The Michigan League of Conservation Voters has once again released their legislative scorecard, and once again, my opponent has received a failing grade for consistently voting against measures designed to protect Michigan’s natural heritage. On the eight issues most important to protecting our state’s environment, the Michigan LCV gave my opponent a score of just 38%. This is the same score he received from the Michigan LCV during his first term in office, meaning that my opponent votes against our natural resources two out of every three opportunities.
The LCV noted that during the 2005-06 session, my opponent voted against a common sense solution to our state’s trash importation crisis; voted for a plan that damages the sustainability of Michigan forests and makes it harder for state residents to enjoy our public lands; and twice voted for legislation that would allow polluters to sidestep their responsibility, making pollution clean-up slower and more expensive.
Worse, one of the bills for which my opponent received a positive score was the Water Legacy Act. While the Act is certainly a step forward, as chair of the House Natural Resources, Great Lakes, Land Use, and the Environment Committee, my opponent represented the anti-environment negotiating position. As a result of my opponent’s work, the Water Legacy Act includes the first legal authorization of water diversion outside the Great Lakes basin in 100 years, and allows up to 100,000 gallons to be withdrawn from Michigan trout streams every day, even if it hurts the trout streams. If I had been chair of that committee instead of my opponent, we would have a Water Legacy Act that truly protected our water legacy.
Thanks to groups like the Michigan LCV who take an active, non-partisan role in informing the people of this state on the important issues, we can see for ourselves who is voting to protect our breathtaking natural resources, and who is not. There is a real choice in this election on who would do a better job as a conservation-minded representative. But don’t take my word for it; just ask the League of Conservation Voters.
