Senator Kerry states that he would not have gone after Saddam had he been in power
There, now that the sentence is complete, it makes sense.
Here is a description of what is wrong with the bush administration’s “healthy” forests initiative (HFI):
The initiative is based on the false assumption that landscape-wide logging will decrease forest fires. This premise is contradicted by the general scientific consensus, which has found that logging can increase fire risk. This disconnect between what the administration says and what science says about logging and fire reveals the administration’s true goal which is to use the forest fire issue to cut the public out of the public lands management decision making process and to give logging companies virtually free access to National Forests. The HFI, if fully enacted, would:
1. Limit environmental analysis and limit public participation by (a) excluding environmental analysis for any site-specific project the Forest Service and BLM claim will reduce hazardous fuels, including post-fire salvage projects; and by (b) limiting public participation by allowing “hazardous fuels reduction projects” to be categorically excluded and suspends citizen’s rights to appeal projects.
2. Accelerate aggressive “thinning” across millions of acres of backcountry forests miles away from communities at risk to forest fires.
3. Uses ‘Goods for services’ as the Funding Mechanism by (a) allowing the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to give away trees to logging companies as payment for any management activity, including logging on public lands; and (b) creating a powerful new incentive to log large fire-resistant trees, old growth, and other commercially valuable forests.
HFI is what I was referring to by EO2504, part of another page I had copied was on the page I was using to cut&paste real quick.