Thursday, February 23, 2006
On the Environment Kelly Gets a Failing Grade
It's one thing for a Congresswoman to come home to her district and circulate environmentally friendly press releases and photo-op pictures, and quite another to actually have an environmentally friendly voting record in Washington, DC. These contradictory actions constitute business-as-usual for Sue Kelly.
You see, the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), the political voice of the national environmental movement and the only organization devoted full-time to shaping a pro-environment Congress and White House, has given Representative Sue Kelly an abysmal 17% ranking in its 2005 scorecard.
While Kelly's colleagues to the South and West, Congresswoman Nita Lowey and Congressman Maurice Hinchey, each received high marks (94% and 89% respectively), the LCV scorecard shows Sue Kelly at the very bottom of the list when it comes to the New York Congressional delegation and their support for the environment. Kelly has a long record of being on the wrong side of environmental issues. In 1995, after campaigning as a staunch environmentalist, Kelly voted for the so-called Clean Water Act, which made huge revisions to the original Clean Water Act of 1972. Pushed by the right-wing Congressional leadership, the bill eased dozens of pollution controls for industries and cities and repealed federal protections for most of the nation’s wetlands. In 2005, Kelly did not vote on an alternative energy plan that would bring immediate relief to consumers at the pump, increase the nation’s investment into renewable fuels and energy efficiency and crack down on price gouging. The measure called on the President to suspend deliveries to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and put the oil on the marketplace, which in 2000 brought down gasoline prices by 14 cents per gallon and crude oil prices by $6 per barrel.
You see, the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), the political voice of the national environmental movement and the only organization devoted full-time to shaping a pro-environment Congress and White House, has given Representative Sue Kelly an abysmal 17% ranking in its 2005 scorecard.While Kelly's colleagues to the South and West, Congresswoman Nita Lowey and Congressman Maurice Hinchey, each received high marks (94% and 89% respectively), the LCV scorecard shows Sue Kelly at the very bottom of the list when it comes to the New York Congressional delegation and their support for the environment. Kelly has a long record of being on the wrong side of environmental issues. In 1995, after campaigning as a staunch environmentalist, Kelly voted for the so-called Clean Water Act, which made huge revisions to the original Clean Water Act of 1972. Pushed by the right-wing Congressional leadership, the bill eased dozens of pollution controls for industries and cities and repealed federal protections for most of the nation’s wetlands. In 2005, Kelly did not vote on an alternative energy plan that would bring immediate relief to consumers at the pump, increase the nation’s investment into renewable fuels and energy efficiency and crack down on price gouging. The measure called on the President to suspend deliveries to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and put the oil on the marketplace, which in 2000 brought down gasoline prices by 14 cents per gallon and crude oil prices by $6 per barrel.
Comments:
<< Home
17% is better than Peter Kings 11%. Not by much though.
To get a score that low do they have to clear-cut trees and pour chemicals into estuaries?
How can they get such a low mark?
www.kingwatch.blogspot.com
To get a score that low do they have to clear-cut trees and pour chemicals into estuaries?
How can they get such a low mark?
www.kingwatch.blogspot.com
Let's talk about lame for a minute. Here's what Kelly's folks was telling reporters yesterday: that the reason the score was so low was that she was at her mother-in-laws funeral and wake. Talk about manipulation!
Here's the real story: Of the 18 votes tracked by LCV, 6 of those votes did in fact occur on April 20-21 when Kelly missed voting for personal reasons. But of the 12 votes tracked by LCV that Kelly did vote on, she voted against the LCV 9 times and for them only 3 times. That's not exactly a stellar record.
Furthermore, five of those votes passed by very slim margins, with 3 passing by only 2 vote margins. Wanna guess which side Kelly was on? Not the LCV's!
Kelly's folks can keep spinning. We'll keep writing about the facts.
Post a Comment
Here's the real story: Of the 18 votes tracked by LCV, 6 of those votes did in fact occur on April 20-21 when Kelly missed voting for personal reasons. But of the 12 votes tracked by LCV that Kelly did vote on, she voted against the LCV 9 times and for them only 3 times. That's not exactly a stellar record.
Furthermore, five of those votes passed by very slim margins, with 3 passing by only 2 vote margins. Wanna guess which side Kelly was on? Not the LCV's!
Kelly's folks can keep spinning. We'll keep writing about the facts.
<< Home
