Liberty Counsel Maintains ‘Viewpoint’ That Sexuality Is ‘Changeable’

By Zack Ford on Feb 20, 2013 at 4:31 pm

A Parent's Guide To Preventing Homosexuality

Ex-gay therapist Joseph Nicolosi, a plaintiff in this case, encourages parents to reject their children.

The Liberty Counsel has filed its final brief in its challenge of California’s ban on ex-gay therapy (SB 1172) on behalf of NARTH. In it, the group reiterates its claims that encouraging young people to change their sexual orientation is simply a “viewpoint,” and thus protected by the First Amendment. Despite the dearth of evidence supporting its effectiveness and the research that shows not only that it’s ineffective but that it can also be harmful, the conservatives stand by their claim that same-sex attractions (SSA) can be changed:

The APA Report admits SSA is “fluid,” which, no matter the debate over “enduring” change, it is clear that SSA can change. Studies reveal that sexual orientation is “not static.” “Contrary to the theoretical notion that one becomes fixated in childhood, the sexual orientation of the individuals in this study often changed remarkably.”

SB 1172 prohibits any counsel under any circumstance to change SSA. If SSA is fluid, then it is changeable. Given that SSA is capable of change, then why does the law prohibit change therapy? If an unhappy homosexual client engages the counselor because he wants to be bisexual, does the counselor violate SB 1172 by providing counsel that helps the client develop sexual attraction for both sexes? Or does the counselor violate the law only when the counsel offered seeks to change the client to be exclusively heterosexual?

SB 1172 prohibits any counsel to change SSA. What are Appellant-Counselors to do when clients return after hearing their opinion that SSA can change and asks the counselor to help them meet their self-determined objective to change their SSA? If the clients seek change, and if the Report admits SSA is fluid, and thus changeable, then why are counselors and clients prohibited from pursuing change? Where is the line drawn? What is permitted and what is not? The licenses of the Appellant-Counselors are on the line. They and thousands of other counselors and clients have no idea how to avoid these landmines.

NARTH and Liberty Counsel are twisting words beyond reproach in an attempt to make their case. There is a difference between the fact that sexual orientation naturally changes over time and the claim that it can be manipulated by therapy. Further, just because an individual has a “self-determined objective” to accomplish any bizarre outcome in therapy doesn’t mean it’s healthy or valid to work toward that objective. Indeed, the reason that professional psychological groups have established that affirming an individual’s sexual orientation is a best practice is because that is what has been determined to help patients regardless of what they’ve been taught to believe about homosexuality.

It’s important to keep in mind the mind-game at work. In the original complaint, these ex-gay therapists argued that the treatment was important for bringing families together. In other words, parents with a bias against homosexuality claim they can only love their child if he rejects his same-sex orientation, but the therapists then blame this situation on the patient — as they are wont to do. The young person is convinced to participate in the treatment to appease his family, implying an ultimatum that he can be gay or he can be loved, but he can’t be both. Thus, the “benefits” of ex-gay therapy are often a sort of Stockholm Syndrome in which young people claim to be happier because they’ve managed to placate their family’s homophobia. This artificial construct is self-serving, caters to parents’ demands instead of children’s well-being, and speaks nothing to the actual validity of ex-gay therapy.

Convincing young people to reject their identities is harmful on its face, and the animus behind defending the practice is not particularly well hidden in these arguments. These counselors can claim that they have an opinion about homosexuality, but they can’t claim to have any truth.

()

Climate Progress

Honda And SolarCity Partner On Low-Cost Home Solar Power Leases

By Jeff Spross on Feb 20, 2013 at 4:28 pm

According to the New York Times, a new deal between automakers Honda and Acura and solar developer SolarCity may give a big boost to the already-rapidly burgeoning solar leasing market.

Solar leases, or solar power purchase agreements, are one of the new innovative tools for encouraging solar deployment. Basically, instead of purchasing a solar array outright, the customer plays host to a developer’s solar system in exchange for an agreement to pay a pre-determined fee structure for the electricity over a set period of time. That allows the developer to acquire a new income stream, and most likely the benefits of renewable energy tax credits.

Meanwhile, the customer gets the electricity for a price that’s often slightly below the going market rate. Perhaps more importantly, they avoid many of the problems that have bedeviled solar installations, such as the up-front installment costs, the permitting process, and the performance risk. As a firm with assets, the developer is generally in a far better position to tackle those hurdles than individual solar customers.

As the Times reports, Honda and Acura will offer their customers home solar systems at little-to-no upfront cost via the partnership with SolarCity, the largest player currently in the solar leasing market. (Honda and Acura will also offer their dealers preferential terms to lease or buy SolarCity’s systems on a case-by-case basis.) So SolarCity gets new capital and a massive new customer base, Honda and Accura get a cut of the returns, and customers get an added promotional deal to lease their homes to SolarCity’s systems and purchase its electricity:

The deal, in which Honda will provide financing for $65 million worth of installations, will help the automaker promote its environmental aims and earn a modest return, executives said. It could also open the door for more corporate investment in solar leasing companies, which has largely been limited to a small cluster of banks to provide capital for their projects….

The program will give Honda and Acura customers an extra $400 discount on top of SolarCity’s normal promotions, which they can use to sweeten the terms of the solar contract, like eliminating the escalation of the monthly payment. Honda projects the fund can finance as many as 3,000 systems on homes and 20 for its dealers. If the program catches on, Honda plans to expand it.

The growth of solar leasing has been one of the biggest recent drivers of the United States’ solar market — even more so than increases in cell efficiency — putting new arrays on government buildings, public and private schools, and private businesses and homes.

A new report from GTM Research found that solar leases are now available in 14 states — comprising over 50 percent of the new residential solar capacity in California, Arizona, Colorado, and Massachusetts, and rapidly gaining market share in the ten others. GTM Research anticipates the solar leasing market will rise from $1.35 billion in 2012 to $5.7 billion in 2016.

“I don’t think that by finding Honda buyers you’ve homed in on the perfect solar customer,” Shayle Kann, vice president at GTM, told the Times. But since car owners are more likely to have the income and credit history to qualify for solar leasing, “there’s enough overlapping between the demographics that you’re better off than the general population.” The initial program will be available in 14 states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas and Washington, and the District of Columbia.

Apparently, Honda originally proposed the partnership with SolarCity in order to supply solar installations for its hybrid and electric vehicle customers. But when encouraging solar deployment seemed to promise more overall carbon emissions cuts than simply selling electric vehicles, they expanded the program to all customers — including those who’ve just clicked through its web sites as opposed to actually buying a car. Honda and Acura are hopeful the project eventually helps integrate solar power with electric vehicle recharging.

Immigration

Conservative Think Tank Undermines Right-Wing Misinformation On Cost Of Immigration Reform

By Rebecca Leber on Feb 20, 2013 at 4:21 pm

Opponents of comprehensive immigration reform in the House of Representatives and at Heritage have stuck to the myth that a path to citizenship would “cost trillions.” Citing a debunked 2007 Heritage study about immigration reform’s impact on Medicare and Social Security, Rep. Lou Barletta (R-PA) argued on ABC’s This Week, “One thing that we’re missing in this whole debate about illegal immigration is the cost.”

Mainstream economic consensus, however, says otherwise. Immigrants contribute far more into the economy than what they receive, paying taxes and creating jobs.

And a new paper from the libertarian Cato Institute agrees, undermining the stereotype that immigrants burden the economy. According to Cato, immigrants are less likely to use a range of social safety net programs than U.S. citizens:

The most recent Census data confirm that low-income non-citizen adults and children generally have lower rates of use of public benefits than native-born adults or citizen children whose parents are also citizens. Non-citizen immigrants’ (both adults and children) utilization of Medicaid, SNAP, and SSI are lower. Adult receipt of cash assistance is uncommon (2% to 3%), regardless of citizenship status. Non-citizen children are less likely to use cash assistance than citizen children with citizen parents.

Moreover, when low-income non-citizens receive public benefits, the average value of benefits per recipient is almost always lower than for those who are native-born. This held true for both adults and children in Medicaid and SNAP, and for non-citizen children in households receiving cash assistance and SSI benefits. The average per recipient benefit levels were similar for adults receiving cash assistance or SSI.

Cato’s results are in line with findings from the Center for American Progress that show immigrants pay substantially more than what they receive in benefits. The chart below shows that immigrants receive 16 percent less in Social Security benefits than the native born:

Immigrants — legal and undocumented — are barred from many government programs, and would not be eligible for health care coverage under President Obama’s reform proposal. Right now, DREAMers granted deferred action remain ineligible for Obamacare, and even in-state tuition in many states.

That has not stopped the Heritage Foundation from arguing a path to citizenship will be too costly, or the New York Times from taking a similarly flawed snapshot that fails to include the billions of dollars in taxes immigrants pay into the system.

Comprehensive reform with a path to citizenship would expand virtually every sector of the economy, injecting $1.5 trillion to the GDP and up to $5.4 billion more in tax revenue.

()

Health

Alabama GOP Moves Closer To Shutting Down The Last Abortion Clinics In The State

By Tara Culp-Ressler on Feb 20, 2013 at 4:10 pm

Anti-choice Republicans in Alabama are inching closer toward successfully forcing the state’s five remaining abortion clinics to close their doors. On Tuesday, the Alabama House of Representatives approved a bill that would impose complicated, unnecessary restrictions on abortion providers — the exact same type of restriction that is threatening to close Mississippi’s last abortion clinic.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Mary Sue McCurkin (R), claims the measure is “truly is a women’s rights bill” because it “protects the right of women having an abortion to have it in a healthy, safe environment.”

But that’s a standard obfuscation in the anti-abortion community. In fact, under the guise of being concerned about women’s safety, anti-choice lawmakers indirectly restrict women’s reproductive rights by subjecting abortion clinics and doctors to burdensome requirements that aren’t placed on other medical professionals. “Ever since we legalized abortion in 1973, there have always been attempts to restrict access to women by overregulation,” Alabama Rep. Patricia Todd (D), who opposes the proposed bill, pointed out during the debate on the House floor.

After three hours of debate, however, the bill ultimately passed by a 73-23 vote. The legislation now heads to the GOP-controlled Senate.

()

LGBT

New Health Benefits Rules Will Protect LGBT People From Discrimination

By Andrew Cray, Guest Blogger on Feb 20, 2013 at 3:41 pm

Today the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the federal agencies charged with implementing the Affordable Care Act, released final rules on Essential Health Benefits standards, which will benefit millions of Americans who will have increased access to comprehensive insurance coverage.

Starting in 2014, small group and individual market health insurance plans – including plans sold inside and outside of Health Insurance Marketplaces — will be required to cover items and services in 10 “Essential Health Benefit” categories. These categories include vital services needed by many gay and transgender people, including prescription drugs, hospital stays, and mental and behavioral health services.

Standards for Essential Health Benefits will benefit everyone who buys small group or individual insurance plans by guaranteeing a comprehensive level of coverage. In addition, the rules provide key protections for gay and transgender people through the unprecedented protections against discrimination in benefits coverage, including on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and health condition. This means that insurance companies cannot use limitations or exclusions for benefits that discriminate against gay and transgender patients — potentially ending a long history of discrimination by insurers.

The federal rules will provide much-needed guidance to state policymakers, who are working quickly to establish Essential Health Benefits standards that will apply to insurers next year. These rules, and the protections they give to gay and transgender individuals and their families, are key in achieving the law’s goal of making affordable, comprehensive health care coverage available to all Americans.

Our guest blogger is Andrew Cray, a research associate for LGBT Progress at the Center for American Progress.

()

Justice

Private Prison CEO Assures Investors of ‘Strong Demand’ For Beds After Immigration Reform

By Nicole Flatow on Feb 20, 2013 at 3:30 pm

As the U.S. private prison industry has grown over the last several years, studies have shown that private prisons are incentivized to lobby for more incarceration. During an investor call this week, the CEO of private prison operator Corrections Corporation of America signaled that incarceration rates would remain high, assuring investors that immigration detention would be a strong source of business for the foreseeable future, ColorLines reports. Addressing the prospect of federal immigration reform, CEO Damon Hininger said Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have said there will “always be a demand for beds”:

It’s too early to tell exactly what the impact [of reform] is going to be, but again, ICE has always said that there’s going to be a demand for bed space here in the US because of all the things they’re doing both within the interior, on the border, from the people that are released from state prisons that are ultimately need to be deported. […]

There is always going to be strong demand regardless of what is being done at the national level as far as immigration reform.

Hininger’s assurances suggest a disturbing financial interest in more incarceration. And this is not the first time CCA officials have expressed optimism about higher incarceration rates. A 2011 report bragged that the industry is resistant to recession and that there is the “potential of accelerated growth in inmate populations following the recession.” CCA facilities have been deemed riddled with violations of state law, and have seen deadly riots break out.

()

Security

Fox News: Al Jazeera America Is A Plot To Activate Muslim Sleeper Cells In Detroit

By Hayes Brown on Feb 20, 2013 at 3:04 pm

In a typical fair and balanced panel, Fox News warned on Wednesday that Al Jazeera is set to “infiltrate” the United States amid dire warnings about “sleeper cells” in the Muslim suburbs of Detroit.

Host Megyn Kelly began a segment about Al Jazeera’s expansion into the American television market by raising questions about the network’s “real anti-American bias.” Contributor Lisa Daftari agreed, veering into blatant Islamophobic fear-mongering in the process:

DAFTARI: The point is they want to differentiate themselves from their sister network, but at the same time, it’s the same thing. They’re having the same type of coverage. They’re apparently expanding to eight cities, including Detroit, Michigan. Detroit, Michigan is a large ex-pat community of Muslim-Americans and sleeper cells have been detected. You can Google this, you can find out all this information. So if you’re trying to set yourself apart the Qatari petro-dollars are backing this, you’re still developing in this area where the sleeper cells have been detected. They’re going to have do do much more to prove to me that they’re different from their sister network.

Watch it:

Daftari was referring to the suburbs of Detroit — like Dearborn, MI and others — which have high populations of refugees and immigrants from Muslim-majority nations like Lebanon. Dearborn has been the target of hate speech and protests against Muslims for years now. As for the specific “sleeper cells” she was referring to, in 2008 a former Dearborn resident was convicted of “providing material support” to Hezbollah — hardly the makings of a widespread support for terrorism.

Conservatives have been concerned about the purchase of former Vice President Al Gore’s Current TV by Qatar-based Al Jazeera since the deal was announced in January. Fox’s points about the difference in coverage between Al Jazeera English — which currently airs in millions of homes in the United States — and Al Jazeera Arabic — the original channel, which was the chosen distributor of Osama bin Laden’s video messages — would be accurate if they weren’t so hyperbolic and fearful of the encroaching Muslim threat. Also, Fox News’ concern about the presence of Middle Eastern oil money in U.S. media does not extend to Fox owner Rupert Murdoch’s deals with Saudi Arabia.

()

Health

Fox News Host: ‘When Was The Last Time You Heard About A Rape On Campus?’

By Sy Mukherjee on Feb 20, 2013 at 3:00 pm

During a segment on concealed carry laws on Fox News’ The Five, host Bob Beckel revealed a stunning lack of knowledge regarding sexual assault on campuses, implying that rapes are a rare occurrence.

Beckel, who is a Democratic strategist, was making an argument against concealed weapons on college campuses. But his train of thought went awry somewhere along the way, devolving into the demonstrably false assertion that sexual assault isn’t a big problem in colleges:

BECKEL: The carry laws, carry laws are around in a lot of states — hidden, carrying guns. If you do that, it seems that the chance of people getting killed –

ERIC BOLLING (CO-HOST): If you eliminate the opportunity for anyone to have a gun at all, you are telling bad guys there is an area no one is carrying guns.

BECKEL: When was the last time you heard about a rape on campus?

BOLLING: What are you talking about? It’s rampant!

Watch it:

Bolling is correct in describing the issue as a “rampant” one, since at least one in four college women will be sexually assaulted during their academic career, 80 percent of them by a known acquaintance. Beckel may be ignorant on the topic, but U.S. universities still have a long way to go when it comes to addressing rape culture and preventing sexual assault on their campuses.

()

Climate Progress

Another Study Names Oil And Gas As Ozone Culprit

By Public Lands Team on Feb 20, 2013 at 2:50 pm

Oil drilling in Utah's Uinta Basin. (Photo: S. Winterton, Deseret Morning News)

By Tom Kenworthy

Extensive oil and gas drilling in the Uinta Basin of northeastern Utah produces the great majority of the chemical air pollution that produces winter ozone in that rural region, a new interagency study has concluded.

“An emissions inventory developed for the study indicates that oil and gas operations were responsible for 98 to 99 percent of” volatile organic compounds “and 57 to 61 percent of” nitrogen oxides in the basin, the study concluded. Those substances combine in the presence of sunshine to produce ozone, which a recent report by the Environmental Protection Agency links to heart and lung diseases and mortality.

The Utah study, conducted by Utah state and federal agencies and three universities, collected data on pollutants last winter. The study said that ozone formation occurs in the region in about half of winter seasons, with severe ozone occurring about one year in four. It said that transport of ozone-producing chemicals from outside the Uinta Basin “is not likely to represent a major contribution to peak ozone events.”

At the press conference announcing the study results, the deputy director of Utah’s Air Quality Administration said ozone levels this year have at times exceeded 130 parts per billion in the basin, far above the 75 parts per billion level considered a health hazard by EPA.

The Utah study follows a recent investigation into ozone in Colorado which found that more than half of the ozone producing chemicals came from oil and gas operations in a community in Weld County, a region that has nearly 20,000 operating oil and gas wells.

Ozone has been a frequent problem during summer months in urban areas of the United States. Wintertime ozone in heavily developed oil and gas regions of the West, including northeastern Utah and western Wyoming, is a relatively new phenomenon fueled in part by snow cover that reflects sunlight and temperature inversions.

The Utah study said that new rules from the EPA requiring so-called “green completions” of oil and gas wells will reduce emissions of VOC’s. A study sponsored by the oil and gas industry criticized that effort, contending it would sharply reduce production.

The Utah study also recommended additional studies to develop ways of reducing ozone in the Uinta Basin. But Brock LeBaron, the deputy head of the state air quality administration, said the state plans no new regulations on the oil and gas industry, favoring instead voluntary steps by energy developers.

“Right now we’re not passing any new rules or regulations,” LeBaron said, according to a report in E&E’s Energy Wire. “We’re not saying you have to control these VOCs from this piece of equipment.”

Tom Kenworthy is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Economy

Why The Nation’s Biggest Banks Are Even Bigger Than You Thought

By Pat Garofalo on Feb 20, 2013 at 2:41 pm

Already, the biggest banks in the U.S. are huge. The largest 0.2 percent of institutions — just 12 mega-banks — control 69 percent of total bank assets. The 20 biggest banks hold assets equal to 84.5 percent of the nation’s entire economic output.

And if the U.S. accounted for bank assets (and risk) in the same way that European countries do, the problem would look even worse:

U.S. accounting rules allow banks to record a smaller portion of their derivatives than European peers and keep most mortgage-linked bonds off their books. That can underestimate the risks firms face and affect how much capital they need.

Using international standards for derivatives and consolidating mortgage securitizations, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co. would double in assets, while Citigroup Inc. would jump 60 percent, third- quarter data show. JPMorgan would swell to $4.5 trillion from $2.3 trillion, leapfrogging London-based HSBC Holdings Plc and Deutsche Bank AG, each with about $2.7 trillion.

JPMorgan, Bank of America and Citigroup would become the world’s three largest banks and Wells Fargo the sixth-biggest. Their combined assets of $14.7 trillion would equal 93 percent of U.S. gross domestic product last year, the data show. Total assets of the country’s banking system would be 170 percent of economic output, still lower than 326 percent for Germany.

Several members of Congress, from both sides of the aisle, have wondered recently why the biggest banks aren’t being broken up, since they’re “too big to fail,” “too big to jail,” and even “too big for trial.” “Glass-Steagall [which separated commercial and investment banking] was put in place in 1933 to prevent exactly what happened to us. It was in place, I think for approximately 66 years, until it was repealed,” noted Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) last week. “If it worked so well for so many years why do you all not believe that it’s something we should return to or look at?”

As Demos noted in a recent report, the financial sector sucks $635 billion out of the economy every year that could otherwise go to more productive uses, while creating behemoths that put the entire economy at risk. “These banks are not just too big to fail, they’re too big to manage,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH). “I think these banks will be stronger and healthier and probably more profitable if they’re smaller.”

()