Taxpayers Forced to Fund Anti-Bush 'Environmentalists'

August 11, 2004
By Roch Hammond
CNSNews.com

To submit a Letter to the Editor: letters@CNSNews.com
Even though most environmental groups are determined to oust President Bush from office this November, those groups are benefiting from an unprecedented level of federal assistance, according to a Washington, D.C., research group.

It's possible that some of that money is also being used in the campaign against a second Bush term, Capital Research Center (CRC) reported in an editorial, citing audits conducted by the White House Office of Management and Budget.

The audits, according to CRC's David Healy, show that in the fiscal year 2004 budget, $143 million was channeled to environmental groups that disclose their finances. That's nearly twice as much as the $72 million that the groups got in fiscal year 1998.

Between 1999 and 2004, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation saw its federal awards increase nearly six-fold while its private donations were increasing at a much smaller rate.

Nature Conservancy's federal grant money doubled between 1999 and 2004, even though the group has been plagued by scandal, Healy reported.

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Sierra Club and League of Conservation Voters (LCV) all received taxpayer dollars from the Bush administration, yet the groups have been working together to mount an anti-Bush "Environmental Accountability Fund," Healy wrote.

For example, according to Healy, the groups have organized "anti-Bush efforts in key battleground states. In New Mexico ... LCV is recruiting volunteers in Albuquerque and Santa Fe, while the Sierra Club has added two full-time campaign staffers, and NRDC has aired at least two radio spots."

The green groups are not shy about enlisting the help of famous Democrat politicians or liberal-minded celebrities either.

Former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall, who is associated with Audubon Society, was quoted by Healy as blasting the Bush administration's environmental policies. "I cannot remember, I cannot recite to you a single positive new policy or program sponsored by the current administration," Udall reportedly said.

Long-time movie star and political activist Robert Redford, a board member of NRDC, was also quoted in Healy's editorial criticizing the Bush administration for appearing "to almost enjoy dismantling the environment."
NRDC received $2.6 million from the Environmental Protection Agency, among other grants, according to Capital Research Center, but Alan Metrick, director of communications for NRDC, downplayed that amount.

Sue the Taxpayers

Metrick called the $2.6 million "minuscule" in comparison to his group's overall budget while admitting that "we sue the EPA pretty much all the time." He said NRDC was "happy to participate" with the government when there are common interests, adding that "there are good-spirited people on all sides of all debates."

Metrick claimed he knew "nothing" about Environmental Accountability Fund.

Tina Kreisher, communications director for the U.S. Department of the Interior, said Interior Secretary Gail Norton encouraged "communication, cooperation and consultation" with all groups for the advancement of environmental conservation.

But an expert on federal grants to non-profit organizations, who wished to remain anonymous, told CNSNews.com that property owners were "extremely unhappy" about environmental policy and with their perceived lack of influence on federal policy during a recent Interior meeting.

"This kind of funding has turned around and is starting to bite [the Bush administration,]" the expert asserted.

'The Bush Administration's Fault'

Kreisher conceded that anti-Bush groups were getting federal environmental grants but maintained that it was illegal for those groups to use the money for political purposes. The Department of the Interior and other relevant agencies "control the parameters" of the grants, she said.
"It's monitored. They have to show us what the money is spent for. There are absolute controls over every grant that goes out," Kreisher asserted.

She acknowledged that the massive funding increases for environmental groups were "the Bush administration's fault."

"[W]hen the Bush administration came in we established two or three more [programs] because of their importance to the president," Kreisher said.

The decisions on who gets the grants are not "based on politics," she added.

'Directly Transferable to Bush-Bashing'

Robert Bidinotto, editor of Organization Trends and Foundation Watch, published by Capital Research Center, said that though federal grants may not be used directly for political activism such as Environmental Accountability Fund, the funds nevertheless helped the environmental groups launch political campaigns.

"Grants, at the very minimum, boost these groups' size, visibility, influence, clout, cache; all of these things are directly transferable to activities such as Bush-bashing during the election year," he said.

The result, Bidinotto said, is "that as the funding from the administration has been going up, so has the volume of [the environmental groups'] voices."

'Revolving Door' and 'Close Connections'

Bidinotto pointed to a "revolving door" problem, in which environmental activists move back and forth between the liberal groups and government jobs depending on whether a Republican or Democrat is in the White House.

"There are people within government agencies who maintain very, very close connections with advocacy groups on the outside," Bidinotto stated.

The EPA, Sierra Club and League of Conservation Voters did not return phone calls requesting comment for this article.
Copyright 2004 CNSNews.com
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2.../11/92635.shtml
Additional researched, recommended reading:
http://www.econot.com/page3.html