• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush gets EPA to stop Gas Regulation for his Republican Contributors

dmcowen674

No Lifer
2-15-2004 White House Shelved MTBE Ban for Contributors

The Bush administration quietly shelved a proposal to ban a gasoline additive that contaminates drinking water in many communities, helping an industry that has donated more than $1 million to Republicans.

The EPA's decision had its origin in the early days of President Bush's tenure when his administration decided not to move ahead with a Clinton-era regulatory effort to ban the clean-air additive MTBE.

On their own, 17 states banned the additive and dozens of communities are suing the oil industry.

Three MTBE producers account for half the additive's daily output.

The three contributed $338,000 to George W. Bush's presidential campaign, the Republican Party and Republican congressional candidates in 1999 and 2000...Since then, the three producers have given just over $1 million to Republicans.

The producers are Texas-based Lyondell Chemical and Valero Energy and the Huntsman companies of Salt Lake City.

"This is a classic case of the Bush administration helping its campaign contributor friends at the expense of public health," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust, a Washington-based environmental group.
 
Originally posted by: XZeroII
We all know that Bush does stuff for contributers. Tell me something I don't know for a change
what? you are not telling that he should be castrated so he wont reproduce, what happened?
 
Just the other day you where whining about pollution. I'm sure you don't know this, but MTBE reduces the amount of air pollution from cas. So, we have traded one evil for another.

What is it you want Dave, do you want Bush to move this bill through so you can champion him for protecting the environment or will you only attack him that our air will be dirtier without MTBE??

[edit]

Here's another question, how many of our resident communist liberals actually know how MTBE contamination gets into the ground...... ....... ......???
 
For cryin out loud. Clintons EPA forced MTBE on the industry even in the face of questions about it's safety and potential environmental hazards. No one was able to change the Clinton Administrations position. Now Bush's EPA doesn't come through with a Ban. I think we would do well to remember who opened the MTBE can of worms to begin with.
 
Originally posted by: NesuD
For cryin out loud. Clintons EPA forced MTBE on the industry even in the face of questions about it's safety and potential environmental hazards. No one was able to change the Clinton Administrations position. Now Bush's EPA doesn't come through with a Ban. I think we would do well to remember who opened the MTBE can of worms to begin with.
Anything to back this up? As I remember it, MTBE was a choice made by companies that didn't want to use ethanol or other, better alternatives.


 
Originally posted by: XZeroII
We all know that Bush does stuff for contributers. Tell me something I don't know for a change
Umm, how about: The President is elected to serve the interests of the American people, NOT special interests with deep pockets. In the old days this was called bribery and it was a cause for putting politicians in jail. Your apathetic ethical standards are one of the reasons this country is going to hell.
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: NesuD
For cryin out loud. Clintons EPA forced MTBE on the industry even in the face of questions about it's safety and potential environmental hazards. No one was able to change the Clinton Administrations position. Now Bush's EPA doesn't come through with a Ban. I think we would do well to remember who opened the MTBE can of worms to begin with.
Anything to back this up? As I remember it, MTBE was a choice made by companies that didn't want to use ethanol or other, better alternatives.

It was one of the many oxygenators available when this law was passed, it was also cheapest at the time(still is i assume). The law was written knowing that MTBE would likely be the choice for many gas producers.
 
Umm, how about: The President is elected to serve the interests of the American people, NOT special interests with deep pockets.

So then I guess we can expect you to not vote for Kerry, right? Heaven forbid you be branded a hypocrite for being apethetic to political bribery simply because of partisanship.
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: XZeroII
We all know that Bush does stuff for contributers. Tell me something I don't know for a change
Umm, how about: The President is elected to serve the interests of the American people, NOT special interests with deep pockets. In the old days this was called bribery and it was a cause for putting politicians in jail. Your apathetic ethical standards are one of the reasons this country is going to hell.

all interests are special, and all politicians take bri... ert, campaign donations
 
Originally posted by: Corn
Umm, how about: The President is elected to serve the interests of the American people, NOT special interests with deep pockets.

So then I guess we can expect you to not vote for Kerry, right? Heaven forbid you be branded a hypocrite for being apethetic to political bribery simply because of partisanship.
Frankly, I don't care for Kerry for that very reason. Nonetheless, I find him 100-fold better than Bush the Lesser. Coincidentally, that's about how much more special interest bribes^h^h^h^h^h^h contributions Bush has taken compared to Kerry.
 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: XZeroII
We all know that Bush does stuff for contributers. Tell me something I don't know for a change
Umm, how about: The President is elected to serve the interests of the American people, NOT special interests with deep pockets. In the old days this was called bribery and it was a cause for putting politicians in jail. Your apathetic ethical standards are one of the reasons this country is going to hell.
all interests are special, and all politicians take bri... ert, campaign donations
Perhaps, but some politicians take most of their bribes retail, i.e., small contributions from many individuals. Dean would be a prime example. Others take their bribes wholesale like Bush, where a few special interests deliver massive contributions. The former approach gives us a government more responsive to the people. This is how it should be. The latter approach gives us a government that focuses on pleasing their special interest masters. This gives us the Bush administration.

 
Frankly, I don't care for Kerry for that very reason. Nonetheless, I find him 100-fold better than Bush the Lesser. Coincidentally, that's about how much more special interest bribes^h^h^h^h^h^h contributions Bush has taken compared to Kerry.

Thank you for admiting your hypocrisy. It is refreshing to hear, and I appreciate your candor in detailing your lack of principle. You are a fine example for the budding liberal mind.
 
Originally posted by: Corn
Frankly, I don't care for Kerry for that very reason. Nonetheless, I find him 100-fold better than Bush the Lesser. Coincidentally, that's about how much more special interest bribes^h^h^h^h^h^h contributions Bush has taken compared to Kerry.
Thank you for admiting your hypocrisy. It is refreshing to hear, and I appreciate your candor in detailing your lack of principle. You are a fine example for the budding liberal mind.
You sir, are a complete and utter moron, a walking, talking personality disorder, a wasted bag of meat. While I have no doubt you can twist my honest statement into something hypocritical in that festering cesspool you call a mind, I am confident rational people do not share your brain spasms.
 
While I have no doubt you can twist my honest statement into something hypocritical in that festering cesspool you call a mind, I am confident rational people do not share your brain spasms.

Hah! Check this:

As with most senior Democrats, Kerry's revolving-door record with lobbyists and donors is one to make Cheney and Bush look like amateurs

Evidently he doesn't share your opinion of Kerry .vs Bush "bribery". Neither do I.

I know, your "heart" tells you Bush is a bigger special interest whore than Kerry.......however; I don't believe that for a second and all the foaming at the mouth ranting and raving you can muster won't do much to obscure the truth in that regard.

Nice string of insults though, must have taken quite a bit of effort to compose that beauty. Rest up.
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: XZeroII
We all know that Bush does stuff for contributers. Tell me something I don't know for a change
Umm, how about: The President is elected to serve the interests of the American people, NOT special interests with deep pockets. In the old days this was called bribery and it was a cause for putting politicians in jail. Your apathetic ethical standards are one of the reasons this country is going to hell.

lol, it's funny how you just go and attack me for some innocent comment. In fact, I DID know that. And I'm very interested in knowing why you would think I didn't and why you question my ethical standards.
 
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: XZeroII
We all know that Bush does stuff for contributers. Tell me something I don't know for a change
what? you are not telling that he should be castrated so he wont reproduce, what happened?

If he asked a stupid question like, "When are we going to invade England?" then yes, he should be castrated. Until that day, he keeps his package.
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: Corn
Frankly, I don't care for Kerry for that very reason. Nonetheless, I find him 100-fold better than Bush the Lesser. Coincidentally, that's about how much more special interest bribes^h^h^h^h^h^h contributions Bush has taken compared to Kerry.
Thank you for admiting your hypocrisy. It is refreshing to hear, and I appreciate your candor in detailing your lack of principle. You are a fine example for the budding liberal mind.
You sir, are a complete and utter moron, a walking, talking personality disorder, a wasted bag of meat. While I have no doubt you can twist my honest statement into something hypocritical in that festering cesspool you call a mind, I am confident rational people do not share your brain spasms.

Like what you do to me?
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: XZeroII
We all know that Bush does stuff for contributers. Tell me something I don't know for a change
Umm, how about: The President is elected to serve the interests of the American people, NOT special interests with deep pockets. In the old days this was called bribery and it was a cause for putting politicians in jail. Your apathetic ethical standards are one of the reasons this country is going to hell.
all interests are special, and all politicians take bri... ert, campaign donations
Perhaps, but some politicians take most of their bribes retail, i.e., small contributions from many individuals. Dean would be a prime example. Others take their bribes wholesale like Bush, where a few special interests deliver massive contributions. The former approach gives us a government more responsive to the people. This is how it should be. The latter approach gives us a government that focuses on pleasing their special interest masters. This gives us the Bush administration.

while i'll agree that dean does seem pretty unique in the make up of his donors, the vast majority of politicians (inc kerry, edwards, bush, gore, and just about everyone else) are bought and paid for by big money. even labor is big money (espeically back when they forced members to bundle checks) with its own "special" interests (having as few people compete with them as possible).

i'd like to point out that the MTBE ban was yet another of those things clinton proposed by executive order in the final days of his administration. the only point to the vast majority of them was to give the democrats to cry foul about when bush didn't implement them the next month. no one cried when clinton didn't issue them when he actually had some power, but people cry when bush doesn't implement them. why is that?
 
some other parts of the article:
The Associated Press obtained a draft of the proposed regulation that former President Clinton (news - web sites)'s EPA sent to the White House on its last full day in office in January 2001.

It said: "The use of MTBE as an additive in gasoline presents an unreasonable risk to the environment."

The EPA document went on to say that "low levels of MTBE can render drinking water supplies unpotable due to its offensive taste and odor," and the additive should be phased out over four years.

"Because of MTBE there has been a marked improvement in air quality and reduction in toxics in the air," Olsen said. "Because of leaking underground storage tanks in some relatively few instances, MTBE found its way into places it shouldn't be.

Georgetown University law professor Lisa Heinzerling said regulating MTBE would be difficult, but "if we can't use the Toxic Substances Control Act to regulate MTBE, which has contaminated water supplies all over the country, then what can you use it for?"

well i'd like to take a look at these. how much groundwater has it gotten into? all over the place like the one lady says, or just a few places like the industry guy says? how much of a threat is it? it tastes funny? is that all? doesn't seem like there is enough information here.
 
Back
Top