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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (23434)	7/10/1998 6:57:00 PM
From: Grainne	Respond to of 108807

Duncan, Lungren is anti-abortion, supports nasty stuff like offshore oil drilling and nuclear waste, and is very, very hazy about just how he evaded getting drafted. Very curious, since his dad was President Nixon's personal physician. It will be an interesting and well-covered race, especially since it has aroused Gloria Steinem's interest. He is a typical conservative Republican, who represents the interests of the ideological right and big business. Where are you guys all going to live after the earth has been turned into a polluted sewer which cannot sustain life? Or are you unconcerned because it the effects will be experienced mostly by your children and grandchildren rather than yourselves? sfgate.com sfgate.com sfgate.com Lungren's environmental record: Odious LARRY FAHN June 23, 1998 AS THE 1998 gubernatorial campaign begins in earnest, citizens should know something about the environmental record of Dan Lungren, anointed as the Republican Party's nominee for governor. Lungren - after a stint in the state Assembly, four terms as a congressman from Long Beach and eight years as California's attorney general - is no friend of our natural heritage. He's been missing in action when it comes to environmental protection. Best known for his repeated advocacy for increasing oil drilling off California's priceless coast, Rep. Lungren voted in 1982 to permit mining and oil drilling, including using explosives, in designated wilderness areas (HR 6542, Aug. 12, 1982). That same year, he joined the timber industry in opposing a modest Oregon wilderness bill (HR 7340, Aug. 11, 1982). A proclaimed advocate of state's rights, Lungren voted against a bill (HR 5203, Aug. 1, 1982) to restore the ability of states to regulate pesticides and herbicides. He opposed legislation to restrict dumping of plastics and other synthetic material into our oceans and would not support legislation to study and deal with or control the problem of acid rain. He voted repeatedly against family planning assistance to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities. Lungren co-sponsored a bill with Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge - our nation's largest and most pristine wildlife habitat, the U.S. version of the Serengeti - for exploitation by oil and gas drillers. He opposed the California Wilderness Act (HR 143, Sept. 12, 1984) and the Columbia Gorge Protection Act, a compromise bill to protect and enhance resources of the magnificent gorge in the Pacific Northwest (HR 5705, Oct. 16, 1986). In January 1987, Lungren voted to oppose a bill to reauthorize the Clean Water Act, one of this nation's most effective pieces of legislation to protect our children and families from water pollution. He voted against the Safe Drinking Water Act and Superfund. He opposed strengthening the Clean Air Act. Lungren's record as attorney general, California's chief officer for the enforcement of the state's environmental laws and regulations, is equally deplorable. He has often let his hostility toward environmental protection interfere with his constitutional duty to represent state agencies, his clients. In one well-known case from Marin County, Lungren sided with wealthy Seadrift property owners and refused to represent the state Coastal Commission in its effort to enforce the public's constitutional right of access to a two-mile stretch of Stinson Beach. In another case, local governments attempted to provide for more stringent regulation of harmful pesticides. Lungren was missing in action and at odds with most of the states and the federal government when he took the position that such laws should be pre-empted by federal law. That view was unanimously repudiated by the U.S. Supreme Curt. His anti-environmental stance in that case prompted the Sacramento Bee to label him a "friend of the chemical industry." In 1991, Lungren was the only one of 50 attorneys general to object to federal legislation requiring military bases to comply with the state environmental law. Apart from Proposition 65 enforcement, which was mandated by voter initiative, the number of environmental enforcement actions brought by Lungren's office has plummeted more than 80 percent from that of his predecessor, John Van De Kamp, a Democrat. Republicans should have considered more closely the wisdom of nominating for governor an individual who is so extremely out of touch with the vast majority of Califoria citizens on such important issues affecting their health and safety and the quality of life of their families. Should this record become widely known, they face a defeat of major proportions come November. Examiner contributor Larry Fahn, who practices law in San Francisco, is chairman of the Sierra Club California Political Committee. c1998 San Francisco Examiner Page A 17 sfgate.com