Bush ready to gut Endangered Species Act.

[malorn]

Originally Posted by TimBikes

OK - if you want to take that cynical of a line...

The public sector typically only masquerades as protectors of the public interest. It is really more protecting their jobs, strengthening their unions, and promoting special interests.

If you don't think so, look at the SEI website. So they agitate for public employee unionization to increase membership so they can garnish wages (whether you want to belong to the union or not) so they can increase their budget so can further expand unionization efforts and further garnish wages to create even larger budgets to buy political favors via political action committees and fealty from their ever-expanding membership come election day.

Very well stated.

[FL_Prius_Driver]

Unfortunately, Manipulators come at both ends of the political spectrum. Some projects were canceled/delayed because of trumped up environmental concerns (Snail Darter anyone?) Many businesses deserve to be stopped in their tracks, not because what they do is bad, but they do it as destructively as possible (WV coal mining).

Sadly, Environmental Organizations and Commercial businesses that work together get the job done seemlessly....and with no media coverage. The smarter businesses have learned that coordinating with the environment is ultimately more profitable than fighting.....but not near as fun as combating the other side in public. Very fortunately, a lot of the cooperative efforts are happening....silently.

[F8L]

Originally Posted by Godiva

No. But it reduces the disturbance and impact. What I believe is that without these laws in place and enforced there would be even worse damage and destruction done by the private sector in the pursuit of profit.

Capitalism isn't about sensitivity to the environment or consideration of the public. If it was, it wouldn't be called Capitalism.

This is very evident throughout the history of our society when and where those regulations are upheld with teeth and education.

This whole deal makes me sick and as such I have avoided replying thus far. I'm tired of ignorant people running the country and our lives.....

[FL_Prius_Driver]

Originally Posted by F8L

This is very evident throughout the history of our society when and where those regulations are upheld with teeth and education.

This whole deal makes me sick and as such I have avoided replying thus far. I'm tired of ignorant people running the country and our lives.....

I'm much more optimistic. Lousy executive branch decisions and initiatives have always been a constant and will continue to be. What has happened is that states and communities are bypassing the federal government and setting their own environmental agendas. California is clearly better than the US executive branch for initiating good (and a few bad) efforts to fight pollution. The better air that I breath is probably more due to CA gov. than the US gov. Same story with solar power. I really belive that the net outcome of trying to gut the ESA will be not what everyone expects at first thought. (i.e. Rather than gutting the ESA, what will happen is the federal government will cede more power to the states and communities unexpectedly.)

[Godiva]

Well, I'm hoping that this will be delayed with feet dragging, delays, whatever until the current doofus is out of office. The GOP can see the writing on the wall. They're scrambling to get as much as they can......Endangered Species Act toothless, cheap off shore leases, I'm sure they have a shopping list of greed and self-interest.

Maybe California won't have to secede after all.

[tripp]

Originally Posted by TimBikes

I know it was stated somewhat tongue in cheek, but there needs to be a balance. The private sector has proven quite efficient in many areas when there is adequate incentive to do so. The public sector is painfully inefficient and ineffective, though when it devises appropriate incentives for the private sector, can achieve desired objectives.

But just be careful how regulation is accomplished. As per my prior example, if any project that produces incremental CO2 can be shut down because it "threatens" polar bears due to "global warming", that is a pretty draconian public policy. Taken to its ultimate conclusion, you couldn't build a road, put up a building, or for that matter, cut a fart without violating the law.

it wasn't completely tongue-in-cheek. Unregulated capitalism is as bad as communism (which has a horrid environmental record). My point is there must be regulation. Yes, there has to be balance. I'm big on that, that's why I'm a centrist and dislike both parties (though I do dislike the republicans more these days). The private sector must be regulated, however, because its participants act soley in their best interest and often in their short-term best interest. DogFriend pointed out two good examples of why that's true. I also don't like unions (for similar reasons really) so I'm not just picking on "bidness". Labour is just a guilty. They're all human institutions afterall... so you know they'll suck.

Taken to it ultimate conclusion, could we still breathe?

Depends on how carbon intensive your diet is...

[dogfriend]

Grrrr....I had just typed out a long treatise on why both parties suck, but the browser went crazy and lost it all.

Regulation is needed because people are basically greedy. But too much regulation becomes bureaucracy and grinds everything to a halt. Balance is needed, not political wars.

[tripp]

Originally Posted by dogfriend

Regulation is needed because people are basically greedy. But too much regulation becomes bureaucracy and grinds everything to a halt. Balance is needed, not political wars.

Aye, that's 'boot reet, mate.

[TimBikes]

Originally Posted by tripp

it wasn't completely tongue-in-cheek. Unregulated capitalism is as bad as communism (which has a horrid environmental record). My point is there must be regulation. Yes, there has to be balance. I'm big on that, that's why I'm a centrist and dislike both parties (though I do dislike the republicans more these days). The private sector must be regulated, however, because its participants act soley in their best interest and often in their short-term best interest. DogFriend pointed out two good examples of why that's true. I also don't like unions (for similar reasons really) so I'm not just picking on "bidness". Labour is just a guilty. They're all human institutions afterall... so you know they'll suck.

Agreed!

[Godiva]

And if you wanted to make any comment on the new act, you can forget it. They're not interested.

"The Fish and Wildlife Service suddenly decided to stop accepting public comments on proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act last December. Andrew Wetzler, the director of NRDC's Endangered Species Project, noticed this earlier today when he was poring over the text of the administration's newest proposal to sabotage the ESA. Here's the passage that caught his eye:
"ADDRESSES: Submit your comments or materials concerning this proposed rule in one of the following ways:
(1) Through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at redirect. Follow the instructions on the website for submitting comments.
(2) By U.S. mail or hand-delivery to Public Comment Processing, Attention: 1018-AT50, Division of Policy and Directives Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 222, Arlington, VA 22203. We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on redirect. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information)."
As he notes, it's standard practical for federal agencies to accept comments by e-mail or fax (heck, even the EPA is still doing it).

Wetzler comments: "Regardless of the reason, one thing is clear to me. The combination of (1) no e-mail comments; (2) a miserly 30-day comment period; and (3) no public hearings signals loud and clear that the Fish and Wildlife Service is not interested in listening to the public—especially about controversial moves like their proposal to fundamentally change the way wildlife is protected under the Endangered Species Act—they are interested in ramming through predetermined results."