Bush nuclear record.

[skids]

I think that both those supporting and those opposing nuclear power can agree that A) nuclear weapons proliferation is undesirable and B) If we do nuclear power, we should excercise all due precautions.

So since Bush is going to touch on energy in the SOTU, here's some reading material on the nuclear portion of that.

2004:

January 29: Bush administration decides to waive
worker safety standards at dozens of federal nuclear
weapons plants and research labs--if contracting
companies disapprove of the regulations.

February 26: Energy Department threatens to withhold
$350 million dollars of federal nuclear waste cleanup
funds if elected officials from the affected states refuse
to approve the agency's proposal to reclassify "high
level" radioactive waste as "incidental"--thereby
allowing the agency to abandon the waste at federal
facilities rather than clean it up.

March 3: An audit by the Energy Department's inspector
general reveals that the agency's records of worker
injuries resulting from nuclear cleanup are inaccurate
or downplay the dangerous nature of the work.

July 9: A federal court finds that the EPA illegally
issued inadequate environmental and public health
standards for the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear
repository site.

I recommend reading Chapter 8 in the following PDF, which is where the above quotes come from, for information on the increased nuclear weapons posture the U.S. has assumed under Bush.

http://www.nrdc.org/legislation/rollbacks/rr2005.pdf <<-- PDF!!

May 2005:

White House pushes nuclear power plants
May 17, 2005: As part of a White House effort to spur construction of nuclear plants, the Department of Energy wants to make it easier for the nuclear power industry to obtain licenses for new reactors, even if those reactors have not been properly tested. Calling the current permitting system a "burdensome regulatory process," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman outlined his agency's plan at a forum hosted by the Nuclear Energy Institute. Under the DOE's "streamlining" plan, it would be harder for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to call for a hearing if nuclear plants -- even those already under construction -- are suspected of violating licensing specifications.

http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2005_05.asp

Though most of it is general environmental, there are articles on other energy related concerns like mercury emissions as well at the above website.

My personal opinion aside, I think we might be able to agree, given the above, that nuclear power is a lot less likely to be safely implemented when neocons are in control of the DOE and EPA.

[Zambero]

1. That's nucular

[punpirate]

2. The bits you provide...

... don't even mention the Bushies looking the other way on paying (by previous agreement) for capture and control of Russian weapons-grade fissionable material. They pretty much let that program languish for years, and, by some estimates, set it back about ten years. For a bunch trying to scare the bejesus out of everyone about terrorists with nuclear weapons, they did damned little to try and prevent that eventuality for years. It's only lately that they've succumbed to public pressure with regard to that program.