[This is one good article from the Heartland’s Journal. It’s worth your time tolook at the whole Journal. -Bob ]
By Paul Dreissen – Re-Blogged From http://www.WattsUpWithThat.com
Author, advisor and former US Senate aide and Colorado Department of Natural Resources director Greg Walcher has written an important article on how sue-and-settle lawsuits ignored and abused our fundamental rights to legal due process from their very beginning – while enriching the environmentalist groups that brought the legal actions. He also explains why EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt was absolutely right to terminate the practice.
Walcher’s analysis should be read by every legislator, regulator, judge … and actual or potential victim of this infamous practice.
By Ken Haapala, President, The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Brought to You by www.SEPP.org
Quote of the Week. “The modern world, after all, is not the product of a successful search for consensus. It’s what’s emerged from centuries of critical enquiry and hard clash.” – Tony Abbott, former Prime Minister of Australia
Letter To Scott Pruitt: On October 17, SEPP President Kenneth Haapala sent EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt a letter requesting action on two science-based petitions for reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding for Greenhouse Gases, one filed by the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC) and one filed jointly by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and the Science and Environmental Policy Project. The letter stated a willingness to assist in a new Endangerment Finding assessment that is carried out in a fashion that is legally consistent with the relevant statute and case law. The letter contained the names of over 60 supporters of the petitions with expertise in climate science and related science fields or energy, public health, and welfare.
By David Middleton – Re-Blogged From http://www.WattsUpWithThat.com
There is a great, overriding bias in corporate America that favors entering into settlement agreements in litigation rather than engage in the trial process. The oil and natural gas industry is no exception to this corporate inertia.
By John Rafuse – Re-Blogged From http://www.WattsUpWithThat.com
Its practices have defiled scientific integrity, but proposed corrections bring shock and defiance.
President Trump’s budget guidance sought to cut $1.6 billion from the Environmental Protection Agency’s $8.1 billion expectation. Shrieks of looming Armageddon prompted Congress to fund EPA in full until September 2017, when the battle will be joined again.
Then EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said he would prioritize Superfund cleanups based on toxicity, health-impact and other factors. The ensuing caterwauling suggested that EPA had no priorities since Bill Ruckelshaus (EPA’s first administrator, 1970-1975). But consider some standard EPA practices:
1. EPA advocates claim the US is unhealthy and dirty. They won’t admit that US water quality has improved dramatically since 1970. They deny that factories, cars and power plants are far more efficient and clean. They ignore that, while most nations continue to cut down forest habitats for fuel, the Lower 48 states have more forest coverage than when the Pilgrims landed in 1620.
By Ken Haapala, President,The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Brought to You by www.SEPP.org
The Climate Establishment Strikes Back: MIT Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences Richard Lindzen had circulated a petition signed by some 300 scientists calling for the US to withdraw from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). He sent the petition with a letter to President Trump.
In response, twenty-two MIT professors sent a letter to President Trump a stating that they have worked on climate science and disagree with him. This letter cites the claimed future risks from increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) including “sea level rise, ocean acidification, and increases in extreme flooding and droughts.”