ThinkProgress Logo

Justice

BREAKING: Arizona Supreme Court Reverses Brewer-Led Impeachment, Reinstates Redistricting Commission Chair

In a stunning reversal, the Arizona Supreme Court tonight reversed an attempted power grab by Gov. Jan Brewer (R) and her Republican colleagues in the state legislature.

Last month, the state Senate took up Brewer’s push to impeach Colleen Mathis, the chairwoman of Arizona’s independent bipartisan redistricting commission. Even Brewer herself couldn’t explain how Mathis had exhibited “neglect of duty and gross misconduct,” the only grounds for impeachment in Arizona. Indeed, Mathis’ only real “crime” appears to be that she led a commission which drew a new congressional map with more competitive districts than had existed previously.

However, justice prevailed tonight as the Arizona Supreme Court rebuffed Brewer and decided to reinstate Mathis to lead the commission:

The Arizona Supreme Court Thursday evening reinstated the chairwoman of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, rebuffing Gov. Jan Brewer’s unprecedented action earlier this month.

The ruling came less than three hours after the court heard arguments on the case, which revolved around the extent to which the commission is free of outside political interference.

The court decided the governor’s Nov. 1 removal letter to Colleen Coyle Mathis did not demonstrate “substantial neglect of duty, gross misconduct in office or inability to discharge the duties of office.”

Now Mathis and the commission will resume their duty to finalize Arizona’s new congressional district maps. As Daily Kos notes, the group “published draft congressional and legislative maps last month, and since then, the commissioners have been hearing public feedback and have indicated that they plan to make changes to the maps in response.”

Barring any more unconstitutional power grabs from Brewer, the commission will be able to finalize the map in advance of next year’s election.

NEWS FLASH

Judge Temporarily Stops Kansas Anti-Abortion Law From Taking Effect | Last week, Judge Franklin R. Theis placed a temporary retraining order on Kansas’s anti-abortion law mandating certain licensing regulations that threatens to shut down every abortion clinic in Kansas. The law was set to go into effect Monday, November 14. Kansas doctors achieved a temporary injunction in July that was set to expire on Monday. The court has yet to set a hearing date. The doctors claimed that the restrictive rules are “oppressive, unreasonable and arbitrary government interference that would significantly impair, if not altogether eliminate…their existing medical practice.”

Climate Progress

IPCC Extreme Weather Report Is Another Blown Chance to Explain the Catastrophes Coming If We Keep Doing Nothing

UPDATE:  Andy Revkin’s comment (here) may be the single most head-exploding and revisionist thing he has ever written. I reply.  The adaptation expert, Dr. Richard Klein, offers a defense of the IPCC process in the comments (here).

Fortunately, the public already understands that global warming makes extreme weather more severe, as new polling reveals:

September polling by ecoAmerica found that 57% of Americans already understand “If we don’t do something about climate change now, we can end up having our farmland turned to desert.”  Duh:

drought map 2 2030-2039

The Palmer Drought Severity Index on a “moderate” warming path (via NCAR, click to enlarge). “A reading of -4 or below is considered extreme drought.” During the 1930s Dust Bowl, the PDSI spiked briefly to -6 but rarely exceeded -3.  We probably can’t stop this, but we can avert far, far worse post-2050 (see below).

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is coming out Friday with its umpteenth watered down report on climate science, in this case on extreme weather.  The thing to remember about IPCC reports is that pretty much everyone involved has to sign off on every word, so it is inevitably a least common denominator document.

The actual scientific literature from 2011 is far more useful than this report — see “Study Finds 80% Chance Russia’s 2010 July Heat Record Would Not Have Occurred Without Climate Warming” and “NOAA Study Finds Human-Caused Climate Change Already a Major Factor in More Frequent Mediterranean Droughts.”  I will provide the links to as many recent studies as possible in this post.

Indeed we already know from a major 2011 study that “human-induced increases in greenhouse gases have contributed to the observed intensification of heavy precipitation events found over approximately two-thirds of data-covered parts of Northern Hemisphere land areas.”  As predicted, the warming has put more water vapor in the air, making deluges more intense.  Climatologist Kevin Trenberth explains:

There is a systematic influence on all of these weather events now-a-days because of the fact that there is this extra water vapor lurking around in the atmosphere than there used to be say 30 years ago. It’s about a 4% extra amount, it invigorates the storms, it provides plenty of moisture for these storms,

Obviously, since it’s getting hotter, we’re worsening extreme heat waves — both in intensity and duration and scale (the area the heat wave covers).  For the same reason, we know humans are making droughts worse — in intensity, duration, and scale.  The earlier snow melts also makes summer droughts worse.

Actual observations reveal that since 1950, the global percentage of dry areas has increased by about 1.74% of global land area per decade (see here).  Heck, our best scientists are already using global warming to help them predict dangerous extreme weather (see “USGS Expert Explains How Global Warming Likely Contributes to East Africa’s Brutal Drought“).

The reinsurance industry understands all this (see Munich Re: “The only plausible explanation for the rise in weather-related catastrophes is climate change”).

Again, much if not most of the public appear to have a better sense of what’s happening right now than you’ll find in the summaries of a typical IPCC report, to go by Yale’s 2011 polling and the September poll from ecoAmerica quoted at the top, which also found:

69% of Americans Know “Weather Conditions (Such as Heat Waves and Droughts) Are Made Worse by Climate Change”

The American public can’t miss the extreme weather because it is everywhere now and increasingly off the charts (see “A New Record: 14 U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather Disasters in 2011“) and links below.

Of course, what’s to come is the real issue, since we still have control over that.  We’re facing 5 to 10 times the warming this century that we’ve seen in the past half century.

Unfortunately, the IPCC continues to conflate uncertainty in future emissions of greenhouse gases with uncertainty in the climate’s sensitivity to those emissions.  This means they present a very large range of possible overall impacts — and that allows the deniers to trumpet the low range with their powerful fossil-fuel-funded megaphone and induces the media to provide “balance” in their stories between the mid-range and the low range.

The reality is we are on the highest emissions trends (see “Biggest Jump Ever in Global Warming Pollution in 2010 means “levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago”).  And the latest science and observation points towards the high end of the climate’s sensitivity (see Journal of Climate: New cloud feedback results “provide support for the high end of current estimates of global climate sensitivity”).

Most climate scientists know what is coming if we don’t act quickly– and more and more are shedding their reticence to speak out, even if that is not yet reflected in bland, least-common-denominator IPCC reports (see Lonnie Thompson on why climatologists are speaking out: “Virtually all of us are now convinced that global warming poses a clear and present danger to civilization”).

And as long as the deniers, inactivists and climate ignorati rule the debate, inaction is assured, which means that we are risking extreme weather beyond imagination, extreme events on top of an average warming this century that could hit 13-18°F over most of U.S. and 25°F in the Arctic:

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE OR COMMENT

Read more

Alyssa

Corporate Art As TLC Takes On Southwest

We talk a lot about overly cozy relationships between business and government, and about the creep of cost-saving measures like products into art, lending it a corporate cast. But it’s rare to see something as blatant as TLC’s planned show about Southwest Airlines. I’ll reserve final judgment until I see the show, of course. But it does seem to me that if you want to make a show about the experience of air travel as a whole, you need to include a lot of people who aren’t employed by specific airlines, particularly air traffic controllers, Transportation Security Administration officers, and ground crew, who are not always affiliated with specific airlines. And it seems like good documentary principal, even if you wanted to make a show about what it’s like to run an airline, to include representatives of multiple companies so viewers can see what the common challenges are and what problems are specific to individual companies and their policies. I understand the desire to make cheap entertainment: these aren’t easy times. But extended looks at individual businesses risk coming across as boring commercials, a la DC Cupcakes, a veteran of the same network.

Economy

Report: The Billions Corporations Avoided Paying In Taxes Would Have Created Over 100,000 Jobs In Education

With income inequality in the U.S. at its highest level since the Great Depression, Americans from every end of the income spectrum are clamoring for corporations and the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes. But because of the numerous tax loopholes and credits worked into the tax code, corporate taxes are at historical lows.

Bank of America paid nothing in federal taxes in 2009. While earning billions in profit, companies like Boeing, Exxon-Mobil, and Wells Fargo also paid nothing in recent years. Other corporations, like Google and Pfizer, dramatically lower their tax rates by deferring profits they make overseas. After making more than $14 billion in profits last year, General Electric not only got a pass on paying any corporate income taxes, but actually received a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.

Thanks to this propitious tax code, corporations kept $222.7 billion in federal revenue from 2008 to 2010. But the loss of that revenue comes at a cost, a cost being paid by middle class and low-income Americans who are already reeling from a sluggish economy — most notably, students. According to a new report from the National Education Association, $9.8 billion of the lost revenue from corporation would have gone to public schools and colleges over the same period. Those funds would have added over 100,000 jobs in public education and ensured that an extra 400,000 kids living in poverty could enroll in preschool. NEA breaks down that $9.8 billion by the numbers:

$1,092: The average amount in extra academic support to help 9 million students in poverty catch up to their peers.

$1,474: The average savings for school districts for each disabled student as a result of greater federal cost sharing.

$1,276: The average amount in additional financial aid to ensure 7.7 million students in need continue or complete their post-secondary studies.

446,655: The number of additional children in poverty enrolled in preschool.

126,568: The number of jobs created in the field of education.

With that $9.8 billion, Ohio would have gained 4,363 jobs, Virginia would get 2,794 jobs, Kentucky would have 2,175 jobs, and Arizona would see more 4,094 jobs. Incidentally, these states are also home to Republican leaders in Congress who are singularly dedicated to maintaining this corporate welfare.

As TP Economy editor Pat Garofalo reported, Republican lawmakers continue to aid and abet corporate tax avoidance by protecting offshore profit deferral, which allows corporations to claim domestic tax credits for profits they earn overseas; by proposing to gut the Internal Revenue Service, whose every dollar used to audit tax cheats brings in more than $10 in revenue; by pushing for tax havens in free trade agreements; by enacting repatriation holidays that allow corporations to bring money earned overseas back into the country at a drastically lower rate, even with its negligible effect on job creation; by endorsing taxpayer giveaways like big oil subsidies; and by publicly defending corporate tax dodgers.

Working on behalf of corporations at the expense of American students and families is quickly becoming part of the Republican orthodoxy. This, however, should not be surprising because after all, for Republicans, “corporations are people too.”

Yglesias

Steve Jobs And The Indeterminacy Of Success

Walter Isaacson’s Steve Jobs biography is a tremendous narrative but doesn’t offer a ton in the way of efforts at analysis. This is probably for the best, since it lets the rest of us talk about it at great length. But to me, one of the most astounding things about Jobs’ life is something Isaacson barely mentions — he made most of his money making animated feature films.

If you’d heard about two different people, one of them a rich guy who investment a few million dollars in Pixar in the mid-to-late ’80s and handled the big picture dealmaking with Disney without playing a substantial role in the company’s movies and the other Steve Jobs who brought us the Apple II, the Macintosh, the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad, you’d think it was ridiculous that the Pixar angel investor made more money than the genius consumer electronics designer. This would probably count as an example of how weird it is that the economy seems to do more to reward people who just shuffle money around than people who invent and create stuff. The fact that they’re actually the same guy makes the life story more interesting, but doesn’t actually change the main point. Inventing successful products is lucrative. Spearheading a successful corporate turnaround is lucrative. But in strict financial terms, it really doesn’t compare to well-timed investment decisions. And yet we all know that the ratio of skill-to-luck involved in industrial design is much higher than in investment timing.

NEWS FLASH

Martin Luther King III: Alabama’s Immigration Law Is Like ‘Jim Crow’ | Calling it “Jim Crow Revisited,” Martin Luther King III and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka lay out similarities between the civil rights movement that Martin Luther King, Jr. helped lead in Alabama and the draconian anti-immigrant law in the same state. “The passage of Alabama’s anti-immigrant legislation, HB 56, invokes inhumanity reminiscent of the Jim Crow South,” they write. “And the police state it has created is equally cruel.” In the op-ed, King and Trumka call on President Obama to stop immigration programs that lead to racial profiling, “including collaboration between state and local law enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security.” After a New York Times editorial compared HB 56 and the civil rights movement, Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley (R) said earlier this week that it was an “insult” to compare the law and the movement. However, it’s more likely that Martin Luther King Jr.’s son is the more authoritative source on if the two struggles are similar.

NEWS FLASH

ADL Condemns Rick Womick’s ‘Shameful, Deeply Disturbing’ Anti-Muslim Comments | The Anti-Defamation League added its voice to the groups condemning remarks made by Tennessee State Rep. Rick Womick (R-Murfreesboro). Womick, in remarks first reported by ThinkProgress, called for Muslims to be purged from the military. The ADL press release reads, “In a letter sent to Tennessee State Representative Rick Womick today, the Anti-Defamation League called on Womick to repudiate his ‘shameful, deeply disturbing’ remarks regarding Islam and Muslim Americans serving in the U.S. Military.” “Singling out and stereotyping the entire Muslim American community for special scrutiny or suspicion is discriminatory and offensive,” said Bill Nigut, Southeast regional director of the Anti-Defamation League in his letter to Womick. “As there are numerous Americans of Islamic faith bravely and diligently serving our nation in the U.S. Armed Forces, your statements about Muslims in the military are particularly shameful and outrageous.”

Health

Another Look At Premium Support And Competitive Bidding In Medicare

Austin Frakt suggests that some progressives — including this blog — may have been too quick to dismiss the Rivlin/Domenici “premium support” proposal that Republicans on the super committee are now advancing as a viable compromise to the Medicare privatization plan contained in the GOP budget. Rivlin/Domenici would provide seniors with “premium support” vouchers that they could spend on traditional fee-for-service Medicare or a private health insurance plan that would be required to offer Medicare benefits. Medicare and private health insurers would compete for beneficiaries by offering bids for a defined benefit, which the government would then convert into a “premium support” based on the second lowest bid in each geographic area. Seniors would enroll in a low-bid plan — whose costs can be fully covered by the premium support — or select a more expensive policy and pay the difference between the bid and the “premium support.”

Some progressives argue that Medicare would lose that competition because healthier beneficiaries would join private plans, causing costs to increase in the traditional fee-for-service program. Frakt disagrees:

With network adequacy in place and prices dropping below private plans to an increasing extent, traditional Medicare may perform well under competitive bidding. Why are so many seeming to lack confidence that the program can compete? After all, look at what’s going on today. Private plans are at a tremendous advantage and have been for many years. They receive per beneficiary subsidies way above the average cost of traditional Medicare. They offer many additional benefits and many plans offer lower premiums and cost sharing relative to traditional Medicare. Still, traditional Medicare retains 75% of the market. Competitive bidding would reduce the overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans, reducing the advantage they have in the market today.

Thus, I think there is a chance traditional Medicare would do just fine under competitive bidding. It might even thrive. This is, admittedly, speculative, and it depends, in part, on what Congress allows the plan to do, which depends on how any competitive bidding statute is written (if ever). The devil, as always, is in the details.

Setting aside the beneficiary cap in Rivlin/Domenici — the premium support grows at GDP plus 1 percent and does not keep up with actual health care spending — I would probably be more enthusiastic about competitive bidding between Medicare and private insurance if it was truly possible to limit adverse selection and both parties competed on an equal playing field (and were required to offer not just the same benefits, but also the same scope of benefits so as to prohibit insurers from dialing up healthy people benefits and dialing down those services that are used by the sick). But I have a sneaking suspicion that insurers and the lawmakers who they work with would oppose this kind of “pure” competitive bidding structure because they’re more interested in privatizing Medicare and lowering federal spending on the program than actually tackling national health care spending. And in that case, this would turn into a cost shift to seniors, rather than a sensible way to reform the program.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up