Mind Vomit by the ikss ~ a journal
Header
Tuesday, Mar. 16, 2004take action
Navigation
the archives
The last few dribbles...
- -
Wednesday, Jul. 06, 2005
good-bye diaryland -
Thursday, Jan. 13, 2005
Social Security -
Thursday, Jan. 13, 2005
save the arctic refuge -
Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2005
it's surreal -
Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2005
the latest entry
Contact the ikss
~ the ikss guestbook ~
email the ikss
notes to the ikss
New here? Start here
The Usual Suspects (Cast)
the ikss Mission Statement: Please Read
the ikss bio
the ikss profile, including favorite diaryland links
somebody out there loves me
�Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead�
-Lucille Ball
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
--Theodore Roosevelt, 1918
REGISTER TO VOTE
"The time is always right to do what is right"
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
"The "seven social sins": Knowledge without character,
Science without humanity,
Wealth without work,
Commerce without morality,
Politics without principles,
Pleasure without conscience,
Worship without self-sacrifice."
--Gandhi
"We have not inherited the world from our forfathers -
We have borrowed it from our children."
--Kashmiri, proverb
The Bush Administration is on the verge of approving new transportation regulations (TSR-1) that would exempt various levels of radioactive material from regulatory control while in transit. Public comment on EPA's controversial reclassification proposal closes this Wednesday, March 17.[1]
EPA has also joined the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Departments of Energy and Transportation in seeking to redefine radioactive materials, including nuclear power, nuclear weapons, and naturally occurring materials (see last Friday's March 12 BushGreenwatch, below).
The new class of material, categorized as Below Regulatory Concern, would not be subject to radioactive regulatory controls. Exempting radionuclides from regulation, labeling or control during transit will also make it easier for the EPA and NRC to deregulate hazardous nuclear waste.[2]
Allowing an increase of unregulated nuclear material on the nation's roads, rails, barges and aircraft is of special concern due to homeland security worries over the transportation of nuclear material possibly enabling a dirty bomb.[3]
"Everyone recognizes this as a very serious threat. The last thing we need is to make this easier," Rick Hind, toxics director at Greenpeace, told BushGreenwatch. "This is yet another example of inadequate public health protection in favor of sweetheart deals for industry."
A major study also found that transportation-related accidents have the potential to cause greater numbers of deaths, injuries and possible large-scale evacuations.[4]
"Radioactive waste is extremely dangerous stuff, probably the most dangerous material that can be shipped," said Fred Millar, former toxics director at Friends of the Earth. "Even a tiny release could be catastrophic in an urban area."
TAKE ACTION
The deadline for comments is March 17th, so act quickly and spread the word. Email the EPA at [email protected] and let them know you oppose federal rules that would deregulate and exempt nuclear materials from regulation. Send a copy of your comment to EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt at [email protected].
SOURCES:
[1] Diane D'Arrigo, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, [email protected].
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] A National Risk Assessment for Selected Hazardous Materials Transportation, Dec. 2000.
~~~
Bush EPA Seeks Weaker Rules for Radioactive Waste
If the Bush Administration has its way, radioactive waste will soon be officially no different than ordinary trash--meaning it could be dumped into your nearby town landfill.
Long a dream--and goal--of the nuclear industry, the Bush EPA is actively considering a reclassification, or redefinition, of what constitutes radioactive waste. The period for public comment on the controversial proposal expires this Wednesday, March 17.
The nuclear industry has been pushing for such a redefinition of contaminated "low-activity" waste for over a decade. Sending this waste to an ordinary landfill or hazardous waste handler (if radioactive material is mixed with hazardous waste) would be cheaper than disposal at facililities licensed to handle radioactive materials, which is what current EPA regulation requires.
In November, when the proposed deregulation was announced, a coalition of prominent leaders from environmental, recycling, and nuclear watchdog groups wrote to EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt, warning that this change "could significantly harm the environment and public health." The group also noted that such a change could result in "public outrage".[1]
"The scientific and medical communities agree that there is no safe level of exposure to radioactive material," Ed Hopkins, director of the environmental quality program for the Sierra Club, told BushGreenwatch. "Radioactive wastes should be carefully contained and isolated, not spread throughout the environment. Only the nuclear industry benefits from deregulating and recycling radioactive waste."
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's past efforts to reclassify radioactive wastes to allow for cheaper disposal, which date from 1986, have prompted strong opposition. In 1992, Congress overturned NRC waste reclassification policies, which went by the term "Below Regulatory Concern". From 1992-1996, 15 states passed laws or regulations aimed at continued regulatory control over the disposal of radioactive materials.[2]
The EPA reclassification proposal dovetails with complementary proposals under consideration by other government agencies, including the NRC, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Transportation, to relax or remove regulations now governing the transportation and disposal of radioactive materials.[3]
The proposed deregulation could also threaten the ability of states to regulate radioactive wastes and protect their citizens.
TAKE ACTION
The deadline for comments is March 17th, so act quickly and spread the word. Email the EPA at [email protected] and let them know you oppose federal rules that would deregulate and exempt nuclear materials from regulation. Send a copy of your comment to EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt at [email protected].
SOURCES:
[1] Coalition letter to Mike Leavitt, Nov. 17, 2003.
[2] Diane D'Arrigo, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, [email protected].
[3] Ibid.
~~~
BUSH THREATENED TO FIRE OFFICIAL FOR TELLING THE TRUTH
During this time of record deficits, President Bush promised the country that his drug-industry backed Medicare bill would cost $395 billion. (1) But just weeks after he signed the bill into law, his own budget office admitted that the bill would actually cost well over $500 billion. (2) And today a new report shows that the President knew that the bill cost more than he had claimed, and yet he deliberately hid the information from the public until the legislation was already signed into law.
As revealed in an exclusive Knight-Ridder report, the White House threatened to fire its own top Medicare actuary "if he told lawmakers about a series of Bush administration cost estimates" that priced the bill at more than $500 billion. (3) At the time, conservative Republicans had "vowed to vote against the Medicare drug bill if it cost more than $400 billion." This means that the president deliberately misled members of his own party on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry that pushed the bill and has been a top contributor to his campaign. (4) As Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC) said, "I think a lot of people probably would have reconsidered" voting for the bill had they not been deliberately misled by the White House.
At Knight-Ridder's website you can see the full text of the 6/26/03 email that Medicare's top actuary Richard S. Foster sent to colleagues informing them of the White House threat. (5)
Sources:
1. "Federal Deficit Hits Record $374B", CBS News, 10/20/2003,
2. "Medicare drug plan balloons", Washington Times, 01/29/2004,
3. "Bush administration ordered Medicare plan cost estimates withheld",Knight Ridder, 03/11/2004,
4. Open Secrets.Org,
5. "E-mail from Richard S. Foster, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services", Knight Ridder, 03/11/2004,
~~~
Take Action: Support an Investigation into Bush's Medicare Lies
In December 2003, Congress passed a Medicare bill written by and for the drug and insurance industries. The bill just barely passed as President Bush begged conservative Republicans for votes and assured them that the cost of the bill was under $400 billion.
Bush lied.
This week, we learned that chief Medicare actuary Richard Foster told the Bush administration weeks before the bill passed that the cost would be much, much higher. Instead of passing along this vital information to Congress, the administration threatened to fire Foster if he told the truth.
And just a few weeks after the Medicare bill passed, the administration admitted that the cost would be somewhere between $500 and $600 billion -- an even bigger windfall for the special interests.
Take Action
The Bush White House's lies to Congress and intimidation of a federal employee show that the administration will stop at nothing to do favors for President Bush's special interest friends.
Click here to sign our petition demanding a full investigation into the White House lies about Medicare and its threats to fire an expert for telling the truth!
~~~
Word of the Day for Tuesday March 16, 2004
redound rih-DOWND, intransitive verb:
1. To have a consequence or effect.
2. To return; to rebound; to reflect.
3. To become added or transferred; to accrue.
last / next
~~~~~~~~~~~peace, love and smooches~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't know why you'd wanna, but on the off-chance you may feel tempted to steal any of my words and claim them as your own, please be advised:
All material
Copyright 2002-2005, Howl-at-the-Moon Words
***DISCLAIMER: These are my thoughts and my thoughts alone. If you know me in my "real life" off the net and have come across this page purely by accident, please keep in mind that you were not invited here and I would suggest you leave this page now. However, should you choose not to do so, please be warned that reading my thoughts here is not an invitation to discuss them off-line. You may discover things you do not know about me and may not like very much. Such is life. Again, this is MY space and I will use it as I see fit. If you are offended by anything here, well that's pretty much your own fault at this point.
I say all of this with love, of course, but there it is.
