The Bush administration is trying to push through changes to the Endangered Species Act that would -- surprise! -- be detrimental to endangered species. Under regulatory changes proposed Monday, tens of thousands of projects funded, built, or authorized by federal agencies each year would be exempt from currently mandated independent reviews. Instead, the administration has determined that federal agencies now have the know-how to decide whether highways, dams, mines, and the like would harm endangered species -- and the regulations would not allow agencies to include greenhouse-gas emissions in those calculations. "We believe federal action agencies will err on the side of caution in making these determinations," says the proposal. Ha ha ha! Oh, that's not a joke? The proposed changes require only a 30-day public comment period -- not congressional approval -- before being finalized.
Terms of Endangerment
Bush admin tries sneaky attack on endangered-species protections 8
-
Posted 1:31 PM on 11 Aug 2008
-
Posted in
Read More About
Related Stories
Denmark’s Hedegaard urges G8 to push ahead on climate talks
China blasts U.S. climate bill enabling penalties on trade partners
Add a Comment
You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
Comments View as Flat
Russ Posted 8:32 am
11 Aug 2008
they'll never give up
How many times are the courts going to have to tell these criminals they have to obey the law? By now someone should really be held in criminal contempt.
The ESA and NEPA are clear - impact statements are required, and if those statements find that an endangered species would be harmed by an action, the action is proscribed.
As for climate change, there too the law is clear: greenhouse gases are pollutants under the CAA, and pollution beleaguerment certainly falls under the rubric of the ESA.
Yet more criminality, obstructionism, scorched earth as the clock runs out on this administration.
Permalink
MattKirby Posted 12:29 am
12 Aug 2008
A Last Gasp from a Failed Administration
One more example of the administration trying to avert current laws through backdoor means. The largest overhaul of the ESA since 1988 and a 60-day public comment period is expected to be sufficient? Yes, sufficient enough to finalize the plans before the new administration.
http://www.sierraclub.org/wildlegacy/blog/2008/08/endange ...
Permalink
christophersj Posted 1:32 am
12 Aug 2008
"I'm trying Ringo"
"I'm trying, Ringo. I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd..." -Samuel Jackson in Pulp Fiction
This is pure hatred of the biosphere and I need your guy's support to find my nonviolent center today. Any URL links to meditations intended to foster nonviolence and mental calm?
Permalink
freeztar Posted 5:01 am
13 Aug 2008
Justice Department
This thing will be struck down by the courts, no worries.
Permalink
J4zonian Posted 3:08 am
14 Aug 2008
Yeah, freeztar,
Good one.
Well of course it will be struck down...well, maybe it will be...well, we can always hope... except even if it is, what makes you think they will pay any attention to what the court says? Apparently the administration gets to make it up as they go along now. Congress won't do anything; the supremes don't have a tactical squad, so they can't take the White House...
30 day comment period. I suggest we comment.
Loudly.
With visual aids.
Permalink
kstitt Posted 11:03 pm
18 Aug 2008
A Lasting Legacy
The current administration will certainly leave a lasting legacy, one which their grandchildren will lament that changed the face of the Earth forever.
Since the administration thinks they are above the law, they create the law. Gee, I always thought that was the job of Congress. Speaking of Congress, why are they on vacation? Will they make any difference?
30 day comment period, no email messages, why not eliminate the comment period altogether, it will save money? They can rationalize anything.
Who will start the court challenge? When?
Permalink
ellipses Posted 3:03 am
19 Aug 2008
Example of how they operate:
Bush administration assurances: "We believe federal action agencies will err on the side of caution in making these determinations."
Oh REALLY... ? This is how it works:
The reality: ... while acknowledging that more research is needed to fully understand the chemical's effects on humans, the federal Food and Drug Administration declared that low doses of bisphenol A are not a threat to infants or adults ...
The result they want: ... On the issue of whether to ban bisphenal A from baby bottles, "I think the evidence is just not clear enough" said the California Legislature.
Permalink
mauryh Posted 6:23 am
19 Aug 2008
Endangered Endangered Species Act
If this RULE is implemented, it will represent yet another example of how in the United States of America, RULES TRUMP LAWS. In 1973 Congress, created as a co-equal third branch of our government, performed its LEGISLATIVE function by passing a LAW--the Endangered Species Act, for the express purpose of protecting endangered species.
Thirty-five years later, despite their best (or worst) efforts--so-called "conservative" Republicans and lobbyists have been unable to convince a majority of Congress to legislate detrimental changes to seriously weaken the Act's safety net of habitat protections. Not to worry--"rules trump laws", say the corporatists.
The Executive Department expects that by proposing this RULE, it can accomplish through regulations what the polluting corporatists have been unable to achieve in Congress.
This proposed rule would end independent environmental reviews for the tens of thousands of projects funded, built, or authorized by federal agencies each year. We all know that ending "independent" environmental reviews by current agencies largely staffed by the public-private revolving door to the subsidized polluters and corporatist--would mean a virtual end to any review. The draft rule also proposes to arbitrarily bar outright any federal agencies from assessing the emissions from projects that contribute to global warming and its effect on species and habitats.
This proposed rule represents nothing less than a transparent attempt to abuse the power of the Executive Department and to avoid enforcement of a law it's RULERS do not like.
Permalink