10 things to know about the ‘God Squad': How it impacts Hawaiʻi
The Endangered Species Committee, colloquially known as the 'God Squad' was created by Congress in 1978 as amendments to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973.
The Associated Press reported that the President of the United States intends to utilize the God Squad to initiate deforestation of national protected lands. So, KHON2.com did a bit of digging and found these 10 facts to know about the God Squad:Members: The committee includes high-level government officials, such as:
The Secretary of Agriculture.
The Secretary of the Army.
The Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality.
The Administrator of the EPA.
The Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
One appointed representative from each affected state.
What it does: The Endangered Species Committee's purpose is to review special requests to allow actions that might harm endangered and/or indigenous species, even if the ESA protects them.
How it decides: Decisions require that at least five members of the committee must agree that:
There are no other good options to avoid harming the species if there is a significant amount of money to made.
The financial benefits of the action are greater than the harm to the species.
The action is important financially for the country or region.
No one broke the rules by harming the species before approval was given.
Helping the species: If an exemption is granted, the group responsible must help the species by protecting its habitat, moving animals or doing other conservation work.
Permanent exemptions: Once a species is granted an exemption, the order remains in effect unless one or both of the following occur:
A new species is found to be in danger.
The Secretary of Defense decides a species needs to have its exemption negated for reasons of national security.
Public involvement: The committee has the ability to:
Involve the public by asking for people to send in written opinions.
The committee can also hold public meetings in which people can share their thoughts, data, cultural information, etc….
Meetings and voting: There must be at least five members of the committee present for a meeting to take place and only government-based committee members can vote while the state representatives must all share a single vote. However, these meetings are open to the public.
Special powers: The committee has the power to do enact the following:
They can ask federal agencies for information that will help with their decision(s).
They can require witnesses to testify if needed.
The committee members can make rules to help the committee do its job.
History: Over the years since its creation, the God Squad has rarely met. As a matter of fact, they have only met a few times in the last 47 years of the committee's existence.
Exemption authority: The committee has the power to allow a project to continue despite harming an endangered species but only under strict conditions.
You can click to learn more about the EPA. You can click to read the legislation that created the God Squad. You can click to read the Associated Press article.
The God Squad has never dealt with an issue that is specifically related to Hawaiʻi. But we do have four national parks/forests:
Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park.
Haleakalā National Park.
Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park.
Ka'ūpūlehu National Forest.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was established during Richard Nixon's presidency in 1970.
Following this in 1973, Congress created the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
It was believed that our ecosystems provide 'esthetic, ecological, educational, recreational and scientific value to our nation and its people.'
This act was created to protect North American indigenous plants and animals that were/are at risk of extinction due to deforestation and other destructive environmental endeavors.
Get news on the go with KHON 2GO, KHON's morning podcast, every morning at 8
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, who oversee land and freshwater animals, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, who oversee sea animals like Hawaiʻi's monk seals and honu (turtles), work to fulfill the mission of the ESA.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fact Check: Viral Stimulus Check Claims for Summer Are False, IRS Will Not Send New Checks This Summer
The federal government has confirmed that it will not be issuing new stimulus checks this summer, debunking circulating online rumors. What Happened: On Friday, the internet was abuzz with rumors that the U.S. government was planning to distribute stimulus checks to certain income brackets in the near future. However, the IRS has clarified that no such legislation has been passed by Congress, and therefore, no new stimulus checks will be issued in the upcoming weeks, reports the Associated Press. Claims that the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department had approved $1,390 stimulus checks for low- and middle-income taxpayers by the end of the summer were also debunked by the IRS. As per the repot, an IRS official stated that this claim is false and no new stimulus checks will be distributed this summer. Earlier this year, the IRS had announced plans to distribute about $2.4 billion to taxpayers who failed to claim a Recovery Rebate Credit on their 2021 tax returns. However, the IRS official confirmed there is no new credit that taxpayers can claim. Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri had introduced a bill in July proposing tax rebates to qualified taxpayers using revenue from tariffs instituted by President Donald Trump. However, this bill has not been passed by either the Senate or the House. Also Read: Public Opinion Divided Over Donald Trump's Tax-And-Spending Law, New Poll Reveals Earlier this year, the IRS announced that it would distribute $2.4 billion to taxpayers who failed to claim on their 2021 tax returns a Recovery Rebate Credit, a refundable credit for individuals who did not receive one or more COVID-19 stimulus checks. The maximum amount was $1,400 per individual. Individuals who had not yet filed their 2021 tax return were required to do so by April 15 in order to claim the credit. According to an IRS official, no new credit is currently available for taxpayers to claim, reports the outlet. Previous stimulus payments were made possible only through legislation passed by Congress. For instance, the relief checks issued during the COVID-19 pandemic were authorized under three major laws: the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the COVID-Related Tax Relief Act, and the American Rescue Plan Act. Why It Matters: The rumors of new stimulus checks had sparked hope among many taxpayers who are still grappling with the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic. The clarification from the IRS, however, has put these hopes to rest. The absence of new stimulus checks could potentially impact consumer spending, which is a key driver of the U.S. economy. The proposed bill by Senator Hawley, if passed, could provide some relief to taxpayers, but its future remains uncertain. Read Next Independent Voters' Approval Rating Of Donald Trump Plummets, Latest Poll Indicates Image: Shutterstock/Alex Millauer Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Fact Check: Viral Stimulus Check Claims for Summer Are False, IRS Will Not Send New Checks This Summer originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Sign in to access your portfolio
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Upset about DC's lack of voting rights? Look to the Democrats.
The deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C. has led to a media and political meltdown. In the New York Times, a column lamented that the military had not revolted against the civilian president. Even, so, commentators declared a ' coup ' because the federal government reasserted its constitutional power over the federal district. A Justice Department employee went so far as to scream profanities at federal officers on the street and assault one of them with a submarine sandwich. He was declared a 'freedom fighter' against 'the Gestapo.' The utter lunacy of the left was again triggered by Trump with an almost Pavlovian predictability. Trump rang the bell, and suddenly thousands of Democratic leaders began to salivate. In addition to denying a very real crime crisis in the district, Democrats immediately pivoted on the issue to renew unpopular demands for D.C. statehood. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, insisted that this was only happening because 'American citizens lack the protections of statehood.' Ankit Jain echoed that view. Jain occupies a farcical position as 'D.C. shadow senator,' an unpaid position in which he pretends to be a member of the U.S. Senate. Jain wrote that 'it's entirely possible that people will die as a result' of the deployment. He insisted that this would not occur in states where democracy governs: 'We may not have it in Washington, but if you live in any of the other 50 states, you do.' Over the years, I have testified five times in the House and Senate to argue for the restoration of full representation for residents in Washington, D.C. Residents could have a governor, two real U.S. senators, a voting representative in the House, a state legislature, and every other trapping of statehood. It needs only to go back whence it came. D.C. needs to return to Maryland through 'retrocession.' In academic writings, I have advocated for what I called ' modified retrocession ' where Maryland would take back the land given initially to create what was called 'the federal city.' The Framers did not want the capital under the control of any state, so they created the federal enclave to be under the control of Congress as a whole. Originally, the outlines of the federal city were laid out by none other than George Washington as the surveyor. It was a diamond shape, with territory ceded by both Virginia and Maryland. Within a few decades, Virginians in what is now Arlington County and Alexandria came to regret not having direct representatives and were allowed to retrocede back to their state. That left the triangle of territory from Maryland. However, Marylanders did not agree with their Virginian counterparts. They liked living in the federal enclave and decided to remain without direct representation. Congress previously allowed retrocession and could do so again. Under my prior proposal, the federal enclave would be reduced to the small sliver of land upon which our Capitol, Supreme Court, and the White House rest. It would finally give every Washington resident full representation. Also, in a city notoriously mismanaged for years, D.C. residents would be part of a state that excels in areas like education that could materially improve their positions. So if the lack of representation is so intolerable, why wouldn't Washington return to Maryland? It would give every Washington resident a voting representative in the U.S. House, two senators, a governor in a sovereign state, and a state legislature. The reason is politics at its most cynical and hypocritical. Democrats only want two senators representing D.C. if it boosts their numbers. It's not good enough to give them Maryland's senators. What's more, Maryland Democrats will not suffer a shift in the center of their state's political gravity from Baltimore to Washington. Finally, D.C. Democratic leaders are not eager to share power with Maryland Democrats, as they might gain all the trappings of a state. This is why, for decades, Democrats have settled to leave D.C. voters without direct representation in Congress. They decided it is better to lament the lack of representation on license plates than to give residents such representation through retrocession of the residential sections of D.C. to Maryland. Polling shows that most Americans still oppose statehood for this one city — a Vatican-like city-state. That is why Democrats are not keen on attempting a new constitutional amendment to change the status of the city. They would rather bewail the lack of direct representation while, ironically, trying to achieve effective statehood without a direct vote of citizens on a constitutional amendment. The fact is, Trump has every right to deploy the National Guard in Washington and to take over the D.C. police. Those are entirely lawful and constitutional orders. Yet the New York Times appears to have changed its position on the danger of insurrection. The Times recently ran a bizarre column by former Obama officials Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson, ' We Used to Think the Military Would Stand Up to Trump. We Were Wrong.' They complain that 'it now seems clear to us that the military will not rescue Americans from Mr. Trump's misuse of the nation's military capabilities.' The 'rescue' would have meant military personnel disobeying a direct order from the commander-in-chief because they disagreed with the need for the deployment. In fairness to the New York Times, that is not exactly an insurrection — it is more of a mutiny. What is striking about this debate is how entirely untethered it is from anything that touches upon reality. Statehood remains easily attainable for Washington, if Democrats would only stop opposing retrocession. Meanwhile, the deployment is clearly constitutional, regardless of how many columns or submarine sandwiches you throw about in another furious fit. The only thing that is clear is that Washington residents are again being played. They remain political props left stateless because returning them to full representation is not politically advantageous. They are given make-believe 'shadow senators' and protest license plates rather than restoring their prior status. As with the debate over crime, few want to discuss how to solve this problem. Given the opposition of the Democrats, Trump should take the lead and order federal officials to develop a blueprint for retrocession. He should use his office to fully inform the American people, and particularly D.C. residents, of the benefits of returning to Maryland.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Bill and Hillary Clinton Hid ‘the True Nature' of Their Friendship With Jeffrey Epstein ‘For Years'
In a virtually unprecedented development, former President Bill Clinton and his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, will be forced to testify before Congress about their relationship with sex peddler Jeffrey Epstein, per New York Post. The Clintons, who were subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee, have downplayed their friendship with the now-dead pedophile, who was convicted in 2008 on prostitution charges related to him having sex with a 14-year-old girl. Yet records show Epstein visited the White House a whopping 17 times during the former commander in chief's first term — sometimes twice in one day, per The Palm Beach Post. Epstein was suspiciously found dead in his New York City jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial for allegedly trafficking underage girls to rich and powerful men. 'It is shocking for individuals who have occupied the highest level of public service to be called to testify about their connection to a man who conducted such depraved activities,' says presidential historian Leon Wagener, who has authored four books on the Clintons. The well-connected couple was summoned along with nearly a dozen former federal officials and politicians, including ex-FBI directors James Comey and Robert Mueller. The move comes after Epstein's convicted madam, Ghislaine Maxwell, was grilled for nine hours by the Department of Justice about her late boss' activities. Maxwell reportedly answered questions about '100 different people' with Epstein associations, according to her attorney Oscar David Markus, who is seeking full immunity for the caged madam for her slated testimony for the committee. Despite a Clinton spokesman insisting in 2019 that the ex-president knew 'nothing' of Epstein's sleazy activities, Bill reportedly flew on the moneyman's private jet, known as the Lolita Express, no less than 17 times from 2002 to 2003 — and 26 times overall. The former POTUS owned up to six meetings with Epstein in 2002 and was captured in photos chatting with girls aboard the disgraced billionaire's plane. Bill also spent nine days with the financier in Africa in 2002, a tour that included Chauntae Davies, then 21, who later testified that she was raped by Epstein. In the same year, Clinton gushed to New York magazine through a spokesperson that 'Jeffrey' was a 'committed philanthropist.' Reps for the ex-president later claimed Bill cut off contact with Epstein in 2005. Yet, Maxwell was photographed at the 2010 wedding of Bill and Hillary's daughter, Chelsea, to investor Marc Mezvinsky, and lawmen discovered an outrageous painting of the former president dressed in a woman's gown in Epstein's New York mansion. Virginia Giuffre — one of Epstein's alleged sex slaves, who mysteriously died by suicide in April — insisted in her unpublished memoir, The Billionaire's Playboy Club, that Epstein hosted a 'big dinner party' on his Caribbean estate, known as Pedo Island, that featured Bill as the guest of honor. Clinton has vehemently denied ever being on the island. Meanwhile, Hillary received a $20,000 campaign donation from Epstein in 1999 during her successful run for Senate in New York. She's currently facing a firestorm following documented allegations that she green-lit a scheme to 'smear' her 2016 presidential opponent Donald Trump with phony claims that he was in cahoots with Russia's dictator Vladimir Putin and the country's mafia in a failed effort to sway the election. 'The Clintons have been hiding the true nature of their friendship with Epstein for decades,' says Wagener. 'This could ruin not only their political and business futures — but mar their legacies forever.' Solve the daily Crossword
