Saturday, November 29, 2014


News Clips For The Day


GOP vs Dems

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/gop-demands-pound-flesh-tax-deal

GOP demands a pound of flesh in tax deal –
By Steve Benen
11/26/14

House Republicans haven’t had much success this Congress passing actual legislation into law, but they’ve nevertheless invested quite a bit of time focusing on one of their favorite pastimes: cutting taxes without paying for it.
 
The Democratic-run Senate has largely ignored the bills from the lower chamber, but in recent weeks, House Republicans and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) have been negotiating a deal on tax breaks set to expire at the end of 2014, and yesterday, a deal took shape. Before we get to the substantive details, it’s important to note how GOP lawmakers approached the talks:

Left off were the two tax breaks valued most by liberal Democrats: a permanently expanded earned-income credit and a child tax credit for the working poor. Friday night, Republican negotiators announced they would exclude those measures as payback for the president’s executive order on immigration, saying a surge of newly legalized workers would claim the credit, tax aides from both parties said.

We really have reached a farcical level of policymaking. Republicans aren’t just obsessed with tax cuts, they’re deliberately scrapping breaks that go to working families. Why? Largely because GOP officials aren’t done with their tantrum over immigration policy – right-wing hissy fits rarely produce sound public policy – and Republicans feel as if they’re entitled to a pound of flesh because the Big Bad President hurt their feelings.
 
The result is a tax deal that treats the working poor as collateral damage in a political war. Sorry, struggling families, Americans elected a far-right Congress, and your loss is their “payback.”
 
And as important as this is, it’s not even the most offensive part of the agreement on taxes that came together yesterday.
 
At issue is a package of 55 tax breaks worth $440 billion over the next decade, nearly all of which benefit corporations, which are already enjoying record profits. Danny Vinik described the agreement as an example of “everything that’s wrong with Washington.”
Imagine somebody asked you to imagine the worst possible deal on taxes. It’d probably have the following qualities:
 
It would be bad for the environment.
 
It would be bad for the deficit.
 
It would give short shrift to the working poor.
 
And it would be a bonanza for corporations.
 
Unfortunately, you don’t have to conjure up such a package. Congressional Republicans already have.

This may sound like an exaggeration. It’s not. Indeed, perhaps the single most striking aspect of this is that Republicans intend to pay for the tax breaks entirely through deficit financing. After all the talk from GOP lawmakers about killing our grandchildren with mountains of debt, all the rhetoric about how “broke” the United States is, all the claims that we can’t invest in job creation or even jobless benefits unless every penny is offset, we’ve received another reminder that Republican talk about fiscal policy is a rather pathetic and insincere joke.
 
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities published a fairly detailed, albeit understated, analysis of the tax deal, calling it “a significant step backward on several key issues facing the nation: long-term budget deficits, high levels of poverty (especially among children), and widening inequality.”
 
And what about the provision in the deal that’s bad for the environment? At Republicans’ request, the package does not extend the wind-power tax credit – GOP lawmakers said it wasn’t fair to the oil and gas industry, so it had to go.
 
Given all of this, President Obama has vowed to veto the agreement. I talked to a handful of Democratic aides on Capitol Hill overnight, and each said the package would enjoy very little Dem support in its current form.
 
The obvious question, aside from why Republicans are so incredibly reckless and irresponsible when it comes to tax breaks for corporations that don’t need them, is why Harry Reid’s office would agree to such a far-right agreement. The Nevada Democrat and his team have been involved in plenty of bipartisan compromises, and they know their way around a negotiating table, so why accept such a ridiculous deal?
 
Reid’s office hasn’t said much publicly – and with an Obama veto now inevitable, it may be a moot point – but apparently House Republicans were quite inflexible during the talks and this was the best result Democratic aides thought they could get before the GOP takeover of Congress is complete.
 
What’s more, some of the existing 55 tax breaks, sometimes called “tax extenders,” actually have merit and progressive support. For Republican negotiators, the message was, in effect, “The only way to keep these breaks is to give us more of what we want.”




“Before we get to the substantive details, it’s important to note how GOP lawmakers approached the talks: Left off were the two tax breaks valued most by liberal Democrats: a permanently expanded earned-income credit and a child tax credit for the working poor. Friday night, Republican negotiators announced they would exclude those measures as payback for the president’s executive order on immigration.... The result is a tax deal that treats the working poor as collateral damage in a political war. Sorry, struggling families, Americans elected a far-right Congress, and your loss is their “payback.” And as important as this is, it’s not even the most offensive part of the agreement on taxes that came together yesterday. At issue is a package of 55 tax breaks worth $440 billion over the next decade, nearly all of which benefit corporations, which are already enjoying record profits.... Republicans intend to pay for the tax breaks entirely through deficit financing.... calling it “a significant step backward on several key issues facing the nation: long-term budget deficits, high levels of poverty (especially among children), and widening inequality.” And what about the provision in the deal that’s bad for the environment? At Republicans’ request, the package does not extend the wind-power tax credit – GOP lawmakers said it wasn’t fair to the oil and gas industry, so it had to go.... What’s more, some of the existing 55 tax breaks, sometimes called “tax extenders,” actually have merit and progressive support. For Republican negotiators, the message was, in effect, “The only way to keep these breaks is to give us more of what we want.”

“Given all of this, President Obama has vowed to veto the agreement.” Thank goodness Obama is a true, if middle of the road, Democrat, and very much on his toes about what the Republicans are up to. He's the little Dutch boy with his finger in the hole keeping back the ocean, now that the Republicans have taken over control of the Senate. Not only are they shafting the poor – which is getting to be a large number of people since the Great Recession began – but they are doing it out of sheer spite. They are profoundly unethical and greedy, but what's new??





http://www.politicususa.com/2014/11/28/bernie-sanders-congressional-liberals-team-obama-kill-corporate-tax-cuts.html

Bernie Sanders And Congressional Liberals Team Up With Obama To Kill Corporate Tax Cuts
By: Jason Easley
Friday, November, 28th, 2014

A group of congressional liberals being that include Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) teamed up with President Obama to kill tax cut deal that would have given hundreds of billions of dollars to the wealthy and corporations.

Politico reported,

“Everyone felt that Reid had suddenly given the store to Republicans and not gotten much in return,” said a Democratic House aide.

The president, with liberal Democratic backing on the Hill, issued the veto threat and the plan imploded, making the tax deal the first major collateral damage of the White House’s immigration action.

We should go back to the drawing board,” said Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. Those concerns were echoed in public by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who sits on the tax-writing Finance Committee and Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee.

A few hours after White House aides spoke with Senate Finance, Obama himself called Wyden to tell him he’d made a decision: He’d veto the deal.

Sens. Reid and Schumer tried to do an end run around President Obama and congressional liberals and got caught. Sen. Bernie Sanders called the plan to give corporations more tax breaks crazy, “This tax cut agreement does exactly the wrong things. At a time of massive wealth and income inequality, it extends huge tax cuts to the rich and large corporations while threatening programs that help low-income children. At a time when we need to reverse climate change and aggressively move to sustainable energy, this agreement fails to eliminate tax benefits for the fossil fuel industry but phases out tax credits for wind and solar. This is pretty crazy stuff. I strongly support the president’s decision to veto it.”

With the red state Democrats out of the Senate, liberals are going to gain power and influence. The entire Senate Democratic caucus doesn’t need to be unified to uphold a presidential veto. It’s now clear that President Obama is working with the congressional liberals to fence in what the Republican congressional majority will be able to accomplish.

Obama won’t have much trouble gathering up votes to sustain a veto as long as Republicans try to pass through wildly unpopular legislation. A smaller Democratic caucus in both the House and Senate does give the president more flexibility when it comes to working with his fellow Democrats. The liberal Hell No caucus is already flexing their muscles. The blocking of the Keystone XL pipeline, and the killing of tax cuts for corporations were only the beginning.

The Republican fantasy of a congress that could challenge Obama has gone up in smoke. If the White House continues to work with congressional liberals, Boehner and McConnell will be pinched in and complaining about their inability to get anything done in a matter of weeks.

The shoe is sliding over to the other foot as Mitch McConnell is about to get a taste of his own medicine.




“Sens. Reid and Schumer tried to do an end run around President Obama and congressional liberals and got caught. Sen. Bernie Sanders called the plan to give corporations more tax breaks crazy, “This tax cut agreement does exactly the wrong things. At a time of massive wealth and income inequality, it extends huge tax cuts to the rich and large corporations while threatening programs that help low-income children. At a time when we need to reverse climate change and aggressively move to sustainable energy, this agreement fails to eliminate tax benefits for the fossil fuel industry but phases out tax credits for wind and solar. This is pretty crazy stuff. I strongly support the president’s decision to veto it.”... Obama won’t have much trouble gathering up votes to sustain a veto as long as Republicans try to pass through wildly unpopular legislation. A smaller Democratic caucus in both the House and Senate does give the president more flexibility when it comes to working with his fellow Democrats. The liberal Hell No caucus is already flexing their muscles. The blocking of the Keystone XL pipeline, and the killing of tax cuts for corporations were only the beginning.”

Just because the Republicans gained some extra seats doesn't mean they will get whatever they want without a fight. The political war sometimes reminds me of a poker game, but at this point it looks more like a couple of sumo wrestlers to me. The gains will be incremental rather than a massive win by either side, but we will continue to push as the Republicans do more and more outrageous things for their corporate friends. I believe the popularity of the GOP will be challenged as the new poor catch on and stop voting for them. What they advertise is a “Christian nation” rather than secular and strong patriotism, but what they deliver is poverty ever more entrenched. That can't forever be advantageous for them. The thing that is almost as important to conservatives than the fossil fuel industries welfare, however, is the social policy issues. I believe the black and Hispanic vote will boost us up as we face a new civil rights contest. I hope to see action on police and court reforms that need to occur sooner rather than later, and on Republican actions to block the blacks, Hispanics and poor people in general from turning out to vote. I am hopeful about progress on these issues.





http://www.forwardprogressives.com/bernie-sanders-nails-republican-lies-about-voter-id-laws-new-gao-report/

Bernie Sanders Nails Republican Lies About Voter ID Laws After Release Of GAO Report
By Allen Clifton
October 9, 2014

Something most liberals have known all along has basically been confirmed in a new report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The report shows new voter ID laws that have been passed in a number of Republican-controlled states are making it more difficult for Americans to vote. Specifically those Americans who tend to vote for Democrats.

I know, you’re shocked.

Here’s part of the statement released by Senator Bernie Sanders’ office:

State laws that make voters show IDs at polling places have put a price on ballot access and eroded turnout – especially among African Americans, young people and recently-registered voters – a non-partisan congressional watchdog concluded.
The Government Accountability Office report also found scant evidence of voter fraud that the new laws that ostensibly are designed to discourage.

The report was requested by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.). The senators asked the research arm of Congress to investigate what they called an “alarming number” of new state laws that make it “significantly harder” for millions of voters to cast ballots.

The report calculated the direct cost to would-be voters in the 17 states where voters must present a driver’s license or other state identification at polling places. The price for driver’s licenses ranges from $14.50 in Indiana to $58.50 in Rhode Island. The cost of getting a birth certificate needed to obtain a non-driver ID ranges from $7 in North Dakota to $25 in Georgia.

Focusing on two states with strict ID laws, Kansas and Tennessee, the GAO found greater falloffs in voter turnout in those states than in states without restrictive voting laws. The 2012 general election turnout compared to 2008 was as much as 3.2 percent less in Kansas and 2.2 percent less in Tennessee than in other states. The falloff was greatest among African-Americans, young people and newly-registered voters, the GAO said.

I highlighted the last two paragraphs because they’re particularly important. Republicans have seemingly found a way around illegal poll taxes by simply requiring people pay to have an ID before they’re allowed to vote. So, in reality, it’s just a roundabout way to levy a poll tax – without directly charging a poll tax.

Not only that, but these laws are lowering voter turnout. And like I’ve said before, anyone who’s trying to make it harder for Americans to vote clearly has some kind of unethical ulterior motives. Especially when this study concluded that the people most adversely effected by these laws were African Americans, young people and newly registered voters. Otherwise known as voters who tend to vote for Democrats more than Republicans. Again, I know you’re completely shocked.

Republican legislatures passing strict voter ID laws that just happen to lower the voter turnout among demographics who vote for Democrats - no way!  And, as most of you might expect, the Supreme Court keeps upholding these unconstitutional laws. But that’s what happens when the court is controlled by conservative justices. This has to stop, because history is just repeating itself. Decades ago poll taxes were used to try to discourage people from voting (specifically African Americans). Now these “poll taxes” are being disguised under the pretense of “combating voter fraud” by requiring Americans to present an ID before they can vote. An ID that the vast majority of Americans would have to pay for in order to obtain. So, if Americans can’t be forced to pay in order to exercise their right to vote, but an ID costs money, how is that not requiring Americans to pay a fee before they can vote? I can’t emphasize this enough, liberals must get out to vote this November. I don’t care what hoops they try to make you jump through - vote. We cannot continue to allow Republicans to violate our Constitutional rights and rig our election process. Because if we don’t get out to vote, we’re just handing this country right over to them. And we damn sure can’t let that happen. -

About Allen Clifton
Allen Clifton is from the Dallas-Fort Worth area and has a degree in Political Science. He is a co-founder of Forward Progressives, and author of the popular Right Off A Cliff column. He is also the founder of the Right Off A Cliff facebook page, on which he routinely voices his opinions and stirs the pot for the Progressive movement. Follow Allen on Twitter as well, @Allen_Clifton.




“State laws that make voters show IDs at polling places have put a price on ballot access and eroded turnout – especially among African Americans, young people and recently-registered voters – a non-partisan congressional watchdog concluded. The Government Accountability Office report also found scant evidence of voter fraud that the new laws that ostensibly are designed to discourage.... The report was requested by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.). The senators asked the research arm of Congress to investigate what they called an “alarming number” of new state laws that make it “significantly harder” for millions of voters to cast ballots.... The price for driver’s licenses ranges from $14.50 in Indiana to $58.50 in Rhode Island. The cost of getting a birth certificate needed to obtain a non-driver ID ranges from $7 in North Dakota to $25 in Georgia.... The falloff was greatest among African-Americans, young people and newly-registered voters, the GAO said. I highlighted the last two paragraphs because they’re particularly important. Republicans have seemingly found a way around illegal poll taxes by simply requiring people pay to have an ID before they’re allowed to vote. So, in reality, it’s just a roundabout way to levy a poll tax – without directly charging a poll tax.... And, as most of you might expect, the Supreme Court keeps upholding these unconstitutional laws. But that’s what happens when the court is controlled by conservative justices. This has to stop, because history is just repeating itself.... I don’t care what hoops they try to make you jump through - vote. We cannot continue to allow Republicans to violate our Constitutional rights and rig our election process. Because if we don’t get out to vote, we’re just handing this country right over to them.”

This article is outdated now, but it contains some important stuff – who requested the GAO report and what it said. As feared, the vote earlier this month was low, and we did lose the Senate leadership. We still have reliable Democrats in the Congress and Senate, and we need to use this GAO report as a basis for future contests to the hated ID laws. I think somebody like the NAACP or the ACLU needs to sue in the various states and try to force the Supreme Court to look at the issue again.





http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/car-runs-over-minneapolis-ferguson-protester

TPM LIVEWIRE
By Brendan James
Wed Nov 26 2014

A driver mowed down a protester Tuesday at a rally in Minneapolis, where people were demonstrating against a grand jury's decision not to indict Ferguson, Mo. police Officer Darren Wilson in the fatal shooting of unarmed teenager Michael Brown.

In footage shot by the Minnesota Star Tribune as well as another video obtained by local TV station KSTP, a driver could be seen plowing through a crowd of protesters and driving directly over one female demonstrator's leg as she screamed in pain.

The videos showed the car screeching to a halt shortly after it rolled over the protester's leg. A crowd immediately surrounded the car as people rushed to help the victim.

Paramedics treated the woman on the scene before an ambulance took her to Regions Hospital in St. Paul with very minor injuries, the Star Tribune reported.

Police did not take the driver into custody or ticket him, according to KSTP. Police told the news station that the incident was under investigation.

The protest was staged near the Minneapolis Police Department’s 3rd Precinct headquarters.

COMMENTS –

Libor Jany @StribJany
Follow
Moments after the woman was struck, a dozen demonstrators pounced on the hood of the vehicle, while others tried to free the victim.

Libor Jany @StribJany
Follow
Other demonstrators are now standing, hand in hand, around the woman, who's being treated by paramedics in the middle of the intersection.


Libor Jany @StribJany
Follow
Witnesses say the car, a teal station wagon, started honking at protesters blocking the intersection, before running down down a woman.




This looks like assault by motor vehicle to me. Otherwise, why did he honk at the protesters first? Why didn't he stop when he saw there was a demonstration? And why didn't the police block the road to oncoming traffic? I do hope this driver will be charged with a crime. “Police told the news station that the incident was under investigation.” That sounds like what they usually say when they don't want to be clear with the press. Hopefully this woman will live.





SOLAR ISSUES AROUND THE WORLD


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/09/13/ozy-solar-power-south-asia/15529551/

Can solar power save South Asia?
Emily Cadei, OZY8 a.m. EDT September 13, 2014

In 2010, Shazia Khan had a bright idea, literally. That's when this Pakistani-American, born and raised in upstate New York, launched the nonprofit EcoEnergyFinance, based in Karachi, Pakistan.

Today, EcoEnergy is out in the villages of Pakistan's Sindh Province, going where no electricity line has gone before. It sells solar lanterns that charge themselves under the baking South Asian sun, and then provide eight to 16 hours of electricity. Solar could well help fill the subcontinent's gaping energy needs. It draws on as many as 300 days of sunshine a year, while circumventing the need for huge infrastructure projects to get electricity where it's needed.

"We're focused on the rural poor because … the Pakistani government knows there is an energy crisis in Pakistan, but whenever they take any sort of policy measures to address this problem, they really don't talk about the rural poor at all," says Khan, formerly an environmental lawyer at the World Bank. "They're focused on setting up these really big power plants."

More from OZY:
How Saudi Arabia will kick its oil habit
The craziest public transit solution ever?
The Caribbean goes geothermal

South Asia's needs are crushingly obvious.

The regular sunshine amounts to a huge underutilized resource, as solar technology improves and costs fall. Potentially it could cut India's and Pakistan's reliance on foreign coal, gas and oil.

Most transformative: The mechanics of solar power make it fairly simple to deliver "off-grid" and avoid the limitations of India's and Pakistan's abysmal energy infrastructure. Solar could bring electricity to the hundreds of millions of rural poor who lack access, in the same way that mobile phones allowed millions of people to leapfrog the expensive infrastructure of the landline.

Today, roughly one-third of Indians rely on kerosene, dung or wood for most energy needs. Next door in Pakistan, it's worse — roughly 40 percent of its 180 million people have no electricity. The financial and physical state of the electrical grids is worse than decrepit. Energy theft is routine in both countries, creating mounting piles of utility debt that make it hard to keep the lights on, let alone improve or expand power lines.

At the end of 2012, Pakistani's energy-industry debt topped $9 billion, according toThe Economist. "It's one unholy mess," says Michael Kugelman, an expert on South Asia energy issues at the Wilson Center think tank in D.C.

Powering up solar, though, raises its own set of issues, including creating incentives for investment in an industry with high upfront costs and low initial returns. "It is very much a long-term investment and not something that can address the immediate energy crisis in Pakistan or the insatiable energy thirst in India," Kugelman says. The greatest hope for capitalizing on solar energy's potential lies with innovative small-scale projects that can connect people to electricity for the very first time, like EcoEnergyFinance.

The company recently received a grant to pilot a pay-as-you-go program for the lanterns via cell phone SIM cards, rather than collecting monthly installment payments, village by village. Another grant will help set up solar-powered energy hubs in villages, where residents can come to power their cell phones and other electronic devices.

EcoEnergyFinance aims to become cash-flow positive, so it can reinvest income and scale up operations.

"Solar energy is a very fundamentally easy thing to put into place," says Kugelman. It just takes solar panels and a few other pieces of equipment. And there's appeal for entrepreneurs and startups to work in communities that have never had electricity. "You're not competing with other industries, the oil industry, the gas industry," he says.

In India, Dr. Arunabha Ghosh, the CEO of the Council on Energy, Environment and Water, a Mumbai-based nonprofit research institute, says his organization has counted 250 companies producing off-grid energy. Most use solar, and most sell individual home systems. Still, more companies are now building "microgrids" — clusters of solar panels connecting anywhere from 20 to 100 households. Some are using the the same pay-as-you-go model that Khan's nonprofit is experimenting with in Pakistan, Ghosh says.

Though the industry is fledgling, political leaders have begun to put money and political capital behind solar. In May, Pakistan's prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, inaugurated the country's first solar power park, with aims of producing 1,000 megawatts of energy by 2016. It's one of the largest in the world. India has an even bigger solar facility in the works, though environmental concerns may slow the project.

According to Ghosh, solar energy in India has grown a hundred-fold, from almost nothing to 2.6 gigawatts in installed capacity in the last four years. That's still just a fraction of the total 300 gigawatts of installed electrical capacity. Ghosh thinks that with the right policies, however, solar and other renewables could grow to make up 15 percent of of India's electrical capacity in the next 15 to 20 years.

New Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is also a solar enthusiast, after successfully launching several projects when he was chief minister of the state of Gujarat. Solar energy will be central to achieving his lofty energy promises, including one light bulb in every Indian household by 2019.

Big projects are still shackled by a lack of financing options and know-how necessary to attract big private investors and scale up solar energy use. But that's not stopping pioneers like Shazia Khan. And Ghosh says it's projects like hers that will embed solar power in the region's energy future. In the same way people in rural communities around the globe have come to rely on cell phones for everyday life, he predicts that solar energy, too, will become "indispensable."

Ozy.com is a USA TODAY content partner providing general news, commentary and coverage from around the Web. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY.




“EcoEnergy is selling a great new product to Pakistanis – solar lanterns that charge themselves and then provide eight to 16 hours of electricity.... Still the need for more is great. “Rolling blackouts in India plunged 700 million people into darkness for two days in late July 2012, a jolting reminder that amid talk of South Asia's economic miracles, energy remains a mammoth Achilles' heel. South Asia's energy resources just can't keep up with its booming population and economy.”

“Today, roughly one-third of Indians rely on kerosene, dung or wood for most energy needs. Next door in Pakistan, it's worse — roughly 40 percent of its 180 million people have no electricity.... The greatest hope for capitalizing on solar energy's potential lies with innovative small-scale projects that can connect people to electricity for the very first time, like EcoEnergyFinance.... EcoEnergyFinance aims to become cash-flow positive, so it can reinvest income and scale up operations. "Solar energy is a very fundamentally easy thing to put into place," says Kugelman. It just takes solar panels and a few other pieces of equipment. And there's appeal for entrepreneurs and startups to work in communities that have never had electricity. "You're not competing with other industries, the oil industry, the gas industry," he says.... Solar energy will be central to achieving his lofty energy promises, including one light bulb in every Indian household by 2019.”

The needs of poor and rural people in India and Pakistan are great – kerosene, dung or wood are the energy sources for the 1/3 of the Indian population and 40% of the Pakistanis – all of whom do not have electricity at this point. The use of small scale solar units is promising, giving perhaps enough panels to produce electricity for a small village financed on a pay as you go plan so that the people don't have to put up tens of thousands of dollars to get set up. The idea of a solar lamp is something that we could use in this country. The goal of “one light bulb in every Indian household by 2019 illustrates how difficult the situation is there at this time, however. Where there is such a dearth of energy in general and no coal or oil available, there should be a broad doorway for the development of solar in those countries. It would be very hard for a cottage industry of some sort to develop there without sources of light besides a flickering fire. The solar industry in the US has produced more and more power, some of which is given back to our local power plants, just by the use of solar panels on our houses. There were several problems being thrown up by nay-sayers – generally Republicans – ten years ago about why solar energy “won't work,” but it is working, and every year some new technology is developed around solar. I think it is an idea “whose time has come,” and I feel greatly encouraged about the future of the CO2 problem – the proverbial elephant in the room. Even if Republicans block progress in the US to protect their oil and coal interests, it is happening in other parts or the world. Compared to burning dung solar power is well worth developing even though it costs money to set a system up.





http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-11-25/revealed-the-oil-lobbys-playbook-against-californias-climate-law

Leaked: The Oil Lobby's Conspiracy to Kill Off California's Climate Law
By Brad Wieners
November 25, 2014

You remember Fillmore. He’s the resident hippie of Radiator Springs in the Pixar blockbuster Cars. Much to the chagrin of his neighbor, Sarge the Army Jeep, Fillmore greets each new day with Jimi Hendrix’s Woodstock rendition of A Star Spangled Banner—“respect the classics, man”—and is quick with a conspiracy theory about why biofuels never stood a chance at America’s gas pumps. Perfectly voiced by the late, great George Carlin, Fillmore has a slight paranoiac edge, as if his intake of marijuana may exceed what’s medically indicated.

Well, as they say, it’s not paranoia if they really are out to delay, rewrite, or kill off a meaningful effort to reduce the build-up of carbon in the Earth’s atmosphere. APowerpoint (MSFT) deck now being circulated by climate activists—a copy of which was sent to Bloomberg Businessweek—suggests that there is a conspiracy. Or, if you prefer, a highly coordinated, multistate coalition that does not want California to succeed at moving off fossil fuels because that might set a nasty precedent for everyone else.

Created by the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA), one of the most powerful oil and gas lobbies in the U.S., the slides and talking points comes from a Nov. 11 presentation to the Washington Research Council. The Powerpoint deck details a plan to throttle AB 32 (also known as the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) and steps to thwart low carbon fuel standards (known as LCFS) in California, Oregon, and Washington State. Northwest Public Radio appears to have been the first to confirm the authenticity of the deck, whichBloomberg Businessweek did as well, with WSPA spokesman Tupper Hull.

Specifically, the deck from a presentation by WSPA President Catherine Reheis-Boyd lays out the construction of what environmentalists contend is an elaborate “astroturf campaign.” Groups with names such as Oregon Climate Change Campaign, Washington Consumers for Sound Fuel Policy, and AB 32 Implementation Group are made to look and sound like grassroots citizen-activists while promoting oil industry priorities and actually working against the implementation of AB 32.

The deck also reveals how WSPA seized on a line from a California Air Resources Board memo that the cap-and-trade program for gas and diesel that goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2015, may affect gas prices in order to launch an ad campaign warning of a “hidden” gas tax that devious Sacramento pols are sneaking through.

“The environmental community is used to sky-is-falling analysis from fossil fuel interests in response to clean energy initiatives, so that part isn’t surprising,” says Tim O’Connor, a senior attorney at the Environmental Defense Fund, to whom I sent the deck for comment. “But it’s eye-opening to see the lengths [the WSPA] has gone to push back rather than move forward. I don’t think anybody knew how cross-jurisdictional, cross-border, and extensive their investment is in creating a false consumer backlash against [climate legislation].”

STORY: Ethanol, Fighting for Its Life, Gets a Temporary Reprieve

In California, O’Connor points out, “we have 70 percent voter approval on clean energy alternatives, so it’s offensive and atrocious they’re using these supposed everyday citizens—who are really paid advertisers—to change the public discourse.”

Reheis-Boyd’s Powerpoint deck, entitled “WSPA Priority Issues,” starts by announcing that these are the “the best of times.” Crude oil production in the U.S. is higher than it has been since 1997, with imports subsequently reduced to a 20-year low, according to the American Petroleum Institute. The next six slides describe why these are also “the worst of times” and include images of demonstrators protesting the Keystone XL oil pipeline, demanding government action on climate change, and pictures of professor-cum-activist Bill McKibbenand billionaire Tom Steyer, with the latter quoted as saying he wants to “destroy these people”—i.e., people like the members of WSPA.

Then there’s a slide with all the different groups that WSPA has funded to make it seem as if there’s a broad group in three states opposing a series of initiatives to reduce carbon pollution from fossil fuels. The most clever of these is the “Stop the Hidden Gas Tax!” campaign. Who, after all, wants that?

“Let me be clear,” says Hull, the WSPA spokesman. “We did not oppose AB 32 when it passed. We believe it’s good to have the reduction of greenhouse gases as a goal. We support that goal.” In the years since, he says, “hundreds of pages of regulations have been added to what had been a page-and-a-half document, and we do object to many of the additions.” What’s more, Hull says, “we have a legitimate concern over what will happen when the cap-and-trade program goes into effect for gas and diesel.”



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-22/sunedison-wins-order-to-supply-california-projects.html

SunEdison Wins Order to Supply California Projects
By Justin Doom  Oct 22, 2014 

SunEdison Inc. (SUNE), the best-performing solar company this year, won an order to install 17.7 megawatts of panels for public agencies at more than 30 sites in California.
Construction on the mix of rooftop, canopy and ground-mounted systems will begin by year-end and be complete by the end of 2015, St. Peters, Missouri-based SunEdison said today in a statement. Financial terms weren’t disclosed for the order, which involves working with nine agencies in Alameda, Contra Costa and San Mateo counties.
SunEdison and its TerraForm Power Inc. (TERP) unit will own and operate the solar arrays. David Einhorn, president of hedge fund Greenlight Capital Inc., this week recommended buying shares in both companies, saying SunEdison is worth $32 a share.
SunEdison climbed 0.4 percent to $19.12 at 10:27 a.m. in New York. The stock has gained 47 percent this year, leading the 21-member Bloomberg Intelligence Global Large Solar index.
To contact the reporter on this story: Justin Doom in New York at jdoom1@bloomberg.net




“Well, as they say, it’s not paranoia if they really are out to delay, rewrite, or kill off a meaningful effort to reduce the build-up of carbon in the Earth’s atmosphere. A Powerpoint (MSFT) deck now being circulated by climate activists—a copy of which was sent to Bloomberg Businessweek—suggests that there is a conspiracy. Or, if you prefer, a highly coordinated, multistate coalition that does not want California to succeed at moving off fossil fuels because that might set a nasty precedent for everyone else.... The Powerpoint deck details a plan to throttle AB 32 (also known as the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) and steps to thwart low carbon fuel standards (known as LCFS) in California, Oregon, and Washington State. Northwest Public Radio appears to have been the first to confirm the authenticity of the deck, which Bloomberg Businessweek did as well, with WSPA spokesman Tupper Hull.... an elaborate “astroturf campaign.” Groups with names such as Oregon Climate Change Campaign, Washington Consumers for Sound Fuel Policy, and AB 32 Implementation Group are made to look and sound like grassroots citizen-activists while promoting oil industry priorities and actually working against the implementation of AB 32.... The deck also reveals how WSPA seized on a line from a California Air Resources Board memo that the cap-and-trade program for gas and diesel that goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2015, may affect gas prices in order to launch an ad campaign warning of a “hidden” gas tax that devious Sacramento pols are sneaking through.... Tim O’Connor, a senior attorney at the Environmental Defense Fund, to whom I sent the deck for comment. “But it’s eye-opening to see the lengths [the WSPA] has gone to push back rather than move forward. I don’t think anybody knew how cross-jurisdictional, cross-border, and extensive their investment is in creating a false consumer backlash against [climate legislation].”... O’Connor points out, “we have 70 percent voter approval on clean energy alternatives, so it’s offensive and atrocious they’re using these supposed everyday citizens—who are really paid advertisers—to change the public discourse.”

Here we are with the Republicans fighting dirty again. They just don't believe in a fair competition. Competition all the way, yes, but not FAIR competition. They ought to keep their dirty hands off of California politics. 70% of California's populace approves of clean energy proposals, so they should be left alone to proceed with it as best they can. Of course that's the problem – the forward-looking California politicians will probably succeed if left alone.





EPA Proposes New Rules To Curb Ozone Levels – NPR
Krishnadev Calamur
November 26, 2014

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency unveiled new rules today to reduce emission levels for smog-causing ozone, which is linked to asthma and other health problems.
The proposed rules would lower the threshold for ozone from 75 parts per billion to between 65 ppb to 70 ppb. The agency said it would take comments on an ozone level as low as 60 ppb.

"Bringing ozone pollution standards in line with the latest science will clean up our air, improve access to crucial air quality information, and protect those most at-risk," EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in a statement. "It empowers the American people with updated air quality information to protect our loved ones - because whether we work or play outdoors – we deserve to know the air we breathe is safe."

The Clean Air Act requires the agency to review standards every five year. The ozone levels were set at 75 ppb in 2008 by President Bush.

The new rules are likely to draw opposition from industry groups as well as Republicans. Critics say the standards will hurt jobs and adversely affect an economy that is only just recovering from the Great Recession.

Jay Timmons, the president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, said today that the new rules jeopardize the manufacturing sector.

"This new standard comes at the same time dozens of other new EPA regulations are being imposed that collectively place increased costs, burdens and delays on manufacturers, threaten our international competitiveness and make it nearly impossible to grow jobs," Timmons said in a statement. "Before the Obama administration moves the goalposts with yet another set of requirements that will make it more difficult for manufacturers across the country, they need to allow existing ozone standards to be implemented and give time to American businesses to meet those already stringent and onerous requirements."

Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas, told the Los Angeles Times that the current ozone standard was healthy and the new levels would hurt the economy.

"The law as it stands now says [the EPA] can't look at jobs," Olson told the newspaper. "But if you don't have jobs, you don't have healthcare, and that is a public health issue."
The EPA's McCarthy rejected those claims in an op-ed article on CNN.com. She said states will have until 2020 to 2037 to meet the new standards, depending on how severe the area's ozone problem is.

"Critics play a dangerous game when they denounce the science and law EPA has used to defend clean air for more than 40 years," she said. "The American people know better."




“The Clean Air Act requires the agency to review standards every five year. The ozone levels were set at 75 ppb in 2008 by President Bush. The new rules are likely to draw opposition from industry groups as well as Republicans. Critics say the standards will hurt jobs and adversely affect an economy that is only just recovering from the Great Recession.... "Before the Obama administration moves the goalposts with yet another set of requirements that will make it more difficult for manufacturers across the country, they need to allow existing ozone standards to be implemented and give time to American businesses to meet those already stringent and onerous requirements."... The EPA's McCarthy rejected those claims in an op-ed article on CNN.com. She said states will have until 2020 to 2037 to meet the new standards, depending on how severe the area's ozone problem is. "Critics play a dangerous game when they denounce the science and law EPA has used to defend clean air for more than 40 years," she said. "The American people know better."

I have always heard that a camel will groan loudly every time a new load is put on his back. That's what these Republicans sound like to me. Businesses are mostly very wealthy indeed, and they can darn well afford to upgrade their technology to achieve less ozone in the air – and CO2, too. Jacksonville, FL had a really terrible smog problem in the 1950s. I have on my many tapes a great documentary from the local public television station about it. See this website for details – http://www.jaxhistory.org/portfolio-items/black-smoke/. According to this article the air was so bad that it was killing plants in 1961, and in 1949 it became so severe that women's nylon hose developed holes and shredded as they were walking downtown. “An airborne agent was responsible, but officials & scientists have never determined exactly what the culprit was. Some citizens blamed sickly-sweet industrial odors, while health officials established acid-bearing soot as the cause. Specifically, the instigator could have been the Inductanee, a floating electric plant that was docked at the foot of Laura Street, the location of The Landing today.” An acquaintance of mine when I lived in Washington DC said that Jacksonville is “the armpit of the South.” Well, things have definitely improved at this time, though I still smell a Maxwell House coffee factory as it roasts coffee and a paper mill which gives off hydrogen sulfide. That smells somewhere between rotten eggs and an outdoor toilet. Of course most of you have never experienced an outdoor toilet. You haven't missed anything!!





http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/28/us/officer-defused-eruptions-as-crowds-grew-volatile.html?smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0

In Ferguson, Officer Defused Eruptions as Crowds Grew Tense
By MANNY FERNANDEZ and BRENT McDONALD
NOV. 27, 2014

FERGUSON, Mo. — Late Wednesday, two nights after rioting left blocks of this suburban city in smoldering ruin, a small but angry crowd assembled at the police station on South Florissant Road.

On previous nights, protesters hurled D batteries, bottles of urine and rocks at the police officers and National Guard troops who stood stern-faced behind steel barricades and concrete barriers.

But around 11 p.m. on Wednesday, an unlikely scene unfolded off to the side.

A teenage protester whose face had been hidden behind a ski mask lowered his headgear, approached a police commander and gave him a hug.

“Good to see you, man,” the commander, Lt. Jerry Lohr of the St. Louis County Police, said to the teenager, Joshua Williams. “How’ve you been? How’s your mom doing? I saw her out here earlier.”

Lieutenant Lohr, 41, had a scratch on his left eyelid from a scuffle that broke out during an arrest the previous night and a wad of chewing tobacco in his mouth. He wore no riot gear — just a standard-issue brown uniform — and held not a baton in his hand but his knit cap.

“We going to have a good night?” he asked Mr. Williams.

“Yeah,” Mr. Williams, 19, said.

Wednesday was indeed a calm night for Ferguson, compared with the looting and arson Monday that came after the announcement that a grand jury had declined to indict the white police officer who fatally shot Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager, in August.

Before, during and after that first night of violence, few law enforcement officials have done more on the ground to ease the volatility of protesters than Lieutenant Lohr, who is white. And few of his white colleagues have been able to connect with the largely black crowds better than he has.

After embracing the lieutenant, Mr. Williams was back at the barricades, his mask again covering his face. “We were having a conversation one day out here, and he seemed like a pretty decent guy, so I grew to like him,” said Mr. Williams, who is black and lives in Ferguson. “He’s the only one I feel comfortable being around. The rest of them — no, I don’t.”

Lieutenant Lohr, a Nashville-born former Texan and father of three with an Army-style buzz cut, is one of the commanders overseeing security at the Ferguson police station. He never wears riot gear, even when he wades into a group of protesters to answer questions, resolve disputes or listen to a stream of insults. Protesters at the gates ask for him by name, so they can make complaints, for example, about the use of tear gas or of officers being too aggressive in arresting a woman.

One night, he approached a woman who led protesters onto the street to block traffic. She looked at her watch.

“It’s 11:12,” she told him. “Give me to 11:15 with these folks out here.”

Lieutenant Lohr agreed, set a timer on his wristwatch and helped direct traffic around them.

Black residents here have long said that their outrage after Mr. Brown’s killing stemmed from the nearly all-white Ferguson police force’s poor community relations and what they said was its abusive and racially targeted practices. Lieutenant Lohr, to many of the protesters, is evidence that law enforcement officials have improved community relations at a divisive time.

“Allowing people to talk on a one-on-one level does a lot as far as building bridges,” Lieutenant Lohr said. “They may not agree with what I’m doing, but now they at least know my name and my face. I’m human again. They realize that I’m a person. I’m not just a uniform.”

“We have to bridge this gap,” he continued. “It’s not going to happen overnight. This is going to be a long-term relationship, a long-term commitment, that both sides are going to have to make.”

On Monday, Lieutenant Lohr helped stop, or at least delay, outbreaks of rioting.

Shortly before 8:30 p.m., as hundreds of demonstrators learned the officer who fatally shot Mr. Brown was not being charged — and Mr. Brown’s stepfather stomped on the hood of a car, urging the protesters to action — those near the front of the barricades surged forward and objects flew over officers’ heads.

But after a man knocked the fence over, Lieutenant Lohr rushed in, standing between the riot-ready officers and demonstrators.

“When I got out there, I said, ‘Please don’t push the barricade down — this isn’t going to help anything,’ ” the lieutenant recalled. “We both picked it up and put it back up.”

The situation eased. Then it reignited down South Florissant, as protesters vandalized a parked police cruiser and hurled rocks.

The next night, Tuesday, before the scuffle that led to the scratch on his eyelid, Lieutenant Lohr crossed South Florissant — the only officer to do so — to speak with demonstrators. There was a brief discussion about the use of the street. The lieutenant told them they could have two of the four lanes.

He was polite to the protesters. His strongest words were reserved for the reporters who stuck microphones at his face and crowded behind him. A protester, Alene Williams, told him she was offended by the presence of the military.

“You have to protect these buildings,” she said. “You have to protect the citizens. But you also have to protect the people.”

“I know,” he said, “and I’m trying to do that.”

The lieutenant’s cellphone rang. “Let me take this call,” he told her. “Thank you.”

As he walked away, Ms. Williams said of Lieutenant Lohr, “He all right. I give him a little credit, but he ain’t going to get too much, because he’s still the police.”





“But around 11 p.m. on Wednesday, an unlikely scene unfolded off to the side. A teenage protester whose face had been hidden behind a ski mask lowered his headgear, approached a police commander and gave him a hug. “Good to see you, man,” the commander, Lt. Jerry Lohr of the St. Louis County Police, said to the teenager, Joshua Williams. “How’ve you been? How’s your mom doing? I saw her out here earlier.” Lieutenant Lohr, 41, had a scratch on his left eyelid from a scuffle that broke out during an arrest the previous night and a wad of chewing tobacco in his mouth. He wore no riot gear — just a stand “We going to have a good night?” he asked Mr. Williams. “Yeah,” Mr. Williams, 19, said.... Lt. Lohr: “We have to bridge this gap,” he continued. “It’s not going to happen overnight. This is going to be a long-term relationship, a long-term commitment, that both sides are going to have to make.”... As he walked away, Ms. Williams said of Lieutenant Lohr, “He all right. I give him a little credit, but he ain’t going to get too much, because he’s still the police.”


We clearly need a lot more of this and a lot less negativity of all kinds. People can talk about their Christianity all they want, but I can tell who is really inspired by the words of Jesus. There is an old standing argument among Christian groups over “faith” versus “good works,” and I'll take good works any day of the week. I don't know about an afterlife, but I do know good from evil. We need a massive amount of good across our whole country, not just in Ferguson. Lt. Lohr is a hero. He doesn't use riot gear and interacts peacefully and respectfully with the protesters, working to resolve issues. He's a good cop. A good man. Maybe he should be promoted to the head of the department and weed out some of the violent officers, initiate retraining and non-aggressive interaction with community members, and then run for office -- Mayor maybe.