Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: U.S. Senate Vote on Climate Stewardship Act - Thursday

Expand Messages
  • Mike Neuman
    Appears to be lots of good healthy tongue-in-cheek here from mauk. BTW, the Senate voted against passage of The Climate Stewardship Act last Thursday, by a
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 5, 2003
      Appears to be lots of good healthy tongue-in-cheek here from mauk.

      BTW, the Senate voted against passage of The Climate Stewardship Act
      last Thursday, by a roll call vote of 55 nays to 43 yeas, and in favor
      of continuing to bury their heads in the sand.

      More than 40 in favor is considered good reason to introduce next
      session.

      Mike


      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "mauk_mcamuk" <mauk2@h...>
      wrote:
      > > ISSUE: The US Senate is scheduled to vote on the Climate
      > > Stewardship Act (S.139) at the end of the week. This piece
      > > of legislation, co-sponsored by Senators John McCain (R-AZ)
      > > and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), is likely to be the only vote
      > > on a comprehensive effort to reduce heat-trapping gas
      > > emissions during the current congressional session.
      > >
      >
      >
      > Ooooh, I think I like this! Anything that gives nuclear power a
      more
      [snip]
    • mauk_mcamuk
      ... Heeheehee! You caught me! :) That said, like it or hate it, nuclear IS a carbon-free and well- proven energy source that can scale dramatically.
      Message 2 of 4 , Nov 6, 2003
        > Appears to be lots of good healthy tongue-in-cheek here from mauk.

        Heeheehee! You caught me! :)

        That said, like it or hate it, nuclear IS a carbon-free and well-
        proven energy source that can scale dramatically. Compared to coal
        (the largest current source of electricity in the world), its a slam-
        dunk.


        >
        > BTW, the Senate voted against passage of The Climate Stewardship
        Act
        > last Thursday, by a roll call vote of 55 nays to 43 yeas, and in
        favor
        > of continuing to bury their heads in the sand.
        >

        Blah. maybe next session.

        > More than 40 in favor is considered good reason to introduce next
        > session.
        >
        > Mike
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.