Our Klamath Basin
Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
Endangered Species Act Reform Project
The Endangered Species Act—motivated by good intentions and inspired by high-minded visions of responsible environmentalism—has proven in practice to be a bad law. As now structured, it cheapens humanity and produces unconscionable results that defy common sense.
Most people would agree, including Pacific Legal
Foundation, that saving significant species and
protecting the environment are important public
policy issues. However, the top responsibilities
of government are to protect human life and
preserve individual freedom. Those values must
never be jeopardized or otherwise denigrated or
subordinated to animals, plants or insects. Yet
throughout America, peoples’ lives and their
livelihoods are jeopardized by the federal
bureaucracy’s inflexible regulations and
enforcement actions under a harsh law that needs
to be questioned—and challenged—on ethical/moral
grounds, on constitutional grounds and on common
sense grounds.
PLF has established a special program that
systematically puts the
Endangered Species Act on trial. The program
has two key components: litigation and public
education.
Attacking “Junk Science”— Before enacting
laws and regulations, legislators and regulators
must ask whether the science behind the measure
justifies the often enormous social and economic
costs involved. Unfortunately, environmental
policy is often based on politically motivated
pressure from environmental activists and federal
agencies trying to justify their budgets. The
Endangered Species Act is no exception, and PLF is
fighting in court to expose the gross
misinformation regulators rely on to unfairly
restrict the use of private property.
Limiting Federal Authority — The
U.S. Constitution’s limits on federal
governmental power have not been respected by the
Congress. And that abuse has been encouraged by a
long line of court decisions that have given the
widest possible interpretation to the
Constitution’s Commerce Clause which allows
Congress to “regulate commerce...among the several
states.” As a result, Congress has authorized
intrusive regulations that control our daily
lives, cradle to grave, in areas only remotely
associated with interstate commerce. Overzealous
enforcement of the Endangered Species Act is a
prime example, and PLF is fighting in court
challenging federal authority to regulate purely
local species that have no connection to
“interstate commerce.”
Demanding Accountability — In the process
of designating critical habitat for species listed
under the Endangered Species Act, regulators are
required to consider the potential economic
impacts of their actions. All too often this
critically important analysis is given little or
no real consideration. Accordingly, PLF is
challenging critical habitat designations around
the country bringing into question whether the
government truly has considered the real economic
impact of their actions.
Much of the misinformation and half-truths we
receive each day on environmental issues come from
a mainstream media that is hopelessly biased in
favor of big government regulation and against
private property rights and free enterprise. To
augment its legal challenges against the
Endangered Species Act, PLF is conducting an
aggressive public awareness campaign through
targeted media relations and public education.
Program Contacts: PLF Principal Attorney,
M. Reed Hopper
or PLF Vice President
M. David Stirling.
|
Home
Page Updated: Thursday May 07, 2009 09:15 AM Pacific
Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2005, All Rights Reserved