|« Equal Opportunity? (or not)||MN - Poverty In The Wealthiest County In Texas »|
Editorial: Perry should bypass pro-pollution lawsuit
Dallas Morning News Editorial
Friday, April 11, 2008
Texas has dirty air.
City dwellers who dare to venture outdoors during ozone season choke on lung-scarring pollutants. And an unhealthy haze hangs over the state's urban areas.
Apparently, Rick Perry likes it that way.
When the Environmental Protection Agency announced new clean-air standards last month, Texas' governor groused that the pollution limits were bad for business. Never mind that the state's smoggy air is bad for breathing.
Mr. Perry is so committed to maintaining current pollution levels that he's considering joining a lawsuit to stop the stricter standards from being implemented. The National Association of Attorneys General recently sent an e-mail to gauge states' interest in suing the EPA.
In Texas, no final decision has been made, but officials in Mr. Perry's office say they're keeping their options open.
The notion that the Bush administration is too aggressively protecting the environment is a new one.
Are you for states' rights or not?
It seems that when the Feds were intervening in the Terry Schiavo case, the liberals were all howling about states' rights and how the Feds don't have jurisdiction.
But when it comes to the EPA dictating to all states what their air standards should be, we all think that's fine?
Again, the devil is in the details. What are the details here? What is the current standard in Texas and what is the average in the country and what is the EPA wanting and what are the CONSEQUENCES of that new policy? We don't know that from the DMN's editorial, of course.
E85 corn ethanol was an emotional policy that has jacked up the price of food all over the world and created more starvation, while not improving air pollution one bit. Great job!
"Rick Perry wants to kill puppies!" Give me a break.
I love the "objective" line about the Bush administration and the environment with no reference to back it up.
Yes, Bush is evil, Perry is evil...no reasons, just they are. They are Republicans.
I loved how Clinton didn't have an energy policy at all and nobody cared. I loved how air pollution and homelessness weren't even problems while Clinton was president.
Clinton didn't spend a dime on Africa. Nobody cared. Bush spends billions and saves lives. Nobody cares.
Indeed, emotional, knee-jerk response that is partisan in nature.
The Terry Schiavo soap opera is analogous to manmade climate change? Making Americans ill is a "state's right"? And this weird, vaguely misogynist rational-versus-emotional dichotomy?
Bill, I know it's your blog and all, but some pruning may be in order in these comment sections.
The cry for states rights is one I haven't heard since I was a wee little lad back in 1864.
You must not have read the blogs that day - the states-righter's lost the war.
Air pollution crosses state lines. The Feds can, should and do regulate emissions.
I just wish they did a better job. And I wish Perry would take the side of Texans health, not only that of his campaign contributers.
Comments are closed for this post.