Source:  SPPI  

by Paul Driessen

Anti-pesticide activists falsely blame new pesticides for bee colony problems

Chemophobic anti-pesticide groups are at it again. This time they’re attacking a widely used and safe new insecticide, but their assertions and real agendas are nothing new.

Radical environmentalism rose to ascendancy on opposition to pesticides, specifically DDT. “If the environmentalists win on DDT,” Environmental Defense Fund scientist Charles Wurster told the Seattle Times in 1969, “they will achieve a level of authority they have never had before.” Using Rachel Carson’s often inaccurate book Silent Spring to drive a nasty campaign, they succeeded in getting the Environmental Protection Agency to ban US production and use of DDT in 1972, leading to a de facto global ban even to combat malaria. (more…)

Source: Sen. Vitter  

Contact: Luke Bolar

(202) 224-4623

Vitter Warns Louisiana of EPA’s Secret “Sue and Settle” Deals, Could Impact State

Says EPA and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are colluding with environmental groups

WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) is warning of more secret “sue and settle” deals with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and environmental groups. In a letter today, Vitter encourages Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell to join the 13 states’ AGs who recently filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with EPA asking for any and all correspondence between EPA and a list of 80 environmental, labor union and public interest organizations that had been party to litigation since the start of the Obama Administration.

“The collusion between federal bureaucrats and far-left environmental organizations entering legal agreements under a shroud of secrecy is the opposite of a transparent government,” Vitter said. “This is a problem across the country, but could quickly become a threat to Louisianans if we see the full weight of the EPA and Fish and Wildlife Service come crashing down on private landowners.”

Vitter is encouraging Caldwell to join the other states’ AGs, and is also encouraging the inclusion of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in their investigation. The Fish and Wildlife Service was not included in the original FOIA request. In his letter, Vitter also highlights a specific recent example where the Fish and Wildlife Service entered an agreement with the Center for Biological Diversity that could impact private property owners across the South and in Louisiana with new rules on habitat for endangered species on private property because private property owners will have few resources to fight any legal challenge of a massive federal agency.

A copy of Vitter’s letter is below.

January 22, 2013

James D. “Buddy” Caldwell

Attorney General

State of Louisiana

1885 N. Third Street

Baton Rouge, LA 70802

Dear A.G. Buddy Caldwell:

I write asking your personal assistance regarding a matter imperative to Louisiana’s economy and private property owners across our great state.   My concern stems from the non-transparent nature of litigation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and specifically the entering of consent decrees through a practice referred to as “sue and settle,” and sometimes referred to as “friendly lawsuits.”

Under this practice, radical environmental groups file lawsuits against a federal agency in a friendly court demanding the agency take action.  Rather than allowing the entire process to play out, the Department of Justice and the agency being sued settles the lawsuit by agreeing to move forward with the requested action.  While the environmental group is given a seat at the negotiating table, private property owners and other affected residents are not given the opportunity to object to these settlements.

On August 10, 2012 thirteen state Attorney Generals filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with EPA asking for any and all correspondence between EPA and a list of 80 environmental, labor union and public interest organizations that had been party to litigation since the start of the Obama administration.  My specific request is that you intervene in these efforts and expand the investigation beyond the EPA to include the USFWS.  The collusion between federal bureaucrats and the organizations entering consent agreements under a shroud of secrecy represents the antithesis of a transparent government, and your participation in the FOIA request will help Louisianans understand the process by which these settlements were reached.

Using these “sue and settle” agreements, a significant portion of regulatory policy is being fashioned behind closed doors with groups that are clearly antagonistic to the economic health of the United States and Louisiana.  This regulatory policy is having a significant, negative impact on states and private property owners.  A specific recent example involves the settlement agreement between the USFWS and the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group who has made clear its goal is to use the litigation process to force species listings.  The agreement to make listing determinations on hundreds of species will adversely impact private property owners across the South and the state of Louisiana with new rules on habitat for endangered species on private property.  Unfortunately, most private property owners will not have the resources to fight the legal and regulatory onslaught of a massive federal agency.

As the new ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, I plan to investigate  this “sue and settle” practice using all available tools to bring to light this often abused path to regulatory influence.  Private interest groups using lawsuits that are settled in secret, with minimal to no input from the regulated community, small businesses and private property owners should no longer go on without oversight.

As the AG, your intervention and requested expansion of the FOIA request can help to investigate and shed light on what our federal agencies are doing to undermine Louisiana and the people of our great state.  I am warily confident that both EPA and USFWS will shun all efforts to open the doors on these practices, the negotiations, and the communications between agency staff and outside groups regarding “sue and settle” agreements.  However, I request that you stay vigilant and join the consorted effort of the 13 other state AGs working to make public the collusion between our federal government and certain interest groups.

If I can be of any assistance please do not hesitate to contact me directly.

Sincerely,

David Vitter

Ranking Member

U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works

Source:  Examinor. com

Lisa Jackson

Lisa Jackson, a former engineer and head of New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection has been Obama’s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator through his first term. Jackson led her state’s efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, and has aligned herself with militant eco-groups in every job-killing green agenda item imaginable. Her radical green activism under Obama has raised suspicion about the negative economic impacts of EPA regulations — a recent Rasmussen poll indicates that only 39% approve of the EPA, while 34% disapprove and 27% are undecided. Much of Jackson’s ambitious regulatory portfolio has ultimately failed in judicial review. Jackson has admitted to unlawfully operating anonymous e-mail accounts in conducting EPA government business, and is presently under Congressional investigation for such excesses. (more…)

Source:  Washington Times

The EPA Hydra

OPINION

One issue that has been noticeably absent from the Republican platform this election season is any discussion of the Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It didn’t even come up at the Republican National Convention a couple of weeks ago. If the omission was an oversight, it was a big one. If it was intentional, it’s cause for concern. (more…)

Imperial War On Fossil Energy

Source:  Heritage Foundation

Source:  NLPC

See SPPI profile on Lisa Jackson

The suspicions of Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe were correct: Rather than sitting before the House Energy and Commerce Committee three weeks ago to explain the ways he “crucified” oil and natural gas companies, instead Al Armendariz – who cancelled his appearance at the last minute – met with the Sierra Club for a job interview.

This time the recently resigned EPA’s Region 6 administrator will eagerly attack another fossil fuel, joining the litigious environmental group as part of its “Beyond Coal” campaign. If there was any question that Armendariz unfairly regulated the gas and oil businesses under his authority in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and other neighboring states, the Sierra Club announcement left no doubt.

“I know how important it is to transition to cleaner sources of energy that don’t pollute the air that our children breathe,” he said, “and I’m proud to be working on a campaign with a proven track record for success.”

Inhofe proved prescient in remarks to National Journal on June 7th. (more…)

Source:  Wash Post

RULE ‘effectively bans’ coal FACILITIES Emissions proposal doesn’t cover existing sites

Source: Wash Times

[SPPI Note:  For more  information on the truth about Mercury, see here.

Two-page Fact sheet here.]

SOON and DRIESSEN: EPA: Extreme Punishment Authority

New air-pollution rules will impose exorbitant costs for illusory health benefits

On Dec. 16, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson released new Clean Air Act National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Once again, she touted the supoosedly huge benefits of controlling emissions of mercury and other air toxics from coal- and oil-fired power plants and electric generating units (EGUs).

This final rule will be one of the most expensive ever devised by EPA. The actual benefits, however, are minimal to imaginary. Americans should no longer tolerate being penalized by the “Extreme Punishment Authority.”

EPA itself says the purported “hazards to public health” from mercury and non-mercury emissions from American EGUs are “anticipated to remain after imposition” of the new regulations. (more…)

Source:  Red State

Obama Administration and EPA Use Clean Water Act for New Overreach

Prepare To Have That Puddle in Your Back Yard Regulated.

Just as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has used the Clean Air Act to broaden the scope of their authority way beyond its original intention with rules like MACT and CSAPR, the Clean Water Act is becoming a tool of overreach by the out of control agency.

Barack Obama and the EPA’s Lisa Jackson have made it clear through their actions that they will circumvent the legislature by using regulatory enforcement to enact Obama’s green dreams, and now it seems that circumvention includes the Supreme Court of the United States. (more…)

Source:  Politico

House Republicans can claim “bipartisanship” in their bid to handcuff the EPA’s climate change rules.

Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) told POLITICO on Wednesday that he will be co-sponsoring the legislation from House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) that puts a freeze on EPA’s regulatory agenda for major industrial polluters like power plants and petroleum refiners.

“The EPA needs to be reined in,” said Peterson, the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee and a frequent critic of the agency. (more…)

Source:  Global Warming.org

by Marlo Lewis

On December 23, 2010, one day before the Yuletide season when Members of Congress, the media, and Tea Party activists are least likely to watchdog the federal bureaucracy, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced rulemakings to establish New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants and refineries. Or maybe “whispered” would be more accurate.

If you didn’t read the text of EPA’s press release and just skimmed the headline, you would not know the agency had just launched the next phase of its greenhouse gas regulatory program. The release carried this bland and uninformative title:  ”EPA to Set Modest Pace for Greenhouse Gas Standards/Agency stresses flexibility and public input in developing cost-effective and protective GHG standards for largest emitters.” (more…)

Source:  CNSNews

A mountaintop mining site at Kayford Mountain, W.Va. (AP File Photo/Jeff Gentner)

Morgantown, W. Va. (AP) – The Environmental Protection Agency said Thursday it’s revoking a crucial water permit for West Virginia’s largest mountaintop removal mine because it would irreparably damage the environment and threaten the health of nearby communities.

Assistant Administrator for Water Peter S. Silva said the agency was employing a rarely used veto power because Arch Coal’s Spruce No. 1 mine in Logan County would use “destructive and unsustainable” mining practices.

The move formalizes an action the agency first threatened nine months ago. (more…)

Source:  Wattsup

Guest post by Paul Driessen

False, misleading or fraudulent claims have long brought the wrath of juries, judges and government agencies down on perpetrators. So have substandard manufacturing practices.

* GlaxoSmith Klein has agreed to plead guilty and pay a $750-million fine for manufacturing deficiencies at a former pharmaceuticals plant. Even though there was no indication of patient harm, said the US attorney, the fine was needed “to pressure companies to follow the rules.”

* Johnson & Johnson was recently slapped with a $258-million jury verdict for allegedly misleading claims about the safety and superiority of an antipsychotic drug. J&J’s actions “defrauded the Louisiana Medicaid system,” prosecutors argued. (The company intends to appeal.)

* The Feds have also prosecuted baseball players for lying to congressional investigators about using performance-enhancing steroids. Said a prosecutor: “Even when you’re just providing information to the Legislative Branch, you need to be truthful.”

Who could oppose following the rules, making quality products and being honest? But shouldn’t these values apply where far more is at stake than a few companies, pills, baseball records or bad role models? Shouldn’t we demand that these rules apply to people and actions that have unprecedented impact on lives, livelihoods, liberties and communities throughout the country? (more…)