Beyond being an environmental concern, pollution is a public health problem. As a result, enforcement of anti-pollution statutes, such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, not only protects the environment, but also furthers fundamental public health goals. Moreover, public health benefits provide politically salient arguments for continuing and even strengthening environmental protection that can counteract any political opposition that can arise as a result of the costs of environmental regulation and compliance to regulated entities and the taxpayers.Thus, it is worth examining the extent to which the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) considers the public health in its environmental enforcement priorities and decisions. Focusing on the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, this Article undertakes such an examination by: (1) outlining the statutory connections between public health considerations and environmental regulation; (2) examining the EPA’s enforcement priorities and guidance; and (3) criticizing the EPA’s presentation of its own enforcement effectiveness over the last decade.This Article concludes that public health considerations do play a significant role in environmental enforcement policies and decisionmaking. However, the EPA’s commitment to presenting the public health benefits of its enforcement actions has varied considerably over the last decade. With the release of its FY2009 enforcement assessment, however, the EPA has both expanded its analysis of the connection between environmental pollution enforcement and public health benefits and created new tools to enhance the transparency of these benefits to the affected public.
Market effects of environmental regulation: coal, railroads, and the 1990 Clean Air Act
