ThinkProgress Logo

Climate Progress

A carbon litmus test: The green eyeshades need to go green

accountant.jpg

[We are barreling headlong into "catastrophic" 5-7°C warming by 2100. Bill Becker says it's time for the federal government to stop subsidizing humanity's self-destruction. That means the green eyeshades -- fiscal managers, accountants, and economists -- must start fully accounting for the harm that carbon emissions do to our health and well-being and for the cost of destroying ecosystem services.]

As Congress gets ready to debate an economic recovery package – and President Obama gets ready to sign one — they should use a simple test to determine who and what gets the money: Is the project friend or foe in regard to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing America’s energy security?

At some point, our energy producers, road-builders, auto manufacturers, building contractors and other sectors of the economy need an unequivocal message from Washington that public funds must pass a strict litmus test from now on. Unless there are legitimate overriding factors of national security or economic trauma, public funds will no longer support global climate change and our dependence on fossil fuels.

In other words, when it comes to taxpayer money, the carbon economy need not apply.

Read more

Politics

Interior Dept. rule allowing guns in national parks may violate White House directive.

Earlier this month, the Department of Interior overturned a Reagan-era regulation, allowing loaded firearms at most national park sites such as the National Mall. Yesterday, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence sued the administration, saying the rule “jeopardizes the safety of park visitors in violation of federal law.” The release notes that the Interior Dept. violated the White House’s own directive:

The suit charges that the Interior Department violated several federal laws in its rush to implement the rule before President Bush leaves office, including failing to conduct any environmental review of the harm that the rule will cause, as is required by the National Environmental Policy Act. The Department also violated a White House directive that no rules should be issued after November 1, 2008, except in “extraordinary circumstances,” issuing the last-minute rule change on December 10, 2008.

The Bush administration also violated its own directive in November with a last-minute rule gutting worker protections.

Yglesias

Seating Burris

Scott Lemieux observes that what the Senate Democrats are threatening to do in refusing to seat Roland Burris is probably illegal:

The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 (and 8-0 among justices deciding on the merits) in Powell v. McCormack that “in judging the qualifications of its members, Congress is limited to the standing qualifications prescribed in the Constitution.”

This is to say that Congress gets to offer definitive rulings on, say, a dispute over whether or not a Senator is really 35. But nobody disputes that Blagojevic is governor of Illinois. And nobody disputes that the Illinois Senate seat is vacant. And nobody disputes that the governor of Illinois is supposed to fill Illinois Senate vacancies. And nobody disputes that Burris was chosen by Blagojevic. And nobody disputes that Burris possesses the standing qualifications prescribed in the constitution. So it seems to me that unless the Senate has some reason to believe that Burris did something corrupt to obtain the seat, there’s neither grounds for expelling him nor for refusing to seat him.

On top of all that, I would have to say that Powell seems like a correctly decided case and that it would be right to apply the precedent to Burris’ case. It’s fine to say that the honorable course for Burris would be to have refused the appointment, but that’s different from saying that the Senate should be able to refuse to seat him merely because having him there would be politically awkward. Giving the Congress the power to arbitrarily exclude duly elected or appointed members seems like a seriously bad idea the more I think about it.

Additional observations: It’s weird for the Senate to get holier-than-thou about this given that one sitting senator is a family values advocate with a taste for hookers and that there was a bipartisan love-in staged on the occasion of Ted Stevens, convicted felon, departing from the Senate. If these guys can get weepy about Stevens, surely they can handle the vague air of impropriety hanging around Burris.

Also — this thing with governor’s appointing senators is one more of the various procedures of American government that makes no sense. Vacancies should be filled by special election.

Yglesias

Nobody Goes There Anymore, It’s Too Crowded

malllife.png

I think trying to build housing in shopping malls is a potentially promising idea. It’s a reminder that I’ve been meaning for a while to write a post about separating the idea of “walkable urbanism” from the idea of “living in a city.” A city is, of course, a political concept. But walkable urbanism is a geographical and lifestyle concept. In the DC area, walkable urbanism exists in the parts of Arlington County that lie along the Blue and (especially) Orange line corridors as well as near the Silver Spring and Bethesda Metro stations in Montgomery County even though those places are “in the suburbs.” And parts of the city don’t exhibit the features of walkable urbanism. And by the same token, traditionally a great deal of walkable urbanism took place in small towns rather than in cities, and also in small cities (see Douglas Rae’s account of New Haven) and “streetcar suburbs” rather than big cities.

All of which is a throat-clearing way of saying that if we see a big increase in the amount of walkable urbanism available to American families, an awful lot of it will probably exist outside the city limits of the municipalities that form the hubs of our metropolitan area. That will mean, yes, converting existing elements of the build environment rather than simply abandoning everything and trying to get everyone to move willy-nilly into downtown Cleveland. In other words — more housing in malls.

But I wanted to end with the observation that I got this item via Felix Salmon who introduced it thusly:

Do you want to live within easy walking distance of shops, restaurants, and other such amenities? Do you want to live in a condo with a doorman, its own private grounds, a screening room, and similar bells and whistles? Up until now, answering “yes” to such questions meant that you had to live in the city — something which many people don’t like doing (dirt, smells, noise, bad schools, you know the drill) and which in any case is often very expensive.

This is like saying that most Americans don’t like BMWs — after all, they’re so damn expensive. Obviously, some people really do have an extremely strong preference for a sizable yard and driving-oriented lifestyle. But equally obviously, people respond to prices and living in desirable urbanist areas is “often very expensive.” That reflects both the intrinsic appeal that such areas have to many people and the short supply that they’re in. This is one of the reasons why we need to build more communities featuring walkable urbanism.

Climate Progress

The most read Climate Progress posts of 2008

Here are all the year’s posts viewed by 15,000 or more people.

It is a more arbitrary list than the most-discussed posts of 2008, since it is wholly determined by whether I get picked up by some uber-popular website like Digg or if the post pops up in search engines. But I will include this list in the year-end recap if for no other reason than it contains one post guaranteed to make you laugh:

15,933 Views: Physicists forced to reaffirm that human-caused global warming is “incontrovertible”

[The only post to make both lists.]

18,962: The truth-telling ad ABC won’t let you see — and what you can do about it

[This received 1700 Diggs and temporarily crashed my system -- otherwise it probably would have gotten considerably more views.]

20,611: Bush launches Unendangered Species List, phones “Rename the Polar Bear” winner

[A lot of people come to Climate Progress after doing a search on polar bears.]

21,848: More conclusive proof of global warming

[If that post doesn't make you smile, then you are simply impervious to schadenfreude.]

Read more

Media

Talking Trash

John Judis is a mensch:

I want to take issue with Martin Peretz’s description of my former colleague Spencer Ackerman’s articles as “trash.” Maybe I am sensitive because Spencer co-authored several with me, including a piece of the Bush administration’s deception about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (“The First Casualty”), which Marty praised at the time. Spencer also co-authored a terrific profile of Dick Cheney with current editor Frank Foer (“What Dick Cheney Really Believes,” November 20, 2003). But Spencer wrote much on his own, including regular commentary on the Iraq war for The New Republic’s website, during which he changed, like others at the magazine, from a supporter to opponent of the decision to go to war. I particularly remember an outstanding cover story Spencer wrote on American Muslims. I would like to link to it, but the links to our archives are broken. It was, called “Religious Protection: Why American Muslims haven’t turned to Terrorism,” and appeared Dec. 12, 2005.

Any editor worth his salt would consider having helped Spencer launch his career a proud accomplishment.

Health

WSJ Continues To Fear Monger Against Health Care Reform

The editorial page of the Wall Street Journal took another shot at President elect Barack Obama’s health care proposal yesterday, warning readers that Obama’s appointed health care leaders — incoming Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Daschle and Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council Melody Barnes — “will ration your health care“:

People are policy. And now that President-elect Barack Obama has fielded his team of Tom Daschle as secretary of Health and Human Services and Melody Barnes as director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, we can predict both the strategy and substance of the new administration’s health-care reform.

The prognosis is not good for patients, physicians or taxpayers…. Americans can expect a quick, hard push to build more federal bureaucracy, impose price controls, restrict medicines and technology, boost taxes, mandate the purchase of health insurance, and expand government health care.

The Journal’s ‘predictions’ are as predictable as they are erroneous. Conservatives have spouted the same-old tired arguments against reform since President Clinton’s failed 1994 effort, and the Wonk Room, along with some other progressive blogs, has been actively disputing their assertions.

But this latest attack piece introduces another more potent argument. The editorial, with Rove-like precision, attempts to invert the nation’s most successful universal health care reform effort into its biggest disaster:

Mr. Daschle’s model is Massachusetts. But Massachusetts’s plan is an unfolding disaster and demonstrates how Mr. Daschle’s private/public model is merely a stalking horse for government-dominated health care.

By conflating universal health care with the challenges of the Massachusetts model and defining ‘success’ as a program that remains budget neutral — not one that extends more coverage to more people — conservatives are stalling reform.

The popular Massachusetts model has greatly reduced the number of uninsured and increasing access to coverage. Nearly three-quarters of previously uninsured Massachusetts residents now have medical coverage, half of the newly-insured “are enrolled in private health insurance and employer-sponsored plans” and “the number of visits to hospitals and community health centers by the uninsured declined by 37 percent,” saving the state an estimated $68 million.

But while Massachusetts “decided not to hold coverage hostage to the difficult decisions about cost,” Obama and his health care team have suggested that they will simultaneously address access and cost. The Massachusetts plan, for instance, “allows private insurers to sell group-style policies to lower-income Massachusetts residents who lack insurance” within a “Connector” or exchange but does not include a public plan alongside private options.

Mr. Daschle’s ‘public/private model‘” conversely, would create a public option alongside the private plans, forcing insurers to compete on price and quality.

The Journal, however, glosses over the details and differences and attempts to discredit both the Obama team and the successes in Massachusetts by regurgitating tired attacks and pretending that the challenges of reform discredit the entire effort.

Yglesias

The Year in Cities

Interesting concept from Jason Kottke who’s listing all the cities he’s been to in 2008. My list (not counting places I just drove through or switched planes in) with asterixes for places I’d never been before:

  • Washington, DC.
  • New York, NY.
  • Los Angeles, CA.
  • Claremont, CA.*
  • Riverside, CA.
  • Tuscon, AZ*
  • Austin, TX.*
  • Miami, FL.
  • Chicago, IL.
  • Geneva, Switzerland.*
  • Helsinki, Finland.*
  • Kitty Hawk, NC.
  • Minneapolis, MN.*
  • Las Vegas, NV.*
  • Baltimore, MD.

All told, I think I did more traveling this year than I had in some time which at times got exhausting (those were three separate trips to Southern California) but overall I found incredibly fun and interesting. I’m still very eager to get to the Pacific Northwest at some point as I’ve never been to Portland, Seattle, or Vancouver and not to the Bay Area since I was a little kid. That or, you know, Asia.

UPDATE: And Cambridge, MA! Apologies to SR my host in that fine town.

Climate Progress

Tennessee not-so-clean coal sludge spill estimate grows to 1 billion gallons

TVA officials originally said the cleanup would take four to six weeks. Now they say they aren't sure.CNN updates the coal story of the year:

Estimates for the amount of thick sludge that gushed from a Tennessee coal plant last week have tripled to more than a billion gallons, as cleanup crews try to remove the goop from homes and railroads and halt its oozing into an adjacent river.

That would be “enough to fill 1,660 Olympic-size swimming pools” assuming you wanted to fill your pool with “concentrated levels of mercury and arsenic.” And that is, as Richard Graves puts it, “more than 100 times larger than the Exxon Valdez disaster and, in fact, more than every drop of petroleum used in the United States that day.”

The next time someone says “clean coal,” be sure to do that bit where you cough and say “B.S.” Or maybe skip the couging part.

Related Posts:

Security

‘Key Ally In The War On Terror’ Breaks With U.S., Condemns Israel For Gaza Strikes

After disastrously invading and occupying Iraq, one of the justifications President Bush frequently offered for sustaining the enormous U.S. costs in lives and resources was that we were developing a “key ally” in the Middle East:

Together we’ll help Iraq become a strong democracy that protects the rights of its people and is a key ally in the war on terror. [9/22/05]

Our mission in Iraq is clear. … We’re helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We’re advancing freedom in the broader Middle East. [6/28/05]

Freedom will prevail in Iraq; freedom will prevail in the Middle East; and as the hope of freedom spreads to nations that have not known it, these countries will become allies in the cause of peace. [3/20/06]

The Wonk Room’s Matt Duss notes that — in a central test of the U.S. alliance with Iraq — our “key ally” is instead more eager to disassociate itself completely from the United States:

Just as they did during Israel’s 2006 war against Hezbollah, Iraq’s leaders are now showing where their true sympathies lie. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s Da’wa Party “issued a statement condemning the attacks and calling on Islamic countries to cut relations with Israel and end all ’secret and public talks’ with it.”

Khalid Hussain of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI) told Gulf News “We have obligations towards Palestine and all Iraqi people are in solidarity with the people in Palestine, and we will support the people in Gaza.” [...]

“Iraqi resistance groups have to retaliate against the Israeli aggression on Gaza by escalating their operations against the US military in Iraq since the US position is in favour of this aggression, firstly, and secondly because the United States and Israel are both enemies of the Arabs,” Omar Al Kubaisi, an activist of the Sunni Muslim Clerics Association.

Shia cleric Grand Ayatollah Sistani has also condemned the Gaza strikes. Duss concludes, “Looking on the bright side, if one can call it that, as with opposition to the U.S. occupation, Gaza is an issue on which Iraqis have achieved rare political consensus.”

Older

Newer

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

Sign Up