Crapo In, Crapo Out

(To be fair, I should make it clear that his name is pronounced “Cray-Poe”.)

You may be wondering why I should care about the activities of a Republican senator from Idaho. Well, I was paging through today’s Philadelphia Inquirer and came across a teen advice columnist who published a letter from Mike Crapo telling teens to be aware of abuse and emphasizing that that does not represent a loving relationship, and also that they should report dating violence. Crapo said that anyone who has any questions or believe that they are in that kind of a situation should contact his web site, www.crapo.senate.gov, to help locate information on victim’s advocacy and domestic violence advocacy organizations nationwide.

That made me curious about him, so I read more about Crapo from Wikipedia. I found out that he is a survivor of prostate cancer, and though a radical procedure cured him for a time, he suffered a recurrence last year (all political consideration aside, I hope and pray for his full recovery…we all have horror stories with that hateful scourge of a disease, and I do also). Also as noted in the Wikipedia article, Harry Reid even mentioned him to fill Sandra Day O’Connor’s Supreme Court vacancy.

It turns out that there is much to admire and respect in this man. However, there’s one big problem with him (being a Repug, you knew there had to be somewhere).

He stinks on the environment (all the more amazing given the fact that he was awarded the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award six years ago).

As noted here, Crapo has introduced a bill to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 which is intended, in part, “to enhance the role of states in the recovery of endangered species and threatened species.”

Sounds benevolent enough, right?

Would that that were true.

This text is contained in this Daily Kos link from the diarist Melvin that describes the true aim of the Crapo bill (similar to an equally dire bill introduced in the House by Richard Pombo of California).

Makes Habitat Protection Completely Discretionary (pages 18-19)

The Crapo bill would eliminate mandatory timelines to designate critical habitat for endangered species, instead giving the Secretary of Interior complete discretion to prioritize designations based in part on "minimizing conflicts" with "construction, development...or other economic activities." Even then the Secretary would not be required to implement the schedule, and citizen groups would be banned from seeking court orders to implement any critical habitat schedules or deadlines. All existing court orders to designate critical habitat would be overruled by the bill.

By the way, the person Dubya has nominated to replace pro-business concubine Gale Norton as interior secretary is Dirk Kempthorne, Idaho governor and former Senator whose seat was filled by Crapo when he was elected, and the preliminary information I read is that Kempthorne is as big of a shill as “our gal Gailie” was.

Makes Species Listing Completely Discretionary (pages 18-19)

As with habitat protections, the Crapo bill would eliminate mandatory timelines to place species on the endangered list, instead giving the Secretary of Interior complete discretion to prioritize listings. Even then the Secretary is not required to implement her schedule and citizen groups are banned from seeking court orders to implement any listing schedules or deadlines. All existing court orders to list species would be overruled by the bill.

Killing One Species in Exchange for Another (pages 36-41)

The Crapo bill would create a system allowing developers to buy and sell credits for destroying endangered species habitat. This senseless system would allow developers to destroy the habitat for one species (e.g. Coho salmon) because they have purchased credits to protect another (e.g. Mount Hermon june beetle). It would result in the destruction of tens of thousands of acres of essential habitat areas.

Undermines Recovery Plans (pages 21-28)

The Crapo bill would create a new convoluted recovery planning process that allows industry to rewrite and overrule the decisions of wildlife experts. A newly created "executive committee" made up of industry interests would make final edits and revisions to the recovery plan developed by scientists and agency biologists. Furthermore, the Crapo bill explicitly makes recovery plans "non-binding and advisory."

Creates Roadblocks to Listing Endangered Species (pages 16-18)

The Crapo bill would create an ambiguous priority system for listing endangered species that includes industry interests. Current law requires endangered species listings to be based solely on the biological needs of the species.

Eliminates Federal Oversight of Endangered Species (page 15)

The Crapo bill would require Fish and Wildlife Service to provide a "provisional permit" for any project on private property (except for "ground clearing") if there is no recovery plan in place. The permit would remain in effect until a habitat conservation plan (HCP) is approved. This would allow activities like mining and logging in endangered species habitat to proceed indefinitely with no federal oversight.

Restricts Wildlife Agencies from Improving Conservation Agreements (pages 50-53)

The Crapo bill would take "No Surprises"--a highly controversial administrative regulation--and make it law. The Fish and Wildlife Service would be unable to update or revoke a permit (HCP) that authorizes harm to an endangered species, even if new information indicates that the original plan was inadequate and even if it is causing the extinction of the species.

Pays Off Developers to Not Violate the Law (page 56)

The Crapo bill would create tax breaks to compensate private landowners for conservation work done on private property. However, the Crapo bill fails to limit these tax breaks to landowners who engage in active conservation--the creation or enhancement of endangered species habitat. Therefore, land developers who are required to set aside some portion of their land from development would also be eligible for these tax breaks. That is, instead of paying private landowners to create new habitat, the Crapo bill would primarily be paying developers to comply with the law, creating no new habitat.

I believe there is a body of information out there online detailing cancer risks from environmental exploitation (water and air pollution, ozone depletion, etc.). Crapo should do some investigating on this.

The latest information on this bill can be accessed from this link (apparently, no activity has taken place since last December, fortunately). As Melvin notes, however, this is something that we should protest by calling our senators and telling them to vote against the Crapo bill (and telling our House reps to do likewise to the Pombo bill).

If I were to spend time with Mike Crapo, I have a feeling that I’d find him to be an honorable man in many ways. However, if he fails to act as a steward of the environment, then that to me would undo much of the good work that he has already done.