Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ish who wrote (635147)	9/29/2004 8:23:06 PM
From: JBTFD	Respond to of 769670

You are listening to what he says, not watching what he does. Ethanol— February 20, 2004 Auto Mileage Standards Up in Smoke, Again Sending a February Valentine to the auto industry, President Bush has extended for another four years a policy that enables carmakers to build less fuel-efficient vehicles while pretending to conserve oil. The auto manufacturers have been more than happy to exploit the loophole, much as they skirt CAFE standards (requiring a minimum number of miles per gallon) by pretending that gas-guzzling SUVs and minivans are light trucks. In effect since the late 1980s, the rule permits auto companies to manufacture cars that can run on either gasoline or ethanol. To burn ethanol, cars must be fitted with corrosion-resistant fuel lines and tanks, modified fuel injectors, special fuel sensors, and other features.[1] The cost of the modifications per vehicle comes to about $300, an expense paid by the auto companies, not consumers.[2] GM, Ford, and the other manufacturers are handsomely rewarded, however. By manufacturing these "dual-fueled vehicles" they get credits toward meeting CAFE standards for their entire fleet. In effect, the credits enable them reduce fuel economy for the millions of other cars they sell. If the policy worked as intended, this might possibly be a net plus for the environment, since the policy was designed to encourage the use of ethanol over oil (experts are divided on the relative merits of ethanol). But the dual-fueled vehicles, while capable of running on ethanol, rarely do. Less than one percent of the fuel burned by the three million dual-fueled vehicles on the road is ethanol.[3] In most places, running a car on ethanol is simply impractical. There are only 180 ethanol refueling stations in the entire country, and 24 states have no refueling stations at all.[4] The policy has become merely a device enabling the automakers to dodge laws designed to require them to build cars that get better mileage. The Bush Administration's extension of the dual fuel loophole, according to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE), means the U.S. will consume an extra 40-110 million barrels of oil from 2005-2008.[5] "It's like putting an extra half-million new cars on the road each year," said Therese Langer, director of ACEEE's Transportation Program. "This move helps to ensure that our reliance on oil imports will continue to rise." bushgreenwatch.org

To: Ish who wrote (635147)	9/29/2004 8:32:32 PM
From: JBTFD	Respond to of 769670

Bush and coal mining: Bush Administration Approves Most Damaging Change to Clean Water Act in Decades Allows Waste Dumps in Streams Nationwide May 3rd, 2002 Contact Info: Ken Goldman 202.667.4500 x 233 Joan Mulhern 202.667.4500 x 223; 202-329-1552 (mobile) Print-Friendly Version Washington, DC-- The Bush administration today finalized changes to Clean Water Act regulations that would for the first time in 25 years allow the US Army Corps of Engineers to permit waste to fill and destroy the nation’s waters. In an attempt to appease the coal mining industry and in a rush to avoid additional Congressional and public scrutiny, EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman signed the rule change. “It says something when an administration takes an action like this late on a Friday -- that they hope no one sees it," said Joan Mulhern, senior legislative counsel for Earthjustice. "This is a ‘Friday Night Massacre’ for our nation's waters and it’s the biggest threat to our nation’s waters in decades, perhaps since the Clean Water Act passed 30 years ago. Allowing masses of industrial wastes to be dumped in streams, lakes, rivers, and wetlands is contrary to the very purpose of the Clean Water Act and represents a major weakening of current clean water law.” EPA’s press release states this will “enhance environmental protections” for waters. “Nothing could be further from the truth,” said Mulhern. “Anyone who has ever seen what happens when a stream is buried under 900 feet of mining rubble would not conclude that this is a good thing for water quality. More than 1000 miles of streams already have been destroyed in Appalachia by the coal companies that have been flouting the Clean Water Act for years while the EPA and the Corps looked the other way.” “Now that citizens have taken state and federal agencies to court to ensure our environmental laws are enforced, coal companies have sought – and been granted – legal relief from the Bush administration. Their lavish contributions to the Bush-Cheney campaign have just been paid back,” Mulhern added. In recent days, dozens of members of Congress have sent letters to President Bush highlighting their concerns about this. US Senators James Jeffords (I-VT) and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) sent a letter on Wednesday to President Bush asking him to stop immediately his administration’s efforts to overturn this important Clean Water Act rule. The Environment and Public Works Committee Chair and the Wetlands Subcommittee Chair, respectively, expressed concern that the rule change would allow industries – such as coal mining and hardrock mining companies – to fill the nation’s waters with waste material. “The proposed rule would jeopardize the health of the nation's streams, wetlands, lakes, rivers and other waters,” the Senators’ letter states. “We ask that your administration not take any further action to finalize this rulemaking, including sending it to the Office and Management and Budget for review, until the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has had an opportunity to review the effects that this rulemaking will have on the health of our nation's waterways.” “It is outrageous that the EPA ignored this request from the Senate committee that oversees the Clean Water Act and most EPA programs,” said Mulhern. On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of 57 members of the House of Representatives, led by Frank Pallone (D-NJ), sent a letter to Administrator Whitman conveying their “strong opposition” to the proposed rule. “This rule change is a clear attempt to legalize the destructive practice of mountaintop removal coal mining, where coal companies literally blow the tops off of mountains and dump the waste into nearby valleys and streams,” stated the House letter. In March, a dozen senior House Republicans led by Representative Chris Shays (R-CT) also wrote to President Bush, urging him to reconsider “this ill-advised and dangerous rulemaking” to allow waste disposal in waters. “The bipartisan opposition to this waste dumping rule has been significant and growing as Senators and Representatives have learned about the threat it poses to waters in their districts,” said Mulhern. “While this rule is being motivated by the administration’s desire to legalize the illegal waste dumping practices of the coal industry, its effects will be nationwide. Every stream, wetland, river, and lake in the country will be placed at risk of becoming a dumping ground for mining waste, construction debris, even garbage.” Copies of the Senate and House letters are available by contacting Ken Goldman. earthjustice.org

To: Ish who wrote (635147)	9/29/2004 8:35:47 PM
From: JBTFD	Respond to of 769670

Wetlands: Published on Friday, January 31, 2003 by the Los AngelesTimes War on the Wetlands Is Bush's Latest Environmental Assault His definition of 'waters' would extend a free hand to industrial polluters. by Paul Koretz and Joan Hartmann The Bush administration issues daily communiques on a seemingly inevitable war with Iraq, but beneath the radar it is engaged in an assault on the nation's environmental laws. The Kyoto treaty on global warming, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act and provisions to protect public lands have been attacked. An obscure notice in the Jan. 15 Federal Register listed the latest target, the Clean Water Act. While President Bush tries to convince the average American of his commitment to the "no net loss" wetlands policy of his father, his administration's actions show his real intentions. He is now seeking a review of how the "waters of the United States" should be defined under the Clean Water Act, the first step toward limiting the water bodies subject to federal protections. Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972 because polluted rivers were catching fire and because almost half of the wetlands in the lower 48 states had disappeared. Although the law has not yet fully accomplished its objective "to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's waters," it has resulted in vast improvements in how we protect our nonnavigable waterways. Factories have learned to limit their discharges of pollutants -- often saving money as they limit or recycle waste products -- and the pace of wetlands loss has slowed. The tourism, fishing and recreation industries also reap financial benefits because of clean water and healthy wetlands. People flock to visit water bodies and to live near them. Much wildlife depends on wetlands at some point in its life cycle. The last thing Americans need is to roll back the progress we have made in the last 30 years. Bush's excuse for seeking to redefine "waters of the U.S." derives from a 2001 decision by a sharply divided Supreme Court, which struck down the "migratory bird rule." This decision would restrict the federal government from regulating "isolated wetlands" whose only link to interstate commerce is use by migratory birds. The constitutionality of the Clean Water Act derives from the authority of Congress to make laws regarding interstate commerce. Thus, a commercial interest must be at stake for the federal government to exert its regulatory powers over water bodies. Although the court has generally set a low threshold for meeting the commerce test, the ruling erected a higher threshold in the wetlands context, holding that migratory bird use fails to meet the test. This has given the Bush administration the ammunition needed to slowly dismantle the Clean Water Act by preparing to restrict the number of wetlands entitled to protection. Without protection, polluters would be able to discharge wastes into California's water bodies without fear of federal interference. Polls have consistently shown that Americans overwhelmingly support the Clean Water Act. But while attention is riveted on the prospect of war with Iraq, the administration is waging guerrilla operations against the environment by systematically dismantling the critical provisions of the nation's decades-old, bipartisan environmental policy. This war is well underway and there will be many casualties. Is anyone paying attention? Paul Koretz is a Democratic state assemblyman representing the 42nd District, which includes West Hollywood, Beverly Hills and part of Los Angeles. Joan Hartmann, an adjunct professor with the environmental studies program at USC, is on the assemblyman's environmental advisory committee. Copyright 2003 Los Angeles Times