Via Twitter, the League of Conservation Voters has issued a response to my blog post of earlier today, "League of Conservation Voters Cries Wolf... Again," teasing it (using LCV's own data) for its exaggerated claim that the 2011 Congress was "the most anti-environmental" ever.
@NationalCenter The current House is most anti-environment ever b/c of breadth & depth of assaults on clean air, public health, etc.My response:
Oh... I'm absolutely cut to the quick.
I was not aware that a plurality of conservatives in one-half of one branch of government could represent such a deep and wide assault on the environment.
I suppose the LCV thinks, in retrospect, that the Private Property Protection Act, the Regulatory Reform and Relief Act; the Cost Benefit Act; the Regulatory Transition Act (freeze on new regulations); the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act; the Congressional Review Act (allowing Congress to review agency rules and pass a motion of disapproval to stop them); the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1995; the "infamous" EPA Riders; the "Endangered Species Conservation and Management Act"; and a host of other initiatives that the left was screaming about back in 1995 were swell.
I always thought these things were just swell... I just didn't know LCV did, too.
If that's not what the LCV means, perhaps it should lay out its detailed methodology for determining that the "current House is the most anti-environment ever b/c of the breadth & depth of assaults on clean air, public health, etc." And it ought to be a lot more thorough than its weak offering "the House Republican leadership voted nearly 200 times to weaken environmental protections."
In 1995, they practically had 200 votes on environmental and health issues before breakfast... on a light day.
Time to either put up or shut up, LCV.
Did you do a rigorous analysis to make your determination – or was it all rhetoric just to generate press for an organization that many thought had gone out of existence?