What’s new is old again. My Obamafriends disbelieve that Hillary’s policies are more liberal than Barack’s. I’ve seen this information posted in the comments of several blogs and am reposting it here. It’s about Obama’s un-Kermit-like vote in 2005, when he voted with big energy instead of environmentalists.
On May 17th, 2008 at 11:32 am, marie3548 said on The Confluence:
LNG or the Bush-Cheney Energy bill of 2005 that Obama voted for and Hillary opposed. The bill cut the states out of the decision-making process re: what energy arrangements would be made within their boundaries. Repeat: Obama voted for it, Hillary voted against it.
LNG or Bush Cheney Energy Bill LNG is Liquid Natural Gas pipeline that will run along our coastline and private farmlands (eminent domain). They will condemn the land for the pipeline right of way and pay what they consider is a fair price which is always really cheap. There is not one thing the property owners can do if they do not stop it early on. The state has no say because its a federal bill. Hillary will give back the state the right to make its own decisions.
As outlined on this site, one of the many issues is that like with any type of pipeline, engineers want it sitting on at least 75 feet of dead land, which cuts off habitat. Also, the specific problem in Oregon is that the pipeline is running out of Wyoming across southern Oregon onto the coast to get LNG to Calif. This is being protested by Oregonians, who do not want more habitat wrecked, trees cut down so heavy equipment can access, risk of disaster, and expropriation of land — all without Oregon being able to legally intervene or negotiate on behalf of its residents.
And here’s about the El Paso, TX energy company that will build the pipeline.