Voice of the Voter: Locals support Affordable Care Act, are split on fracking-desktop
There are 2 comments on the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle story from Oct 22, 2012, titled Voice of the Voter: Locals support Affordable Care Act, are split on fracking-desktop. In it, Rochester Democrat and Chronicle reports that:
"It's just kind of daunting," she said. "I truly don't know." "I haven't seen anything that I can sit down and read that will give you a point by point description of how people would be affected in their different strata," she said.
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.
#1 Oct 22, 2012
It might me noted that as NY contemplates the development of our natural resources to provide energy for Americans to reduce foreign dependence, NY State gave up their opportunity to protect the Saint Lawrence river and Great Lakes from the dumping of ballast water containing virus and bacteria by a mostly foreign shipping industry that dose not pay US tax's in favor of a weak plan contrived by the Coast Guard under the Obama administration that environmental groups have claimed to be inadequate. This happened after keeping all the Great Lakes States in suspense for over three years with a strong plan that had the ability to create economic equal for all Great Lakes States when negotiating trade with the shipping industry. NY not only spent tax dollars to do this but they also defended this right successfully in court before giving up. Sadly this issue has been avoided by broadcast media and very few people know.
#2 Oct 23, 2012
Noticing that TV WHAM edit my comment and used it out of context on the air by not including my correlation to a 2009 report for congress detailing the cost to a mostly foreign shipping industry that suggested the cost of foreign imports brought into our country on foreign ships would rise and my belief it would create American manufacturing jobs, I am posting an excerpt of the report so this voters voice can be clarified.“Although estimates of the costs of ballast treatment may be imprecise and vary from vessel to
vessel, there is some general agreement on average costs.14 For example, it may cost an estimated
$400,000 per vessel for modification of container/bulk vessels to use onshore ballast water
treatment facilities at California ports. More generally, the cost of retrofitting vessels to treat
ballast water has been estimated at between $200,000 and $310,000 per vessel for mechanical
treatment and around $300,000 for chemical treatment.15 Most of this expense will be borne by
foreign shipping companies, as the U.S. flag fleet is a small percentage of the global fleet,16 and
likely passed along to consumers of products imported on these ships.”
I did mention to the reporter that I believed they would never allow talk about ballast water on broadcast media. It is sad you can not count on news from an ABC affiliate to provide the whole story. Has anybody ever heard about ballast water and the economic issue that it has created for our country on any broadcast media?
Add your comments below
|November Surprise: Obamacare Rate Hikes to Hit ...||Fri||Ritual Habitual||1|
|That Time Elizabeth Warren Accused Hillary Clin...||Fri||Fart news||13|
|Nurse anesthetists aren't the same as anesthesi... (Sep '10)||Fri||Military CRNA||135|
|Press release distribution, EDGAR filing, XBRL,...||Thu||DIANE||1|
|Bernie Sanders's claim that he would expand, no...||Thu||WACKER||2|
|Has anyone heard of Pfizer's Chantix (Dec '06)||Feb 11||Barb||70,566|
|$280,000 salary at DHS has lawmakers talking||Feb 10||Gilliam and DesMange||8|
Find what you want!
Search Healthcare Law Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC