Scientists & Engineers for America Action Fund

Environmental groups target 2008 races…all Senate.

environmental coalition

A coalition of environmental groups including the League of Conservation Voters, The Sierra Club, Clean Water Action, Environment America, and Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund have come together to target three key Senate races this year, Colorado, New Hampshire and New Mexico. The groups announced that they are backing Representative Mark Udall (D-CO-2) to fill the seat being vacated by Sen Wayne Allard (R-CO) in Colorado; Former Governor Jeanne Shaheen, who lost in 2002, but is running high in polls against Senator John Sununu; and Representative Tom Udall (D-NM-3) who is running for the seat being vacated by Senator Domenici, who is also retiring.

According to League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski, the groups decided to target Senate races because “Passing vital global warming legislation will require a 60 vote pro-environment majority in the Senate.”

While race targeting is nothing new in elections, this particular coalition is significant because of their past success. They are widely credited for the defeat of Representative Richard Pombo the rather anti-environment former Chairman of the House Resources Committee in 2006. Pombo was defeated by now Representative Jerry McNerney (D-CA).

What did the White House do on Earth Day?

Jim ConnaughtonIt occurred to me earlier today that we didn’t hear much about Earth Day from the White House this year. “Perhaps they forgot,” I thought. But a quick trip to the White House web page revealed that they had one of their lovely Ask the White House sessions where a staff member answers preselected questions from the public. On Earth Day, Jim Connaughton, Chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality took part in a session and boy did they pick hard questions for him. Here are the questions and excepts from the answers, which are questionable at times in their accuracy and severely spun at others to imply that the President has a positive record on the environment, an assertion well-disputed by most environmental groups.

  1. What exactly is Earth Day? Why is there an Earth Day?
    “…It’s a day that reminds us that we must be good stewards of our natural resources. To the President, Earth Day is a reminder that we can’t take our land and resources for granted…”
  2. What is the President doing for Earth Day?
    “…The President is in New Orleans…The President planted a Shumard oak tree as a reminder of our global duty to protect the environment. New Orleans lost about 250,000 trees to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita …. Replanting trees is vital not only to recovery of the city’s character, but also its environment.” And?
  3. On this particular Earth Day, we find ourselves in a dire situation with Global Warming and all its side affects. What is our government doing to help heal our planet before it is to late?
    “…We are working internationally as well. As a contribution to discussions under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, President Bush brought together the world’s major economies for a series of high-level meetings to recommend ideas for how to move forward on energy security and climate change issues after the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012….The President believes addressing climate change is a long-term effort and must be done without harming our economy or hurting American workers, something that would simply move emissions from America to other countries and do little or nothing to address the environmental problem….” Wow, it’s as if we have been doing something about climate change by not doing anything.
  4. How are we doing meeting the Pesident’s goal of moving past no-net-loss of wetlands?
    “…On Earth Day 2004, President Bush declared that the nation had at last accomplished the government’s twenty year old policy of “no net loss of wetlands in America” (which his father as President had established). President Bush then announced that it was time for a new policy that would produce an overall increase of our nation’s wetlands…” Pesident? Tell that to the people living aroud the Klamath river.
  5. Hello May I know how environmental friendly is The White House? Thanks
    “Hello Joyce – this is one my favorite questions, since I work in the White House! I have had the privilege to be part of a very motivated and creative team that has worked to make the White House complex a leading example of the practical things that can be done to be sensible stewards of the environment…” Guess what happens when you do a Google search for “Joyce from Singapore”? It looks like Joyce has a lot of her questions answered by the White House.
  6. What is the administration doing for ocean conservation?
    “…As a scuba-diver, sailor, and all around water guy, this subject is a particular personal passion..(Insert laundry list of activities)..We are probably the only country in the world that is giving ocean conservation this level of attention…” Can someone verify all of these programs. There really do seem to be a lot? Kudos to Mr Connaughton.

I particularly liked the misspelling of “president” in question 4. Was that a White House flub or out of all the questions they could have chosen to answer, did they pick the one with the typo? Only John from Maryland, who asked the question will ever really know. I urge you to read his answers in full and to look more closely at Mr. Connaughton’s record. For example Talking Points Memo remembers Mr. Connaughton’s role in forcing the EPA to suppress data on the possible toxicity of the air and dust in lower Manhattan in the name of “national security.”

Hundreds of EPA Scientists Experienced Political Interference

EPAThe Union of Concerned Scientists just released the results of a survey of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists that is thoroughly disturbing. Of the nearly 1600 scientists surveyed, 889 reported that they have experienced some kind of political interference in their job in the past 5 years.

UCS has released several reports on political interference with federal scientists, most notably the FDA, and it never ceases to amaze me to learn how wide spread the damage has been.

Among the UCS report’s top findings:

– 889 scientists (60 percent) said they had personally experienced at least one instance of political interference in their work over the last five years.

– 394 scientists (31 percent) personally experienced frequent or occasional “statements by EPA officials that misrepresent scientists’ findings.”

– 285 scientists (22 percent) said they frequently or occasionally personally experienced “selective or incomplete use of data to justify a specific regulatory outcome.”

– 224 scientists (17 percent) said they had been “directed to inappropriately exclude or alter technical information from an EPA scientific document.”

– Of the 969 agency veterans with more than 10 years of EPA experience, 409 scientists (43 percent) said interference has occurred more often in the past five years than in the previous five-year period. Only 43 scientists (4 percent) said interference occurred less often.

– Hundreds of scientists reported being unable to openly express concerns about the EPA’s work without fear of retaliation; 492 (31 percent) felt they could not speak candidly within the agency and 382 (24 percent) felt they could not do so outside the agency.

The worst part is that the White House was intimately involved in the suppression of science, something we have heard many times before, but never gets any easier to comprehend.

Nearly 100 scientists identified the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as the primary culprit. In scientists’ responses to an essay question, “How could the integrity of scientific work produced by the EPA best be improved?,” OMB took center stage:

– “Currently, OMB is allowed to force or make changes as they want, and rules are held hostage until this happens,” said a scientist at the agency’s Office of Air and Radiation. “OMB’s power needs to be checked as time after time they weaken rulemakings and policy decisions to favor industry.”

– “OMB and the White House have, in some cases, compromised the integrity of EPA rules and policies; their influence, largely hidden from the public and driven by industry lobbying, has decreased the stringency of proposed regulations for non-scientific, political reasons,” said a scientist from one of the agency’s regional offices. “Because the real reasons can’t be stated, the regulations contain a scientific rationale with little or no merit.”

– “They [OMB] . have inappropriately stopped agency work that has been in progress for years due to their lack of scientific understanding,” said a scientist at the agency’s Office of Research and Development.

Keep up the good work UCS.

Candidates’ science advisors on energy and environment

environment debateThrough all the blatantly superficial presidential debates, there has yet to be a serious look at energy and the environment. However, E&ETV has footage of an event sponsored by the Society of Environmental Journalists where the the candidates’ energy and environment advisers laid out the candidates positions on a number of environmental and energy issues. The panelists include Jason Grumet, environmental adviser for Barack Obama, Todd Stern, adviser to Hillary Clinton, and James Woolsey, environmental adviser to John McCain.

It’s worth taking a listen to the advisors, but it would be far better if the canfdidates were asked these questions themselves in a science debate, which could have happened today…

LCV Members name McConnell to their “Dirty Dozen” list

Mitch McConnellAccording to a press release, the League of Conservation Voters has just voted Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list of politicians who have committed the most egregious offenses against the environment. They bestowed the title of “don of the Dirty Dozen” to McConnell stating that he “has served as the chief enforcer for Big Oil and other corporate polluters, leading efforts to derail and weaken legislation that would protect our families and keep America’s land, air, and water clean.”

The Dirty Dozen list is significant for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that 9 of the 12 listed on the 2006 list lost their elections.

Also on the list this year are Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) and Congressman Joe Knollenberg (R-MI). Senator Inhofe was named a member of its 2008 Dirty Dozen, because the Senator has vowed to filibuster any climate change-related legislation.

Knollenberg on the other hand was named because has “repeatedly voted for corporate polluters and against environmental protections.” Including voting against raising fuel economy standards for cars and trucks.

So far, LCV members have not named any Democrats to their 2008 list, but there sure are a few who are likely to make it.

The SHARP Network has been updated for all three and we will post here on any further additions to the list.