Citizens of Mobile, Alabama feel "slapped in the face" new spending bill

Mobile has fought the LNG project slated for Mobile & they thought they had WON! That is until this latest spending Bill was actually READ. FERC can now approve even if the state and local folks OBJECT!!!


http://www.al.com/search/index.ssf?/base/opinion/110163690951940.xml?mobileregister?oedit#continue

LNG mickey slipped into spending bill

Sunday, November 28, 2004

Three paragraphs tucked into the 3,300-page federal spending bill demonstrate again why Congress' last-minute approach to lawmaking is no way to run a country.

The three paragraphs gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a happy Thanksgiving, by supporting FERC's contention that it can approve new liquefied natural gas facilities in spite of state and local opposition.

The provision is a slap in the face to communities like Mobile, where ExxonMobil has wisely dropped plans for an LNG terminal at the site of the former Navy Home Port. Residents, the school board and Gov. Bob Riley opposed the project in large part because of public safety issues surrounding the transportation of massive amounts of superchilled natural gas into the Theodore Ship Channel.

As is the case with the sneaky little clause in the same spending bill allowing some members of Congress to look at individual tax returns, it is unclear who put the LNG provision in the spending bill.

We doubt that any member of Congress actually read all 3,300 pages, or that members knew exactly what they were voting on. In a post-election, pre-holiday session in which everyone is trying to get his or her piece of pork and keep the government running, it's all too easy to get away with something like this.

While little has been said about the provision as yet by the Alabama congressional delegation, members of Delaware's delegation as well as environmental and citizens' watchdog groups are incensed.

There's considerable opposition to an LNG terminal proposed on the Delaware River. The three paragraphs represent "a sneak attack on Delaware's sovereignty," the director of Green Delaware told The News Journal of Wilmington.

While the provision is not legally binding, it represents the "sense of Congress" as to whether FERC should be able to override the wishes of the people affected by new LNG facilities.

It doesn't immediately affect Mobile because the ExxonMobil proposal has been dropped and Cheniere Energy has not moved forward with its proposed terminal near downtown. But other corporations could propose land-based LNG facilities here, and new sites continue to be controversial around the country.

If it really was the intent of Congress to encourage FERC to approve LNG sites over the heads of the people who live in the affected areas, then senators and representatives have chosen to override the wishes of their constituents.

The need for new sources of natural gas is undisputed, and liquefied natural gas can be transported from overseas in huge quantities. But there is an alternative to the risks of an accident or terrorist attack in or near a populated area: offshore LNG facilities.

The Register editorial board has said before that Congress should require all new LNG transfer terminals to be located offshore. Meantime, through a new resolution, Congress should remove or neutralize the offending three paragraphs in the spending bill as soon as possible.

And, for the information of citizens in the communities affected by this bit of stealth language, Congress should also figure out and identify "whodunit."

government for big business, people don't count anymore.

Enjoy your victory, y'all.

It's a beautiful place. Too bad its citezens can't see through their theocratic blinders at what happens when they vote for people who care nothing about them.

This is what you get when you listen to preachers and ignore the teachings of Jesus himself.

should put up billboards up in the local areas to show what a one party system is capable of doing.

Billboards are the answer if you want to reach the masses quickly. They're probably cheaper than my NYT's idea.

Have you posted this idea in the Activism forum? I would contribute to a billboard fund and I'll bet lots of people would. We just need somebody to lead it and somebody trustworthy to manage the money.

I'd be willing to help as much as time would allow.

If you put this up in the activist forum, I'd appreciate it. I'll lurk a while to see how it all works.

Thanks.

I posted something in the Activism area and it dropped like a stone. It doesn't get a lot of attention. General Discussion seems to get more eyeballs. Let me float it out there and see what folks think.

Thanks

You voted for it, suckers.

Keep voting for the Repukes, you assholes. Well, at least Bob can't marry Steve. Fuck you, choke on the chemicals.

It's not just states that come in red blue, it's also people. Whether it is New York or Mobile, any disaster kills democrats and republicans, men and women, blacks and whites, adults and children. Not everyone in the red states is against you. Try not to change that.

The first thing that Bush did when he declared his win in his second term was to amputate all things blue. He will not support anything that is important to the Dems.

I'm glad you're here, Done, but the reality is that Dems in red states have been very ineffective. I'm not a dem, but I am living in a red state and I'm big enough to take the criticism because I think it's deserved and I don't think it's going to get better in my state. In fact, if I came into serious money, the first thing I would do is convince my family to move.

they control the bill, when it comes to the floor.