weren t these numbers the same numbers floated around a week ago when the administration suspended its ozone standards? clearly not, no. they weren t? no, they were not. what were those figures? i actually don t have them at the top of my head, but i certainly can provide them. reporter: in a letter sent to mccarthy, smith an environment subcommittee chris stewart wrote the agency failure to comply with repeated congressional requests shows blatant disregard for policy and president obama s promise of transparency. with no data provided to the science committee so far, smith says. the only conclusion i reach why the epa refused to give the data used for regulations when they promised to do so repeatedly is that they ve got something to hide or their data is embarrassing. reporter: an epa spokesperson tells fox the agency provided lawmakers with data and insists its actions will protect americans from pal u tanlts. committee aids h aides say it is
energy and commerce committee cast jackson as ubeer regulator, oblivious to impact of her policy in time of stubbornly high unemployment. but the witness gave as good as she got, whether defending the clean air act. 40-year history shouldn t be ignored just because of doomsday scenarios by those who want to stop public health protections in this room. reporter: or invoking last year s deadly b.p. oil spill to rebut republican call for regulation. not every deregulatory push works out well for the country or the environment in 2009, a company called another federal agency s rule an unnecessary burden. that agency with us mineral management service and that company was transocean. reporter: g.o.p. members seized on president obama rejection this month of the epa proposal for ozone standards. you may want to carry out your agenda, even the the president acknowledged you have gone too far. on the house floor, lawmakers debated a bill to subject epa rules to new enter
benefits, more government bureaucrats. did you just see i m agreeing with him? if you have time. i was reading, i think, in the wall street journal this morning, it said in advance of the president s speech tomorrow night, one thing ceo s would like the president to do or say is i m going to get out of the way because there are too many clamp downs and regulations the way it is. well, he s not going to do that. no. so why did he do it with the ozone regulation? why did he rescind them? why didn t he get out of the way? there s a re-election coming. precisely. 41 states and hundreds of counties would not have been in compliance with the stricter ozone standards. that means businesses in those states and counties could not expand. that means you can t get jobs. now, the president saw this, knows this. there s an election coming and he moves backwards on those regulations. that s what bill clinton would do. yes, but this is not for reasons of principle. it s not that
looks at the change and regulations and what impact politics may be playing. reporter: with the 2012 campaign pressures in play, critics see evidence from the obama administration is quietly beginning to ease epa s regulatory enforcement. last july the epa announced it would postpone for the fourth time new ozone standards, with a promise to reconsider at a later date in august, epa regulators chose to ignore toughening of carbon mo knockside standard standards carbon monoxide standards. angering many environmentalists. we think it s terrible thing. the conservative critics say it s the exception, not the rule. there is indication right now they are pulling back when it pertains to the epa. tracy and others point to the new calf they standards for increased auto mileage that begin to take effect in 2012. still tougher regulations set for 2025.
regulations and what impact politics may be playing. reporter: with the 2012 campaign pressures in play, critics see evidence from the obama administration is quietly beginning to ease epa s regulatory enforcement. last july the epa announced it would postpone for the fourth time new ozone standards, with a promise to reconsider at a later date in august, epa regulators chose to ignore toughening of carbon mo knockside standard standards carbon monoxide standards. angering many environmentalists. we think it s terrible thing. the conservative critics say it s the exception, not the rule. there is indication right now they are pulling back when it pertains to the epa. tracy and others point to the new calf they standards for increased auto mileage that begin to take effect in 2012. still tougher regulations set for 2025. that would require cars to get