Should there be term limits for the Governor of Texas? Definitely, I agree 100% with Sebastian Espinoza, that there should be term limits. But NO to going back to prior laws on Texas Governor term limits like in the past; changing between 2 to 4 to 2 and back to 4 years a term again, no more flip flopping. I think 2-year term is too short, and 4-year term is just right. As for the term limits, I think there should be only between 2 to 3 consecutive 4-year terms, a total of 12 years and not a day more. (Leap year occur every four years, so those 2 to 3 extra days are exceptional). I think if former Governor Rick Perry had not campaign for the U.S. Presidency, he could have stayed as Texas Governor as long as he'd like. We should give those who wish to run for governor more chances. When the State is forced to find a new Governor, it allows the newly elected governor, to introduce, appoint and implement new plans, talents and ideas into the executive branch as well as in Texas.
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Thursday, April 7, 2016
EPA: Oil, Gas, Coal stop messing with Texas
The State of Texas should stop opposing and suing the EPA so much and agree to some regulations, at least give the EPA a break. Texas has sued the Obama Administration over 40 times. Former Attorney General and current Governor Greg Abbot filed over 30 of those lawsuits. Many of the lawsuits were on regulations over the toxic pollution from power plants.
One example, the EPA wants the coal-fired power plants to produce less toxic pollution such as sulfate and other gases. The air pollution in Big Bend national park is ruining the scenic views that visitors loved so much. Visitors have claimed some days, the pollution was so bad that the visibility was less than 30 miles far. On good days, which are becoming rarer, they can see over 100 miles away. The National Park Services stated "nearly half of the visibility reduction is due to sulfates." These sulfates are created by coal-fired power plants near by and the industrial processes create white hazes that diminish the scenic landscape. And coal-fired power plants produce a very small percentage of the total energy produced in Texas. The main source of energy production in Texas is from oil, and any regulation on big Texas oil would be very difficult to be agreeable by Texas and the oil industry. So let's just focus on coal for now.
The EPA is only looking out for the future of our a state and our country. And as the threat of climate change is becoming greater and greater, we should watch what we polluted. The majority of Texans support the EPA and its regulations. Because many Texans are concerned about their air, lands, and water. So the state of Texas should start doing what the majority of Texas residents think is best for them and accept EPA's regulations.
EPA opposition will claim that the regulations on oil, gas and coal will harm Texas economically and threaten our employment growth. But the truth is Texas' economy is very diversified. So let's encourage and increase the diversification of our energy production as well as creating new jobs at the same time. We can do this is by increasing greater incentives for oil, gas and coal to produce less pollution as well as for small and big businesses to invest and pursue renewable energy. And of course, I am sure we can negotiate with the Feds to give us millions of dollars with these incentives too. It is inevitable that the renewable energy will be the way of the future, so let's start now.
One example, the EPA wants the coal-fired power plants to produce less toxic pollution such as sulfate and other gases. The air pollution in Big Bend national park is ruining the scenic views that visitors loved so much. Visitors have claimed some days, the pollution was so bad that the visibility was less than 30 miles far. On good days, which are becoming rarer, they can see over 100 miles away. The National Park Services stated "nearly half of the visibility reduction is due to sulfates." These sulfates are created by coal-fired power plants near by and the industrial processes create white hazes that diminish the scenic landscape. And coal-fired power plants produce a very small percentage of the total energy produced in Texas. The main source of energy production in Texas is from oil, and any regulation on big Texas oil would be very difficult to be agreeable by Texas and the oil industry. So let's just focus on coal for now.
The EPA is only looking out for the future of our a state and our country. And as the threat of climate change is becoming greater and greater, we should watch what we polluted. The majority of Texans support the EPA and its regulations. Because many Texans are concerned about their air, lands, and water. So the state of Texas should start doing what the majority of Texas residents think is best for them and accept EPA's regulations.
EPA opposition will claim that the regulations on oil, gas and coal will harm Texas economically and threaten our employment growth. But the truth is Texas' economy is very diversified. So let's encourage and increase the diversification of our energy production as well as creating new jobs at the same time. We can do this is by increasing greater incentives for oil, gas and coal to produce less pollution as well as for small and big businesses to invest and pursue renewable energy. And of course, I am sure we can negotiate with the Feds to give us millions of dollars with these incentives too. It is inevitable that the renewable energy will be the way of the future, so let's start now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)