REP. EARL BLUMENAUER ON ROLLBACKS TO THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

September 29, 2005

"I rise in strong opposition to both the rule and the bill.  No matter how the proponents of the bill classify it, putting soft words and talking about it being reasonable or a compromise, it does not make it so.  This is less about reform of the E.S.A., or to protect species, and more about making it easier for the exploitation of the environment. 

"We've been in a state of stalemate for a number of years because the goal has not been reasonable refinement.  There are things we could do right now to make the Endangered Species Act more efficient and more effective; for instance, adequately funding the enforcement and conservation mechanisms. But the goal was not the modest reform and improvement, it was a radical adjustment.  My friend from Utah's batting average analogy simply misses the point. It’s not about just the species that have been restored, but it’s the protection that has been extended across America to make it possible that we are not losing environmental ground.  And given the environmental circumstances, that’s no easy task. 

"I've watched it work in my own backyard, literally.  I’ve got an urban creek that flows twenty-six miles through the heart of my congressional district.  The salmon listing under the Endangered Species Act prompted action by four local cities and two counties.  We were able to come forward with an innovative streamlining agreement to meet the standards necessary to comply with the Endangered Species Act, and move quickly through the permitting process.  We've been able to make progress.  I've seen it work when people are committed to doing so.

"There are many troubling aspects of this legislation.  Putting science in the hands of political appointees perverts the decision-making process.  These are not people I think we ought to turn this over to. 

"But, the most troubling part of the legislation is found in the new entitlement program contained in Section 14.  It goes far beyond paying people to obey the law, far beyond compensating for loss of customary use.  It actually would create a perverse incentive for developers to propose the most environmentally destructive projects possible, in order to get higher payment from the government.  And if you think we've had litigation under the Endangered Species Act now, wait until you see people coming forward right and left with bizarre proposals for development, seeking compensation for things that were never customary uses.  It’s not only an unfunded mandate; it’s providing a form of environmental blackmail. 

 "I urge my colleagues to reject the rule and this radical rollback of the Endangered Species Act."

“ Democrats are united in presenting a New Direction for America, one that will make our nation as strong as its people, one that brings opportunity, security, and prosperity to all Americans. ”

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi