Steven Holt: “The bill before us today has many problems, but one of the most egregious and obvious is in section 3, where the bill…”

“The bill before us today has many problems, but one of the most egregious and obvious is in section 3, where the bill declares that any and all data submitted by States, tribes, or local governments shall be considered the ``best scientific data available.'' I am offering here an amendment with my friend from California (Mr. Huffman), which would strike that provision and would force Federal agencies to accept as the best available science actual science. The language in question says: The term ``best scientific and commercial data available'' includes all such data submitted by a State, tribal, or county government. The Endangered Species Act is one of our Nation's strongest and most successful environmental laws. One reason for that success is that the law has been based on scientific evaluation using peer-reviewed science by trained scientists, not the whims and ideological wishes of legislators. The Endangered Species Act is not a shouting match or a fight for power and influence among interested parties; it is a look at the need to protect endangered species as determined by the best science. This language that the best scientific and commercial data available includes all such data submitted is as preposterous as it is impractical. Where is the quality control? Now, what happens if a locality submits something that is not, in fact, true, or not, in fact, established within the scientific community?…”