There are certain issues that steal the spotlight for short or long periods of time. Right now, health care is the focus of the media's attention and in Washington D.C., health care is the hot topic right now with Congress looking at reforming our broken system.
But one issue that should not be forgotten is the environment. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand hasn't forgotten about the importance the environment plays and why keeping our air and water clean and addressing the issues with climate change deserve to be a top priority.
But Sen. Gillibrand is hoping that it will pass, but not at the environment's expense. Earlier this month, she spoke out regarding one key element in the House bill that would give coal-fired power plants less regulation and strip the Environmental Protection Agency of its power to regulate those coal plants.
Environmental activists already have complained that the House bill is too friendly to polluters and have been urging the Senate to toughen it by selling more emissions allowances -- rather than donating most of them to businesses initially.
Senate deal-making also jeopardizes some of the last-minute agreements that were key to passage in the House. For instance, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., is worried about a provision added to the House bill that would strip the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate pollution from coal-fired power plants -- language backed by lawmakers in coal mining states.
"The EPA has to have authority to regulate coal plants under the Clean Air Act," said Gillibrand, who has promised "to use every bit of persuasive power" she can to ensure the bill "reflects the needs of New York." Leaders in New York have been concerned about acid rain traced to coal-burning plants in the Midwest.
This provision was criticized by environmental activists for being too lenient on polluters in a bill supposedly touting clean (and green) energy. In response, progressives have led the charge to make sure that such a provision won't survive in the Senate version (and the future agreed upon version) of the bill. MoveOn has a petition you can sign voicing your opposition to the provision and also sent out an e-mail to New York members of MoveOn asking them to send a note of thanks to Sen. Gillibrand for being "one of the very first senators to speak out publicly against rolling back the Clean Air Act."
Here's an excerpt from that e-mail:
For years, New York has had some of the worst air pollution in the country. On top of local pollution, New Yorkers get tons of smog and acid rain blown in from out of state.
Now, coal industry lobbyists are trying to slip a provision into Obama's clean energy plan that would repeal a key part of the Clean Air Act. This would bring about a whole new generation of dirty coal power and make New York's pollution problems even worse.
But not if Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has anything to say about it. She's one of the very first senators to speak out publicly against rolling back the Clean Air Act.
...
Under the Clean Air Act, dirty coal-fired power plants are required to meet standards for their global warming pollution. The Bush administration refused to enforce these rules, but President Obama has already started taking steps to crack down.
That's why coal lobbyists are trying to repeal key sections of the Clean Air Act, letting coal plants off the hook and sticking New Yorkers with lots more pollution.
This rollback is the wrong thing to do, and it certainly doesn't belong in a "clean energy" bill. But the polluters might get away with it if champions in Congress don't fight back.
Sen. Gillibrand is fighting. She told the Albany Times-Union in an article that got picked up nationwide that "The EPA has to have authority to regulate coal plants under the Clean Air Act" and promised "to use every bit of persuasive power" to ensure the bill "reflects the needs of New York" by cutting power plant pollution.
MoveOn also thanked Sen. Gillibrand outside of her office in New York City:
Gillibrand has been at the forefront of many progressive issues during her time as a senator. This isn't the first time, but it is key since this legislation will be taken up by the Senate and there are already debates about what protections should be included (or excluded). Senators from coal-friendly states will be facing pressure to defend the interests of the industry. Gillibrand won't face such pressure, but she isn't going to let the best interests of coal be reflected in a bill that is supposed to be promoting clean and green energy.
