At DNR, Stepp Embraces Emergency Rule-Making, But Had Called It "DEMOCRAT...HYPOCRISY"

I'd posted several recent items - - here and here - - about the contradictions between Cathy Stepp's behavior as DNR Secretary and the words she wrote in a partisan, anti-DNR screed she posted in 2009 when Democrats ran state government.

Well, here's another example.

In that 2009 rant, Stepp blasted the use of DNR emergency-rule making authority as: "Just another example of the democrats game plan: Change the Rules to Fit the Players," yet the DNR under Stepp is promulgating a wolf hunt under fast-tracked, public-input-free, emergency rule-making.

As Midwest Environmental Associates attorney Jodi Habush noted in testimony before the Natural Resources Board on Wednesday:

May 23, 2012 Statement of Jodi Habush Sinykin
Before the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board Regarding
Act 169’s Statement of Scope—Wolf Hunting and Trapping Regulations

While I have been tracking this law since its first rushed introduction in the weeks following delisting, I didn’t fully appreciate, until quite recently, the extent and depth of concern raised by the prospect of a rushed, ecologically-unsound wolf hunting and trapping season in Wisconsin. I share this concern....
 
At present, the DNR is to be called upon to draft “emergency rules” for the law, a curious, unsubstantiated designation that will serve to eliminate customary Wisconsin rule-making procedures—i.e. there will be no state-wide hearings and no opportunity for expert stakeholder input into the emergency rules being written up for final approval in less than 8 weeks time. This departure from established Wisconsin rulemaking protocol is especially worrisome to the core group of UW academics and renown wolf experts I have been working with, as they fear that the law—if poorly regulated—will seriously and unnecessarily jeopardize the species.

So match that up with Stepp's 2009 rant that included this blast at emergency rule-making by the DNR:

Those of you that haven't had the pleasure of peeking behind the scenes of our state agencies like DNR, Health and Family Services, etc...need to know how some of the most far-reaching policies come down on our heads.

The most crushing/controversial rules that businesses have to follow in our state are--most times--done through the "rule making process" of our state agencies. Without bogging everyone down with some really boring procedure talk, suffice it to say that many of these great ideas (sarcasm) come from deep inside the agencies and tend to be reflections of that agency's culture...

When an agency sees an urgent need--example would be Chronic Wasting Disease management plans--they're allowed to implement an Emergency Rule. Understandable, since these ideas get an urgent run through the Joint Committee to Review Administrative Rules (affectionately known as JCRAR) without much public notice or scrutiny. The process is there to address emergencies ONLY.

Well, sometimes agencies try to use this process as an end-around the legislative process to implement Rules, which end up having the same affect as Laws. (Those of you who have piers in lakes or culverts at the end of your driveways have probaby experienced these Rules.)

Why should this scare you? When (not if, I said WHEN) they give this authority to the DNR there will be more of a whooshing sound as businesses run for the borders...

Just another example of the democrats game plan: Change the Rules to Fit the Players.

Shout it with me, now: HYPOCRISY, THY NAME IS DEMOCRAT.

So when Democrats use this authority, it a source of outrage, fear and name-calling. But when Stepp and the GOP use the authority - - and rule-making generally has been further consolidated out of the public view in Gov. Walker's office since 2011 - -  it's what? Business as usual?

Situationally meritorious?

One expert even predicts that the way the DNR is going about establishing the hunt will lead to court action and landing wolves in Wisconsin back on a federal, no-hunt list.

By the way, here is the full text of Stepp's screed, typos, bad diction, warts and all :

Those of you that haven't had the pleasure of peeking behind the scenes of our state agencies like DNR, Health and Family Services, etc...need to know how some of the most far-reaching policies come down on our heads.

The most crushing/controversial rules that businesses have to follow in our state are--most times--done through the "rule making process" of our state agencies. Without bogging everyone down with some really boring procedure talk, suffice it to say that many of these great ideas (sarcasm) come from deep inside the agencies and tend to be reflections of that agency's culture.

For example, people who go to work for the DNR's land, waste, and water bureaus tend to be anti-development, anti-transportation, and pro-garter snakes, karner blue butterflies, etc...This is in their nature; their make-up and DNA. So, since they're unelected bureaucrats who have only their cubicle walls to bounce ideas off of, they tend to come up with some pretty outrageous stuff that those of us in the real world have to contend with.

I could go on and on with examples of some of the most ridiculous stuff I've seen come down the pike, (no pun intended), but for the purposes of this post, I am going to pull out a quote from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau's summary report on the outcome of the "budget negotiations" that legislative democrats had with each other. (Note: I said with "each other." There were no republican ideas or motions accepted AT ALL during the Conference Committee process. No surprise there.)

When an agency sees an urgent need--example would be Chronic Wasting Disease management plans--they're allowed to implement an Emergency Rule. Understandable, since these ideas get an urgent run through the Joint Committee to Review Administrative Rules (affectionately known as JCRAR) without much public notice or scrutiny. The process is there to address emergencies ONLY.

Well, sometimes agencies try to use this process as an end-around the legislative process to implement Rules, which end up having the same affect as Laws. (Those of you who have piers in lakes or culverts at the end of your driveways have probaby experienced these Rules.)

Why should this scare you? When (not if, I said WHEN) they give this authority to the DNR there will be more of a whooshing sound as businesses run for the borders.

It's always the fine print in these things that have the heaviest hit.

Just another example of the democrats game plan: Change the Rules to Fit the Players.

Shout it with me, now: HYPOCRISY, THY NAME IS DEMOCRAT.