Excellent points, Eddie... the cajuns have lived off the land around here for hundreds of years... we do not need the oil companies... what we do need is our land restored and our aquifers pure in order to fall back on our ancestral way of life when that becomes necessary.
And Katherine, I agree, it is a bit ambiguous and the second probably should have read "lawsuits against the oil companies are frivolous"
The time has come to respect and support ULL's Dept of Renewable Resources. Dr. Griff Blakewood and supporters of renewable energy sources is the direction we must go or the planet will suffocate from excessive carbon dioxide. The ocean is already acidic and we have gone beyond 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide for the first time in human history.
It is time for transition to carbon neutrality and global use of renewable energy sources.
Vic Hummert, Sierra Club member
Mr. Briggs can threaten the people of south Louisiana with him taking his business elsewhere and losing all those jobs, but you have taken advantage of this area for too long. The people of south Louisiana are not fools Mr Briggs. We love out land, we are fed up with your threats and we are not going to take it anymore. Where are you going to take the jobs? The oil and gas reserves are here. You need us and our resources. Where will you be when it is all sucked out of the ground? What will out state look like when you finish with us? You care only about the resources, while we care about the people and the land. We were here before you came in to take what you wanted, and we will be here long after you leave. And we do not intend to clean up your mess - that is your responsibility.
The second question about frivolous lawsuits is unclear. People taking the survey might suppose they need to vote for one or the other rather than marking both. Perhaps including some directions would clarify things. I think it's frivolous for oil companies to sue the state and for Buddy Cakdwell to permit lawsuits of this natureagainst the state. He should be protecting the state against these companies. That's why I marked both items. But even I am not sure that I should have marked the second one. If it reads the way I think it does, then I did the right thing by marking it,