Environment

Can’t Run Away

Gordon Smith can’t run away from his record this campaign cycle.

In an editorial today The Oregonian said it will watch closely how candidates handle climate change this election cycle.

“Thus the challenge for us in making endorsements -- and ultimately for voters in marking their ballots -- lies in distinguishing the sincerely green candidates from the Sam Brownback fakes. Global warming isn't the only crushing issue, of course, but it's a big one, requiring voters to weigh some tough questions in making their choices.”
(The Oregonian Editorial, 4-22-08)

So, where does Smith stand on the issue?

He stands opposite Oregon’s Democratic U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden and right in line with the special interests who fund Smith’s campaigns.

Smith’s donors have bought his opposition to the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act. Wyden is a co-sponsor of the bill to combat climate change and the bill has bi-partisan support.

But Smith won't support this important legislation. He’s taken millions of dollars from the special interests who oppose this legislation, including hundreds of thousands from Big Oil.

Oregonians made that point yesterday as they protested outside Smith's offices in Eugene and Medford.

Smith’s environmental negligence is no surprise. He consistently earns low environmental ratings, including an anemic 14 percent from League of Conservation Voters in 2006.

And he has consistently chosen to provide tax breaks for Big Oil over funding alternative energy development.

“Gordon Smith’s record shows that the only green he cares about is campaign cash,” DPO Chair Meredith Wood Smith said. "Gordon Smith has become a vending machine for votes. Special interests insert money and Gordon Smith will oppose climate change legislation, provide tax breaks to Big Oil and vote any way the special interests want him to."

Discuss: Can’t Run Away

Posted April 22, 2008 in Environment - 0 comments

Smith Stands With Special Interests And Against Wyden

Does Oregon need any more evidence that Gordon Smith impairs Ron Wyden’s work and votes for his special interest contributors, not his constituents?

Oregon’s senior U.S. Senator, Democrat Ron Wyden, is co-sponsoring a bill to combat climate change.

Despite pleas from his senate colleagues and 670 groups of hunters and sport fishermen - including 28 based in Oregon - Oregon’s other U.S. Senator, Republican Gordon Smith, won’t co-sponsor it and won’t support it, according to an editorial by The Register-Guard.

“While Ron Wyden fights for Oregon, Gordon Smith fights for the special interests,” DPO Communications Director Marc Siegel said. “Gordon Smith, who has raised millions of dollars from special interests, responds to donors’ checks, not constituent phone calls, meetings and letters.”

Smith And Special Interests

Smith has raised nearly $1.5 million from the special interests who control his vote on climate change.

According to the Center For Responsive Politics, Smith has accepted:

$271,475 from Oil & Gas Interests

$300,354 from Electric Utilities

$230,871 from Air Transport Interests

$91,947 from Trucking Interests

$305,804 from Manufacturing & Distributing Interests

$163,019 from Railroad Interests

$93,850 from Sea Transport Interests

Discuss: Smith Stands With Special Interests And Against Wyden

Posted February 28, 2008 in Environment, Who Loves Gordon? - 2 comments

It's Not Easy Being Green

At least not for Gordon Smith. Download these flyers highlighting Smith’s broken campaign promise not to drill in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and his opposition to combating climate change.

Let your green friends know about Smith’s anti-environmental record! Pass out these flyers at environmental events and email your friends the link to StopGordonSmith.com/environment so they can learn more.

Discuss: It's Not Easy Being Green

Posted February 1, 2008 in Environment, Grassroots Resources, static - 0 comments

30 Days to Watch 90 Minutes

One month after we sent Gordon Smith “An Inconvenient Truth,” the award-winning documentary on climate change, reports show global warming is only getting worse.

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called the recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) "as frightening as a science-fiction movie."

Hopefully Smith will watch the Al Gore film and get the picture that he needs to improve his votes.

Smith has voted repeatedly against reducing greenhouse emissions, against increasing fuel economy standards, and against cutting foreign oil imports.

Smith even voted to keep $5 billion in tax loopholes for Big Oil companies.

Smith continues to stand with President Bush on climate change and almost every other issue.

Let’s hope Smith watches the movie soon and:

1.Lets Oregonians know if the video has changed his mind on global warming.

2.Lets Oregonians know if he will vote for the environment instead of for Big Oil.

Discuss: 30 Days to Watch 90 Minutes

Posted November 19, 2007 in Environment - 0 comments

New Video - An Inconvenient Gift for Gordon Smith

Al Gore and climate change are all over the news. But, is Gordon Smith getting the message?

Read more and discuss: New Video - An Inconvenient Gift for Gordon Smith

Posted October 18, 2007 in Environment, Smith Videos - 8 comments

Al Gore Wins. Gordon Smith Ignores. Oregon Loses.

Has Gordon Smith heard of Global Warming?

Not according to his campaign and U.S. Senate websites. There is no mention of “global warming” nor “climate change” on either site.

There is nothing to indicate he has changed his stance from 2003 when The Daily Astorian said his climate change position would earn him induction into the Flat Earth Society.

And his voting record signals little concern over climate change. Smith has voted against proposals to reduce green house emissions, against boosting CAFE standards, and for windfall profits for Big Oil.

In each of those votes, Smith voted opposite Oregon’s other U.S. Senator, Democrat Ron Wyden.

So, with Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize victory today, do we have an opportunity to get Smith’s attention on this issue?

What would it take to get Smith to recognize global warming as a priority?

A phone call from Al Gore?

A free copy of “An Inconvenient Truth"?

An all expenses paid trip to the polar ice caps?

What do you think it will take to get Smith to recognize the causes and threat of global warming?

Discuss: Al Gore Wins. Gordon Smith Ignores. Oregon Loses.

Posted October 12, 2007 in Environment - 1 comments

DPO Chair Responds To Attack From Smith’s Hometown Newspaper Regarding Smith’s Documented History of Environmental Violations

East Oregonian attacks DPO, but fails to mention key information
DPO provided newspaper at newspaper’s request.

Democratic Party of Oregon Chair Meredith Wood Smith emailed this letter to the editor to the East Oregonian today in response to the newspaper’s inaccurate editorial attack on the DPO.

In a Thursday, September 27 editorial, the newspaper attacked the DPO for its answers to reporters’ questions about environmental violations at U.S. Senator Gordon Smith’s(R-OR) plant.

However, the editorial from Smith’s hometown paper failed to mention crucial information on numerous, serious environmental violations at Smith’s plant that the DPO had supplied the East Oregonian at the newspaper’s request.

“At the newspaper’s request, we supplied the East Oregonian with information on the $75,000 fine and nearly 20 environmental violations at Smith’s plant during his day to day management, but the newspaper chose not to use that information,” Wood Smith said. “It is disappointing they would rather attack the messenger than report the facts, that Smith has a well documented record of violating environmental laws.”

The following letter points out that Smith’s company had a much worse environmental record when Smith was responsible for the day to day management of it. Since he’s moved on to Washington, DC, Smith’s company has still faced several fines, but none as serious as when he was responsible for the day to day operations of the plant.

Smith often claims now he has little to do with the company. That means there were many more violations during his watch than since he’s left that responsibility to others.

Letter to East Oregonian Editor:

Dear Editor,

Where were the facts in the editorial detailing the third environmental fine at U.S. Senator Gordon Smith’s (R-OR) plant since the 1990s?

Not only was this violation labeled “serious” by the Department of Environmental Quality, but it’s part of a long history of environmental violations at Smith’s plant.

You ignored documentation on Smith’s long track record of environmental damage that the DPO provided your newspaper at your organization’s request.

You asked for evidence to see if there was a history of violations at Smith’s plant.

We provided it.

You ignored it.

Smith’s Plant Actually Responsible For More Frequent and More Serious Environmental Violations When He Was Principally In Charge. Better Record, Although Still Flawed, Since He’s Left.

As the DPO noted in an email to the East Oregonian, between 1981 and 1996, there were at least 18 environmental violations filed against Smith Frozen Foods. In 1986, officials forced Smith to line a waste pond to comply with new environmental rules, leading Smith to accept a $766,000 government bailout to pay for the project.

After this, the company was still caught violating permit conditions, including failing to test a creek running alongside company property. In 1991, a leaking pipe sent processing fluid into the creek, killing hundreds of fish and leaving Smith with a $75,000 fine.

As the DPO noted in its email, all of this was reported in the magazine Oregon Business.

What this information means is that Smith’s company actually had a worse environmental record when he was principally in charge of the plant. Since he’s left, they have polluted waterways several times. But, the recent violations are actually still an improvement over the damage done during Smith’s negligent leadership.

Pendleton Area’s Environment May Be Cleaner With Smith Gone, But Our Country’s Environmental Laws Are Weaker With Him In Washington, DC.

With Smith in Washington, DC, the Pendleton area’s environment is cleaner. But, his presence in Washington, DC has meant bad news for America’s environment.

Since he’s arrived in Washington, DC, Smith has voted to support Big Oil over alternative energy, voted to drill in ANWR, amassed an environmental voting record that has earned him a lifetime score of just 26 percent from the League of Conservation Voters, and campaigned on his political coordination with the White House – coordination that caused the biggest fish kill on the West Coast in recent history.

Again, as we said in a blog post to www.StopGordonSmith.com, it’s important to explore if there’s a connection between the decades of environmental violations at Smith’s plant, and his repeated legislative attacks on the environment.

Senator Smith’s environmental record – both his votes in Washington, DC and his fines and violations in Oregon – is of interest to your readers.

In the future, I hope you will use all the facts at your disposal to make your editorials as accurate and thorough as possible.

Sincerely,

Meredith Wood Smith
Chair
Democratic Party of Oregon

Discuss: DPO Chair Responds To Attack From Smith’s Hometown Newspaper Regarding Smith’s Documented History of Environmental Violations

Posted October 1, 2007 in Environment - 1 comments

Is Smith Still Cool To Solving Global Warming?

As the world turns its attention to Global Warming with three international conferences in America this week, what does Gordon Smith have to say on the issue?

Has he changed his position since 2003 when The Daily Astorian said his climate change position would earn him induction into the Flat Earth Society?

Or does he stand by a voting record that only hastens climate change?

Smith has voted against proposals to reduce green house emissions, against boosting CAFE standards, and for windfall profits for Big Oil. In each of the following votes, Smith voted opposite Oregon’s other U.S. Senator, Democrat Ron Wyden.

SMITH'S VOTES:

Smith Repeatedly Voted Against Bipartisan Proposal To Reduce Green House Emissions.
In 2005, Smith voted against an amendment to limit greenhouse emissions. Sen. John McCain's amendment would have limited greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels by 2010. The amendment would also have allowed the trading of emission allowances and reductions through a government sponsored greenhouse gas database that maintained an inventory of emissions and a registry of reductions. Smith had voted against a similar plan in 2003. [Vote 148, 6/22/05; CBS, Market Watch, 6/22/05; Union Leader, 10/31/03; Vote 420, 10/30/03]

Smith Twice Voted Against Boosting CAFE Standards.
In 2005, Smith voted against an amendment that would have mandated phased increases in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. Passenger vehicles made before 2008 would have to average 25 miles per gallon. The standard would gradually increase to 40 miles per gallon by model year 2016. Non-passenger vehicles made before 2008 would have to average 17 miles per gallon. By model year 2016, the standard would rise to an average of 27.5 miles per gallon. Smith voted against a similar amendment in 2003. The amendment would have also closed the so-called "SUV loophole."
[Vote 157, 6/29/05; Vote 309, 7/29/03]

Smith Voted Against Cutting Oil Imports By 40%.
In 2005, Smith voted against a proposal to reduce America‘s dependency on foreign oil by 40% over the next 20 years.
[Vote 140, 6/16/05]

Smith Helped Protect $5 Billion Big Oil Tax Windfall.
Tax loopholes that save the oil industry $5 billion were removed from the original Senate version of the GOP tax reconciliation bill in February 2006, but after heavy lobbying by the industry, Congressional negotiators reinserted them into the final bill. The $5 billion tax break for big-oil could have been used instead to partially offset the increase in middle class taxes. Gordon Smith voted for the final tax bill with the big-oil tax breaks.
[Republican Policy Committee, 2/7/06; Washington Post, 4/26/06; Joint Tax Committee, 5/9/06; Vote 118, 5/11/06]

Smith Twice Rejected Windfall Profits Tax for Big Oil in 2005.
In November 2005, Smith voted against imposing a temporary 50% tax on oil company profits from the sale of any crude oil above $40 a barrel. Revenues from the tax would be used to provide income tax rebates to consumers. The same day, Smith voted against a separate but similar windfall tax amendment that would use the revenue to provide a $100 income tax credit for every personal exemption.
[Vote 331, 11/17/05; Vote 341, 11/17/05; Houston Chronicle, 11/17/05; Las Vegas Review-Journal, 11/18/05; Environment and Energy Daily¸ 11/18/05]

Discuss: Is Smith Still Cool To Solving Global Warming?

Posted September 26, 2007 in Environment - 1 comments

Pattern or Coincidence?

Recent newspaper reports have revealed that Gordon Smith is not just protecting polluters, he is one.

But, is there really a connection between the repeated environmental violations at Gordon Smith’s plant, and his repeated legislative attacks on the environment?

According to The Oregonian, for the third time since the 1990s, his Pendleton-area processing plant has been fined for polluting nearby Pine Creek.

So, over the course of about a decade, Smith hasn’t instituted tight environmental controls on his plant.

During roughly that same time period, he has voted to support Big Oil over alternative energy, voted to drill in ANWR, chosen political science over real science, and amassed an environmental voting record that has earned him a lifetime score of just 26 percent from the League of Conservation Voters.

If he cared more about the environment as a senator, would he care more as a businessman?

Would he have taken a closer look at what was going on at his plant?

Or are his environmental violations and his legislative assaults on the environment just a coincidence? An unfortunate coincidence for Oregon’s environment.

Discuss: Pattern or Coincidence?

Posted September 25, 2007 in Environment - 0 comments

Gordon Smith: Environmentalist?

Judging by his voting record, Gordon Smith’s backyard must be an overdeveloped, smoggy, oily, toxic mess.

The man simply does not care about the environment.

Smith has voted to drill in ANWR, to protect a $5 billion big oil tax windfall, against reducing greenhouse gas emissions, against a proposal to reduce America’s dependency on foreign oil by 40% over the next 20 years and against proposals to clean up SuperFund sites.

For votes cast in 2006, Smith received just a 14% rating from the League of Conservation Voters. Smith’s lifetime score from the LCV is just 26%.

Smith’s environmental contributions rank with the Exxon Valdez.

How would you rank Smith’s environmental gifts to Oregon?

Discuss: Gordon Smith: Environmentalist?

Posted July 3, 2007 in Environment - 4 comments

Smith chooses Big Oil over Alternative Energy – Twice!

Twice this week, Smith voted against collecting billions from Big Oil companies to fund alternative energy.

With his votes this week on alternative energy legislation, United States Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR) told Oregon families, drivers and environmentalists whose side he’s on.

Big oil.

For the second time this week, Smith voted to let big oil companies – who are already reaping record profits – keep billions of dollars of excess profits rather than using that money to expand incentives for alternative energy development. A bipartisan group came forward and decided that alternative energy sources for Americans was more important than the big profits for big oil, but Smith stuck with his big oil friends. It’s no surprise, given the more than $250,000 Smith has gladly taken from the oil and gas industry.

Read more and discuss: Smith chooses Big Oil over Alternative Energy – Twice!

Posted June 21, 2007 in Environment, Who Loves Gordon? - 0 comments

Smith on the Environment

Smith Has Taken A Quarter Of A Million Dollars From Big Oil and Gas. Since taking office, Smith has accepted $259,775 from the oil and gas industry and $639,061 from the energy sector as a whole. [www.opensecrets.org]

Read more and discuss: Smith on the Environment

Posted June 15, 2007 in Environment - 1 comments