Group's Suit Seeks Data On EPA'S Award Of Grant Money To Activists

Inside EPA ^ | 12/4/02 | Tenille Tracy

[wcdukenfield]

A free-market legal group filed suit against EPA and two other federal agencies last month to compel them to respond to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for information on federal grant money being awarded to environmental groups such as World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense and The Nature Conservancy.

Sources with the Landmark Legal Foundation (LLF) say they suspect environmental groups are using millions of dollars in federal grant money to further their political agendas, a move that is illegal under federal tax rules and violates the intended purpose of the research or pilot project contracts under which the money was awarded.

LLF sources say their goal is to ensure that groups that are found to use the money for political purposes no longer receive federal funds. “Our ultimate goal is to make sure that no advocacy groups, right or left, are misusing the funds,” one Landmark source says.

Landmark sources also say they suspect federal agencies are not tracking how the money is used. The legal foundation says it was forced to file suit against EPA, the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management and the Agriculture Department's Forest Service when the agencies did not respond to FOIA requests filed in October 2001. The legal foundation is expected to file a similar suit in the next few weeks against the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

The FOIA requests ask for information on the terms and conditions of contracts written for the federal grant money, how much the grants were for, and whether federal agencies are performing audits or management reviews on the groups receiving grant money. Landmark is seeking all information dating back to January 1993.

At press time, none of the three agencies had responded to the FOIA request, but one source at the LLF says EPA has been most willing to at least look at what information it could provide.

The FOIA requests were prompted by an October article in The Sacramento Bee that alleged that since 1998, $400 million in federal grants have gone to environmental groups to further their political agendas.

The group also has another lawsuit pending in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, where it accused former EPA Administrator Carol Browner and several high-ranking agency officials of intentionally destroying records regarding the interaction or contact EPA had with environmental groups during the crafting of new regulations.

Sources with environmental groups were unavailable for comment.

Issue: Vol. 23, No. 1

© Inside Washington Publishers

[brityank]

Thanks for the repost; I had not seen this previously.

"When the government funds a group to do things you may not disagree with, it frees up resources for it to do things you do disagree with," said O'Toole.

Exactly !!
The federal government has no authority to provide any funding to any specific group, regardless of their political or social position. It is getting close to the time when we will need to reacquaint the new Tories in DC of the consequences brought on by The Declaration of Independence.

Thanks for the ping, e-s.

[Virginia-American]

Any organization that receives any taxpayer money should be required to post a prominent notice to that effect on all fund-raising appeals [at least].

[zog]

--about time! I hope those leaders of those orgs get some jail time out of it as well, and it shocks the sheeples into stopping the 'voluntary" funding as well as cutting off the fed gov tax payer ripped off coerced at freeking GUNPOINT money funding.

[Landru]

"That W seems intimidated seems obvious. - The question is why?"

I'm sorry, e-s; when I cannot understand a person's mode of reasoning?
I can't in good conscious ccite their motive, "obvious."
Merely not understood; to me.

"He is enjoying historically unparalleled public support..."

Yea; thanks to the towl head SOBs; only.

"...and I am convinced that the public is so radically anti-bureaucrat..."

Again; I disagree.
I only use, for example, the bold & shameless behavior(s) of Dashole as proof many are not radically anti-bureaucrat!
"Pro-American" at a time when she's threatened?
Yea, sure.
Don'tcha think it might be somewhat hasty to assume the average 'rat voter's support for Dubya is a statement of an anti-bureaucratic sentiment?
The main Lib pigs don't seem to think so.

Many of these pro-Dubya bozos are nuzzled-up to the public teet in one way or another; just remind 'em of that & watch what happens then, & methinks Dubya's aware of this finickiness.
Surely you remember the Yellow Stone Park vendor quoted here, there, and everywhere during the '95 (?) Thanksgiving budget showdown?? Hmmmm?
There're a lot of those type of people out there who're on the one hand very patriotic in their support of a POTUS during a time like this, and just as spirited in their support of the clymers who protect their place at the nipple.
Add to that, Dubya's got to plan his moves around an incredibly viscious, maniacal Liberal Lamestream media minefield on any & all things the Liberals lay claim to? (enviro-socio-racial et al issues)
Means, you, I, US are (probably) not going to know what the hell's happened with this guy's administration until after the fact?
Hell, look how he's running the war abroad to get a clue how he's got to run the one here at home.

"...that failing to act is a far more likely source of public displeasure."

To us; his base -- his shifting base.
A base which is continually being minimized by one side, the other, or both at one time or another; depending what outcome they want?

...anyway; that's how it seems to me.

[snopercod]

Bush is a terrific politician. He's positioning himself for his next Presidential run

Translation: Bush cares more about getting re-elected than about property rights or the environment.

[snopercod]

...and one more thing, I am sick and tired of so-called conservatives selling us out. And I am also sick and tired of people excusing sellout after sellout as "good politics":

What is the moral stature of those who are afraid to proclaim that they are the champions of freedom? What is the integrity of those who outdo their enemies in smearing, misrepresenting, spitting at, and apologizing for their own ideal? What is the rationality of those who expect to trick people into freedom , cheat them into justice, fool them into progress, con them into preserving their rights, and while indoctrinating them with statism, put one over on them and let them wake up in a perfect capitalist society some morning?

--Ayn Rand, Conservatism, an Obituary

[SierraWasp]

"The federal government has no authority to provide any funding to any specific group, regardless of their political or social position."

While I was in government, I developed tinitus in my left ear from the constant din of the leftist buzz phrase... "Public/Private Partnership!"

It was part of "Reinventing Government!" It was to provide opportunities for "collaberation" between Non-Governmental Organizations(NGO's) and the world's greatest "Democracy!"

It always lead to ways to use taxpayer extractions called a "revenue stream" to throw money down some stream on some stupid "erosion control" or "watershed restoration" or "viewshed restoration" or "hysterical (excuse me) historical restoration" or some other pet project of the CA Native Plant Society, or the Audubon Society, or the American River Conservancy, yada, yada, yada... BARF!!!

snopercod, as to post #16, that is called "chummin the waters for rants!" Right?

[sistergoldenhair]

Thanks for the waste, fraud and corruption ping.

[walden]

Good deal. This is a racket-- I've read about it from other sources as well-- and it needs to stop. But, as far as I am concerned, money is fungible. Our government should not be in the business of giving money to political groups, period. If the organization in question participates in any political activities at all, it should not receive federal funds and that rule should be applied to ALL activist groups, not just environmental ones. Research grants should be given to research organizations exclusively. Or, more accurately, the government should subcontract and pay for research from research organizations with no political agendas or affiliations.

[stlrocket]

We understand that this Save the Whales group rec'd a disproportionate share! Something smells here!

SAVE THE REALLY BIG WHALES?

[CPT Clay]

You had better believe that this is exactly what the rats are doing.

Looking for federal budget cuts or line item vetos? Start with these.

Congratulations to Mark Levin(ake The Great One)for filing the suit!!!!!!

[a_federalist]

bump

[joanie-f]

(A belated) thanks for the ping, editor-surveyor.

The legal foundation says it was forced to file suit against EPA, the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management and the Agriculture Department's Forest Service when the agencies did not respond to FOIA requests filed in October 2001.

Translation: Our taxpayer dollars are funding a representative republic in which the laws passed by our elected representatives are being arrogantly ignored by high-level federal agencies.

Conclusion: The federal government has become so corrupt, and has declared itself so immune to Constitutional rule, that it believes it may ignore its own laws at will (provided the ignoring is for a good leftist cause).

Solution: The American public needs to get out from in front of its televisions/video games/sports events/rock concerts and start paying attention to the fact that its hard-earned, easily-siphoned-by-Big-Brother money is being used (unconstitutionally) to fund insidious programs whose sole purpose is to bring our republic down.

Chance of solution coming to pass: About the same as the survival of a snowball in hell.

At press time, none of the three agencies had responded to the FOIA request, but one source at the LLF says EPA has been most willing to at least look at what information it could provide.

You don't suppose this source at the LLF expected that particular comment to mollify those of us who would like to hold the spenders of our taxpayer dollars accountable? That comment is tantamount to saying, 'Joanie's financial records have been subpoenaed in conjunction with the embezzlement case which has been filed against her, and she has been kind enough to at least peruse them and consider handing them over.'

The EPA has a history of fighting to prevent Mark Levin from obtaining documentation (Carol Browner's deleted files being probably the most overt....the remainder being marked by simple arrogant obfuscation). One of the standby excuses (usually accompanied by surprised hand-wringing) for leftists in government who risk getting caught with their hands in the cookie jar are claims of ignorance or incompetence. If the public is vigilant, and if they seek to be good stewards of their tax money, there comes a time when a mountain of ignorance and incompetence begins to look more like deliberate obstruction. And where there is deliberate obstruction there is something to hide. If the Clinton years taught us nothing else, it should have taught us that.

Yes, the corruption is entrenched. But we haven't yet reached the point in this country where a good dose of public outrage won't at least have the corruptors thinking twice before thumbing their noses at us as they spend our own dollars on programs that will kill us. Trouble is, the American public doesn't appear to be capable of summoning the energy for outrage against anything less heinous than 9/11. Our outrage threshold needs to be lowered significantly, or, when we finally do summon the energy, we may find that outrage is no longer allowed.

[Rowdee]

...."This is part of the give and take of democracy," said Michael Replogle, transportation director at Environmental Defense, a nonprofit advocacy group. "Government agencies have a role to play" in reaching out to the environmental community, he said".....

Government agencies sure do play a role....they take from the American taxpayer and give it to the socialist bastards who can't stand on their own two feet and beg for private funding of their losing ideals!!!

[philman_36]

Our outrage threshold needs to be lowered significantly, or, when we finally do summon the energy, we may find that outrage is no longer allowed.
I'm sorry to inform you my FRiend, but even outrage is no longer allowed, having been declared illegal by recent legislation. The only emotions allowed are fear and terror, the latter being that which we are at perpetual war against and which the government promises to protect us from and to eventually eliminate.
Emotional outbursts, such as outrage, have been determined to be detrimental to the mental well being of our fellow Citizens and even saying anything, much less doing anything, can be construed as a criminal act which may allow incarceration and even death if the PTB so determine. Some might even go so far as to label it as treason, ensuring a certain demise.
So forgo your outrage as it will, in the end, only prove detrimental to you or your loved ones. Strike up the band, sing with a hearty voice, and join the parade.

That wasn't too funny was it?
I just can't get a laugh out of this no matter how hard I try.

[philman_36]

...to fund insidious programs whose sole purpose is to bring our republic down.
BTW......."This is part of the give and take of democracy," said Michael Replogle...
An active participant of insidiousness.

[philman_36]

Did you mention outrage?
Years go by...