One day, back in 2009, while driving my ’99 Chevy Malibu home from classes in Marleboro College’s MBA in Managing for Sustainability, I set a target for my next car that it would get over 45 Miles Per Gallon. That basically means a hybrid like the Ford CMax (Edmunds / Ford) pictured above or one of the uber-efficient Volkswagon TDI Clean Diesel (news / autoblog / VW).
The same way that they filibustered the The American Jobs Act of 2011, Senate Republicans filibustered the Veterans Jobs Corps Act of 2012. According to the Examiner, here,
the proposal failed 58-40, with most Republicans voting against it. Sixty votes were needed to overcome the procedural hurdle and push the bill toward final passage. Five Republicans – Sens. Scott Brown (Mass.), Susan Collins (Maine), Dean Heller (Nev.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Olympia Snowe (Maine) – voted with all 53 members of the Democratic Conference to sidestep the procedural roadblock.
I know the Republicans CLAIM to be “Fiscal Conservatives” and “Patriots” but the evidence shows that they are neither.
Continue reading
“Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.” – Oliver Wendell Holmes.
Progressive tax structures are not about punishing the rich. They are a recognition that wealthy people – like everyone else – derive benefits from being in society. Warren Buffett, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Michael Jordan, Oprah, for example, got rich because people buy their products or watched them play basketball or on TV. Paris Hilton is wealthy because her great-grandfather built a successful business. Their successes are wonderful. But their success should not require me to subsidize their lifestyles.
It’s not just Obama v Romney – it’s Hope v Nope.
As Andrew Frank, of Baltimore, MD, put it, here,
It’s not Romney’s Blunders, It’s His Message.
The Obama Administration issued final rules Tuesday 8/28/12 requiring joint mileage and carbon emissions rules for model years 2017 through 2025 that will eventually force automakers to meet a standard equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon (news / White House / Announcement).
Back on July 7, 2009, when President Obama raised the CAFE standards from 27.5 mpg to 35.5 mpg, I wrote “CAFE Standards, Not Meaningless but Trivial,” I wrote, here,
Pres Obama has raised the CAFE standards from 27.5 mpg to 35.5 mpg, by 2016. Raising the CAFE standards to 35.5 mpg in 7 (or 26) years is not the change we need. It is very little, and very late. The standard for cars has been 27.5 mpg since 1990 (DieselNet). However, at least we are starting to move forward.
The standard of 54.5 MPG is Meaningful, Significant, and Terrific!
We also need a clean energy goals for the Efficient Use of Solar, Wind, Geothermal, Wave Power. 20% by 2020, and 100% by 2035!
We learned this week, thanks to Mother Jones, that Mitt Romney, speaking at a fundraising event on May 17, 2012, said,
But who are these 47%?
If you don’t invest in infrastructure, it fails. Remember New Orleans and Katrina? These pictures were not taken in New Orleans, Baghdad, Iraq, Falujah, Iraq, Hama, Syria or Afghanistan.
Image Copyright (C) L. Furman, 2011. Used with Permission
They were not taken in Gaza, Sudan, recently, Sarajevo in the 1990s, or Dresden, London Hiroshima, or Nagasaki, after WW II.
Copyright (C) 2011, L. J. Furman, All Rights Reserved
They were taken in New Jersey on the entrance to the Lincoln Tunnel on Nov. 23, 2011.
State by state information courtesy of NYU Brennan Center (here) & Thought Catalog (here). Verify that you submit suitable ID. Continue reading
Monday, Sept. 17, was the First Anniversary of the “Occupy Wall Street” protests.
The protesters at Occupy are/were demonstrating against the current economic system and to make “Fracking” illegal. (See “Stop Spectra: Resist Fracking in NYC” or “City Limits, Occupy Wall Street, Opposes Fracking“) Energy Policy and Economics … the intersection of energy and economics in the bio-humanosphere – the memes we knit together at Popular Logistics.
My coverage of Occupy Wall Street started on Sept. 22, 2011, with “Protesting Marked Cards and a Stacked Deck.” Quoting Mr. Buffett’s op-ed in the NY Times, “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich,” and citing President Obama’s statement about the American Jobs Act, explained on White House . gov and Talking Points Memo, which Senate Republicans subsequently filibustered, I called for repeal of the “Bush Tax Cuts” on the wealthy, and for passage of Obama’s American Jobs, the so-called Buffett Rule.
I concluded,
Tax policy must be linked to fiscal policy. What we are doing today, Obama, Buffett, and the protesters would say, is using tax policy to make rich people more rich…. we should use tax policy to develop infrastructure… to build a 40 kilowatt photovoltaic solar array on each of the 92,000 public schools in the United States…. This would use tax revenues to pay for infrastructure upgrade – and tax revenues pay public schools electric bills. PV Solar systems provide energy without pollution, without toxic wastes, without greenhouse gases. And in the event of an emergency, if disconnected from the grid, we would have a network of 92,000 local emergency shelters with power during the day, when the sun is shining.
With thanks to Kate Clifford Lawson, author of Bound For The Promised Land: Harriet Tubman, Portrait of an American Hero, and the related website, HarrietTubmanBiography.com, we note that this year, the Jewish new year coincides with the anniversary of Tubman’s first escape from slavery. We’d like to point out some of her accomplishments which we suspect are not common knowledge:
Disenfranchised as a woman, an African-American, a slave, burdened by disability, Harriet Tubman nonetheless redefined herself, repeatedly risking her life to save others, and perhaps helping to redeem our country from the moral taint of slavery. Our words here can do nothing to add to those accomplishments; but it is within our reach to honor her memory.
In that spirit, regardless of calendar or faith, please accept our wishes for a just, peaceful and prosperous year to come.
In the Election of 2000, Al Gore won the “Popular Vote” 50,999,897 to 50,456,002, 48.38% to 47.87%, by a margin of 543,895, or 0.51% of the vote. However, he lost Florida by 547 votes. Consequently Florida’s 25 Electoral College votes were awarded to Bush and Gore lost the election in the Electoral College 271 to 266 – by five votes. Had he won Florida votes he would also have won the Electoral College Vote, but the Supreme Court intervened, ruled that there was no time for a recount, (see wikipedia entry, here) therefore George W. Bush had won in Florida, and that Mr. Bush, therefore, was elected President by the Electoral College. But what if Gore had won a decisive majority in the Electoral College? What if our elections were determined by the popular vote? What if the election of 2000 had been called for Gore? (Source: Federal Election Commission, FEC, Presidential Election, 2000, Official Results.
What kind of jurists would a President Gore have appointed to the Supreme Court?
Presidents tend to appoint justices who agree with them on political philosophy. Notable exceptions were Warren Burger, appointed by President Eisenhower, and David Souter, appointed by President G. H. W. Bush.
George W Bush appointed Samuel Alito and John Roberts, to the Supreme Court. These men typically join with Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas, and they typically find in favor of corporations and the government rather than individual citizens.
Bill Clinton appointed Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. They typically find in favor over individuals rather than corporations or the government. Barack Obama appointed Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, who typically agree with Breyer and Ginsburg. Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan and Sotomayor have occasionally forged majorities with Kennedy and Roberts.
As President, Al Gore would have probably have appointed jurists like Kagan and Sotomayor who tend to find in agreement with Ginsburg and Breyer. He might have appointed Bill Clinton to the Supreme Court. He probably would have appointed justices with a comprehensive understanding of environmental law and the reasons why we need tough protections on the environment.
We saw these patterns in the decisions on Citizens United and Florence v Burlington, described by me as “Landmark Mistakes of the Supreme Court” (here). These were decided by Chief Justice Roberts, and Associate Justices Alito, Kennedy, Scalia and Thomas in the majority and Associate Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor in the minority. The decision on the Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare,” was made by Chief Justice Roberts, with Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor.
Justices appointed by a President Gore would probably have found in favor of Albert Florence, in Florence v Burlington, that the Fourth Amendment should be understood to bar strip-searches of people arrested for minor offenses not involving drugs or violence, unless officials had a reasonable suspicion that they were carrying contraband. In Citizens United, they probably would have found that citizens and groups may not spend unlimited amounts of money to influence the outcome of elections.
The practical implications those rulings – that police, after reading an apprehended suspect his or her rights in accord with the Miranda decision, can strip-search him or her, and that anyone and corporations can spend unlimited amounts to influence the outcome of elections, suggest that the (human) Citizens of the Republic would be better served with one or two more Justices who would tend to rule in favor of the rights and liberties of (human) citizens rather than the powers of corporations and the state.
In the recent decision on the Affordable Care Act, aka, “ObamaCare” judges appointed by a President Gore might have found, like Chief Justice Roberts, the law Constitutional under the taxing provision of the Constitution. On the other hand, they might have ruled that the laws establishing Medicare for Seniors, Medicaid for the poor, and the Veterans Health Administration must be expanded, because they are discriminatory against non-veterans who do not qualify for Medicare and Medicaid, and that these programs must be combined to create a “Citizens Health Administration” or “Medicare for All,” which would guarantee all Americans access to basic medical care.
–
Neither Presidents Clinton, Bush, or Obama, or any of the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court were reached in the preparation of this post. Observations by current or former Presidents, Justices of the Supreme Court or justices in other courts would be welcome.
–
As an analyst with Popular Logistics, I am available for research and analysis on a per project or a per diem basis. I can be reached at ‘L Furman 97” @ G Mail . com.
–
Adenocarcinoma found via Pap test. Pap “stain” is what provides the color (and thereby the coloration and visibility) in this slide.
There’s a proposal pending in Texas which would effectively decertify Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider. Andrea Grimes, an investigative reporter who writes about reproductive and women’s health issues at RHRealityCheck, made inquiries as to the actual availability of health care to women on Medicaid in the Austin area.
Grimes used as her criterion the Pap smear, which should be a routine test for adult women (at intervals of three years for those at least risk, more frequently if other risk indicators are present). Among other things, a Pap smear can be the first indication of cancer. In other words, it’s a basic service. A provider of women’s health services who isn’t providing Pap smears isn’t providing basic, necessary services. So the criterion is a reasonable proxy.
While widely available provider lists suggest wide availability a total of 181 medical providers within a thirty-mile radius from one ZIP code in Austin. One potentially barred Planned Parenthood clinic which Grimes reports as “busy” is located within the ZIP boundaries. Grimes confirmed that, in fact, only thirteen of the 181 providers accepted Medicaid and performed Pap smears. That’s 7.2%.
Grimes has done a very elegant piece of investigative reporting, but we wish to stress that she’s demonstrated two problems:
Here’s an excerpt from Ms. Grimes’ piece, Without Planned Parenthood, What’s Left for Texas Women? Not Much.
Of the 13 providers that could actually see a Medicaid Women’s Health Program patient, the thirteenth is a forty minute drive from East Austin. And that’s with no traffic. And if you live in Austin, you know there’s no such thing as no traffic. By public transportation it would take over two hours to get to that clinic. And that’s with a half mile walk at the end. Excluding Planned Parenthood from the Women’s Health Program absolutely reduces access to quality care. Full stop. Already, the state has demonstrated that the systems it says it has in place to support women without Planned Parenthood don’t work. Trying to get low-income, quality reproductive health care in Texas, in a major metropolitan area like Austin, without Planned Parenthood is like trying to get a pap smear at a colonoscopy clinic. And I know because I actually tried.
In the XB Cold Fingers song, “Sunbathing In Siberia,” (Listen / Try or Buy / Lyrics ) 
I wrote,
“If Gore had been awarded the White House
he’d chain us to Kyoto, don’t ya see.
There’d be solar panels on the rooftops,
wind power, clean power, almost free.”
While the song is a tongue-in-cheek look at energy, climate change, and the election of 2000; what if Gore had been the 43rd President?
In this series of posts, I’ll explore this scenario in terms of what it would have meant for the Supreme Court, foreign policy and defense.
This next post in the series looks at the Supreme Court. Stay tuned.
The Anna Maria Blog reported here
[Australian] Mining magnate Gina Rinehart intends to bring in semi-skilled migrants to work in her mines. She doesn’t want Australian workers because our wages are too high so she’s had a brilliant idea – bring in desperate people from other nations willing and overjoyed at the opportunity to work for half the Australian wage. She’s trying to convince anyone who will listen that it’s got nothing to do with profit, she’s not being unpatriotic, she is simply suffering from an acute labour shortage.
The Anna Maria Blog reported in the same post that there are 10’s of thousands of Australians who would want the jobs Rinehart wants to fill, but they would want them at union scale.
Rinehart has been publicly advocating that Australians should work for no more than $2 per day, given the rates at which Africans and Asians work. Does she include herself in that? If she was to start working for $2 per day? As she is said to makes $600 per second, 51.840 Million per day, what would she do with the $51,839,998 excess?
Mark Memmott, showing that he can cover arcane neuroscience as well as hard news at the NPR “Two-Way” blog, has reported that Rinehart, reported to be accumulating money at a rate of $600/second, appears to be having trouble with self-awareness, cognition, and empathy. Some memory loss may be indicated. These symptoms of cognitive deficits are most marked in a video which Rinehart produced herself, posted on the website of the Australian Mining Club (one suspects that the A.M.C.’s wine cellars are at exactly the right depth), in which she argues that great fortune is the product of merit. The BBC, which reported the $600 per second figure, also reported that she acquired her wealth via inheritance. It may be that her merit consists of having persuaded the legator of her merit in leaving her or his fortune to her, or that merit may have been self-evident.
Forbes currently lists Rinehart as the world’s 29th-richest person, with a net monetary worth of $18 billion, and the wealthiest woman from the Asia/Pacific region. She could be headed toward becoming the world’s richest person, the magazine speculated last year.
If Australia is, as Rinehart claims, to expensive for business ( Anna Maria Blog / Herald Sun / LA Times ) maybe she should move her operations, and herself, to China or Africa. If she did so would doubtless make Belgium’s King Leopold look like a prince, or Mother Theresa.
Do Rinehart’s mining interests include the mining of lead or mercury? Does she eat the lead? Mainline the mercury? Perhaps she eats whale?
It has also been suggested that lower income class warriors want to “Eat the Rich.” If that is the case, Rinehart could feed a lot of them.
It’s sad that such an obviously superior woman should be experiencing so much stress as the result of her wealth or the rate of accumulation of same. Perhaps Australian health authorities should temporarily place her funds in the hands of a custodian while she returns to her senses or regains her humanity or her sense of affiliation with same.
Perhaps Rinehart should spend some time with Paris Hilton. While Hilton’s net monetary worth is estimated at only $100 Million, as opposed to Rinehart’s $18 Billion, but from an existential perspective there doesn’t seem to be an qualitiative difference between $18 Billion of net monetary worth and $100 Million of net monetary worth – both are greater than an individual can ever reasonably expect to spend. And I suspect that Hilton has more fun and may have a more profound sense of herself as a person.
Note that I use the term “Net Monetary Worth” rather than “Net Worth.” This is deliberate and an attempt to distinguish between a person’s intrinsic or existential worth from the value of assets or resources at their disposal.
