Spintested: 12/11/11

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

Sunday, December 11, 2011

The nation is circling the drain because the left has done more than 30 years of compromising.

Real Democratic policies aren't that hard to sell to Americans. When most Americans want Medicare and other government programs which they've benefitted from to continue and teabaggers shout "No government control of healthcare; Get your hands off my Medicare", the answer is EDUCATION.

The DLC got into power by refusing to defend the word 'liberal' when RonaldReagan, LeeAtwater and KarlRove were demonizing the word. Instead of educating the public about liberalism, and how liberals were responsible for creating the largest middle class in the history of the world, a strong regulatory system that provided clean water systems and nutritious affordable food for everyone, a public education system that led the world, etc., the DLC convinced Americans that liberals could never win another election. The DLC attributed to ideology what is more accurately explained by lousy campaigns outgunned by election dirty tricks and fraud.

When informed of the issues, most Americans agree with liberal policies. Neither they (nor I) would characterize themselves as far-anything or extreme, but mainstream. For example, nobody likes the idea of abortion, but most Americans do not want the government involved if they find themselves in the predicament of an unwanted pregnancy. And if you frame it as, "You like to kill babies?!?! ?!?!", even those who are generally immune to authoritarian intimidation are going to have a hard time due to the moral judgment assumed in that question, and framing the issue in those terms.

If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and Rove were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush and Rove were just more ruthless doing what politicians had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans -- If you keep at it, escalate your attacks, don't take 'no' for an answer and never back away, you will wear the opposition down.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

To those who defend Obama and his "compromises":

Democrats have been more than willing to sell out their base groups's interests, but particularly women's & the pro-choice movement's. And Obama's been particularly 'oily' (slippery) on these issues. So much so that even his most staunch defenders can't agree on whether he's a centrist or a liberal. [Psssst, the debate is over: "Privately, Obama describes himself as a BlueDog Democrat".]

One example of how Democrats & Obama are real free and easy "compromising away" a base group's interests is Obama's healthcare legislation which opens the door to ending insurance coverage of all abortions). We wouldn't be down to this horrifying situation where you can't get an abortion in 92 percent of the counties in the US (and 3 states in the country that have only one ab0rt!on clinic, and other states that heavily restrict a woman's access to abortion, and banning abortions in clinics or any facility that receives public funds, and banning ab0rt!on counseling and clinic recommendations) if Democrats and Obama weren't so breezy with women's hard-fought for rights.

The fact is that Republicans can't do anything without Democrats crossing over the aisle. Faux Democrats are the problem. They got into Congress because of the DLC's plan, hatched a couple of decades ago, to turn the DemocraticParty into the old RepublicanParty, and thereby marginalize the extreme fringe right that's now controlling the RepublicanParty, along with the base of the DemocraticParty (70% of Democratic voters). Then they'd "govern the country for 100 years".

We've been doing it your way, the DLC's way, for 20 years now, & the government & the DemocraticParty keeps moving farther to the right. That's because your way is to l!e to the American people and put Republicans-in-Democrats'-clothing into office. At the rate this is going, Republicans won't have to bother getting Roe overturned -- Why bother outlawing abortion when you've made it virtually impossible to obtain one?

If you and I are on the same side (as you insist), and want real Democratic policies, and going about getting them your way (protecting Obama, reelecting DLC Democrats) is getting Republican policies, NOT Democratic policies, when do you realize that maybe you don't know what you're talking about?

When do you realize that you've become that classic definition for 'insan!ty' ("Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results")?

Do you ever realize it?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

Been there, done that.

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress.

So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed.

NancyPelosi and HarryReid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting BushCheney and beating Republicans back, among which were investigations, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administration to testify under oath, and impeachment.

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did. We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And we gave them the White House.

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old raclst America than ever voted for any other presidential candidate in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate tool.

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at death's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises and slowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything, in lockstep.

His political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation. If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a dead giveaway that the last thing these politicians want is an active populist movement.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

Apparently you have.

In Debt Talks, Obama Offers Social Security Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

It's Obama who put Social Security and Medicare in play; he put it up on the table for cuts.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

The "thinning of the herd" is what's happening. Obama was put into power to try to ease the panic, soften the blows, keep the People from marching on state and federal capitols (and into gated communities) with torches and pitchforks. To keep us 'frogs' in the pot until it boils us to death.

Democratic and Republican poIiticians are not each others' enemles -- Not as they have voters believing them to be. Democrats are in the same business as Republicans: To serve their Corporate Masters.

Think of them as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. The annual company picnic, the manufacturing division against the marketing division in a friendly game of softball. One side (Republicans) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, and when the People have had enough, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric.

Once in power, Democrats consolidate Republicans' gains from previous years, continue on with Republican policies but renamed, with new advertising campaigns. They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't what we thought they were.

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigans and all the different ways they've been tricked, and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republicans, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business.

Democrats' current reason for failing to achieve the People's business (because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc.) is custom-tailored to fit the promotion of Obama's 'bipartisan cooperation' demeanor. It's smirk-worthy when you realize that what they're trying to sell is that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do...And their ineptitude, like that's somehow "a good thing".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

What do you imagine Obama will think his mandate is should he win reelection?

Social Security and Medicare cuts?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

Just remember that Obama won the election with the largest turnout in US election history. He got more votes than any president in US election history.

===========================

And what did Obama do with that victory?

He blew it off. "Bipartisanship". Have you heard him swear off 'bipartisanship'? I haven't. He keeps moving to the right.

Between redistricting, restrictive voting legislation, etc., Congress is as Democratic as it's ever going to be in our lifetimes.

Obama's not the answer.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

A year to go, and the best the GOP can do is Newt Gingrich.

===============================

Have you ever wondered why that is? Why mainstream Republican politicians aren't throwing their hats into the ring?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Gaining Support From Democrats

That's what I'm hearing from Democratic and Independent voters (not just union members), too.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

There are other ways to get money to the poor and middle classes that doesn't put Social Security and Medicare at risk.

And people collecting unemployment benefits wouldn't benefit from extending a payroll tax
'holiday'.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

It's called political science for a reason.

Read this and this and this.

And after 2012, 'reliably' liberal Democratic members of Congress won't be there as their seats have been eliminated (Dennis Kucinich's, for example), or they're retiring (Barney Frank, Lynn Woolsey, two other examples).
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

Obama did everything he could to discourage Democratic voter turnout in 2010.

From flip-flopping and breaking campaign promises and pushing through Republican-like legislation to Obama broadcasting in the weeks before the 2010 midterms that he was going to continue to "work in a bipartisan manner" with Republicans, no matter what the outcome of the elections. Whether Democrats gained seats or lost control of the Congress:

Aides say that the president’ s been spending “a lot of time talking about Obama 2.0,” brainstorming with administration officials about the best way to revamp the strategies and goals of the White House.

And despite the predictions that Democrats may relinquish a large degree of legislating power, including perhaps control of the House and even Senate, Obama isn’t thinking of the next two years as a period that’ll be marked with the same obstructive nature from the GOP.

“It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, [Republicans] feel more responsible, either because they didn’t do as well as they anticipated, and so the strategy of just saying no to everything and sitting on the sidelines and throwing bombs didn’t work for them,” Obama says. “Or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals and work with me in a serious way.”

Dick Durbin says Obama’s post-election agenda “will have to be limited and focused on the things that are achievable and high priorities for the American people.” Tom Daschle says Obama has to reach out more: “The keyword is inclusion. He’s got to find ways to be inclusive. “

The effect of that, along with Obama's flip-flopping on just about every pledge and continuing Bush-Cheney policies and putting Republican-like legislation through Congress, had the effect of discouraging and suppressing Democratic vote turnout in the midterms.

The Democrats who did turn out thew Blue Dogs out in big numbers; progressives only lost 3 seats. Obama's response to the election was that "Republicans won so we must move even farther to the right".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

Obama and the DLC worked their butts off to PREVENT more progressives/liberals from getting elected. Obama and the DLC put the power of the White House, the DNC, and the Democratic congressional committees behind Blue Dogs, Republicans and Independents over progressives/liberals and real Democrats. Some, but not all, examples:

Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln over progressive Democrat Lt. Governor Bill Halter.

Republican-turned-Independent Arlen Specter over progressive Democrat Joe Sestak.

Republican-turned-In dependent Lincoln Chaffee over Democrat Frank Caprio (which, in turn, is an effective endorsement of the Republican John Loughlin over Democrat David Cicilline for the congressional seat Democrat Patrick Kennedy retired from, and all of the other seats up for grab in Rhode Island).

Republican-turned-Independent Charlie Crist over liberal Democrat Kendrick Meek.

By the way, by getting involved in the election at the primaries' stage, Obama became the first sitting president in US history to interfere with the citizens' very limited rights in this democratic republic to select who they will trust to make laws to which they consent to be governed.

Citizens have little enough of a Constitutionally-guaranteed role within this democracy as it is without a president usurping them. We have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted (the founders were nothing if not ironic). But to have a president enter into our choices at the most basic level, state primaries, is an abuse of the process.

Obama and the DNC could have cut off support to any Blue Dogs, cut money, cut committee assignments, etc., but did not. Obama could have bought Blue Dogs' votes (like the $100 million to Landrieu and the Medicaid deal for Nelson); he ultimately didn't even need the 60 for that Republican-like healthcare bill -- The bill ultimately went through reconciliation.

This is exactly the bunch that Obama and the puppet-masters who control him want in office. On both sides of the aisle. Obama, Ds and Rs in office, working on behalf of transnational corporations.

Reform isn't on the agenda of either party.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

To begin with, given how voting districts are drawn, the outcome of the 2008 election made government as Democratic as it's ever going to get in the foreseeable future. 2008 was as good as it's going to get for Democrats. This is as good as it's going to get for Obama. He's not going to get more Democrats on his coattails in 2012 than he got in 2008 (and we know what he did with that Democratic majority in the House and filibuster-proof Democratic Senate - He blew it).

What would change if Obama was returned to the White House for a 2nd term?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

The old 'lesser of two evils' argument doesn't cut it anymore.

Obama's continuing just about all of the BushCheney policies, even going BushCo one better: How do any of Obama's 'most ardent supporters' explain Obama's doctrine that presidents have the right to kill American citizens with no due process, no oversight, and his push for 'indefinite preventive detention' and no transparency of anything a president asserts should be his secret? Pure Kafka.

As a Democrat, I don't know how any Democrat can get behind this.

At this point, I would argue that Obama and Democrats are worse. Bush-Cheney-GOP make no bones or excuses for what they've done and who they are, whereas Obama and Democrats ran on knowing better.

Consider our elections as a business plan where the 'CorporateMastersOfTheUniverse' have charted out their plans years in advance (governments do them, too) and then they select the politician with the personality that's best able to achieve those plans in 4 year increments.

If you want to l!e the country into war for oil and war-profiteering, then GeorgeWBush is your man to front it, with DickCheney, the former Secretary of Defense who initiated the privatizing of the military a decade earlier, actually running the operation from the shadows.

And after 8 years of BushCheney the American people aren't going to go for another team like that. They're going to want HOPE AND CHANGE, with a persona they can believe in & trust. BarackObama.

Obama's 'most ardent admirers' just like the packaging better. I'm not talking skin color, although that may be a factor for some of them; I'm talking about how a 'D' after the name is a brand they trust believe and trust in, despite the fact that it's the same 'soap' (product).

You continue to support Obama and Democrats at the expense of your own best interests. As long as his numbers remain high, he does the bidding of corporations and establishment elites.

Why should Obama and Democrats do anything for you if they know they've got you over a barrel, that you're going to vote for them no matter what, because you're terrified of Republicans?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

#6 - Continue the Insanity, meaning we keep doing the same thing* over and over again hoping for a different outcome.

[* - Same thing = Continue to refuse to believe our own 'lyin' eyes', keep doing what we've been doing for the past 20 years, continue voting for DLC-controlled Democrats, vote again for Obama in the hopes that he's a closet liberal playing 12-dimensional chess, believing that he's got a plan, a strategy, that nobody can see or figure out, but because he's the smartest, grown-uppiest in the room, in all of Washington (on the whole planet, even) his scheme eludes and confounds us, so we just need to be like Republican voters and have blind faith in our political leaders.

Clue: There aren't any grown-ups to save us; we're 'it'.]

What happens when millions are out of work, no jobs, no money, no hope. London, Philadelphia, where next?

"Quickly Brad, there are thousands of lives at stake... Brad any answer..." - Roy Neary, 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

#4 - A Third Party Challenge
We're not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republicans. There are other alternatives besides sitting out the election or voting for Republicans. There are other candidates running as independents, from Green to Libertarian, in just about every race. If for no other reason than to get the 5 percent that is necessary for getting a seat at the table, I think that may be enough for great numbers of Democratic voters this time around.

#5 - The "Oh, F R I C K it, let's get it over with - Vote for Republicans"-plan

The horse is out of the barn and we should just let the radical right have its way. It's not like Obama and the gutless Dems are going to stop them.

It would be carnage for a few years, people eating other people (though that really only happens in the southern tier of states), old people dying (why are we so eager to keep them alive, anyway?) and cats and dogs living together...

Let it all come crashing down--but let's make sure to kill Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare. These Tea Partiers should be allowed to pay what the market will bear, right?

By the way, while our Tea-Party/Real Men (or whatever those guys who wouldn't pay taxes a few years ago are called) friends talk about how they'd like to keep more of their hard earned money and give less to the idiots who "gave us Vietnam and Iraq," perhaps they'd like to pick up the bill for the grading and paving of the road that leads from their home to their office--can't be what, more than $60K a year.

While they're at it, maybe they'd like to cut a check for the police and fire people they'd have to employ to protect their home and valuables from damage. If they could get one guy for another $30K, they'd be lucky. Oh, and then there's that water and waste service, if you've got that.

Really, just let these frickers get what they want.

KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

#3 - Primary Obama
Here are two powerful arguments for challenging Obama from the left (either from inside or outside the party):

Michael Lerner's very powerful case for primarying Obama.

Ralph Nader's very powerful case for primarying Obama (and no, he's not running again).

Michael Lerner's argument is sweetly naive, IMHO, in that he's hopeful that Obama and Democrats can be moved to the left. I don't think that's true anymore. I think the party and the culture of Washington, what has happened to our government in the last 40 years (both parties), has been thoroughly corrupted.

Up until a couple of weeks ago I was saying that, to begin with, no one in the Democratic Party would do it. Due to the hierarchical system of party government, it would be su!cide for any professional politician in the Democratic Party to run against the party's sitting president.

Liberals/progressives within the Democratic Party, no matter what their rhetoric, no matter what they say, they march to Obama's/Reid's/Pelosi's tune. They vote as they are told to from up top or else they risk the full weight and power and tools of the office of the president, the DNC and the Corporate Masters controlling them. The Party will cover them as best it can, get as many votes as it needs from Democrats in safe districts first, and will only call upon liberals/progressives to betray their constituents from safe districts if it needs them, accompanied by threats/promises of national party help when it comes time for their reelection bid (Alan Grayson, Dennis Kucinich, 2 examples).

The DLC has gotten too powerful, what with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratically-controlled Senate overseeing an NSA with today's eavesdropping abilities (I say that somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but it's really impossible to deny in light of things like this).

As I said, that was up until a couple of weeks ago. Word has it that a challenge is coming, but it's really not a serious one, not intended for anyone to get the nomination from Obama.

So unless Obama drops out (in which case another corporate tool will take his place), the only legitimate challenges to him will come from outside the Democratic Party (Republicans or Independents). And the most likely way that Obama would drop out is if his numbers plummet.

So what's left?

KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

"Privately, Obama describes himself as a Blue Dog Democrat"

Blue Dog = (might as well be registered as a) Republican

Obama's continuing just about all of the BushCheney policies and pushing Republican-like legislation isn't because he's even a centrist. Obama's corporate, a neoliberal), which bears no relationship to liberalism.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

Are you aware of any web sites, political organizations, splinter groups, or very smart, brave people who have another candidate to propose for 2012? We need an FDR, not a Hoover representing Democrats and the nation in the White House. It's clear Obama is not the person we thought we elected. There are millions of people like us, deeply disappointed in him and looking for any reasonable alternate in 2012.Steven Weber asked a question: "Well, then, fine. So who will it be?"

==================================================

I get this question regularly so bear with me for a moment as I explain the situation as I see it, the options available, possible solutions, etc.

#1 - Sitting Out The Election
I never advise people to sit out elections because the first rule of politics is, "If you're not at the table, you're on the menu". It's what p!sses me off about Obama (and one of many reasons I know him to be a con man betraying "them that brung 'im") because by shutting out liberals, the Democratic base, from his administration, by taking single payer, a public option, off the table, by putting Social Security and Medicare on the table, by eliminating regulatory oversight from finance reform legislations, he's given pro-corporate, Republican-like policies an inside line. The People's advocates can't even get in the door of this government much less a seat at the table.

#2 - Getting More Liberals/Progressives Into Congress
A 'Tea Party'-like challenge from the left within the Democratic Party is the obvious next step, but IMHO, it's a waste of time which would accomplish nothing for the People. Obama and the DNC have been working their butts off to prevent real Democrats, real progressives, from getting into office - Their strategy for getting more Democrats into office has been to run Democratic candidates who believe in Republican ideology and support Republican policies and legislation.

One variation on this is if, A) Obama doesn't pull an LBJ (drop out) or, B) another Democrat or third party candidate doesn't challenge him, then take the money and shoe leather that you were planning on spending for Obama and use it to make both Houses of Congress overwhelmingly 'blue' and let the chips fall where they may (Obama sinks or swims on his own, or a Republican gets into the White House) and we go to work immediately finding a real Democrat for 2016.

Given how effective Republicans (with the smallest minority in decades) have been at stymieing Democratic legislation and policies, you would think Democrats could do the same for any Romney/Gingrich/Perry/Bachman/Romney/Palin/etc. administration.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

The Keystone XL Pipeline: Oil for Export, Not for U.S. Energy Security

Incidentally, one of the corporations set to buy tarsands oil via Keystone XL is co-owned by the Saudi government.

Obama is more than happy to risk the public's health and water supply for foreign nations' corporate profits.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

This happens to be wrong. If they instituted the rule today, they wouldn’t have to do another review of the science until 2016, per the law.

So consider what we have here. A bunch of enviro groups were ready to sue over ozone standards. The Obama Administration came in and said “don’t worry, we agree with you, we have the authority, we’ll impose the higher standards you want.” Then they waited for two years, and finally, they punted. It’s a total sellout and a de-fanging of the enviro groups who wanted to go to court to get the rules changed.

As a result, the 2008 rules promulgated by the Bush Administration won’t be implemented either; the EPA already directed states not to comply with them. So most states are operating under the objectively worse 1997 standards. And that is expected to continue. So the Obama Administration is allowing, for his entire first term, ozone standards that are worse than George Bush’s.

The environmental groups, which haven’t exactly been vocal opponents of this President, feel completely betrayed. And this is the second betrayal in a week. Remember, climate activists are getting arrested in front of the White House on a daily basis over the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, and the State Department just released a whitewash environmental review of the project.

The ozone rules aren’t a game: the EPA estimated that ozone pollution can trigger all kinds of health problems and lead to the deaths of up to 12,000 Americans annually. The reason the regulation seems so expensive is that you’re talking about complying up from 1997 rules. Of course fixing a 14-year gap will be expensive. It will only get more expensive. And people will die as a result of inaction.

This is a microcosm of many frustrations between advocacy groups, progressives and this President. And in this case, there is no Congress on which to blame it.

About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

Republican politicians fear their own base.

Democratic politicians despise their own base.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Makes Decisions On Contraception, Other High-Profile Issues Ahead Of 2012

At the end of the day, Obama will win because progressives, moderates and independents are not going to vote against their own interests.

======================================

Voting for Obama is voting for BushCheney, all over again. For example:

Obama's Capitulation on Ozone Much Worse When You Learn the Context

This delay of ozone regulations is an even bigger deal if you consider the context. Brad Plumer has that story.

Basically, what happened is that the Bush Administration dragged its feet on new national ozone standards for years. Under the law, there must be a five-year review. EPA’s review of the science in 2006 showed that the current standards, set in 1997, were woefully inadequate. The Bush Administration countered with a new rule in 2008 that was well below the recommendation from EPA scientists.

And then…

"Groups such as the American Lung Association quickly filed a lawsuit to stop the Bush rules, which they claimed were too weak and would lead to thousands of unnecessary deaths and cases of respiratory disease. However, when Obama came into office, the new EPA said it basically agreed with the critics and would issue revised rules by August 2010. At that point, the ALA agreed to hold off on its lawsuit. But August 2010 rolled around. Still no rules. Then October. Then November. Still nothing. Then the EPA said it wanted to go back and look at the science again, just to double-check. Sure enough, EPA’s scientific review board said that 60 to 70 parts per billion was the way to go. And EPA administrator Lisa Jackson announced that the final rules would be more or less in line with the science [...]

So now, today, the White House announced that it’s not going to have any new rules. On a call with reporters, White House officials argued that it doesn’t make sense to put out new rules in 2011 when there’s going to be another scheduled review of the ozone science in 2013."

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP