[Alexander Rubin]

The ESA might have been conceived of with good intentions, but its implementation has been problematic, at best, and a complete fiasco, at worst. Its cost tens of thousands of hardworking, honest Americans their jobs, devalued property rights and is just another example of a seemingly benevolent liberal agenda run amok to cause pain and chaos.

[SiliconValleyGuy]

The ESA might have been conceived of with good intentions, but its implementation has been problematic, at best, and a complete fiasco, at worst.

You're much closer to the truth with the latter.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Yep, just like the Americans with Disabilities Act has been used by lawyers and wheelchair "victims" to enrich themselves and hurt others.

[Publius6961]

HEAR! HEAR!

If anyone thinks that they have a rational argument to the contrary, I would love to hear it.

[Jeff Head]

The ESA has been and is being used by enemies to this nation, both foreign (read UN) and domesticto undermine and curtail US agriculture and many other U industries (timber, mining, etc.) and thereby making us more dependent on foreign interests.

See an example at:

THE STAND AT KLAMATH FALLS: THE KALAMATH BASIN CRISIS.

The ESA should have ben abolished long ago. In fact, my understanding is that it sunsetted years ago, but congress has administratively continued its funding because of all the special interests that have built up around it.

[Gabz]

I can't imagine how anyone could argue with those sentiments - however we know they will, because in the midset of these types, trees are more valuable than people and rights.

[talleyman]

NYT Headline:
"Republicans & Greedy Corporate Interests Seek to Wipe Out All Life on Earth!"

[glock rocks]

Ping!

[untrained skeptic]

Speaking of the law being unconstitutional. Where in the US Constitution does it grant the Federal Government the authority to pass laws regarding the protection of endangered species?

This law is unconstitutional outside the Washington D. C. simply because it's outside the authority of the Federal government.

For the federal government to have such power a constitutional ammendment would need to be passed granting such authority.

THe states have the authority to pass usch laws. The federal government does not.

[Libertarian444]

"All your private property are belong to us."

     -The Supreme Court, June 23, 2005

[goldstategop]

In view of today's Supreme Court decision, I'm skeptical the ESSA will ever be repealed. Republicans are as much afraid of being labeled an enemy of the environment as they're afraid of being labeled an enemy of Big Bird and Jim Lehrer.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[SandRat]

Oh please cancel that piece of trash, PULLEEEEZEE! That's the only thing that the Center for Bio Diversity has to constantly beat us over the head with like homegrown Taliban.

[bert]

The problem is sub species. If the law is limited to species and allows elimination of small populaations of subspecies that exist mainly in the mind of a splitter biologist then all will probably be ok.

There is a current flap over cave beatles in Texas. There are lots of species and they are all isolated to perhaps only one cave . They are protected even though all are closely related only an entomologist needing academic credit for naming a species would declare a difference.

[hattend]

BTTT