Pruitt Efforts Applauded
Federal regulations should be based on reality, not agendas
The Oklahoman Editorial • Published: March 24, 2014
OKLAHOMA Attorney General Scott Pruitt has filed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s “sue and settle” practices, which dramatically expand federal regulations without public input. This is a worthy fight. If nothing else, Pruitt’s lawsuit highlights the complete absence of logic involved when federal officials make far-reaching regulatory decisions.
In “sue and settle,” environmental activists file lawsuits to have additional species granted federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections. Federal agencies quickly settle and reach agreements that expand their regulatory powers to the detriment of landowners, private businesses and even state governments.
For example, Fish and Wildlife recently agreed to settle a lawsuit over the listing status of numerous animal species, including the lesser prairie chicken. The agency agreed to determine whether to grant the chicken “threatened” status under ESA by March 31. As part of that settlement, the agency agreed to not consider granting the bird the less-significant “warranted but precluded” designation. If the animal is formally declared “threatened,” it will have major consequences in Oklahoma, where the chicken roams freely.
Pruitt believes “sue and settle” violates federal law and the constitutional rights of citizens. He notes ESA requires the federal government to make determinations on species’ listing “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available” while also taking in account state efforts to preserve animals. Oklahoma government, in conjunction with neighboring states and private industry, has designated $26 million for conservation of the lesser prairie chicken.