Editorial: All eyes on task force

Tuesday, Aug. 23, 2005 | 11:36 a.m.

A congressional task force consisting of 12 Republicans and nine Democrats is meeting regularly in an effort to "improve" federal legislation that has helped protect the environment for more than three decades. At stake are environmental impact statements, which were required by Congress as part of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The statements come into play whenever a development requires federal licensing or federal funding.

Generally such developments are quite large, meaning that their consequences for the environment are also quite large. It only makes sense to have a clear understanding of how a large project will affect air quality, bodies of water, ground water, wildlife, soils and other environmental factors before it is begun. The 1969 legislation requires hearings that allow citizens to have their comments included in preliminary environmental impact statements, and it also requires that those comments be addressed in the final statement. Environmental impact statements are public documents and are subject to review by citizens and advocacy groups. If citizens or advocacy groups oppose the conclusions in the statements, they can file lawsuits, delaying the projects.

The whole system is designed to provide for thorough study, citizen participation and judicial intervention if need be. Environmental impact statements are complex and time consuming, as are judicial reviews and judgments in the case of lawsuits. An environmental impact statement can take a year or two, or even more, but large projects change the landscape and environment virtually forever. In that sense, a couple of years is a wise investment. Sometimes what is learned during the compiling of impact statements stops projects cold. Normally, however, they result in changes to the original design to lessen the negative environmental impact.

Serving on the congressional task force is Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev. He told Las Vegas Sun reporter Launce Rake, for a story that ran on Sunday, that "People in Nevada want to understand that government is really taking care of the public land. A modernization of (impact statements) that leads to a better result is what we're after." There may indeed be ways to streamline the process. But with 12 Republicans as members, at a time when the environmentally tone-deaf Bush administration is in power, this is a task force that needs watching. Just whom do they want benefiting from the "better result?"