iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Liz Butler

GET UPDATES FROM Liz Butler

Who Wants to Cash in on Gutting the Clean Air Act?

Posted: 02/11/11 11:25 AM ET

The latest attacks on the Clean Air Act are not about policy or even politics; they're about corruption, plain and simple.

We see these attacks coming from both Republicans and Democrats, but nearly all of them are coming from lawmakers who have received large infusions of cash or pressure from big polluters like the coal industry.

Most telling, the attacks are coming from elected officials who have previously acknowledged and discussed the dangers of climate change. For example, Representative Fred Upton (R-MI) was fairly concerned about the climate crisis just a few short years ago:

I strongly believe that everything must be on the table as we seek to reduce carbon emissions... Climate change is a serious problem that necessitates serious solutions.

But more recently, in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, co-authored by Tim Phillips of Americans for Prosperity, Upton likened the EPA's regulation of green house gasses to physical torture:

We think the American consumer would prefer not to be skinned by Obama's EPA.

Representative Upton, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and a number of members of Congress who are acting more like big polluter allies, have sponsored legislation to destroy the Clean Air Act's existing regulations that protect us from climate change pollution and toxic chemicals in our air. Taken a step further, many members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee have cut out the middleman and hired former big polluter lobbyists right onto their staff.

What changed the minds of lawmakers like Representative Upton?

In three words: Dirty energy money. Big polluters like Dirty Coal and Koch Industries have spent more than $500 million in lobbying and campaign expenditures in the last year. Representative Upton alone received more than $200,000 in contributions during the midterms and more than $500,000 throughout his career, with the majority coming from the coal industry.

The point is, these companies are getting what they've paid for. It's a bargain, really: they get tireless allies on both sides of the aisle in Congress in exchange for a meager percentage of their profits. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) put it well when he described the upcoming Clean Air Act hearings as anti-science and as promoting a "flat earth society agenda."

It's true: allies of big polluters in Congress are fighting tooth and nail for a spot in the newest version of the "flat earth society." Members get an all-expenses paid trip back to their seat in the next election, courtesy of Dirty Coal, Big Oil, and the Koch brothers, but at the expense of everyday Americans and people across the globe.

Even my nine-year-old knows we should be listening to the science.

It's certainly not a bargain for us. American families concerned about rising levels of mercury, arsenic, lead, and climate change pollution in our air are being short changed.

The fact of the matter is that we cannot ignore the corruption of elected officials whose job is to fight for the good of the public, not for the good of big polluting industries that support their re-election. All of this makes our job that much more important. It is time for all of us to organize our communities to stand up to big polluters and demand that members of Congress protect the public by protecting the Clean Air Act.

We cannot hope to fight the flat earth society with a person here and a person there: we must stand united in the face of dirty polluters. That means all of us who care about stopping climate change pollution need to stand together and say no. No, you cannot buy our democracy; no, you cannot pollute our air; and no, you cannot overpower us with money. Together, we are stronger than that, and together we can overpower the latest assault and move on to saying yes to a clean energy economy and a safer and healthier climate.

 

Follow Liz Butler on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Liz1Sky

 
 
  • Comments
  • 10
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Linda from Deerfield
Paying attention
10:08 AM on 02/15/2011
I do keep saying no, but it does not seem that I am ever heard. My family's insistence on good gas mileage was one way that we said no over the years to those who cut a big hole in the standards through which the gas guzzling SUV could drive. I was told by politicians that Americans wanted big cars and that I was therefore unAmerican. We proudly maintain our 60 year old home with original windows performing to 1994 efficiency standards (we're not done improving it yet) and my 16 year old Saab that got 33 mpg between Illinois and New York because these things drastically reduce the energy required to replace them (and save us money). Every now and then, I get that my peers think such modest living means that we must be poor, not understanding that it makes us richer, probably richer than they are. That is my thanks for saying no.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Frank
My last name is FRANK so thats what I am..
10:13 AM on 02/13/2011
What with all the debate going on about going green and using less foreign oil why isn't ANYONE hearing anything about thorium as a relatively safe alternative to standard nuclear fuel? Its been studied extensively for years and has been proven to be a viable and safe source of power and is far more plentiful than uranium

A thorium-fueled nuclear reactor generates hundreds of times the power as a uranium or coal power plant but produces essentially no waste. A thorium power plant would produce much less than 1% of the waste that a uranium plant of equal magnitude produces and, of course, would produce no carbon dioxide. More importantly, while the waste of a uranium power plant is toxic for over 10,000 years, the little waste that is produced in a thorium plant is benign in under 200 years.

I'd be willing to bet that the energy giants of today would rather have it covered up and swept under the rug so as to squash anyone cutting into their profits.. (oil, natural gas, traditional nuclear power, etc..)

Check it out and help spread the word on facebook, myspace, emails, whatever...

http://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com/
06:04 PM on 02/14/2011
The name of this con game is "manufactured scarcity". It has nothing to do with trying to solve our energy problems. It is all about taxation and control of all people through an unelected one-world government.
miloiki
sweet as can be
12:42 PM on 02/12/2011
Down with climate change nonsense. Up with low cost energy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
12:07 PM on 02/12/2011
Look's like a battle between the flat earth society and NIMBY environmentalist.

If the EPA's gets everything it ask for do you think we will reduce the ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere? Hint; remember they call it Global Warming and Climate Change not American Warming or American Climate Change.

Some interesting facts from the EIA; coal usage actually went down between 2000-2009 in the North America and Europe. Coal usage for the planet went up over 50% with almost all that increase from Asia! If coal usage keeps increasing at this pace coal will replace oil as the most consumed fossil fuel before 2016!

Mean while we are losing our high tech jobs in the energy intensive industries to Asia because of the cost of energy not labor! Recent loses include solar cells to China from California - Intel's largest micro chip manufacturing to Viet Nam lured there by cheap dirty coal!

So who ever wins between the flat earth society and our NIMBY environmentalist is irrelevant as far as Climate Change!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marchmont
07:44 AM on 02/12/2011
Holland, one of the most farsighted of European nations, has decided to abandon its renewable energy targets and terminate subsidies for wind power. The scientifically advanced Dutch have decided the EU diktats requiring 20 per cent of domestic power to be produced by renewables make no environmental sense. They also say that wind turbines cost more in subsidies than they produce and the associated engineering and maintenance problems are proving intractable. In a radical change of policy which the US would do well to note, it has given the green light for the country's first new nuclear power plant for almost 40 years. However they have clearly taken note of technical advances which mean the world now has 250-year reserves of cheap shale gas and renewables are yesterday’s folly.
01:58 AM on 02/12/2011
One sky indeed!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
01:43 AM on 02/12/2011
Apparently everyone agrees with your analysis so much they have no comments about it!

I agree completely. Not much else to say.

Have a nice day.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
03:01 PM on 02/13/2011
didn't read my comment. But I'll re-post.

Look's like a battle between the flat earth society and NIMBY environmen­talist.

If the EPA's gets everything it ask for do you think we will reduce the ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere­? Hint; remember they call it Global Warming and Climate Change not American Warming or American Climate Change.

Some interestin­g facts from the EIA; coal usage actually went down between 2000-2009 in the North America and Europe. Coal usage for the planet went up over 50% with almost all that increase from Asia! If coal usage keeps increasing at this pace coal will replace oil as the most consumed fossil fuel before 2016!

Mean while we are losing our high tech jobs in the energy intensive industries to Asia because of the cost of energy not labor! Recent loses include solar cells to China from California - Intel's largest micro chip manufactur­ing to Viet Nam lured there by cheap dirty coal!

So who ever wins between the flat earth society and our NIMBY environmen­talist is irrelevant as far as Climate Change!
02:52 PM on 02/11/2011
We are stronger than that! The only thing stopping us from running these types out of office is us! We saw this in California this year. When we had a legislation that was 100% sponsored by oil and gas money from texas regarding California clean air policy, we rejected it. The only reason that we really knew what was trying to be passed was because it was used as a political tool during the elections. The awareness and understanding is what we lack. When it comes to bills being passed, we must be ever vigilant to make sure that terrible bills aren't being passed. I think there should be an internet forum where every bill that has to do with global issues like climate change be posted in plain english for all Americans to see and to give feedback on. The elected must be able to still hear the people that elected them. The only way we will achieve transparent and fair policy for election promises made and then ignored once they hit the house or the senate is to have the work and the bills themselves in an open dialog on what we feel about the policy at hand...