How Cheney Undercut Environmental Rules To Benefit Businesses

2 July 2007 - 12:00pm

How the vice president intervened on behalf of businesses in cases such as the Klamath River dispute, the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, Clinton-era land protection measures, and the resignation of former EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman.

"The survival of two imperiled species of fish was at stake. Law and science seemed to be on the side of the fish. Then the vice president stepped in. First Cheney looked for a way around the law, aides said. Next he set in motion a process to challenge the science protecting the fish...Because of Cheney's intervention, the government reversed itself...What followed was the largest fish kill the West had ever seen...Characteristically, Cheney left no tracks."

"The Klamath case is one of many in which the vice president took on a decisive role to undercut long-standing environmental regulations for the benefit of business. By combining unwavering ideological positions...with a deep practical knowledge of the federal bureaucracy, Cheney has made an indelible mark on the administration's approach to everything from air and water quality to the preservation of national parks and forests."

"It was Cheney's insistence on easing air pollution controls, not the personal reasons she cited at the time, that led Christine Todd Whitman to resign as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, she said in an interview that provides the most detailed account so far of her departure.

The vice president also pushed to make Nevada's Yucca Mountain the nation's repository for nuclear and radioactive waste, aides said, a victory for the nuclear power industry over those with long-standing safety concerns. And his office was a powerful force behind the White House's decision to rewrite a Clinton-era land-protection measure that put nearly a third of the national forests off limits to logging, mining and most development, former Cheney staff members said."

Full Story: Leaving No Tracks
Source: The Washington Post, June 27, 2007
Bookmark and Share
All of that only scratches the surface of what's wrong with this study. The idea that complex urban development patterns and human behavior can be meaningfully studied according to one primary criteria — density — is wrong from the start.