Hudson Valley Democrats Score High on Environment

Rep. Nan Hayworth is the fifth highest scoring Republican member of Congress, according to the environmental watchdog organization.

Democratic members of Congress from the Hudson Valley had high marks on the annual New York League of Conservation Voters 2011 National Environmental Scorecard release Tuesday.

Both Democratic senators—Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand—had top scores of 100, said Marcia Bystryn, president of the league.

"New Yorkers care a lot about our environment," she said. "It should not come as a surprise both of our senators had perfect scores in 2011."

In the House, Rep. Nita Lowey, D-Harrison, achieved a 97, while Rep. Eliot Engel, D-Bronx, scored a 94.

On the Republican side of the aisle in the House, Rep. Nan Hayworth, R-Mount Kisco, was given a grade of 43.

"While her score is nothing to write home about," Bystryn said, "her score in the fifth highest in the Republican House."

Alex Taurel, the league's legislative representative, said the league talks to Hayworth all the time about environmental issues.

"We are going to keep working with her," he said.

Taurel said first session of the 112th Congress was the most anti-environment in the nation's history.

"It's a sad testament to the radical nature of the first session," he said.

The 2011 Scorecard includes 11 Senate and a record 35 House votes on issues ranging from protecting public health to clean energy and land and wildlife conservation.

Taurel said that one of the good stories from 2011 is that a lot of the anti-environment legislation that made it out of the House was not taken up by the Democratic-controlled Senate or enough votes were not obtained to pass.

New York's average scores were 100 for the Senate and 72 for the House of Representatives, compared with national averages of 55 for the Senate and 45 for the House.

Only Connecticut, Delware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Rhode Island, Oregon and Vermont had better House averages than New York. 

The full 2011 National Environmental Scorecard can be found here.

Don Pachner February 10, 2012 at 05:47 PM
Francis, Please try to read the entire article before jumping to conclusions. I will post the relevant part below. Additionally, you should note, if you give science any credence at all, that very cold air cannot carry much moisture (when you see condensation inside a cold window pain, that is the moisture from the warm room where it hits the cold barrier.) Consequently, snow accumulation on top of normally extremely cold high altitutde glaciers increases with the warmer air temperatures that global warming brings. Of course, that may very well change as the climate warms beyond current temperature levels. This may account for some of the dynamic in connection with the mass measurements mentioned in the article; however, you should note that the glaciers themselves in most parts of the world are receding at an astounding pace, and photographic evidence of this can easily be found on the internet. The additional comments in the article you cite in next posting:
Don Pachner February 10, 2012 at 05:48 PM
Francis,, If you read the full article, you will note that 150 tons of glacial ice are melting annually: Bamber was quick to caution that the new study doesn’t alter his view that the climate is changing, and rapidly. “This new study doesn't change our view of the risks and threats from climate change,” he said in an online chat at the Guardian. “What it does do is improve our knowledge of the recent behavior of one part of the climate system.” Indeed, Wahr’s study clearly notes that lower-altitude glaciers and ice caps are melting, to the tune of about 150 billion tons of ice annually, which the study predicts could lead to an overall rise in sea levels. He concluded that the higher altitude and therefore colder Himalayan peaks may be temporarily impervious to factors causing melting. "One possible explanation is that previous estimates were based on measurements taken primarily from some of the lower, more accessible glaciers in Asia and were extrapolated to infer the behavior of higher glaciers. But unlike the lower glaciers, many of the high glaciers would still be too cold to lose mass even in the presence of atmospheric warming," Wahr said.
Don Pachner February 10, 2012 at 05:49 PM
Francis, Sorry for my typo...if you read the article you cite, 150 BILLION tons of glacial ice are melting annually.
Kevin February 10, 2012 at 05:52 PM
I didn't know, and it doesn't sway me at all. I am happy to see the scientists correct themselves on this isolated matter. This was a short term study of a specific region. Doesn't change my views on global issues, long term. Try again though. It's entertaining. BTW, so these are the same people who you didn't believe before. Now you do? Which is it? Can you admit that you were unaware about the scientists cleared of wrong doing, because you let that slip off the radar. http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0209/Study-Himalayan-glaciers-melting-more-slowly-than-thought-but-seas-are-still-rising http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/10/glacier-data-climate-change-debate?intcmp=239
Bob Ogden February 10, 2012 at 09:23 PM
Watchdog/Francis/Scott, Every morning when I get up and walk into my tile bathroom, I notice that my feet are cold. This therefore proves that there is no global warming because if there was I'm sure my bathroom tiles would be hot and not cold which is what they were forty years ago when I did the same thing. Stay in your world. We will deal with the reasonable people who believe in science.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »