HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Why did Bernie cosponsor ...

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 07:48 PM

Why did Bernie cosponsor a bill and vote to dump Vermont’s nuclear waste in a poor Latino community?

In 1998, the House of Representatives approved a compact struck between Texas, Vermont and Maine that would allow Vermont and Maine to dump low-level nuclear waste at a designated site in Sierra Blanca, Texas. Sanders, at the time representing Vermont in the House, cosponsored the bill and actively ushered it through Congress.

Located about 16 miles from the Mexican border, Sierra Blanca’s population is predominantly of Mexican ancestry. At the time, the community was about two-thirds Latino, and its residents had an average income of $8,000, according to the an article in the Bangor Daily News.

113 replies, 16116 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 113 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why did Bernie cosponsor a bill and vote to dump Vermont’s nuclear waste in a poor Latino community? (Original post)
wyldwolf Sep 2015 OP
arcane1 Sep 2015 #1
stonecutter357 Sep 2015 #2
mike_c Sep 2015 #3
DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2015 #34
LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #69
geek75 Sep 2015 #4
Skwmom Sep 2015 #11
geek75 Sep 2015 #90
jkbRN Sep 2015 #5
djean111 Sep 2015 #6
villager Sep 2015 #27
djean111 Sep 2015 #49
Ed Suspicious Sep 2015 #102
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #7
restorefreedom Sep 2015 #8
DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2015 #36
restorefreedom Sep 2015 #43
Skwmom Sep 2015 #9
Skwmom Sep 2015 #13
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #38
Skwmom Sep 2015 #59
NCTraveler Sep 2015 #10
cheapdate Sep 2015 #31
Vattel Sep 2015 #12
HooptieWagon Sep 2015 #14
artislife Sep 2015 #21
polly7 Sep 2015 #62
DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2015 #37
treestar Sep 2015 #68
R B Garr Sep 2015 #88
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #106
NorthCarolina Sep 2015 #15
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #16
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #24
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #28
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #33
m-lekktor Sep 2015 #17
JackInGreen Sep 2015 #64
NorthCarolina Sep 2015 #81
Betty Karlson Sep 2015 #51
Skwmom Sep 2015 #18
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #25
Skwmom Sep 2015 #76
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #82
Skwmom Sep 2015 #19
MindfulOne Sep 2015 #22
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #42
MindfulOne Sep 2015 #20
Thor_MN Sep 2015 #23
CanadaexPat Sep 2015 #26
HERVEPA Sep 2015 #29
JDPriestly Sep 2015 #30
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #32
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #35
JDPriestly Sep 2015 #44
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #45
Armstead Sep 2015 #46
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #47
Armstead Sep 2015 #61
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #65
Armstead Sep 2015 #95
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #96
Cheese Sandwich Sep 2015 #39
morningfog Sep 2015 #40
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #41
PowerToThePeople Sep 2015 #48
Betty Karlson Sep 2015 #50
Turbineguy Sep 2015 #52
leftofcool Sep 2015 #53
delrem Sep 2015 #54
Armstead Sep 2015 #92
Vinca Sep 2015 #55
leftofcool Sep 2015 #56
Vinca Sep 2015 #57
leftofcool Sep 2015 #60
Vinca Sep 2015 #63
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #66
leftofcool Sep 2015 #73
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #79
Vinca Sep 2015 #86
Vinca Sep 2015 #85
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #91
Vinca Sep 2015 #93
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #94
Vinca Sep 2015 #104
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #105
Vinca Sep 2015 #108
beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #109
MannyGoldstein Sep 2015 #58
workinclasszero Sep 2015 #67
LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #70
leftofcool Sep 2015 #72
LondonReign2 Sep 2015 #77
leftofcool Sep 2015 #84
MineralMan Sep 2015 #71
leftofcool Sep 2015 #74
MineralMan Sep 2015 #75
leftofcool Sep 2015 #87
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #89
Motown_Johnny Sep 2015 #78
Chitown Kev Sep 2015 #80
Recursion Sep 2015 #83
NCTraveler Sep 2015 #97
wyldwolf Sep 2015 #98
NCTraveler Sep 2015 #100
leftofcool Sep 2015 #101
NCTraveler Sep 2015 #107
leftofcool Sep 2015 #99
Skwmom Sep 2015 #110
NCTraveler Sep 2015 #111
pa28 Sep 2015 #103
MiaCulpa Feb 2016 #112
wyldwolf Feb 2016 #113

Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 07:49 PM

1. He hates Latinos too?

 

You guys really need some new material.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 07:52 PM

2. K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 07:57 PM

3. because he hates latinos even more than he hates poor people....

Right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:38 PM

34. And Uruguayans too. He hates the everliving shit out of them. No one knows why.

 

He was also the secret mastermind behind the invasion of Panama--Noriega was cutting into Bernie's drug profits, which negatively affected his Klan outreach program.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:37 AM

69. Where does his hatred of Latinos and poor rank with his hatred of blacks and gays?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:01 PM

4. No candidate is perfect

 

But I'll tell you this. Bernie is very good. I'm sick of this infighting within the Democratic Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek75 (Reply #4)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:58 PM

11. He voted for a compact. It was never built there. But later on New York sent its toxic sludge

Last edited Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:20 AM - Edit history (2)

there. When I looked at what that did versus some articles I read on the low level radioactive disposal sight which was subsequently built, I'm not sure the sludge was the better option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #11)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 04:59 PM

90. Sanders is the best we have

 

Trump would do this and worse in every community.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:02 PM

5. Aw, is this the best you got?

i could fill up all the boards with all the bad votes Hillary has voted for.

Would you like me to do that? I certainly can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:08 PM

6. Had nothing to do with a poor Latino community.

 

It was the depth of the water table that made the Texas site more viable. I do not believe it was Bernie who designated the site.
I do love how Bernie is portrayed as totally ineffective in congress, right up until he is Super Representative,

No matter what the story, I would rather vote for Bernie than vote for someone who traveled all over the world pushing fracking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #6)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:08 PM

27. He's done nothing in Congress except single-handedly forced through every bit of legislation....

 

...that's right here on my "talking points" sheet!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #27)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:47 AM

49. I know - you would think there would be more story coordination, right?

 

Dunno if the problem is lack of coordination, very poor memory - or the assumption that Bernie's supporters have poor memories - or just total clueless contempt. Or all of those. But yeah. Interesting, in an appalling sort of way, to see the mud machine cranked up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #27)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:47 PM

102. They think each issue drop exists in a vacuum. It's hilarious watching the Hillionaires flail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:10 PM

7. Because he hates minorities, obviously.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:50 PM

8. why did hillary vote for a destructive, costly, and divisive war of choice?

ok, your turn......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to restorefreedom (Reply #8)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:41 PM

36. A war that slaughtered the fuck out of hundreds of thousands of souls.

 

If the other side wants political hardball, I can do that. Scorched motherfucking earth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #36)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:37 AM

43. it is amazing

that some want to engage given the ample 3rd way material we have to work with

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:55 PM

9. Bernie voted for a nuclear compact.

Last edited Sat Sep 26, 2015, 09:07 AM - Edit history (3)

The Facility was NEVER built at the Latino Community, listed in that lovely brochure put out by a Clinton Group (or another candidate who knows)

Though I'm sure the opposition research has long known about the Compact.

Texas was most likely going to build the facility without the compact. In the bill I read there was NO site specified and TX had control of where the site would be. In addition, with a compact they could limit the type of waste they received.

However, the site was later used to ship sludge from New York City.

Biden voted for it and Pres Clinton signed it into law.

http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/blanca.html

On the house floor:

This is not a political assertion, it is a geological and environmental reality. Furthermore, even if this compact is not approved, it is likely that Texas, which has a great deal of low-level radioactive waste, and we should make the point that 80 percent of the waste is coming from Texas, 10 percent from Vermont, 10 percent from Maine, the reality is that Texas will go forward with or without this compact in building a facility to dispose of their low-level radioactive waste.

If they do not have the compact, which gives them the legal right to deny low-level radioactive waste from coming from anyplace else in the country, it seems to me they will be in worse environmental shape than they are right now. Right now, with the compact, they can deal with the constitutional issue of limiting the kinds of waste they get.


Mr. Chairman, let me touch for a moment upon the environmental aspects of this issue. Let me address it from the perspective of someone who is an opponent of nuclear power, who opposes the construction of power plants and, if he had his way, would shut down the existing nuclear power plants as quickly and as safely as we could.

One of the reasons that many of us oppose nuclear power plants is that when this technology was developed, there was not a lot of thought given as to how we dispose of the nuclear waste. Neither the industry nor the Government, in my view, did the right thing by allowing the construction of the plants and not figuring out how we get rid of the waste.

But the issue we are debating here today is not that issue. The reality, as others have already pointed out, is that the waste is here. We cannot wish it away. It exists in power plants in Maine and Vermont, it exists in hospitals, it is here.

The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Reyes] a few moments ago said, `Who wants radioactive waste in their district?' I guess he is right. But do Members know what, by going forward with the nuclear power industry, that is what we have. So the real environmental issue here is not to wish it away, but to make the judgment, the important environmental judgment, as to what is the safest way of disposing of the nuclear waste that has been created. That is the environmental challenge that we face.

The strong environmental position should not be and cannot be to do nothing, and to put our heads in the sand and pretend that the problem does not exist. It would be nice if Texas had no low-level radioactive waste, or Vermont or Maine or any other State. That would be great. That is not the reality. The environmental challenge now is, given the reality that low-level radioactive waste exists, what is the safest way of disposing of that waste.

Leaving the radioactive waste at the site where it was produced, despite the fact that that site may be extremely unsafe in terms of long-term isolation of the waste and was never intended to be a long-term depository of low-level waste, is horrendous environmental policy. What sense is it to say that you have to keep the waste where it is now, even though that might be very environmentally damaging? That does not make any sense at all.

No reputable scientist or environmentalist believes that the geology of Vermont or Maine would be a good place for this waste. In the humid climate of Vermont and Maine, it is more likely that groundwater will come in contact with that waste and carry off radioactive elements to the accessible environment.

There is widespread scientific evidence to suggest, on the other hand, that locations in Texas, some of which receive less than 12 inches of rainfall a year, a region where the groundwater table is more than 700 feet below the surface, is a far better location for this waste.


http://www.c-span.org/congress/bills/billAction/?print/1410681

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #9)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:16 PM

13. In the bill I read there was no site designated and it NEVER built at that site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #9)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:46 PM

38. Paul Wellstone disagreed

Paul Wellstone

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I would like to speak out this evening about an enormously important issue that has seldom, if ever, been addressed on the floor of the United States Senate. I understand my colleague needs to leave at 7, and I am going to try to figure out a way to accommodate him if at all possible. My understanding is, I will also have a chance to speak more about this in morning business.

This issue I want to address tonight has variously been called `environmental discrimination,' `environmental equity,' `environmental justice,' or `environmental racism.' These terms are used interchangeably to describe the well-documented tendency for pollution and waste dumps to be sited in poor and minority communities who lack the political power to keep them out.

Environmental justice has been at the center of the debate over H.R. 629, legislation granting congressional consent to the so-called Texas Compact. If passed unamended by this Congress, the Texas Compact would result in the dumping of low-level radioactive waste from nuclear reactors in Texas, Maine, and Vermont--and potentially from nuclear reactors all over the country--in the poor and majority-Latino town of Sierra Blanca in West Texas.

Environmental justice is an issue that demands the full attention of the Senate. If we pass this legislation unamended, we can no loner pretend to be innocent bystanders as one poor, minority community after another is victimized by political powerlessness--and, in some cases, by overt racism. We can no longer pretend that a remedy for this basic violation of civil rights is beyond our reach. That is the ultimate significance of this legislation--and of this debate.

The moral responsibility of the Senate is unavoidable and undeniable. If we approve H.R. 629 without conditions, the Compact dump will be built within a few miles of Sierra Blanca. There's really very little doubt about that. And if that happens, this poor Hispanic community could become the premier national repository for so-called `low-level' radioactive waste.

If we reject this Compact, on the other hand, the Sierra Blanca dump will not be built at all. The Texas Governor has said so publicly--more than once. It's as simple as that. The fate of Sierra Blanca rests in our hands.

Compact supporters would prefer that we consider the Compact without any reference to the actual location of the dump. But that simply cannot be done. It's true that H.R. 629 says nothing about Sierra Blanca. But we know very well where this waste will be dumped. In that respect, the Texas Compact is different from other compacts the Senate has considered.

The Texas legislature in 1991 already identified the area where the dump will be located. The Texas Waste Authority designated the site near Sierra Blanca in 1992. A draft license was issued in 1996. License proceedings are now in their final stages and should be completed by summer. Nobody doubts that the Texas authorities will soon issue that license.

There's only one reason why this dump might not get built--and that's if Congress rejects the Texas Compact. In an April 1998 interview, Texas Gov. George Bush said, `If that does not happen,' meaning congressional passage of the Compact, `then all bets are off.' In the El Paso Times of May 28, Gov. Bush said, `If there's not a Compact in place, we will not move forward.'

For these reasons, we cannot fairly consider H.R. 629 without also considering the dump site that Texas has selected. Sierra Blanca is a small town in one of poorest parts of Texas, an area with one of the highest percentages of Latino residents. The average income of people who live there is less than $8,000. Thirty-nine percent live below the poverty line. Over 66 percent are Latino, and many of them speak only Spanish.

It is a town that has already been saddled with one of the largest sewage sludge projects in the world. Every week Sierra Blanca receives 250 tons of partially treated sewage sludge from across the country. Depending on what action Congress decides to take, this small town with minimal political clout may also become the national repository for low-level radioactive waste. And I understand plans for building even more dump sites are also in the works.

Supporters of the Compact would have us believe that the designation of Sierra Blanca had nothing to do with the income or ethnic characteristics of its residents. That it had nothing to do with the high percentage of Latinos in Sierra Blanca and the surrounding Hudspeth County--at least 2.6 times higher than the State average. That the percentage of people living in poverty--at least 2.1 times higher than the State average--was completely irrelevant.

They would have us believe that Sierra Blanca was simply the unfortunate finalist in a rigorous and deliberate screening process that fairly considered potential sites from all over the State. That the outcome was based on science and objective criteria. I don't believe any of this is true.

I am not saying science played no role whatsoever in the process. It did. Indeed, based on the initial criteria coupled with the scientific findings, Sierra Blanca was disqualified as a potential dump site. It wasn't until politics entered the picture that Sierra Blanca was even considered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #38)


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 08:56 PM

10. I'm going to guess its because they don't have proper facilities in Vermont.

 

I don't know the reasons the location was chosen, but I'm sure Sanders had nothing to do with it. I don't know the facts though. With his efforts to bring home the bacon with a known failed fighter jet, politicians will be politicians. Maybe there is more to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #10)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:25 PM

31. As a guess, I'd go with that.

Finding places to store nuclear wastes is a huge problem.

Vermont is far, far from being the only state forced to confront the problem. Criticizing proposed solutions is easy work. Coming up with viable alternatives is much harder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:02 PM

12. Why didn't you find out before you posted?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:19 PM

14. Why did Hillary vote to drop cluster bombs on children?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #14)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:59 PM

21. Here is the result of her policies on brown children in Libya.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to artislife (Reply #21)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:11 AM

62. That punches you right in the heart, doesn't it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #14)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:45 PM

37. She came. She saw. They died in horrible agony.

 

I have a great deal of contempt toward the message posted at the top of this page. I'm an unapologetic Bernie Sanders supporter, and I'm going for the soft, stupid jugular of anyone who wants to lie about my candidate in order to prop up a bringer of death.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #14)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:26 AM

68. Not dealing with the question

That's the type of question Bernie will have to deal with - he can't just do that childish well Hillary voted for bad things too.

If Hillary's stuff can be challenged, so can Bernie's, so you're deflecting with the best of the Hillary supporters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #14)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 02:54 PM

88. why does Bernie support drones?

No way to claim any moral high ground after that announcement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #14)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:19 AM

106. And she's pro-death penalty which is extremely racist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:24 PM

15. Hillary should raise the issue in the debates. I'm sure she'll

 

catch him off guard with that one.

If this is the type of alternate reality tripe the establishment is going to attack Bernie with then there is little doubt they are extremely afraid of voters of all stripes migrating to the better candidate. So, they've started the whisper campaign to cover the Black community, and now the Latino community. Any guesses how Bernie dissed the LGBT community? I can't wait to see if they are next. Something like, Oh sure, Bernie SAY'S he was for gay marriage way back when, BUT then he went and got himself STRAIGHT married so was he REALLY ever in favor of gay marriage, or was it just a ruse? That's why we support Hillary because she came out in favor of gay marriage Tuesday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #15)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:29 PM

16. They already tried to smear him with the lgbt community.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #16)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:00 PM

24. Who is this "they" that you refer to?

I'm not a Clinton supporter. It was Bernie Sanders' position at the time.

and I think that Bernie Sanders is simply a politician with a good schtick...I could have posted this story about Sierra Blanca a long time ago...and it was Paul Wellstone that called HR 629 "enviornmental racism" simply because racism was very blatantly the reason that the cite was chosen...ypu should go an look at Wellstone's late night speech on c-span video as I did, I think that it was one of Wellstone's greatest speeches.

And yes, it was racism.


That the State of Texas had sought from the outset to find a community in which English is a second language is not even a matter of speculation; it was the advice given by two Texas A&M professors in their state-commissioned public opinion study in 1984, at the beginning of the state’s search for a likely site. The general public everywhere is going to oppose this dump, they found, and the more that people feel they know about the project, the higher their level of opposition is likely to be. “A preferred methodology may be to develop public information campaigns targeted at special populations. One population that might benefit from such a campaign is Hispanics, particularly those with little formal education and low incomes. This group is the least informed of all segments of the population. The Authority should be aware, however, that increasing the level of knowledge of Hispanics may simply increase opposition to the site, inasmuch as we have discovered a strong relationship in the total sample between increased perceived knowledge and increased opposition.


http://social-ecology.org/wp/1998/10/the-texas-vermont-maine-nuclear-dump-bringing-environmental-racism-home/

That sounds like racism to me.

Oh, the Texas NAACP was actually against this. So much for that 100 NAACP score.

Bernie Sanders is not perfect on every issue by no means; no politician (not even Paul Wellstone...a man and a progressive that I greatly admire).

A lot of Bernie Sanders supporters cannot bear to hear that Sanders is not perfect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #24)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:08 PM

28. So you're falling back on the Bernie hates minorities meme?

How original.


First you tried to prove he was opposed to marriage equality (and failed) and now you're claiming he's an environmental racist.


And you pulled the strawman "A lot of Bernie Sanders supporters cannot bear to hear that Sanders is not perfect." out of your bag of tricks too.


At least you're consistent.


And you've got an easy road ahead, many others blazed that trail long before you got here.


Thanks for the opposition research, I guess everyone needs a hobby.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #28)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:34 PM

33. 5:35:00 in this video (near the end of the video

Paul Wellstone said it, I didn't.

One of his greatest floor speeches...

http://www.c-span.org/video/?107441-1/senate-session

Actually, I have watched much of this debate and there are things in this debate that Bernie Sanders says that I agree with

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #15)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:33 PM

17. Her husband , the president, signed the bill on september 28.1998 according to the first link.

Hillary might not want to go there!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to m-lekktor (Reply #17)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:38 AM

64. When has the big fan there

Ever stopped that campaign from flinging shit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to m-lekktor (Reply #17)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:23 PM

81. Perhaps they will inform us that it was Bernie, and ONLY Bernie, that forced Clinton

 

to sign the legislation against his will. He apparently had a secret agenda to kill minority groups en masse. Who could have known

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #15)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:04 AM

51. Which debates? DWS is holding all of them off. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:41 PM

18. There was some dumpinp, but it wasn't VT, it was New York.

Craig Monk from Texas says:

New York in 1979 commissioned the alleged mob back Merco to dump million of tons of Class B and unprocessed sewage sludge on Sierra Blanca Tx. Today the sewage dump still exist on top of the ground and NY continues to ignore their negligence for Texas.
There is a continuing struggle of citizens to stop this ill conceived practice everywhere. Whether you realize it or not it affects your food and water sources. Why would Whole Foods ban any produce grown on sewage sludge?

Major player in this schema is the EPA, USDA, the CDC and US legislature which pulled the trigger on it in 1990. It has gone too far and now if the EPA was to come clean about contamination millions of acres of farm land the resulting lawsuits by citizens and farmers would exceed the national debt.

Be warned and research what I am saying. Your family and health depend on it.
Dec. 1, 2014, 6:03 pm

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/37/49/dtg-sludge-boats-newtown-creek-2014-12-05-bk_37_49.html

I have to track down what the poster said, but it sounds legit to me (not to sure about the estimated damages). At least a lot more legit than Politifact and Camp Clinton.

Found it: http://www.txpeer.org/toxictour/merco.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #18)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:04 PM

25. the Texas Commission in 1998

refused the license and the nuke dump site was never built...one of the main points in the Congressional debate (which you can still find on C-Span) is that the Compact was open-ended...meaning that, sure, Maine and Vermont could start sending their waste there (low-grade radioactive waste, that is) but that other states would want to join in and use that site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #25)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 11:02 AM

76. Everything I've read said the compact was not open ended. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #76)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:46 PM

82. There was a loophole there, though

If Governor George W. Bush did anything, he actually tried to close that loophole (his dumb ass was good for something every once in a while)...apart of the fear was that Texas would make it open-ended at some point and other states would send their low-grade nuclear waste to the site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:55 PM

19. Did you realize Bill Clinton signed the Bill into law?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #19)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 10:02 PM

22. It had 11 Dem and 11 Rep cosponsors, and Biden voted Yea.

 

This OP gets a big fat F for Fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MindfulOne (Reply #22)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:28 AM

42. Yet another of the reasons

that I don't see Biden as an alternative to Clinton

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 09:57 PM

20. But wait, I thought that Bernie never got anything done!!!11!!

 

Now you can't have it both ways!

OBTW, 2/3 Latino in that part of Texas is pretty white.

Do you own an atlas or a Google?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 10:37 PM

23. OMG!!! An actual anti-Sanders post!!! They do exist!!!

 

This is a big day. I've finally seen a post actually attacking Sanders. I'm going to have reprioritize my thoughts on this...

The Anti Clinton-Anti Sanders ratio has tipped from infinity to a really huge, but real, number...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:07 PM

26. Because corporatist Dems were pro-nulear power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:17 PM

29. Argo...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:19 PM

30. a DUer posted an excerpt from Bernie's statement at the time of his vote.

As I recall, Bernie opposes using nuclear energy when as now, we have no safe way to dispose of the waste.

But, Bernie explained that while no place is really safe for storing. Nuclear waste, the geology in the area where the waste is sent is much safer than Vermont because the groundwater lis much further from the surface in thatarea of Texas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #30)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:31 PM

32. That's what I remember too but the Clinton machine has been busy smearing the record.

And the usual suspects fell for it.

BERNIE HATES BROWN PEOPLE ARGLE BARGLE!!1!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #30)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:40 PM

35. That's the problem

Sanders repeatedly said during the debates which go back to 1997) that he would rather all nuclear reactors be shut down but since they are not, the (low-level radioactive waste) has to go somewhere...he made a good point.

I would have appreciated it, though, if Sanders had acknowledged the concerns of the Sierra Blanca community (as Sheila Jackson Lee and Eddie Bernice Johnson did, in spite of supporting the bill).

There are parts of the debate where Sanders also comes off as an insensitive asshole that really didn't give a fuck where it went as long as it left Vermont.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #35)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 01:02 AM

44. S a matter of geology. We need to stop building nuclear pWhere the waste goes iower plants, but

Waste from medical uses will remain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #44)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 01:10 AM

45. and nuclear waste as a result of medicine (low grade radioactive material)

was the issue here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #35)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 02:43 AM

46. Vermont is located in a major population center ecologically

 

Yeah Vermont itself isn't highly populated, but it is part of an ecosystem that is densly populated,, is near the water supply for Boston, not far from the Capital District of New York, and near the Hudson River which flows into New York City. A nuclear leak there would have far-reaching consequences for millions of people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #46)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 03:43 AM

47. The Rio Grande

Sierra Blanca is ~25 miles from the Mexican border right on the Rio Grande...talk about being near water..remember, this was a foreign policy issue as well for both Bill Clinton and (yes) Governor George W. Bush.

There were protests outside the American embassy in Mexico City.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #47)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:09 AM

61. Good point. Unfortunately this ws a Hobson's Choice

 

Bernie was right in his original warnings about nuclear power, in terms of waste. There is basically nowhere that crap can be put without potential jeoprdizinyg people and places. It is a matter of which wrong place, with the least potential environmental impact.

But the casting of this as an example of Sander's "insensitivity" to Hispanics is bogus. There are plenty of Hispanics, as well as whites, blacks and people of all races in the northeast, southeast,west etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #61)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:07 AM

65. But the site was specifically known

to have been chosen because of racism; Paul Wellstone had documented evidence of that that he presented on the Senate floor.

In some ways this is like Sanders' vote on the crime bill where, by and large, he doesn't have to live with the potential collateral damage (which he did know) because it is not in his state (granted a lot of stuff is like that).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #65)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:41 PM

95. Politics is filled with choices between bad and worse

 

And sometimes Senators have to choose lesser evils.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #95)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:49 PM

96. True enough

and sometimes opinions differ as to what constitutes "the lesser evil."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Wed Sep 23, 2015, 11:48 PM

39. Why did Hillary vote for a war that killed half a million people and created millions of refugees?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:02 AM

40. Bash Bernie! BASH BASH!!

 

Did I do it right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #40)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:06 AM

41. Here, use this:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:45 AM

48. Trash canning this turd op.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:02 AM

50. If we are digging up 17 year old records, can we have a word about Mrs. Clinton's vile remarks

 

against marriage equality? Those were as recent as 2008?

The stench of desparate efforts is just overwhelming at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:08 AM

52. Because he obviously

wanted Donald Trump to be President!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:13 AM

53. He didn't want it dumped in Vermont?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #53)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:19 AM

54. I heard that he was looking for a place with orphans where he could dump it.

But he ran out of time so he found a Latino community to dump it on instead.

My word! I'll bet Hillary has something to say about that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #54)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:17 PM

92. Actually, he was looking for a site full of cute kittens

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:21 AM

55. Because Texas was actively courting the business.

If you're a dairy farm with a giant pile of manure and a home gardener wants to buy it to compost are you going to keep the stinky manure and turn down the cash?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #55)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:24 AM

56. Why not dump it in downtown Dallas then?

Why choose a poor community?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #56)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 06:32 AM

57. You'd have to ask Dallas or the developers of the waste site.

FYI, I live 10 miles from the Vermont waste in question and it's currently in storage on site there and will be until the end of time. Not the best of options since the site abuts the Connecticut River and the Connecticut flows past a number of large cities.

Edited to add that I do not live in a poor area and the town where the waste is stored is not a poor town. It's there. It's safely stored for now and it's guarded. If it happened to be near the Mexican border I'm sure the same would be true, plus it would provide some jobs for that area.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #57)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 08:05 AM

60. I am an old cynic who just can't get past the words safe and guarded

But I also think the crap they call "green laundry soap" is just over priced Tide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #60)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:29 AM

63. The best case scenario would have been no nukes anywhere ever.

Unfortunately, that's not what happened. I remember the BS sales job in the 1960's about "almost free" electricity. In any case, the waste is here now and IMHO it's best to store it in an area that isn't heavily populated and has the least chance of having a natural disaster cause havoc. The Vernon, VT site does not fit either of those criteria, but it is what it is. I don't think this is something to go after Bernie about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #63)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:15 AM

66. A nice pristine white state

chooses to dump its' garbage in a politically powerless area with a lot of poor people and Hispanics...

which is par the course of these environmental things; poor communities and communities of color get the very raw end of the deal.

And Sanders had to have known the racial reasons that Texas chose the site as well as the geological reasons...of course, the Vermont legislature had voted for it so...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #66)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:54 AM

73. If this has been Hillary, we would never hear the end of how she is in the pocket of nuclear dumpers

But because this was a bill that Bernie sponsored and got passed, it is perfectly okay because he "probably didn't know they (Texas) would be dumping the shit in a poor community."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #73)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 11:29 AM

79. FTR. I'm not a Hillary supporter but you are right

there's already a couple of comments in this thread about how Hillary's HUSBAND signed this bill, lol.

The fact is that in order to win the nomination, Sanders will have to peel off a LOT of Hillary Clinton supporters.

One of the things that some Sanders supporters are selling to POC is Sanders' civil rights record...that Sanders WILL act on behalf of racial justice and Hillary will sell you down the river at the behest of Goldman Sachs...or something like that.

But we see here with the Sierra Blanca issue (which the Texas NAACP was against...so much for that 100 NAACP score...Jim Hightower denounced Bernie Sanders to his face...and no one is going to say that Jim Hightower is NOT a progressive) and with the 1994 crime bill that, at times, Sanders has concerns other than racial justice (like getting re-elected...)

Nonetheless, spirits were high on Thursday morning, August 20, as the West Texans, along with about twenty Vermonters, trudged up and down the lush green hills on their way to a Springfield rally, where Bernie was scheduled to speak. They'd driven two thousand miles and walked nearly a hundred, and they'd had a wonderful time, meeting Vermonters, talking with them about the Sierra Blanca dump, and changing quite a few minds. Gary Oliver explained some of the group dynamics this way: "There'd been all this tension on the walk, because it's been planned since February, and we just got invited two months ago. But the issues [nuclear power and nuclear weapons] are two warts on the same hog."

Before the rally Sanders invited the three West Texans to meet with him privately, and the Texans eagerly agreed. The meeting was no longer than Sanders' attention span - when it comes to Sierra Blanca. "He didn't listen," Curry said. "He had his mind made up." Afterward, Bernie was giving his pro forma campaign speech, never mentioning nuclear power or nuclear waste. Sierra Blanca activist Bill Addington, who'd arrived just that morning to join the march, along with his neighbor María Méndez, had had enough, and he yelled from the crowd, "What about my home, Bernie? What about Sierra Blanca?"

Several others joined in. "What about Sierra Blanca, Bernie?"

Sanders left the stage, which surprised no one in the small Texas delegation. Earlier, he had told them, "My position is unchanged, and you're not gonna like it." When they asked if he would visit the site in Sierra Blanca, he said, "Absolutely not. I'm gonna be running for re-election in the state of Vermont."

A few people took Bill Addington to task for being so rude. Then all the marchers took the stage, to sing a unique version of "Down by the Riverside." One of the new verses was, "I'm gonna lay down my nuclear waste, down by the riverside." The West Texas marchers sang along.

Asked how he felt about the rally, Hal Flanders summed it up: "I'm disgusted."


Sounds like politics as usual to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #73)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 02:02 PM

86. I don't think it's a matter of rich or poor community, it's a matter of space.

Texas has vast expanses of uninhabited land so the stuff can be protected. The only affect that would have on the poor is to increase the available job market. They wouldn't be any closer to nuclear waste than I am sitting at my computer in beautiful, rural New Hampshire. The truth is, you're scrambling for a way to bash Bernie because Hillary is losing steam. If she's indicted on anything you might be stuck with Bernie anyway. Oops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chitown Kev (Reply #66)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 01:57 PM

85. That is just ridiculous.

There's a real risk of the waste being on the banks of the Connecticut River as Hurricane Irene demonstrated not long ago. Your beef is with the State of Texas and the developer of the site, not with Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #85)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:13 PM

91. But it's a "white" state and Bernie hates brown people.

Or something.

I love how Vermont is now a target for anti-Bernie folks who think that people who live in white states are automatically racists. It started the day Bernie announced and it's only gotten worse.

It's so...liberal.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #91)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:35 PM

93. It's going to come as a shock to some of the people I see every day over in Vermont

that despite what they might think, they're really white. LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #93)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 05:36 PM

94. I'm a Vermonster, Vinca!

Currently an expat living in the Bible belt but I appreciate all of the people who defend my homies here.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #94)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:02 AM

104. I'm a native Vermonter, too, currently living across the river in NH.

It was a good real estate deal and I had no idea way back then that NH was so backward politically. But I suppose that's nothing to someone living in the Bible belt. Condolences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #104)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:16 AM

105. Thanks! I'm still in culture shock.

I've lived in other states but the south is a whole other world for this atheist.

Beam me up.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #105)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:25 AM

108. Back in the time of dinosaurs, I lived in Daytona Beach, Florida.

I was young and dumb and not political so it really didn't matter. And there wasn't much exposure to southern living on the beach which is where I spent most of my time. I can't imagine living in the south now. It's really too bad since now I'm old and wouldn't mind skipping the snow and ice part of New England. I'm sorry you'll be missing foliage season. This year is predicted to be better than usual because of the dry weather. You can already feel that fall nip in the air.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinca (Reply #108)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:29 AM

109. I can smell the leaves and wood smoke now...

Fresh homemade apple cider, horseback rides in the brilliant woods, leaves crunching underneath ...man I miss it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:19 AM

67. Wow

 

So he co-sponsored the bill and got it through congress.

Thats really unfortunate. It must be horrible for the poor people living in that area.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:43 AM

70. More intential lies posted from Camp Weathervane

How very surprising

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LondonReign2 (Reply #70)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:51 AM

72. What part is the lie? That he sponsored it or got it through Congress?

It is in the Congressional Record.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #72)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 11:16 AM

77. It is a lie of omission, knowingly told by her campaign

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LondonReign2 (Reply #77)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:51 PM

84. See post #79

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:51 AM

71. Were they going to just dump it in the streets and backyards?

Of course they weren't. In the end, no waste was dumped there at all. We still haven't figured out what to do with radioactive waste from nuclear power plants and other sources. There have been lots of ideas, but there are objections to each and every one of them.

House members are always under pressure from constituents in their states to do something about the nuclear waste in their state. Nobody wants it. There's no good plan for storing it, really. The plan Sanders voted for was one of those plans. It never happened, and wasn't going to dump the waste in that town anyhow. It would have created a facility near that town. That didn't happen, either. Every proposed site for disposal will have an impact on the area near where it is located.

This has nothing to do with Bernie Sanders' opinion about Hispanic Americans. Nothing at all. It is an unjustified issue in 2015.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #71)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 10:55 AM

74. Funny, I just read here on DU that it was safely stored and under guard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #74)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 11:02 AM

75. It's sort of safely stored, temporarily, onsite.

However, that is only a short-term option. Frankly, there is no good way to deal with it. Every storage and disposal option has many drawbacks. The reality of it is that there is plenty of that waste that needs to be dealt with. We should have anticipated that long ago, but did not.

Nuclear power generation is not safe, and cannot be made to be safe. That said, we did build all of those plants and have to deal with our decision to do so. How we will do that is still undetermined.

I'm an opponent of nuclear power generation, and have been since the 1950s, when there was a meltdown in the very first commercial nuclear power plant near my home. My opposition, however, did not lead to a ban on such plants, and many have been built. Now, we must deal with the reality of past poor decisions.

The plants exist. The waste exists. Those are facts. We must figure out what to do with that waste. There are no options that do not have drawbacks. But some solution needs to be found that will have the least impact. I do not know what that option is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #75)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 02:31 PM

87. That is my problem with nuclear energy.

If the waste could be stored without environmental worry or worries about the plant blowing up, I would be all for it. If the GOP would put more energy into scientific research on this instead of worrying about planned parenthood, we might find some good clean energy here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #75)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 03:15 PM

89. Exactly

In the 1997 debate that I've seen on HR 629, Eddie Bernice Johnson said that IF she lived in the area that she would probably be opposed to it but...she lived in Houston where a lot of this low-level waste is generated by universities and medical centers/hospitals...it's a complex problem; NO ONE wants these materials in their area.

It's complicated.

And, yes, communities of color often suffer the brunt of things like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 11:16 AM

78. Texas is a fucked up state that was going to dump there anyways.

 


Why shouldn't a Senator have the best interests of his constituents in mind and take advantage of Texas being so damn stupid?

Blame the Texan politicians who authorized the dumping there.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Motown_Johnny (Reply #78)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 11:34 AM

80. Neither Paul Wellstone nor his constituents

had any vested interest in this issue...that did not stop Wellstone from being a true champion on this issue, however.

BTW, this project was more of an Ann Richards baby than anything else

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 12:49 PM

83. This and the JSF attacks are just silly

He's from Vermont. He's going to vote in ways that help Vermont. This isn't rocket science, people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:27 PM

97. Wyldwolf, there is an interesting name at this link.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #97)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:40 PM

98. fascinating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #98)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:43 PM

100. I think so. Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #98)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:44 PM

101. I took a screen shot of that just in case it disappears or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #98)

Fri Sep 25, 2015, 08:23 AM

107. In 2010 Sanders held rallies to help Shumlin in a tight race.

 

A short time later Shumlin appoints her to this cushy commission position. It is a governor appointed position. Not the only one she is currently on. I believe the other commission she is on is by governor appointment as well but I didn't take the time to read the rules like I did the first one. She was appointed to it after the Sanders favor as well. She is listed on the Vermont Economic Development Authority website as a commissioner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #97)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:42 PM

99. Wow!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #97)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 09:03 AM

110. It's on her linked in page so I'm sure it's been known for a long time.


Not like it's a new discovery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #110)

Sat Sep 26, 2015, 09:11 AM

111. In my op yesterday I posted her LinkedIn link.

 

Sanders campaigns for Shumlin, a short time later Sanders wife gets appointed to two commission seats by Shumlin. The definition of cronyism. Thanks for the mention of the link. I provided it here in my op yesterday. Politicians will be politicians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Thu Sep 24, 2015, 09:52 PM

103. Probably for the same reason Bernie has refused to rule out a national puppy eating day.

Puppies that look like this:



He's a puppy eater who hates latinos. Even more than puppies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Mon Feb 8, 2016, 03:41 AM

112. Why did Bill Clinton sign it into law?

I agree it was a bad vote. I don't know why Sanders voted for it without hearing from him directly, and it's late so, my educated guess is there was a lot of pressure to find a place that would have as little environmental impact as possible. As I understood it then, the elevation of the area was considered "good" and that the remaining town of Sierra Blanca, 5 miles west of the proposed site was 30% vacant, boarded up buildings. There was much ado over money that the county in TX would receive from states participating in the pact. The only library in Sierra Blanca was built, among other pluses for the tiny community that lived well below the poverty level, and was never expected to thrive again in any way. This was also low-level nuke waste that would all have dissipated within 100 years.

Even after Clinton signed it into law, the committee in TX that had to give final approval for the site did not do so after much community protest, which is a good thing. When citizens are against something and protest, it's always excellent when community/state officials listen and give heed to their wishes.

I wouldn't have wanted the waste near my community, but I don't know where my state stores such, like Gov. Snyder would tell anyone? Also, I do still support Bernie Sanders for President.

Here's an old post that gives a lot of info on these events:

http://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/texans-defend-sierra-blanca-community-against-nuclear-waste-disposal-1996-1998

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MiaCulpa (Reply #112)

Mon Feb 8, 2016, 07:08 AM

113. who knows? Next time he runs for President I'll ask.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread