Armed Forces ] Civil Rights ] Economy ] Education ] Election 2000 ] [ Environment ] Foreign Relations ] Health Care ] Iraq War Reasoning ] Oil Pipeline ] Sep 11 ] Terrorism (1) ] Terrorism (2) ] Ties to Bin Laden ]

  • Weakened Fuel Efficiency Standards
  • April 25, 2002 Amendment to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 that would prohibit the fuel efficiency standards for pickup trucks from ever being raised above the current 20.7 miles per gallon.

     

  • Tried to get rid of 90% of the wildlife refuge in the U.S.

    The U.S Fish & Wildlife Service website says "Congress has designated 75 wilderness areas on 63 units of the National Wildlife Refuge System in 26 states. Over 90 per cent — or 18.6 million acres — of Refuge System wilderness is in Alaska. The remaining 2.5 million wilderness acres are in the lower 48 states."  That means that 90% of our refuge area would be destroyed by opening ANWR to drilling.

    Wildlands threatened by this administration:

    1. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska
    2. Grand Staircase - Escalante National Monument, Utah
    3. Rocky Mountain Front, Montana
    4. Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument, Montana
    5. Red Desert, Wyoming
    6. California Coastal National Monument, California
    7. Carrizo Plains National Monument, California
    8. Little Missouri National Grasslands, North Dakota
    9. Otero Mesa, New Mexico
    10. Vermillion Basin, Colorado
    11. Book Cliffs, Utah
    12. Bridger-Teton National Forest, Wyoming
    13. Hanford Reach National Monument, Washington
    14. Canyons of the Ancients National Monument, Colorado
    15. Ironwood Forest National Monument, Arizona
    16. Crown Point, New Mexico
    17. Kaibab National Forest, Arizona
    18. Valle Vidal/Carson National Forest, New Mexico
    19. San Juan National Forest, Colorado
    20. Weatherman Draw, Montana

    Now, since I am personally from the four corners area of Colorado (the junction of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona) you can see why I take this really seriously.  The San Juan National Forest was like my childhood playground.

    Every organization that deals with the outdoors from Greenpeace to Ducks Unlimited has blasted the Bush administration on this as well as the "Forest Initiative".  See the article "Conservative Sportsmen Turn Against Bush" Published on Wednesday, January 28, 2004 by USA TODAY

     

  • (Destroy the) Healthy Forests Initiative

    The health-by-logging approach reveals the wide separation between two opposing views concerning the best use of U.S. forests. The administration, seeing the forests as a source of extractive wealth, presses for more logging and road-building in wilderness areas. Its strategists appear determined to mute or override the provision of the 1976 National Forest Management Act requiring that forest plans "provide for the diversity of plant and animal communities."

    The economic argument for increased road-building and logging is unfounded. It is contradicted by the U.S. Forest Service's own measure of forests' contributions to the nation's economy. Of the $35 billion yielded in 1999 (the last year for which a comprehensive accounting was published), 77.8 percent came from recreation, fish and wildlife, only 13.7 percent from timber harvest, and the modest remainder from mining and ranching. Roughly the same disproportion existed in the percentages of the 822,000 jobs generated by national forests

     

  • Cutting Funding for National Renewable Energy Laboratory

    Immediately after taking office, the first budget approved by G.W. Bush cut the funding for NREL by over 35% from $373M to $237M.  [Department of Energy Website]

     

  • Clear (the) Skies (of birds) Initiative

    The Clear Skies legislation sets new targets for emissions of sulfur dioxide, mercury, and nitrogen oxides from U.S. power plants. But these targets are weaker than those that would be put in place if the Bush administration simply implemented and enforced the existing law! Compared to current law, the Clear Skies plan would allow three times more toxic mercury emissions, 50 percent more sulfur emissions, and hundreds of thousands more tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides. It would also delay cleaning up this pollution by up to a decade compared to current law and force residents of heavily-polluted areas to wait years longer for clean air compared to the existing Clean Air Act.