Tim Scott on Environment

Best thing for environment is to bring home jobs from China

Sen. Tim SCOTT: If we want the environment to be better, the best thing to do is to bring our jobs home from China. If we create 10 million new jobs in my Made in America Plan, we will have a better economy and a better environment. America has cut our carbon footprint in half in the last 25 years. The places where they are continuing to increase -- Africa, 950 million people; India, over a billion; China, over a billion. Why do we put ourselves at a disadvantage, devastating our own economy? Let's bring our jobs home.

Reverse Waters of the United States: leave it to owners

Allow longer than 10 years to rebuild depleted fisheries.

Congressional Summary:

• Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to require fishery management plans, amendments, or regulations for overfished fisheries to specify a time period for ending overfishing and rebuilding the fishery that is as short as practicable (under current law, as short as possible).
• Modifies the exceptions to the requirement that [currently states that the rebuilding] period not exceed ten years [to allow a longer period].
• Requires consideration, in evaluating progress to end overfishing and rebuild overfished stocks, of factors other than commercial and recreational fishing.

Co-sponsor`s explanation: (Rep. Walter B. Jones, Dec. 16, 2011): H.R. 3061 would allow the 10-year time period for rebuilding fisheries to be extended under certain common-sense circumstances. In allowing such flexibility, the bill would provide for timely restoration of healthy fisheries while also preventing fishermen from being put out of business because of the rigid, arbitrary timelines contained in the Magnuson Act.

Opponents` explanation Pew Environmental Group, April 7, 2009, www.endoverfishing.org): This bill is designed to weaken the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA), the nation`s primary law governing management of US ocean fish. This bill would:

• Threaten recovery, long-term sustainability and forego economic benefits of healthy, rebuilt fish populations;
• Abandon congressional intent requiring federal fishery managers to rebuild depleted fish populations as quickly as possible;
• Allow federal fishery managers to avoid making tough decisions by claiming that the health of depleted fish populations is beyond their control; and
• Allow federal fishery managers to continue overexploiting a vulnerable fish population, if it is caught with other populations of healthier fish.

Rated 13% by HSLF, indicating an anti-animal welfare voting record.

112th Mid-Term Humane Scorecard: The Humane Society Legislative Fund has posted the final version of the 2011 Humane Scorecard, where you can track the performance of your federal lawmakers on key animal protection issues during last year. We rated legislators based on their voting behavior on measures such as agribusiness subsidies, lethal predator control, and the Endangered Species Act; their cosponsorship of priority bills on puppy mills, horse slaughter, animal fighting, and chimps in research; their support for funding the enforcement of animal welfare laws; and their leadership on animal protection. All of the priority bills whose cosponsorships we`re counting enjoy strong bipartisan support; in the House, each of the four now has more than 150 cosponsors.

The Humane Scorecard is not a perfect measuring tool, but creating some reasonable yardstick and allowing citizens to hold lawmakers accountable is central to our work. When the Humane Scorecard comes out each year, it helps clarify how the animal protection movement is doing geographically, by party affiliation, and in other categories. It helps us chart our course for animals by seeing where we have been effective, and where we need to improve.

Loosen restrictions on predator control in Alaska.

Library of Congress Summary: This joint resolution nullifies the rule finalized by the Department of the Interior on Aug. 5, 2016, relating to non-subsistence takings of wildlife and public participation and closure procedures on National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska.

Case for voting YES by House Republican Policy Committee: The Fish and Wildlife Service rule--which lays claim to more than 20% of Alaska--violates ANILCA (Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act) and the Alaska Statehood Compact. Not only does [the existing 2016 rule] undermine Alaska`s ability to manage fish and wildlife upon refuge lands, it fundamentally destroys a cooperative relationship between Alaska and the federal government.

Case for voting NO by the Sierra Club (April 6, 2017):

• President Trump signed H.J. Res. 69, overturning the rule that banned `predator control` on federal wildlife refuges in Alaska unless `based on sound science in response to a conservation concern.`
• Any rule mentioning `sound science` is in trouble under a Trump administration.
• So what kinds of practices will the Trump administration now allow on our federal wildlife refuges? Activities that include shooting or trapping wolves while in their dens with pups, or hunting for grizzly bears from airplanes.
• It`s all about ensuring a maximum yield of prey species like elk, moose, and caribou for the real apex predator: humans. So if having more elk requires killing wolf pups in their dens, then so be it.
• The Obama administration`s rule (which Trump revoked) never tried to stop all hunting. Subsistence hunting was still allowed. What`s changed is that the predators on federal wildlife refuges are now under the control of the state of Alaska. And that makes them prey.