|
Mike Gravel on Environment
Libertarian for President; Former Democratic Senator (AK)
|
1971 support of SST conflicted with environmentalists
In March 1971 another controversial vote came up that cost me with environmentalists. I backed Boeing’s proposed Supersonic Transport (SST) for two reasons: I believed in the advancement of aviation and I wanted to shift funding from military to civilian
projects. Until then, advances in commercial aviation were derived from military aircraft. Why wasn’t it possible to skip the military stage and fund non-military technology directly?But environmentalists killed the SST in the end.
The Senate defeated a $290 million spending request to keep the project going. As I feared, a more advanced military supersonic jet was built in its place. The environmental impact made by the world’s militaries is still little understood or appreciated.
I lost, but I had battled openly--I was no ideologue. I could even side with Jackson and Nixon, my sworn enemies, and oppose environmentalists, my allies, if I believed in something.
Source: A Political Odyssey, by Mike Gravel, p.177-178
May 2, 2008
Strengthen Clean Water Act & Clean Air Act
Gravel supports the following principles regarding the environment:- Strengthen the regulation and enforcement of the Clean Water Act.
- Strengthen the regulation and enforcement of the Clean Air Act.
- Strengthen emission controls on all
gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles.
- Strengthen fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles.
Source: Presidential Election 2008 Political Courage Test
Apr 22, 2008
To get Americans to conserve, change the tax structure
Q: How do you get Americans to conserve?A: Very simple, change our tax structure. Have a fair tax where people are taxed on what they spend rather than what they earn. And our tax system is totally corrupt right now.
And so if we now have a retail sales tax, you’ll take this nation of ours from a consuming nation to a savings nation. And that’s the most significant thing we can do to alter climate change.
Source: 2007 YouTube Democratic Primary debate, Charleston SC
Jul 23, 2007
Iraq funds could build 4 million homes for Katrina victims
Q: Would you support a federal law guaranteeing the right to return to New Orleans & other Gulf regions devastated by Hurricane Katrina?KUCINICH: Absolutely. The aftermath underscores everything that’s wrong in this country about race.
GRAVEL: Yes.
And just keep in mind, if we weren’t squandering our treasure on this terrible war that we didn’t have to start, we would have 4 million housing units available, & a good portion of them could go to Katrina residents.
DODD: I would as well. New Orleans
and Katrina have become a symbol of everything that went wrong with this administration’s failure to respond to a people in need.
CLINTON: I have proposed a 10-point Gulf Coast Recovery Agenda, because even if we were to give people a right, there is
nothing to return to.
BIDEN: It’s an American problem. We should guarantee the reconstruction.
RICHARDSON: Yes, I would support that. I would also support the Katrina Recovery Act.
EDWARDS: This is an issue I care about personally and deeply.
Source: 2007 Democratic Primary Debate at Howard University
Jun 28, 2007
Support a carbon tax and stop fighting wars for oil
I support a carbon tax. That’ll raise the price of gasoline. Let’s be candid about that. If we want to get off of the dependency in the Middle East, we have to own up to the problem. These things cost money. They’re controlling our society. The sooner we
stop fighting these wars, stop and think. You only see $3. Just watch those wheels turn. There’s another $4, which is what we spend to keep American troops around the world to keep the price. So you’re paying more than $7 a gallon; you just don’t know it
Source: 2007 Dem. debate at Saint Anselm College
Jun 3, 2007
Sponsored bill for Congress to decide land use, not DOI.
Gravel sponsored that congress should decide land use, not DOI
OnTheIssues.org EXPLANATION: Public lands are open for grazing, recreational, and other public uses. Prior to this bill, the Secretary of the Interior or the President would decide when to declare parcels of public land as a "national monument," which has much more restrictive land use. This bill proposes to let Congress decide when the parcel is over 5,000 acres, instead of the Secretary of the Interior deciding without Congress.
OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: A bill to amend the Act entitled "An Act for the Preservation of American Antiquities", approved June 8, 1906, to provide congressional review of Presidential monument proclamations, and to amend the Act entitled "Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976", approved October 21, 1976, to alter the congressional review procedures of land withdrawals.
EXCERPTS FROM BILL:
Antiquities Act Amendments of 1979- Amends the Antiquities
Act to define "objects of historic or scientific interest" to include specified items. Stipulates that such objects must be directly associated with human activities.
- Requires congressional approval of any Presidential proclamation of a national monument before it can effect a reservation of public lands in excess of 5,000 acres.
- Permits the continuance of uses of public lands within a national monument which were valid uses prior to the designation of such lands as a monument, including hunting, guiding, hiking, boating, and use of motorized vehicles.
- Stipulates that such uses must not adversely affect the objects sought to be protected by the reservation.
- Grants such provisions governing the proclamation of national monuments retroactive effect as of October 14, 1978.
- Amends the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to require congressional approval of withdrawals of public lands in excess of 5,000 acres by the Secretary of the Interior.
Source: Antiquities Act Amendments (S.1741) 79-S1741 on Sep 12, 1979
Sponsored bill allowing tax deduction for recycling costs.
Gravel sponsored allowing tax deduction for businesses that recycle
OnTheIssues.org EXPLANATION: This bill would make costs for recycling be tax-deductible for businesses that build facilities to handle recyclable beverage containers.
OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: Amends the Internal Revenue Code to exclude from gross income interest on industrial development bonds the proceeds of which are to be used to provide for the construction, reconstruction, erection, or acquisition of a beverage container facility used in connection with a law prohibiting or discouraging the sale of beverages in nonreturnable containers.
Source: Internal Revenue Code amendment (S.2547) 79-S2547 on Apr 3, 1980
Page last updated: Feb 08, 2010