Obama failed to successfully negotiate protection for his Illinois Constituents regarding the simple notification of nuclear power plant leaks in their area after a radioactive tritium leak was discovered in the drinking water from an Exelon nuclear power plant in Illinois late 2005. Both his bills (S: 2348 Nuclear Release Notice Act of 2006² and S. 2224: Nuclear Release Notice Act of 2007³) were watered down by Senator Obama himself. Apparently, the low level radioactive leaks had been going on for years without notification. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.” Voluntary reporting vs. mandatory reporting.

Senator Obama failed to represent his Illinois Constituents interests: immediate notification of nuclear plant leaks. Instead, Senator Obama failed in working to bring both Senate Democrats and Republicans together to agree on the bill that was clearly in the best interest of all parties: protecting the health and environment of Constituents that live near nuclear power plant facilities. Voluntary reporting brings the power back into the hands of nuclear power plant operators, like Exelon, one of Senator Obama’s biggest financial backers.

Mike McIntire writes in the NY Times, “Paul Gunter, an activist based in Maryland who assisted neighbors of the Exelon plants, said he was “disappointed in Senator Obama’s lack of follow-through,” which he said weakened the original bill. “The new legislation falls short” by failing to provide for mandatory reporting, said Mr. Gunter, whose group, Beyond Nuclear, opposes nuclear energy.”¹

We’ve explored where Senator Obama as a new Senate member initially “attempted” to support major concerns of his Illinois Constituents. With further study, we have learned that he faced a blatant conflict of interest that watered down not only the bills that he initiated, but the overall health of these same Constituents that voted him into the Senate on his second attempt.

How can Senator Obama hope to achieve his Presidential agenda with zero bi-partisan success in the US Congress? How do we as Americans hope to change our country’s international stature and good will in action if we elected a President who learns “on the job?” Do we risk the lives of our heroic American men and women who are serving, wounded or dying in Iraq and Afghanistan?

How do we save our economy and the livelihood of America’s middle class at such a time of peril with a President that has zero federal experience in politically achieving bi-partisan solutions?

Major Consideration for electing a Democratic President:

Can Democrats assume that the US Senate and House of Representatives will remain a Democratic majority while electing a Democratic President? This assumption is a risk by any measure. Without a clear majority in the House and Senate, the President will have to know exactly where to begin and how to negotiate to get our heroic men and women out of Iraq, rebuild our middle class through programs designed to support and uplift them, initiate health insurance for all Americans and build a burgeoning “green” economy around renewable resources thus, reducing America’s dependence on middle east oil.

These lofty yet urgent goals of a Democratic President are critical for the well being of all Americans, the economy, global warming and saving needless lives of an unexplainable war.

¹ Nuclear Leaks and Response Tested Obama in Senate

Written By Mike McIntire, NY Times

Published: February 3, 2008

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?emc=eta1

² S. 2348 [109th]: Nuclear Release Notice Act of 2006

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-2348

³ S. 2224: Nuclear Release Notice Act of 2007

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-2224

 The Obama Glow – The Nuclear Industry’s Golden Child

Written by Joshua Frank, Atlantic Free Press

Wednesday, 27 February 2008

http://atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3479/81/