Submitted by Sandra Jeffries, Nov 29, 2006 22:05

Dear Mr. Bray, With all due respect I disagree with your comments regarding the coalition's use of the courts instead of the political process. I am not an expert on global warming nor the political process but this is my naive take on why they may have went the court route. As you noted elected representatives voted down the Kyoto Protocol 95-0. This would most likely occur with the issue of the EPA regulating emissions as well. I don't believe that it is because elected officials don't realize that emissions are a problem. I think that it has more to do with the fact that the individuals who contribute to politicians' campaigns are involved in indusrty in some way or another. If emissions were to be regulated it would effect everyone, some maybe more so than others. The bottom line is that it would be hard for elected officials to explain to their constituents, who support them financially, their vote on this issue. If the court were to take a look at the evidence their opinion would be based on what is the appropriate thing to do v.s. what will keep me in office. I personally would rather have a group of individuals seek out and act on what is the right thing to do instead of someone basing their vote on what is best for me and my constituents.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.