(Ezekiel Loseke, Headline USA) The Atlantic article is entitled “Not Everyone Should Have a Say.” The subtitle reads, “To speed up permitting for energy projects, we’ll need to rethink community input.”
The article then proceeds, as one would expect, to make the case against community input regarding environmental regulations.
The argument of the article was inspired by the ideas of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., who sought to include language in this summer’s environmental program that would expedite permits for infrastructure programs. He included this argument to “make it harder for green groups to block new infrastructure projects in court.” Manchin’s amendment got little support and died.
The Atlantic sought to use Manchin’s idea, not to save jobs in coal country as he did, but to force their new environmental infrastructure upon the American people.
Rep. Don McEachin, D-Va., explained that Manchin’s program would deny Americans the right to rule themselves.
“If we give people the ability to access the courts, if you give people the ability to stand up and speak their peace, that quite naturally leads to some delay—and I’m not going to compromise that for anything, quite frankly,” he said.
The Atlantic acknowledged that its plan would destroy popular sovereignty. Still, it argued that “Community-input processes are undemocratic by nature.”
Further, The Atlantic argued that allowing the people to have a say in environmental regulations would destroy the utility of the regulations. As supposed evidence, the publication noted regulatory processes have been used to prevent the development of wind farms in Nantucket as well as more suitable industries (such as logging, mining, and ranching).
The mainstream media is OK with these lawsuits when they serve their political allies, but not when they hamper their green agenda. The article stated that over 190,000 environmental lawsuits hampered Obama’s infrastructure project.
The Atlantic seemed to argue that environmental lawsuits are outstanding for thee but bad for me.
