Offshore Drilling Ban

Dear Auntie Nanuuq:

Thank you for writing to me to express your opposition to expanding offshore oil and gas production. I appreciate the time you took to write, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

I share your concerns and agree that expanding offshore drilling represents a false promise and an unnecessary risk to our coastal communities, economies and ecosystems. The United States has only three percent of the known global oil reserves under its water and lands but accounts for nearly 23 percent of global oil consumption. Energy independence cannot be achieved by expanding offshore oil and gas production. The recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is a stark reminder that drilling in critical places off of our coastlines carries with it real and potentially catastrophic risk. Instead, the United States must make a permanent shift toward low-carbon, renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. Investing in clean energy will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase energy independence, and contribute to long-term economic growth.

You will be interested to know that I joined Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) in introducing a bill (S. 3358) that would permanently prohibit offshore drilling on the outer continental shelf of California, Oregon and Washington State. I have also cosponsored legislation (S. 3308) that would require the Secretary of the Interior to suspend oil and gas exploration, development, and production activities in the outer continental shelf, including seismic and other geological and geophysical surveys, until the joint investigation into the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has been completed. I am pleased that the Administration has declared that there will not be any leasing in new areas off the coast of the United States until a review of the Gulf oil spill is completed. In my view, very clear standards and greater environmental and safety oversight should be in place before drilling resumes and any new rigs are placed offshore. 

Please know that I share your concerns about expanding domestic oil and gas production on the outer continental shelf, and I will keep your thoughts in mind should the Senate consider legislation on this issue in the 111th Congress. 

Again, thank you for writing. If you have additional comments or questions, please contact my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841. Best regards. 

Sincerely yours,
 Dianne Feinstein
         United States Senator
Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the Nation are available at my website http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/.  You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list at http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ENewsletterSignup.Signup. Feel free to checkout my YouTube page http://www.youtube.com/Senatorfeinstein

Bail-out Funds for Oil Companies? Hell NO!

Dear Auntie Nanuuq,

Big Oil Bailout? Tell the Senate to Vote NO on the Murkowski resolution!

Can you believe it? The Senate may soon vote to exempt Big Oil from regulation when just the opposite is needed!

Big Oil’s friends in Congress are getting ready for a key vote that amounts to nothing less than a bailout for this dirty industry. We need your help telling the Senate to VOTE NO on Senator Murkowski’s Big Oil Bailout.

As oil continues to pour into the Gulf of Mexico and new images of oil-soaked animals hit our screens almost every hour, Senator Murkowski (R-AK) is poised to bring her Big Oil Bailout to a vote within days.  Her resolution would weaken the Clean Air Act and help keep America reliant on oil at a time when we should double-down on our pursuit of clean, renewable sources of energy. 

Don’t let the Senate gut the Clean Air Act in order to help Big Oil! Please email your Senators today.

Under a Supreme Court ruling, the Environmental Protection Agency was charged with regulating global warming pollutants under the Clean Air Act, but Sen. Murkowski’s legislation, (S.J. Res. 26) would stop the EPA in its tracks.  As glaciers disappear from Glacier National Park and polar bears face an uncertain future in a warming Arctic, as more violent storms march across our country leaving devastation in their paths, we are reminded again and again why America must act to address global warming.  The Clean Air is one very potent tool to reduce greenhouse gases. 

Don’t let the Senate gut the Clean Air Act – contact your Senators today!

Sincerely,

Kathy Kilmer
The Wilderness Society

Californians Vote Green.com (Or Do They)?

Isn't this a beautiful photograph?  Do not the words evoke a pro-environment group?  Does not this make you think that the "Green Party" has sent you a mailing?  Well, you better think again and read the Fine Print. Because I am here to tell you after I read the fine fine print I began to wonder what the hell these people are up to.

I am by no way or means a political dummy or ostrich...I GIVE A DAMN about what's going on politically, environmentally, medically, consumer wise,etc.  So, out of curiosity I wanted to know why a so called "Green" voters group would endorse those propositions paid for by PG&E & Mercury Insurance.

According to the disclaimer at the bottom of the page in fine print, I quote: "Appearance in this mailer does not necessarily imply endorsement of others appearing in this mailer, nor does it imply endorsement of,or opposition to, any issues set forth in this mailer.  Appearance is paid for and authorized by each candidate and ballot measure which is designated by an *"

I'm going to say right out: What a crock of crap!  If this organization was so concerned with being "Green" and pro-environment (because that Is that 'Green' means)...then they would not accept any type of payment from PG&E or Mercury Insurance!  Nor would they accept any type of payment or donation from dubious candidates.

When you accept money from bad intentioned corporations & people (Mercury Insurance & PG&E) then you are In Fact endorsing them.....You are aiding & abetting them by taking a pay-off/bribe.  There is no two ways about it....you have fallen into the greed way...and you are in no way absolving yourself of collusion by adding a written "disclaimer" on the bottom of your literature.  

Ten (10) out of 15 candidates paid to have their names placed in this mailer and all four (4) of the State & City measures (3 of which are anti-environment & consumer) appearing on this mailer were also put in by paid campaign funds.

When I went to the website URL listed on the mailer there was absolutely no information about the group itself posted/available.  What there was however was this: 
 
"If you are interested in purchasing placement, please send us a list of candidates and measures that you will be running in the June primary to rtaylor@californiansvotegreen.com. Click here to submit your slate candidacy information (You must have recieved your order confirmation number before submitting. If you need a confirmation number contact pauljoseph29@msn.com)"

Very interesting......makes you wonder don't it?

In all fairness, I emailed Paul and inquired about his intent and I pointed out his group's lack of integrity.....  We shall see.....

Voter BEWARE!!!!!