NST Online Top Stories - Google News
NST Online Top Stories - Google News |
| Top GOP leaders slam lawmaker's use of racial slur - USA TODAY Posted: 29 Mar 2013 09:29 AM PDT WASHINGTON — Top Republicans denounced a veteran House GOP member's use of a racial slur to describe migrant farm workers, saying such language is not helpful as the party tries to improve its standing with Hispanics. Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn all decried Rep. Don Young, who used the term "wetbacks" in a radio interview earlier this week. The Alaska congressman, in office since 1973, said late Thursday he "meant no disrespect" and explained the term was commonly used when he was growing up on a farm in central California. STORY: GOP congressman uses slur to describe farm workers "Congressman Young's remarks were offensive and beneath the dignity of the office he holds," Boehner, R-Ohio, said in a statement. "I don't care why he said it — there's no excuse and it warrants an immediate apology." Young's timing could not be worse. A bipartisan group of senators and House members plan to unveil bills in April that would dramatically revamp the nation's immigration laws and include a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States. Meanwhile, the Republican National Committee is spending $10 million starting this year on outreach efforts to minorities, women and gay voters as the party seeks to become more inclusive and welcoming. The new outreach is the result of the GOP's scathing post-election "autopsy" report, which noted that much work needs to be done to attract Hispanics. In the last election, President Obama won 71% of the Hispanic vote. Priebus, the national GOP chairman, said Young's words "emphatically do not represent the beliefs of the Republican Party." "As I have continued to say, everyone in this country deserves to be treated with dignity and respect," he said. "Our party represents freedom and opportunity for every American and a beacon of hope to those seeking liberty throughout the world." Cornyn, R-Texas, noted that migrant workers come to America looking for ways to improve their lives and those of their families. "They do not come to this country to hear ethnic slurs and derogatory language from elected officials," Cornyn said. "The comments used by Rep. Young do nothing to elevate our party, political discourse or the millions who come here looking for economic opportunity." Members of Congress drafting immigration legislation are also considering the number of work visas that are granted to immigrants in several areas of the economy, including high-tech workers, agricultural workers and lower-skilled fields. Many of those visas would end up going to people from Mexico, Central and South America. Rep. Ruben Hinojosa, D-Texas, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said an immigration overhaul will only be possible through bipartisanship. He noted that Young, who has served beside many Hispanics in his decades in Congress, "should know terms like 'wetback' have never been acceptable." "Now, more than ever, we must resolve the many issues of our broken immigration system," Hinojosa said. "But as we move forward, it's important that our Republican colleagues are mindful of how words have consequences. When elected officials use racial slurs, it sets back our nation and sets back legislators who are seriously working toward real, bipartisan solutions." Contributing: Alan Gomez |
| EPA orders cuts in sulfur content of gasoline and tighter emissions standards - Washington Post Posted: 29 Mar 2013 09:24 AM PDT WASHINGTON — The Obama administration proposed new regulations Friday to clean up gasoline and automobile emissions, claiming the new standards would provide $7 in health benefits from cleaner air for each dollar spent to implement them. The costs likely would be passed on to consumers in higher gasoline and automobile prices. The Environmental Protection Agency said the new rule would reduce sulfur in gasoline and tighten automobile emission standards beginning in 2017, resulting in an increase in gas prices of less than a penny per gallon. The agency estimated it also would add $130 to the cost of a vehicle in 2025, but predicted it would yield billions of dollars in health benefits by slashing smog- and soot-forming pollution. EPA Acting Administrator Bob Perciasepe said the proposal is designed to "protect the environment and public health in an affordable and practical way." The oil industry, Republicans and some Democrats wanted EPA to delay the rule, citing higher costs. An oil industry study says it could increase gasoline prices by 6 to 9 cents a gallon. "Consumers care about the price of fuel, and our government should not be adding unnecessary regulations that raise manufacturing costs, especially when there are no proven environmental benefits," said Bob Greco, an American Petroleum Institute official. "We should not pile on new regulations when existing regulations are working." Environmentalists hailed the proposal as potentially the most significant in President Barack Obama's second term. The so-called Tier 3 standards would reduce sulfur in gasoline by more than 60 percent and reduce nitrogen oxides by 80 percent, by expanding across the country a standard already in place in California. For states, the regulation would make it easier to comply with health-based standards for the main ingredient in smog and soot. For automakers, the regulation allows them to sell the same autos in all 50 states. The Obama administration already has moved to clean up motor vehicles by adopting rules that will double fuel efficiency and putting in place the first standards to reduce the pollution from cars and trucks blamed for global warming. "We know of no other air pollution control strategy that can achieve such substantial, cost-effective and immediate emission reductions," said Bill Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. Becker said the rule would reduce pollution equal to taking 33 million cars off the road. But the head of American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, Charles Drevna, questioned the motives behind the agency's regulation, since refining companies already have spent $10 billion to reduce sulfur by 90 percent. The additional cuts, while smaller, will cost just as much, Drevna said, and the energy needed for the additional refining actually could increase carbon pollution by 1 percent to 2 percent. "I haven't seen an EPA rule on fuels that has come out since 1995 that hasn't said it would cost only a penny or two more," Drevna said. A study commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute estimated that lowering the sulfur in gasoline would add 6 cents to 9 cents a gallon to refiners' manufacturing costs, an increase that likely would be passed on to consumers at the pump. The EPA estimate of less than 1 cent is also an additional manufacturing cost and likely to be passed on. A senior administration official said Thursday that only 16 of 111 refineries would need to invest in major equipment to meet the new standards, which could be final by the end of this year. Of the remaining refineries, 29 already are meeting the standards because they are selling cleaner fuel in California or other countries, and 66 would have to make modifications. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the rule was still undergoing White House budget office review. ___ Follow Dina Cappiello on Twitter: https://twitter.com/dinacappiello Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Top Stories - Google News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
