21 July 2005

The Roberts nomination

The debate over the Roberts nomination is heating up. Moveon.org criticizes Roberts for his stance on the following points (among others):


  • Environment: Opposition to clear air rules. Assistance to coal companies stip-mining mountaintops.
  • Labor: Work to prevent workers from receiving disability.
  • Voters' Rights: Work to prevent Congress from strengthening the voting act.

I'd like to get more facts before making up my mind, but I would be vehemently opposed if he has supported loose regulations for mining. I was surprised to learn recently that the pollution from mine run-off isn't a short-term problem but frequently goes on indefinitely. Eventually, the companies go out of business and the tax payers (and people who catch cancer and other diseases) end up picking up the tab. The point about hard work to prevent those who work hard from receiving disability fits in well with Shrub's unique brand of "compassion."

4 comments:

Eric_Jaffa said...

Typo in "stip-mining."

Karlo said...

Uh oh. I stripped an "r" off the word.

The Continental Op said...

While he was at Hogan & Hartson, Roberts represented the National Mining Association in its challenge to the federal ban on "mountaintop removal". Roberts's defenders will assert that he was merely doing his job as an attorney, advocating for his client's position. But, as a recovering attorney myself, I take issue with that excuse. An attorney in private practice is always free to accept or reject a client, and--with the exception of criminal defense, which is a horse of a different color--must take responsibility for the choices s/he makes.

O.T. -- what's with the cats? Yeech.

Karlo said...

Yeah. The cats were an experiment. I guess they don't really go to well with the content... But the cat's laughing picture was just so cool. I felt like I had to do something with it.