Monthly Archives: May 2006

How Congressman Reichert Uses Advantages of Incumbency to Reach Voters

Monday night US Representative Dave Reichert’s Mercer Island office was open until 9 PM helping seniors sign up for the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefits Program. Congressman Reichert is running for re-election in Washington’s 8th Congressional District. He is facing a strong challenge from Democrat Darcy Burner.

Reading his press release from last Thursday one almost could conclude that the Republicans in Congress passed this program as part of their re-election strategy. Make the program so complicated that Congressman Reichert has to have an:

“ongoing effort to assist seniors during the sign-up period. In addition to keeping his office open late, Congressman Reichert has sent over 125,000 pieces of mail to constituents that explains the program and provides sign-up information. He has made over 40,000 phone calls to seniors in his District about the program. He has held 16 workshops, helping seniors to sign-up and giving them access to the program’s experts.”

In an April 10, 2006 press release he announced workshops in Eatonville, Orting, Carnation, Bellevue and Boney Lake.

On May 3, 2006 , he announced additional workshops in Eatonville and Renton.

All this of course is paid for by the taxpayers. What I found intriguing was that “He has made over 40,000 calls to Seniors in his District” One has to wonder how he was able to get anything else done during this time in Congress or even have any time to spend with his family.

Assuming he only spent 2 minutes per constituent, which is short considering how absurdly complicated the program is, it would comprise some 1333 hours of his time. At 8 hours a day that’s some 166 days. If he did this for 5 days a week, he’s now spent some 33 weeks talking to Seniors or over half a year just on this one issue.

He must be getting tired. Maybe that’s the reason his press release makes no mention of extending the sign up time without a penalty. In fact one has to wonder why there is any penalty at all for signing up later. Isn’t this program supposed to benefit Seniors or is it meant to punish Seniors?

Of course we all know this program wasn’t really meant to help Seniors that much or it would have allowed for bulk buying of drugs to reduce costs to Seniors. Because in point of fact, the legislation is really a Prescription Drug Company Price Guarantee Act.

 

HorsesAss.org Once Again Makes the Headlines -this Time in the Seattle PI

Horsesass.org is an irreverent in-your-face political blog that originates out of Seattle, Washington. This morning, the face and name behind Horsesass.org, David Goldstein, aka Goldy, was staring me in the face as I opened the Seattle PI. I was just getting ready to drink some coffee but David’s mug gave me the same jolt. You see, his picture was covering about a sixth of the page.

The story, Political bloggers step in to rally the troops. Sites create buzz, raise funds for the candidates is a well deserved tribute to David who has doggedly pursued his passion of writing and writing and writing and saying whatever he is passionate about at the moment. Some 2000 people visit his site every day looking for his pearls of wit and and satire and sarcasm as he engages his readers in a “tell it as he sees it” conversation.

The article notes the increasing role of bloggers in political campaigns. The Darcy Burner campaign is discussed from the perspective of the help bloggers have given her in building up her campaign and in critical fundraising. Burner is a Democrat running for Congress against first term incumbent Republican Dave Reichert.

Reichert has tried to represent himself as a moderate but as Daniel Kirkdorfer points out in his blog On the Road to 2008 blog, Reichert has voted some 94% of the time with the majority Republican position. You can visit the site for a more detailed analysis.

David recently celebrated his 2nd birthday as a blogger. He has posted some 1624 times. Rumor has it that neither Michael Brown or David Irons sent him a congratulatory card. Whatever happened to Emily Post etiquette?

If You Disagree with Tim Eyman he Wants to Send You to Jail

Poor Tim Eyman. Things must really be getting tough for his getting signatures on his anti- government type initiatives. Now he wants that same government to protect him whose funds and services he keeps trying to cut with his initiatives. Tim files lots of initiatives in Washington State. It’s his business.

As he puts it, he doesn’t want people who oppose his initiatives to be “pushing, shoving, touching, spitting, or throwing objects, yelling, screaming, or being verbally abusive, blocking or intimidating” him when he asks them to cut government services like libraries or fixing roads or keeping fire and police stations open.

And he means business because, gasp, he’s filed another initiative. More business.

Anyway, there are already laws against “pushing, shoving, touching, spitting, or throwing objects, yelling, screaming, or being verbally abusive, blocking or intimidation” Its usually goes under the definition of harassment. All you need to do is call 911, Tim. That’s one of the services our tax dollars provide. And fortunately your effort to reduce local tax dollars with Initiative 864 failed so you didn’t further force us to cut local police services.

But existing laws aren’t good enough for Tim it seems. He wants special protection because he is such a special and important person carrying out his, I mean, the people’s business. He also doesn’t want anyone who disagrees with him “being within twenty feet of any person gathering signatures and any person trying to sign a petition.”

In other words Tim wants to abolish free speech, you know, like void the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Well good luck Tim. You’ve joined hands and minds (sic) with President Bush who likewise wants to remove anyone who disagrees with him. But you’re one upping him. He only moves them a mile or two away.

And your penalty for being within 20 feet of Tim Eyman while he’s getting signatures and you say something like “Are you kidding? I won’t sign your initiative and I urge anyone else who can hear me, also not to sign.” A class C Felony. You know like the felony where you lose your right to vote. Oh and a class C felony sends you to jail for at least 1 year and up to 5 years. Tim also wants you to be fined up to $10,000.

Welcome to Tim’s world. Tim, say Hi to Karl the next time you see him.

BIAW Kills Proposed Rule that Drinking Water be Available at all Times for Farm Workers

The Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW), according to KPLU, is bragging how they stopped an emergency rule that required that ” drinking water be available at all times” for farm workers and other outdoor workers. The proposed rule also would have required a shaded rest area and education efforts for workers and supervisors about the danger of heat stress.

My wife last night mentioned that she had heard the story on KPLU and this morning I went to their website and listened to it. I am just as appalled as she was in listening to it. Click here to listen to the broadcast “Heat Stress: The Politics Behind State Rule-Making”

BIAW Human Resources Analyst Amy Brackenbury in the KPLU newscast indignantly retorts, “Are you serious with this? Another, you know, this is just another thing that we are going to have to do. This is very frustrating.”

Oh how horrible it is, how frustrating it is that people sweat in the sun, harvesting crops, so we can have food to eat and they need to drink water. What is the matter with these people? Drink water? Isn’t it enough that we let them work for us?

Well what are the consequences of not providing water? Like maybe death? KPLU reports that last summer a 64 year old farm worker died from heat stress in Washington State. No drinking water was available. Four deaths were also reported last year in California, including a Kern County, California farm worker. And many workers can suffer heat related illnesses that do not result in death but still are serious.

Unless the BIAW doesn’t read what it links to on its own website, it should be well aware of the dangers.The BIAW links to the “Heat Stress” information page of the Washington State Bureau of Labor and Industries .

In an EPA document on that page entitled “Heat Stress in Agriculture” it says that

“High air temperatures and humidities put agricultural workers at special risk of heat illness. Worker Compensation claims for heat illness among agricultural workers are among the highest of any occupation. …

Heat stress is the buildup in the body of heat generated by the muscles during work and of heat coming from warm and hot environments. Heat exhaustion and heat stroke result when the body is subjected to more heat than it can cope with.

When the body becomes overheated, less blood goes to the active muscles, the brain, and other internal organs. Workers get weaker, become tired sooner, and may be less alert, less able to use good judgment, and less able to do their jobs well.

As strain from heat becomes more severe, there can be a rapid rise in body temperature and heart rate. Workers may not realize that this is happening because there is no pain. Mental performance can be affected with an increase in body temperature of 2oF above normal. An increase of 5oF can result in serious illness or death.

The most serious illness is heat stroke. Its effects can include confusion, irrational behavior, convulsions, coma, and even death. Heat stroke can make survivors very sensitive to heat for months and cause varying degrees of brain and kidney damage. More than 20 percent of people afflicted by heat stroke die, even young and healthy adults. An average of nearly 500 people are killed each year in the United States by the effects of heat.

During hot weather, heat illness may be an underlying cause of other types of injuries, such as heart attacks on the job, falls, and equipment accidents arising from poor judgment.
What do workers need in terms of water? The AgSafeWorker on the same “heat stress” page says:

Research in sports, exercise, military and some industrial settings has yielded lessons about heat stress that are very applicable but not widely understood or easily applied in agricultural workplaces.Not surprisingly, the single measure that these studies suggest as most important for reducing risks of heat stress is to steadily replenish the fluid that the body loses as sweat. Because thirst is a late signal of a water deficit, drinking based on what we know is a safer strategy than drinking based on what we feel. Chugging to quench an intense thirst is no more timely than pouring water on a wilted plant.

The amount of water needed to replace sweat loss is a function of workload, weather, and personal physical attributes. A military guideline recommends drinking one quart per hour when performing hard work and wearing protective gear in 90+ degree temperatures and resting for 50 minutes per hour!
For moderate work in temperatures of 82-90 degrees, the standard is about 3/4 quart and only 20 minutes of rest per hour. Of course, few if any businesses can afford to follow those rest guidelines, but all can strive to help workers meet the fluid replenishment advice.

Washington’s current regulation covering farmworkers and heat stress was written over 33 years ago. It is printed below:

WAC 296-62-09013 Temperature, radiant heat, or temperature-humidity combinations.(1) Workmen subjected to temperature extremes, radiant heat, humidity, or air velocity combinations which, over a period of time, are likely to produce physiological responses which are harmful shall be afforded protection by use of adequate controls, methods or procedures, or protective clothing. This shall not be construed to apply to normal occupations under atmospheric conditions which may be expected in the area except that special provisions which are required by other regulations for certain areas or occupations shall prevail.[Order 73-3, 296-62-09013, filed 5/7/73.]

I highlighted the second sentence because one could easily interpret the second sentence as voiding the weak first sentence because farming is a “normal occupation in Yakima and it is usually hot in the summer” so there is no need for regulation.

At the request of the United Farm workers, the Department of Labor and Industries was asked to implement an emergency rule to help protect farmworkers from heat related illnesses and death. California, after four deaths of farmworkers last year, put just such an emergency
regulation in effect at the request of Governor Schwarzenegger.

United Farmworkers proposed that Washington State implement a similar three part rule: to prevent heat stroke and other heat stress illness:

1. Make drinking water available at all times.
2. Provide a shaded rest area.
3. Educate employers and employees about the dangers of heat stress.

Labor and industries started the review process to put in place a new rule.

In the truest sense of showing concern for farmworkers, Amy Brackenbury of the BIAW showed the BIAW’s keen sense of compassion and concern for fellow human beings by opposing the rule change. ON KPLU she responded, “We made it very clear from the very beginning. If Labor and Industries continued down this track they were headed, we would challenge it in court. If not successful there, we, you know, would take it to the people like we did with the ergonomics rule several years ago.”

Labor and Industry, like true cowards, cowered by the mighty BIAW, caved in. Who needs water anyway? They have keep the present rule as is, supposedly made some change in a rule for indoor workers and decided to push education.

Meanwhile I heard the BIAW has removed all drinking water access from their organization’s building in Olympia, saying that if its good enough for the farm workers, its good enough for them. Employees are responsible for bringing their own water. They are strictly monitored for any abuses. They said it was a show of their solidarity for the farmworkers.

Meanwhile in the real world The United Farm Workers are continuing their campaign for farm worker water and shade requirements and urge that Gary Weeks, the Director of Labor and Industry, not accept the final rule modification adopted but instead implement the earlier proposed rule, specifically requiring water and shade be available for all workers. By clicking here you can go to the United Farm Workers Action page and send an e-mail to Labor and Industry asking whether they are a tool of the BIAW or if they represent workers in this state.

The BIAW is the same BIAW that in the last several elections has pumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into its PAC’s to skirt campaign finance laws limiting direct contributions to candidates. Their candidates receiving this so called “independent”‘ support have include Rob McKenna in his race for Washington State Attorney General and two Supreme Court Justices – Justice Jim Johnson and Saunders.

On election night the BIAW reported in its own newsletter that McKenna had called them and said “if it were not for the BIAW I wouldn’t have been elected.” The BIAW had spent some $275,000 on 1200 TV ads attacking McKenna’s opponent.

The BIAW gave some $100,000 directly to Jim Johnson’s race for Washington State Supreme Court in 2004. The Washington State Legislature this year passed legislation limiting such direct contributions in the future to Supreme Court Justices. This year the BIAW is planning to do like it did with McKenna and spend the money on it’s own as it works to elect more BIAW type Supreme Court Justices. I wonder if their candidates will agree with the BIAW that farmworkers don’t need water or shade?

Press Release Attorney General Rob McKenna Should Join Federal Lawsuit on Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Standards

Press Release May 8, 2006
For Immediate Release
For More Information Contact
Steve Zemke 206-999-6095

Why is Attorney General Rob McKenna not Defending Washington’s Clean Car Act?

Is over $36,000 in campaign contributions from automotive interests affecting Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna decision not to join a Federal lawsuit?

Last Tuesday the State of California and 9 other states plus New York City and Washington, DC filed a Federal lawsuit challenging the Bush Administration’s fuel economy standards for SUV’s and light trucks. They alleged that the standards were too weak, were costing consumers money and failed to address global warming and other environmental concerns.

Attached to the regulations issued in March was a 52 page memorandum from the Bush Administration alleging that the Federal Government, not states, have the ability to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. This is despite the Federal Clean Air Act saying states could choose either Federal clean air standards or California’s.

Here is a lawsuit that follows the intent of Washington’s Clean Car Act passed last year by the Washington State Legislature and which in part is a direct response to President Bush’s challenge to a state’s right to regulate dangerous car emissions. Yet our Attorney General fails to join with other states, which have passed Clean Car Legislation modeled after California’s pioneering legislation, in challenging Washington State’s right to protect its citizens from harmful emissions and global warming

“One has to wonder just whose interests our Attorney General is representing. Is it the citizens of Washington State? Is it laws passed by our state Legislature? Or is it the interest of campaign contributors?” asked Steve Zemke, who writes the MajorityRulesBlog.

Zemke continued, “Is there a desire of the AG not to challenge the policies of the Bush Administration because they are from the same political party? Or is it because the AG doesn’t feel we need to reduce emissions contributing to global warming?”

On Wednesday Steve Zemke e-mailed and called the Attorney General’s office asking for an explanation of why Attorney General Rob McKenna hadn’t joined the lawsuit. Late Friday, after inquiry by the media started, the Attorney General’s Office contacted Steve Zemke of MajorityRulesBlog to say that they would respond to his request for an explanation.

They said there would be a written statement on Monday afternoon explaining Attorney General Rob McKenna’s position. “All the Attorney General has to do is say he is joining the lawsuit,” said Steve Zemke

Resources:

MajorityRulesBlog Missing in Action – Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna
MajorityRulesBlog – Update on Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna Asleep at the Wheel
MajorityRulesBlog 2nd Update – Still Waiting to Hear from Attorney General Rob McKenna
MajorityRules Blog 3rd Update –Washington State Attorney General McKenna Should Join Car Fuel Efficiency Lawsuit

Washington Post – 10 States Sue over Fuel Economy Standards

Oregon Attorney General’s Press Release – Governor, Attorney General Sue Feds over Fuel Efficiency Standards

New York Attorney General Press Release – State and City Sue For Better Fuel Efficiency Standards

Washington’s Clean Car Act HB 1937

3rd Update -Washington State Attorney General McKenna Should Join Car Fuel Efficiency Lawsuit.

Last Tuesday the Attorneys General of 10 states filed a Federal lawsuit urging stronger fuel efficiency standards for SUV’s and light trucks. Lead by California, the other states on the lawsuit included Oregon, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Vermont.

Conspiciously absent from the lawsuit was Washington State. Almost all of the states filing the lawsuit have passed Clean Car Legislation patterned after California’s. Washington State passed such legislation last year. The Federal Government when it issued new fuel efficiency standards in March asserted that only the Federal Government, not the states could regulate CO2 emissions.

Majority Rules Blog has posted 3 times in the last week asking the question of why Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna is missing in action in defending Washington’s Clean Car Act. We called the Attorney General’s office and e-mailed the Attorney General’s office asking for an explanation. Finally late Friday we got a call back saying that a formal response was being written and would be reviewed by the Attorney General and available on Monday afternoon.

While we will be interested in seeing what explanation Attorney General Rob McKenna may come up with for not initially joining the lawsuit, we believe that Rob McKenna should act now to join the lawsuit. Washington State needs to join with other states in efforts increase fuel efficiency in new vehicles which will save consumers money, as well as increase efforts to reduce CO2 emissions which are a main contributor to global warming.

Rob McKenna is a Republican Attorney General and had received over $36,000 from automotive interests in his campaign for Attorney General. Republicans as represented by the Bush Administration have long resisted efforts to increase automobile fuel efficiency standards and President Bush has vigorously resisted efforts to reduce global warming by reducing CO2 emissions.

We urge Rob McKenna to step outside the Republican rhetoric if this has affected his decision not to join in efforts of other Attorneys General to increase car fuel efficiency, save consumers money nd reduce global warming. McKenna needs to act in the best interests of Washington State citizens and fight for their needs, not the needs of an intransigent car industry that is fighting needed change.

references:

MajorityRulesBlog Missing in Action – Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna
MajorityRulesBlog – Update on Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna Asleep at the Wheel
MajorityRulesBlog 2nd Update – Still Waiting to Hear from Attorney General Rob McKenna

2nd Update – Still Waiting to Hear From Attorney General Rob McKenna

Since I both called and e-mailed Attorney General McKenna on Wednesday, I still have not received a reply. My question – Why didn’t Rob McKenna join  the lawsuit filed on May 2, 2006 by California and 9 other states questioning the fuel efficiency standards issued by the Bush Administration?

One issue of particular concern is the 52 page memorandum attached by President Bush to the standards issued at the end of March which challenged the right of states to regulate CO2 emissions. This was saying the Federal Government overrode any standards set by the Clean Car Act HB 1937 passed by the Washington State Legislature.

I speculated it might have something to do with a number of his campaign contributions coming from people who worked in the automotive industry. But maybe its something even more basic. Rob McKenna is a Republican. Republicans in general don’t believe in regulation and support the concept of free enterprise – even when it threatens the lives and health of people in Washington state. Rising gas prices are just part of business as usual. Companies can charge whatever they want. They can make whatever profit they can gouge out of consumers.

Maybe Rob McKenna doesn’t think that we know enough about global warming to act to try to reduce greenhouse gases. That what Bush says and McKenna would be a disloyal Republican to challenge the beliefs of his Commander in Chief. That despite the fact that almost all scientists believe that we are facing a real problem and that it is fair to call it a crisis.

In the preamble to HB 1937 it says:

(2) Air pollution levels routinely measured in the state of Washington continue to harm public health, the environment, and the economy. Air pollution causes or contributes to premature death, cancer, asthma, and heart and lung disease. Over half of the state’s population suffers from one or more medical conditions that make them very vulnerable to air pollution. Air pollution increases pain and suffering for vulnerable individuals. Air pollution imposes several hundred million dollars annually in added health care costs for air pollution-associated death and illness, reducing the quality of life and economic security of the citizens of Washington;
(3) Reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from transportation sources are necessary, and it is equitable to seek such reductions because reductions in greenhouse gas emissions have already been initiated in other sectors such as power generation

New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in his press release announcing joining the lawsuit stated:

“At a time when consumers are struggling to pay surging gas prices and the challenge of global climate change has become even more clear, it is unconscionable that the Bush administration is not requiring greater mileage efficiency for light trucks,” said Attorney General Spitzer. “The failure of this Administration to lead on vital environmental issues like this will burden our nation for generations to come.”

Meanwhile Rob McKenna, according to the the Attorney General’s website, is busy monitoring gasoline pricing.

“Recent actions in participation with other state attorneys general The Washington State Attorney General’s Office works in close cooperation with other Western states to review the factors influencing the price of petroleum products in the West. This office has and will continue to work with other state and federal agencies to insure petroleum prices remain competitive.”

In the past several weeks, gasoline prices in Washington have reached record levels. The Attorney General’s Office regularly monitors gasoline pricing to determine whether price increases indicate possible anticompetitive behavior or reflect normal market forces….Current high prices appear to be a reflection of a tight supply/demand balance. Furthermore, all indications are that prices will tend to remain high.

It is instructive to note that while a number of action were taken against oil companies to protect Washington consumers during Gregoire’s tenure, there is a conspicuous absence of action since 2002.

My concern is the role of the Attorney General in protecting Washington citizens from rising gas prices and global warming, issues addressed partially by HB 1937. By all indications we not being represented by Rob McKenna. It appears he is being loyal to the Bush mantra by following the failed policies of President Bush. When the largest oil companies are reporting record profits while consumers are being hit with record gas prices, how is that just “normal market forces”. Our economy and people’s jobs are dependent on a gasoline run car society. What choice do people have?

It would be one thing if oil companies were making profits somewhere in the middle of U.S. companies, but people are feeling real pain. When an oil company like Exxon Mobil breaks a record $36 billion last year, making the most profit of any US company, and sets another record for the first quarter of 2006, exceeding last years 1st quarter, with a profit of $8.4 billion this is I’m supposed to believe according to McKenna, just “normal competition.”

Conoco Philips and Chevron also came in with huge profits.They’re not feeling any pain are they, unless it their aching muscles raking in all the dough Americans are giving them by inflated prices at the gas pumps?

Let’s face it. Rob McKenna is doing the little feel good things with his public service ads promoting himself but he is just another Republican. Republicans represent corporate interests like automotive companies and oil companies, not the average citizen. Two days ago he had posted on the state website that no price gouging was occurring with gasoline prices. Today I can’t find it. Maybe he had to go out and fill up his car.

Update on Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna Asleep at the Wheel

On Tuesday I speculated aloud about why Washington State was not a party to the Lawsuit filed by California and 9 others states plus the city of New York and the District of Columbia challenging the weak Federal Fuel Efficiency Standards issued in March.. I wondered if it could have been because McKenna received some 28 contributions over $1000 each (over $36,000) from automobile interests when he ran for Washington State Attorney General.

To be fair I have a call into the Attorney General’s Office asking why Washington State is not a party to this lawsuit. When the Bush Administration issued the fuel efficiency standards in March it also included a 52 page statement saying that only the Federal Government could regulate CO2 emissions from cars and trucks.

Such an action would override the Clean Car legislation the Washington State Legislature passed last year. It seems that from consumer protection, health protection and environmental protection Attorney General Rob McKenna is not protecting Washington State’s interests.

In addition to trying to get their response verbally I have just sent them the following e-mail entitled “Why is Washington State not a party to the Lawsuit filed by the California AG to increase fuel efficiency standards for SUV’s and light trucks?


Dear Attorney General Rob McKenna,

Yesterday the California Attorney General and nine other state Attorney Generals and the District of Columbia and New City filed a lawsuit in Federal Court challenging the Federal fuel efficiency standards set in March for light trucks and SUV’s. See press release http://ag.ca.gov/news alerts/release.php?id=1299#attachments

Almost all of the states in the lawsuit have passed Clean Car Legislation patterned after California’s. Washington State passed such legislation last year.And Oregon is in the process of enacting similar rules.

As part of the final standards issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a 52 page memorandum was added by the current administration stating that the Federal Government, not the states , have the authority to regulate CO2 emissions.

It would seem to me that the state of Washington needs to respond to this issue, not just because it challenges legislation passed by the Washington State Legislature, but also because of the need for Washington State to do all it can increase fuel efficiency and cut gases that contribute to global emissions.

Thank you for your response.

Sincerely,
Steve Zemke
In addition I have contacted the California Attorney General’s Office on this matter.I asked them if they had asked McKenna about being on the suit. A person in their press office responded that “the protocol is to reach out to a wide variety of states.” They do this through their national organization – the National Association of Attorney Generals.

She said they communicated regularly with other states to make it possible to join the lawsuit. “Lots of communication goes on”. She said I should check with the Washington AG’s office and said” it was a fair question to ask” when I wondered if his decision was affected by our Attorney General getting donations from automotive interests.

Missing in Action – Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna

Where is Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna? Is he asleep at the wheel? It certainly seems that is the case. In the story reported today in the Washington Post Washington state is conspicuously absent from the list of states today filing a suit to enforce and protect Washington citizens from rising gas prices and global warming.

Today California Attorney General Bill Lockyer and nine other states filed suit against the Bush Administration. Joining the California Attorney General in the lawsuit were Attorney Generals from Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont.

They are challenging the Bush Administration’s recently issued weak fuel economy standards for SUV’s and light trucks. Weak standards contribute to wasting gasoline, rising gas prices and global warming.
Lockyer states that:

“With gas prices skyrocketing, we must substantially increase fuel efficiency in new vehicles, not only to protect the pocketbooks of working families, but also to reduce vehicle emissions that contribute to global warming,” said Lockyer. “These rules fail that test by not requiring enough from the auto industry. The Bush Administration once again has missed an opportunity to promote new technology, fuel economy and conservation by issuing fuel economy goals that are status quo.”

In addition Lockyer noted that when Bush issued the fuel efficiency rules, Bush attached a 52 page discussion that asserted only the Federal Government, not individual states, could regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Reducing carbon dioxide is crucial to reducing global warming.

President Bush and his Administration have spent most of their time in office representing corporate America and the oil and gas industry and car manufacturers while arguing that global warming is only a theory. He refused to sign the international Kyoto Protocol to help reduce worldwide global warming.

Washington State last year passed HB 1937 – changing vehicle emission standards. The vote in the House was 55 to 42 and in the Senate 29 to 19. The preamble to HB 1937 noted that

motor vehicles are the largest source of air pollution in the state of Washington, and motor vehicles contribute approximately fifty-seven percent of criteria air pollutant emissions, eighty percent of toxics emissions and fifty-four percent of greenhouse gases”

Washington State is one of 10 states that have adopted Clean Car Legislation. The other states are California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

The state of Oregon is currently adopting California style clear air standards by administrative rule. The Dept of Environmental Quality just won a lawsuit opposing their action in March and will present the recommendationsions to the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission in June for adoption.

In a previous letter to the National Highway Safety Administration, the states suing asserted that the NHTSA,

“failed to consider alternative approaches that would have promoted energy conservation, made meaningful contributions to increased fuel economy and encouraged technological innovation. In addition, the letter said, NHTSA failed to consider the environmental consequences of its proposed overhaul of light truck standards, failed to consider the changes in the environment since the 1980s, when NHTSA last assessed the environmental effects of the standards, and failed to evaluate the impact of carbon dioxide emissions despite identifying the threat of CO2 and global climate change as new information concerning the environment.”

Now here’s a question for you. In looking at Rob McKenna’s 2004 Attorney General campaign contributors, it turns out that a number are employed by auto industry firms. Maybe a third of his contributors appear not to have an employer listed as required by law so I’m sure the number is higher. But of those that do, here is a list of employers, who were easily identified, of the contributors, who gave McKenna $1000 or more. You can see yourself by going to www.pdc.wa.gov.

Titus Will $2700
Honda Auto Center $2500
Toyota of Puyallup $1350
Bob Bridge Auto Center $1350
Enterprise Rent a Car $1350
Lexus of Bellevue $2700
Pignataro Volkswagen $1350
Sound Ford $1350
United Services Automobile Assoc $1350
Washington Oil Marketers Assoc PAC $1250
Sound Ford $1150
Brotherton Cadillac $2000
Downtown Toyota $1000
Honda Auto Center $1000
Volvo of Tacoma $1000
Lexus of Tacoma $1000
Lexus of Bellevue $1000
Jaguar of Tacoma $1000
Dick Hamak Dealership $1000
Chevron Texaco $1000
Acura of Seattle $1000
Volkswagen Hyundai $1250
Richland RV Park $1350

So while almost all of the other states which have passed Clean Car Legislation, joined the suit to try to force the Bush Administration to come up with standards to increase fuel efficiency and reduce global warming, Washington State’s Attorney General has not done so. Can it be because of his automobile industry friends and contributors?

McKenna also did not represent Washington citizens last year in a similar case. Washington state was not among 10 states suing the EPA over greenhouse gases. Is Rob McKenna representing our interests or the interests of corporate America? Maybe he doesn’t believe in global warming? Or maybe he can still afford to fill up his car?

If you would like to ask Rob McKenna why he hasn’t filed on this lawsuit you can contact him at:

Attorney General Rob McKenna
1125 Washington St. SE
PO Box 40100
Olympia, WA. 98504-0100
Telephone: 360-753-6200

Fax: 360-586-7671

E-Mail: Contact the Attorney General Online.
http://www.atg.wa.gov/ago_contact.shtml#38 click not listed for a response form

"I am the Law," says George W Bush. "I am the Judge, Jury and Executioner..!"

UpperLeft yesterday caught one of those mind numbing articles that even shakes us hard core live in the rain Seattle types. He picked up on a Boston Globe story by Charlie Savage.

Everyone knows that Bush ignores a law here or there but over 750 is what the Boston Globe found when it looked more closely!

President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.
Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ”whistle-blower” protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research.
Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush’s assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government. The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ”to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to ”execute” a law he believes is unconstitutional.


Bush will sign bills in public but it is what is happening quietly afterwards that is disturbing. When queried Bush’s represerntatives have told the Boston Globe that “the President wil execute the law in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution.” What the Boston Globe says happens next is that

Bush quietly files ”signing statements” — official documents in which a president lays out his legal interpretation of a bill for the federal bureaucracy to follow when implementing the new law. The statements are recorded in the federal register.
In his signing statements, Bush has repeatedly asserted that the Constitution gives him the right to ignore numerous sections of the bills — sometimes including provisions that were the subject of negotiations with Congress in order to get lawmakers to pass the bill. He has appended such statements to more than one of every 10 bills he has signed

The Boston Globe article continues at length and is well worth reading. As the Globe notes at the end:

Bruce Fein, a deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration, said the American system of government relies upon the leaders of each branch ”to exercise some self-restraint.” But Bush has declared himself the sole judge of his own powers, he said, and then ruled for himself every time.

”This is an attempt by the president to have the final word on his own constitutional powers, which eliminates the checks and balances that keep the country a democracy,” Fein said. ”There is no way for an independent judiciary to check his assertions of power, and Congress isn’t doing it, either. So this is moving us toward an unlimited executive power.”

Additional commentary on this article can also be found at TheBradBlog