Monday, October 25, 2010
THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 48 - THE LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS GIVE HER A FAILING GRADE - PART 1
This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us
When I was a kid conservatives loved conservation, Teddy Roosevelt was their hero, and Republicans would have received top scores from a group like the League of Conservation Voters. The times, and Republicans, have changed.
The League of Conservation Voters (LCV) gives Lynn Jenkins a failing grade. Their scorecard on Jenkins can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:h.r.03534. Here's the summary.
1) H.R. 3534, the Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources Act of 2009. Lynn Jenkins voted "yes" on the motion to recommit, a vote to kill the bill, and "no" on passage. According to the LCV HR 3534, The Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources Act (CLEAR), would implement commonsense reforms to overhaul safety and environmental rig standards, repair our broken and corrupt oil and gas leasing processes, and hold Big Oil responsible for disasters like the catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico.
2) H.Res. 989, a resolution "Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should adopt national policies and pursue international agreements to prevent ocean acidification, to study the impacts of ocean acidification, and to address the effects of ocean acidification on marine ecosystems and coastal economies". Lynn Jenkins voted "no" on roll call 341.
The LCV position is that "while increasing carbon dioxide emissions are a key factor in global climate change, these emissions are also the cause of another crisis emerging in our oceans: acidification. As carbon dioxide enters the ocean, it combines with seawater to from carbonic acid, thereby increasing the acidity of the water and reducing the availability of compounds which are vital to the development of the shells and skeletons of a variety of marine animals. Addressing the causes and effects of ocean acidification is essential to the long term viability of ocean ecosystems. H. Res. 989 encouraged the United States to take action on this critical issue that could have long term impacts on marine ecosystems and the coastal economies. LCV strongly encouraged support for the important resolution."
3) H.R. 5019, the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act of 2010. Lynn Jenkins voted "no" on roll call 255. According to the LCV, "The Home Star Energy Retrofit Act of 2010 will significantly reduce pollution and create an estimated 168,000 clean energy jobs over the next two years. The Home Star residential retrofit program would provide rebates and incentives to consumers who invest in new energy efficient appliances, weatherize their homes, or purchase other efficient technologies for their home. Home Star would reduce energy consumption by the equivalent of three coal-fired power plants each year, if fully funded with $6 billion. In addition, through this program consumers are anticipated to save between $200 and $500 per year in energy costs, while reducing global warming pollution and improving the comfort and value of their homes."
4) H.R. 4715, the Clean Estuaries Act of 2010. Lynn Jenkins voted "no" on roll call 209. The LCV says, "Estuaries are coastal transition zones between fresh water from rivers and saline water from oceans. These unique ecosystems protect water quality and provide a buffer against erosion which protects our coastal communities during extreme weather events. Also, healthy estuaries provide recreational opportunities, essential wildlife habitat, and commercial and recreational fishing. The Clean Estuaries Act ensures that our nation's estuaries will better protect our communities and preserve wildlife habitat by:
•Requiring that estuaries in the NEP identify vulnerabilities to climate change and plan for adaptation responses
•Requiring that each approved estuary program be evaluated every four years and the results be publicly released
•Increasing federal attention to local priorities and requiring federal agencies to participate in the planning process
•Increasing the authorization for the program from $35 million to $50 million annually for fiscal years 2011 through 2016
Since estuaries are important to our public health and our wildlife, and play a major role in creating jobs and boosting local economies, no oil and gas development take place in National Estuary Program areas. This type of development would be inconsistent with goals and purpose of the NEP.
Funding and strengthening the NEP will protect the nation's estuaries from pollution, development and overuse. Protecting our nation's estuaries helps ensures clean water for our communities and a healthy environment for wildlife."