Environment

My Background
My concern for the environment goes way back. At age 16, I organized the cleanup of a wetland. In 1984-85, I worked for the Iowa Citizen Action Network on clean water and utility reform. During all of my 14 years in the State Legislature, I served on the Environmental Protection Committee, and I have helped lead efforts in recent years to address global climate change. While serving as a state representative, I:

· Worked on legislation to require buffer strips on certain streams to minimize the extent to which toxic chemicals can seep into ground water.

· Worked on legislation to allow greater disclosure of the risks of lawn chemicals.

· Built a bipartisan coalition to control urban sprawl.

· Helped lead the charge against HF 519 (the factory hog confinement bill) in 1995.

· Served on a special commission to recommend improved options for waste disposal.

My efforts have gone beyond my work in the Legislature. I also:

· Exposed a toxic spill at a proposed coal-fired power plant in Pleasant Hill.

· Led efforts to protect a rare wetland, Engeldinger Marsh, from highway expansion.

· Helped organize successful efforts to prevent a four-lane highway from being constructed through a flood plain on the north side of Des Moines.

· Helped lead efforts to increase local and state initiatives to address global climate change, and served as secretary on Governor Culver’s Climate Change Advisory Council in 2007.

· Was endorsed by the Sierra Club in my campaign for governor in 2006.

· Co-founded I’m for Iowa.

· Co-founded 1000 Friends of Iowa.

My Opponent’s Record

I have a lot of respect for Congressman Boswell. He has served with dignity and done some good things. I’ll run a positive campaign, but it’s important that you know the differences. He sent out a mailing in early February – at taxpayer expense – that portrayed him as a leader on environmental protection. But the facts say otherwise. His lifetime score from the League of Conservation Voters (LCV) is 57%. If your children came home and said they were leaders in their math class but their average grade was 57, you’d tell them that isn’t leadership – that’s failure.

For last year alone, the LCV lists Congressman Boswell’s following anti-environmental votes as follows:

· Voted against grasslands protection (the Cooper amendment to H.R. 2419, 07/27/07), which a majority of House Democrats supported.

· Voted against an amendment to prevent the expediting of oil shale drilling throughout the Intermountain West that would have allowed time for researching the impact of that drilling on water, air, and wildlife (the Udall amendment to H.R. 2643 07/27/07), which House Democrats supported 202-27.

· Voted against an amendment to prohibit funds from being used for private harvesting of timber in the Tongass National Forest (Andrews amendment to H.R. 2643, 06/26/07), which Democrats supported 211-20.

· Voted for an amendment to permit offshore drilling for natural gas (Peterson amendment to H.R. 2643, 06/26/07), which House Democrats opposed 194-38.

But Congressman Boswell’s votes against his fellow House Democrats and the environment didn’t start last year.

· He voted against an amendment to H.R. 4 (08/01/01), which House Democrats supported, that would have raised Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standards for cars and light trucks to 27.5 mpg beginning in 2007.

· He voted against an amendment to preserve a 25-year moratorium on drilling for oil offshore (Markey amendment to H.R. 4761, 06/29/06), threatening our ecologically sensitive coastal areas. House Democrats supported the amendment 147-48.

· He voted for $14.5 billion in tax breaks and incentives for oil and gas companies (H.R.6, 07/28/05) at a time when they were posting record profits. House Democrats opposed this bill 124-75.

· He voted with Republicans against barring federal funds from being use to convince children that burying nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain (only 90 miles from Las Vegas) is safe (Amendment A008 to H.R. 5427, 05/24/06). House Democrats voted 135-60 to bar such spending.

Congressman Boswell’s taxpayer-funded mailing highlights his vote for higher CAFE standards and support of the Safe Climate Act. But it doesn’t mention that both his vote for higher CAFE standards (which he had previously voted against) and his support for the Safe Climate Act (which was introduced in March 2007) took place in December, after he learned I would be running against him.

In a recent visit to the Newton Daily News (02/21/08), Boswell presented himself as a long-time environmentalist, and called for research on cleaner coal, saying: “It’s dirty, but if we can, put the science to it, and clean it up, scrub it up and make it work” [posted on newtondailynews.com on 02/25/08]. But the article doesn’t mention that Boswell signed a letter last year to the House Speaker and Majority Leader calling for legislation to support continued use of coal “for decades to come,” promising assistance on climate change legislation “while ensuring the continued use of our nation’s most abundant resource” – coal (02/16/07).

Issues

After I released my position paper on global climate change in February, Greenpeace issued a press release that reads in part:

Greenpeace applauds Ed Fallon for introducing a comprehensive, science-based global warming platform…. It is especially encouraging to see Fallon’s strong opposition to dirty, dangerous energy sources like coal and nuclear. Federal support for these costly distractions will only come at the expense of real global warming solutions like wind power…. Greenpeace encourages Rep. Boswell to follow Fallon’s lead and go beyond signing the Safe Climate Act to oppose any federal subsides to the coal or nuclear industries. [2/20/08]

In addition to the issues of global climate change, energy efficiency, renewable energy, creating ‘green’ (environmentally-friendly) jobs, and rejecting dangerous energy sources such as coal and nuclear, there are other environmental issues that need to be addressed.

Clean water: Our commitment to the environment, health, recreation, and the economy means we must make every effort to clean-up and maintain water quality. For three decades, the Clean Water Act of 1977 has helped “restore the physical, chemical and biological integrity of our waters.” But the Act itself has been under assault throughout the presidency of George W. Bush.

Clean air: The Clean Air Act has been a bulwark against air pollution for decades. The Bush Administration has been trying to undermine it for years by supporting legislation such as the ‘Clear Skies Act,’ which despite its name, would allow factories to release more pollutants into the air. When California asked for a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency to toughen California standards against greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, Bush’s Administrator – over the objections of his own staff – refused the waiver, preventing California and more than a dozen other states from putting greater reductions in place.

Factory hog lots: Confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) have been an environmental problem in Iowa for over a decade. When I was a member of the House Agriculture Committee, I helped lead the charge in 1995 against HF 519, which changed Iowa law to enable a drastic shift in hog production from family farms to corporate giants such as Iowa Select, DeCoster, Murphy, and Premium Standard. Although most House Democrats opposed the bill, Leonard Boswell – then President of the Iowa Senate – helped to pass it.

Toxics: In 1980, Congress created the Superfund for cleaning up toxic waste sites. A great deal has been done in the years since, but a great deal also remains to be done. According to the League of Conservation Voters,

One in four people in America, including ten million children, still live within four miles of a Superfund site. In addition, on top of the 1,000 active Superfund sites that remain on the National Priorities list and the hundreds of thousands of toxic sites that remain unlisted, Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast and left the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the monumental challenge of clearing up the toxic pollution left behind. [LCV website on toxics]

Congress created the Superfund Trust Fund to pay for the cleanups, and the money came from fees charged to oil and gas companies, chemical manufacturers, etc. But the fees ended in 1995 and the Trust Fund has dried up. This means that: (1) fewer cleanups are done (in the 1990s, the annual average was 77 – this year the Bush Administration plans only 24); and (2) the taxpayer burden for the cleanups has shifted from only 18% in 1996 to 100%.

I will work to defend the quality of our air and water, and to support an EPA that is working for the environment and not against it,
that will take its lead from science
and not business interests.

___________________________________

What I Will Do in Congress

If elected, I will be a strong and consistent advocate for the environment. I will ask to serve on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. That will position me to be actively involved in legislation to address climate change and the related issue of renewable energy.

I will work to defend the quality of our air and water, and to support an EPA that is working for the environment and not against it, that will take its lead from science and not business interests. And I will work to see that polluters and not taxpayers bear the burden for cleaning up toxic waste sites.