125 Republican Votes Against the Environment

[one...two...tree 2,762]

To hear Republicans tell it, their attacks on the EPA in this congress are in response to what the American People want. Well, just so The American People know what The American People want, here is a searchable online database (thanks to Leslie Kauffman at the New York Times Green blog) that details each of the 125 votes that House Republicans have taken on environmental issues in this congress.

The list was compiled by the staffers of Rep Henry Waxman, (who co-authored the Waxman-Markey climate bill, that the CBO scored as injecting $60 billion into our economy while cleaning up our little climate problem before it gets too catastrophic by switching us to clean energy using cap and trade – that Senate Republicans filibustered).

Like Mr. Markey, Mr. Waxman's legislative staff have time on their hands these days, as no other legislation is being proposed by the House Republican majority. Other than not paying our bills, that is.

"We do want a record of what the House Republican agenda is, very clearly stated so people can see it one spot," said Karen L. Lightfoot, spokeswoman for Mr. Waxman.

You're familiar with the votes against lightbulb innovation of course. Here's one of the more arcane. They blocked funding to remediate damage from broken hydro-electric dams.

They took twenty votes to block actions addressing climate change. Twenty two votes would defund or repeal clean energy initiatives.

Twenty-eight were to undermine elements of the Clean Air Act, blocking the agency from issuing rules on particulate matter, ozone pollution, or mercury, and to prevent the implementation of greenhouse gas rules.

Nearly half of them target the EPA, with fifty votes against environmental regulation. We've covered some here recently.

The list includes stand-alone bills and amendments filed to other pieces of legislation. Along with the EPA, the departments of Interior with twenty five measures, and Energy were also also in the crosshairs with twenty four votes.

One of the sillyest was a vote against Democrat Jay Inslee's bill to transfer Department of Energy ARPA-E research funding to clean energy innovation from fossil energy. The oil industry has been around since the nineteenth century, and they should have it down by now. ARPA-E was specifically designed to advance cutting edge new clean tech.

http://cleantechnica...ontent=FaceBook

[mawilson 2,133]

[SMR 368]

How is a vote against a ban on incandescent light bulbs a "vote against light bulb innovation?" If the "innovative" light bulbs are truly better then the market should speak for itself and there would be no need to ban the old ones.

In many areas of the world, the heat is on for well over half the year. During that time, incandescent light bulbs are no less efficient than fluorescent light bulbs. That's simple thermodynamics. For the other half of the year, fluorescent light bulbs are more efficient, but the sun is up for the vast portion of the day meaning reasonable use of windows means you don't need to turn the lights on anyways most of the time. It's a crock.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The lunacy of this article is astounding.

There are actually idiots out there (some on this board) that believe congress can change the climate.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Nothing changed. In defiance of the vote, we still have environment, but, that's how we roll