Happy Earth Day!
AbelM...@webtv.net
has reversed 3 decades of laws that have increased environmental
progress. Bush has allowed corporate polluters to write the
environmental laws, and in the process he has rolled back the Clean Air
Act and the Clean Water Act. And Bush has cut the funding to States
that allowed them to control pollution from such things as storm water
runoff, agriculture and so on. The end result is that our water is less
safe to drink today than it was before Bush stole the election 3 years
ago.
The Republicans who constantly, mindlessly, and religiously defend
Bush's awful policies keep saying that we need to allow polluters to
increase their pollution so that we can have a strong economy. Well the
verdict is in, and it's obvious now. Bush's policies are never based on
the truth, we now have a weak economy, with more jos lost than any other
time in our nations's history since the Great Depression, and we also
have a more polluted country. The worst of all worlds.
Abel Malcolm
__________
From: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_0422.html
Senator John Kerry: Earth Day Address
April 22, 2003
It is great to see all the young people here today.
Are you ready to improve your environment?
Are you ready to build up our neighborhoods?
Are you ready to take your future back?
Well, that's what Earth Day is all about.
As a young man, more than thirty years ago, I helped plan the first
Earth Day here in Massachusetts. Like many, I had read Rachel
Carson's "Silent Spring" and was determined to act. It was a time in
our country when we were being awakened to the dangers posed by
chemicals and pollution. When people were getting increasingly
worried about what we were doing to our air and water. When Americans
were afraid we would lose our natural heritage forever.
In the years since that first Earth Day, many of us have committed
ourselves to the cause of a cleaner, safer, and more pristine
environment for all. Sometimes it has been two steps forward and one
step back, but America has made real progress in the past thirty
years.
We have removed lead from gasoline, reduced air pollution, reclaimed
waterways, renewed land that had been lost to toxic waste, defended and
expanded our national parks - and we have even saved our national
symbol, the bald eagle, from extinction across this nation.
But let's not kid ourselves, we have a lot more work to do. And every
day they occupy the White House, the Bush Administration is giving us
even more work to do. This President has not only refused to act, he
has set back the cause of environmental protection in ways that will do
lasting damage to America's communities and natural heritage.
First, President Bush broke a campaign promise to reduce the harmful
carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming from power
plants. Instead of enforcing the law, he's taking environmental cops
off the beat and letting power plants hundreds of miles away pollute New
England's air. Instead of renegotiating the Kyoto Treaty to improve
it, he simply repudiated it - and took a fateful step toward isolating
America in the world. He's made taxpayers instead of polluters pay
for clean ups. He's stood in the way of our efforts to make cars
cleaner and more fuel efficient. And despite all our efforts to stop
him, he continues to want to open up our most pristine and sacred
national resources to destructive development and drilling.
Under President Bush, America's environment has become threatened,
endangered, and imperiled. I'm running to make America safer,
stronger, and more secure. And we know protecting our environment is
central to that cause.
We need to strengthen environmental protection, not roll it back. We
need to strengthen the Clean Air Act and reduce mercury, sulfur,
nitrogen and carbon emissions. We need to clean up more toxic sites and
reduce the harmful chemicals being released into our air, water and
land. And we need to lead the world in reducing, not creating, the
greenhouse gases that cause global warming.
Our commitment to the environment is a compact with our children, our
grandchildren and the generations beyond. To keep clean the water
they drink, the air they breathe, the yards and parks in which they play
and laugh, and the communities in which they live.
And this commitment isn't there just for the sons and daughters of
privilege or those who live in certain neighborhoods. Our commitment
is for all of America's children and all of our people.
Some environmental challenges - like global warming - require us to act
today to prevent terrible harm from occurring in the future. But
other challenges require action because of the danger they clearly
present right now.
Sometimes it's not enough to preserve the environment. Sometimes you
have to repair it.
And nowhere is that more true than in neighborhoods like this one all
over America. Here in the Dudley Street neighborhood, there are more
than one thousand abandoned lots. Once they were the site of homes,
now they are overrun with aluminum cans, beer bottles and car tires,
used-up needles and broken-down refrigerators.
They are more than an eyesore. They are an environmental danger.
Many of these sites are contaminated with lead. It gets into the
soil. It gets into dust. And it harms our children. According
to one study, an average of two homes per street in this neighborhood
have a child suffering from lead poisoning.
This is happening in communities all over America. Nearly one million
American children have lead levels in their blood that are high enough
to cause irreversible damage to their health. Lead can cause learning
disabilities and ADD, low birth weight and impaired growth. And the
tragedy is that it is entirely preventable. It doesn't have to happen
and shouldn't happen anywhere.
Sadly, it is happening. And while it's happening all over the nation,
some communities are affected more than others. Poor and minority
communities are bearing much more than their share of this evil.
More than half of all African American children in poverty enter the
first grade with toxic levels of lead in their blood. The rural
community of Kellogg, Idaho has more than 21 square miles contaminated
with lead and other metals because of emissions from mining
operations. The town has a population of 2,300 people but it is the
second largest Superfund site in the country.
Everyday, all across the nation, minority families and poor families of
all colors are facing danger from pollution in their air, water, and
land. They cope with higher risks of disease and lower quality of
life.
Hispanic communities south of Interstate 8 in California are dealing
with the worst air pollution in San Diego County. In Tuscon, Arizona,
children are being born with heart defects because of chemical's in
their mothers' drinking water. More than half of textile workers in
the San Francisco area are Asian women whose neighborhoods are at risk
from formaldehyde and other dangers.
Asthma, not gun shot wounds, is the greatest danger to inner city youth
in America. It's the number one reason for childhood emergency room
visits in most big cities. And while asthma is up for all children,
African Americas are almost two times more likely to die from it than
whites.
Eighty percent of Hispanic families live in counties with substandard
air and three out of five African Americans live in communities with
abandoned toxic waste sites. Overall, minority communities in this
state have more than nine times as many hazardous waste sites as other
communities and low-income communities are home to three out of four
sludge landfills.
Dangers from the environment are creating a national environmental
health crisis that needs to be addressed. No community - of any
income or any race - should have their children endangered. And it is
wrong when communities that don't have the economic or political power
carry an unjust burden of pollution.
Environmental activists all across America need an ally in the White
House. I know about environmental activists first hand. I'm not
only married to one, I was raised by one. My mother started a local
recycling program. When I was young, she would wake me up in the early
hours of the morning to walk with her in the woods listening to the
sound of wild birds. At the time, I wasn't so happy about being woken
up. Now, I understand she was teaching me a lesson about leaving your
little piece of this planet better for your children than you found it.
Today, committed activists like you are working to lift the unjust
burden of pollution off their neighborhoods' shoulders. You are
speaking out and organizing; meeting and marching; and you're making a
difference in communities that need a voice. I believe its time you
had a government that helped you in this cause.
For too long, poor and minority communities have been overlooked when it
came to the environment. For too long, they've felt they didn't have
the power to fight back. And for too long, polluters thought they
could get away with breaking the law as long as it was in someone else's
back yard.
Well, those days need to end. Under a Kerry Administration, no
community will have their environment overlooked. They will have the
power to fight back. And the polluters won't get away with it any
more.
Today, I am announcing three new policies that would put environmental
justice center stage if I am elected President.
First, I believe we need to create Environmental Empowerment Zones that
will help communities help themselves. These zones will be designated
areas where the federal government will make sure its resources are
backing up the fight for environmental justice and where communities
will get help to build a better environment for themselves from the
ground up.
Second, we will reinvigorate action on environmental justice at the
federal level. I will create a new Assistant Administrator position
for Environmental Justice at the EPA and will revive the Office of
Environmental Justice. Today, this office is under-staffed,
under-funded, and undermined on a daily basis. We will bring it back
to life so it can serve as a resource and advocate for community
activists all over America.
Third, we need to track asthma and other diseases that are caused by the
environment. For example, in Texas, there are hundreds of thousands
of children going to school within two miles of a chemical plant.
When the alarm bell rings, they know it doesn't mean a fire drill. It
means they need to shut the windows and turn off the air conditioner
because of a nearby chemical release. But we have very little idea
about what is happening to these children on a daily basis. We need a
national tracking system to monitor environmental health hazards.
Taken together, these policies amount to a national commitment to
environmental justice that is long overdue. And a commitment that
cannot be delayed.
A clean environment isn't a zero sum game. When your neighbors'
neighborhood makes progress, everybody wins. Environmental justice
means action to repair the environment in all communities wherever they
may be. It means an end to playing favorites when it comes to
Americans' health and their very lives. All Americans, regardless of
their color or income deserve clean air, pure water, land that is safe
to live on, food that is safe to eat.
Finally, I applaud you on your goal to register one million voters this
year. We need to get it done so that their communities have a vote
and a voice.
And we need to give people something to vote for, too. So let's get
the word out. And then let's work just as hard to make sure that
environmental justice rolls through the rivers of this country, that it
seeps into the soil of our cities, and that it spreads through the air
and touches every neighborhood in America. On this Earth Day, let's
have a new commitment to make environmental justice the law of the land.
Thank you.
Godzilla Pimp
<AbelM...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:299-4087...@storefull-3135.bay.webtv.net...
>It's important to note that in 3 short years, the Bush administration
has reversed 3 decades of laws that have increased environmental
progress.
I have a question for you lefties. After you have succeeded in transforming
the West into another 3rd world region, how do you think all of your complex
and very expensive environmental laws and regulations will continue to be
enforced?
GP
JohnAndrew
This seems like a great question, except it's based on a very
questionable assumption.
Who's to say that the West is going to become "another 3rd world
region" because of environmental regulation?
If you look at the
actual history of the Third World, you'll find that most of it
has a history of being colonized by the major European powers
or the US, or both. It's a combination of good old Western
capitalism, along with good old Western guns and naval expeditions
and war, that basically produced the Third World that we
see today.
Maybe if the United States can avoid being
invaded and conquered by outsiders - as India was conquered
by the British, for example, and as Panama was basically
created and repeatedly occupied by the United States, and
as most of the Central American countries have been repeatedly
invaded by the U.S. Marines since 1900 -- if we can avoid
being humiliated by rich capitalist foreigners, as we have
humilated others, we may be able to avoid the poverty and environmental
degradation that the Third World has experienced.
Of course, environmental purity can be overdone. People
can indeed refuse to accept necessary tradeoffs between
environmental purity - which is impossible to achieve
completely - and allowances for human economic enterprise.
But if you're talking about the risks of environmental regulation
inspiring US industry to move overseas, to where they can destroy
the environment at will -- well, why don't we eliminate idiotic
free trade laws like NAFTA and GATT to stop this? And while
we're at it, why don't we seek to impose laws on the export of
investment capital, so that corporations that have earned billions
of dollars from the hard work put in by American workign people
can't simply pick up their factories and move to places like
Mexico and China?
The fact is, it isn't only environmental laws that give
US multinational companies an incentive to moving their
factories to Third World hellholes where they can do whatever
they choose. It's also LABOR costs, which are a huge factor
in production. And unless we find ways to compel American
companies to REMAIN American, they're going to keep shipping
jobs overseas until they can push down American wage levels
to those prevailing in a lot of impoverished societies overseas.
I mean, why won't the Fortune 500 companies move to India, or
China, or Burma, or Haiti, or any other low-wage, politically
repressive country they can find where the government keeps
the labor unions from raising wages, if US laws allow them to
do so? They can make higher profits by firing American workers
and hiring the cheapest foreign labor they can find; they also
can make higher profits if they do business in places where
they can poison the planet freely with their air and water emissions.
So don't we need to control where they can move, if either
American workers OR American environmentalists hope to
see a decent future for this country?
**
Richard
> "Godzilla Pimp" <w...@wahwah.org> wrote
> > <AbelM...@webtv.net> wrote
> >
> > >It's important to note that in 3 short years, the Bush administration
> > has reversed 3 decades of laws that have increased environmental
> > progress.
> >
> > I have a question for you lefties. After you have succeeded in transforming
> > the West into another 3rd world region, how do you think all of your complex
> > and very expensive environmental laws and regulations will continue to be
> > enforced?
>
> questionable assumption.
>
> Who's to say that the West is going to become "another 3rd world
> region" because of environmental regulation?
There's a more fundamental assumption^ than the one you suggest.
Namely: Who are corporations, that they get to say--with impugnity,
no less--that our choices are between jobs and clean water?
ANY corporation that says such a thing, either by policies or by its
actions, should be globally boycotted out of business.
Anybody sewing sneakers in China who thinks that production won't
move to Zimbabwe the minute it's cheaper to do business there is just
fooling themselves. The workforce and consumers are the same folks,
if one only thinks globally. I don't fault Chinese shoemakers for
taking a job if there's one available, but if we all stop buying the
damned products from companies that do stuff like that we'll take
back the power to have both a job and air that doesn't cause cancer.
Now, that's the kind of globallism I like!
^To answer your question, I think the logic goes like this:
Corporations will set up shop and hire labor where it's cheaper and
easier for them to do so. That probably isn't the USA, so eventually
the jobs dry up here. A middle class with no jobs turns America into
a 3rd world region.
--
If labor costs for cars are cheaper now, how come the price never
comes down?
Cheney? Wrong on almost everything. Fire him this November.
Rumsfeld? Botched the planning of the Iraq War. Fire him, too.
Ashcroft? Is there anyone scarier in the Bush admin? Fire him.
Powell? Gave up his principles to be a good soldier. Fire him.
Rice? Nice person, but completely over her head. Fire her, too.
Consumerism is slavery.
Godzilla Pimp
"JohnAndrew" <AJFee...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2fcaf67c.04042...@posting.google.com...
Gawd, you're thick. You missed the point of my post completely. When the
Western World becomes a part of the 3rd world, it will have neither the
money nor inclination to enforce complex and expensive environmental
regulations. Get it?
GP
JohnAndrew
My deepest apologies for being "thick," as you put it. I guess I'm in
presence of a superior being, but I still don't "get it," exactly.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
Are you saying the human species and the natural world are
both screwed if the capatitalist global market leads everyone
on earth, or virtually everyone, to becoming poor and economically
insecure?
If so, I agree with that. As a leftist, I'd have to admit that
we don't have good alternatives to capitalism invented yet,
and I'd also admit that the system has created superb technology
and amazing wealth for many, many people. But if the direction
of the world market pushes everyone in the direction of living
in poverty under "Third World" conditions, as it may well be
doing right now, I think we're screwed.
Is that what you mean?
Or are you mostly a racist or an anti-immigration
person, and you mean to say that Earth Day was a "white" invention
and that without enough white people around to protect nature,
those terrible black & brown & yellow folks, who make up maybe
80% of the world's popluation, are going to do awful stuff?
If you're trying to make that point, I think you're mistaken.
European and American whites have indeed done a lot to
promote "conservationist" thinking since about 1900, but that's
partly because we needed to - we ourselves were trashing
North American so thoroughly that people like Teddy Roosevelt
and John Muir recognized the need to cry "halt."
For white folks to now declare our supposed environmental
superiority to other people under those circumstances is
really to miss the point, I think. I'm white myself, and
frankly I've been racially prejudiced at times, and I sympathize
with Anglo-Americans who dislike open immigration - because
mass immigration is always disruptive. But I think people of
all races and income levels around the world need to recognize
that we're in the same boat environmentally. If white & black &
brown & yellow and "other" people of all kinds can't cooperate
to save the planet, it's going to get badly trashed.
To me, that means we all need to leave our racial & religious
& political hangups behind, difficult as that may seem, and
learn to work respectfully with other people to fix the
environment. Personally, I find this difficult, because I
sometimes disrepect others on an "equal opportunity" basis. But
we've got to learn to work cooperatively or perish, IMHO.
I'm still not sure I get your point, though. What were you
really trying to say?
**