Tag Archives: Attorney General Rob McKenna

Facebook Opposition to McKenna Now Exceeds Opposition to Eyman’s 1033

The Internet is bubbling with outrage at Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna’s partisan decision to try to join Washington State to an effort by 12 other states to overturn the just passed national health reform bill. An indication of the pushback by the public is that the number of people joining the Facebook page Washington Taxpayers OPT OUT of Rob McKenna’s lawsuit  is growing faster than I can type this post.

Just started 2 days ago the number as of 11:54 AM today is at 12,608 and  now exceeds the number of people on another recent surge of FACEBOOK outrage, people opposing Eyman’s I-1033 which went down to a decisive defeat in  November. The Anti-1033 site, No on 1033 has 12,212.

At 12:15 PM (I took a phone call) the anti McKenna lawsuit page now has 12,713.  The number is growing at a rate of 200 to 400 an hour right now.  Add your name to the facebook page by going to Washington Taxpayers OPT OUT of Rob McKenna’s lawsuit.

It’s 12:29 and the nmber is now 12,766.

Rob McKenna has two Facebook pages up.

Rob McKenna the Politician has 1797 fans.  The site Rob McKenna has 3097. Looks like a lot more people don’t like what Rob McKenna is trying to do to right now than want to be his fan or friend.

I think McKenna made a big miscalculation in joining with the Tea Party fanatics and those in the Republican Party of No in opposing health care reform. This can’t be good news for his ambitions to be Governor. At least you now know where McKenna’s real allegiances are after his many year front of trying to be positioned as a consumer advocate representing the public good.  I guess health care for Washington citizens doesn’t rank up there with the potential for corporate dollars from special interests or wanting to befriend Tea Party fanatics or not being able to be independent of the Republican Party of No’s strategy to say no to everything.

12:40 PM  12,821 – still growing
12:48 PM  12,846

posting now

Rob McKenna Needs to Appoint an Independent Prosecutor to Pursue BIAW Case!

Attorney General Rob McKenna is in a tough spot. The PDC has asked the Washington State Attorney General to consider legal action against the BIAW – the Building Industry Association of Washington. But the BIAW PACS are his friends and contibuted heavily to McKenna’s election in 2004.

As reported in the Seattle Times on Wednesday:

The state Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) ruled Monday that the builders violated several campaign laws by not properly reporting more than $500,000 in contributions that passed through a BIAW subsidiary and to a political-action committee, ChangePAC, opposing Gregoire.
The PDC referred the case to McKenna’s office, which will decide by Friday whether to pursue legal action.

What the article doesn’t mention is that Rob McKenna has a clear conflict of interest and needs to recuse himself from this case. MajorityRules Blog wrote about this in several of its early posts in 2005. Rob McKenna benefited from donations given to BIAW’s ChangePAC 2004 which shuffled the money to another of its PAC’s “It’s Time for a Change”.

Change PAC, Change PAC 2004, and It’s Time for a Change are all BIAW PAC’s. The same mailing address appears for all 3 PAC’s, namely PO Box 1909, Olympia, WA 98507. Elliott Swaney, the BIAW’s Political Affairs Director has been the treasurer for all 3 PAC’s and the phone number listed for contact information 360-352-7800 is the main phone number for the BIAW’s office in Olympia.

It’s Time for a Change raised some $1,058,539 in 2004. A quick look shows that ChangePAC 2004 contributed some $867,818 of that amount in cash. Because Swaney was the treasurer of both organizations one wonders if he put the check in the mail when he sent it from PO Box 1909 to PO Box 1909.

One wonders where the PDC was on all this because the BIAW never listed these PAC’s as affiliated with them.

The BIAW’s It’s Time for a Change also deliberately obscured how it was spending over $200 thousand dollars by not clearly identifying what candidate it was making specific expenditures for or against. BIAW’s “It’s Time for a Change” spent a minimum of $415,580 in independent expenditures on the McKenna/Senn race for Attorney General in 2004 – supporting Rob McKenna and opposing Deborah Senn.

It appears to have spent some $421,427 opposing Chris Gregoire and supporting Dino Rossi for Governor. The only identified additional expenditure was $12,500 to support Jim Johnson for State Supreme Court.

This leaves some $208,714 that is not identified as to who it was spent supporting or oposing. If all of this money was spent for Rob McKenna, he was the beneficiary of up to $624,294 collected by the BIAW.

Rob McKenna needs to appoint an independent prosecutor to look at this case and decide what to do. He is too close to the problem. Rob McKenna personally thanked the BIAW after the election in 2004 for their “independent efforts” to help get him elected.

One has to question just how vigerously an Attorney General who benefited by the actions of the BIAW’s PAC’s in 2004 would go after prosecuting the current violations alleged by the PDC.

Rob McKenna has a clear conflict of interest in this case.

Washington State Attorney General’s Office Responds to Not Joining Other States on Fuel Efficiency Lawsuit

Seems the Washington State Attorney General’s Office is eager to get their spin out on why they did not join the California lawsuit challenging the weak fuel efficiency standards proposed by the Bush Administration for light trucks and SUV’s. When I received their response I was not surprised that they really did not seem to comprehend the need for Washington state to be a leader on this issue.

Washington State last year passed ESHB 1397 – the Clean Car Act – patterned after California’s. Instead of joining with other states that have passed Clean Car Legislation to help reduce global warming, Attorney General Rob McKenna has decided to sit on the sidelines and not participate.

The issue of reducing global warming and reducing oil consumption which contributes to global warming requires aggressive action, not excuses.

My previous posts on this issue started with “Missing in Action – Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna , and four updates , here, here, here, and here.

The AG’s Office says they are involved and reference a case regarding the EPA saying it was not going to regulate CO2 emissions as a pollutant from cars. The interesting point here is that this lawsuit was initiated by Attorney General Rob McKenna’s predecessor Christine Gregoire in 2003 before McKenna took office.

While I attacked Rob McKenna for his lack of leadership in this area I must also, if he has correctly stated it, say that he shares this lack of action with the Governor’s Office. McKenna belongs to the Republican Party which has not shown any initiative over many years in dealing with increasing fuel efficiency standards, beside Bush’s token effort this year.

But the Seattle Times, in an editorial today, entitled “Democrats on Energy, Still a Zero”, points out that nationally the Democratic Plan on Energy released last week, was just as silent on raising fuel efficiency standards, in this instance as a way of saving energy.

The Seattle Times attributes the Democrats timidity to the influence of states with automotive workers and unions. The irony is that with rising gasoline prices, foreign carmakers that emphasized fuel efficiency, with hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid, are busy selling lots of cars.

Whether its reducing global warming or saving energy, both political parties need to be more aggressive on pursuing real solutions to real problems. This includes making serious efforts to increase Federal fuel efficiency standards to both decrease global warming and save energy.

Below is the response I received from the Washington State Attorney General’s Office.

Dear Mr. Zemke,
Thank you for your inquiry regarding the state of Washington’s decision not to intervene in Cal. et al. v. NHTSA, challenging the federal fuel efficiency standards published in April 2006. The state of Washington, including the Attorney General’s Office, is concerned about the impacts of climate change and supports the states in their efforts to urge federal agencies to fully consider the environmental impacts of CO2 emissions from cars.
In fact, Washington is currently involved in another key case – led by the state of Massachusetts -which we believe more directly addresses concerns about the regulation of CO2 emissions from cars. Last month in Mass. v. EPA, the states, including Washington, asked the Supreme Court to review EPA’s decision not to regulate CO2 emissions from cars as an air pollutant. View the cert petition here.
When this office was asked to consider joining the suit against NHTSA, Attorney General McKenna authorized review of the case and directed that our agency clients be consulted. The main claims of the states’ case relate to whether NHTSA complied with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Washington State Attorney General’s office, Governor Gregoire, Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development and the Washington State Department of Ecology carefully evaluated the request to join the lawsuit. Based on a variety of factors -including Washingnto’s involvement in Mass. v. EPA- we jointly concluded that this is not a case that Washington should join at this time.
The Attorney General’s office is frequently asked to join lawsuits and file “friend of the court” briefs in support of parties to lawsuits. We evaluate such requests carefully and make decisions based on a variety of factors, including:
· Our ability, in the time provided, to fully consider the legal merit of the claims and the impact of the arguments being advanced on the interests of the state of Washington and its agencies;
· The role and timing of the requested participation;
· The best use of the legal resources of the office; and
· Which states may be most familiar with the legal issues and arguments.
Multi-state litigation presents unique challenges, both substantively and procedurally. Decisions to join a lawsuit or file a brief are made for a variety of reasons, and decisions not to participate should not be construed as taking a formal position on the issues in that case.
To provide further background, there are three multi-state lawsuits currently dealing with carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Two are related to cars and one is related to power plants.
The two related to cars are:
· The Massachusetts-led case related to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA’s) authority to regulate CO2 as a pollutant under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA)(United States Supreme Court); and
· The California-led case challenging the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration fuel efficiency (CAFÉ) standards that were just adopted (Ninth Circuit).
The third case deals with the validity of newly updated New Source Performance standards (NSPS) that EPA adopted for emissions from power plants. This is the New York case you reference in your blog.
Here’s a quick description of the state’s involvement in each of those cases:
(1) Mass. et al. v. EPA re: EPA authority to adopt CO2 emission standards for cars. On Oct. 23, 2003, Washington joined a number of states and environmental organizations that filed a Petition for Review under Section 202 of the federal CAA challenging EPA’s refusal to regulate CO2 and other motor vehicle emissions that contribute to global warming. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ three judge panel issued its decision on July 15, 2005, denying the petition. The states, including Washington, filed a Petition for Certiorari on April 7, 2006, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case.
(2) Cal. et al. v. NHTSA re: the CAFE rule, alleging that the standards rule should not have been adopted under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) without preparation of an environmental impact statement because the rule’s impacts are significant.
The 52-page statement you reference presents an argument that states are preempted from setting their own vehicle emission standards for CO2. However, the rule is about NHTSA, a federal agency, setting fuel efficiency standards for cars, not about whether states can adopt their own standards. Thus, we do not consider the reference to preemption of state law to be relevant to the challenged rulemaking action and understand that it will not be a main focus of the challenging states’ case.
3) New York et al. v. EPA re: EPA regulation of power plant emissions including CO2. We considered joining this case when it was filed last month, but after careful evaluation and because of its relationship to Mass. v. EPA, we opted to wait and monitor the case instead. We determined that if Mass. v. EPA is accepted for review, a decision in that case could resolve a key issue in New York’s power plant case. We continue to evaluate whether to intervene in this case before the deadline.
Thank you very much for your letter and please feel free to call or e-mail if you continue to have questions regarding the Attorney General’s Office and the cases in which we are involved.
Janelle Guthrie, APRDirector of Media RelationsWashington State Attorney General’s Office1125 Washington Street SEPO Box 40100Olympia, WA 98504-0100Phone: (360) 586-0725Cell: (360) 584-3046E-mail: janelleg@atg.wa.govJoin Attorney General Rob McKenna’s Listserv for the latest news from the AG’s office or visit our Web site at http://www.atg.wa.gov/

Press Release Attorney General Rob McKenna Should Join Federal Lawsuit on Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Standards

Press Release May 8, 2006
For Immediate Release
For More Information Contact
Steve Zemke 206-999-6095

Why is Attorney General Rob McKenna not Defending Washington’s Clean Car Act?

Is over $36,000 in campaign contributions from automotive interests affecting Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna decision not to join a Federal lawsuit?

Last Tuesday the State of California and 9 other states plus New York City and Washington, DC filed a Federal lawsuit challenging the Bush Administration’s fuel economy standards for SUV’s and light trucks. They alleged that the standards were too weak, were costing consumers money and failed to address global warming and other environmental concerns.

Attached to the regulations issued in March was a 52 page memorandum from the Bush Administration alleging that the Federal Government, not states, have the ability to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. This is despite the Federal Clean Air Act saying states could choose either Federal clean air standards or California’s.

Here is a lawsuit that follows the intent of Washington’s Clean Car Act passed last year by the Washington State Legislature and which in part is a direct response to President Bush’s challenge to a state’s right to regulate dangerous car emissions. Yet our Attorney General fails to join with other states, which have passed Clean Car Legislation modeled after California’s pioneering legislation, in challenging Washington State’s right to protect its citizens from harmful emissions and global warming

“One has to wonder just whose interests our Attorney General is representing. Is it the citizens of Washington State? Is it laws passed by our state Legislature? Or is it the interest of campaign contributors?” asked Steve Zemke, who writes the MajorityRulesBlog.

Zemke continued, “Is there a desire of the AG not to challenge the policies of the Bush Administration because they are from the same political party? Or is it because the AG doesn’t feel we need to reduce emissions contributing to global warming?”

On Wednesday Steve Zemke e-mailed and called the Attorney General’s office asking for an explanation of why Attorney General Rob McKenna hadn’t joined the lawsuit. Late Friday, after inquiry by the media started, the Attorney General’s Office contacted Steve Zemke of MajorityRulesBlog to say that they would respond to his request for an explanation.

They said there would be a written statement on Monday afternoon explaining Attorney General Rob McKenna’s position. “All the Attorney General has to do is say he is joining the lawsuit,” said Steve Zemke


MajorityRulesBlog Missing in Action – Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna
MajorityRulesBlog – Update on Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna Asleep at the Wheel
MajorityRulesBlog 2nd Update – Still Waiting to Hear from Attorney General Rob McKenna
MajorityRules Blog 3rd Update –Washington State Attorney General McKenna Should Join Car Fuel Efficiency Lawsuit

Washington Post – 10 States Sue over Fuel Economy Standards

Oregon Attorney General’s Press Release – Governor, Attorney General Sue Feds over Fuel Efficiency Standards

New York Attorney General Press Release – State and City Sue For Better Fuel Efficiency Standards

Washington’s Clean Car Act HB 1937

3rd Update -Washington State Attorney General McKenna Should Join Car Fuel Efficiency Lawsuit.

Last Tuesday the Attorneys General of 10 states filed a Federal lawsuit urging stronger fuel efficiency standards for SUV’s and light trucks. Lead by California, the other states on the lawsuit included Oregon, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Vermont.

Conspiciously absent from the lawsuit was Washington State. Almost all of the states filing the lawsuit have passed Clean Car Legislation patterned after California’s. Washington State passed such legislation last year. The Federal Government when it issued new fuel efficiency standards in March asserted that only the Federal Government, not the states could regulate CO2 emissions.

Majority Rules Blog has posted 3 times in the last week asking the question of why Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna is missing in action in defending Washington’s Clean Car Act. We called the Attorney General’s office and e-mailed the Attorney General’s office asking for an explanation. Finally late Friday we got a call back saying that a formal response was being written and would be reviewed by the Attorney General and available on Monday afternoon.

While we will be interested in seeing what explanation Attorney General Rob McKenna may come up with for not initially joining the lawsuit, we believe that Rob McKenna should act now to join the lawsuit. Washington State needs to join with other states in efforts increase fuel efficiency in new vehicles which will save consumers money, as well as increase efforts to reduce CO2 emissions which are a main contributor to global warming.

Rob McKenna is a Republican Attorney General and had received over $36,000 from automotive interests in his campaign for Attorney General. Republicans as represented by the Bush Administration have long resisted efforts to increase automobile fuel efficiency standards and President Bush has vigorously resisted efforts to reduce global warming by reducing CO2 emissions.

We urge Rob McKenna to step outside the Republican rhetoric if this has affected his decision not to join in efforts of other Attorneys General to increase car fuel efficiency, save consumers money nd reduce global warming. McKenna needs to act in the best interests of Washington State citizens and fight for their needs, not the needs of an intransigent car industry that is fighting needed change.


MajorityRulesBlog Missing in Action – Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna
MajorityRulesBlog – Update on Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna Asleep at the Wheel
MajorityRulesBlog 2nd Update – Still Waiting to Hear from Attorney General Rob McKenna

2nd Update – Still Waiting to Hear From Attorney General Rob McKenna

Since I both called and e-mailed Attorney General McKenna on Wednesday, I still have not received a reply. My question – Why didn’t Rob McKenna join  the lawsuit filed on May 2, 2006 by California and 9 other states questioning the fuel efficiency standards issued by the Bush Administration?

One issue of particular concern is the 52 page memorandum attached by President Bush to the standards issued at the end of March which challenged the right of states to regulate CO2 emissions. This was saying the Federal Government overrode any standards set by the Clean Car Act HB 1937 passed by the Washington State Legislature.

I speculated it might have something to do with a number of his campaign contributions coming from people who worked in the automotive industry. But maybe its something even more basic. Rob McKenna is a Republican. Republicans in general don’t believe in regulation and support the concept of free enterprise – even when it threatens the lives and health of people in Washington state. Rising gas prices are just part of business as usual. Companies can charge whatever they want. They can make whatever profit they can gouge out of consumers.

Maybe Rob McKenna doesn’t think that we know enough about global warming to act to try to reduce greenhouse gases. That what Bush says and McKenna would be a disloyal Republican to challenge the beliefs of his Commander in Chief. That despite the fact that almost all scientists believe that we are facing a real problem and that it is fair to call it a crisis.

In the preamble to HB 1937 it says:

(2) Air pollution levels routinely measured in the state of Washington continue to harm public health, the environment, and the economy. Air pollution causes or contributes to premature death, cancer, asthma, and heart and lung disease. Over half of the state’s population suffers from one or more medical conditions that make them very vulnerable to air pollution. Air pollution increases pain and suffering for vulnerable individuals. Air pollution imposes several hundred million dollars annually in added health care costs for air pollution-associated death and illness, reducing the quality of life and economic security of the citizens of Washington;
(3) Reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from transportation sources are necessary, and it is equitable to seek such reductions because reductions in greenhouse gas emissions have already been initiated in other sectors such as power generation

New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in his press release announcing joining the lawsuit stated:

“At a time when consumers are struggling to pay surging gas prices and the challenge of global climate change has become even more clear, it is unconscionable that the Bush administration is not requiring greater mileage efficiency for light trucks,” said Attorney General Spitzer. “The failure of this Administration to lead on vital environmental issues like this will burden our nation for generations to come.”

Meanwhile Rob McKenna, according to the the Attorney General’s website, is busy monitoring gasoline pricing.

“Recent actions in participation with other state attorneys general The Washington State Attorney General’s Office works in close cooperation with other Western states to review the factors influencing the price of petroleum products in the West. This office has and will continue to work with other state and federal agencies to insure petroleum prices remain competitive.”

In the past several weeks, gasoline prices in Washington have reached record levels. The Attorney General’s Office regularly monitors gasoline pricing to determine whether price increases indicate possible anticompetitive behavior or reflect normal market forces….Current high prices appear to be a reflection of a tight supply/demand balance. Furthermore, all indications are that prices will tend to remain high.

It is instructive to note that while a number of action were taken against oil companies to protect Washington consumers during Gregoire’s tenure, there is a conspicuous absence of action since 2002.

My concern is the role of the Attorney General in protecting Washington citizens from rising gas prices and global warming, issues addressed partially by HB 1937. By all indications we not being represented by Rob McKenna. It appears he is being loyal to the Bush mantra by following the failed policies of President Bush. When the largest oil companies are reporting record profits while consumers are being hit with record gas prices, how is that just “normal market forces”. Our economy and people’s jobs are dependent on a gasoline run car society. What choice do people have?

It would be one thing if oil companies were making profits somewhere in the middle of U.S. companies, but people are feeling real pain. When an oil company like Exxon Mobil breaks a record $36 billion last year, making the most profit of any US company, and sets another record for the first quarter of 2006, exceeding last years 1st quarter, with a profit of $8.4 billion this is I’m supposed to believe according to McKenna, just “normal competition.”

Conoco Philips and Chevron also came in with huge profits.They’re not feeling any pain are they, unless it their aching muscles raking in all the dough Americans are giving them by inflated prices at the gas pumps?

Let’s face it. Rob McKenna is doing the little feel good things with his public service ads promoting himself but he is just another Republican. Republicans represent corporate interests like automotive companies and oil companies, not the average citizen. Two days ago he had posted on the state website that no price gouging was occurring with gasoline prices. Today I can’t find it. Maybe he had to go out and fill up his car.

Update on Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna Asleep at the Wheel

On Tuesday I speculated aloud about why Washington State was not a party to the Lawsuit filed by California and 9 others states plus the city of New York and the District of Columbia challenging the weak Federal Fuel Efficiency Standards issued in March.. I wondered if it could have been because McKenna received some 28 contributions over $1000 each (over $36,000) from automobile interests when he ran for Washington State Attorney General.

To be fair I have a call into the Attorney General’s Office asking why Washington State is not a party to this lawsuit. When the Bush Administration issued the fuel efficiency standards in March it also included a 52 page statement saying that only the Federal Government could regulate CO2 emissions from cars and trucks.

Such an action would override the Clean Car legislation the Washington State Legislature passed last year. It seems that from consumer protection, health protection and environmental protection Attorney General Rob McKenna is not protecting Washington State’s interests.

In addition to trying to get their response verbally I have just sent them the following e-mail entitled “Why is Washington State not a party to the Lawsuit filed by the California AG to increase fuel efficiency standards for SUV’s and light trucks?

Dear Attorney General Rob McKenna,

Yesterday the California Attorney General and nine other state Attorney Generals and the District of Columbia and New City filed a lawsuit in Federal Court challenging the Federal fuel efficiency standards set in March for light trucks and SUV’s. See press release http://ag.ca.gov/news alerts/release.php?id=1299#attachments

Almost all of the states in the lawsuit have passed Clean Car Legislation patterned after California’s. Washington State passed such legislation last year.And Oregon is in the process of enacting similar rules.

As part of the final standards issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a 52 page memorandum was added by the current administration stating that the Federal Government, not the states , have the authority to regulate CO2 emissions.

It would seem to me that the state of Washington needs to respond to this issue, not just because it challenges legislation passed by the Washington State Legislature, but also because of the need for Washington State to do all it can increase fuel efficiency and cut gases that contribute to global emissions.

Thank you for your response.

Steve Zemke
In addition I have contacted the California Attorney General’s Office on this matter.I asked them if they had asked McKenna about being on the suit. A person in their press office responded that “the protocol is to reach out to a wide variety of states.” They do this through their national organization – the National Association of Attorney Generals.

She said they communicated regularly with other states to make it possible to join the lawsuit. “Lots of communication goes on”. She said I should check with the Washington AG’s office and said” it was a fair question to ask” when I wondered if his decision was affected by our Attorney General getting donations from automotive interests.

Missing in Action – Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna

Where is Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna? Is he asleep at the wheel? It certainly seems that is the case. In the story reported today in the Washington Post Washington state is conspicuously absent from the list of states today filing a suit to enforce and protect Washington citizens from rising gas prices and global warming.

Today California Attorney General Bill Lockyer and nine other states filed suit against the Bush Administration. Joining the California Attorney General in the lawsuit were Attorney Generals from Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont.

They are challenging the Bush Administration’s recently issued weak fuel economy standards for SUV’s and light trucks. Weak standards contribute to wasting gasoline, rising gas prices and global warming.
Lockyer states that:

“With gas prices skyrocketing, we must substantially increase fuel efficiency in new vehicles, not only to protect the pocketbooks of working families, but also to reduce vehicle emissions that contribute to global warming,” said Lockyer. “These rules fail that test by not requiring enough from the auto industry. The Bush Administration once again has missed an opportunity to promote new technology, fuel economy and conservation by issuing fuel economy goals that are status quo.”

In addition Lockyer noted that when Bush issued the fuel efficiency rules, Bush attached a 52 page discussion that asserted only the Federal Government, not individual states, could regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Reducing carbon dioxide is crucial to reducing global warming.

President Bush and his Administration have spent most of their time in office representing corporate America and the oil and gas industry and car manufacturers while arguing that global warming is only a theory. He refused to sign the international Kyoto Protocol to help reduce worldwide global warming.

Washington State last year passed HB 1937 – changing vehicle emission standards. The vote in the House was 55 to 42 and in the Senate 29 to 19. The preamble to HB 1937 noted that

motor vehicles are the largest source of air pollution in the state of Washington, and motor vehicles contribute approximately fifty-seven percent of criteria air pollutant emissions, eighty percent of toxics emissions and fifty-four percent of greenhouse gases”

Washington State is one of 10 states that have adopted Clean Car Legislation. The other states are California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

The state of Oregon is currently adopting California style clear air standards by administrative rule. The Dept of Environmental Quality just won a lawsuit opposing their action in March and will present the recommendationsions to the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission in June for adoption.

In a previous letter to the National Highway Safety Administration, the states suing asserted that the NHTSA,

“failed to consider alternative approaches that would have promoted energy conservation, made meaningful contributions to increased fuel economy and encouraged technological innovation. In addition, the letter said, NHTSA failed to consider the environmental consequences of its proposed overhaul of light truck standards, failed to consider the changes in the environment since the 1980s, when NHTSA last assessed the environmental effects of the standards, and failed to evaluate the impact of carbon dioxide emissions despite identifying the threat of CO2 and global climate change as new information concerning the environment.”

Now here’s a question for you. In looking at Rob McKenna’s 2004 Attorney General campaign contributors, it turns out that a number are employed by auto industry firms. Maybe a third of his contributors appear not to have an employer listed as required by law so I’m sure the number is higher. But of those that do, here is a list of employers, who were easily identified, of the contributors, who gave McKenna $1000 or more. You can see yourself by going to www.pdc.wa.gov.

Titus Will $2700
Honda Auto Center $2500
Toyota of Puyallup $1350
Bob Bridge Auto Center $1350
Enterprise Rent a Car $1350
Lexus of Bellevue $2700
Pignataro Volkswagen $1350
Sound Ford $1350
United Services Automobile Assoc $1350
Washington Oil Marketers Assoc PAC $1250
Sound Ford $1150
Brotherton Cadillac $2000
Downtown Toyota $1000
Honda Auto Center $1000
Volvo of Tacoma $1000
Lexus of Tacoma $1000
Lexus of Bellevue $1000
Jaguar of Tacoma $1000
Dick Hamak Dealership $1000
Chevron Texaco $1000
Acura of Seattle $1000
Volkswagen Hyundai $1250
Richland RV Park $1350

So while almost all of the other states which have passed Clean Car Legislation, joined the suit to try to force the Bush Administration to come up with standards to increase fuel efficiency and reduce global warming, Washington State’s Attorney General has not done so. Can it be because of his automobile industry friends and contributors?

McKenna also did not represent Washington citizens last year in a similar case. Washington state was not among 10 states suing the EPA over greenhouse gases. Is Rob McKenna representing our interests or the interests of corporate America? Maybe he doesn’t believe in global warming? Or maybe he can still afford to fill up his car?

If you would like to ask Rob McKenna why he hasn’t filed on this lawsuit you can contact him at:

Attorney General Rob McKenna
1125 Washington St. SE
PO Box 40100
Olympia, WA. 98504-0100
Telephone: 360-753-6200

Fax: 360-586-7671

E-Mail: Contact the Attorney General Online.
http://www.atg.wa.gov/ago_contact.shtml#38 click not listed for a response form