Recently, an internal memo from the Environmental Protection Agency was uncovered by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California), revealing that EPA officials have specifically asked some of the organization’s staff members not to respond to inquiries from reporters or even The Office of Inspector General. Specifically the memo states:

"If you are contacted by a reporter, please forward the call or email to Laura Gentile and Roxanne Smith, cc Robbi. Please do not respond to questions or make any statements."

"If you are contacted directly by the IG’s office or GAO requesting information of any kind, please forward their call or email to Gwen Spriggs, cc Robbi. Please do not respond to questions or make any statements."

This memo indicates that the EPA is censoring its own staff and scientists. Sen. Boxer commented that the memo shows that the EPA’s administration have been turning the agency into “a secretive, dangerous ally of polluters, instead of a leader in the effort to protect the health and safety of the American people.”

If we are going to be able to solve our environmental problems we need an environmental agency that listens to its scientists. Please take the time to write or call Administrator Johnson and demand that the EPA adopt a policy that stresses scientific openness.

Take action! Place a call to Administrator Johnson demanding that EPA adopt a policy of scientific openness.

Simply dial 1-800-262-8333 pin #0865
Sample Call: "Hello, my name is ____ and I live in _____. I'm calling to urge Administrator Johnson EPA adopt a policy of scientific openness, and allow the EPA’s scientists and staff to speak to the press as they see fit.”

If you prefer, you can also send a handwritten letter to the EPA at the following address:

Administrator Johnson
USEPA Headquarters
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20510

Recently, Congress took a potential landmark step by listing the Polar Bear as a “threatened” species under the Endangered Species Act. It marks the first time a species has been declared threatened as a direct result of global warming. The designation has the potential to call into question the legality of actions that cause global warming, and are therefore destroying the bear’s habitat. However, will the Polar Bear actually receive the protection it deserves?

Just as the Polar Bear was designated as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Bush administration and the Fish & Wildlife Service included a rule which limits the ESA’s protections from being applied to the Polar Bear. Located within section 4(d) of the ESA, the new rule states that human activities, such as oil and gas development that cause Polar Bear deaths, are only illegal if they occur within the state of Alaska. This added detail creates a loophole for harmful, human activities that originate outside of Alaska, such as the production of greenhouse gases or the operation of off-shore drilling. Further, the 4(d) rule weakens the credibility of the Endangered Species Act.

Everyday the sea ice that the Polar Bear depends on for survival becomes less prevalent as a result of greenhouse gases and global warming. Cutting the new, section 4(d) rule of the ESA would provide Polar Bears with the necessary protection, while also representing a step toward curbing global warming pollution.

Just this past month a 160 square mile section of the Antarctic ice shelf fell off. It was just the latest reminder of the volatility of our climate. As an Earth Tones customer, you probably don’t need to be convinced about the seriousness of global warming. Instead, we need your help to make sure that the next administration in Washington, D.C. takes immediate steps towards solving our climate and energy crises.

During the Bush administration, progress towards implementing cleaner cars has repeatedly been blocked. The next president will be in a unique position to promote the use of clean cars, and therefore, help protect the climate. We may not know who the next President will be, but we need them to commit to making the use of clean cars a priority during their first days in office.

By implementing plans such as Environment America’s Clean Car Program, the next president could swiftly prevent 400 million tons of global warming pollution from harming our environment. Make your voice heard, and let all of the presidential candidates know how you feel about the use of cleaner cars in our country.

From Virginia and Kentucky to Alabama and Tennessee, the southeastern United States is home to 19 million acres of rolling, hardwood forests, including the highest concentration of old growth forests on the east coast. Numerous species of wildlife, many of whom can be found nowhere else on earth, call these woods home. But today, this breathtaking landscape is at risk of being sold to the highest bidding paper company.

President Bush has proposed the sale of thousands of acres of southeastern forests rich in biodiversity, and the Forest Service continues to try and open tracts of road-less land to commercial logging and road-building.

All of these actions would benefit companies making “throwaway” paper products, such as napkins and toilet paper. Furthermore, these companies practice outdated clear-cutting forestry techniques. And if they do attempt to reclaim the logged forest lands, these companies typically create single-species tree plantations, which decrease the region’s biodiversity and ecological health. So, why are we clear-cutting old growth forests for products that can be easily made from post consumer recycled content?

With average temperatures predicted to rise by as many as 9 degrees by the end of this century, global warming is one of the most profound threats that we face. From rising sea levels to more dangerous heat waves to increasingly severe hurricanes, the effects of global warming could drastically alter our environment and our lives.

In 2008, the senate will be debating the Climate Security Act (S. 2191) a bill that has the potential to provide concrete steps towards curbing global warming by using economic incentives and emissions allowances. If passed the bill would mandate the transportation and other industries to reduce the amount of global warming pollution that they emit. Additionally, the incentive-based act would help generate funds for the development of clean energy technologies.

The Climate Security Act, led by Senator Lieberman (I-CT) and Senator Warner (R-VA), needs to be strengthened before it is signed into law. We need your help to ensure that the most environmentally friendly form of the bill is passed. Please urge your senator that additional emissions reduction measures need to be added to the Climate Security Act. Further, we must decrease the number of emissions allowances that are distributed to polluters for free. No company should be allowed to pollute without cost. By forcing companies to purchase all of their allowances, we could create additional funds for the promotion of clean energy

The gray wolf, one of our nation’s most iconic symbols of wildlife and unabated wilderness, is under attack from all directions. In Alaska, a brutal aerial hunting program is being used to “control” wolf populations. In the Northern Rockies, a rule change passed in January could allow more than half of the region’s wolves to be killed. And all this is happening as the grey wolf is on the verge of being removed from the endangered species list.

Since a few dozen individuals were reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park in 1995, the gray wolf has indeed undergone a remarkable comeback. Today, about 1,500 wolves reside throughout the states of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho and help contribute to a balanced ecosystem. This success has been so great that the gray wolf is going to be removed from the endangered species list within the coming months. The problem is that once the animal is off the list, its fate will be decided by flawed state management plans.

In January, an important rule in the Endangered Species Act was revised by the Bush Administration and Secretary of the Interior, Dirk Kempthorne. The “10j rule change” affects state management plans and makes it so that they only have to protect 20 breeding pairs and 200 total wolves per state. How does legislation that allows the killing of more than half of a currently endangered species’ population make sense? Please help us reverse Secretary Kempthorne’s rule change!

Federal agencies have the ability to say “no” to oil and gas drilling that would irreparably harm the environment. But when it comes to proposed hardrock mining developments, federal and local governments are virtually powerless. This is because the federal law regulating hardrock mining has not been modified since 1872. Without the necessary reform many of our nation’s cherished environmental areas could be in jeopardy. For example, the Grand Canyon is currently experiencing a “gold rush” of new mining activity. Since 2003, 800 new hardrock mining claims have been staked along the edge of the canyon. With cyanide and sulfuric acid regularly used to mine these minerals, the Grand Canyon could become a toxic waste site.

By passing The Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007, the House took the first step to protect the Grand Canyon and other treasured lands. Now it’s the Senate’s turn to promote environmentally friendly mining reform. Currently, the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, led my Senators Bingaman and Domenici, is reviewing this long overdue reform.

Specifically, The Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007 mandates that mining companies adhere to basic environmental standards and clean up old mining sites. Furthermore, the bill would end the disproportionately cheap sale of public lands to mining companies, create a fund to restore water and land resources harmed by past mining practices, and increase the ability of local and state governments to prevent unwanted mining developments.