Bush backers use California fires to promote "Healthy Forests"

[theivoryqueen]

This is exploitation at it's finest (and you knew it was coming!!!).

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-na-dcfire28oct28,1,3765447.story


Washington Feels the Heat From California
A compromise on a measure to thin forests and reduce fire risks has split Senate Democrats.




By Richard Simon and Bettina Boxall, Times Staff Writers


WASHINGTON — With wildfires burning across Southern California, pressure is growing for lawmakers to act on President Bush's stalled plan to limit environmental and judicial reviews of tree-thinning projects in national forests.

Supporters of the legislation, which the administration says would help reduce fire risks, said Monday that images of burning homes and smoke-filled skies should compel Congress to pass a wildfire prevention bill this year. But deep divisions remain over the legislation, which opponents say would do little to stop the type of chaparral fires that have leapt across more than 500,000 acres the last several days.

The legislation is designed to speed up forest thinning on as much as 20 million acres of federal wild lands at high risk of fire. Both the House bill and the compromise proposal crafted by the bipartisan group of senators would let the Agriculture and Interior secretaries decide which forests would be targeted for thinning projects. A large part of the effort is expected to take place in California.

A version of Bush's "healthy forests" initiative passed the House in May but has met resistance in the Senate, where a bipartisan group recently worked out the compromise. But that effort has split Senate Democrats, a divide that was evident Monday as Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats from California, took to the Senate floor.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[maggrwaggr]

1. idiots

Man, these people are like kids who just can't take their eyes off the candy jar. You slap their hands away again and again, but as soon as you're not looking, they're back on it.

Just say "NO" to destroying our forests.

Just say "NO" to corporate welfare.

The fires in LA have absolutely 0% of anything to do with "forest fires". This is chapparal. There are no trees in chaparral. It's designed to burn by God. Seeds aren't even released until there's fire.

It's part of the climate here. It's a dumb place to put a city. End of story.

[phaseolus]

2. hypocrites, too.

When it serves their purposes the repukes rail against uniform federal regulations, the idea being a solution that might work in Maine, say, might not be the best thing for Alabama.

But when they wanna toss a bone to their big contibutors, suddenly the same forest policy is gonna be great in Oregon, Southern California, Georgia, Minnesota...

Assholes.

[realFedUp]

3. they seem to always spin a disaster their way....

This is about built up undergrowth and people not wanting
it burned off in controlled fires. This cycle of burn and new
growth has gone on forever in this area...it's nature's way
and unfortunately people build wooden structures in the
hills and mountains. This is going to keep happening.
Removing old live trees that are slow to burn isn't the
answer.

Bush Inc. absolutely disgusts me.

[tom_paine]

4. Either that or they are "incredibly lucky"

Those Busheviks keep hitting trifectas like they'd planned it that way.

Just sayin'...they're very lucky folks.

[raysr]

5. Trees

It's not trees burning it's brush! Log all the brush!