Guess Who Is Paying for Lawyers to Sue Themselves?
July 22, 2010
The federal government spends about the same amount of money funding environmental lawyers as it does to protect endangered species according to an investigation conducted by a Wyoming lawyer who defends farmers and ranchers involved in environmental lawsuits.
According to the Capital Press, Karen Budd-Falen was curious how much money the federal government paid the lawyers who initiated cases against her clients and uncovered more than $4.7 billion in taxpayer money that the government paid to environmental law firms between 2003 and 2007. That represents an average of $940 million a year, compared to $922 million spent directly on the 986 endangered and threatened species, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s annual report.
According to her research, Budd-Falen found that three environmental groups—Western Watersheds Council, Forest Guardians and the Center for Biological Diversity—filed more than 700 lawsuits against the U.S. government between 2000 and 2009.
“That money is not going into programs to protect people, wildlife, plants and animals,” Budd-Falen told the Capital Press, “but to fund more lawsuits.”
According to Budd-Falen, environmental groups are eligible for government funds under the Equal Access to Justice Act, which provides for the award of attorney fees to “prevailing parties” in cases against the government. The firms also are accessing government funds through the Judgment Fund, which is a line-item appropriation in the federal budget used for paying claims against the government.
“We tried to track the fees paid to environmental groups in certain federal courts. These guys are charging between $350 and $450 an hour in legal fees.” Budd-Falen told Now Public.
“If you just look at the raw number and say ‘why in the world is the United States paying a million dollars bankrolling them to sue us,’ well that’s what congress set up through EAJA. That’s the law, we’re bound by it,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Haws of Boise told Now Public.
Read the entire article here:
Note: Your tax dollars at work… paying lawyers to sue ourselves? WTF??? – FedUpEditor
Letdown? OPINION
July 16, 2010
It seems to me there has been a bit of a let down in the intensity of the conservative movement lately. Maybe it’s just me. It could be because I had to go back to work and have not had time to opine like had been doing. But \it could also be because people only have so much emotional reserves. Unlike liberals who seem to get up every morning frothing at the mouth about every political topic under the sun, we on the other side have to make a living to support those who can’t or won’t!
One of the articles I have in the works is an opinion piece called “Something for Nothing… or Even Less” which will be about how lucrative it is to continue to stay unemployed. After all, the cruel United States of America has provided all sorts of safety nets for its disadvantaged, so much so that it almost pays to be a bum… sorry, I mean homeless person. Unfortunately, I was stuck in the welfare system back when I moved here from Iowa. But the benefits were so little that I had to find work… and quick! Now, I can almost make as much not working as I can in an entry level minimum wage job. Not to mention the additional benefits of health and dental care paid for by the taxpayers. How sad is that? I even contemplated going on unemployment when my census stint ended. Who knows how long they will extend the benefits?
But back to the emotional intensity issue. Perhaps people are having a letdown after the primaries. Although they didn’t put as many conservatives on the ballot as we would like. For example, there’s no way I will ever vote for Abel Moldonado for Lt. Governor… or anything for that matter. But the “moderates” who made it (Fiorina and Whitman, for example) have a good chance of winning in California’s political climate. The alternative Democrat choices (Boxer and Brown) are disasters we’ve already seen in action and have a proven track record of failure. Then we have Jim Judd for Congress and Robert Louis Stephens for Assembly who stand a good chance of winning according to a generic poll I just saw today.
On the down side, the Marin County Republican Central Committee was unable to remove the “moderate” Chair, Sashi McEntee, from her position, even though there was an apparent sentiment of anger over her choosing to openly back open primaries with a newspaper editorial. Regardless of the outcome, we have shown that grass roots groups like the Marin Conservative Forum and the North Bay and Bay Area Patriots actually can have as much or more influence than the local Republican Party. If they clean house next year that could change, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I, for one, am getting worn out with all the bad news coming out of this administration. It seems like there is a daily effort to undermine the Constitution, and none of our elected leaders seem to challenge Obama about it. Why do we even have a legislative body when many of the mandates the President is handing down are not privileges given to the Executive Branch? The recent health care mandate to demand insurance companies provide FREE services to their customers is a perfect example of Executive overreach. How is that even legal? These orders bypass the very congressmen and senators who were elected to pass laws. Yet Ms. Pelosi is mum about the usurpation of her powers by our President. Maybe because they are of the same mind and political party? I hardly see her standing still if Bush were trying to do the same thing. But that argument requires intellectual honesty; something liberals seem to lack.
Look at the race issue with the election tampering in Philadelphia. If that had been white people intimidating black people in front of the polls instead of the other way around, that’s all we would be hearing about on the mainstream media. Instead, about the only place we can hear about the incident is in alternative media or on Fox news. That is a sad commentary on the state of race relations in the United States. Watch the movie Invictus (whether factual or not) and tell me that Obama is following the same prescription that Mandela did in bringing his country together. Mandela, at least in the movie, was a man of principle and intellectual honesty. He knew that the law had to be color blind before race relations would improve. Instead, Obama is allowing the New Black Panthers to disobey the election laws which can only the, that is if people actually hear about it!
During the day I listen to shows like Hannity and Limbaugh when I can and am amazed at the people who call into the show supporting the administration’s handling of the incident… which is basically ignoring it. Again, no intellectual honesty. And in my opinion, this constant barrage of negativity leads to a let down to those of us who are pulling the cart. I’m sure that is the goal. By wearing us down, it’s easier to get us to stay with the status quo.
The perfect example came from my accountant who is a conservative. He said, “When it all comes down to it, Republican or Democrat, they are all the same!” Then he used an expletive.
Are they?
FedUpEditor
API Sounds Off on the Drilling Moratorium… The Second One!
July 15, 2010
There’s a lot happening today in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon accident — BP is testing the integrity of the Macondo well in hopes of capping it; the House and Senate are marking up energy legislation; and the deepwater drilling moratorium continues to threaten livelihoods in the Gulf.
I’d like to call your attention to a blog post we posted yesterday about the moratorium. Despite the administration’s stated reason for imposed the second moratorium, it will do nothing to improve the engineering and geological knowledge required to solve the Deepwater Horizon problem. It won’t help the industry contain blowouts. It won’t improve spill-response technology. And it won’t encourage safer operations. But it will put tens of thousands of Americans out of work, reduce domestic oil and natural gas production and make the United States increasingly reliant on other countries for energy. API’s CEO Jack Gerard also condemned the decision in a statement released on Monday.
I also wanted to give you a heads up that you are likely to see advertisements and other communications efforts from environmental groups who are seizing upon the oil leak to advocate for punitive measures against the oil and natural gas industry – new taxes in particular. API has developed a briefing paper on this issue that might be helpful to you in sorting out the facts.
And finally, API just issued a short statement on the markup of Rahall’s energy bill (CLEAR). It is attributed to Jack Gerard and says:
“The bill passed by the House Natural Resources Committee today moves well beyond a response to the tragic accident in the Gulf of Mexico, to the point where – if adopted by the Congress – provisions of the legislation will kill jobs, stifle economic recovery and punish an already-reeling Gulf Coast community.
“The numerous provisions that discourage U.S. oil and natural gas development have the potential to drive investment out of the United States, killing U.S. jobs and harming our economy.
“We support efforts to ensure safe and environmentally responsible operations, and we are committed to being part of the solution. But we cannot forget that oil and natural gas demand is growing and that it is critical to every sector of our economy. Any policy changes must bear that in mind. We can protect the environment without jeopardizing our economic security.”
Jane Van Ryan
API
Editor’s Note: With this same type of reasoning we would stop all air travel the next time a plane crashed. Obama and his goons think this is a justification for shutting down an industry they want to eventually put out of business! Pro business? HA! And remember that when government punishes big oil, those taxes are sent along to us in the form of higher energy prices. Environmentalists are also anti business and need to be stopped.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey [clueless]: Fighting Childhood Obesity at School
July 2, 2010
Note: We are going to add comments in the body of the blog article to refute what she is saying. – Editor
It’s been 30 years since the regulations limiting junk food sales in schools were updated, despite big changes in nutrition science. Today, 23 million children and adolescents are obese or overweight. Obesity rates for children between 6 and 11 years old have more than tripled over the last 40 years. [Note: so has this ban helped? NO! Liberals think that by limiting something they can change people's behavior, but obesity is on the RISE! Take a look in the mirror, Lynn. You're getting up there yourself!]
Throughout their lives, these children are at greater risk for heart disease, Type 2 Diabetes, stroke, cancer, and social and psychological problems. One of the most important ways to help fight this epidemic is to ensure that higher quality, more nutritious foods are sold throughout the day in our schools. [Note: This will not solve the problem. What it will take is a change in mindset!]
This is why I have introduced H.R. 1324, the Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act, which requires that all foods sold in schools throughout the entire school day are based on the most current nutrition science. [Note: More nanny state government bureaucracy! We're too stupid to think for ourselves!]
This bill has 170 cosponsors and has been endorsed by over 90 public health, school, food and beverage industry, and nutrition groups, including the American Beverage Association, General Mills, and the American Heart Association. I am pleased that this language has been included in Chairman George Miller’s (D-CA) H.R. 5504, the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act. [Note: And if everyone said it was a good idea to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, would you do it, Lynn? (Please say yes!}]
This provision does not affect school parties or foods sold during sporting events or band concerts in which parents are present. It only regulates foods sold in schools, and allows USDA to exempt foods sold as part of fundraisers. It’s also important to realize that schools that are switching to selling healthier foods and are not losing revenue.
Studies by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Centers for Disease Control, and the Center for Weight and Health at U.C. Berkeley found that the majority of schools switching to healthier foods in their vending machines and a la carte lines actually increased their total revenues.
In other words, it is a win-win situation for schools—healthier students and a healthier bottom line as well.
[Note: This is a lose-lose for our schools since kids will now go off campus to the 7/11 or Safeway to buy their junk, leaving less time for studies. Lynne Woolsey, you are a loser! Resign now and let the grown ups run the government!]
DOJ is a DOG
July 1, 2010
