via Tollers/Flickr

Polar bears may be Arctic icons, but even their animal rock-star status can’t always sway Congress to protect wildlife.

Global warming is melting habitat the big white bears depend on to survive, but recent and upcoming votes by the nation’s lawmakers could make the situation even worse.

This year, some members of Congress have taken a sledgehammer to America’s bedrock environmental safeguards, shattering protections that have been in place under Republican and Democratic administrations for decades.

Congressional Attacks

For polar bears, Congress has focused its attack in two ways:

1. Pushing for drilling in vital polar bear habitat:

In February, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) introduced legislation to drill the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, putting polar bears and their onshore denning habitat at risk. More recently, House members tried to push aside the federal Clean Air Act permitting process to allow Shell Oil to rush forward with ”exploratory drilling” off of Alaska’s coast.  As NWF has reported, an oil spill in this area would be devastating to polar bears and other Arctic species.

2. Blocking the Environmental Protection Agency from controlling carbon pollution:

Congress has considered and voted on a slew of anti-EPA amendments aimed at hamstringing the agency’s court-ordered responsibility to control carbon pollution. According to scientists, we must take swift action to reduce carbon pollution if we hope to save polar bears from extinction.

Even though polar bears are one of the fiercest creatures on the planet, they are helpless against these attacks.

Speak up for Polar Bears

Help protect polar bears and urge Congress to support programs that mitigate the consequences of climate change on wildlife.  It’s not too late for lawmakers to try and make things right, but like Arctic sea ice, time is a resource we’re also running out of.

Wildlife in the Crossfire – About this Series

This four-part blog series highlights wildlife caught in the crossfire of the federal budget battle raging in Congress and gives you the tools to fight back. Congress is in recess and members are back in their home districts. Now is the time to stand up for wildlife.

Fact: America’s investment in wildlife is not to blame for the budget problems we face today. Over the past 30 years, America’s investment in parks, wildlife, clean water and clean air has fallen from 1.7%  to 0.6% of federal spending.

Walruses deserve protection (Photo Credit: NWF)

Extinction doesn’t wait, but the Pacific walrus will have to wait to receive federal protection.

In a disappointing turn of events, this animal will not be joining its Arctic neighbor, the polar bear, on the endangered species list. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledges the walrus deserves protection under the Endangered Species Act, but does not consider the animal a high priority compared to other threatened plants and animals.  Unfortunately, the Pacific walrus waits in a long line of over 250 species that are also candidates for federal protection – essentially, stuck in endangered species limbo.

Warmer temperatures are melting the sea ice Pacific walruses rely on for breeding, foraging, and protection from predators.  As a result, these animals are forced to go on land more often, increasing competition for food, overcrowding, and the likelihood of young walruses being crushed in stampedes.

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski balked at the idea of the Pacific walrus receiving protection as an endangered species. The lawmaker is siding with oil companies and other commercial interests in criticizing any federal protections for the animal.  Similar complaints were also made when the polar bear was listed as an endangered species in 2008. The debate about federal protections pits oil companies and their supporters against people and wildlife: declining walrus populations could also hurt local economies where communities depend on them for food and other subsistence needs.  Tourism dollars associated with wildlife viewing are also in jeopardy.

Even though the Pacific walrus has been waitlisted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, it can’t wait out the devastating effects of climate change in the Arctic.

Find out more about the impact of global climate change and what you can do to fight for wildlife >>

Photo credit: Patrick Kelley, US Coast Guard

Let me pose a hypothetical situation:  Three corporations cause one of the biggest environmental disasters in recorded history, and an investigation shows it could have avoided it if they’d been focused on safety. Not only that, but the government could have prevented the disaster if only they hadn’t rubber-stamped the project in the first place.

So, what would the next logical step be?

If you’re like me you probably thought, “Well, obviously we need to get better rules in place and make sure they’re followed.”

This is, of course, what’s going on with the Deepwater Horizon disaster, which will continue to impact the Gulf of Mexico for years to come.

BP, Transocean, and Halliburton were found grossly negligent by the federal Oil Spill Commission, which also criticized regulators for failing in their duty to the American public.  But it wasn’t all about pointing fingers: the commission’s report included some common sense recommendations.  Now they face the unenviable task of convincing Congress to act…and this can be like talking to a small child who happens to control your bank account and car keys.

William Reilly (Bush Sr.’s EPA chief) and former Senator Bob Graham are the Oil Spill Commission’s co-chairs, and they trekked up to Capitol Hill last week to make the case for stronger rules and safety first.  Drilling is an important part of our economy, they both said, but we need to do it responsibly, and the system failed us.

I won’t bore you with the details (there’s a reason they show these things on C-SPAN and not EPSN) but suffice to say: One group of Congressmen protested that “regulation” is just code for “job-killing” and generally accused Reilly and Graham of bias and skullduggery.  The other group said better safe than sorry, and vowed to learn the lessons of this disaster.

At one point, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) took issue with the word “systemic,” which was how the commission described problems in the drilling industry.  Are they really systemic, she asked, and not just the fault of a couple of rogue companies?  Also, she added mockingly, are we supposed to believe that good luck was the only thing that prevented a big spill before now?  Reilly paused a moment and then responded. 

“Senator,” he said, “I would answer that question with just one word: Yes.”  We’ve had a lot of near misses, he explained, and it’s “inconceivable” that the problems are confined to one rig or one company.

This from a former Republican cabinet member.

Last year, a pretty good spill response bill was passed by the House but stalled in the Senate.  The elections created big challenges for environmental causes, and oil drilling was no different – BP and the other inmates are still running the asylum and the guards are working double shifts just to save the whole operation from total catastrophe.

“We’ve done what we can do,” Reilly said to the assembled Congressmen and women, “but now it’s over to you.”

Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) has introduced legislation that would accomplish many of the goals set by the Commission.  It’s going to take a lot of work to make sure that these reforms are instituted, but you can make a difference by sending an email to your members of Congress, telling them not to buy into the false choice between jobs and safety.  After all, it’s your Gulf, too.

On one side is Big Oil and their Senate surrogate, Senator Lisa Murkowski.  She’s got a letter from 68 oil barrons backing her on their desire to pollute to their hearts content. A June 8 letter obtained by Wildlife Promise tells her the National Petrochemical Refiners Association – Big Oil more or less – wants to offer their utmost support in her efforts to blow a hole in the Clean Air Act and stop action to rein in global warming.

On the other side is 71 PERCENT OF AMERICANS who support government action to regulate global warming pollution. And oh yes, the White House has promised to veto her resolution, S J Res 26, should it somehow pass. The poll number was released by the Washington Post today.

So Senators now have a clear choice. Follow Americans who want clean energy solutions, or follow Big Oil.

You can help. Take Action Now.

Update by Miles — Check out this video of a Big Oil Bailout protest on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, featuring NWF interns Natalie Chin & Maggie Germano starting at the 1:15 mark:

Click here to view the embedded video.

I had a wonderful time today at Millsaps College in Mississippi talking with about 60 students interested in what they can do to protect their future and create clean energy jobs in Mississippi.

I was glad to hear of their interest and enthusiasm for cleaner air, more economic opportunity, and enhanced national security – all of which America will get with clean energy and climate legislation that Senator Reid has asked for and Senator Kerry has promised to deliver within two weeks. How can we deny them this future?

Next week I’ll have the opportunity to join with many more students from around the country who want the same thing. I’ll be joining the National Climate Seminar hosted by the Bard Center for Environmental Policy on March 3.

With so many youth and others around the country who want cleaner air and a brighter future, I can understand why the co-author of the Dirty Air Act, Senator Lisa Murkowski, seemed awkward when confronted by youth activists from the Consequence Campaign arriving at a fundraiser organized by polluter lobbyists.

Check out this cringe-inducing video of Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), co-author of the Dirty Air Act with Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), arriving at a fundraiser organized by polluter lobbyists at a swank DC restaurant. Youth activists from the Consequence campaign were waiting outside with surgical masks & “Dirty Air Act” signs as Murkowski hurried past. Ouch:

Senators Judd Gregg (R-NH), Mike Enzi (R-WY) Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) also had to face the climate activists as they walked in.

Is it really worth it? Is this why they got involved in politics? To scurry past angry protesters to collect their cash from polluter lobbyists?

It’s not too late for Senators to do the right thing. Please take a moment to contact your Senators right now and ask them to stand behind the Clean Air Act’s protections against air pollution. Our children, grandchildren & America’s wildlife need you to speak loud & clear on their behalf.

I posted this response “Preserve the Clean Air Act’s Protections” on National Journal’s blog in response to the following question:

Should Congress Stop EPA?

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, last week introduced a disapproval resolution — essentially a congressional veto — that would stop the EPA from controlling greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Murkowski, the top Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, argued that Congress, not EPA, should determine federal climate change policy.

Should EPA regulate carbon dioxide emissions? Is the Obama administration using the agency to force Congress to pass legislation? Could EPA regulation help industry plan for a low-carbon future? Should the agency’s power be temporarily suspended to give Congress more time to hash out a bill? Or should EPA be barred from controlling greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act? How could this resolution affect the overall debate on climate legislation?

My response:

Just last week, NASA announced 2009 was the 2nd-hottest year on record, with the 2000s being the hottest decade on record. That leaves Sen. Murkowski and her supporters in a delicate position. With climate science looking more dire by the day, why would they try to direct the Environmental Protection Agency to ignore scientific climate findings about global warming’s threat to human health?

Sen. Murkowski’s effort would allow unlimited emissions of carbon pollution from the biggest corporate polluters and could stall the growth in clean energy jobs by creating uncertainty about our government’s commitment to a cleaner energy future. Clean Energy Works has rightly called it a Dirty Air Act.

Sen. Murkowski says she prefers a legislative solution and we encourage her to focus on finding one. But in the meantime, we urge her to stop attacking the EPA and the Clean Air Act, which are the best tools we currently have to begin addressing climate change.

Since 1970, the Clean Air Act has a proven track record of protecting public health and the environment from harmful pollution while ensuring our economy is strengthened. Between 1970 and 1990 actions to reduce air pollution saved the nation an estimated $22 trillion in health costs and lost productivity, at a cost of $523 billion—a remarkable 40-1 benefit-cost ratio. In 1990, the Clean Air Act was revised with bipartisan support and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush – demonstrating that goals of clean air and less pollution are shared by Republicans and Democrats alike.

Now is the time to move forward as a country in confronting climate change and building a clean energy economy. This so-called Dirty Air Act would to takeaway a critical tool that can be used to stop the unlimited emissions of global warming pollution from the nation’s biggest polluters, and would stall growth of clean energy jobs by creating uncertainty about the America’s commitment to a cleaner energy future. It’s precisely the wrong approach to take in solving today’s most pressing environmental and economic problems.

Sen. Murkowski is trying to have it both ways on climate science – on the one hand saying she doesn’t deny global warming, and on the other trying to reject the EPA’s scientific climate findings. Sen. Murkowski says she prefers a legislative solution for climate change and we encourage her to focus on finding that solution. In the meantime, we urge her to stop attacking the EPA and the Clean Air Act, which are the best tools we currently have to begin addressing climate change.

Pat was also interviewed on Anchorage TV station KTUU.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski has faced a wave of negative publicity in the last week over her planned assault on Environmental Protection Agency of global warming pollution under the Clean Air Act. Scrutiny has especially focused on her contributions from electric utilities and Big Oil — Sen. Murkowski is among Congress’ biggest recipients of polluter cash.

But as soon as today, she may move forward with her attempt to gut the Clean Air Act anyway — and it’s not too late to ask your Senators to say no.

Today, a coalition of groups in Alaska are planning a news conference to unveil a new television ad asking Murkowski to put Alaska first. The groups include the National Wildlife Federation Action Fund, the Alaska Public Interest Research Group, and Republicans for Environmental Protection. Here’s the ad:

<br

“Given the threats Alaska faces due to global warming, it’s mystifying that Sen. Murkowski would be fighting to open a new carbon pollution loophole in the Clean Air Act while working closely with lobbyists from outside Alaska,” said Sue Brown, executive director of the National Wildlife Federation Action Fund.

Friends of the Earth Action is also airing radio ads targeting Sen. Murkwoski, accusing her of being “more interested in working for Washington lobbyists and special interest than she is in protecting Alaskans’ way of life.” Meanwhile, Clean Energy Works has launched NoDirtyAirAct.com to bring the attacks — and the polluters behind them — to light.

The New York Times called on Sen. Murkowski yesterday to drop her planned “mischief”:

Senator Lisa Murkowski’s home state of Alaska is ever so slowly melting away, courtesy of a warming planet. Yet few elected officials seem more determined than she to throw sand in the Obama administration’s efforts to do something about climate change.

And today, the Washington Post is asking Sen. Murkowski to back off:

Instead of accepting [EPA regulation] as a prod toward useful action, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) apparently wants to disarm the administration.

Despite all this, Sen. Murkowski’s spokesman continues to dismiss conservationists as a “special interest” and says the assault on the Clean Air Act will go on as planned. Please contact your Senators right now and ask them to help stop this polluter-backed attack on America’s citizens, wildlife and natural resources.

<pPhoto via Flickr’s YoungAlaskans