|
|
||
|
|
More on Moore
Dear Editor; We have all read accounts of religious organizations, which have turned over their financial assets to investors who have occasionally invested their assets in such legal investments as Las Vegas Casinos and bordellos.
So what is the point of Forum writer
Jim Meyer's letter, Michael Moore Owned Halliburton Defense
Stock (published in the last edition of Review) bought through
his foundation?
The wealthy invest their wealth and earn
greater wealth. Is this privilege only reserved for conservative
Republicans?
I'm sure Moore isn't making these
investments himself. He's too busy. Maybe he did say he wants no part of
the stock market. But what if he did and changed his mind? Is that also
only a prerogative of Republicans?
I fail to see the great expose.
I also fail to see this book by this
author Peter Schweizer as a blockbuster. Next year it will no
doubt be available in Dollar Stores. Is he an alumni of the Matt
Drudge School of Journalism? I haven't sent Schweizer's book on the
best seller list.
I'm undersold.
Charles Guoan Editor's Reply: The issue of Moore's foundation owning stocks in the same defense contractors he's attacked is not unlike the religious organizations you reference investing in such instruments as Vegas Casinos and bordellos: while it may be legal, it's still a case of hypocrisy. Conservatives often chastise liberals over what they view as 'moral relativism', and frankly, morality is all about choice - whether or not to take the high road or the low road.
In 'Stupid White Men' Moore wrote "I
don't' own a single share of stock.' Now we find his foundation owns
more than $280,000 in corporate stock and nearly $100,000 in corporate
bonds.
It may be no great expose, or of
little surprise when political and cultural leaders so routinely
straddle both sides of the fence - but heroes do not serve two Masters.
To paraphrase: If you're going to talk the talk, you've got to walk the
walk.
Honest Journalism? Editor, The Review; I am writing to respond to the letter by Jimmy Greene attacking my husband for writing a letter to the Saginaw News on the illegal use of white phosphorous by US troops in Iraq.
Green complains that my husband was
grandstanding because he signed his name as "Candidate for the 95th
House of Representatives".
I demand the Saginaw News
editorial board come clean and print a retraction admitting they changed
the letter he sent in!
In fact the Saginaw News
editorial board added those words to the letter. He signed it with only
his name and phone number. We have copies of the original in our files.
Is this what you call honest journalism?
Intentionally editing his letter to
create controversy for their own agenda is not only unethical but is
potentially illegal.
Greene having spent a term on The
Saginaw News editorial staff, and recently outing himself as an
"African-American Republican", obviously is participating in continued
attacks against my husband and myself.
Is there no bottom to just how low this
paper and editorial staff will go?
Jo Kraych Goshka's Christmas Gift to Dow Will Diminish Public Health Protection It seems a great many people want us to believe proposed legislation by Senator Mike Goschka that would grant Dow Chemical final authority over contaminated property on the Tittabawassee floodplain is not about Dow Chemical.
Dow Chemical says it's not taken a
position on the bill, they cop ignorance by saying they've not seen the
amended bill introduced by Senator Goschka.
Legislators trying to protect Dow
Chemical are proposing to change the way the State manages our cleanup
laws with negative consequences for everyone in Michigan.
HB 4617/SB1 would remove the state's ability to designate some property as a "facility" or potentially contaminated. An amendment would also allow the polluter to decide whether a property can receive the designation.
The result will be more expensive
cleanups, slower cleanups, and increased liability for individual
property owners whose property may be contaminated. Residents may
actually lose the ability to force polluters to pay!
In addition, the "Don't Ask, Don't
Tell" provisions of the bill would prevent property owners from
knowing that their property is contaminated, would prevent future
owners from being informed, and would prevent the DEQ from doing
anything about it, even if the property owners wanted help.
But these bills seem to be just fine with
Senator Goschka, Rep. Moolenaar and Kahn. It would
also appear to be OK with the Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce
and County Commissioner Ken Horn, who feel the amended bill would
expedite cleanup.
Dow Chemical says they've not
taken a position on the legislation and in a recent Saginaw News;
Dow went on to say they've not seen the amended version of the bill.
Odd! Dow's lobbyist, Jerry Howell, was in attendance at the
Senate Appropriations Committee meeting when the bill was passed. He
must have forgotten to turn in his homework.
Dow has everything to gain by the
passage of this legislation and they lose nothing! But public health,
natural resources and the integrity of our watershed will suffer
greatly. Special interests are at play for the benefit of Dow Chemical.
Hard as everyone tries to assure us
that this legislation is not about Dow Chemical, let's look at whom is
backing this legislation and who is lobbying for it in Lansing:
Representative John Molenaar: Former Dow Chemical employee representing the City of Midland. The same John Moolenaar whose mantra is "DEQ is out of control". The same John Moolenaar who threatened last year to legislate away the DEQ division that enforces Dow's license and the ultimate cleanup of the rivers. The same John Moolenaar who wants the cleanup criteria to be 1,000 ppt because then Midland wouldn't have a problem. No homes would be listed as 'facilities' and life would go on in this quiet all American community. The City of Midland: Who have consistently opposed any testing until Dow studies demonstrate that dioxin is not a hazard. Having accused the DEQ of failing to use "sound science" the City of Midland like Dow Chemical, refused to participate in the EPA SITE Project (Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation) for the rapid and inexpensive detection of dioxin in the environment. Sound Science can only be Dow Science. Midland's lobbyist on HB 4616 / S1, is Jeff McAlvey from McAlvey and Associates in Lansing. Mr. AmAlvey previously worked for Governor John Engler. Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce: Garret Greer, Dow Chemical, serves as Vice Chairman of the Chamber's Board of Directors Executive Committee. Veronica Horn, VP for the Chambers' Community Initiatives serves as the Chair for the Dow funded U of M study, which HB 4617 sanctions the use of to determine cleanup levels. Apparently it doesn't matter that the study does not include
vulnerable populations like children. Contrary to the erroneous
statement in the Chamber's Feb-March publication of Business
Advocate, the DEQ is not over seeing the research in the Dow
funded exposure investigation. 1. Removing the Tittabawassee River and floodplain from Dow's Corrective Action License in 2002. 2. Lying to the public about a Consent Order being negotiated with Dow Chemical (October 2002) 3. Blackening out and redacting public documents that made any reference to Dow's dioxin in the Tittabawassee River (Nov. 2001) 4. Advocated raising the clean up standard for dioxin (March 2002) 5. Denied comment from DEQ toxicologists on the Dow studies in the Consent Order (PRA Nov. 2002) 6. Removed DEQ Toxicologist from public meeting panel because she did not agree with Dow's study parameters (Nov. 2002) No doubt there are others. About Harding's new home at The Mackinaw Center? The lion's share of funding to the MC is rumored to come from Dow Chemical, but the Center never releases their funding source. Russ Harding on the cost of cleanup for Dow Chemical: "That would be a huge expense for them for what they think is not money well-spent." ( Chemical Policy Alert Magazine October 2004) The Saginaw County Board of Commissioners: Ten of them supported the bill. The most vocal being Commissioner Ken Horn from Frankenmuth who also happened to be the best versed on the bill. Although there were several erroneous statements made by Commissioner Horn, he did a great job advocating for all of the above special interest groups. The groups most concerned about money, real estate, corporate profit and business as usual. No concern for public health or this watershed. Senator Goschka " Someone has to give the perceived liable party its due process, its day in court, because it will end up paying the bill. My feeling is that it is wrong to assume contamination and make a company pay for it when there may not be contamination. It needs to be proven. " Right Mike, so remove the facility designation that compels the company to do the testing to find the contamination. And by all means ignore the fact that Dow agreed to the river and floodplain being a "facility" and signed a contract with the DEQ, ( i.e., the people of Michigan) assuming responsibility for those facilities in turn for their permit to do business. It's called corporate responsibility!
There are others. Representative Kahn,
Senator Stamas, Senator Barcia and Tittabawassee Twp.
HB 4617 /S1 is an attempt to rewrite the law after the fact to benefit Dow Chemical. It is intended to interfere with the class action lawsuit and it is intended to implement one more avenue to create chaos and delay cleanup.
Commissioner Horn stated this week this
bill isn't about Dow Chemical. Yet, in a letter to a local official from
Senate Majority Leader, Ken Sikkema, he acknowledges it is about
Dow.
"As you know, some soil samples taken
from the Tittabawassee River watershed have shown elevated dioxin
levels, which is most likely a result of past contamination by the Dow
Chemical Company. The Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality recently designated more than 400 properties in the general
vicinity of the Tittabawassee River as contaminated, or more
specifically a facility, without performing environmental testing on
each property���"
No concern voiced by any of the above for
public health and safety demonstrates some ignorance if you ask me.
Part 201 - the law they want to
amend - is all about environmental response by the state for the
protection of citizens and natural resources.
I will let each and everyone of you draw
your own conclusions, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a
duck.......
Michelle Hurd Riddick The Loan Tree Council Editor's Reply: Year's ago I read an important book by a Harvard Professor called 'Managing the Environment'. The thesis was simple: rather than looking at natural resources as a 'free' commodity, they should be valued and calibrated as our most 'valuable' commodity - a gold standard whereby all other values of property and products are determined.
In essence, the 'invisible hand' of
the market place would become visible when profits & dividends were
based upon how well corporations, business, and government protected
their irreplaceable resources, as opposed to denigrating them.
In a capitalist society, this can only
be done by assigning a value to finite resources - especially in a State
surrounded by one of the largest supplies of fresh water on the globe.
If such methodologies were in place
today, it would not be necessary to pit property owners and the
integrity of our watershed and public health against profits and jobs,
which in a healthy society and economy, flow together.
The Review welcomes your letters. Please address all correspondence to Letters to the Editor * Review Magazine * 318 S. Hamilton St. * Saginaw, MI 48602. Or e-mail us at www.review-mag.com |
|
|
|
||
