| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sunday, January 18, 2015
I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn
Friday, November 28, 2014
Pollution and Politics and the E.P.A.!
Earlier this week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced - [ http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/27/us/epa-ozone-limits-divide-industry-and-environmentalists.html ] proposed regulations to curb emissions of ozone, which causes smog, not to mention asthma, heart disease and premature death. And you know what happened: Republicans went on the attack, claiming that the new rules would impose enormous costs.
There's no reason to take these complaints seriously, at least in terms of substance. Polluters and their political friends have a track record of crying wolf. Again and again, they have insisted that American business — which they usually portray as endlessly innovative, able to overcome any obstacle — would curl into a quivering ball if asked to limit emissions. Again and again, the actual costs have been far lower than they predicted. In fact, almost always below the E.P.A.'s predictions [ http://www.epi.org/publication/bp69/ ].
So it's the same old story. But why, exactly, does it always play this way? Of course, polluters will defend their right to pollute, but why can they count on Republican support? When and why did the Republican Party become the party of pollution?
For it wasn't always thus. The Clean Air Act of 1970, the legal basis for the Obama administration's environmental actions [ http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/27/us/without-passing-a-single-law-obama-crafts-bold-enviornmental-policy.html ] , passed the Senate on a bipartisan vote of 73 to 0, and was signed into law by Richard Nixon. (I've heard veterans of the E.P.A. describe the Nixon years as a golden age.) A major amendment of the law, which among other things made possible the cap-and-trade system that limits acid rain, was signed in 1990 by former President George H.W. Bush.
But that was then. Today's Republican Party is putting a conspiracy theorist who views climate science as a "gigantic hoax" in charge of the Senate's environment committee. And this isn't an isolated case. Pollution has become a deeply divisive partisan issue.
And the reason pollution has become partisan is that Republicans have moved right. A generation ago, it turns out, environment wasn't a partisan issue: according to Pew Research- [ http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/partisan-polarization-surges-in-bush-obama-years/6-4-12-v-6/ ], in 1992 an overwhelming majority in both parties favored stricter laws and regulation. Since then, Democratic views haven't changed, but Republican support for environmental protection has collapsed.
So what explains this anti-environmental shift?
You might be tempted simply to blame money in politics, and there's no question that gushers of cash from polluters fuel the anti-environmental movement at all levels. But this doesn't explain why money from the most environmentally damaging industries, which used to flow to both parties, now goes overwhelmingly in one direction. Take, for example, coal mining. In the early 1990s, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, [ https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/totals.php?ind=E1210 ] the industry favored Republicans by a modest margin, giving around 40 percent of its money to Democrats. Today that number is just 5 percent. Political spending by the oil and gas industry has followed a similar trajectory. Again, what changed?
One answer could be ideology. Textbook economics isn't anti-environment; it says that pollution should be limited, albeit in market-friendly ways when possible. But the modern conservative movement insists that government is always the problem, never the solution, which creates the will to believe that environmental problems are fake and environmental policy will tank the economy.
My guess, however, is that ideology is only part of the story — or, more accurately, it's a symptom of the underlying cause of the divide: rising inequality. [ http://themonkeycage.org/2011/10/18/polarization-and-inequality/ ]
The basic story of political polarization over the past few decades is that, as a wealthy minority has pulled away economically from the rest of the country, it has pulled one major party along with it. True, Democrats often cater to the interests of the 1 percent, but Republicans always do. Any policy that benefits lower- and middle-income Americans at the expense of the elite — like health reform, which guarantees insurance to all and pays for that guarantee in part with taxes on higher incomes — will face bitter Republican opposition.
And environmental protection is, in part, a class issue, even if we don't usually think of it that way. Everyone breathes the same air, so the benefits of pollution control are more or less evenly spread across the population. But ownership of, say, stock in coal companies is concentrated in a few, wealthy hands. Even if the costs of pollution control are passed on in the form of higher prices, the rich are different from you and me. They spend a lot more money, and, therefore, bear a higher share of the costs.
In the case of the new ozone plan, the E.P.A.'s analysis - [ http://www.epa.gov/glo/pdfs/20141125fs-overview.pdf ] suggests that, for the average American, the benefits would be more than twice the costs. But that doesn't necessarily matter to the non-average American driving one party's priorities. On ozone, as with almost everything these days, it's all about inequality.
Friday, September 26, 2014
Fw: "South Carolina 5th Cir. Top Prosecutor Called SC Police Shooting a 'Clean Shot' & should recuse Himself and his Office from Prosecuting this Case!"
South Carolina 5th Cir. Top Prosecutor Johnson Called SC Police Shooting a 'Clean Shot' & should recuse Himself and his Office from Prosecuting this Case! And obviously he has watched a different video then the rest of America.
Levar Jones was shot by a (now) former member of the South Carolina Highway Patrol earlier this month. The disturbing video hit national media today, showing that Sean Groubert, the officer in question, wildly discharged his firearm as Jones attempted to comply with the officer's request to produce identification. Groubert had taken valuable time out of his day, during the middle of the capital city's rush hour, to write Jones a $25 ticket for a seatbelt violation.
After being suspended pending an investigation, Groubert was fired, and prosecutors pressed felony charges today.
One might be tempted to levy some praise on Richland County, and on the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, for handling the matter in a swift and egalitarian manner. These parties did what many police departments have not by firing and charging the officer in question.
But that ending just seems a little bit too perfect for South Carolina, now doesn't it? The state's been known for its criminal justice fumbles, and deeper digging shows that you can add this one to the list.
Enter Dan Johnson, the solicitor of South Carolina's fifth circuit. For the uninitiated, South Carolina has its citizens elect the top prosecutor in each part of the state, with that prosecutor hiring a team of assistants to handle most cases.
In the immediate wake of the shooting, having viewed the video tape, Johnson called the incident a "clean shot." FITSNews and the DailyBanter have both reported that Johnson told the chief of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) that the use of force was warranted.
Dan Johnson has been accused of sexually harassing "multiple women" in his own office. He's been accused of using a firearm to threaten the life of an FBI agent. He's also alleged to have had an affair, then used his position to make difficult the life of the man married to his mistress.
Johnson's questionable background not withstanding, his past employment sheds some light on why he might claim that this shooting was "clean," and it also suggests that he may be unfit to prosecute this particular case.
According to his bio:
He served as Chief Deputy and Legal Counsel for the Richland County Sheriff's Department, where he worked for eight years. While there he assisted the Sheriff in directing the county's law enforcement programs and performing various legal and administrative duties to ensure the strict enforcement of state and local laws relating to the public's safety and welfare.Johnson is an eight-year veteran of the Richland Police Department, and while prosecution personnel and local police often have a cushy relationship, that past, combined with his statements on this case, call into question his ability to oversee this particular case.
Rogue cops and lone actors are scary, especially if you're a black man in America. Johnson, who himself is black, presents perhaps an even greater problem. When the chief executor of the law in one of South Carolina's largest counties provides his personal stamp of approval to an incident so clearly unlawful, what does that suggest about the system?
After reviewing a report from SLED, and under tremendous pressure from local and national forces, Johnson's office did press charges against Lance Corporal Groubert.
But Johnson, and potentially his office, should recuse themselves from this case. His judgment has been compromised, and his credibility to prosecute this crime has been undermined by his public statement on the lawfulness of the act.
And for the love of God, fine people of Richland County - it's time to vote out the alleged sexual harasser who believes that the officers patrolling the streets of your country should have open season on young black men. It's far past time to eradicate this disease.
Friday, September 19, 2014
Another Official Message, filled with LIES & Bullshit from Dirty Energy's Congressperson, Cynthia Lummis!
Here's another bullshit filled and ignorant letter from Cynthia Lummis, Wyoming's lone Congressperson, and slave to dirty energy.
She brings up Solyndra, a solar energy company who got government money, but whose failings are not related to Wind Energy, which is what my letter was about.
Cynthia is a political whore who is living off the money of dirty energy and big business.
In a radio story on Wyoming's public radio today, she was again beating up the EPA, the whipping boy for the corporate owner republicans, and village-idiots like Cynthia.
I say, if she thinks polluting water is A-OK, then, when ever you see her eating out with her dirty-energy lobbyist friends/clients in DC, you pee in her water cup, and watch her drink it, or maybe even pour mercury and arsenic in her cow's water trough, because she thinks it's OK for it to be in our water. Oh, I forgot, if it's Cynthia's water source, it probably is already full of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. Yep!!!
She is a political-whore, through and through, and has sold her soul to the dirty-energy Devil long ago.
Now, read this bullshit she promotes, along with the lies and misinformation! Who the fuck elects assholes like her?
| ||||||
| September 19, 2014 William Harasym 200 Smith Street Sheridan, WY 82801-3857 Dear William: Thank you for contacting me regarding production tax credit (PTC) for wind energy manufacturers. I appreciate hearing from you. As you may know, since 1992 the wind energy industry has enjoyed a unique tax credit that allows them special tax treatment for each kilowatt hour produced. Then, in 2010 under the stimulus bill, a new program was established that paid wind energy companies a cash payment roughly equivalent to what they would have gotten with the tax credit. Since then, 205 recipients have received more than $7.8 billion tax-payer dollars in direct payments to support their wind energy business. The cash payment program expired on December 31, 2011, and the PTC was set to expire on December 31, 2012. The program was extended for one year, and expanded to include any projects that begin the process of construction this year, in the fiscal cliff deal passed in early January. While I believe that an "all of the above" energy strategy for our country is laudable, the Solyndra case highlights that we must pay careful attention to the amount of tax-payer dollars we funnel to inefficient and ineffective sources of energy that cannot survive absent government subsidies. Data shows that each time the PTC for wind lapsed since 1992, wind energy production declined, suggesting that the wind energy industry simply cannot stand on its own as a marketable business. However, that may be changing as recently many in the wind energy industry have now publically supported a phase out of the PTC. I support that idea. Every source of energy has a trade-off, and I believe those trade-offs must be recognized if we are to honestly assess our nation's energy portfolio. We certainly need a diversified energy portfolio, but we deceive ourselves if we believe we can solely depend on one source or another. Instead, we must focus on finding ways to use traditional energy resources in a cleaner and more efficient manner, while smartly investing in research and technology that will help us bring viable alternative energy sources to market. To that end, I will certainly take your opinion into consideration should the issue come before me for a vote. Thank you again for taking the time to write to me. I value your input. If you haven't done so already, I would like to encourage you to visit my website at www.lummis.house.gov. There you can sign up to receive my newsletter, and have access to a wealth of other information. I won't flood your email box, but I will provide you with updates once in a while about activities in Washington that affect our lives in Wyoming. I hope you will sign up so that we can stay in close touch, and I look forward to seeing you in Wyoming. Sincerely, Cynthia M. Lummis Member of Congress, Village-Idiot and Slave To Dirty-Energy | ||||||
| ||||||
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
"Tiny Hamster vs Kobayashi"
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Saturday, September 13, 2014
William Harasym sent you a video: "1st Snow of the Fall-Winter Season 2014-15 on 9-11-2014"
William Harasym sent you a video: "1st Snow of the Fall-Winter Season 2014-15 9-11-2014"
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Saturday, September 6, 2014
Enough With the War Criminal & Dirtbag Cheney Already!
| "Out of all the possible speakers the Wyoming State Bar could have invited to deliver the keynote address for its Sept. 10 annual banquet in Cheyenne, the honor predictably and appallingly went to Dick Cheney. We realize the former vice president is an alleged war-criminal, but seriously? WTF?" |
Out of all the possible speakers the Wyoming State Bar could have invited to deliver the keynote address for its Sept. 10 annual banquet in Cheyenne, the honor predictably and appallingly went to Dick Cheney.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)