jump up ^ Feldscher, Kyle. "Trump says he'd eliminate 'Department of Environment Protection'". Washington Examiner. Retrieved September 13, 2017.
Jump up ^ Eilperin, Juliet (April 16, 2017). "EPA emerges as major target after Trump solicits policy advice from industry". Washington Post. Retrieved April 21, 2017.
Jump up ^ Bump, Philip (December 13, 2016). "Trump's Cabinet picks are often in direct conflict with the agencies they may lead". Washington Post. Retrieved April 15, 2017.
Jump up ^ Newman, P. A., Nash, E. R., Kawa, S. R., Montzka, S. A. and Schauffler, S. M (2006). "When will the Antarctic ozone hole recover?". Geophysical Research Letters. 33 (12): L12814. Bibcode:2006GeoRL..3312814N. doi:10.1029/2005GL025232. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Jump up ^ Calculating the Cost of Environmental Regulation
Further reading[edit]
Rushefsky, Mark E. (2002). Public Policy in the United States at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century (3rd ed.). New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. pp. 253–254. ISBN 978-0-7656-1663-0.
EPA Alumni Association: A Half Century of Progress – former senior EPA officials describe the evolution of the U.S. fight to protect the environment
External links[edit]
US Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Law Institute
History of Scenic Hudson – the advocacy group which brought the landmark Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission case
Excerpt from "The Birth of Environmentalism" by Robert E. Taylor
Environmental Protection Bills - GovTrack.us
[show]
v
t
e
United States environmental law
Supreme Court
decisions
Missouri v. Holland (1920)
Sierra Club v. Morton (1972)
United States v. SCRAP (1973)
Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill (1978)
Vermont Yankee v. NRDC (1978)
Hughes v. Oklahoma (1979)
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992)
United States v. Bestfoods (1998)
Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (2000)
SWANCC v. Army Corps of Engineers (2001)
Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen (2004)
Rapanos v. United States (2006)
Massachusetts v. EPA (2007)
National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife (2007)
Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (2009)
Major
federal legislation
and treaties
Rivers and Harbors Act (1899)
Lacey Act (1900)
Weeks Act (1911)
North Pacific Fur Seal Convention of 1911 (1911)
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918)
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1934)
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (1954)
Clean Air Act (1963, 1970)
National Environmental Policy Act (1970)
Clean Water Act (1972)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (1972)
Noise Control Act (1972)
Endangered Species Act (1973)
Safe Drinking Water Act (1974)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (1976)
Toxic Substances Control Act (1976)
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (1977)
CERCLA (Superfund) (1980)
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (1986)
Emergency Wetlands Resources Act (1986)
Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (2016)
Federal agencies
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Council on Environmental Quality
Office of Surface Mining
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Regulations
and concepts
Best available technology
Citizen suit
Discharge Monitoring Report
Effluent guidelines
Environmental crime
Environmental impact statement
Environmental justice
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Priorities List
New Source Performance Standard
Not-To-Exceed (NTE)
Right to know
Total maximum daily load
Toxicity category rating
[show]
v
t
e
Public policy of the United States
Agricultural
Arctic
Climate change (G. W. Bush)
Domestic (Reagan, G. W. Bush)
Drug
Economic (G. W. Bush, Obama)
Energy (Obama)
Environmental
Fiscal
Foreign (History, Criticism, Reagan, Clinton, G. W. Bush, Obama, Trump)
Gun control (Clinton)
Low-level radioactive waste
Monetary
Native American (Nixon, Obama)
Nuclear energy
Science
Social (Obama)
Space (G. W. Bush, Obama)
Stem cell
Telecommunications
Trade
Visa
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Environmental_policy_of_the_United_States&oldid=832783605"
Categories:
Environmental policy in the United States
United States federal policy
Hidden categories:
Webarchive template wayback links
CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Français
日本語
Suomi
Edit links
This page was last edited on 28 March 2018, at 00:00.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: href title

value: sup

value: p

values: Environmental movement in the United States

values: United States Environmental Protection Agency

attrs: href class title

values:
/wiki/Mitigation_of_global_warming
mw-redirect
Mitigation of global warming

values: Edit section: Power delegation and policy jurisdiction

values: United States federal executive departments

values: Executive Office of the President of the United States

values: United States Department of Health and Human Services

values: United States Department of the Interior

values: United States Department of Housing and Urban Development

values: United States Department of Transportation

values:
/wiki/Department_of_Homeland_Security
mw-redirect
Department of Homeland Security

values: United States Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry

values: United States Senate Committee on Appropriations

values: United States Senate Committee on the Budget

values: United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

values: United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

values:
/wiki/Strip_mining
mw-redirect
Strip mining

values: United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works

values: United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

values: United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

values: United States Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources

values: United States Senate Committee on Small Business

values: United States House Committee on Agriculture

values: United States House Committee on Appropriations

values: United States House Committee on the Budget

values: United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

values: United States House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs

values: United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce

values: United States House Committee on Natural Resources

values: United States House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

values: United States House Committee on Science and Technology

values: United States House Committee on Small Business

values:
/wiki/Solid_Waste_Disposal_Act
mw-redirect
Solid Waste Disposal Act

values:
/wiki/Toxic_Substances_Control_Act
mw-redirect
Toxic Substances Control Act

values:
/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(1963)
mw-redirect
Clean Air Act (1963)

values:
/wiki/Water_Quality_Act
mw-redirect
Water Quality Act

values:
/wiki/Air_Quality_Act
mw-redirect
Air Quality Act

values:
/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(1970)
mw-redirect
Clean Air Act (1970)

values: Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

values: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

values:
/wiki/Oil_Pollution_Act
mw-redirect
Oil Pollution Act

values:
/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(1990)
mw-redirect
Clean Air Act (1990)

values:
/wiki/Endangered_Species_Act
mw-redirect
Endangered Species Act

values: Edit section: Origins of the environmental movement[5]

values:
/wiki/Second_Circuit_Court_of_Appeals
mw-redirect
Second Circuit Court of Appeals

values:
/wiki/Power_plant
mw-redirect
Power plant

values: Edit section: The Nixon Administration and beginning of the Environmental Decade (1970–1980)

values:
/wiki/Atmospheric_particulate_matter
mw-redirect
Atmospheric particulate matter

values:
/wiki/Dissolved_oxygen
mw-redirect
Dissolved oxygen

values: Edit section: The Reagan Administration (1981–1989)

values:
/wiki/Heritage_Foundation
mw-redirect
Heritage Foundation

values:
/wiki/Anne_Burford
mw-redirect
Anne Burford

values: Edit section: The George H. W. Bush Administration (1989–1993)

values:
/wiki/William_Reilly
mw-redirect
William Reilly

values:
/wiki/Rio_de_Janeiro,_Brazil
mw-redirect
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

values: List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions

values: Edit section: The Clinton Administration (1993–2001)

values:
/wiki/Clinton_Administration
mw-redirect
Clinton Administration

values:
/wiki/Green_Party_(United_States)
mw-redirect
Green Party (United States)

values:
/wiki/U.S._Supreme_Court
mw-redirect
U.S. Supreme Court

values: Edit section: The George W. Bush Administration (2001–2009)

values: Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration

values: Edit section: The President’s Initiative

values: Edit section: Global environmental policy

values: Edit section: Campaign promise on the environment

values: Edit section: The Obama Administration (2009–2017)

values: United States presidential election, 2008

values:
/wiki/Nobel_prize
mw-redirect
Nobel prize

values: Edit section: The Trump Administration (2017–present)

values: Environmental policy of the Donald Trump administration

values:
/wiki/Paris_agreement
mw-redirect
Paris agreement

values:
/wiki/Secretary_of_Energy
mw-redirect
Secretary of Energy

values: Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency

values:
/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant
mw-redirect
Fossil fuel power plant

values:
/wiki/Smoke_stack
mw-redirect
Smoke stack

values:
/wiki/Ultraviolet_radiation
mw-redirect
Ultraviolet radiation

values: Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer

values:
/wiki/Life_cycle_assessment
mw-redirect
Life cycle assessment

values: Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Smoking_in_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Smoking in the United States

values:
/wiki/Relative_Risk
mw-redirect
Relative Risk

values:
/wiki/U.S._Fish_and_Wildlife_Service
mw-redirect
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

values: Climate change policy of the United States

values: Foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration

values: List of environmental agencies in the United States

values: List of United States federal environmental statutes

values:
/wiki/Watershed_central
mw-redirect
Watershed central

values:
nofollow
external text
http://openjurist.org/354/f2d/608

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1029%2F2005GL025232

values: Category:CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
http://www.epa.gov/
external text

values: Template:United States environmental law

values: Template talk:United States environmental law

values: United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures

values: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

values: Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc.

values: Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. Army Corps of Engineers

values: Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen

values: Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency

values: National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife

values: North Pacific Fur Seal Convention of 1911

values: Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954

values: Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

values: Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act

values: List of federal agencies in the United States

values: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-inner

values: Agricultural policy of the United States

values: Climate change policy of the George W. Bush administration

values: Domestic policy of the United States (page does not exist)

values: Domestic policy of the Ronald Reagan administration

values:
/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Drug policy of the United States

values: Economic policy of the United States (page does not exist)

values: Economic policy of the George W. Bush administration

values:
/wiki/Economic_policy_of_Barack_Obama
mw-redirect
Economic policy of Barack Obama

values: Energy policy of the Obama administration

values:
/wiki/History_of_U.S._foreign_policy
mw-redirect
History of U.S. foreign policy

values: Foreign policy of the Ronald Reagan administration

values: Foreign policy of the Bill Clinton administration

values: Foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration

values: Foreign policy of the Donald Trump administration

values: Gun control policy of the United States (page does not exist)

values: Gun control policy of the Clinton Administration

values: Low-level radioactive waste policy of the United States

values: Native American policy of the United States (page does not exist)

values: Native American policy of the Nixon Administration

values: Native American Policy of the Obama Administration

values: Nuclear energy policy of the United States

values: Social policy of the United States (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Barack_Obama_social_policy
mw-redirect
Barack Obama social policy

values: Space policy of the George W. Bush administration

values: Space policy of the Barack Obama administration

values: Stem cell laws and policy in the United States

values: Telecommunications policy of the United States

values:
/wiki/Trade_policy_of_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Trade policy of the United States

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Environmental policy in the United States

values: Category:Webarchive template wayback links

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: Politique environnementale des États-Unis – French

values: アメリカの環境と環境政策 – Japanese

values: Yhdysvaltain ympäristöpolitiikka – Finnish

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Environmental_policy_of_the_United_States rootpage-Environmental_policy_of_the_United_States skin-vector action-view