53 U.S. Senators Stand Up to Protect Public Health

Jackie Weidman
Climate Progress / News Report
Published: Thursday 21 June 2012
“Forty-eight Democratic Senators and 5 Republican colleagues voted against Senator Jim Inhofe’s (R-OK) Congressional Review Act resolution, S.J. Res 37, which would have blocked the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard. Forty-one Republicans and 5 Democrats voted for it to stop the mercury protections.”
Article image

Today the Senate rejected another attempt to block vitally important public health safeguards. Forty-eight Democratic Senators and 5 Republican colleagues voted against Senator Jim Inhofe’s (R-OK) Congressional Review Act resolution, S.J. Res 37, which would have blocked the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard. Forty-one Republicans and 5 Democrats voted for it to stop the mercury protections.

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, or MATS, was finalized by the Environmental Protection Agency in December 2011. It would require steep reductions of mercury, lead, arsenic, and other toxic pollutants from coal-fired power plants, the largest domestic source of mercury emissions in the United States. These plants spew 53,510 pounds of mercury into the air each year. Mercury and other airborne toxics are linked to birth defects, brain damage, learning disabilities, cancer, and other serious ailments.

The 46 Senators who voted in favor of blocking these important health protections received over $14 million in direct campaign donations from the coal and utility industries throughout their congressional careers. The senators who voted against the resolution received just $4 million, according to Center for Responsive Politics data.

Senators who opposed mercury safeguards received an average of $313,000 in contributions, while supporters of protections received an average of $83,000 from the polluting companies.  In other words, Senators who wanted to block clean air standards received nearly $4 in campaign cash for every $1 received by supporters.  These contributions don’t include any donations to Super PACs that support them.

The opponents of S.J. Res 37 included Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV). He bravely spoke against it, and emphasized the rule’s public health benefits.  He chastised his colleagues who “shrug off the advice of the American Academy of Pediatricians” by minimizing the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard’s health benefits.

Senator Rockefeller noted that West Virginians need “real world solutions to protect the future of coal.” and not a “foolish action [that] wastes time and money,” such as trying to stop public health protections.

Despite the failure of his resolution, Senator Inhofe vowed to continue his anti-health crusade. He said

“Our fight is not over: we will continue to do everything possible to expose what the Obama-EPA’s damaging regulatory regime will do to destroy jobs and weaken our economy, and work every day in our efforts to stop President Obama’s war on oil, gas and coal.”

Sen. Inhofe is badly mistaken – with $4 billion in annual tax breaks for big oil companies, and no reductions in carbon pollution from existing power plants, there is hardly a war on our fossil fuel energy supply.  But, unfortunately, today 45 Senators joined Sen. Inhofe’s war on our children’s health.



Get Email Alerts from NationofChange

Top Stories

10 comments on "53 U.S. Senators Stand Up to Protect Public Health"

McullenNE

June 30, 2012 8:48am

Inhofe what jobs would those be? Where are all those jobs you Repug's are producing for us? Oh I know overseas.

Wilfrid

June 21, 2012 6:01pm

This only proves that the industry failed to bribe sufficient people - an unforgivable mistake - incompetent CEOs.

pitch1934

June 21, 2012 5:37pm

The fact that 5 so called Democrats voted for this bill is what is troublesome. No one wnts to protect the interests of the future. It is "blow up the mountain today and screw tomorrow."

mike morell

June 21, 2012 4:27pm

Repubs screamed against Clinton’s Employer Mandate for health and for Individual Mandate instead. Now they parrot against Obama’s Individual Mandate. GOP’s got no credibility.

Ed Bradford

June 21, 2012 4:03pm

What is wrong with Hg? (Mercury).
Is there too much of it in the environment?
Does it kill?
I don't understand what the issue is?

Monique DC

June 21, 2012 4:47pm

Ed, yes, mercury kills. This is why the EPA lists certain fish they caution people against eating (or eating often) because they are the fish most likely to retain mercury (cause it gets into the water/ocean as well).

Essentially, the poisons (there is no Clean Coal) that we have been permitted by these bills would poison persons and the surrounding environments.

It is a rare, but good thing that the Senate stops this pandering to the coal industry.

Ed Bradford

June 21, 2012 5:47pm

OS! When I was a kid, my dad and I played with Hg a lot. Have you ever seen it?
It kills? Am I dead? I did that 50+ years ago.

Hg does not kill. That is not the reason people think Hg is bad.
Guess again.

bladtheimpailer

June 21, 2012 1:09pm

These Senators realise that this type of enviromental polution won't stop at the gates to their estates and would indeed effect themselves, their kin, and descendants. Noting Rockerfeller spoke against against this de regulation speeks volumes. However, coal dust won't reach them or theirs so that polution and enviromental disease will be allowed to continue and wreck havoc on those men, women and children who live close by. But at least they did vote the correct way.

Diane

June 21, 2012 1:01pm

Many, many thanks to those senators who voted against S.J. Res. 37. It didn't necessarily take courage to vote against it (as did Oregon's two senators), just an educated awareness of what this kind of polution can do to our environment.

I have long believed that Senator Inhofe needs to be sent back to high school - with strong emphasis on science classes. Since he might object to that, I would suggest someone abandon him on a melting iceberg in the Artic Circle. That, I suspect, would yield a rather quick re-educational outcome.

Theodore Ziolkowski

June 21, 2012 12:48pm

What more could you ask for? This is a list of which Senators you should vote out of elected office.