Cuomo's Cheney-Style "Transparency" on Fracking | Food & Water Watch
Victory! Farm Bureau case challenging EPA’s right to share factory farm data dismissed. more wins »


You're reading Smorgasbord from Food & Water Watch.

If you'd like to send us a note about a blog entry or anything else, please use this contact form. To get involved, sign up to volunteer or follow the take action link above.

Blog Categories

Blog archives

Stay Informed

Sign up for email to learn how you can protect food and water in your community.

   Please leave this field empty

October 31st, 2011

Cuomo’s Cheney-Style “Transparency” on Fracking

By Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director at Food & Water Watch

[Originally published by Huffington Post]

Since his first day in office, Governor Andrew Cuomo has touted his goal of open and transparent leadership. His inaugural act, Executive Order No. 1, even proclaimed, “It is essential to the maintenance of a democratic society that the government perform its business in an open and public manner.” But in the time since that Order brought down the concrete barriers that had prevented access to the state Capitol, Cuomo has erected a much more damaging barricade to public access on a critical issue: fracking.

Less than a year later, Governor Cuomo’s 18-member fracking advisory panel sits in secret. It’s during closed door sessions that essential decisions about the state’s future are being negotiated by a handful of people, many of them strongly self-interested and industry-biased. And the vast majority of New York’s residents that will bear the harmful brunt of that decision-making will never know what environmental and community health sacrifices are being offered in the false name of economic prosperity and industry profit. We’re looking at shades of Dick Cheney’s energy policy all over again, this time under a Democratic state administration that ironically proclaimed open government a top priority a short ten months ago.

Cheney’s twisted legacy in the fracking arena unfortunately extends beyond the secrecy approach adopted by Cuomo’s fracking panel; the ex-Vice President also led the fight to make fracking exempt from key protections in federal environmental and public health laws like the Safe Drinking Water Act, and made sure that the industry didn’t need to disclose its long list of cancerous poisons it pumps into the earth every day of its irresponsible gas extraction activities. Fracking is one of the most critical issues facing New York, and the oil and gas industry’s history of operating in the dark is now being replicated by the Cuomo administration.

Despite the secrecy, it’s clear that Cuomo’s fracking panel exists solely to provide cover for the Governor when, not if, he announces that New York is opening the floodgates to fracking. Cuomo’s Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Commissioner, Joseph Martens, who refused to place a single anti-fracking grassroots activist on the panel despite appointing industry representatives, has already announced that “high-volume hydrofracking can be undertaken safely.” The panel’s stated goals are not to assess if fracking might do more harm to our state than good, but rather to provide input on proper oversight and revenue streams based on DEC reports, which have not been released to the public.

Last year, the New York State legislature did the right thing when it passed a temporary moratorium on fracking. But fracking could commence when the final DEC environmental impact study is issued, likely early next year. The draft study, which Cuomo is expected to approve, recommends banning fracking in New York City’s watershed while opening up large parts of the rest of the state to fracking. Trading away the health and safety of upstate New Yorkers is not leadership; it’s a political calculation designed to appease the heavily Democratic voting block of Cuomo’s urban base, even though residents of New York City may not be aware that they, too, would be affected by the air pollution, risks to food, and continued threats to water that fracking would bring.

There are signs that Cuomo is looking to trade elsewhere in order to get fracking up and running. In his recently launched online “town hall” chat website, Cuomo stated, “There is no doubt that we need replacement power if we are to close Indian Point [nuclear power plant].” Is he laying the groundwork for the day when he tells New Yorkers that they’ve got a choice between poisoned drinking water and nuclear meltdown, and he’s picking the former?

Governor Cuomo, the growing movement against fracking will not accept this tired “two bad choices” trick.

There is, of course, a third choice. Ban fracking, as the New Jersey legislature did before its own governor vetoed the ban last summer. If the industry cannot extract natural gas without poisoning our water, without exemptions from federal water protections, and without full, public disclosure of the toxins being injected into our drinking water systems, then they have no right to reap immense profits off the compromised health and safety of our communities. Anything less is a betrayal.

3 Comments on Cuomo’s Cheney-Style “Transparency” on Fracking

  1. Judith A Cartisano says:

    Something odd happened at the beginning of this. The DEC was supposed to have issued 6 subpoenas to various fracking companies per the NY Daily News. By the next day a report in the NY Times said 5 companies. I have been trying to find out about that 6th company for some time now. I’ve asked about this during calls to both the Governor’s office and the DEC. There is speculation that the 6th company is Halliburton. I say this based on a e-mail I received from a Sierra Club lobbyist in Albany who also believed Halliburton to be the 6th company. If this is so, then here is yet another example of underhandedness and deceit. If this company is involved we need to know it. I they are not involved, then so be it.

  2. Jim Egged says:

    On October 13th and 14th, I had a very interesting experience at the University of Michigan Ross School of Business involving a speaker’s panel I was asked to be on about hydraulic fracturing. On this panel were 4 people representing different aspects of this issue. There was a man from DTE Energy, a geologist from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, a natural gas contractor who works with companies that do this drilling and of course me. The Net Impact Organization, who is a group of mostly graduate students at business schools across the country, put this panel together. Their purpose is to create a business climate where sustainability and profit work cooperatively to protect the environment. The contractor was from Oklahoma and was “Skyped” in, the rest of us showed up at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. We got together for a pre-discussion conference call on October 13th to set up the parameters of the discussion the next day. We only had a little over an hour so we had to keep the discussion restricted to the drilling itself and not about any of the ancillary environmental impacts of this industry. When I e-mailed my presentation to the industry contractor, he contacted the organizer said he didn’t want to participate if he was going to put on the spot so to speak. I had to call him smooth his ruffled feathers and keep my presentation to the areas of major concern. Then he said he would participate. He was first, I went third, he touted the all the environmental precautions and the companies he represented were just the most upstanding of corporate citizens. I then brought up the concerns and finally the DTE Energy guy spoke and supported the environmental concerns, as did the geologists, although in Michigan some of this process is limited because state laws do not allow certain methods, like the use of a retention pond. In any case when the students had their chance to question us they really hammered on the environmental impact what is being done to insure the safety and health of the neighbors and habitats. The industry guy did not stay long, he answered one or two questions and had to leave for some other obligation. The three of us stayed answered the rest of the questions and for the most part got the information across to these very interested young people that this is not the way to go.

  3. Rita Humphries says:

    The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor is right at the heart of our beautiful Great Lakes region ~ and Upstate New York. Areas that are rich in people who love the land. All the info you can give every day people here about their rights to protect their homes and cottages wil be well received.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *