[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

Re: E-M:/ Reponse to earlier media release



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from Christopher Graham <grahamz@umich.edu>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi, All --

I don't know if that "other forum" is listening, BUT......


Forgive me, the overriding issue here is:  TRUSTING those who know how to 
do a job -- who have been trained, hired and are paid to do the job, who 
best know the approaches and process needed in each specific case -- TO DO 
THAT JOB and obtain the results required (in this case by long-standing law).

The legislature is suggesting an approach which is, in fact, MEDDLING!!

To meddle in employee's work is widely recognized never to be good business 
practice -- in any organization, agency or business.

Republican legislators ought to know better that to propose a meddling 
management scheme, as a matter of the nature of their character -- one 
would think.  Aren't they the ones who represent business the most?  Aren't 
some of them business men or women?  Certainly not one who has been 
successful in business has failed to learn this lesson!

If a staff judgement call ever goes seriously out of line, the legislature 
certainly has ways to exert its influence.  The Legislature has always 
exerted its influence quite adequately!

Meanwhile, our government needs more income.  What better place to receive 
dollars than from those who cost the state dollars to regulate them, and 
who cost the people of Michigan via the diminished value of natural 
resources of the state that are polluted by their actions??!!

This is not rocket science.  It does not matter whether we are talking 
about water rules or rules on business which operate in the State -- same 
management principles are to be applied.



Chris.





At 10:51 AM 2/19/2004, HAMILTREEF@aol.com wrote:
>The following is the response is to the Clean Water Action media release 
>and letter sent to State Senator Sikkema, signed by the 40 groups.  This 
>is how another forum supports their Republican pollution cohorts.
>
> From the forum:
>>quote:. "Political agendas pale in comparison to our need for clean water 
>>for drinking, swimming and fishing."
>
>No really. Now for the political spin.
>>quote:The rider would limit the ability of the MDEQ to do its job 
>>overseeing polluters.
>
>No! It would limit their ability to set the fine for said polluter.
>>quote:." Legislative leaders want to place limitations on Governor 
>>Granholm and her administration that would make it more difficult to 
>>protect our water.
>
>Waite! Heaven forbid the governor and her administration have CHECKS AND 
>BALANCES ON THEM!
>
>Definition of Republic = a state or nation in which the supreme power 
>rests in all the citizens entitled to vote and is exersized by 
>representatives elected, directly or indirectly, by them and responsible 
>to them.
>
>Note the definition is plural not singular. Not one elected governor and 
>their appointed administration.
>>quote:The rider would limit the ability of the MDEQ to do its job 
>>overseeing polluters. "To protect our waterways, the Governor has no 
>>choice but to veto this bill," said Cyndi Roper of Clean Water Action.
>
>Note who is vetoing the bill!
>>quote:"Clean water is the bottom line here," said Lana Pollack of 
>>Michigan Environmental Council.
>
>
>>quote:Your caucus' insistence to include a provision regarding rulemaking 
>>authority is an unnecessary
>
>Waite! I thought the clean water was the bottom line not authority.
>>quote:The bill would have charged polluters user fees and used that money 
>>to help regulate waste flow into the Great Lakes. But, Senator Sikkema 
>>and other legislative leaders added a rider that poisoned the bill.
>
>Note the blame on the legislators and past tense of the bill. And the bill 
>was poisoned how? Because the MDEQ cant set the fees.
>Remind me again what is the most important thing here. Oh yea its the 
>clean water. I think the Democrats forgot.
>>quote:This could mean a costly federal takeover of the program that would 
>>be bad for businesses and the environment.
>
>WOW! I am not even going to go there. Feel lucky.
>>quote:Lawmakers tell us they want clean water and to lessen government 
>>red tape. Then they add unnecessary requirements designed to aid 
>>polluting facilities
>
>Not once did they show how the legislator is aiding polluting facilities.
>
>I fail to see any evidence or facts that show any reason beyond the usual 
>politics for the veto. Three times including Granholmes own admision the 
>veto's reason is because of the legislators wanting to have control over 
>the fines. The sad thing here is how opinions and innuendos can be slanted 
>to appear as facts. That is dangerous.
>
>
>

Christopher L. Graham, ASLA
(734) 975-7800 (O)
email   grahamz@umich.edu
sms email   7342609890@page.nextel.com 



==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================