Politicians Vote with The Money, Where Dies It Come From???

The "I Stand Against Citizens United" song is a played out song Senator Kay Hagan. Much more demands attention in our state. For those of you following her as your Democratic stance lends...she is not the one you may think she is. Senator Kay R. Hagan has reported a total of 2,426 contributions ($200 or more) totaling $2,033,428 in the 2013-2014 cycle. Search Top 20 Contributors to Campaign Cmte Rank Contributor Hires lobbyists? Lobbying firm?* Lobbyist(s) give to member? Total Indivs PACs 1 Lorillard Inc $68,806 $59,000 $9,806 2 Votesane PAC $63,450 $63,450 $0 3 Cisco Systems $51,500 $41,500 $10,000 4 Morgan Stanley $46,750 $36,750 $10,000 5 EMILY's List $42,650 $37,650 $5,000 6 Citigroup Inc $41,750 $31,750 $10,000 7 USAA $39,265 $25,265 $14,000 8 Wells Fargo $37,900 $27,900 $10,000 9 Genworth Financial $33,795 $23,795 $10,000 10 Bank of New York Mellon $32,900 $25,900 $7,000 11 MacAndrews & Forbes $26,250 $16,250 $10,000 12 Goldman Sachs $24,400 $14,400 $10,000 13 Oracle Corp $23,250 $17,750 $5,500 14 University of North Carolina $23,100 $23,100 $0 15 K&L Gates $22,750 $18,250 $4,500 16 Comcast Corp $22,575 $12,575 $10,000 17 Altria Group $22,500 $16,500 $6,000 18 Laboratory Corp of America $21,750 $11,750 $10,000 19 Bank of America $20,700 $19,700 $1,000 20 Duke Energy $20,650 $10,650 $10,000 Download: CSV CSV CSVAbout OpenSecrets.org's download options | View Top 20 | Top 100 Click on arrows to view detailed data. *registrants, or active lobbying firm This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2009-2014 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates. Why (and How) We Use Donors' Employer/Occupation Information METHODOLOGY NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for the 2009-2014 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on Tuesday, December 17, 2013. ("Help! The numbers don't add up...") Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center.

MORE ON DUKE ENERGY'S COAL ASH SPILL!!!

Up To 82,000 Tons Of Toxic Coal Ash Spilled Into North Carolina River From ‘Antiquated’ Storage Pit BY JOANNA M. FOSTER ON FEBRUARY 4, 2014 AT 2:17 PM facebook icon 7,209 twitter icon 503 google plus icon email icon "Up To 82,000 Tons Of Toxic Coal Ash Spilled Into North Carolina River From ‘Antiquated’ Storage Pit" Share: Share on facebook Share on google_plusone_share google plus icon Share on email A leak at a power plant in Kingston, TN in 2009 spilled 1 billion gallons of coal ash. A leak at a power plant in Kingston, TN in 2009 spilled 1 billion gallons of coal ash. CREDIT: AP IMAGES A stormwater pipe under an unlined coal ash pond at a shuttered plant in Eden, North Carolina, burst Sunday afternoon — draining tens of thousands of tons of coal ash into the Dan River. Duke Energy, which owns the Dan River Steam Station, retired since 2012, estimates that 50,000 to 82,000 tons of coal ash and up to 27 million gallons of water were released from the 27-acre storage pond. The leak has at least temporarily been stopped, while Duke works on a more permanent solution. Coal ash is a toxic waste byproduct from burning coal, usually stored with water in large ponds. The closest community at risk from the spill is Danville, Virginia, which takes its water from the Dan River about six miles downstream of the pond. No water quality issues have been reported so far. “This is the latest, loudest alarm bell yet that Duke should not be storing coal ash in antiquated pits near our state’s waterways,” Frank Holleman, an attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) told the Charlotte Business Journal. SELC and others have been calling for Duke to remove ash from earthen basins such as the one at Dan River to more secure lined ponds to protect local water sources. Duke has 14 coal-fired power plants in the state, 7 of which have been retired. In addition to air pollution, coal-fired power plants generate millions of tons of waste every year contaminated with toxic metals including lead, mercury, arsenic, chromium, and selenium — more than two-thirds of which is dumped into landfills, storage ponds, or old mines. The Southeast is home to 40 percent of the nation’s coal ash impoundments, and according to the EPA contains 21 of the nation’s 45 high hazard dams. The nation’s most notorious coal ash spill was in 2008 at a plant operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority. Just a few days before Christmas, over 1 billion gallons of coal ash burst through a dam at a storage pond and damaged or destroyed two dozen homes and 300 acres of riverfront property. Late last month, the EPA announced plans to finalize the first-ever federal regulations for the disposal of coal ash by December 19, 2014. The announcement was part of a settlement in a lawsuit brought in 2012, by environmental and public health groups and a Native American tribe. In October, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the EPA must review and revise its waste regulations under the Resource and Conservation Recovery Act. The EPA has never finalized any federal regulations for the disposal of coal ash — the nation’s second-largest industrial waste stream. Duke has also garnered negative publicity recently for saying that they believe the utility is paying its customers too much for the surplus solar energy generated on residential rooftops. Duke currently pays solar customers about 11 cents per kilowatt-hour, under a decade-old net-metering standard. Electricity generated by large-scale solar operations costs the utility just 5 to 7 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Duke Energy is not on your side NC! Read please.

Duke Energy plant reports coal-ash spill By Bruce Henderson bhenderson@charlotteobserver.com Posted: Monday, Feb. 03, 2014 dan river JOHN SIMMONS - jsimmons@charlotteobserver.com Duke Energy said Monday that 50,000 to 82,000 tons of coal ash and up to 27 million gallons of water were released from a pond at its retired power plant in Eden into the Dan River. Buy Photo | Store Map Data Terms of Use Report a map error Map Satellite Eden NC MORE INFORMATION Risks to local water supplies, plans to protect them Duke Energy looking to buy stakes in N.C. plants Duke Energy said Monday that 50,000 to 82,000 tons of coal ash and up to 27 million gallons of water were released from a pond at its retired power plant in Eden into the Dan River, and were still flowing. Duke said a 48-inch stormwater pipe beneath the unlined ash pond broke Sunday afternoon. Water and ash from the 27-acre pond drained into the pipe. “We’ve had some temporary solutions that have intermittently worked at times during the day, but we are still working on a short-term solution and the long-term repair,” spokeswoman Erin Culbert said shortly after 9 p.m. Monday. The pond has a liquid capacity of 155 million gallons when full, according to a recent inspection report, but was at a lower level because the Dan River power plant’s coal-fired units were retired in 2012. It’s not known how much ash was in the basin, but Culbert said most of it appears to still be in the pond. Duke said it notified local emergency managers and the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, which last year sued Duke over its ash handling, on Sunday afternoon. The first public notice of the spill came from Duke at 4:03 p.m. Monday. Environmental groups that have filed lawsuits in an effort to force Duke and other utilities to remove ash stored near waterways quickly pointed out the lapse in time before public notification. The Dan River plant is about 130 miles northeast of Charlotte near the Virginia line. The North Carolina environmental agency said it notified downstream water districts of the spill. The nearest municipality that draws water from the Dan River, Danville, reported no problems with its water. Duke and the North Carolina agency took water samples from the river but said results are not yet back. Coal ash contains metals that can be toxic in high concentrations. The pond’s dam beside the river “remains secure,” Duke said. Some erosion has occurred on the side of a berm farthest from the river, it said, and engineers are working to stabilize it. Independent engineers who inspected the pond’s dam in 2009 for the Environmental Protection Agency found it in good condition, but they noted some seepage and recommended a stability study on the structure’s river side. Built in 1956, it was divided into two ponds in the 1970s. The report said the dam had “significant hazard potential” if it were breached, mainly for property and environmental damage. A security guard spotted an unusually low water level in the ash pond about 2 p.m. Sunday, Culbert said, leading to the discovery of the pipe break. Ash was visible on the banks of the Dan River on Monday, and the water was tinted gray. “While it is early in the investigation and state officials do not yet know of any possible impacts to water quality, staff members have been notifying downstream communities with drinking water intakes,” the North Carolina environmental agency reported late Monday afternoon. Danville, Va.’s water intake is about 6 miles downstream of the pond. Barry Dunkley, the city’s water director, said in a release that “all water leaving our treatment facility has met public health standards. We do not anticipate any problems going forward in treating the water we draw from the Dan River.” A 1-billion gallon spill of ash slurry at a Tennessee Valley Authority power plant in Tennessee in 2008 ignited national debate over coal ash. Last week the EPA, which had been sued by two North Carolina environmental groups among others, said it would issue the first federal rules on ash-handling by December. Duke has closed seven of its 14 North Carolina coal-fired power plants, including Dan River, and is evaluating ways to close the ash ponds at those sites. Groundwater contamination has been found around all 14 of its unlined ash ponds, although much of the contamination may occur naturally. Ash ponds are at the Allen power plant in Gaston County near Belmont and at the Riverbend plant on Mountain Island Lake near Mount Holly. North Carolina environmental officials, pressured by advocacy groups, sued Duke last year over ash handling at all its coal plants. Environmentalists say Duke should remove the ash from the retired ponds, as utilities in South Carolina have agreed to do. Henderson: 704-358-5051; Twitter: @bhender Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/02/03/4661193/duke-energy-plant-reports-coal.html#.UvE6U2JdWSp#storylink=cpy

Letter to the S.E.L.C.

To: Derb S. Carter, Jr. Director, North Carolina Offices, and whomever this may concern. Hello, My name is Peter Graves Roberts and I am seeking the NC Senate seat for District One. I am running an unsupported and unfunded Independent campaign to try and raise awareness about several issues directly affecting my county (Dare), as well as other issues such as failing nuclear facilities and hydraulic fracturing in other regions of my beautiful state. I will be clear. These are my issues with you: (1) the frivolous attack through the exploitation of legal loopholes you have undertaken has caused a very serious danger to the people of Hatteras Island. (2) your methods of "defending wildlife", including, but not limited to the blockage of a new Bonner Bridge, as currently planned by NCDOT and (3) the fact that through your efforts over the last decade have in fact set the subject of true environmentalists back, many, many years. To elaborate, and clarify my objections to your practices: Many of my fellow residents of Dare County agree with many of the aspects by which you continually block the construction of a new bridge in the current location. I concede, after many years of studying the works of Dr. Stan Riggs and working myself in the sector of environmental education, that a bridge in the same place would inevitably end in the same circumstance as we are now facing. I do not agree with the plan, in full, proposed by the NCDOT to replace the bridge as currently planned by NCDOT; however, I am at the point of placing my individual notions on the back burner for now as the citizens of Dare Co. and specifically Hatteras Island need immediate resolution to this problem and those within the NCDOT, North Carolina State Legislature and our representatives in the U.S.Congress have failed to reach a satisfactory agreement. As I understand, the plan as currently constituted by NCDOT would provide for a thirty-year bridge. If built now, this bridge would serve as nothing more than a "band-aid" in the opinion of many; however, if built, it would rectify the dangerous reality of losing the invaluable link between the southern townships and the northern Outer Banks. The recent closure, albeit short, cause nearly fatal consequences to residents living on Hatteras Island and I blame your organisation directly for this. I am not alone. I consider myself a conservationist. I have volunteered to help Network For Endangered Sea Turtles (N.E.S.T.). I have acted on behalf of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife in discovering and roping off endangered nesting sites for Least Terns, and I have spent countless hours over the last decade working the Northern beaches, educating thousands of visitors to our area about the unique geology and ecology of our extensively bio-diverse ecosystems, namely the Currituck Sound region. It brings me much sadness to see comments on social media every time a picture of a Snowy Owl is posted from the beaches of Hatteras, only to be followed by comments such as " I hope they eat all the Piping Plovers they can!" This such outrage is, in my opinion, a direct by-product of not only the frivolity with which you haplessly block progress for the residents of Hatteras Island and upper Dare County, but also the killing of ALL non-native species under the guise of the "re-wilding" campaign led by one of your major contributors The Defenders Of Wildlife. I will state again clearly; your organisation has very much contributed to the hatred of wildlife that would have otherwise gone unnoticed by most of our residents and visitors if you did not continually cite legal precedent set by C.A.M.A. and others, to block any development in the Oregon Inlet area. We are fed up. As part of my campaign I have begun emailing and calling every elected representative within our State Legislature and our U.S.Congress. I am David, if you will, and you are a "collective" Goliath, so to speak. My only ambition is to expose the ones within your organisation and our elected offices for the charlatans you truly are. My eyes have been opened after defending the very principles you and your organisations stand for. In closing, I would like to state again, very clearly, that in my opinion, and that of many concerned, ecologically minded residents of Dare County, that you are doing nothing more than giving the case of environmentalism a seriously bad reputation, and completely sabotaging the efforts of TRUE environmentalists state-wide. It is very disheartening that those within our state and U.S. offices have allowed this to go on for a decade; and I implicate our current Governor McCrory and all else involved in trying to do things "on the cheap". I have separate agendas for exposing the ills within their ilk and those of the NCDOT. I have just begun. DO NOT expect this to be a passing message. My supporters are many and are ready to see you fail, ultimately in your agenda to "re-wild" Hatteras Island and force all human residents off so that it may become a playground for the likes of your cohorts. Lastly, regarding the case of nesting turtles and bird species; I have personally witnessed the moving of turtle nests in Carova when laid in a dangerous area for the survival of the hatch-lings, and this could be done in the Oregon Inlet area as well. As for the birds, I do not feel that if construction begins on a new bridge, even as currently planned, the birds would have any problem nesting a few hundred yards down the coast. We have over 200 miles of coastline. Keep in mind the dredge spoil in Oregon Inlet now referred to as Pelican Island. They have adapted wonderfully and have thrived in that man-made location. No progress can be made until you step back, abandon your ruthless pursuit of the agendas of powerful NGO's such as D.O.W., and others whom you represent, and you come to terms that the reality of this volatile situation is met with cooperation from all sides, environmentalists, businesses, and our representatives. I have quite a few bones to pick with the latter as well. I would thank you for this opportunity to reach out, but I have the suspicion that this will just be thrown in the recycle bin along with the petitions and complaints from many individuals and groups who share my opinion. Please, let us govern ourselves. Respectfully Submitted, Pete Roberts. Pete Roberts for NC Senate, District One, 2014.

Waste water in the Haw river???

ALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — The public wasn't told about a 3.5 million gallon sewage spill into the Haw River as quickly as the law requires because North Carolina environmental officials wanted to wait until the leak was stopped before it was disclosed. Burlington officials said sewage that spilled from a broken pipe at a municipal wastewater treatment plant reached the river Monday night and was not stopped until Wednesday afternoon. Public notice of the spill was not issued until Thursday, nearly four days after the leak was identified. State law requires water systems to report any spill of more than 1,000 gallons of untreated wastewater to media outlets in the affected within 48 hours of sewage reaching a river, stream or lake. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources spokeswoman Susan Massengale said the agency told the City of Burlington it could delay the required disclosure beyond the 48 hours mandated by law. Massengale said Division of Water Quality supervisor Corey Basinger "felt that it was important to make sure that the public press release accurately represented the amount of untreated waste that entered the river and so, especially under these adverse conditions, allowed the city some extra time to make sure of the report's accuracy. Instead of the report coming out Wednesday night, it was released some time on Thursday." Massengale said Burlington officials quickly notified the state about the leak Monday night and the primary focus was on fixing the problem before a winter storm hit Tuesday. Officials said bad weather delayed the arrival of needed personnel and equipment. "As the storm moved in and the temperature dropped, the effort focused on locating appropriate equipment to handle the situation, addressing the situation and limiting the spill, and keeping personnel safe as they worked in somewhat treacherous conditions," Massengale said. Burlington water officials brought in a bypass pump to stop the sewage leak. The city did notify Pittsboro, a downstream community about 33 miles south of Burlington that gets its drinking water from the Haw River. The river then flows into Jordan Lake, a source of drinking water for Cary and Apex. Burlington officials claimed there were no noticeable adverse environmental effects on the river from the massive spill and that the cold weather likely slowed the growth of potentially harmful bacteria. The law requiring that such a spill be disclosed to the public within 48 hours does not grant discretion to state regulators to delay or defer that notification. Hope Taylor, executive director of the environmental advocacy group Clean water for North Carolina, said the state allowing Burlington officials to wait beyond 48 hours is "outrageous." "The reason for those notifications is public health and for anyone who could be impacted downstream to be aware," Taylor said. "We already think 48 hours is too long. To delay that further just for the trivial reason of not knowing the precise amount of the spill is really ridiculous." ___ Follow Associated Press writer Michael Biesecker at Twitter.com/mbieseck

FRACK ? NO!

NC fracking panel sets safe drilling distances from homes, streams BY JOHN MURAWSKI jmurawski@newsobserver.comJanuary 31, 2014 Updated 19 hours ago FacebookTwitterGoogle PlusRedditE-mailPrint COREY LOWENSTEIN — clowenst@newsobserver.com |Buy Photo MOST POPULAR STORIES UNC vs. NC State: Two teams rising at right time Triangle's best restaurants you need to taste in 2014 The South, the snow and the snickers 3.5 million gallons of sewage spill into Haw River over three days Triangle schools, businesses deal with growing popularity of e-cigarettes Duke’s Mike Krzyzewski prepares to face his ‘best friend’ in basketball, Syracuse’s Jim Boeheim TOP PHOTOS & VIDEOS The Day's Best | 01.31.14 First Look: Shop Talk's Mix and Mingle... The Day's Best | 01.29.14 The Day's Best | 01.25.14 RALEIGH — The state commission created in 2012 to create safe fracking standards has wrestled with one controversy after another and always found a way to agree unanimously – until Friday. After 2-1/2 hours of debate, the N.C Mining and Energy Commission voted 10-1 on safe drilling distances from homes, streams and other sensitive landmarks. After the vote, some commissioners congratulated themselves for what they said was one of the toughest “setback” rules in the nation. The commissioners based their decision on similar developments in other states where shale gas exploration is already underway. “I don’t want to be constrained by yesterday’s best practices,” said Commissioner George Howard, who runs a land reclamation business in Raleigh. “The new rules tend to have a long reach to them.” North Carolina’s rules dictate 650 feet as the minimum safe distance that a natural gas well can be drilled from buildings, homes and water wells. The lone holdout, Commissioner Charles Holbrook, a retired industry geologist from Chevron Corp., denounced the standards approved Friday as too strict and based on emotion. He suggested his colleagues were pandering to a vocal fringe of fracking opponents, and said 500 feet is plenty safe and would give energy companies the maneuvering room they need. “If we want to achieve what we set out to achieve – which is to bring energy development to North Carolina – then we have to be practical,” Holbrook urged his colleagues. “What you are really doing is obstructing potential energy development in the future.” Fracking rules approved by the Mining and Energy Commission are recommendations to the state legislature, which will have final say over North Carolina’s fracking standards. North Carolina’s safety distances are not the longest in the country. New York requires a safety buffer of 2,000 feet, Dallas requires 1,500 feet, and Pennsylvania and Colorado both adopted 1,000 feet for buildings or water sources. Some states grant waivers to their setbacks, and some don’t have setback rules at all. The Dallas buffer, approved by the Dallas City Council in December, is being criticized – and celebrated – as a de facto ban on future fracking. Howard said Friday’s decision to extend the setback from 500 feet to 650 feet puts North Carolina in the 90th percentile. Critics here were not placated, saying proximity to drill derricks, tanker trucks and other heavy equipment would expose residents to potential chemical spills and noxious fumes. “No, I am not comforted at all,” said Therese Vick, a community activist with the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League. “Once people have been exposed to this big burst of toxic pollutants, they cannot be unexposed. The trigger has been pulled, and the bullet cannot be called back.” Fracking remains under moratorium in the state until the Mining and Energy Commission passes 100-plus rules and the state legislature approves a rule set. The first exploratory wells would not be drilled until next year at the earliest. Fracking refers to hydraulic fracturing, a means of extracting natural gas trapped in prehistoric shale rock by drilling sideways for a mile or more and blasting the rock formations with a high-pressure blend of water, sand and chemicals. The setback distance is measured from the wellhead at the surface, where a heavy industrial operation must be set up during the drilling and fracking process. There are no objective standards on what constitutes an adequate safety buffer in fracking, commissioners said. One local fracking critic recently suggested 7 miles as a reasonable standard for North Carolina. The Mining and Energy Commission has looked to other states as lodestars, and states with experience in fracking are extending their setbacks, said Commissioner Amy Pickle, who directs the State Policy Program at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. The commission also adopted a 200-foot safety buffer for fracking from streams, wetlands and flood plains. Commissioner Holbrook dissented at every turn. “The setback changes are unnecessary and excessive and not in line with reality on the ground,” he said. Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/01/31/3580659/nc-fracking-panel-sets-safe-drilling.html#storylink=cpy