EPA Eschews Transparency With ‘Sue and Settle’ Tactics

January 2009 had the potential to be the dawn of a new era in Washington. The newly-elected President Obama promised that his administration would be “committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government” and that it would “work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation and collaboration.”[1] Four years later, however, Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seems to be doing just the opposite by entering into agreements behind closed doors with environmental litigants.

One of the tactics environmental activists groups use to promote greater regulatory control over the economy is lawsuits. This is an especially effective tactic if environmental groups sue a sympathetic administration with the hopes of settling the lawsuit without the need for the administration to go through the regular regulatory process. This is dubbed “Sue and Settle.”

One of the most effective ways for these lawsuits to proceed is for the environmental litigant to sue the EPA, for example, for a missed deadline, and then enter into a settlement that allows the EPA to quickly enact new regulations while claiming that it was forced to do so by the terms of the lawsuit. In nearly 60 of these lawsuits,[2] EPA chose not to defend itself. EPA simply agreed with the terms set forth by the environmentalist groups. In nearly all of these proceedings, EPA also did not disclose to Congress, stakeholders or the Office of Management and Budget that it was even being sued until the consent decree had already been agreed to.[3]   

Read More:  http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2013/06/05/epas-sue-and-settle-tactics-eschew-transparency/