BS: Environmental Action needed in USA

Subject: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: katlaughing
Date: 29 Jul 01 - 07:35 PM

US Mudcatters: please consider contacting your congressperson about the following. I have a friend who works for the Wilderness Society, which this came from. Thank you, kat

__________________________________________________________

July 20, 2001

The House Resources Committee has approved energy legislation that would mandate oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; give Big Oil companies billions of dollars in relief from royalties they would otherwise owe American taxpayers; and threaten energy development on most other federal public lands, like Wildlife Refuges and National Forests. Next stop is the full House.

Take action today at http://www.wilderness.org/takeaction/?step=2&item=529 or tell your Representative that ripping up the Arctic Refuge while ripping off taxpayers will do nothing to solve our energy problems.

WHAT A RIP-OFF

Demonstrating that it is radically out of step with the majority of the American people, the House Resources Committee approved H.R. 2436, the Energy Security Act, introduced by the committee's chairman, Rep. Jim Hansen (R-1/UT). The vote paves the way for the full House to consider the bill, which is expected as soon as next week.

"This bill will rip up some of America's most outstanding wildlands while ripping off American taxpayers," said Jim Waltman, Wilderness Society Director of Refuges and Wildlife.

Among others, Rep. Hansen's legislation would:

- *Mandate* oil and gas drilling in the biological heart of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge -- the 1.5 million-acres coastal plain. It's hard to imagine a more inappropriate place to drill for oil.

- Require the Interior Secretary to inventory "all federal lands," except national parks and wilderness areas, for coal, geothermal, wind, and solar energy. That means all National Monuments, National Wildlife Refuges, Wild & Scenic Rivers, National Forest Roadless Areas, BLM Wilderness Study Areas and Areas Of Critical Environmental Concern, National Conservation Areas, and units of the National Trail System would be open to energy production.

- Require suspension of royalties for certain offshore oil and gas leases, handing Big Oil companies a way out of billions of dollars of royalties they would normally have to pay American taxpayers.

- Requires the Departments of Interior and Agriculture to determine what regulations stand in the way of energy development on public lands.

- Limits the ability of the BLM and Forest Service to require environmental safeguards for oil and gas drilling on public lands.

- Disallows the Forest Service from restricting certain areas of National Forests from oil and gas development.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

Much of the discussion of energy production from federal lands appears to be driven by the perception that abundant resources have been "locked-up" or put off limits, to the detriment of the country's energy future. "This is a myth that should not drive the energy policy debate," stated Waltman. In fact, the vast majority of federal lands already are open to energy production. Significant efforts were made in the last few years to enhance, where appropriate, oil and gas production on these lands even in the face of falling prices. Important new areas were opened and are being leased.

SECRET ENERGY TASK FORCE

Meanwhile, Vice-President Cheney continues to refuse divulging who his secret energy task force met while preparing the Administration's energy policy. Even the General Accounting Office (GAO), Congress's auditing arm, is demanding that he disclose details, something the GAO has never had to ask a Vice-President before. Cheney has admitted meeting with energy executives but won't reveal who. If Cheney refuses to do so, the GAO could go to court.

TAKE ACTION

Please contact your Representative as soon as possible -- the full House is expected to vote on Rep. Hansen's energy bill as soon as next week. Send a message from http://www.wilderness.org/takeaction/?step=2&item=529 or contact them directly with this message:

- OPPOSE Rep. Hansen's Energy Security Act, HR 2436, because it would:

- Mandate oil drilling in America's last frontier, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

- Give Big Oil companies billions of dollars in royalties owed the American people.

- Open up what much of what is left of our public wildlands to energy development. It has to stop somewhere.

Send your message to: Rep. ________ U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515 [phone] Look up your Representative at http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html

Founded in 1935, The Wilderness Society works to protect America's wilderness and to develop a nation-wide network of wild lands through public education, scientific analysis and advocacy. Our goal is to ensure that future generations will enjoy the clean air and water, wildlife, beauty and opportunities for recreation and renewal that pristine forests, rivers, deserts and mountains provide. To take action on behalf of wildlands today, visit our website at http://www.wilderness.org

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 12:20 PM

They are voting, today, on Bush's so-called environmental plan which, among other things, will open the Alaskan wilderness to oil drilling.

PLEASE CONSIDER PHONING YOUR CONGRESSPEOPLE, TODAY.

LET THEM KNOW HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT, PLEASE!!

Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 01:25 PM

Good on yer, Kat. Hope you whip up some support. There you all are - floodwaters one direction, forest fires another, and Jim Hansen comes along and spots a way to fuck things up quicker. That catalogue of actions reads almost like a spoof - frightening to think the guy's for real.

Those disinclined to protest might like to read the first section of John McPhee's classic on Alaska, Coming into the Country (or at least click the blue clicky),and then see if they are still content to do nothing.

Subject: Bush To Remove Toxic Petroleum From Parks
From: Mark Clark
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 02:04 PM

Thanks for this thread Kat. I hope it does some good.

      - Mark


In case Catters missed this piece...

Bush Vows To Remove Toxic Petroleum From National Parks

WASHINGTON, DC — Vowing to "restore the pristine splendor of America's natural treasures," President Bush Monday unveiled "Project: National Parks Clean-Up," an ambitious program to remove all toxic petrochemical deposits from national parks by 2004. "Places like Yellowstone and Yosemite were once pure, unspoiled wilderness," Bush said at a White House press conference. "But over the course of the past 10 million years, we have allowed them to become polluted with toxic fossil-fuel deposits, turning a blind eye to the steady build-up of vast quantities of dangerous pollutants. It's time to end this terrible neglect."

Continued Bush: "A comprehensive survey of our parks, conducted by a team of top geologists specially commissioned by me, has discovered giant pockets of petroleum, coal, and other 'fossil poisons' beneath an alarming 38 percent of our national parks' surface area. Though a majority of these poisons are buried under several million tons of rock strata, should they ever seep to the surface and spread into the surrounding areas, they would spell disaster for the parks' precious ecosystems."

To underscore the severity of the crisis, Bush produced a chart illustrating survey results for Yellowstone National Park, where a "staggeringly huge" toxic-petroleum deposit was discovered. "This amount represents the equivalent of 40,000 supertankers worth of oil," said Bush, gesturing toward a line on the chart. "To put the dangers into perspective, consider this: If these 'petro-poisons' should ever spill out into the park itself, the resulting environmental disaster would be 40,000 times worse than the damage caused by the wreck of the Exxon Valdez."

"We cannot allow such a thing to happen," Bush said. "We must remove this oil now, before it's too late."

Under the Bush plan, 7.2 billion tons of toxic petroleum would be removed by the target date of January 2004. Unlike other federal environmental clean-up initiatives, administration officials say the plan would pay for itself, offsetting costs through the sale of petroleum byproducts produced as a result of the clean-up process. The clean-up, EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman said, may even prove profitable, a prospect that has attracted the participation of private industry. Already, many U.S. companies have expressed interest in lending assistance, and it is hoped that these companies will carry out much, or perhaps all, of the clean-up effort.

Though "Project: National Parks Clean-Up" represents Bush's first major environmental initiative since taking office, supporters are quick to point that he has been a longtime champion of petroleum removal. "As governor of Texas, Bush fought tirelessly to protect the state's subterranean environment through a series of massive petrochemical-deposit clean-up projects," Secretary of the Interior Gale A. Norton said. "Under his governorship, more tons of petroleum-based subterranean environmental contaminants were removed in Texas than in all the national Superfund clean-up sites combined. The Democrats talk a good game about the importance of cleaning up the environment, but when it comes to actually eliminating the threat of enormous oil deposits lurking under the surface of our nation, no one can hold a candle to George W. Bush."

Thus far, reaction has been mixed. Some have said it is unrealistic for the president to try to remove so much petroleum so quickly. Others, such as Sen. Bob Smith (R-NH), have charged that the president is caving in to pressure from environmentalists, arguing that the government's energies would be better directed toward improving the military. But despite such criticism, Bush stressed that the urgency of removing the oil deposits should take precedence over everything else. "Nothing is more important than the legacy we leave future generations," Bush said. "The costs of this project pale in comparison to the importance of safeguarding our planet's ecosystem. Our primary mission must be to protect and foster our nation's most precious natural resource: oil. I mean, the environment."

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 02:27 PM

Interesting, Mark. I am very sceptical of him, though. Kind of like hoping we won't see what the right hand is doing, if we're watching the left hand doing good.

Thanks, Fionn.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: Peter T.
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 02:29 PM

Very funny, Mark. Where does it come from?
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: Mark Clark
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 10:01 PM

Kat, I'm shocked (shocked I say) to learn that you are suspicious of Governor George "the Usurper" Putch, President per curiam of the U.S. of A. You must be one of those trouble makers we hear so much about.

Peter, I think it came from a political discussion forum but I'm not sure. It was sent to me via email. I looked around the Net some trying to find a site that had published it but came up empty handed.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 11:00 PM

Mark, that's brilliant! I love it! (kat, I hope you got it by now!)

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 11:04 PM

Oh, man, I just checked that link. Now there's a puddle under my chair.....

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 11:05 PM

Duh...I am a little slow, today, guys. SmartypantsMClark!**BG**

Oh, yes, moi? Moi, a troublemaker, why whatevah gayuv yew thet ideeah?

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 11:15 PM

Ohmygawd, that is sacrilege! I'm glad Bill Gaines isn't here to see the maligning of Alfred E.!! Talk about shocked!!**BG**

BTW, didn't any of you jokers check the second link I put in? How do you feel about being surveiled all of the time? Too paranoid, well, it doesn't sound as though it would be too far away. One can already go on the internet and look at someone's backyard via satellite!

katthetroublebrewer

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: thosp
Date: 01 Aug 01 - 11:49 PM

thanks for the post Kat! very funny Mark!

as far as the majority is concerned -- Cheney/Bush got their 5 votes - seems like a mandate to me

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: katlaughing
Date: 02 Aug 01 - 01:52 AM

That was only the House, though, right? Doesn't it still have to go to the Senate?

Here's another little convenient mistake for the Shrub's Fantasy Island which he is fast constructing; some voting records in Florida have been erased!

Files erased in Florida, damaging election review

By Geoff Dougherty
Tribune staff reporter
Published August 1, 2001

Five months ago elections officials in Palm Beach County, Fla., turned their attention from last year's controversial presidential balloting to the spring election for dozens of municipal offices.

As they prepared for the new election, they wiped out computer files showing how each ballot was punched in the presidential election, removing that information from the public domain even as scholars and journalists continue to analyze the results of Florida's presidential voting. The data is especially important because Palm Beach was one of the key counties in the five-week recount process that ultimately sent President Bush to the White House.

The files were the only computerized record of the way the county's tabulating machines registered each ballot last November. The punch card ballots themselves were not destroyed but cannot be accurately recounted because they have been extensively handled and possibly damaged since Election Day.

The erasure is an unexpected blow to advocates of election reform because of the data's historical value. By wiping out the records, the elections staff also may have violated Florida's strict rules against destroying public records.

"Whether or not it's in violation of the law is sort of irrelevant," said Alison Steele, a St. Petersburg, Fla., lawyer who specializes in media issues. "This is terribly foolhardy. This was certainly the closest election in modern history. It's important for historians to study it, and for us to study it and find out what went wrong."

The missing files came to light when the Tribune filed a request for copies of them.

Media organizations and academics have used the files to examine voter behavior, including the impact of the so-called butterfly ballot that may have led some voters to mistakenly select Pat Buchanan instead of Democratic nominee Al Gore. Palm Beach County also had an unusually high rate of spoiled ballots in the election.

Gore won the county by 116,000 votes. Democrats had hoped the recount there and in a few other Democratic counties with widespread voting problems would have turned up enough votes for Gore to give him the state and the presidency.

Although the files were copied and distributed to some media organizations before they were deleted, it's not clear whether they will be made available to the public.

Jeff Darter, information technology manager in Election Supervisor Theresa LePore's office, said the files were deleted so they wouldn't be confused with files from the March municipal election.

`They're just not there'

"We have no problem giving them to you," he said Tuesday. "They're just not there. If we had realized someone might have wanted to have them, we would have backed them up. Hindsight is 20/20."

LePore said the files had never been requested for review until the 2000 election. They could only be read by using a new computer program written after the election.

In the past, the files were "not something that we could retrieve and be able to read," said LePore. "We never thought of saving them."

Last month, The New York Times reported that Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris may have violated the public-records law in a similar fashion. The newspaper said Harris had allowed two top Republican strategists to use state computers while writing a statement about her policy on accepting absentee ballots from overseas.

Democrats believed Harris, a Republican, had authorized a lenient policy that would favor Bush, the Times said. Harris refused to provide copies of all the documents on those computers, and said some of them may have been erased.

Since then she has hired a data specialist to see if the files can be recovered, and agreed to allow an expert retained by a group of newspapers to inspect the computer.

Florida law bars government officials from destroying public records and specifies criminal punishment for those who do so intentionally.

Steele said evaluating LePore's actions would involve determining whether the deleted files are covered by the law. In routine usage, computers generate dozens of files that cannot be read by most software and are of little or no value. Those are not considered public record. The same goes for inconsequential phone messages and Post-it notes.

But another 1st Amendment lawyer, Sam Terilli of Miami, said the issue was not complicated.

"The bottom line is that Palm Beach County created an electronic record of the punch card," he said. "That record included valuable public information which is not available from another source. And Palm Beach County destroyed that record. The law does not allow agencies to destroy public records. It's that simple."

Even though officials meant to delete the records, Terilli said, it's unlikely the criminal provisions of the law would apply.

"I doubt any prosecutor would take on this case," he said. "But that doesn't excuse what they did and it doesn't make it right."

Few people even knew about the files until last November, and the state election supervisors' group never has discussed policies on archiving them. But some officials said it was clear to them that they had to save the files.

"I can't imagine deleting them," said Pam Iorio, the election supervisor in Hillsborough County, where Tampa is located.

"We try to hold on to records for as long as possible. Anything having to do with this election, I will not get rid of."

Loss likely to grow

Susan MacManus, a political science professor at the University of South Florida, said the magnitude of the loss is likely to grow in coming years.

"Those files will always be of interest because of the close election and because the media recounts have differed in their results," she said. "There's always someone who will want to go back and look at the data."

That the missing files were from Palm Beach County, site of some of the most significant voting problems, was not lost on MacManus.

"Maybe," she joked, "they were trying to erase a bad memory."

Copyright © 2001, Chicago Tribune

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: Mark Clark
Date: 06 Aug 01 - 01:19 AM

Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Environmental Action needed in USA
From: kendall
Date: 06 Aug 01 - 08:38 AM

The state of Maine has many things to be thankful for. Two of them are Tom Allen and John Baldacci in the House of Reps. in Washington. We only have two reps. to congress and they are both Democrats, and very much opposed to this rip off.