Thursday, June 26, 2014


News Clips For The Day


http://www.wafb.com/story/25868687/boehner-says-house-plans-to-sue-obama

Boehner says House plans to sue Obama
By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent
Updated: Jun 25, 2014

WASHINGTON (AP) - The House will vote next month on legislation authorizing a campaign-season lawsuit accusing President Barack Obama of failing to carry out the laws passed by Congress, Speaker John Boehner announced on Wednesday.

In a memo distributed to House members, Boehner, R-Ohio, accused Obama of "aggressive unilateralism" and said if left unchecked, it would give the president "king-like authority at the expense of the American people and their elected legislators."

White House press secretary Josh Earnest dismissed any suggestion that the president has failed to act within the law in issuing executive orders or taking other actions. "We feel completely confident that the president was operating within his authority as the president of the United States to take these steps on behalf of the American people," he told reporters.

Whatever the outcome of the suit in the courts, Boehner's announcement guarantees creation of yet another political struggle between Republicans and Obama and his Democratic allies in a campaign already full of them.

"On matters ranging from health care and energy to foreign policy and education, President Obama has repeatedly run an end-around" on the public and Congress, the speaker wrote. He accused him of "ignoring some statutes completely, selectively enforcing others and at times, creating laws of his own."

At a news conference, Boehner strongly brushed aside a question of whether impeachment proceedings could result from the suit.

In his memo, he stopped short of accusing the president of violating his oath of office. Instead, he said Obama was "straining the boundaries of the solemn oath he took on Inauguration Day."

Other Republicans have been less restrained. Rep. Lou Barletta, R-Pa., said recently the House probably has the votes to impeach Obama, although he said he wasn't calling for it. One former tea party-backed lawmaker, ex-Rep. Allen West of Florida, has called for the House to vote to remove the president from office.

Boehner also rejected a suggestion that the suit was a political move designed to give traditional Republican voters an added impetus for going to the polls this fall when control of Congress will be at stake.

But Rep. Steve Israel of New York, who chairs the Democratic campaign committee, said Boehner planned a "politically motivated lawsuit," and predicted the voters would punish Republicans for it.

He accused the speaker of a "reprehensible waste of taxpayers' money and a desperate political stunt meant to gin up the Republican base at a time when House Republicans are historically unpopular."

A group established to help elect Democrats, the House Majority PAC, rushed out an online request for donations that said Boehner had "sunk to a new low" and was "caving in to pressure from the right and suing President Obama."

Disputes about the balance of power between the executive branch and the Congress are as old as the Constitution under a system in which lawmakers pass laws and the president carries them out.

Boehner said the House "must act as an institution to defend the constitutional principles at stake."



Unitary executive theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The unitary executive theory is a theory of American constitutional law holding that the President possesses the power to control the entire executive branch. The doctrine is rooted in Article Two of the United States Constitution, which vests "the executive power" of the United States in the President.

Although that general principle is widely accepted, there is disagreement about the strength and scope of the doctrine.[1] It can be said that some favor a "strongly unitary" executive, while others favor a "weakly unitary" executive.[1] The former group argue, for example, that Congress's power to interfere with intra-executive decision-making (such as firing executive branch officials) is limited, and that the President can control policy-making by all executive agencies within the limits set for those agencies by Congress. Still others agree that the Constitution requires a unitary executive, but believe this is a bad thing, and propose its abolition by constitutional amendment.[2]
In several states, in contrast to the federal government, executive officers such as lieutenant governor, attorney general,comptroller, secretary of state and others are elected independently of the state's governor, with Texas being one example. This type of Executive structure is known as a Plural Executive.

The Vesting Clause of Article II provides, "The executive Power [of the United States] shall be vested in a President of the United States of America." Proponents of the unitary executive theory argue that this language, along with the Take Care Clause ("The President shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed..."), creates a "hierarchical, unified executive department under the direct control of the President."[3]

The general principle that the President controls the entire executive branch was originally rather innocuous, but extreme forms of the theory have developed.[4] John Dean explains: "In its most extreme form, unitary executive theory can mean that neither Congress nor the federal courts can tell the President what to do or how to do it, particularly regarding national security matters."[4]
In either its strong or weak form, the theory would limit the power of Congress to divest the President of control of the executive branch. The "strongly unitary" theory posits stricter limits on Congress than the "weakly unitary" theory.[1]

Some scholars oppose even the "weakly unitary" theory and favor creating a plural executive, as in the many state governments that separately elect an attorney general.[2] However, those scholars acknowledge that a constitutional amendment would be required to eliminate the federal unitary executive.
Proponents of a strongly unitary theory argue that the president possesses all of the executive power and can therefore control subordinate officers and agencies of the executive branch. This implies that the power of Congress to remove executive agencies or officers from Presidential control is limited. Thus, under the strongly unitary executive theory, independent agencies and counsels are unconstitutional to the extent that they exercise discretionary executive power not controlled by the president.[3]

Contrary to claims of some authors,[18] the first administration to make explicit reference to the "Unitary Executive" was not that of President George W. Bush. For example, in 1987, Ronald Reagan issued a signing statement that declared: "If this provision were interpreted otherwise, so as to require the President to follow the orders of a subordinate, it would plainly constitute an unconstitutional infringement of the President's authority as head of a unitary executive branch."[19]

The George W. Bush administration made the Unitary Executive Theory a common feature of signing statements.[20] For example, Bush once wrote in a signing statement that he would, "construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power."[21] Critics acknowledge that part of the President's duty is to "interpret what is, and is not constitutional, at least when overseeing the actions of executive agencies," but critics accused Bush of overstepping that duty by his perceived willingness to overrule U.S. courts.[22]



http://civilliberty.about.com/od/waronterror/p/imperial101.htm

Line-Item Veto:
Although the concepts of the unitary executive and the imperial presidency are most often associated with Republicans, President Bill Clinton also worked to expand presidential powers. Most notable was his successful attempt to convince Congress to pass the Line-Item Veto Act of 1996, which allows the President to selectively veto specific parts of a bill without vetoing the entire bill. The Supreme Court struck down the Act in Clinton v. City of New York(1998).

Presidential Signing Statements:

Similar to the line-item veto is the presidential signing statement, in which the President signs a bill but also specifies which parts of a bill he or she actually intends to enforce.

Until the Reagan administration, only 75 signing statements had ever been issued.

Presidents Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, and Clinton issued a total of 247 signing statements.

President George W. Bush alone has issued 130 signing statements, which tend to be more sweeping in scope than those of his predecessors.

Possible Use of Torture:

The most controversial of President Bush's signing statements was attached to an anti-torture bill drafted by Senator John McCain (R-AZ):

The executive branch shall construe (the McCain Detainee Amendment) in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch ... which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President ... of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks.

The NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP), aka Spygate:

President Bush openly violated the terms of the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 when he ordered the NSA to spy on telephone calls without a warrant. He has relied primarily on the unitary executive theory in his defense of the policy.

A Short History of the Imperial Presidency:

President Bush's attempt to obtain increased wartime powers represent a troubling challenge to American civil liberties. But the challenge is not unprecedented:

The Sedition Act of 1798 was selectively enforced by the Adams administration against newspaper writers who supported Thomas Jefferson, his challenger in the 1800 election.

The very first landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, Marbury v. Madison (1803), established the power of the judiciary by resolving a separation-of-powers dispute between the President and Congress.

In Worcester v. Georgia (1832), President Andrew Jackson openly defied a Supreme Court ruling--the first, last, and only time that any U.S. president has done so.

During the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln took on unprecedented wartime powers and violated multiple civil liberties on a large scale, including due process rights for U.S. Citizens.

During the first Red Scare following World War I, President Woodrow Wilson suppressed free speech, deported immigrants on the basis of their political beliefs, and ordered massive unconstitutional raids. His policies were so draconian that they inspired protesters to form the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in 1920.

During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an executive order calling for the forced internment of over 120,000 Japanese Americans, as well as forced surveillance, ID cards, and occasional relocation for immigrants from other perceived "hostile" nations.

President Richard Nixon openly used executive branch law enforcement agencies to attack his political opponents and, in the case of Watergate, to actively cover up his supporters' criminal activities.

Presidents Reagan, H.W. Bush, and Clinton all actively pursued expanded presidential powers. One particularly stunning example was President Clinton's claim that sitting presidents are immune from lawsuits, a position the Supreme Court rejected in Clinton v. Jones (1997).

More About the Imperial Presidency and the Unitary Executive Theory

Overview of U.S. Government and Politics
Is America Developing an Imperial Presidency?
Summary of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)





John Boehner accused the president of exercising “king-like authority at the expense of the American people and their elected legislators.” The Republicans started the trend of giving the president stronger powers, under the Unitary Executive theory, and I will be interested to see how Boehner succeeds with a law suit against the President for using Executive Orders to affect the law. One of the things discussed in the Wikipedia article is the use of “signing statements,” which put conditions on the President's signature. I do remember Obama stating once that since Congress wouldn't work with him or the Democrats under the influence of the Tea Party, he would use his powers to achieve changes. George W. Bush was notorious for exercising his unitary executive powers in the case of torturing prisoners for information and other things.

“White House press secretary Josh Earnest dismissed any suggestion that the president has failed to act within the law in issuing executive orders or taking other actions. 'We feel completely confident that the president was operating within his authority as the president of the United States to take these steps on behalf of the American people,' he told reporters.” At least one Tea Party representative is calling for impeachment. Boehner has yet to describe exactly what laws the President is supposed to have broken.





http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/26/missing-detroit-boy-charlie-bothuell_n_5532164.html

Missing Detroit Boy Charlie Bothuell V Found Alive In Dad's Basement
Posted: 06/26/2014

DETROIT (AP) — A 12-year-old boy who had been missing for a week and a half and was the subject of an extensive police search was found alive and well Wednesday in the basement of his home.

Officers discovered the boy while serving a search warrant on the home as part of their investigation into his disappearance. It's not clear if the boy had been there the entire time; officers had been inside the home before and cadaver dogs searched the house last week.

Detroit Police Chief James Craig said when police found Charlie Bothuell V, he appeared to be hiding and did not announce himself. Hours earlier, Craig had told reporters that investigators were "not ruling out the possibility of homicide" in the case.

When police found the boy, he was behind some boxes and a large plastic drum. Bedding also was found nearby. The boy will be medically evaluated.

"He was nervous, but excited," Craig said. "He indicated he was hungry. He appeared fine."

The boy lives in the home with his father and stepmother. The father, Charlie Bothuell IV, said he was as surprised as anyone that his son was in the basement.

"I'm shocked. I looked. The Detroit police looked. The FBI looked," he said. "To imply that I knew my son was in the basement is absurd."

The elder Bothuell was swarmed by reporters outside the house when he arrived home Wednesday evening.

"I thought my son was dead," he said as he broke down in tears and hugged a reporter.

Craig told reporters earlier Wednesday that the boy's father had taken a polygraph test about his son's disappearance, but the boy's stepmother declined to do so.




I assume that there will be a followup to this story. I saw the father talking to Nancy Grace on television when it was announced that the boy had been found, and he was definitely shocked. He was unable to speak for a good minute or more. It's hard to know why his wife refused a polygraph test. Could she have had a conflict with the boy and he hid as a result? It's interesting that the cadaver dogs didn't find him if he was in the basement the whole 11 days, but cadaver dogs are trained, I believe, to alert when they find signs of death, not living people.

The most likely possibility, to me, is that the boy was not in the basement when police, FBI and others searched earlier. He may have run away and hidden in a friend's home or somewhere else nearby until he decided he didn't like being away and then went home. The report said he was “nervous, but excited” when found, and also “hungry.” Nervous that his parents would punish him and excited that he had succeeded in fooling everyone? I am waiting in intense anticipation to find out what really happened here.






Families in Santa Barbara killings speak to CBS News
By BEN TRACY, ALEXANDER TROWBRIDGE, LULU CHIANG
June 26, 2014

David Wang and George Chen were the joys of their parents' lives.

David, 20, kind and peaceful, was called a "math genius" with dreams of starting a computer business. George, 19, often donning his famous big smile, was a diligent student who, like David, was majoring in computer engineering at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

The stabbing deaths of the two young friends on May 23, when Elliot Rodger went on a killing spree that ultimately took six lives were, their parents said, a loss for society.

In an interview with CBS News, David and George's grieving parents spoke of the torment of losing their sons, the frustration of watching the media lavish attention on their sons' killer, and their aching desire for an end to the senseless violence plaguing their adopted country.

"We have love in our heart, tears in our eyes, responsibility on our shoulders, and we hear the voice from our children from heaven," said Kelly Wang, George's mother. "We want to do something."

"We are calling for the end of the killing of innocent people," said Jane Liu, David's mother, who said that as a hospital nurse, she faces death every day, but has found the loss of her son to be unbearable. "It's time for all Americans to wake up."

The parents of David and George are dismayed by the attention paid to their son's killer, whose manifesto and video rants recorded before the killings drew widespread coverage.

Focusing on Rodger, they said, creates the side effect of making him a celebrity, and may encourage other troubled kids to seek attention through violence.

"We want the young generation to know: Killing is a crime." said Kelly Wang. "Killing is not something cool."

The two families, immigrants from China who describe themselves as low profile and did not initially plan to speak out after the attack, said they instead want to focus attention on the victims and tell their story.

"In every photo of George, he's always smiling," said George's mother Kelly, as the two families sat around a table at the Wangs' Fremont home, with photos of the two young men spread out in front of them. "You never see a photo where he's worried or something. He always tried to put up his big smile everywhere."

In the photos, George is indeed beaming, whether posing with his dad, mom or -- smiling extra wide -- with his younger brother. "He loved to play with his little brother," Kelly Chen said.

"If you see those pictures, you can see how close we are," said Jane, of her son David. "Each time he would hold my shoulders, hold my hand. He was very very sweet."

"Their life was so short, so tragically taken," Johnny Chen, George's father, said of George and David. "They're like flowers even before the blossom."

The parents said they would have given their own lives in exchange for those of their sons, but they weren't given the chance. There's so much about the time leading up to the attack that they wish they could change. They wish the police had picked up on the killer's now apparent list of troubling signals. They wish the Rodgers family had done more to keep their son from committing his brutal crimes.

"We think good parenting is the first step to prevent the crime," said Kelly Wang. "Yes, you can do gun control, but if somebody has so much hatred in his heart, they can use other ways to kill innocents, and that happened to our boys."

Peter Rodger, the killer's father, will be the subject of an upcoming television interview, which has upset David and George's families. Rodger met with Richard Martinez, whose son was a victim. But when asked if they'd heard from the Rodger family personally, Johnny Chen, the father of George, said no.

"Personal condolence and apologize, and this is the minimum they should do," he said.

After CBS News reached out to Peter Rodger for comment late Wednesday, he sent the families a letter of apology.

Just a month after losing David and George, the two families are still coming to terms with the reality that they're gone.

"Rationally, we have accepted the fact," said Kelly Wang. "But in our heart, many times we still picture him coming back home."

"I still think my son is alive and not gone," David's father, Charlie Wang, said, with his wife Jane translating. "I still don't understand why this happened to such beautiful heart, beautiful lives."

For now, they can just remember the two decades they said they were blessed to have with their sons, young lives taken many decades too soon.




This was not portrayed as a hate crime, as the victims were not of one ethnicity. It is true that Rodger's face was on the TV for over a week, smiling into the camera as he recorded his statement of hatred. He was furious at women for not gravitating toward him. He was probably effeminate – he looked effeminate – or otherwise “not normal,” and women are definitely not drawn to those things. The real problem, though, is that the news media focused on his video and didn't focus on his victims, and it is true that aspiring young killers do imitate others in committing their own crimes. Giving killers that much media attention may exacerbate the problem in future cases.

Parents sometimes are aware that their child is seriously disturbed, but too often they accept their child's behavior, such as covering up all the windows in their room and isolating themselves in there rather than participating in the family activities, and do not require the child to go to a therapist and take medication as needed. Sometimes the kids rule their homes, which is never a good sign. The police, too, in this case failed to pick up on his anti-social tendencies and didn't report the problem. Within a few weeks of the police visit at the request of his parents, Rodger committed his crimes. The police should not be sent out alone to interview a person considered to be mentally disturbed, but should hire a qualified psychologist to accompany them. Police alone are not able to diagnose mental illness, no matter how good their intentions.






Low-dose aspirin may reduce pancreatic cancer risk
By JESSICA FIRGER CBS NEWS June 26, 2014

The heart healthy benefits of low-dose aspirin are widely known, but that's not all this humble little pill could do to save your life. A growing body of research indicates aspirin may also help lower the risk of one of the deadliest forms of cancer.

A new study published Thursday by researchers at the Yale School of Public Health finds aspirin taken daily in small doses could lower incidences of pancreatic cancer by as much as 48 percent.

Pancreatic cancer kills close to 40,000 Americans each year and has a 5-year survival rate of only 5 percent.

"The thought that there's something that could lower the risk of someone getting pancreatic cancer is remarkable and exciting to me as a physician who has patients who have gotten -- and died from -- pancreatic cancer," said CBS News chief medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook. "There's very little we can do for most people that get pancreatic cancer."

For the study, published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, researchers recorded information on aspirin use and medical histories of 362 pancreatic cancer patients and 690 patients who did not have the disease, between 2005 and 2009.

The researchers found that patients who took low-dose aspirin (75 to 325 milligrams) for six years or less had a 39 percent reduced risk for pancreatic cancer, while people who took it for more than 10 years reduced the risk for the disease by 60 percent.

The authors suggested that people with a strong family history of pancreatic cancer or other risk factors for the disease may want to consider a daily aspirin regimen to reduce their risk.

This new paper is one of several indicating that aspirin may safeguard patients from cancer. Other studies have shown aspirin can lower risk for ovarian,colorectal, stomach, esophageal, prostate, breast, lung and skin cancer.

So how exactly could this little over-the-counter painkiller be such an effective cancer-buster?

"Aspirin interrupts the inflammatory pathway in the body," explained LaPook. "It turns out those same pathways look like they're part of the pathways that can lead to cancer. If you interrupt those pathways, theoretically that might be the reason why you lower the risk for cancer. We don't know that for sure, but that's one thought."

This promising research could also offer a new route for cancer treatments. "There's also a suggestion that not only is there a role for aspirin in preventing cancer but possibly in treating a cancer like colorectal cancer," he said.

However, taking aspirin long-term poses a number of serious health risks. "Aspirin can cause gastrointestinal ulceration and bleeding, it can cause bleeding in the brain. These are potentially very serious complications," said LaPook. "So yet again we say you have to talk to your doctor, you have to weigh the benefits. This is personalized medicine."




A daily regimen of low dose aspirin has been found to reduce the incidence of pancreatic cancer by 48%. The disease kills some 40,000 American annually and has a 5% survival rate over the span of 5 years. “The researchers found that patients who took low-dose aspirin (75 to 325 milligrams) for six years or less had a 39 percent reduced risk for pancreatic cancer, while people who took it for more than 10 years reduced the risk for the disease by 60 percent....Other studies have shown aspirin can lower risk for ovarian,colorectal, stomach, esophageal, prostate, breast, lung and skin cancer.” The “inflammatory pathway” is perhaps the cause of cancer in some cases, and aspirin “interrupts” that pathway. That's the theory. It may serve as a treatment rather than merely a preventative for colorectal cancer. Unfortunately it can cause stomach ulcers and bleeding in both the stomach and the brain, so it's not totally harmless.





Sudan frees Christian woman following airport arrest – CBS
AP June 26, 2014

KHARTOUM, Sudan -- A Sudanese Christian woman whose death sentence for apostasy was overturned has been freed again after being detained on accusations of forging travel documents.

Eman Abdul-Rahman, the lawyer for 27-year-old Mariam Ibrahim, told The Associated Press that she was released on Thursday from a police station after foreign diplomats pressed the government to free her.

She was detained Tuesday at Khartoum's airport while trying to leave the country with her family.

Ibrahim, whose father was Muslim but who was raised by her Christian mother,was convicted of apostasy for marrying a Christian. Sudan's penal code forbids Muslims from converting to other religions, a crime punishable by death.

A higher tribunal overturned the ruling and ordered her release.




“Mariam Ibrahim, whose father was Muslim but who was raised by her Christian mother,was convicted of apostasy for marrying a Christian. Sudan's penal code forbids Muslims from converting to other religions, a crime punishable by death.... she was released on Thursday from a police station after foreign diplomats pressed the government to free her.”

The freedom of religion, and the freedom from religion as sometimes occurs, is one of our most basic rights in this country. A mandated state religion is one of the most harmful societal laws, as much as the confiscation of private property under governments such as Cuba, in my opinion. There would be riots in the streets here if the Tea Party decided to require that all citizens attend a Protestant Christian church, for instance. It's really unspeakable what the citizens of too many nations live under. I hope we always remain too varied in our beliefs and too darned uppity to put up with that kind of state control of the populace. I'm so glad this woman was released unharmed.






Five-year rescue plan to save the world's oceans
By MICHAEL ROPPOLO CBS NEWS June 26, 2014

The health of the world's oceans are in decline and a five-year rescue plan must be implemented by governments around the world in order to prevent more damage, according to a report released on Wednesday.

Over the past 18 months, the Global Ocean Commission has been studying and analyzing data on the greatest threats to the seas. Loss of habitats and biodiversity, overfishing and an increase in need for natural resources have led to what a summary of the report describes as a "degraded, underproductive and exploited ocean."

The report proposed creating a sustainable development goal for the global oceans to help ensure sustainable fishing; protect vulnerable marine areas; reduce biodiversity loss; fight illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; and reduce plastic debris entering the environment by 50 percent. Progress on these proposals would be monitored by an independent Global Ocean Accountability Board.

The authors note that the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has been largely ignored. The high seas, once thought to be protected by its inaccessibility, can now be easily reached for oil drilling, industrial fishing vessels and deep sea mineral extraction. Countries are often not able to take action against those who violate the convention due to the so-called "rule of freedom," which forbids any interference with ships flying a foreign flag except in limited circumstances.

The commission calls the UNCLOS agreement outdated and ineffective, and proposes a new agreement to strengthen conservation efforts. It also suggests the U.N. create a post for a Special Representative for the Ocean, and that governments around the world appoint ocean ministers.

In a statement on Wednesday, the State Department commended the Global Ocean Commission for addressing the key challenges facing the world's oceans.



http://www.globaloceancommission.org/ and http://www.voanews.com/content/obama-announces-initiative-to-protect-pacific-ocean/1939326.html give more information.

Obama Announces Initiative to Protect Pacific Ocean
Zlatica Hoke
June 18, 2014

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has announced a new initiative to protect parts of the Pacific Ocean from overfishing and environmental damage. He announced his plan in a video message to an international conference on the oceans at the U.S. State Department. 
 
For years, scientists and environmentalists have warned that oceans are deteriorating because of human activity, mostly pollution and overfishing, but political leaders have lacked the will to do much about it. The Obama administration is now taking a step towards finding a solution. 
 
Obama announced Tuesday that he is directing the federal government to create a national strategy to combat illegal fishing and pollution in the Pacific Ocean.
 
"Pollution endangers marine life, overfishing threatens whole species as well as the people who depend on them for food and their livelihoods.  If we ignore these problems, if we deplete our oceans of their resources, we won't just be squandering one of the humanities greatest treasures, we'll be cutting off one of the world's major sources of food and economic growth including for the United States, and we cannot afford to let that happen," said Obama.

Obama's videotaped message was shown during the "Our Ocean" conference at the U.S. State Department.
 
Some of the possible measures, such as bans on fishing and industrial exploration in parts of the central Pacific, are expected to spark political battles in Washington.
 
"I'm going to use my authority as president to protect some of our most precious marine landscapes, just like we do for mountains, rivers and forests," said Obama.
 
Hollywood actor Leonardo DiCaprio, an environmental activist, supports the effort.
 
"Several billion people a year depend on seafood as a source of protein and yet we are failing to protect these vital waters. If we don't do something to save our oceans now, it won't be just the sharks and the dolphins that will suffer, it will be all of us, including our children and our grandchildren," said DiCaprio.
 
Secretary of State John Kerry hosted the conference, attended by members of the international oceans community, government ministers, scientists and advocates.
 
"We have today received commitments for action in over [$1.45 billion] and that is all directed at this ocean effort," said Kerry.
 
Kerry also announced progress on efforts to get the required number of nations needed to ratify an international port law that would prevent illegally caught fish from going to market.
 
President Obama's proposal is due to go into effect later this year.




The Global Ocean Commission has been commended by the US State Department for its study on modern day threats to the oceans. It describes the current situation as “a 'degraded, underproductive and exploited ocean, 'which is being overfished and reduced in its biodiversity, with too much plastic debris. The drilling for oil and extraction of deep sea minerals are also problems. The report recommends that the UNCLOS agreement of 1982 be replaced or revised as it is “outdated and ineffective,” and a new UN post for a Special Representative for the Ocean, while governments worldwide should appoint ocean ministers.

“Obama announced Tuesday that he is directing the federal government to create a national strategy to combat illegal fishing and pollution in the Pacific Ocean.” There he goes, exercising the power of his executive position again. This kind of action has been so often impossible to get through by legislative means due to “conservative” money-centered thinking. He stated, “... If we ignore these problems, if we deplete our oceans of their resources, we won't just be squandering one of the humanities greatest treasures, we'll be cutting off one of the world's major sources of food and economic growth including for the United States, and we cannot afford to let that happen.”

"'We have today received commitments for action in over [$1.45 billion] and that is all directed at this ocean effort,' said Kerry.... Kerry also announced progress on efforts to get the required number of nations needed to ratify an international port law that would prevent illegally caught fish from going to market. President Obama's proposal is due to go into effect later this year.” It would be shameful if the US House and Senate should prevent the US from joining this group of nations who are boycotting illegally fished products from entering our ports by failing to ratify the Port Law. As far as I know, the US still has failed to ratify the UN ban on land mines, and to me this kind of “conservative” thinking is very similar. I hope the legislature will join in and support the new international law. I wonder what the Tea Party will have to say about these issues.




1 in 10 U.S. beaches fails bacteria test in survey – CBS
By STEVEN REINBERG HEALTHDAY June 25, 2014

Swimmers, take heed: Ten percent of water samples taken from U.S. coastal and lake beaches fail to meet safety standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a new report finds.

"There can be hidden dangers lurking in many of our waterways in the form of bacteria and viruses that can cause a great inventory of illnesses like dysentery, hepatitis, stomach flu, infections and rashes," Steve Fleischli, water program director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said at a Wednesday press conference.

Of nearly 3,500 samples taken annually at beaches around the country, Great Lakes beaches have the highest failure rate, with excessively high bacteria levels, the defense council said.

This finding confirms that water pollution caused by storm-water runoff and sewage overflows persists at many U.S. beaches, the agency said.

Storm-water runoff often includes trash, chemicals, oil and animal and human waste as well as bacteria and viruses.

"It's really all of our urban slobber going untreated into local waterways," Fleischli said.

Still, the agency singled out 35 popular "superstar" beaches that have excellent water quality.

Each of these met national water quality standards 98 percent of the time over the past five years. They include:

Delaware: Dewey Beach-Swedes in Sussex County
Florida: Bowman's Beach in Lee County
Georgia: Tybee Island North in Chatham County
Massachusetts: Singing Beach in Essex County
New Jersey: Stone Harbor at 96th St. in Cape May County

The 17 "repeat offenders" that continue to have serious water pollution problems include:
California: Malibu Pier, 50 yards East of the pier, in Los Angeles County
Indiana: Jeorse Park Beach in Lake County
Massachusetts: Cockle Cove Creek in Barnstable County
Maine: Goodies Beach in Knox County
New Jersey: Beachwood Beach in Ocean County
New York: Main Street Beach in Chautauqua County

In the Great Lakes, 13 percent of samples failed to meet federal public health standards, the researchers said.

Other regions with excessively high bacteria in swimming water samples include: the Gulf Coast (12 percent), New England (11 percent), the western coast (9 percent), New York and New Jersey coasts (7 percent), and the southeast (7 percent).

States with the highest failure rates include: Ohio (35 percent), Alaska (24 percent) and Mississippi (21 percent).

For cleaner water, try the Delmarva Peninsula area on the East Coast, where 4 percent of samples failed the test.

Three states had a failure rate of just 3 percent: Delaware, New Hampshire and New Jersey, the researchers found.

As many as 3.5 million Americans are sickened from contact with raw sewage overflows each year, according to the EPA.

"The elderly and little kids are most likely to fall prey to contamination in the water because of their weaker immune systems," Fleischli said.

"Children are also more likely to dunk their heads under the water or swallow water when swimming, both of which increase risk," he added.

Under the federal Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act, states must test beach water for bacteria. When bacteria levels are too high -- such as after a heavy rain -- beaches may be closed or people might be advised not to swim.

More than 10 trillion gallons of untreated storm water, including billions of gallons of untreated sewage, find their way into America's waterways each year, the EPA said. Historically, this is the largest known source of beach water pollution.

The best way to prevent beach water pollution, said the defense council, is to invest in "smarter, greener infrastructure on land, like porous pavement, green roofs, parks, roadside plantings and rain barrels."

Such improvements enable rain to evaporate or filter into the ground instead of being carried from dirty streets to beaches.




Our beaches at Jacksonville, FL are not likely to be on the 35 cleanest list, as we have had several incidents of Ecoli in the water, plus a few times when sections of the city were warned to boil the tap water before drinking it. “Under the federal Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act, states must test beach water for bacteria. When bacteria levels are too high -- such as after a heavy rain -- beaches may be closed or people might be advised not to swim.”

The Defense Council recommends city investment in “porous pavement, green roofs, parks, roadside plantings and rain barrels.” I have personally never seen any “porous pavement” that I can remember. What would it be made of? Is some concrete porous? And what is a “green roof”? Roadside plantings, parks and rain barrels I understand.

Let's see if I can find an Internet site explaining “green roofs” and “porous pavement.” The following article on porous paving goes on to list even more porous materials which can be used than merely concrete. These news and Internet articles have been a true how-to lesson in environmental planning, I must say. Since I looked all this up I do hope Big Brother is looking at my blog today so that the government can take advice from it.





http://www.greenroofs.org/index.php/about/aboutgreenroofs
About Green Roofs

A green roof system is an extension of the existing roof which involves a high quality water proofing and root repellant system, a drainage system, filter cloth, a lightweight growing medium and plants.

Green roof systems may be modular, with drainage layers, filter cloth, growing media and plants already prepared in movable, often interlocking grids, or loose laid/ built-up where each component of the system may be installed separately. Green roof development involves the creation of "contained" green space on top of a human-made structure. This green space could be below, at or above grade, but in all cases the plants are not planted in the "ground'. Green roofs can provide a wide range of public and private benefits.

Principal Green Roof Technology Components

Source: National Research Council, Institute for Research in Construction

In North America, the benefits of green roof technologies are poorly understood and the market remains immature, despite the efforts of several industry leaders. In Europe however, these technologies have become very well established. This has been the direct result of government legislative and financial support, at both the state and municipal level. Such support recognizes the many tangible and intangible public benefits of green roofs. This support has led to the creation of a vibrant, multi-million dollar market for green roof products and services in Germany, France, Austria and Switzerland among others. In Germany for instance, the industry made 700 million DM in sales in 1997, up from 500 million DM in sales in 1994. The industry continues to experience growth with with 13.5 million square metres of green roofs constructed in 2001, up from 9 million square metres built in 1994. In North America, thanks to education and policy support the green roof industry continues to grow rapidly.

Green roof technologies not only provide the owners of buildings with a proven return on investment, but also represent opportunities for significant social, economic and environmental benefits, particularly in cities.
Find out more about the private and public benefits of green roof technologies here.



Permeable paving
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Permeable paving is a range of sustainable materials and techniques for permeable pavements with a base and subbase that allow the movement of stormwater through the surface. In addition to reducing runoff, this effectively traps suspended solids and filters pollutants from the water.[1] Examples include roads, paths, lawns and lots that are subject to light vehicular traffic, such as car/parking lots, cycle-paths, service or emergency access lanes, road and airport shoulders, and residential sidewalks and driveways.

Although some porous paving materials appear nearly indistinguishable from nonporous materials, their environmental effects are qualitatively different. Whether pervious concrete, porous asphalt, paving stones or concrete or plastic-based pavers, all these pervious materials allowstormwater to percolate and infiltrate the surface areas, traditionally impervious to the soil below. The goal is to control stormwater at the source, reduce runoff and improve water quality by filtering pollutants in the substrata layers.

Description and applications[edit]

Permeable solutions can be based on: porous asphalt and concrete surfaces, concrete pavers (permeable interlocking concrete paving systems - PICP), or polymer-based grass pavers, grids and geocells. Porous pavements and concrete pavers (actually the voids in-between them) enable stormwater to drain through a stone base layer for on-site infiltration and filtering. Polymer based grass grid or cellular paver systems provide load bearing reinforcement for unpaved surfaces of gravel or turf.

Grass pavers, plastic turf reinforcing grids (PTRG), and geocells (cellular confinement systems) are honeycombed 3D grid-cellular systems, made of thin-walled HDPE plastic or other polymer alloys. These provide grass reinforcement, ground stabilization and gravel retention. The 3D structure reinforces infill and transfers vertical loads from the surface, distributing them over a wider area. Selection of the type of cellular grid depends to an extent on the surface material, traffic and loads. The cellular grids are installed on a prepared base layer of open-graded stone (higher void spacing) or engineered stone (stronger). The surface layer may be compacted gravel or topsoil seeded with grass and fertilizer. In addition to load support, the cellular grid reduces compaction of the soil to maintain permeability, while the roots improve permeability due to their root channels.[2]


Main article: Pervious concrete

Pervious concrete is widely available, can bear frequent traffic, and is universally accessible. Pervious concrete quality depends on the installer's knowledge and experience.[9]

Installation of porous pavements is no more difficult than that of dense pavements, but has different specifications and procedures which must be strictly adhered to. Nine different families of porous paving materials present distinctive advantages and disadvantages for specific applications. Here are examples:

In new suburban growth, porous pavements protect watersheds. In existing built-up areas and towns, redevelopment and reconstruction are opportunities to implement stormwater water management practices. Permeable paving is an important component in Low Impact Development (LID), a process for land development in the United States that attempts to minimize impacts on water quality and the similar concept of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in the United Kingdom.

The infiltration capacity of the native soil is a key design consideration for determining the depth of base rock for stormwater storage or for whether an underdrain system is needed.