Of Course Tim Fox Shills for Coal, He’s a Montana Politician
In a post that could have been more developed, the Cowgirl takes a little jab at Montana AG, Tim Fox, in a piece titled Has Montana’s Attorney General Privatized His Own Job?
The crux of the piece is that a private law firm—Orrick, Harrington & Sutcliffe LLC—submitted comments regarding an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Fox’s behalf.
The Cowgirl’s post doesn’t really get into what this EIS is all about. It’s about coal. More specifically, it’s about the “proper” EIS scope for a proposed coal export terminal in Washington State.
I can understand why the Cowgirl wouldn’t want to get too much into that whole coal thing, considering our former Governor was such an irresponsible cheerleader for coal, but that’s what this is about. I wrote a post about this last month when Missoula city councilman, Adam Hertz, went on a brief liberal shame campaign for coal.
For more context on this current coal development, I found this article from the Bellingham Herald:
Former Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna, now practicing law in the Seattle office of the multi-national Orrick law firm, has prepared formal comments for the states of Montana and North Dakota, challenging Washington state’s constitutional right to require a sweeping environmental review of coal export terminal impacts.
“The States (Montana and North Dakota) strongly believe that such regulatory decisions are outside the scope of Washington’s authority under the U.S. Constitution, and improperly burden international commerce,” the McKenna-authored comments say.
Those comments were submitted to state, Cowlitz County and federal regulators now conducting the scoping process for Millenium Bulk Terminals in Longview, Wash.
In remarks issued on his official web page, Montana Attorney General Tim Fox elaborated:
“As one of the most trade-dependent states in the nation, Washington knows full well the importance of access to global markets. Montana is simply asking that Washington regulators follow established law in conducting their reviews,” Attorney General Fox said.
The formal comments submitted by Montana and North Dakota say the Washington Department of Ecology was wrong to mandate a sweeping review of the Gateway Pacific Terminal project in Whatcom County, and Ecology should refrain from doing the same thing in Longview.
The comments were submitted on McKenna’s Orrick letterhead, over his signature.
Here’s what McKenna wrote about Cherry Point, on behalf of his clients:
“Ecology’s EIS scope for the Cherry Point project is unrealistically broad, includes speculative impacts, requires impossible assessments of foreign environmental impacts, and appears to have been designed to hinder the development of that terminal.”
Interesting. I wonder what Steve Bullock thinks about all this.
And I wonder how many more disasters we will watch before we finally understand this can’t go on.