The Environmental Litigation Bond Returns…again!

Time to change the legislative channel. It’s another bad rerun. 

If it feels like you’ve seen this episode before at the state capitol, you probably have. This time, anti- environmentalist Mike Noel (R-Kanab) is airing his grievances with greens and the constitution by floating HB 379, the Environmental Litigation Bond. This retread of a bill would require a bond be posted by anybody challenging the legality of a decision made by certain state agencies.
 
Despite the fact that governors Mike Leavitt and Jon Huntsman have already used their veto stamp on comparable legislation in 2002 and 2006, this bill sailed through the Natural Resources committee on Monday with a unanimous vote. It now moves on to the House floor. 

Contact your representative today and request a no vote on HB 379, the Environmental Litigation Bond

We would like to see our lawmakers demonstrate a basic understanding of our nation’s most sacred document, the United States Constitution, and vote this bill down. They need to hear from you to make this happen.   

Some sample arguments:

1. Amendment 1 of the US constitution states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."  We should not attempt to undermine our Founding Fathers by attempting to limit the people’s fundamental right to access the court system. 

 

2. HB 379 is a violation of federal law.  If passed, the federal government would rescind the state's authority to enforce Federal regulations such as the Endangered Species Act or Clean Water Act.  If that were to happen, the EPA would be calling all the shots in Utah instead of our state agencies.

 

3. This bill is a waste of time and resources.  Past versions of it have been vetoed by governors Mike Leavitt and Jon Huntsman.  If it were to pass, it wouldn’t survive a challenge in the courts but would still cost taxpayers millions of dollars.