HorizonForumsone horizon
Log inSign up

[ms] · Est. May 2002

Music madethis place,we just kept itgoing...

One durable person. One social graph. Many communities—and every way people speak, share, listen, write, gather and remember.

Forums / Politics

bush vs the environment.

15 durable postsStarted 2008-12-12Latest 2008-12-20
#63462Post 1 of 15

how many more days do we have to deal with this dimwit? at least obama is going to reverse it on jan 20th.

[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7778749.stm[/url]

[B]The Bush administration has made it easier for drilling, mining and major construction projects to go ahead without a full scientific assessment.[/B] Revised rules mean agencies will no longer have to consult scientists about whether projects, such as the building of dams or mines, would harm wildlife. Environmentalists say the changes could take away protection for animals and plants facing possible extinction. Democratic President-elect Barack Obama has vowed to reverse the new rules. Modifications to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) are expected to come into effect in about 30 days. Republican supporters of the changes, along with developers and some federal agencies, argue the current system of environmental reviews causes delays to projects, pushing up costs. Critics of President George W Bush say his administration is trying to rush through unpopular reforms during his last days in office, and correspondents say environmental groups are likely to challenge the changes in the courts. [B]Common sense?[/B] The changes proposed by the Bush administration would let federal agencies make decisions on planned projects without a full scientific assessment as to their likely impact on the environment. Under current rules, the impact of such projects must be assessed by experts.
[IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif[/IMG] [IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif[/IMG] [B]The Endangered Species Act is not the right tool to set climate change policy[/B] [IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif[/IMG]

		                 			                      			                     	Dirk Kempthorne

Secretary of the Interior

		                 			             			         				 				 			     			 	     The US interior department said the "common sense modifications" were a "narrow update of existing regulations" prompted by concerns the ESA would become a "backdoor for setting climate change policy". 

"The rule strengthens the regulations so the government can focus on protecting endangered species as it strives to rebuild the American economy," said Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne. "The Endangered Species Act is not the right tool to set climate change policy." The White House has previously denied the late spate of rule changes is politically motivated. Mike Daulton, a director of the National Audubon Society, an environmental group, urged Mr Obama and Congress to reverse the "destructive changes". "The swan song of this administration is par for the course - special treatment for special interests at the expense of sound science and conservation." [B]Endangered list[/B] Senior Democrats have questioned the "one-minute-to-midnight" rules which, if in place before Mr Bush leaves the White House, would be harder for Mr Obama to repeal when he takes office on 20 January 2009. Mr Obama's chief of transition, John Podesta, has said the incoming president would review the last-minute actions, and seek to repeal those that are "not in the interests of the country". Mr Bush has already been criticised by environmentalists for adding fewer than 10 species of plant and animals a year to the endangered list. That contrasts with former President Bill Clinton, who added an average of 65 species a year.

#1133900Post 2 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[quote=chloe harris;687149]how many more days do we have to deal with this dimwit? at least obama is going to reverse it on jan 20th.

[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7778749.stm[/URL]

[B]The Bush administration has made it easier for drilling, mining and major construction projects to go ahead without a full scientific assessment.[/B] Revised rules mean agencies will no longer have to consult scientists about whether projects, such as the building of dams or mines, would harm wildlife. Environmentalists say the changes could take away protection for animals and plants facing possible extinction. Democratic President-elect Barack Obama has vowed to reverse the new rules. Modifications to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) are expected to come into effect in about 30 days. Republican supporters of the changes, along with developers and some federal agencies, argue the current system of environmental reviews causes delays to projects, pushing up costs. Critics of President George W Bush say his administration is trying to rush through unpopular reforms during his last days in office, and correspondents say environmental groups are likely to challenge the changes in the courts. [B]Common sense?[/B] The changes proposed by the Bush administration would let federal agencies make decisions on planned projects without a full scientific assessment as to their likely impact on the environment. Under current rules, the impact of such projects must be assessed by experts.
[IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif[/IMG] [IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif[/IMG] [B]The Endangered Species Act is not the right tool to set climate change policy[/B] [IMG]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif[/IMG]

                                                                                                 Dirk Kempthorne

Secretary of the Interior

                                                                                                                                                 The US interior department said the "common sense modifications" were a "narrow update of existing regulations" prompted by concerns the ESA would become a "backdoor for setting climate change policy". 

"The rule strengthens the regulations so the government can focus on protecting endangered species as it strives to rebuild the American economy," said Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne. "The Endangered Species Act is not the right tool to set climate change policy." The White House has previously denied the late spate of rule changes is politically motivated. Mike Daulton, a director of the National Audubon Society, an environmental group, urged Mr Obama and Congress to reverse the "destructive changes". "The swan song of this administration is par for the course - special treatment for special interests at the expense of sound science and conservation." [B]Endangered list[/B] Senior Democrats have questioned the "one-minute-to-midnight" rules which, if in place before Mr Bush leaves the White House, would be harder for Mr Obama to repeal when he takes office on 20 January 2009. Mr Obama's chief of transition, John Podesta, has said the incoming president would review the last-minute actions, and seek to repeal those that are "not in the interests of the country". Mr Bush has already been criticised by environmentalists for adding fewer than 10 species of plant and animals a year to the endangered list. That contrasts with former President Bill Clinton, who added an average of 65 species a year.[/quote]

go hug a tree. we got more important things to worry about atm.

/global warming bs

#1133901Post 3 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

What a fuckface, I'd be a lot happier if he just crawled into a hole until January

#1133926Post 4 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[QUOTE] Revised rules mean agencies will no longer have to consult scientists about whether projects, such as the building of dams or mines, would harm wildlife. [/QUOTE]

Well, would not building dams, mines, etc...automatically 'harm wildlife' according to environmentalists? It's damned if they do, damned if they don't.

It is true, that it will cost way more money. It will cost taxpayers more money. it does hinder growth. As far as I can tell, Obama should agree to this if he wants to build up American infrastructure.

#1134583Post 5 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

I'm all for a better environment too, but right now we got short term financial problems that are more important. And btw hasn't Obama switched his position to drill more in the short term last I remember? What the fuck ever. But, right now the more important thing right now is for the government to work with the industry to make sure our fucking economy doesn't collapse.

#1135048Post 6 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

Bush is a loser and we all know that. Obama is not going to ride in on his white horse and save the day though.

#1135658Post 7 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[QUOTE=superdave;687939]I'm all for a better environment too, but right now we got short term financial problems that are more important. And btw hasn't Obama switched his position to drill more in the short term last I remember? What the fuck ever. But, right now the more important thing right now is for the government to work with the industry to make sure our fucking economy doesn't collapse.[/QUOTE] There is nothing more important than the environment. Without a healthy environment we have nothing !!

Big business has been taking advantage of Bush's policies to line their pockets instead of getting out and moving with the times and working on green answers . They could have been rich and environmentally friendly but it was just too easy to go with the flow!!

Maybe the economy deserves to collapse so people can get there priorities right!! Unfortunately it looks like the working man/women is going to be carrying the bulk of the burden.

I can't believe a Bush bailout for the car industry was predicated on working men and women taking massive pay cuts and losing benefits. Bush for business still :evil:

#1135784Post 8 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[quote=DIDI;689116]There is nothing more important than the environment. Without a healthy environment we have nothing !!

Big business has been taking advantage of Bush's policies to line their pockets instead of getting out and moving with the times and working on green answers . They could have been rich and environmentally friendly but it was just too easy to go with the flow!!

Maybe the economy deserves to collapse so people can get there priorities right!! Unfortunately it looks like the working man/women is going to be carrying the bulk of the burden.

I can't believe a Bush bailout for the car industry was predicated on working men and women taking massive pay cuts and losing benefits. Bush for business still :evil:[/quote]

retarded... without an economy, food to eat, etc... the environment means shit. do you honestly think that when you have nothing to eat, when you are worrying every single day what you're going to do the next day youre gonna give fuckall about the environment?

australians...

#1136002Post 9 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

Without an environment you don't have to worry about food . You are dead!!

Very famous saying.

[B]Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money. ~Cree Indian Proverb[/B]

#1136032Post 10 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[quote=DIDI;689502]Without an environment you don't have to worry about food . You are dead!!

Very famous saying.

[B]Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money. ~Cree Indian Proverb[/B][/quote]

no but with money you can make anything...

fake food ftw

#1136242Post 11 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

The environment is important, but definitely secondary to our financial woes.

#1136345Post 12 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

^^^And this is probably why the world is fucked !!

#1139187Post 13 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[quote=DIDI;689878]^^^And this is probably why the world is fucked !![/quote] but the environment did not cause subprime mortgages and a credit bubble. greedy people did.

#1139242Post 14 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[quote=shosh;689260]retarded... without an economy, food to eat, etc... the environment means shit. do you honestly think that when you have nothing to eat, when you are worrying every single day what you're going to do the next day youre gonna give fuckall about the environment?

australians...[/quote]

you are joking here yeah???

#1139531Post 15 of 15

Re: bush vs the environment.

[QUOTE=Miroslav;689927]but the environment did not cause subprime mortgages and a credit bubble. greedy people did.[/QUOTE]:lol: :lol: It's amazing that people keep looking at everything through money.

I meant that the world was fucked environmentally.

Log in to reply