In The News
Krugman and Climate Change
Tuesday April 5, 2005
ANWR
Tuesday March 22, 2005
EPA Mercury Regulations
Thursday March 17, 2005
Highway Bill and Congestion
Wednesday March 16, 2005
Highway Bill and Jobs
Monday March 14, 2005
FACT: According to DOT estimates, every $1 billion of federal funds invested in highway improvements creates 47,000 jobs. The same $1 billion investment yields $500 million in new orders for the manufacturing sector and $500 million spread throughout other sectors of the economy. Unfortunately, there are serious consequences if Congress further delays the process. State contract awards for the 2005 spring and summer construction season are going out to bid. If Congress fails to pass a bill soon, states will not know what to expect in federal funding and the uncertainty will potentially force states to delay putting these projects out to bid. According to a study done by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, an estimated 90,000 jobs are at stake nationwide. This problem is even more serious for northern-tier states that have shorter construction seasons. In many states, transportation departments have advanced state dollars to construct projects eligible for federal-funding in anticipation of action by Congress to increase those funding levels. Without a new bill, states are holding the bag until Congress acts.
Republicans Give, Democrats Give Up
Thursday March 10, 2005
FACT: While Clear Skies supporters reached out, listened, and made significant changes, Democrats simply voted NO. On February 16th (four weeks ago) Inhofe, Voinovich and Senator Kit Bond circulated a manager’s amendment offering major changes based on concerns raised by the opposition and stakeholders. On March 2 they amended the package further. The manager’s amendment includes: Tightening the phase 2 deadlines for all 3 pollutants to 2016, creating an EPA regulatory program to eliminate the risk of mercury hotspots, addressing carbon in a credible way by creating a pool of allowances worth more than $650 million to promote IGCC technology, and tightening numerous provisions to further reduce pollution, increase monitoring and eliminate potential loopholes. It now appears the Tribune was wrong, Republicans gave a lot, but the significant progress of Clear Skies may well be lost because Democrats did nothing but vote no.
Bashing Bush Bad for Environment, Good for Fundraising
Wednesday March 9, 2005
FACT: The escalating hostile political rhetoric of the leadership of today’s so called “environmental groups” reveals a truly disturbing problem. The obsessive abhorrence of President George W. Bush takes precedence over environmental progress. While Kennedy claims the “environmental message” never reached the American voter; it seems more likely the American voter rejected the “environmental groups” extreme liberal rhetoric. Consider rather, these special interest groups while losing the election, learned extreme political rhetoric results in substantial financial contributions. Of the top 527 groups in the Presidential election, League of Conservation Voters and Sierra Club ranked near the top. According to opensecrets.org, the League of Conservation Voters established "Environmental Victory Project,” and according to the website, “will focus on four states where the presidential vote was close in 2000.” In total, the LCV 527 group raised $6,049,500 for these four battle-ground states. The Sierra Club raised even more money, a sum total of $9,574,827.00. The description of the Sierra Club 527 group states on the website, “It is coordinating with another 527 organization, America Votes, to “register, educate and mobilize the public for the 2004 elections.” Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope speaking of the 2004 election told an online environmental journal, "Of course our strategies will evolve in the next four years ... but it was the most sophisticated, well-funded, and determined effort by this community to sway a presidential election to date," "Not only that, it worked." Not too long ago, a vote against campaign finance reform was a vote against the environment -- according to the League of Conservations Voters scorecard, but now LCV President Deb Callahan understanding the financial gain seems to indicate these groups have changed their minds and will be opposing further campaign finance reform measures targeting 527 groups in the future.
Clear Skies and CAIR
Tuesday March 8, 2005
So why the change of heart? Simple, litigation, litigation, litigation. David Whitman in his article Party Sunny writes “CAIR, however, is significantly more vulnerable to court challenges than Clear Skies would have been (it is easier to bring a challenge to regulations than to enacted law) and will undoubtedly be held up, not unlike the Clinton administration's 1997 air quality standards.” Darren Samuelsohn, E&E Daily senior reporter agrees writing, “Litigation over CAIR is almost certain to be filed from various stakeholder groups, from environmentalists bound to view the final plan as weak and industry groups who may feel it parcels out emissions credits unfairly.” A Washington Post article from today clinches the environmental litigation strategy stating, “Environmental groups are so disenchanted with the trading proposal that they have stopped fighting it -- they want the agency to issue the rule in order to fight it in court.”
FACT: Signing Clear Skies legislation into law provides greater certainty than implementing Clean Air Interstate Rule. Furthermore, Clear Skies proposes to put in place an integrated set of emissions control requirements with coordinated compliance deadlines. It avoids piecemeal implementation of multiple emissions control obligations and is essential if electric power generators are to achieve compliance in the most economically efficient manner possible. Among other things, coordinating the compliance deadlines for all three air pollutants (SO2, NOx and Hg) will promote economic efficiency, including enabling many companies to meet a substantial portion of Hg emission reduction obligations through the co-benefits achieved by installing pollution controls to reduce SO2 and NOx (scrubbers and SCRs).