Tag Archives: Republicans

The crackpot caucus

Too bad Timothy Egan didn’t include the word “conservation” in his NY Times op-ed column of today. But no matter. He made his point in spot-on fashion. Science and Republicans? Crackpot yes, but science?

Romney’s energy plan: Drill everywhere, even in national parks

The Republican presidential wannabe is a Big friend (amigo) of Big Oil, and Big Coal, too. As this Climate Progress piece explains, the Republicrat candidate would turn drill rigs loose everywhere, even, I guess, on the lawn of the White House and the National Mall in D.C. Whatta guy.

Ocean policy protects ocean health, benefitting anglers

The Hill picked up this op-ed in response to predictable knee-jerk Republican reactions to President Obama’s ocean policy.   They really just oppose it because it’s an Obama initiative. You can read it here.

 

House signs off on horrible conservation

Read all about this legislation that purports to be favorable to “sportsmen.” Hay, any bill that’s backed by the NRA and Safari Club International is bad, just bad. My bet is this legislation was supported by, among others, Republican Louis Barletta, whose district I used to live in before moving to Vermont and Bernie Sanders’s district.

U.S. Senate bats aside GOPers’ pro-pollution add-ons to trans bill

Changing the chemistry of Earth’s oceans

That’s right, buckaroos. And guess who’s responsible: We are, of course. Just as our burning of fossil fuels, like coal, is heating up our planet (the only one we’ve got, sports fans), so is it changing the chemistry of our oceans. The result: Acidification. This editorial from the NY Times explains why we should stop burning rocks like coal and liquids like petroleum. But, of course, we won;’t because knuckleheads wield too much power over our former Democratic government. I won’t name the names here, but people who identify themselves as conservationists or environmentalists or even plain old “naturalist” know the names.

Republicans vs. environment (and a lot of other things, too)

The GOP (Greedy Old Party?), and its mouthpieces like Sarah) just can’t seem to finally realize that if a place is trashed environmentally, there is no local economy. And the same holds true for the continent – and the planet, too. This op-ed, from the Chicago media world, talks about all this. Very nicely, too.

Big Oil keeps subsidies, thanks to polluter-friendly Republicans

The Greedy Old Party is all for reducing the deficit, fighting national debt, etc., but not when it comes to the source of much of its campaign dollars. Another Republican debacle.

Polluters lose in Clean Air Act attack

Polluters Lose in Clean Air Act Attack

from Wildlife Promise

0 4/6/2011 // Joe Mendelson // Clean Air Actclimate changeCongressContinuing ResolutionEPAGlobal Warming

Today, attempts to rollback parts of the Clean Air Act that direct the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to address carbon pollution failed in the Senate.  In a game of political hide-and-seek, varying polluter interests attempted to highjack a bill (S. 493) that reauthorizes two small business innovation and technology research programs. It was a stealthy attempt to amend the bill to prevent the EPA from limiting the vast amount of carbon pollution spewing everyday from our power plants, oil refineries, and factories. Instead of a polluter payday, however, the attempted high-jacking exposed confusion among the varying interests targeting the Clean Air Act and showed that navigating how to limit air pollution is a job best left to the experts at the EPA.

Indeed, the votes showed that the Senate process of trying to forge polluter loopholes in the Clean Air Act creates nothing but a political mess. It took four different amendments to the small business bill to try and cater to the various and differing concerns. Each one failed and combined to create one big sinkhole of squabbling polluters interests.

The four failed votes put a spotlight on the separate special interests seeking their own particular version of a rollback.

  1. An amendment offered by Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) (Amendment 183) was supported by the oil industry because it would allow their refineries to continue to spew unlimited carbon pollution. It failed to get the needed 60 votes (a vote of  50 to 50) despite the oil industry’s campaign contributions, led by Koch Industries and Exxon-Mobil, totaling nearly $28M in 2010.  At $560,000 a vote, this was one expensive failure for Big Oil.
  2. A separate amendment offered by Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) (Amendment 215) was a two-year “stop work” order on the EPA’s carbon control efforts and supported by his home-state coal companies.  It failed 12 to 88.    In the 2010, campaign contributions from the coal industry topped $7.3M with Senator Rockefeller’s co-sponsor and West Virginian colleague Senator Manchin (D-WV) by far topping the list. In coughing up over $608,000 a vote, Dirty Coal fared even worse than Big Oil.
  3. Another amendment offered by Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) (Amendment 277) that sought a more nuanced form of a 2-year delay on EPA’s enforcement of carbon limits designed to help manufacturers also failed 7 to 93.  The substance of this rollback amendment was not even enough to placate the National Association of Manufactures and their $8.5M in 2010 lobbying expenditures.
  4. Finally, an amendment offered by Senator Baucus (D-MT) (Amendment 236) trying to navigate the EPA’s use of the Clean Air Acton agricultural facilities failed 7 to 93.  This loophole amendment still couldn’t garner the support of the American Farm Bureau Federation, political contributor of nearly $700K in the 2010 election cycle.  The Farm Bureau joined with the Koch Brother’sAmericans for Prosperity to seek an even broader attack on the EPA’s ability to limit carbon pollution.

Simultaneously, the Senate’s polluter compatriots in the House continued their own assault on the Clean Air Act.  Picking up where they left off in using the budget battle to gut EPA (see my previous blog here),  the House is poised to pass Congressman Upton’s H.R. 910 later tonight - a bill that even overturns the scientific finding that carbon pollution causes climate change.

As these special interest measures collided on the Senate floor and the House legislated away a scientific consensus, the public continued to look on with disgust.  A recent poll confirms that 77 percent of Americans, including 61 percent of Republicans, believe that “Congress should let the EPA do its job.” Only 18 percent believe that “Congress should block the EPA from updating pollution standards.

Luckily, thirty-four senators have actually chosen to stand up for the majority of Americans.  They have introduced a resolution (S. Res 119) supporting the economic, environmental, and public health benefits of the Clean Air Act.   And over 150 House members took a similar stand in a letter released this week. These numbers ensure that if the polluter dollars somehow are successful in an attempt to roll the Clean Air Act on either another bill or during the upcoming budget battles a Presidential veto of their dirty work would be upheld.

 

 

Joseph Mendelson III

Director of Policy, Climate and Energy Program

 

National Wildlife Federation

901 E Street NW, Suite 400

Washington, DC 20004

GOP’s austerity budget apparently gives Big Oil a free ride

GOP=Greedy Old Party. There is no other explanation except for campaign contributions and the like. Read how the Republicans don’t like the planet’s climate.