Hi,Cathy. Although it's quixotic, the division between "life" and "choice" is, I have come to believe, specious: flawed on both sides. The real choice is: Love--or Fear? That's the ultimate question that Jesus (and Buddha, too) pose. Choosing Love is choosing humility and compassion, trust and joy. It is to choose freedom. Choosing fear (and it is a choice, though all kinds of coercion are used to delude us into thinking otherwise) is choosing pride and anger, mistrust and sorrow. Fear is bondage. It seems to me that in almost every case, we--all of us--choose fear in one form or another. What would happen if we chose love? End of sermonette. Anyway, there's no question who I'll vote for, regardless of Gluba's "pro-life" stance. --Bill Just so everyone knows, even though this is not an environmental plank(as > such): Mr. Gluba is Pro-Life not Pro-Choice. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerald Neff" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 10:00 PM > Subject: Fwd: Questionnaire from Bill Gluba > > >> >> In a message dated 7/14/04 3:51:46 PM, [log in to unmask] writes: >> >> << This is the letter and response to federal questionnaire from Bill > Gluba, >> >> running for Congressional District 1 against Jim Nussle. The Eagle View >> >> Group voted to endorse Bill Gluba so the Chapter should consider whether > or >> >> not to endorse Mr. Gluba. If the ExCom does, then national will have to >> >> consider endorsement, also. >> >> >> 14 July 2004 >> >> >> Enclosed please find my candidate questionnaire for the Sierra Club. As >> a >> >> long-time and active member of the Sierra Club and its political PAC, I >> >> would like to formally request your endorsement for my campaign for >> United >> >> States Congress. >> >> >> When I am elected to Congress, I look forward to supporting legislation >> to >> >> provide our generation and our future generations with clean air, water > and >> >> soil. However, I need your help for this to happen. I would also like >> to >> >> formally request $5,000 from your federal PAC to my campaign. Please >> make >> >> the check payable to Friends of Bill Gluba, PO Box 2205, Davenport, IA >> >> 52809. If you have any questions regarding my questionnaire or my > campaign, >> >> please feel free to contact me at 563-459-6558. >> >> >> Thank you for your support and interest in my campaign for Congress. >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> >> Bill Gluba >> >> Democratic Candidate for Congress >> >> 1st Congressional District of Iowa >> >> >> P.S. Together, we can build a better country! >> >> ============================================ >> >> Sierra Club Candidate Questionnaire >> >> Bill Gluba for Congress >> >> >> ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP >> >> 1. What has been your greatest environmental achievement? >> >> >> In State Senate, co-sponsored the 1st can deposit bill in Iowa. >> >> >> 2. What top three environmental issues would you become actively >> involved >> >> with once elected to Congress? >> >> >> The three issues would be our dependence on foreign oil, clean water, >> and >> >> companies that ship jobs overseas with little or no environmental >> >> regulations in third world countries. >> >> >> 3. Are there any issues where you find the pro-environment/Sierra Club >> >> position troubling? If so, which issue? >> >> >> No problems that I know of. >> >> >> PROTECTING THE NATURAL HERITAGE OF OUR PUBLIC LANDS >> >> 4. America's National Forests and other federal public lands are owned > and >> >> enjoyed by the American people. Unfortunately, these lands have long >> >> suffered from money losing, taxpayer subsidized commercial logging > program. >> >> >> Qa. Will you support a bill ending subsidies and phasing out the > commercial >> >> logging program in our National Forests? Why or Why not? >> >> >> I will support a bill ending subsidies and phasing out the commercial >> >> logging program because the destruction of our National Forests should >> not >> >> come at the burden of the taxpayers. >> >> >> Qb. Will you support legislation such as the National Forest Protection > and >> >> Restoration Act, which focuses on protecting and restoring National > Forests? >> >> >> YES!!! >> >> >> 5. The National Academy of Sciences and the Supreme Court have >> identified >> >> habitat protection as critical to restoring viable populations of > threatened >> >> species of wildlife and plants. >> >> >> Q. What do you think the federal role should be in protecting habitat, >> >> including critical habitat as defined under the Endangered Species Act? >> >> >> The federal government has a moral responsibility to protecting and >> >> preserving our ecological system by any means possible. >> >> >> 6. Special designations, such as Wilderness Areas and National Parks, >> are >> >> also critically important for protecting habitat and for public > recreation. >> >> >> Qa. Will you support significant additions to the National Wilderness >> >> Preservation System, specifically, designating more than 9 million acres > of >> >> wilderness in Utah, or classifying the coastal plain of the Artic >> National >> >> Wildlife Refuge as wilderness? >> >> >> Yes. >> >> >> Qb. Would you vote against all bills and amendments authorizing >> drilling >> >> for oil in the Alaska Natural Wildlife Refuge? >> >> >> Absolutely! >> >> >> PROTECTING OUR AIR QUALITY >> >> 7. The Bush Administration has recently weakened the Clean Air Act's >> New >> >> Source Review program, allowing factories to make substantial changes >> >> without installing modern pollution control technology. >> >> >> Q. Do you support efforts in Congress to turn back these changes, > restoring >> >> this protection? >> >> >> Yes, if factories have the money to renovate their facility, there is no >> >> reason why a modernized pollution control system should not be apart of > the >> >> renovation. >> >> >> 8. Pollution from power plants is a serious problem for communities > around >> >> the country. Several legislative proposals address this issue, >> including >> >> the Bush Administration's deceptively titled "Clear Skies" initiative, > which >> >> undermines several key Clean Air Act protections, substituting a > "pollution >> >> trading" scheme. >> >> >> Q. Will you oppose Clear Skies, and support efforts to clean up power >> >> plants without weakening the Clean Air Act? What alternative measures > would >> >> you propose? >> >> >> I oppose the "Clear Skies" initiative that is turning back the clock on >> >> environmental regulations. As for new measures, I would have to study >> the >> >> Clean Air Act in further detail to determine what measures I would > propose. >> >> >> STOPPING SPRAWL >> >> 9. Since 1991's Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act >> (ISTEA), >> >> federal transportation legislation has underscored the importance of >> >> transportation choices including public transit and bicycle/pedestrian >> >> improvements, recognizing that transportation is not simply about roads. >> >> This legislation has also included air quality mitigation measures, >> >> beautification, and more. These bills have enjoyed strong bipartisan >> >> support. >> >> >> Q. Will you oppose transportation legislation if it does not, at >> minimum, >> >> meet the percentage investment in public transportation as 1998's TEA-21 > or >> >> if it severs the links between transportation projects and air quality? >> >> What standards would you consider reasonable? >> >> >> All legislation should meet at least the minimum previous standards. >> >> >> 10. Bills currently before Congress would weaken the National > Environmental >> >> Policy Act (NEPA) by diminishing the public's ability to participate in >> >> transportation planning processes and by limiting environmental-impact >> >> reviews. >> >> >> Q. Will you oppose this or similar legislation, either in >> transportation >> >> reauthorization or as stand alone bills? >> >> >> Yes. >> >> >> PROTECTING OUR WATER QUALITY >> >> 11. The Bush administration issued guidance and proposed rulemaking >> that >> >> changes and limits the definition of "waters of the United States" under > the >> >> Clean Water Act to exclude from protection many wetlands, intermittent >> >> streams, small lakes and ponds. Many states would be left without a > federal >> >> backstop for protecting their waters. >> >> >> Qa. Will you support a bill that restores the original definition of >> >> "waters of the United States" that has been in place since the 1970's? >> >> >> Yes >> >> >> Qb. Will you support reducing the subsidies to large livestock >> operations >> >> under the Farm Bill's Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) so >> >> that the money can be spent on real environmental improvements rather >> than >> >> on subsidies for expanding poor waste management practices like lagoons > and >> >> sprayfields? >> >> >> Yes. >> >> >> Qc. Will you oppose efforts that would give large industrial livestock >> >> operations immunity from the Clean Air Act and Superfund in exchange for >> >> simply having the EPA collect air emissions data from some Confined >> Animal >> >> Feeding Operations (CAFOs)? Please be specific. >> >> >> Yes. Industrial livestock operations should not be held to different >> >> standards than everyone else. Air emissions data from select areas is >> not >> >> sufficient enough. >> >> >> SUPERFUND CLEANUP >> >> 12. One of every four people in the United States lives within four >> miles >> >> of a toxic waste site. To pay for the cleanup of more than 1,200 >> national >> >> priority toxic waste sites, Congress authorized polluter pays fees, >> which >> >> were put into a fund known as the Superfund. The fees sunset in 1995 >> and, >> >> as a result, the fund will run out of money before the end of 2003. >> >> >> Q. Will you support legislation that restores the original 'polluter > pays' >> >> fees and ensures that tax payers do not pay the bulk of the cleanup >> costs? >> >> What percentage of the cost of clean up do you believe polluters should > pay? >> >> >> I fully support polluter pays fees. Polluters should pay in proportion >> of >> >> how much damage they have caused to the environment. That payment >> should >> >> not have to come at the burden of the taxpayers. >> >> >> CURBING GLOBAL WARMING >> >> 13. The United States is the world's largest emitter of the greenhouse > gas >> >> carbon dioxide, with transportation accounting for nearly one third of >> all >> >> U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. Improving fuel economy of our cars and >> >> trucks is the biggest single step we can take to curb global warming and >> >> protect sensitive areas from oil drilling. Additionally, producing more >> >> electricity from clean, renewable sources such as wind solar power will > also >> >> help cut greenhouse gas emissions. >> >> >> Qa. If elected will you support increasing miles per gallon standards >> >> (known as corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards) for cars, SUV's, and >> >> light trucks to a 40mpg average? >> >> >> Yes, and perhaps an even higher standard. >> >> >> Qb. Will you support a law to mandate that at least 20% of our > electricity >> >> come from clean, renewable sources by 2020? >> >> >> Yes. >> >> >> Qc. What other measures do you believe Congress should take to curb > global >> >> warming? >> >> >> We should have less dependence on foreign oil and more dependence on >> >> domestic forms of energy and renewable sources. This is a matter of not >> >> only environment, but also for homeland security and jobs/economic > purposes. >> >> >> SLOWING GLOBAL POPULATION GROWTH >> >> 14. The magnitude of increased human activity pollutes and diminishes > fresh >> >> water and clean air, adversely contributes to global climate change, > further >> >> jeopardizes threatened and endangered species, and erodes the health and >> >> quality of life on earth. One of the most comprehensive ways to address >> >> rapid population growth and better protect the environment is to ensure > that >> >> families everywhere have access to quality voluntary family planning and >> >> reproductive health care. >> >> >> Qa. Do you support a funding increase in international and domestic > family >> >> planning programs? Why or why not? >> >> >> Because I am not too familiar with these programs I cannot say if I >> would >> >> support or oppose funding increases in this area. >> >> >> Qb. Will you oppose restrictions placed on this funding, such as the > global >> >> gag rule? >> >> >> Again, because I am not too familiar with these programs I cannot say if >> I >> >> would support or oppose restrictions in this area. >> >> >> Qc. Will you support the Equity in Prescription Insurance and > Contraceptive >> >> Coverage Act, which requires insurance companies that cover >> prescriptions > to >> >> cover prescriptive contraceptives? >> >> >> Probably not. >> >> >> HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT >> >> 15. At this time of heightened concern about international issues, U.S. >> >> companies are informal ambassadors of our country around the world. >> >> However, American companies have too often been implicated in human >> rights >> >> abuses, environmental destruction and labor rights violations. U.S. >> >> corporations have no legally binding obligations to disclose specific >> >> environmental and labor information about their offshore operations as > they >> >> must in order to operate within the U.S. >> >> >> Q. Will you support legislation requiring U.S. based multinational >> >> corporations to disclose basic information on their human rights, labor > and >> >> environmental practices much in the same way they disclose domestic >> >> information? >> >> >> Yes >> >> >> PROMOTING ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE TRADE >> >> 16. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade >> >> Organization (WTO) have been used to weaken environmental protection in > the >> >> United States and abroad. The downward pressure on environmental, >> health >> >> and safety standards could increase with completion of the Free Trade >> Area >> >> of the Americas (FTAA) and the Doha Round of WTO talks. Regrettably, >> >> Congress cannot exercise its normal constitutional powers as a check and >> >> balance on the executive with respect to trade agreements because > fast-track >> >> procedures deny Congress its normal power to make amendments or to >> conduct > a >> >> thorough debate. >> >> >> Qa. Will you support reform of current and future trade rules so that > they >> >> no longer can undermine environmental, health and safety protections? >> >> >> Yes. >> >> >> Qb. Will you support an alternative to fast-track procedures that would >> >> allow Congress to fully debate and amend trade agreements? What type of >> >> agreements would you support? >> >> >> I would support alternatives to fast track procedures. I would support >> >> agreements that give the American worker a fair deal in trade agreement, >> >> contrary to what is happening under this administration. >> >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> >> >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to: >> [log in to unmask] >> > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: > http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp