iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Frances Beinecke

GET UPDATES FROM Frances Beinecke
 

Most Anti-Environment House of Representatives in History Tries to Do More Damage

Posted: 07/19/11 12:04 PM ET

Tea Party leaders in the House have dramatically stepped up their assault on America's environmental and public health safeguards. Last week alone they used about 50 floor votes and more than 30 policy riders on spending bills to undermine the protections that keep our air safe, our water clean, and our public lands intact.

Another barrage of anti-environment bills is on its way. The upcoming debate in the full House on funding for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Interior Department will likely feature votes on even more policy riders designed to prevent the government from upholding basic environmental standards.

These attacks could continue into the fall unless Americans put a stop to it.

Public outcry has helped contain some of damage, but we must raise our voices even louder in the coming weeks. We must tell lawmakers they cannot repeal the safeguards that protect our families and favorite places.

And we must do it now before more damage is done. For never in my 40 years as an environmental advocate have I seen such a concerted effort to undermine bedrock environmental laws.

Not even Newt Gingrich's 1995 campaign against the environment can match it. Back then, conservative leaders proposed 17 policy riders designed to handcuff the Environmental Protection Agency. This year, the House has added more than 20 riders that tie the EPA's hands, with at least another 10 targeting other environmental agencies.

And this time around, the scale is even broader: everything from smog standards to wildlife protections to clean water rules is fair game.

Last week's House activity reveals how far-ranging the attacks are.

On Monday, Representative Joe Barton (R-TX) brought his BULB Act to a vote. The bill would repeal the national energy efficiency standards for light bulbs enacted in 2007 by President Bush--standards that provide consumers with a wide choice of incandescent and compact florescent bulbs and will save $12.5 billion every year on energy costs.

Barton's bill would have taken those savings away. It would have also represented one of the first times lawmakers repealed a standard that is already in effect and that manufacturers support.

Like many of the current attacks on environmental protections, Barton's bill was rushed to a vote without hearings, a tacit admission that such bills wouldn't survive scrutiny. NRDC and our allies helped counteract the Tea Party's haste with data on cost savings and testimonials from manufactures and business leaders. Once lawmakers understood the facts about Barton's bill, it failed to get the required two-thirds vote. But some representatives introduced a one-year delay in lighting standards that was approved later in the week as part of the Energy and Water appropriations.

The attacks on standards and protections continued throughout the week. On Tuesday, the House Committee on Appropriations passed a budget for the Interior Department loaded down with more than 30 anti-environment policy riders.

These riders don't reduce spending by one penny, but they do block the government from following environmental laws. One provision would permanently weaken air pollution standards from offshore oil and gas drilling and make some sources of air pollution exempt from the Clean Air Act. Another would block the Department of Interior from enforcing safeguards designed to protect streams from coal mining pollution.

Anti-environment lawmakers didn't stop there. On Wednesday, the House passed a bill that would gut the Clean Water Act, and once again, the extent of the attack is almost unprecedented. Instead of repealing a couple of regulations they don't like, Congressman John Mica (R-FL) and Nick Rahall (D-WV) are trying to rewrite fundamental legal principles that have held firm for four decades. Their bill would allow states to veto federal water quality decisions even if a waterway is severely polluted.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service wrote about the bill: "it is highly unusual for Congress to advance legislation that would broadly alter the federal-state partnership in order to address dissatisfaction with specific actions by EPA or another agency."

So far, we have managed to limit the damage. The BULB bill failed, the most destructive policy riders in the budget are unlikely to pass in the Senate, and the effort to dismantle the Clean Water Act has already drawn a strong veto threat from President Obama.

But make no mistake; the assaults will keep coming. The only way to assure that they won't succeed is for Americans to make their voices heard.

In 1995, Gingrich and his allies started their barrage on environmental safeguards with an attack on the Clean Water Act in May. By July, their efforts had so outraged the public that the House GOP leadership lost its first vote on anti-environment bills and lawmakers started shying away from attacking safeguards.

We must turn the tide once again. The next big vote will be on the rider-laden EPA spending bill, which could come before the House next week. Click here to tell your lawmakers to stop these attacks on the protections that have made our families safer, our water cleaner, and our natural heritage better preserved.


This post originally appeared on NRDC's Switchboard blog.


 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 275
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
09:55 PM on 07/20/2011
The Republicans and the Tea Baggers are waging war on the earth, women, the poor, the marginalized, immigrants, homeless, elders, and children. They are doing so boldly, in the name of sheer greed and profit. Although these same people claim to exist and operate under the banner of Jesus and Christianity, they actually espouse a fundamentalist empire-building agenda hiding under a mantle of Christianity and a belief in 'manifest destiny.' These people enrich themselves by taking a huge portion of the gifts meant for all peoples of the earth. They constantly claim that they speak for God, and yet, at the same time, they work incessantly to completely deny the poor the resources demanded by their own Christian biblical teachings. They do not espouse a preferential option for the poor as Jesus unequivocally requires of his followers. There seems to only be a preferential option for . . . themselves. They will continue to pollute, plunder, and rape the earth with zero understanding of the interconnectedness of all living things on this planet. They refuse to acknowledge that this is the primary source of poverty in our country and around the earth. Why? Sheer, unadulterated greed. By attacking the environment, they continue to attack science, the earth, women, and the poor. The Founding Fathers of this nation would be totally ashamed of them. . .and would eschew their overt selfishness and greed, at the expense of the poor...future generations, and of the earth itself. Dean Leh
05:47 PM on 07/20/2011
The US Chamber of Commerce and the Koch brothers put these Republican children into office.

Now your children and grand children will suffer the consequences of their actions.

The top 2%, of course, will not suffer because they can afford to move away from the pollution.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fisher65
05:04 PM on 07/20/2011
anti America is what it sums up too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimtodd
Unrepentant child of '60s
01:57 PM on 07/20/2011
The economy, the government, and the environment the teavangelical destruction of America is proceeding on schedule.
photo
drp103
SYSTEM ON
03:09 PM on 07/20/2011
the unholy trinity ; )
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
loco48
TRUTH trumps ideology!
04:22 PM on 07/20/2011
At my age I will not be around when the environment is destroyed. With the growing world population, the demand for rescorces will increase beyond the earth capacity to furnish the resorces. As far as america , we are heading toward an oligarchy, where working americans will be worked like workers at the start of the 20th century. Work 6 days per week, 10 hours days, no retirement, vacation, just enough pay to feed your family. When you are to old aand worn out to work, then go to the poor house. Forget Orwelle's 1984, read "atlas shrugged" if you want to see the kind of world Cantor and ryan would like for the next generation.
12:47 PM on 07/20/2011
Watching Republicans in the house (with some Democratic allies) do everything they can to hamstring the EPA is terrifying and nauseating. I know most of them have families... do they not care what we're doing to the world we will bequeath to our children? Maybe they believe their wealth and power will insulate them, but the scale of our collective environmental crisis makes that unlikely. As you say, we need to double down on our efforts to block them from removing the few protections we do have.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
10:41 AM on 07/20/2011
Reversing the ban on traditional incandescent light bulbs and putting the country's energy policy back in the hands of our elected officials are both proper policy decisions imho. The government should not be banning perfectly safe products, and a federal agency should not have the power to effectively ban power production from coal through control on the price of carbon. I am not well informed enough on the other challenges to offer an opinion. Generally I am in favor of limiting toxic pollutants such as mercury so long as there is a viable technological solution that does not cost an order of magnitude or more than the problems it addresses.
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
04:20 PM on 07/20/2011
"Reversing the ban on traditiona­l incandesce­nt light bulbs..."

There is no ban on incandescent bulbs, merely efficiency standards which industry has already met. Your new bulbs look and act just like your old bulbs. Someone has fed you some false information! What is your primary news source?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
02:04 PM on 07/21/2011
Those new incandescents that meet the standards are halogens and they certainly do not look like traditional incandescent bulbs. They have a much harsher, whiter light; I do not want my home lit like my office. The new standards are indeed an effective ban on traditional incandescent bulbs. Its like saying a fuel economy standard of 100 mpg would not be a ban on traditional internal combustion engines.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
loco48
TRUTH trumps ideology!
04:33 PM on 07/20/2011
why do we let the government restrict lead in paint, asbestos in sheet rock, E-coli in vegetables, Corporate monopolys, lead in your gas, speed limits, stop signs, rocket launchers? Putting your future in Rep bartons hands as an elected official would be like leaving hoody doody in charge of the nuclear arsenal. If incandescents use more energy than the curly bulbs, then they are not a safe product. Harmful to our ecology by burning up resources.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
02:25 PM on 07/21/2011
Everything you mentioned save monopolies are public safety issues.

As far as being harmful to our ecology goes, do you really want the government to be able to make decisions for us in that regard? How about banning air conditioners by setting efficiency standards that only heat pumps could meet? I hope you don't mind sleeping at 77 degrees.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Genep34
stop the nightmare, end the GOP
10:36 AM on 07/20/2011
Cowardly Heartless Hateful
the tea party republicans
want only to malign and harass this president
even if it dooms this country, the planet and their own families

Please, end this madness - stop the nightmare
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
michael westman
not stepping in right wing cowpies
08:10 PM on 07/20/2011
vote em out
photo
janie@atthelake
Keep Austin Weird
10:26 AM on 07/20/2011
Anyone watching Cspan this morning on the Yellowstone River???
10:02 AM on 07/20/2011
The main problems for environment science are politicians inside science.
This article is the best confirmation for that.
EPA must be free from politic and provide not only regulations, but also solution, how to achieve them.
09:48 AM on 07/20/2011
Environmental activists have also damaged the environment, and are NOT always right. It's time for people to wake up and look at both sides of the story.
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
10:20 AM on 07/20/2011
"Environmen­tal activists have also damaged the environmen­t, and are NOT always right. It's time for people to wake up and look at both sides of the story."

The EPA relies on science, not activism. What is the other side of the story?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
11:57 AM on 07/20/2011
Net cost to society.
photo
artleads
Let's have a national retreat.
11:23 AM on 07/20/2011
What's the other side?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
11:49 AM on 07/20/2011
For me there does need to be balance. There is no such thing as environmentally neutral human activity. The main goal is maximizing human welfare. To do that we need inexpensive power, but we also need an environment that is conducive to healthy human habitation. Its a tremendously complex problem. The developing nations of the world plainly stated at Copenhagen that if power is going to artificially be made more expensive the rich world is going to have to pay for it which we are obviously not willing to do and possibly not able to do.

There are over a billion people in the world without adequate access to power that live short, brutish lives dominated by disease. Regimes in the developing world have taken the stance out of compassion or enlightened self interest that lifting these people out of abject poverty is a top tier priority. Raising the price of power necessarily prolongs profound human suffering on a horrible scale.

So we are in a situation where rising emissions from the developing world will swamp any reductions we can make. That will be the case until there are non carbon alternatives that are cheaper in fact and not solely by rich government fiat.Once that happens no government will have to lift a finger. Until we get there I do not see the point of economically hobbling ourselves for nothing more than a blip on the curve of rising global carbon emissions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bombadillo22
Not all who wander are lost...
09:34 AM on 07/20/2011
[Tea party Leaders try to do more damage]..." this time around, the scale is even broader: everything from smog standards to wildlife protections to clean water rules is fair game. "

This from biblicaly appointed 'stewards of the earth'?

Tea party is really the christian conservatives, rebranded and tyring their best to bring about the end of days and armageddon. When there are no more fish in the sea, nor breathable air and clean water to drink, perhaps then, they surmise everyone will have to pray to their savior.

well then God help us all today--from the tea party leaders
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
09:20 AM on 07/20/2011
The Senate says what bills pass, and Dems control it. The Dem-controlled House passed lots of bills that died in Senate. It only takes 41 to block any bill in the Senate, the Dems have 50+.

"The Senate is where bills go to die". No different now, Obama will never have to use his veto.
photo
clero1
Walking with you for a better world
09:19 AM on 07/20/2011
Let's remind legislators of both parties that making money is not a corporation's only responsibility. Insisting that corporations also be good citizens, reminding their boards and stockholders that we all share the land, water and air is in the best interest of both the public and big business.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:00 AM on 07/20/2011
That will not happen. It would be asking too much of these corporate people. This is why environmental protection and other public services need to be distributed by the gov't--there should be no such thing as "competition" to "make prices fair" for healthcare, education, etc. I wish I could say "yeah, let's leave people responsible for their own healthcare and do it the traditional capitalist way," but not everyone can participate in the market. Perfect competition is an illusion, as is the idea of asking CEOs to be "good people."
08:58 AM on 07/20/2011
The right wing of the house is so bent on preventing Obama's re-election that they will oppose anything that the dems either like or want to pursue. Get your heads out of your a$$es.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realitytrumpsbull
Two 'alves of coconut!
07:04 AM on 07/20/2011
I say if you used all the money that this council has probably absorbed out of the taxpayers the last decade or so to actually build more wind farms and solar arrays instead, we'd probably be able to mothball 3-4 coal plants. But, until we REALLY do the 'wrench time' to replace one source of electrical capacity with a viable alternative, this whole argument will go 'round and 'round, and the lightbulb nazis will wag their fingers sternly....