One the surface I like how it sounds.
Who doesnt want clean air & water,protection for our forests and wetlands!!!
KERRY: Wrong on the Environment
"John Kerry missed the vote on Healthy Forests legislation and denounces the bill as a “giveaway to big timber companies.” Healthy Forests passed Congress by overwhelming bipartisan margins. The Senate version of HFRA passed on October 30, 2003 by a vote of 80 to 14, garnering 30 Democrats in support. The House version passed on May 20, 2003 by a vote of 256 to 170, with 42 Democrats voting in favor.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) characterized Healthy Forests legislation this way: “This legislation is not a logging bill, as some would typify it--I think falsely. This legislation would allow the brush to be cleaned out and it would also provide the first statutory protection for old-growth stands and large trees ever in the history of this Nation. I have heard people fault it, saying it is not this and it is not that--but it is, and no one has submitted legislation prior to our doing so in this particular area.”
John Kerry says he supports renewable energy but refuses to take a position on a proposed wind farm near Cape Cod, Massachusetts. “Five miles off the coast of Cape Cod lies an inexhaustible source of energy. By harnessing this wind energy, we can meet three-quarters of the power needs of the Cape, protect our environment, and secure our future.” [Cape Wind Associates Website] “I don’t think it is appropriate for me (to weigh in). I think it is most appropriate thing to do is listen to the people of on the Cape, listen to the people who have concerns, weigh the arguments,” Kerry said. [Kevin Landrigan, “Kerry Offers Ways to Fight Pollution, The Telegraph [Nashua, N.H.] 4/23/03]
John Kerry criticizes President Bush for rejecting the Kyoto Treaty, suggesting that the U.S. should ratify it. According to Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates, the Kyoto Protocol would destroy 2.4 million jobs and cost the U.S. economy $400 billion annually. Dr. James Hansen of NASA has found that Kyoto would have an insignificant impact on global climate.
John Kerry opposes President Bush’s environmentally responsible reforms to the burdensome New Source Review program (NSR). New Source Review reform is supported by mayors, governors, unions, and officials from state and local governments. According to Howard Gruenspecht of Resources for the Future: “Environmentalists are crying foul, saying that the Clean Air Act's New Source Review program is the cornerstone of meaningful environmental regulation. But these critics are wrong on their own terms. The New Source Review retards environmental progress and wastes resources. To assure sustainable environmental progress, NSR should be replaced with effective and efficient policies.” (“A Level Playing Field on Pollution at Power Plants,” by Howard Gruensphecht and Robert Stavins, January 26, 2002 in the Boston Globe)
"He's probably use all the same methods Dubya is using."?????????
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
U.S. Rep. McInnis To Kerry/Edwards: Where Have You Been?
["“Kerry/Edwards Forest Plan is Simply Political Pandering to the West”
Washington, DC – U.S. Rep Scott McInnis, author of the bipartisan Healthy Forests Restoration Act, issued the following statement regarding the Kerry/Edwards forest plan announced today:
“The announcement of a new forest plan by the Kerry/Edwards campaign for the west’s ailing forests is embarrassingly late and offers little if any new and constructive ideas to address the growing wildfire crisis.
“This sudden introduction of a forest management plan, said McInnis, should not be interpreted as a commitment to the health of our forests but rather seen for what it is: A year late and a dollar short. It is simply a veiled attempt to build support among western voters who have many reasons to question Kerry’s and Edwards’ commitment to the region’s values.
“Somehow Senators Kerry and Edwards have managed to sleep through the last several years of dialogue and achievement in the area of community wildfire protection. Their plan proposes forest management methods that are essentially already in place, first incorporated in the National Fire Plan in 2002 and culminating with the passage of the Healthy Forests Act last year; a bill that Kerry and Edwards vehemently opposed. Either they want credit for years of work that’s already been done, or they don’t know it occurred. Either way this reflects poorly on their forest and environmental credentials.
“While much work still needs to be done, significant progress has been made, particularly in the areas proposed in the Kerry/Edwards forest plan---which begs the question: Where was Kerry and Edwards? Where was their concern for the west when we debated this on the House and Senate floors? It took months of negotiations and considerable support from many of Mr. Kerry’s and Edwards’ Democratic colleagues to address this crisis. I can tell you as the act’s author, I could have used their support for the bills provisions, while pushing it through the Congress.
“By offering up a hollow shell of my Healthy Forests Restoration Act, Kerry and Edwards are trying to play both ends against the middle. First, their plan is an attempt to revert to the days of excessive environmental studies and frivolous litigation which prevents addressing hazardous fire conditions until it’s too late. At the same time, the plan also panders to western voters who clearly want action taken for the protection of their homes and families.
“The fact is when the west needed their votes and support most, they simply were not there. This is political pandering at its finest, and I doubt that many western voters are going to take a proposal seriously from two senators whose major western forests experience comes from their Gulfstreams at 30,000 feet.” "]
