Archive for the ‘League of Conservation Voters’ Category

LCV’s Operation Spotlight; Exposing the Influence of Dirty Money in Congress

Monday, December 10th, 2007

I was looking on the Internet for websites to find out how our political candidates stand on the environment. Fortunately, I received my League of Conservation Voters newsletter in the mail today. The LCV has a new Presidential Candidate Profiles Website. It has the most comprehensive analysis of the candidate’s positions on global warming, energy, and how they’ve voted in the past. It also has Operation: Spotlight. Real interesting. The objective of the LCV is to target 14 states with a total of 159 electoral votes to elect environmentally friendly legislators in those states.

Unfortunately, Michigan is on the list of the 14 states that need a change in order to be environmentally up-to-par. I say unfortunately because we are surrounded by the world’s 2nd largest freshwater supply, and we can clearly see the fight for freshwater is in America’s future after this summer’s droughts. While our current legislators work to get a multi-state compact signed to keep our water here where it belongs, we have a Republican Senate that is not too terribly friendly to the environment. So we fight to keep freshwater here, and then do nothing to stop the industry pollution that threatens it? No sense to it at all. I know we have the Great Lakes Legacy cleanup thing going. You know where they dumped all the dredged up toxic sludge from the first project? Right near my house near Pt. Mouille game reserve, various protected wetlands, and another DNR game reserve all on the banks of Lake Erie again. It’s all just getting moved around. 

As far as our federal congress, a small group of Republican Senators has already blocked the House’s new energy bill. The LCV sites Senator Sununu for standing “with a minority in the Senate that sided with big oil and big coal to block a measure that is good for jobs, good for the economy, good for national security, good for consumers and good for the planet.” The power behind the lobby of big polluters is a force to be reckoned with. The LCV website is very informative as to who and who isn’t being bought by big energy, oil, lumber, coal, etc. According to the LCV, among the top candidates who are up for re-election or looking to move to the senate and receiving massive contributions by polluters to stop any progress forward to protect our earth, our health, and the lives of everything on the planet:

  • Heather Wilson (NM)            835,512
  • James Inhofe     (OK)             636,965
  • Pete Domenici   (NM)            567,928
  • Steve Pearce     (NM)             547,415
  • Arlen Specter    (PA)              546,303

What’s up with New Mexico? I know it has plenty of open land. It’s a shame its legislators are being backed by dirty money, by that the LCV means polluter’s money, because New Mexico has a lot of open space. It could be an ideal place for solar or possibly geothermal energy. And it is one of 5 states fed by one river threatened by global warming.  Three people on that list will vote against the environment. Where’s the sense? If New Mexico runs out of water, watch them eyeball Michigan. It’s irresponsible. Add up that column above and it totals $3,134,123.00 to keep polluting. And it’s very early yet. Imagine the contribution total by November, 2008. It’s a sad statement considering the same money could be invested in alternative energy sources creating a win win situation no matter how the future progesses. 

 Check out more of “Operation: Spotlight, exposing the influence of dirty money in Congress” on the LCV website. This is valuable info. Politicians have scorecards for their voting history for specific environmental bills year by year. If you’re concerned about the environment, it is essential to know the candidates.  This is a must see checklist for doing your homework before elections: http://www.lcv.org/      

 http://www.lcv.org/OperationSpotlight/home.html                

The Declaration of Independence, Patriotism, and the Environment

Wednesday, July 4th, 2007

Want to be a real patriot on the 4th of July? As independent citizens we celebrate our right to decide the direction of our country through elected representatives. So one of the most patriotic acts any American citizen can perform, outside of being a soldier, is to let our reps know what we think about anything and everything relative to the environment and “going green.” Take the time to e-mail them that we want to proceed with “going green” in Michigan by creating a brand new economy that is bursting-at-the-seams to happen. Our reps need a push, as there are many bills before them in our state’s congress. The number one bill HB 4667 and SB 444 to impose a moratorium on new and expanding animal factories or CAFO’s needs to pass!

I know I repeat, but for a state with the largest freshwater supply, with so many inland lakes that feed into that water, people looking to move up north in Michigan to enjoy the nature and peace, Michiganders cannot afford to let our natural resources take a back seat to pollution. The economy and moving ahead to “going green” go hand in hand. Advance one advance the other. Mother Nature counts and outside of ending the war, preventing terrorism, the environment should be at the top of our list.  A little reminder, as proof nature counts, and to coincide with this 4th of July celebration, 2007, here is  the opening paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, 1776:

“When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

This beginning to a powerful document that is the essence of this country clearly states “the powers of the earth … the Laws of Nature … of Nature’s God.” There is no denying the respect for nature here, and as being one with God. As patriots we need to see that this respect for nature continues and direct our reps to follow our wishes. The beginning paragraph to the Declaration also addresses “the opinions of mankind” and that mankind “should declare the causes which impel them.” Pollution is a cause which should impel all of us to protect and respect nature always.
.
If we can put the flags and banners up, and shoot off fireworks, fireworks, and more fireworks to celebrate what this country is all about, freedom to speak, to affect change, to have a part in the decisions of our country, than we can surely drop our reps a single e-mail. There are all types of issues both federal and state that are important to the environment that are being cut beyond reason. The war funds are coming from somewhere, and all of the loans are not from China so cuts are deep.

The League of Conservation Voters newsletter said that special interests in Washington—Big Coal, Big Auto, Big Oil—have pushed for new provisions to be included in the most recent House Energy legislation that takes back the Supreme Court’s ruling that the EPA has the authority to regulate global warming pollution. It will block 12 states or more from adopting clean car standards. It also lowers the auto mileage standards that Bush proposes. The Supreme Court ruled on this already. It was a victory for the environment.  But already the opposition has plans to repeal it. It looks to me more like the federal government seeks to take power away from the states.

In our state of Michigan there is a partisan stranglehold about policy to make up for the huge deficit. In the course of cutting back spending, “funding for natural resource protection has already been cut to the bone, which means a severe decrease in environmental law enforcement” as the Sierra Club reports. After reading the opening paragraph to our Declaration of Independence and comparing it to what is happening in our own state, makes me wonder what country we’re in?
 

Operation Spotlight

Friday, June 29th, 2007

Operation Spotlight is a new move by the League of Conservation Voters to expose the politicians who accept the most money from special interest groups (lobbyists). It’s a timely program, since congress has a new bill in front of them now, to limit lobbyist donations. This bill to restrict lobbyists may or may not pass in Congress. Regardless, the LCV hopes to defeat the candidates that do the bidding of rich lobby groups through Operation Spotlight. What a good name for the program. What do you think about lobbyists? Remember there are lobbyists that want good things like more research and funding for children’s diseases, humane organizations for animals. Lobbyists are not all bad. Do we want to get rid of all of them, or some of them, or put restrictions on what is allowed?

LCV plans to let senators and reps know that Operation Spotlight will be paying attention to who contributes what, to whose campaign, relative to blocking efforts to curb global warming, and allowing pollution to continue. They will publish the information. This is a good thing. The first Operation Spotlight report will be out in the coming weeks. But LCV has been keeping track all along, and I was a little surprised at the figures from 2006. The big contributors against efforts to help the environment are:

       Electric utilities, which donated $15 million;
       Oil and coal industries that padded coffers with $21 million;
       Transportation, such as car companies, that offered up almost $40 million.

Over all, since the 2000 election corporate polluters contributed $586 million dollars to candidates in congress! That’s some mighty big opposition to going green. My biggest surprise was the contribution by car companies. Aren’t they supposed to be in financial trouble ? No wonder we can’t come up with cars that get more than 35 miles per gallon. Fuel efficiency like that gets put off until 2020. Thirteen years is a pretty steep wait, considering we are supposed to get moving in the next 10 years to try to squelch some of the bad weather and rising waters that are already turning up. It was clearly stated, at least I got it, that even though we act quickly; we are still going to see some pretty bad stuff. And I don’t know about you, but I don’t wanna.