15 December 19
I don't like getting solicitations for donations any more than anybody else does. Except that for RSN, this seems to be a very "necessary evil" for funding and continuing quality reading. - BUT, RSN is one thing I am TOTALLY WILLING to contribute to! ...BTW, I'm retired, on a fixed income - and not all that much $$ income at that!
So howzabout all you "readers" (but non-donors) becoming REAL SUPPORTERS - send RSN some $$$, PLEASE!! (I for one do NOT want to lose RSN at this crucial time!!) Thanx RSN!
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
14 December 19
Garrison Keillor | So Much One Can Live Without and Should
Garrison Keillor, Garrison Keillor's Website
Keillor writes: "I keep unsubscribing from junk mail and it seems that the simple act of unsubscribing opens the sluiceway to even more junk."
Garrison Keillor, Garrison Keillor's Website
Keillor writes: "I keep unsubscribing from junk mail and it seems that the simple act of unsubscribing opens the sluiceway to even more junk."
EXCERPT:
We live in bubbles, and for me, the remarkable thing about the House Judiciary Committee hearing last week was the chance to hear an articulate and well-reasoned argument that disagreed with my own point of view. A person should have this experience more often.
Four law professors sat at the witness table and one of them, Jonathan Turley, argued against impeachment, that the process is moving with undue haste and has not established a solid foundation for such a radical act. I listened to him in wonder. The Republicans who should’ve been making the argument have wandered off into berserk corners and Professor Turley did their work for them as the other professors sat nearby and listened, no sneering, no insults. (For credibility’s sake, he had to aver that he hadn’t voted for Trump and didn’t agree with him.) But his testimony was so dramatic, it inspired death threats against him and his family. This is what we’ve come to in America. Respectful disagreement is in short supply and aggressive stupidity is running wild.
Democratic candidates on stage. (photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
All 7 Democratic Candidates Scheduled to Debate Threaten to Skip Over Labor Dispute
Juana Summers, NPR
Summers writes: "Amid a labor dispute at the site of next week's presidential primary debate, all seven Democratic candidates who made the stage are siding with unions and threatening not to participate in the event."
Juana Summers, NPR
Summers writes: "Amid a labor dispute at the site of next week's presidential primary debate, all seven Democratic candidates who made the stage are siding with unions and threatening not to participate in the event."
Candidates are scheduled to meet for the Democratic presidential debate on the Loyola Marymount University campus in Los Angeles on Dec. 19.
Workers represented by Unite Here Local 11 have been picketing since November. Union representatives say that Sodexo, the subcontractor that employs the more than 150 university food service workers, abruptly canceled scheduled negotiations. Workers are set to picket Thursday outside the debate venue.
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, one of seven candidates set to appear onstage Thursday, was the first to signal that she would not cross the picket line.
".@UNITEHERE11 is fighting for better wages and benefits—and I stand with them. The DNC should find a solution that lives up to our party's commitment to fight for working people. I will not cross the union's picket line even if it means missing the debate," Warren tweeted on Friday.
.@UniteHere11 is fighting for better wages and benefits—and I stand with them. The DNC should find a solution that lives up to our party's commitment to fight for working people. I will not cross the union's picket line even if it means missing the debate.
3,628 people are talking about this
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders followed soon after, tweeting that he "will not be crossing their picket line" until the union reaches a deal with Sodexo.
Former Vice President Joe Biden also says he won't cross a picket line, adding on Twitter that "we've got to stand together...for affordable health care and fair wages."
Mayor Pete Buttigieg also tweeted that he "will not cross their picket line."
"I take the debate stage to stand up for workers' rights, not to undermine them," he wrote.
I take the debate stage to stand up for workers’ rights, not to undermine them.
I stand in solidarity with the workers of @UNITEHERE11 at Loyola Marymount University and I will not cross their picket line.
1,753 people are talking about this
And a spokesperson for Sen. Amy Klobuchar tweeted that the candidate told labor leaders in Miami Friday that she would also not participate in the debate without a resolution.
At event with labor leaders in Miami, @amyklobuchar says she will not be crossing picket line in LA next week for the Democratic debate.
82 people are talking about this
Candidate Andrew Yang also vowed not to cross the picket line to take part in the debate. "[T]here is nothing more core to the Democratic Party than the fight for working people," wrote Yang on Twitter.
Billionaire and environmental activist Tom Steyer also says he won't cross the picket line but that he believes the Democratic National Committee will find a solution before Thursday's debate.
Greta Thunberg. (photo: Getty Images)
Greta Thunberg Slams COP25, Says Response to Climate Crisis Is "Clever Accounting and Creative PR"
Democracy Now!
Excerpt: "At the U.N. climate summit in Madrid, 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg addressed world leaders Wednesday, hours after she was named Time magazine's Person of the Year."
READ MORE
Democracy Now!
Excerpt: "At the U.N. climate summit in Madrid, 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg addressed world leaders Wednesday, hours after she was named Time magazine's Person of the Year."
READ MORE
LeeAnne Walters shows water samples from her Flint home. (photo: AP)
Executives at Flint's Utility Knew the Water Might Be Poisoned
Emily Holden, Ron Fonger and Jessica Glenza, Grist
Excerpt: "Executives at one of the world's largest utilities companies knew that families in Flint, Michigan, might be at risk of being poisoned by lead in their tap water months before the city publicly admitted the problem, according to internal company emails."
Emily Holden, Ron Fonger and Jessica Glenza, Grist
Excerpt: "Executives at one of the world's largest utilities companies knew that families in Flint, Michigan, might be at risk of being poisoned by lead in their tap water months before the city publicly admitted the problem, according to internal company emails."
Email exchanges in February 2015 between executives at Veolia and a city contractor show some senior employees were aware that lead from the city’s pipes could be leaching into drinking water. They argued that city officials should be told to change Flint’s water supply to protect residents.
But the company never made that recommendation public. At the time, Veolia was exploring other lucrative contracts with the city.
Flint began struggling with foul-tasting, discolored water after switching to the Flint River as its supply in April 2014. Test results soon showed elevated levels of carcinogens. The water was corrosive, so it was releasing lead from pipes. The city found extraordinarily high lead levels in one resident’s water in February 2015, but residents were not made aware of the extent of the problem until September 2015.
Five years later, the people of Flint continue to demand accountability for the water crisis, which exposed residents to high levels of lead, a potent neurotoxin. Children and infants who consumed the water are likely to suffer lifelong learning disabilities. Flint residents are still advised to either drink bottled water or filter it from the tap.
The emails, reviewed by the Guardian and MLive in a joint investigation, came to light in a lawsuit filed by the Michigan attorney general in the Genesee county circuit court. The lawsuit accused Veolia of “professional negligence, negligence, public nuisance, unjust enrichment and fraud.” The attorney general alleged Veolia gave Flint bad advice, and did not help it to prevent its lead crisis by pushing harder for safeguards against corrosion or a switch to a different water supply.
The court dismissed nearly all of the claims against Veolia last month, citing mainly procedural reasons. One claim remains, for unjust enrichment.
The internal Veolia emails, obtained from the court by the watchdog group Corporate Accountability, show company executives discussing the possibility of lead seven months before the city confirmed the problem publicly.
On February 9, 2015, a Veolia vice president wrote an email to company executives saying the firm had previously identified the risk of lead contamination.
“Do not pass this on,” wrote Rob Nicholas, then the vice president of development, in an email to Veolia executives. “The city however needs to be aware of this problem with lead and operate the system to minimize this as much as possible and consider the impact in future plans. We had already identified that as something to be reviewed.”
Nicholas forwarded the information to Veolia engineer Marvin Gnagy, adding: “Yep. Lead seems to be a problem.”
Days later, Bill Fahey, Veolia’s technology vice president, emailed senior executives calling for the company to advise Flint to change its water supply, adding that “the politics of this should not get in the way of making the best recommendation.” Reiterating the call in another email, he added: “PLEASE … this will come back and bite us.”
‘The facts were unknown, concealed and covered up’
Veolia signed a $40,000 contract with Flint on February 10, 2015 for a “top-down assessment” of Flint water, and its proposal said it would review and evaluate the city’s water treatment process and distribution system.
But Veolia has said it was only hired by the city to assess bacteria and harmful chlorine compounds (trihalomethanes) in Flint’s water supply, not lead.
Veolia said it nonetheless warned city officials about the possibility of lead contamination, and that the city resisted discussions of changing its water supply. Veolia said it warned the then mayor, Dayne Walling, about how the corrosive water could cause lead to leach from the pipes and raised corrosion in a final public report to the city on March 18, 2015. But that report did not disclose the possibility for lead contamination, focusing instead on how corrosion could be causing water discoloration.
Months prior, in 2014, Flint had switched its water supply from the Detroit water system to the Flint River. But the Flint River water was not properly treated to reduce its corrosive properties on old pipes. So in addition to the bacteria and trihalomethanes, lead from the pipes began to flow into local taps.
In a 20-page response to questions from the Guardian and MLive, Veolia argued that city and state officials caused the crisis and are now “trying to create a corporate villain where one does not exist.”
“It is critical when analyzing what happened in Flint to remember the context of the situation at the time it occurred; we now know in 2019 the myriad of ways that the government officials behaved badly, but as the Flint water crisis unfolded many of those facts were unknown, concealed, and covered up by the government perpetrators,” Veolia said.
Nayyirah Shariff, director of the local activism group Flint Rising, recalls presentations Veolia executives made to city officials and the public at the time, in a news conference on February 10 and public meetings on February 18 and March 19.
She remembers feeling the company downplayed the concerns of residents.
“They were like, ‘everything is fine,” Shariff said. To her, Veolia’s assessment at the time “raised more questions and didn’t add up to what we were beginning to see.”
Veolia’s interim water quality report, presented on February 18, said: “Safe = Compliance with state and federal standards and required testing. Latest tests show water is in compliance with drinking water standards.”
An MLive article on that presentation was headlined: “Despite quality problems, ‘Your water is safe,’ says Flint consultant.”
A clash over solutions
The crisis in Flint, a majority-black city of 100,000, has served as a rallying cry for victims of environmental racism across the U.S. And Flint’s experience has been a precursor to lead discoveries in the water in Detroit; Newark, New Jersey; and Pittsburgh.
Flint residents have filed more than a dozen lawsuits against the city, the state, and the federal government. The state attorney general is suing the two companies hired to help at the time — Veolia and Lockwood Andrews Newman (LAN), which worked with Flint before the water switch.
LAN officials have said Flint emergency managers routinely ignored doing what was best for the city’s water system and instead did what was cheapest.
The internal Veolia emails show Veolia executives were quick to recognize that Flint’s water system was fraught with problems that stemmed from lack of investment, outdated equipment, and unqualified workers.
“There is no process control, plant operators are not well trained, data is not well managed or trended, just reported to the state,” Gnagy, the water process and quality manager for Veolia, wrote in a work summary dated February 12, 2015.
Multiple emails show individuals at Veolia clashing over whether to recommend that Flint change its water source. Veolia’s technology vice president Fahey in February told the engineering vice president, Kevin Hagerty: “If the best ‘technical decision is to go back to the city of Detroit as its supplier’ we should not be afraid to make that call. Just make sure that the politics of this should not get in the way of making the best recommendation.”
When Veolia’s director of treatment plant operations, Joseph Nasuta, said that Veolia’s business development department, or “BD,” was refusing to suggest the switch, Fahey reiterated: “Go on record with BD that we should advise Flint to open the valve from Detroit if we believe that is the best technical solution. DO NOT let BD make any technical calls. PLEASE … this will come back and bite us.”
Veolia today maintains that Flint’s emergency manager, Gerald Ambrose, would not discuss changing the water source. Ambrose told Veolia to “assess the current situation and provide recommendations to address the stated problems” and “not be drawn into discussion” on the merits of the water switch, according to an email on February 14, 2015.
Ambrose could not be reached for comment through an attorney who has represented him in matters related to the water crisis. Multiple attempts were made to contact Ambrose for comment on this article.
Flint’s former mayor Dayne Walling said in response to questions about Veolia’s work that he “understood the scope to be comprehensive, scientific, and technical in regards to the water safety and quality.”
Veolia was interested in securing future work with Flint in early 2015. On February 19, 2015, Veolia’s communications vice president, Scott Edwards, said in an email that work already under way in Flint could lead to a $15 million to $30 million annual contract. Veolia disputes that its recommendations in Flint might have been colored by the prospect of future business with the city.
Corporate Accountability’s spokesperson, Alissa Weinman, called Veolia’s actions “despicable.”
“The documents show a Veolia executive, a month before the corporation told the city its water was safe, saying that ‘lead seems to be a problem,’” she said. “I think anyone has to ask themselves how the story in Flint would be different five years later now if Veolia had made those private concerns public.”
Teachers protest in Morgantown, West Virginia. They went on strike in February 2018 over health care costs and pay. The strike inspired similar strikes across the nation. (photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
The Lies We're Told About Appalachia
Ivy Brashear, YES! Magazine
Brashear writes: "Granny Hazel taught me how to feed the chickens. Hold the ear of dried corn in both hands and twist to pry the kernels from the cob, then throw it out into the yard for the waiting chickens to eat."
READ MORE
Ivy Brashear, YES! Magazine
Brashear writes: "Granny Hazel taught me how to feed the chickens. Hold the ear of dried corn in both hands and twist to pry the kernels from the cob, then throw it out into the yard for the waiting chickens to eat."
READ MORE
A general view of protesters outside the federal court holding placards in support of the Tamil asylum-seeking family on September 18, 2019, in Melbourne, Australia. (photo: Asanka Ratnayake/Getty Images)
Migrant-Led Movements Are Leading the Charge Against Australian Border Barbarism
Max Kaiser, Jacobin
Kaiser writes: "Australia's sadistic border regime doesn't stop at its offshore detention camps in Papua New Guinea and Nauru."
READ MORE
Max Kaiser, Jacobin
Kaiser writes: "Australia's sadistic border regime doesn't stop at its offshore detention camps in Papua New Guinea and Nauru."
READ MORE
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen unveils Europe's 'Green Deal' plan to fight climate change on Dec. 11, 2019, at the European Commission headquarters in Brussels. (photo: Aris Oikonomou/AFP/Getty Images)
EU Unveils 'Green Deal' Plan to Get Europe Carbon Neutral by 2050
Mehreen Khan, Financial Times
Khan writes: "The European Union unveiled a sweeping set of environmental initiatives on Wednesday aimed at creating the world's first carbon-neutral continent by 2050, touching everything from state aid rules to a green industrial policy and a carbon border tax on imports."
Mehreen Khan, Financial Times
Khan writes: "The European Union unveiled a sweeping set of environmental initiatives on Wednesday aimed at creating the world's first carbon-neutral continent by 2050, touching everything from state aid rules to a green industrial policy and a carbon border tax on imports."
The plan, designed to 'reconcile the economy with our planet,' includes a carbon border tax and money for a just transition for poorer Eastern European countries.
he European Union unveiled a sweeping set of environmental initiatives on Wednesday aimed at creating the world's first carbon-neutral continent by 2050, touching everything from state aid rules to a green industrial policy and a carbon border tax on imports.
In its much-anticipated Green Deal for Europe, the new European Commission, led by Ursula von der Leyen, laid out 50 policies to be rolled out over the next three years that would revamp rules and regulations to meet ambitious climate goals.
The EU wants to become the first big economic bloc to reach zero carbon emissions by 2050, and it expects to propose a climate law in March to enshrine the target. The new commission also wants to ramp up medium-term targets, cutting emissions by 50 to 55 percent in 2030, up from a current target of 40 percent.
It also plans to mobilize €100 billion of the EU budget and investment loans from the European Investment Bank to fund a "just transition" in poorer, eastern member states whose economies currently rely on fossil fuels.
"The green deal is Europe's 'man on the moon' moment," von der Leyen said on Wednesday. "Our goal is to reconcile the economy with our planet. The old growth model that is based on fossil fuels and pollution is out of date and out of touch with our planet. It will be a long and bumpy road. But we are determined to succeed."
Having laid out her plans, von der Leyen's first major task will be to convince Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to back the 2050 zero-emissions target at a summit of EU leaders in Brussels on Thursday.
The three countries have said they will not commit to the target until they can secure billions of euros in financial aid to make the transition. Details of her €100 billion Just Transition Mechanism will be unveiled in January, and it will "precisely target the most vulnerable regions and sectors," von der Leyen said.
The Challenge of a Carbon Border Tax
Among the most contentious elements of the green deal is a planned "carbon border adjustment mechanism" to be proposed in 2021.
The commission wants to reserve the right to impose selective levies on foreign producers to protect the EU's domestic businesses from unfair competition from countries that do not respect international climate targets. Officials said Brussels would explore a limited border tax that starts with imports of steel and cement.
The proposal faces complications as it would need to avoid falling foul of World Trade Organization Rules and risks retaliation from Europe's trading partners.
Marcia Bernicat, U.S. ambassador to the UN's COP25 summit, said any EU carbon border tax "would be of great concern to us."
Targeting Jet Fuel and Aviation Emissions
Other measures planned under the green deal include a revision of Brussels's state aid rules to allow governments to spend on technologies that reduce carbon emissions. The commission will also propose a revamp of its rule on energy taxation to open the door to an EU-wide jet fuel and aviation tax.
Officials said the tax plans were still in the early stages and would probably face steep resistance from EU governments that see tax policy as a fiercely protected part of national power.
von der Leyen will have to rally a majority among EU governments and members of the European Parliament (MEPs) to win support for her proposals. The Greens in the European Parliament want a more ambitious 65 percent emissions cut by 2030, while conservative groups have warned against accelerating the target and hurting business.
Does It Go Far Enough?
Franziska Achterberg, EU spokeswoman for Greenpeace, said the climate targets were "too little, too late." "By delaying its proposal for the 2030 EU emissions reduction target to summer 2020, the commission risks undermining the Paris Agreement and any hope for EU climate leadership," Achterberg said.
In an early sign of how divisive climate policy is in the EU, member states on Wednesday failed to agree on a system of rules for sustainable finance after France pushed for the inclusion of nuclear energy.
Talks broke down when France, the UK, and a host of eastern member states said they could not support a deal unless nuclear energy was given a clear green light under the classification system.
Paul Tang, a Dutch center-left MEP, said it was "shocking that on the same day the Green New Deal is presented, the compromise on a sustainable standard for investment is refused. [French president] Emmanuel Macron wants to be champion of sustainable finance but also wants to let nuclear contaminate the standard.
No comments:
Post a Comment