Barone Is Wrong About the Interior Department, Oil and Democrats in the West

December 23, 2008 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (4)

By John Aloysius Farrell, Thomas Jefferson Street blog.

I must admit that I'm somewhat stunned at my Thomas Jefferson Street colleague Michael Barone's view of the U.S. Department of Interior, which is so different than my own.

Michael sees a federal agency staffed by sleeper cells of anti-growth radicals, who are now stirring in the advent of a new Democratic administration, ready to emerge and thwart economic progress across the globe.

He's issued warnings about "the environmental restrictionist culture of Interior Department career employees" and—admirably and candidly owning up to his own traumatic near-encounter with a polar bear—urged us to overcome our misplaced, emotional sympathies for these cruel, mighty killers of the North.

Well, Interior's career employees must be hardy moles, Mike. They've been working for GOP chief executives and Free Market ideologues and Republican-appointed Secretaries—and sleazy industry goons like disgraced deputy secretary Steve Griles—for 20 of the last 28 years.

Yes. Having spent some time working for a great Western newspaper, I'll concede that there are still a few wildlife biologists and other scientists left in the ranks at Interior, who respect the law and do the science and write honest technical reports.

Not all have quit, or succumbed to the relentless political pressure to tailor their research. Being a scientist, or an honest civil servant, at Interior in recent years has been much like serving in the CIA before the Iraq war. There is truth, and then there's what the bosses want to hear. Slam dunk, baby.

Some of the federal scientists—shocking though it might seem to Hugh Hewitt—even reach conclusions that disappoint the environmental movement.

During the presidential campaign, John "Drill, baby, drill" McCain had great fun ridiculing federal scientists who conducted a grizzly bear DNA study in Montana. Well, guess what? The study found that the bears were faring pretty well—to the chagrin, no doubt, of environmental groups that wanted to employ the plight of endangered bear cubs in their fundraising letters, and legal briefs.

As for the prospect of a new Western "sagebrush rebellion"—we're in one. And it's Democrats who are leading the rebel armies.

A tide of new energy development out West has gone largely unnoticed on the coasts. We flatlanders need gas to heat and cook. And natural gas—for a fossil fuel—is a relatively clean alternative.

But vast swaths of Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico have been pockmarked by thousands of new gas wells. The Bush administration has been so eager to approve new drilling that Interior personnel who were supposed to be working on mitigation and reclamation plans were pressed into service to process (that is, to approve) permits and leases.

In the process, the rapacious, often arrogant, land-grabbing and at-times-polluting energy companies have alienated many of their former conservative political allies who ranch, hunt, fish, backpack, camp, ski and hike on public lands out West—or who make their living supplying the ranchers, outfitters and recreation industry—or who just chose and cherished the region as a quiet, free place to live.

There are lots of reasons why Ken Salazar and Mark Udall are the Democratic senators from Colorado—why Ken's brother John represents conservative, rural western and southern Colorado in Congress—and why so many Western states (Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Montana, Wyoming etc.) have elected Democratic governors in recent years. But one major factor is that the oil and gas industry has pretty much run amok in the Cheney-Bush era, and Western voters have voiced their objections at the polls.

Tags:
Department of the Interior,
Bush administration,
energy,
energy policy and climate change,
environment

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Could you help me. Many people weigh the guilt they will feel against the pleasure of the forbidden action they want to take.

I am from Herzegovina and also now'm speaking English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "Give yourself a fighting chance and start with step rather than halfway down the list."

With best wishes 8-), Riley.

Riley of NY 2:30PM February 15, 2009

I'm sorry you aren't aware of all the closures of roads and access to public lands. Less than a month ago the "Center for Biological Diversity" litigated the State of California to stop stocking fish is all moving water in the state as well as any lake or reservoir that has a stream or river (nearly all). That effectively ends family fishing in many - if not most of the state. That's just the most current example.

I personally know of a dozen campgrounds and many more access roads that have been closed to the public for one enviro-sensitive reason or another. I know it's happening all over and that Montana is no exception; lot's of enviros moving there from the coasts. Perhaps you have fewer closures there because your state government fights the feds and enviros and perhaps because your local forest and fish and game managers are not hard left members of the "eco-elite" That's great for you - You're still gonna lose your access, albeit, more slowly. Here in California (and most of the country) the eco-elite control everything: schools, courts, government and the media. Here,sportsmen, RV'ers, families etc,, don't stand a chance.

Every point I made in my previous post was on target - And, truth be known, most of it came from an article I wrote nearly 10 years ago when they closed access and campgrounds along Sespe Creek - A place I grew up fishing and took my own kids to until they closed it down because of trout DNA and toads... Heck, any excuse will do when your goal is to simply keep the public out. After all, we're speaking of "dogma" not science...

R.L. Schaefer of CA 1:22PM December 24, 2008

Okay,this is where I cross the middle and lean left--but RL, there are plenty of places for the groups you want to have access to have access. Spend a night in a campground entertained by radios, crying children, and drunks and you will understand the need for some areas that are much less accessible. There is no such thing as a wilderness car campground--it is merely civilization set on the edge of the wilderness. Then spend a night high in the Bob, able to hear silence, and experience real wilderness. I have done much of both--and we need much of both. BTW, there are active programs to put the disabled on horseback and take them for a nonmotorized wilderness experience.

That said, it is not Democrats who are leading the way in energy development--it is CENTRISTS and those belong to both parties--those who are willing to talk about how to

best use the resources and yet preserve that which is valuable.

The greatest controversies are where one side demonizes the other, or where efforts at incorporating both sides of the discussion are ignored. In the case of a CFB coal plant outside Great Falls, Montana, it was the Dept of the Interior who stepped up and stated that the protocols had been ignored and that this plant--set in an otherwise agricultural area on the very edge of the Portage National Historic Landmark without notifying the DOI and following DOI procedure and discussion was in fact not able to comply with the standards. Unfortunately it didn't matter as the teeth needed to enforce the established protocol weren't there. The plant is breaking ground and a fierce fight is in progress. How much easier and less costly if the company had been straightforward and a discussion could have been held prior to site selection--there is an alternative site that was eliminated early and never really brought to the table--as well as alternative technology that might have been better employed.

MontanaMountainWoman of MT 3:17AM December 24, 2008

John A. Farrell

John A. Farrell

John Aloysius Farrell is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. An award-winning Washington reporter, he has written for The Boston Globe and The Denver Post and is the author of Tip O’Neill and the Democratic Century and an upcoming biography of the great American defense attorney, Clarence Darrow.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Latest Videos

advertisement