Archive for Thursday, April 17, 2008

Sebelius rejects second bill on coal-fired plants

April 17, 2008


(AP) - Gov. Kathleen Sebelius has vetoed a second bill allowing two coal-fired power plants in southwest Kansas.

Like a measure she rejected last month, the bill would permit Sunflower Electric Power Corp. to build the two plants in Finney County.

It also would strip the secretary of health and environment of some of his power.

In October, Secretary Rod Bremby denied an air-quality permit for Sunflower's $3.6 billion project. He cited the plants' potential carbon dioxide emissions.

But bipartisan majorities in both houses support the project.

In her veto message, Sebelius criticized the bill's supporters for not working toward a compromise.

Supporters need two-thirds majorities in both chambers to override her veto.


Phil Minkin 10 years ago

I hope people figure out that Bremby is Sec. of HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT not economic development or corporate welfare.

sinedie 10 years ago

During that 83-41 vote, the only person absent was Sheryl Spalding, and she has voted NO previously.There are several Democrats who will be uneasy about voting to override the Governor, so that "83" figure may be soft.In the end this may be settled by the courts, as it should have been in the first place.

gr 10 years ago

Y2KrsGod hating, homosexual, atheistic, evolutionistsGlobal alarmistsLoser sebeliusThose who let hype rule their lives, ignoring facts or the absence thereof.Don't mean to be redundant.

snowWI 10 years ago

"one vote away:.."Thank you for stating the obvious.

snowWI 10 years ago

its_getting_warmer (Anonymous) says:"ahhh, snowy needs a big hug:"I wouldn't want you to get too worked up over the coal plant issue again.

Richard Heckler 10 years ago

A governor with some backbone. Too bad do realize the bad economics of coal fired plants. The feds are coming down on coal fired plants.As far as economic growth is concerned the greater majorityof legislators are no whiz kids.....kinda like right here in river city.

doubledogleg 10 years ago

I can't understand a couple of things: 1) how can people assume the federal government is going to "come down" on coal fired plants? Congress is not that predictable. anyone who thinks they can tell you with that much certainty what Congress is going to do is either subject to wishful thinking or lying. It's damn tough to get 60 votes in the US Senate for anything let alone a policy that will effectively raise taxes on the poorest Americans - which brings me to my second question. 2) why are Democrats so gung ho to raise utility rates which will impact their supposed core constituency the most? 3) why won't a reporter ask these tough questions. the electricity must come from somewhere or rates go up - period. and the poor will end up "paying" the most. Everyone is for a clean environment - but at what cost? Is there a reporter out there who will ask the Governor and those legislators opposed if they are comfortable "raising rates" on fixed income widows?

a_flock_of_jayhawks 10 years ago

doubledogleg says,"1) how can people assume the federal government is going to "come down" on coal fired plants?"Review the SCOTUS EPA decision from last year regarding regulation of CO2 and couple that with the CO2 production from coal-fired power generation plants.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.