- Man shot by police ID'd; witness shares his side of story (2/17/17)31
- Settlement reached in accidental shooting case at Kelly High (2/15/17)10
- MSHP: McLendon shot in side; autopsy refutes witness account (2/19/17)23
- Jackson board votes to demolish high school building if bond issue passes (2/15/17)24
- Cape officer shoots man inside a home (2/16/17)7
- Business notebook: Owners ready to roll out the Barrel 131 (2/20/17)4
- Apparent punch at girls basketball game propels lawmaker into action (2/21/17)4
- Former Cape cop indicted on possessing child porn (2/17/17)
- Man dies after being shot by officer; said to have come at cop with knife (2/16/17)29
- Ray's of Kelso to close, then reopen under new ownership (2/16/17)6
Voting records on the environment
To the editor:
Thank you for acknowledging the importance of the environment and climate change in this year's presidential election by printing the piece, "Where the presidential candidates stand on the environment" by Valerie Strauss of the Washington Post.
A clarification, however, is in order. The League of Conservation Voters, a nonpartisan organization that evaluates the records of candidates on critical environmental issues and endorses those with strong records -- whether Republican or Democrat -- analyzed the Senate records of the presidential candidates.
The LCV reports that John McCain has a lifetime record of 24 percent, while Barack Obama has a lifetime score of 86 percent. As you report accurately, McCain's record is damaged by the fact that he did not show up to vote during 2007 on any critical environmental issues. And, indeed, his absence was disastrous since several times the loss was by just one vote, which could have been McCain's. His campaigning cost our environment dearly. Obama, meanwhile, appeared most of the time and still scored 67 percent.
As a result of their analysis, the League of Conservation voters endorsed Barack Obama for president.
KATHY CONWAY, Cape Girardeau