Climate Crisis: If a Three Year-Old Gets It, Why Don't Republicans?

I've been both dreading and looking forward to the conversation I had tonight with my three year-old daughter. We bought a book at the Monterey Bay Aquarium a few months ago called Why Are the Ice Caps Melting? in preparation, but I wanted the right moment. Tonight, she got in bed early and then (predictably) had a second wind and started talking with me. Somehow we got on the topic of climate, so I decided to give her the 411, topped off with the book.

Knowing my daughter's sensitive nature, I expected she would be sad, a little scared and concerned about the animals and plants, but I didn't anticipate so many questions. The book explores all aspects of the problem - garbage, auto pollution, aerosol sprays, storms, rising water levels and the greenhouse effect - it's like a mini version of Al Gore's slideshow. That's a lot to digest, but it's all connected.

What fascinated me about the discussion was how quickly my daughter seemed to grasp the problem: Too hot, plants dying, animals and people dying, big storms, houses flooding = bad. And she already wants to help. [Proud mom moment.] Meanwhile, the national policy discussion is slowly turning to security and its connection with "climate change" (aka euphemism of the century) and only now are Republicans starting to listen. To the credit of whoever made the decision to turn this into a talking point, it's a powerful one. Keep it going.

But really, if a three year-old can understand that a sick planet = dead people and animals, I have little patience with Ivy League educated legislators who gloss over the problem. Sick environment = sick people = weak security = hostile takeover = imminent destruction. Sure, there are combinations and permutations of the equation that are more complicated, involving Anthrax, methane, CO2 poisoning, etc. but the bottom line is the same. People aren't stupid, but we can be lazy and spoiled. And although the Republican party line previously was to say there's no proof, the continuous mounting evidence is now irrefutable. I also think the state of the economy is such that now people have already started tightening belts and being frugal, it's a little easier for them to look at going green as part of the solution. However, some legislators are still afraid to vote their conscience and take serious measures in terms of environmental legislation. We're making progress, just not enough.

So now I'm wondering: do we need to send a copy of this book to every member of Congress and every Republican still dragging their heels? Yes, it's made of paper, but it's small and can be passed around, loaned out, reused. It takes ten minutes to read and it's easy to understand for anyone - including the minimally educated. It may be more on the level of a grade schooler than a preschooler, but it's no more complicated than a ballot. It may be a tough conversation to have with policy makers and kids alike, but it's a lot easier than the alternative. Fifty years from now, our kids will all thank us for it, and I'd like to be around for that conversation.

...

Sarah Granger also writes for the Huffington Post and her articles have appeared in ecofabulous, the Silicon Valley Moms Blog and Bay Area Parent. She formerly served as an Environmental Quality Commissioner for the City of Menlo Park, California.

He's Back! Former VP at Monsanto To Advise FDA Commissioner on Food Safety

Michael R. Taylor, the former Vice President for Public Policy at Monsanto has returned through Washington's revolving doors and will now advise FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg on food safety.

We learn of this discouraging connection on the same day the White House announced its new commitment to upgrading the country's food safety system.

Much hope had been held out for a change in FDA perspective due to Commissioner Hamburg's lack of industry ties. Her career has consisted of public health research and policy positions. Prior to her appointment as FDA commissioner, she worked as the New York City health commissioner. Unfortunately, it appears that with the addition of Taylor, the FDA has remedied that problem.

It seems Taylor is just the man you'd want on the job, if you're concerned about unwanted industry regulation and corporate representation of toxic hormones in your dairy. But, examining bad industry practices that lead to salmonella and E. coli tainted foods? Not so sure about that.

According to a release Tuesday on the agency's website, Taylor will now serve as senior advisor to the FDA head. In the announcement, Hamburg, said of Taylor:

"I am pleased to welcome Mike Taylor back to the FDA," Commissioner of Food and Drugs Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., said in announcing Taylor's appointment. "His expertise and leadership on food safety issues will help the agency to develop and implement the prevention based strategy we need to ensure the safety of the food we eat."

Taylor's "long and distinguished career" is noted therein without mention of his 7 years of work as an attorney for Monsanto, the giant agricultural biotech corporation.

A few months ago, I posted a story on The Huffington Post highlighting the insidious way rBGH (the bovine growth hormone) made it into our country's food supply, with the help of Michael R. Taylor. I wrote about the dangerous effects of the addition of rBGH to our dairy supply:

In humans, studies indicate milk from cows treated with rBGH may contain elevated levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IFG-1), which can increase the risk of breast cancer and other types of cancer.

Here is a portion of what I detailed about Taylor's connections in that story:

"An excerpt from a 1998 article in The Ecologist magazine details Taylor's journey and its significance:

"In March 1994, Taylor was publicly exposed as a former lawyer for the Monsanto corporation for seven years. While working for Monsanto, Taylor had prepared a memo for the company as to whether or not it would be constitutional for states to erect labeling laws concerning rBGH dairy products. In other words. Taylor helped Monsanto figure out whether or not the corporation could sue states or companies that wanted to tell the public that their products were free of Monsanto's drug."

So, just what will Taylor's duties be?

As Senior Advisor to the FDA Commissioner, he will be expected to:

* Assess current food program challenges and opportunities
* Identify capacity needs and regulatory priorities
* Develop plans for allocating fiscal year 2010 resources
* Develop the FDA's budget request for fiscal year 2011
* Plan implementation of new food safety legislation.

See this page to read more on Taylor's industry and political connections.

-Christine

Our Wind-Powered Future: Will Congress make it possible, or stand in the way?

Before finishing their debate on the ACES (American Clean Energy and Security) energy bill recently passed by the House, the Senate needs to take a look at this bit of breaking science news: Analyzing the latest and best weather data from sources around the world, a recent study by Harvard environmental science experts predicts that, using current wind turbine technology, with strategically placed wind turbines, the United States could generate 16 times the amount of electricity the nation currently uses.

Let me repeat that for you: Some of the most respected environmental scientists in the world just predicted that if the United States were to shut down every existing coal-fired power plant, every electricity-generating trash incinerator, every nuclear power plant, every natural gas plant, every hydroelectric plant, and even every solar power generator currently in existence and just build wind turbines using current technology to supply ourselves with electricity, we could still produce 16 times the electricity we currently need.

In fact, the study predicts that if nations around the globe were to switch to a wind-power-only electricity generation system, the world could produce 40 times the electricity it currently uses. That means all of the people currently living without electricity in developing nations could hook up to the grid and attach a refrigerator and a washing machine and a computer and a plasma TV and pretty much start living just like power-hungry Americans, and (materials cost of all those new appliances notwithstanding) the world would still have more than enough electrical power to go around. Without having to wonder what to do with the nuclear waste produced by fission plants. Without fighting wars over dwindling fossil fuel resources. Without having to figure out some way to capture and lock away greenhouse gases from carbon-belching coal. 

The study took into account the possible environmental impact of wind turbines on birds, and the resulting need to leave some areas free of wind turbines to preserve wildlife habitats. It took into account the fact that not every person wants a wind turbine spoiling their view of the prairie or coastline, and that therefore there will be some areas where building wind farms would be impossible for cultural or economic reasons. It took into account the fact that the wind does not blow in all places all of the time. And even having taken all these factors into account, and adjusting predicted wind turbine placement and efficiency values accordingly, the study's authors still predict that if humanity were to make a concerted effort, now, to switch entirely to wind power, wind powered energy plants could produce much, much more electricity than we need.

So what does this new information about the potential efficacy of wind power have to do with the ACES Act?

Two important anti-government protests - outside of Iran - that changed the world this month

With all the media coverage of this month's courageous public protests against government corruption and election fraud in Iran, major clashes between protesters and governments in two other countries have unfortunately failed to garner the attention they also deserve:

In the city of Shishou in central China, after local government officials initially refused to allow the family of 24-year-old Tu Yuangao, who was found dead at a hotel under highly suspicious circumstances, to have an autopsy conducted on his body, a small group of local protesters surrounded the young man's body and refused to allow local police to take it.

As local police called provincial authorities for backup, the crowd of protesters grew, reportedly organizing via text messaging and Twitter. Rioting in the streets lasted for several days; reports of the final size of the protest vary wildly across different news sources; Reuters quotes one witness estimating the crowd at 10,000, but some estimates of the peak crowd have been as high as 70,000. Some protesters managed to circumvent Chinese government blocks on internet access to post video of the incident to YouTube:

Tu Yuangao's family and the protesters claim the young man was murdered by a business owner with ties to organized crime who is a relative of the town's mayor; his family reports his body showed signs of torture. and that the local government wanted to cover up the crime by cremating the body before an autopsy could be performed.

White House Rundown: Tax changes, Franken, the Budget, health care, the OPE, credit cards, and air pollution

The White House Press releases have stacked up to a guilt-inducing and slightly concerning level in my inbox, so I decided to take the most recent (and to me, highest priority) and do a quick list-like rundown in one post to (a) clear my email and conscience, and (b) get us all up-to-date on a few current events and additional resources for more information.

Here we go, in chronological order from oldest to most recent:

7. Jason Furman responds to Twitter and Facebook comments about tax changes

"Yesterday, even before we posted here on the blog about the President's proposals to curb offshore tax havens and end tax incentives for companies shifting jobs overseas, we asked for your reactions on our various social networking outposts. As we expected, there were a lot of interesting comments and questions, largely supporting the President but some raising concerns and objections. We asked Jason Furman, Deputy Director of the National Economic Council, to address some of them."

Read all of the questions and Jason Furman's answers at the whitehouse.gov blog.

Run, Mama, Run*: Candidate for Congress Judy Chu Answers More Questions, Part 2

 (Intro to the series here. Part 1, here.)

Less than two weeks to vote for a congressional representative for CA CD-32! It's anticipated to be a low voter-turnout election, so it's vitally important for all registered voters to get out to the polls on May 19, 2009, for the special election.

(Hilda Solis and Judy Chu both wearing lucky red for Chinese New Year.)

Here's the promised Q&A between MOMocrats' Cynematic and Dr. Chu. It delves a little deeper into Dr. Chu's background, her first entry into politics, and concrete plans for representing her district and serving Americans in Congress. (*I should note that "Run, Mama, Run" is a MOMocrats series that features progressive pro-choice women of note as they compete for local, state, and federal offices. We use 'mama' in the literal sense--many of the women we feature are mothers of either very young or grown children--and in the more colloquial, friendly and intimate sense--of acknowledging metaphorical kinship with women in a greater struggle for justice that benefits all. In each case, we leave it to the candidate to reveal and discuss the particulars of her family life as she wishes.)

Barbara Boxer: Lean, Mean & Green

I spent yesterday morning deep in the world of Silicon Valley cleantech in order to hear what Barbara Boxer, Chair of the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works had to say about green energy, Silicon Valley and the economy. The event began late, but it was interesting and Senator Boxer's candor was refreshing. (For hashtag lovers, I live tweeted it, but if you like details, please read on...)

In Other News This Week: Science (or not), Mountaintop mining (or not), and (no 'ors' here) Flournoy takes Afghan point, and Sebelius confirmation hearing and HHS Conscience Rule recension moving forward

In other news you may have missed this week:

• Texas narrowly avoids a quick trip to the dark ages when three Republican and four Democrat members of the Texas State Board of Education barely defeated seven socially conservative Republicans attempt to require science classes to teach evolution "weaknesses"
• Two Senators introduced legislation to ban mountaintop mining in their Appalachia Restoration Act
• NPR's Morning Edition reported that, "The point person for the new Afghanistan strategy at the Pentagon is Michele Flournoy, a well-respected analyst who worked in the Clinton administration and is now undersecretary for policy."
• Daily Women's Health Policy report says to watch for HHS Secretary-Designate Sebelius' confirmation hearing next week and read the Christian Science Monitor examination of Obama's plan to rescind HHS Provider 'Conscience' Rule

Read on for more details!

Economic Stimulus Reconciliation: Key Differences in House and Senate Bills

Now that the U.S. Senate has passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Senate version of the stimulus bill must be reconciled with the House version before the final legislation is sent to President Obama's desk. Though the different bills bear a similarly staggering final price tag—  $819.5 billion for the the House version, and $838.2 billion for the Senate's bill— the Senate plan makes some pretty drastic changes in certain key areas that many economists predict will weaken its economic impact, particularly in terms of job creation.

To appease Republican Senators in order to garner the supermajority needed to pass an emergency spending bill, the Senate bill cut billions of dollars in proposed government stimulus spending from the House stimulus package and replaced it with an expanded tax cut proposal. However, leading economic experts, including Moody's chief economist, Mark Zandi, contend that tax cuts actually have a far weaker effect on the economy than appropriately directed government spending, which means that if the Senate version of the bill wins out over the House plan, the bill's stimulative effect will be substantially weakened. 

The Center for American Progress predicts that the Senate version of the stimulus bill, which CSPAN reports proposes $545.6 billion in direct spending and $292.5 billion in tax cuts, would create 343,000 to 444,000 fewer jobs than the House version, which proposes $637.2 billion in spending and $182.2 billion in tax cuts. The Economic Policy Institute agrees that the Senate stimulus bill is inferior in terms of potential for job creation. And Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman says of Republican cuts to the Senate plan:

Would the Obama economic plan, if enacted, ensure that America won’t have its own lost decade? Not necessarily: a number of economists, myself included, think the plan falls short and should be substantially bigger. But the Obama plan would certainly improve our odds. And that’s why the efforts of Republicans to make the plan smaller and less effective — to turn it into little more than another round of Bush-style tax cuts — are so destructive.

Missing Kyoto

Found this very interesting study via Clusterstock.  In a report released by the Centre for Industrial Economics at the Ecole des Mines in Paris, a strong correlation was found between ratification of the Kyoto Protocol (yeah, the one that Bush didn't) and green technology innovation.

The researchers first looked at the effect of Kyoto on the speed of development of climate-related technologies compared to all technologies (based on number of patent filings), and this is what they found across all countries:

Great, so the Kyoto Protocol spurred innovation in climate change technologies.