The Washington Post has reported a story that has Casual Friday more than a little concerned. So concerned, in fact, he's delaying his Mothers' Day wishes to the greater good of making everyone aware.
George Washington University Law School and the Humane Society of the United States (the HSUS) have announced the Animal Law Litigation Project, a joint venture intended to "improve enforcement of animal protection laws."
In this little "project", a group of university law students will be working with the HSUS legal staff to get "clinical experience representing the interests of animals in court." There's also a brand new class at GWU: "Animal Law Lawyering". In it, the students will get credit for work on federal and local court cases to "protect wildlife, prevent mistreatment of animals in factory farms and improve the treatment of performing animals and animals used in research." The program will be co-managed by an official of the GW Law School along with Johnathan Lovvorn, vice president of animal protection litigation for HSUS.
I don't mean to sound paranoid, but doesn't sound good for anyone.
This story comes on the heels of information sent to The Outdoor Wire regarding an impending investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency and that group's discretionary grant programs. If comes following a September 2004 report released by the U-S Senate's Environment and Public Works Majority Staff Oversight Grants Team. The group uncovered some disquieting information regarding the recipients of discretionary grants awarded by the EPA.
While the two billion plus-dollars in discretionary dollars was to fund environmental research projects, the oversight report indicates that the big environmental organizations who received these grants used them to play politics and pay big salaries. These groups, the report states, "are NOT about the environment." Further, it produces evidence that demonstrates the use of "EPA Discretionary Grants" to promote the groups' agendas to take control of land and water resources.
A pair of these reports ("Political Activity of Environmental Groups and their Supporting Foundations, " and "Grants Management at the Environmental Protection Agency") clearly lay out the connections between the League of Conservation Voters and highly-active political organizations, including the Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense. Groups that represent themselves as organizations concerned about the environment, but contrary to that claim, are being used to "slither" soft money into political campaigns.
Repeatedly, these grants are described as "lacking oversight", containing "no evaluation of success or failure", and "no deliverables" in grant work plans. In short, gifts passed to groups who, in turn, appear to have used them to either support or attack politicians with whom they disagree.
see part 2 of this article >>>>>>>>>>>>