- Neelys Landing man shot, killed by highway patrol trooper after traffic stop (05/01/16)43
- Cape student sues, accuses school officials of slamming her to ground multiple times (04/28/16)49
- Missouri House votes to allow concealed weapons without permits (04/28/16)8
- River Ridge Winery changes hands (05/02/16)
- Police report filed, but no charges in incident at Cape Central (04/29/16)40
- 2016 All-Missourian Boys Basketball (04/29/16)
- Statement: Man says cops’ good work drove him to grow his own marijuana (05/01/16)1
- Bob Evans restaurant in Cape Girardeau among chain's 21 closings (04/26/16)9
- Senator introduces bill for I-57 that would connect Sikeston with Little Rock (04/28/16)4
- Hopper Road to close for months during construction of Veterans Drive (04/27/16)9
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