- Waller deemed competent to stand trial (1/11/17)5
- Young Elvis impersonator from Bernie performs on 'Ellen DeGeneres Show' (1/12/17)
- Two subjects of interest in 1992 homicide to take polygraph tests (1/15/17)7
- Business notebook: Jackson salon owner also opens a clothing store (1/16/17)
- Two men shot after argument; houses also struck by bullets (1/12/17)21
- 113 drug tests at Jackson High net one instance of illicit usage (1/11/17)15
- Cape SportsPlex contractor offers a look at the project (1/15/17)14
- Meat-processing plant faces $70K penalty for Clean Water Act violations (1/17/17)2
- Two Cape men recovering after shooting (1/13/17)
- Governor cuts $146 million, colleges take hit (1/17/17)
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