CLINTON: Absolutely. This is an emergency. Every day that goes by that these people, particularly children, are not tested so we can know what steps must be taken to remediate the effects of the poisoning that they have been living with is a day lost. We need to be clear about everything that should be done to try to remedy the terrible burden that the people of Flint are bearing. If Michigan won't do it, there have to be ways that we can begin to move, and then make them pay for it, and hold them accountable.
SANDERS: I think the Secretary described the situation appropriately. I did ask for the resignation of Governor Snyder because his irresponsibility was so outrageous.
However, there was one winner: Democratic donor and Indonesian billionaire James Riady, who owns the second-largest deposit of similar clean coal. The same James Riady pled guilty to a felony charge and paid $8.6 million in criminal fines for making millions of dollars of illegal campaign donations to the Clinton-Gore ticket. But Clinton-Gore had the money to spend when it counted.
If I were the U.S. senator from New Hampshire, I would vote to repeal Clinton's abuse of the 1906 Antiquities Act. I would cheer free Americans making voluntary choices about extensive use of solar, wind, biodiesel and energy-saving improvements, but I would fight against corrupt bureaucrats and politicians trying to force their personal preferences upon us.
ROMNEY: Well, I'm not familiar with the specific regulation as it applies to New Hampshire, but I do believe that we have a responsibility to keep the air clean, and we have to find ways to assure that we don't have the pollution of one state overwhelming the ability of another state to have clean air. In my state of Massachusetts we received a lot of air from the rest of the country, given the winds coming from the west. And so the responsibility in our state was to get the emissions from our power plants down. That's one of the reasons why we moved to natural gas. If we want to help people in New England emit less pollutant into the air and therefore would have cleaner air and also have lower cost energy, it's let's build out this natural gas system.
GINGRICH: If you look at the EPA's record, it is increasingly radical, it's increasingly imperious, it doesn't cooperate, it doesn't collaborate, and it doesn't take into account economics. In Iowa they had a dust regulation under way because they control particulate matter. They were worried that the plowing of a cornfield would lead dust to go to another farmer's cornfield, and they were planning to issue a regulation. In Arizona, they suggested that maybe if they watered down the earth, they wouldn't have these dust storms. And people said to them, "You know, the reason it's called a desert is there's no water." Now, this is an agency out of touch with reality, which I believe is incorrigible, and you need a new agency that is practical, has common sense, uses economic factors, and in the case of pollution actually incentivizes change, doesn't just punish it.
|2016 Presidential contenders on Environment:|
2016 Third Party Candidates:
Please consider a donation to OnTheIssues.org!
Click for details -- or send donations to:
1770 Mass Ave. #630, Cambridge MA 02140
(We rely on your support!)