The American Legislative Exchange Council's (ALEC) Economic Impact Statement Act is a telling example of its approach to environment-related legislation. Little wonder that most of the big corporations behind ALEC would love to see this one on the books: it would require state agencies to produce detailed "economic impact statements" for all existing and proposed environmental regulations. ALEC says the draft bill has been designed "to provide environmental protection while permitting the creation of wealth through requiring an economic analysis of new environmental regulations." In truth, the proposed legislation seems little more than a perversion of the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act, which mandates environmental impact statements for significant federal government actions. Environmental activists have long used the landmark federal law to promote the public interest by halting or delaying potentially destructive projects; now, through ALEC's "model" legislation, corporate special interests aim to turn the tables at the state level. Although ALEC's self-described mission is to limit government, here's a case where it conveniently puts aside its principles. Agencies or other arms of state governments, after all, would have to generate all those economic impact statements required under its "model" legislation. The New Mexico Fish and Game Department has estimated, for example, that it would need twenty additional employees, at a cost of $1.5 million a year, to get the job done. In 2003, Economic Impact Statement bills were introduced in Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Texas. In a time when state budgets are suffering and programs are being cut back, states should not add another layer of bureaucracy to the important task of protecting our environment.