This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
Please vote "Do Pass" on SB 138 requiring pipeline companies to put up bonds or other guarantees to cover damages caused by their work. South Dakota requires its own citizens to carry proof of financial responsibility when they drive a car; it makes at least as much sense to require oil companies to guarantee their financial responsibility for damages their pipeline operations might cause in our state. With TransCanada's Keystone pipeline pending, we need this legislation now.
There have been arguments that the chances of a pipeline accident -- a spill, an explosion, etc. -- are slim. However, we should also weigh the chances that, if a pipeline does leak or worse, the company that owns it may try to avoid its responsibilities or may even go insolvent and not be able to pay for the cleanup. We should not take a chance with our natural resources, our safety, or even our own state budget. Vote to send SB 138 to the full Senate with a "Do Pass" recommendation. Thank you for protecting South Dakota's interests.
RIP Quincy Jones
-
Probably one of the greatest music producers EVER! I have to tell you, I
have been beside myself, I get it, he was old, but everything you listened
to deca...
17 hours ago
I remember working with Frank Kloucek who introduced a bill a few years ago. I was taken aside by my local republican friends and told in no uncertain terms that if Kooky Kloucek is involved in a bill, the Governor will fight it. I did not find him Kooky, in fact, he did his research and he seems genuinely interested in helping constituents. It is too bad when people get labeled in state politics and those around them cannot see the strong common sense bills for their merits. I'm not saying Kloucek is always on target, but the fact that South Dakota is not requiring thicker pipeline walls and requiring a bond disturbs me. At least Frank has the clackers to push the big boys, unlike our PUC and others in Pierre.
ReplyDeleteI listened the testimony from this hearing and was blown away by the professionalism, honest and thoughtful testimony given by the proponents. It seems to me the Republicans who killed the bill were saying, just trust us, we'll protect you. But the legislation, if passed, would have meant we didn't have to rely on trust. Instead there would be cold hard cash to put our faith in.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, our state leaders have sided with out of state, in this case foreign big business, instead of our own people.
One other thing. I heard concern, thoughtfulness and research on the part of the proponents. Right away Garno's tagged us as "emotional". Well we are but we're not stupid so accept the emotions as truthful feelings about a dangerous situation and vote for the damn bill, you helmet haired jack ass!!
That "emotional" label is such a red herring. A person can be passionate and emotional and still be dead right on the facts as well. Let's keep on fighting! (Just don't call anyone a "helmet-haired jackass" in committee, Frank! ;-) )
ReplyDelete