Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, called the Republican-led House “the most anti-environment house in history.” He cited votes “to block action to address climate change, to stop actions to prevent air and water pollution, to undermine protections for public lands and coastal areas, and to weaken the protection of the environment in dozens of other ways.”
On Monday, Waxman released an online searchable database that breaks down anti-environment votes taken by the current Congress into categories. The database can be reached by clicking here.
The Huffington Post noted that the legislative efforts to undermine environmental protection have been mostly partisan in nature:
On the bills compiled in Waxman’s database, 97 percent of Republican votes were cast for the anti-environment position while 84 percent of Democratic votes were cast for the pro-environment position, according to a July press release sent out by the Democratic staffs of the House Natural Resources Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The Huffington Post also noted support for Waxman’s claim:
‘House Republicans are showing how far they will go to please big polluters,’ said a spokesman for the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC). ‘Instead of focusing on jobs and the economy, they are busy stopping all rules to clean up the air and save lives.’
Frances Beinecke, president of the NRDC, said Congress this year has gone further in pushing anti-environment legislation than even the Congress led by then-Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1995.
‘At the time, 17 policy riders that went after the EPA were proposed,’ Beinecke said in a blog post. ‘This year close to 40 have been proposed going after smog standards, wildlife protections, and clean water.’
In addition to these votes, the House before the August recess stalled the Interior Department and environment appropriations bills over a number of anti-environment riders, which the Sierra Club called ‘the worst single attack on our nation’s air, water, wildlife and land to date.’
The statistics contained in Waxman’s database and cited by The Huffington Post are further proof that the House Republican caucus is simply unwilling to work towards environmental protection. This, as with many other issues, places the House GOP in conflict with the sweeping majority of American Jews who believe that environmental protection is an important part of tikkun olam (repairing the world).
Cap and trade has nothing to do with environmental protection and everything to do with lining the pockets of Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, and the New York Stock Exchange (named explicitly by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand in “Cap and Trade could be a Boon to New York”) and also the profiteers in the Climate Action Partnership. Anybody who votes “to block action to address climate change” (i.e. force working Americans to pay more for energy to enrich Obama’s cronies) has my vote AUTOMATICALLY.
Mr. Waxman is the same individual who recently said that the Jews in NY District 9 voted Republican to “protect their wealth,” i.e. an anti-Semitic “Jews and money” slur. I never respected Waxman and I respect him even less if that is possible. His push for cap and trade shows which side he is on, and it is not the side of the working American.
It is particularly telling that Mr. Obama backed off on smog reduction to reduce environmental compliance costs while insisting on the cap and trade agenda. The reason is obvious to me; there is no profit for Mr. Obama’s friends at Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, and General Electric (all of which bundled contributions for him in the high six figure range, see Opensecrets.org for 2008) in mitigation of genuine pollutants that sicken people or shorten their lives. They profit only from “mitigation” of a gas we all exhale every few seconds. As is usual in government, follow the money.