ThinkProgress Logo

Climate Progress

Anti-Science ‘Monkey Bill’ Passes Tennessee Senate

By Climate Guest Blogger on Mar 20, 2012 at 8:06 pm

Bill requiring ‘teaching the controversy’ on evolution and global warming opposed by leading science groups

A National Center for Science Education repost

“The Senate approved a bill Monday evening that deals with teaching of evolution and other scientific theories,” the Knoxville News-Sentinel (March 19, 2012) reported, adding, “Critics call it a ‘monkey bill’ that promotes creationism in classrooms.” The bill in question is Senate Bill 893, which, if enacted, would encourage teachers to present the “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses” of “controversial” topics such as “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.”

Among those expressing opposition to the bill are the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, the American Institute for Biological Sciences, the Knoxville News Sentinel, the Nashville Tennessean, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, the National Earth Science Teachers Association, and the Tennessee Science Teachers Association, whose president Becky Ashe described (PDF) the legislation as “unnecessary, anti-scientific, and very likely unconstitutional.”

The Senate vote was 24-8. According to the Tennesseean (March 20, 2012), Andy Berke (D-District 10) “noted the state’s history as a battleground over evolution — the so-called Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925 drew national attention and inspired the Oscar-winning film Inherit the Wind — and said the measure would cast Tennessee in a bad light.” Berke also objected that the bill would encourage inappropriate discussions of religious matters, saying, “If my children ask, ‘How does that mesh with my faith?’ I don’t want their teacher answering that question.”

The bill now proceeds to the House of Representatives, which passed the counterpart House Bill 368 on April 7, 2011. SB 893 was amended in committee before it passed the Senate, however, so the two houses of the legislature will have to resolve the discrepancies between the bills. Tennessee’s governor Bill Haslam previously indicated that he would discuss the bill with the state board of education, telling the Tennesseean (March 19, 2012), “It is a fair question what the General Assembly’s role is … That’s why we have a state board of education.”

– NCSE has said of creationism that “students who accept this material as scientifically valid are unlikely to succeed in science courses at the college level.”

Related NCSE Post:

  • Tennessee’s top scientists, including Stanley Cohen, Nobel Prize winner in physiology of medicine, oppose “monkey bills”: ”By undermining the teaching of evolution in Tennessee’s public schools, HB368 and SB893 would miseducate students, harm the state’s national reputation, and weaken its efforts to compete in a science-driven global economy.“

Economy

GOP Budget Plan To Reduce The Debt Actually Makes The Debt Worse

By Travis Waldron on Mar 20, 2012 at 6:10 pm

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) released the GOP’s new budget this morning, and in doing so, he touted it as a plan to make America’s level of debt more sustainable. “We’ve shared with Americans a specific plan of action that cuts spending, pays off the debt and gets our economy back on the path to prosperity,” Ryan said.

The problem with Ryan’s rhetoric is that his plan fails to match it. By giving massive tax breaks to corporations and the top one percent and preserving unsustainable levels of defense spending, the House GOP’s plan to reduce the debt would fail to reduce the debt. In fact, because it assumes levels of revenue that are pure fantasy under his tax proposals, the plan would actually increase the debt, according to an analysis by Center for American Progress Tax and Budget Policy Director Michael Linden:

But the House budget’s entire claim to deficit reduction is built on the foundation of those fantasy revenue levels. Without them, the debt goes up, not down. In fact, with all the House budget’s tax cuts properly accounted for, revenue would average just 15.3 percent of GDP from 2013 through 2022, not 18.3 percent. The result: deficits would never drop below 4.4 percent of GDP, and would rise to more than 5 percent of GDP by 2022.

The national debt, measured as a share of GDP, would never decline, surpassing 80 percent by 2014, and 90 percent by 2022. By comparison, President Barack Obama’s budget proposal, released in February, would stabilize the debt by 2015, and bring it down to 76 percent by 2022.

As Linden notes, the GOP’s “debt reduction” isn’t just based on fantasy levels of revenue — it’s based on “massive, unrealistic” spending cuts as well. Medicaid would face $1 trillion cuts in the first decade, while education and workforce training programs would get cut in half and transportation funding would be reduced by nearly 25 percent. The plan, which also ignores previous deals and increases defense spending, would also require deep cuts in other vital domestic programs.

“If you agree it’s morally wrong to ignore the most predictable crisis in U.S. history, this is your budget,” Ryan tweeted yesterday. Apparently, though, it seems Ryan and his Republican colleagues got so wrapped up in creating a budget that benefits the top one percent, they forgot to actually reduce the debt.

Alyssa

Gender Inequality, ‘The Richer Sex,’ and Science Fiction

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Mar 20, 2012 at 6:07 pm

I tend to be suspicious of studies or articles that proclaim the end of men, or of the gender gap—after all, the hecession turned into the hecovery, and sexism looks relatively entrenched to me. But I’m kind of intrigued by Liza Mundy’s The Richer Sex. That book notes that 40 percent of married women now outearn their husbands, and starts thinking about how our sense of masculinity might evolve if men and women switched their roles.

There’s already a fair bit of pop culture that explores the lives of stay-at-home dads, of which the best, I think, is Up All Night. But a lot of those depictions are still rooted in the idea that fathers taking on primary responsibility for their children or women supporting their husbands and families as the sole breadwinner is a strange and new thing. And in these worlds, what we understand to be masculine and feminine is pretty much the same thing, with a dose of daddy grooming rituals to keep things hot at home.

This goes hand in hand with our conversation from a couple of weeks ago about world-building. But I’d love to see someone take a book like The Richer Sex and use that as a basis for thinking about a science fictional world. We’ve had some good science fiction, like The Handmaid’s Tale and Children of Men that’s come out of a rethinking of the value of women’s fertility: when it goes up, women tend to be in even more danger of finding themselves under men’s control. But I wonder if we can imagine a future where women are more economically powerful men that is culturally different but not inherently antagonistic. What does masculinity look like when it’s divorced from the exercise of power? And what does femininity mean when it’s divorced from domesticity. I’d imagine different in the short-term and long-term, but that’s a thought experiment worth doing.

NEWS FLASH

Obama Heading To Oklahoma To Fast-Track Southern Leg Of Keystone XL | “President Obama plans to announce in Cushing, Oklahoma Thursday that his administration will expedite the permit process for the southern half of the Keystone XL pipeline, a source familiar with the president’s announcement tells CNN.” Obama foreshadowed this decision in his January announcement to deny the international permit for the Canada-to-Texas tar sands pipeline, when he said he supported “the potential development of an oil pipeline from Cushing, Oklahoma to the Gulf of Mexico.”

By Brad Johnson on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:48 pm

Justice

Top GOP Congressman Reaffirms His Doubts About Obama’s Birth Certificate, Cites Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Investigation

By Scott Keyes on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:12 pm

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) confirmed today that he is a birther

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), who was roundly criticized last week after ThinkProgress reported the Florida congressmen questioning whether President Obama’s birth certificate is “legitimate,” confirmed today that he is indeed a birther.

When asked about the issue on Capitol Hill today, Stearns told reporters, “I am, shall we say, looking at all the evidence.” He called for credence to be given to birth certificate investigations, saying, “I don’t think it is unreasonable just to see what they have to say.” The Hill has more:

In April 2011, the White House released Obama’s long-form birth certificate to the public, hoping to put the matter to bed for good. But the issue has popped back up repeatedly — most recently in early March, when Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio said he had evidence the document was a fake.

Asked Tuesday if he thinks the birth certificate is legitimate, Stearns cited an inquiry by an Arizona sheriff – an apparent reference to Arpaio – and noted he believed there is “another investigation” as well.

“I think we are just going to hold in abeyance a final decision until we hear, you know, some of these people seem to have legitimate concerns, so I don’t think it is unreasonable just to see what they have to say,” Stearns said.

The man Stearns finds it reasonable to listen to is disgraced Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, generally known for rampant racial profiling against Latinos, but more recently for assembling a team of volunteer self-styled investigators to examine Obama’s birth certificate. Earlier this month, that team concluded that the birth certificate is a “forgery and fraud.”

Not so long ago, Stearns actually accepted the fact that President Obama was born in the United States. In 2009, his office looked into the matter and concluded that there was “no reason to question the President’s citizenship.” It’s unclear whether new evidence or a right-wing primary challenger has since led Stearns to dive into the murky world of birtherism.

Stearns is chairman of the the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, a perch he has used to spearhead the investigation into failed solar manufacturer Solyndra and Planned Parenthood.

Economy

Democratic Budget Head Slams GOP Budget As ‘Ideological,’ Based On ‘Discredited Theory’

By Travis Waldron and Jeff Spross on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:10 pm

The House Republican budget is based on a flawed ideology and the discredited idea of trickle down economics, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said Tuesday. Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) unveiled the GOP’s budget this morning, revealing that, like last year, it targets steep cuts in Medicare and Medicaid and includes more than $3 trillion in tax breaks for corporations and the wealthiest Americans.

Ryan claims the budget will be revenue neutral and put a significant dent in the nation’s deficit, but Van Hollen dismissed it as an unserious plan that doesn’t come close to getting Democrats to the table for compromise. Republicans, Van Hollen said, are hamstrung by their loyalty to anti-tax activist Grover Norquist’s “no new taxes” pledge and their belief in the discredited theory of trickle down economics:

VAN HOLLEN: This is a totally ideological budget. You have to remember that 98 percent of Republicans in the House have signed this pledge to Grover Norquist that says they will not support closing one tax loophole, not one penny from closing one tax loophole, for the purpose of deficit reduction. Well if you’re not going to take one penny from getting rid of oil and gas subsidies or closing tax loopholes for deficit reduction, by definition, you’re not going to take a balanced approach, you’re not looking at both sides of the budget equation.

So, I think it is based on ideology, and again, the underlying ideology here is this discredited theory of trickle down economics, the notion that by providing these windfall tax breaks for the wealthiest in this country, somehow that will just trickle down and lift the middle class. The reality is the only people it’s lifting up is the yachts, not the regular boats that are out there.

Ryan and his colleagues continue to cling to the belief that providing enormous tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations will spur economic growth, and this plan is no different. That belief, however, ignores reality. Providing a huge tax break to the wealthy in the form of the Bush tax cuts did nothing to spur economic growth or job creation, and as Center for American Progress economist Adam Hersh noted today, the GOP’s massive tax cuts for businesses under both Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush failed to boost business investment.

And yet, the GOP is back with another budget that cuts vital safety net programs for the middle class and the poor to pay for massive tax cuts for the rich, and yet again, the party claims such policies will boost job growth and speed the economic recovery. The reality, however, is that the Republican Party’s trickle-down policies don’t work and never have.

LGBT

White House: Same-Sex Families ‘Deserve Legal Protections And The Ability To Thrive’

By Zack Ford on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:05 pm

At a press conference this afternoon, White House press secretary Jay Carney responded to a question about First Lady Michelle Obama’s comments at various campaign stops yesterday defending same-sex couples right to “love whomever they choose.” Stopping short of indicating support for marriage equality, Carney explained that her comments referred to the President’s opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act:

CARNEY: She has said this before and has for some time, and that is a reference to the president’s position on the Defense of Marriage Act. The president and first lady firmly believe that gay and lesbian Americans and their families deserve legal protections and the ability to thrive just like any family does. The first lady has said she is proud of his accomplishments, including the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ ensuring hospital visitation rights and calling for the repeal of DOMA and obviously our actions on DOMA. And our decision not to defend DOMA is well known.

The only kind of legal protection that would allow same-sex families “to thrive just like any family does” is marriage, so this comment represents perhaps the closest the Obama administration has come to openly supporting marriage equality. As Greg Sargent pointed out today in the Washington Post, the first lady’s rehtoric “was just vague enough to again underscore the confusion that surrounds the White House’s position on this issue,” and Carney’s response only accentuates that confusion. Nevertheless, without a full-throated endorsement, the President presumably continues to “evolve” on whether he personally supports legalizing same-sex marriage.

NEWS FLASH

Wyden Won’t Support Paul Ryan’s New Budget | A spokesperson for Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has confirmed that while the Oregon Democrat still supports the joint Medicare “premium support” reform plan he introduced with Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) last year, he will not be endorsing the House Republican Budget unveiled today. Both plans would transform the government’s contribution to Medicare into a “premium support” subsidy and would allow seniors to purchase insurance from the traditional government-sponsored program or an exchange of private plans. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) first told reporters that Wyden wasn’t backing Ryan earlier this afternoon, saying that Wyden called him to say “He doesn’t like the budget Ryan came up with.” Wyden’s spokesperson confirmed the conversation to ThinkProgess, adding, “They spoke this morning. Senator Wyden said he doesn’t support the House Republican Budget, but he didn’t say it ‘ends Medicare as we know it.’ He’s not backing away from Wyden-Ryan.”

By Guest Blogger on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:01 pm

Justice

New Research Suggests William Rehnquist Lied About Explosive Memo Backing Racial Segregation

By Josh Israel on Mar 20, 2012 at 4:55 pm

Chief Justice William Rehnquist

Chief Justice William Rehnquist (1924-2005)

During his 1971 Supreme Court confirmation process — and again in 1986, when he was elevated to chief justice, William Rehnquist was forced to explain a 1951 memo he’d written, as a clerk to then-Justice Robert H. Jackson. He told the Senate the document, which argued that the court should preserve “separate-but-equal” racial segregation in the Brown v. Board of Education case, was merely written as “a statement of Justice Jackson’s tentative views for his own use.”

Rehnquist’s memo said:

I realize that it is an unpopular and unhumanitarian position, for which I have been excoriated by “liberal” colleagues, but I think Plessy v. Ferguson was right and should be re-affirmed.

Jackson and the unanimous court ended up rejecting the “tentative view,” overturning Plessy‘s embarrassing holding that public accommodations could legally be segregated along racial lines.

A Boston College Law Review article examines another newly discovered letter from Rehnquist highly critical of his former boss, calling Justice Jackson “half-cocked” and predicting he would not leave “a lasting influence on the court.” The letter, the authors say, appears to show “Rehnquist’s disappointment with Brown and the beginning of his outspoken criticism of the Warren Court.” The letter and other clues raise significant doubt about the veracity of Rehqnuist’s explanations of the 1951 memo. Had they been discovered at the time, the authors suspect, it “would have been a bombshell at his Supreme Court confirmation hearings in 1971 and 1986.”

Instead, Rehnquist got to sit for more than 33 years on the high court — 19 of them as chief justice. Over that time he joined in countless opinions and dissents attempting to deny civil rights protections to LGBT Americans, oppose Affirmative Action, restrict freedom of speech, and undermine the separation of church and state.

Climate Progress

Commerce Department Announces Small Tariffs On Chinese Solar Panels

By Stephen Lacey on Mar 20, 2012 at 4:48 pm

After months of speculation and debate about unfair Chinese subsidies to domestic solar manufacturers, the U.S. solar industry finally has an answer to one piece of the ongoing trade case: Solar panels imported from China will be hit with a small tariff.

The Department of Commerce issued a preliminary decision today based upon the agency’s impartial review of Chinese subsidies to domestic solar companies.

The tariffs range from 2.9 percent to 4.73 percent — dramatically lower than the 20 percent expected by many industry analysts. It is important to note, however, that today’s decision from Commerce is the first of two key tariff rulings: subsidies and dumping. The second decision on whether Chinese companies are dumping panels into the U.S. market below cost is expected in May.

The complaint was filed in October by SolarWorld and a small group of unnamed solar manufacturers that called themselves the Coalition of American Solar Manufacturers, or CASM. It sparked a contentious debate in the solar industry between upstream panel manufacturers getting squeezed by rapidly falling prices and downstream developers benefiting from cheap equipment.

The Center for American Progress has taken a nuanced stance on the issue — understanding the value of falling solar prices and free trade, but also supporting trade enforcement mechanisms when needed. Melanie Hart, CAP’s China Energy and Climate Policy Analyst, explained the importance of the case in a statement:

Read more

Older

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

Sign Up