Obama vs. Mccain Energy Crisis

Joshua Rindahl

Nicole Bui

Section 1 + 2

Senator Mccain wants to construct 45 nuclear plants by 2030, in order to obtain more energy. Mccain states “Nuclear power is a proven zero-emission source of energy and it is time we recommit.” He also believes it is “critical that the U.S. be able to build the components for these plants and reactors within our own country so that we are not dependent on foreign suppliers with long wait times.” But it is unclear how Mccain hopes to do this when he himself said “our manufacturing base to even construct these plants is almost gone.” In addition, each reactor costs up to $8 Billion, and Mccain seem to have an effecient way of raising this money.

Though Obama is also interested in nuclear energy, he has a different approach to the energy crisis. Obama has proposed putting a higher priority in developing renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, bio-fuels and being more efficient in using our existing energy sources. Obama is against using nuclear energy as our main energy source “because we haven’t figured out how to store the waste safely, or recycle the waste.” It is clear that Obama is against using nuclear energy until he can find a safe solution for recycling the waste. Obama promises to invest $150 billion in clean energy projects over 10 years with most of it going towards non-nuclear energy sources. Obama has also states he “definitely understands that nuclear power plays a major role in our electricity mix and will continue to do so into the foreseeable future.” Obama also vows that he would “find ways to safely harness nuclear power.”

Sources ~

http://environment.about.com/od/environmentallawpolicy/a/mccain_zero.htm

http://election-coverage.com/2008/08/obama-and-mccain-head-to-head-voting-record-on-energy/

http://www.lcv.org/newsroom/press-releases/lcv-releases-2007-national-environmental-scorecard.html

 

Voting Records

 

McCain

McCain once said that, “Of course we want renewable energy. Of course we want better standards. I want to do everything I can to see that wind, solar, hydrogen, ethanol … and all of these, including nuclear power, [are put to better use].” However, his actions don’t reflect this.

 

2007 Key Environmental Votes ~

1. Cloture on H.R. 6, the energy bill (6/21, Vote 225)
2. Passage of H.R. 6, the energy bill (6/21, Vote 226)
3. Maintaining Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) in H.R. 6 (12/7, Vote 416)
4. Taking away giveaways to Big Oil to subsidize clean energy (12/13, Vote 425)
5. Loosening public health and environmental regulations on refineries (6/13, Vote 210)
6. Undermining the RES with coal and nuclear energy (6/14, Vote 211)
7. Offshore drilling in Virginia (6/14, Vote 212)
8. Liquid coal (6/19, Vote 213)
9. Environmental safeguards for biofuels (6/20, 219)
10. Consider global warming for water projects (5/15, Vote 166)
11. Appropriately prioritizing water projects (5/15, Vote 165)
12. International family planning (9/6, Vote 320)
13. Farm Bill subsidy reform (12/11, Vote 417)
14. Farm Bill subsidy caps (12/13, Vote 424)
15. Eminent Domain for public parks (12/3, Vote 429)

Of these 15 key environmental votes, McCain failed to show up to vote for all of them.  The LCV (League of Conservation Voters) keeps a scorecard on each person’s votes, and Mccain only has a score of 24 (out of 100) for environmental issues. 0% of his score came from the year of 2007.

Obama

In comparison to McCain, Obama has missed only 4 of the 15 key votes in the year 2007 (due to campaigning). He also has a score of 86 (out of 100) from LCV, with 67 of it coming from the year 2007. By Obama’s voting records, it shows that he has always been firm in his position as pro-environmental and renewable energy sources. 

 

Obama Voted For ~

• Oil Subsidies Repeal – Cloture 12/13/2007
• Farm Bill – Subsidy Caps 12/13/2007
• CAFE & Clean Energy – Cloture 12/07/2007
• CAFE & Energy Efficiency – Passage 06/21/2007
• CAFE & Energy Efficiency – Cloture 06/21/2007
• Biofuels 06/20/2007
• Undermining Renewable Electricity 06/18/2007
• Water Resources – Global Warming 05/15/2007

 

Voting Record here:

http://www.capwiz.com/lcv_stage/bio/keyvotes/?id=3181&congress=1102&lvl=C

 

Votings that Obama and McCain both were present to vote for ~

 

3/16/2005; Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act: S 3711: A bill to enhance the energy independence and security of the United States by providing for exploration, development, and production activities for mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes.

Obama: No

McCain: Yes

 

3/16/2006; LIHEAP Funding Amendment: S Amdt 3074 to S Con Res 83: To increase funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program by $3,318,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, increasing the funds available to carry out that program to the fully authorized level of $5,100,000,000, to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.

Obama: Yes

McCain: No

 

6/28/2005; Energy Policy Act of 2005: HR 6: To ensure jobs for our future with secure, affordable, and reliable energy.

Obama: Yes

McCain: No

 

http://election-coverage.com/2008/08/obama-and-mccain-head-to-head-voting-record-on-energy/

Terry Vs. Ohio (The Fourth Amendment)

The Fourth Amendment

 

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Terry vs. Ohio portrays the Fourth Amendment, that there is a prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, and that this is not violated when a police officer feels that there is “probable cause,” to arrest/confront, or search them.

A police detective named Martin Mcfadden, one day saw two men standing outside a store window. They would start to converse, and than periodically one of the men would walk in, look around the store. Than the man would walk back out of the store, and continue to converse with the man. This happened every so often, and a total of about twelve times. This seemed as “probable cause” to Mcfadden, so he decided to confront the two. After a few questions, he decided to pat the two’s clothing down, and found that they were both armed. Mcfadden arrested them for possesion of “concealed weapons.” Terry plead not guilty, however was sentenced to 3 years in prison

Pertaining to the fourth amendment, the amendment only applies to seizures. Since what the police officer did to Terry, did not qualify as a seizure, and he seemed to have “probable cause,” the fourth amendment did not protect him.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!