Politics V. Endangered Species, or The Julie MacDonald Drama (Again)

T_eques-low.jpg Good article in today’s Christian Science Monitor on how political efforts to undercut the Endangered Species Act are facing fire in the courts. In each case, Bush’s political appointees overrode federal scientists’ recommendations, with little or no justification, according to six lawsuits filed Thursday by the Center for Biological Diversity. Who are the losers? Mexican garter snakes, Mississippi gopher frogs, Santa Ana suckerfish, to begin with. We’ve heard this before but—

“This wave of lawsuits is different—and what makes them so different is that the agency itself and its inspector general have provided a lot of compelling evidence of political interference with the proper functioning of the act,” says J.B. Ruhl, a law professor at Florida State University in Tallahassee and an expert on the ESA. A big factor in the CBD’s legal fusillade hinges on the April release of a scathing report [pdf] by the Interior Department’s inspector general on the actions of Julie MacDonald, the department’s former deputy assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and parks. The report found numerous questionable actions on endangered species and criticized her release of internal documents to outside groups opposed to the ESA.

csantaa1.jpg

Moreover, the Endangered Species & Wetlands Report revealed that Julie MacDonald received a Special Thanks for Achieving Results (STAR) award for her work during 2004. That amounted to a tidy $9,628 windfall—just short of the $10,000 threshold that would have triggered a review by the Office of Personnel Management. This, according to DOI, for “an outstanding one-time accomplishment or contribution of a non-recurring nature that produces tangible savings or intangible benefits.

Frog3.jpg

Oh. Is that what they call eviscerating a stellar piece of legislation?

Julia Whitty is Mother Jones’ environmental correspondent. You can read from her new book, The Fragile Edge, and other writings, here.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.