Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Justice’ Category

Part 8, the continuing saga of H.R.3590.

We’ve traveled a sad road from health reform hyperbole and buzzwords, in the Ohio debate, in 2008, to feeding and electing a lot of scalawag Blue Dog Democrats at any cost this year. We have had to learn all over again that presidential candidates DO often avoid saying what they mean, and not what we think, or want to hear. We had to learn again that media interjects it’s own desire for ratings over what the candidates are attempting to communicate. WE are the losers in this interchange.

Candidate Obama offered “universal health coverage“. Clinton disputed his term.

Perhaps this is part of the learning experience for us. When a lawyer or other skilled wordsmith uses a term like “universal” we must think critically about what the person really means and how the words are parsed. This IS a universal coverage bill. It applies to all of the United States, her territories, and her protectorates. It is NOT a universally applicable bill.

In fact, despite the benefits of the Mikulski amendment, 51% of the population will be treated differently under this bill, and this is not a good thing. When this bill becomes an act, much of what women need in health insurance will be subject to line item scrutiny. Native Americans, children, the homeless, and veterans will also be subject to line item scrutiny, while that of men will not. Women are still a special interest group, born out of recognition in the 60’s of their treatment as second-class citizens. The struggles to achieve equality for women have been left moldering at the gate of the ERA, shut by society’s errant deadline in 1982.

Though the ERA did not die, except for a few soldiers, most of us just didn’t know how to continue fighting for it. We walked away, defeated in our ignorance, or we tried to gain bits and pieces of equality through more line items in other bills. We had yet to learn to “never, never, never, give up”. Now, though our understanding of the ERA’s role and absence is reawakening, it does not yet inform our lawmaking in Congress. There are ways to again take up it’s banner, to fight the deadline, to start anew if need be, but not enough of us know that yet.

It is the recognition of the conundrum that the line items designed for us, and to protect us, are weak sisters as compared to full equality, and the privileges, responsibilities and authorities that equality bring.

In this regard, over at the Confluence, Riverdaughter has written clearly about the blow to Griswold and Roe that this bill will inflict.

After the 2008 presidential election of a thousand cuts, we have become more attuned. We have found a voice and we are gathering strength.

Congress has struggled mightily to achieve what our President put forth as his health agenda, and they are almost there. As he said, every criterion has been met. He is telling us that this was the health agenda for which we voted him into office. Someone gave him and Congress the green light to proceed.

This Congress and President were not sent to DC to get us single payer health insurance.  Even as an option, is was a toss off. Refresh your memory. Forget the YouTube, the Websites, the pundits who may have told you what a candidate did or did not say. Read the debate transcripts again.

[Editor’s note: This is part two of the transcript for the Democratic presidential debate sponsored by CNN and the Congressional Black Caucus Institute on January 21, 2008….

(Clinton)….: Well, first of all, if you don’t start out trying to get universal health care, we know — and our members of Congress know — you’ll never get there.

If a Democrat doesn’t stand for universal health care that includes every single American, you can see the consequences of what that will mean. I think it is imperative that we have plans, as both John and I do, that from the very beginning say, “You know what? Everybody has got to be covered.”

There’s only three ways of doing it. You can have a single-payer system, you can require employers, or you can have individual responsibility. My plan combines employers and individual responsibility, while maintaining Medicare and Medicaid.

I think that the whole idea of universal health care is such a core Democratic principle that I am willing to go to the mat for it. I’ve been there before. I will be there again. I am not giving in; I am not giving up; and I’m not going to start out leaving 15 million Americans out of health care.

Secondly, we have seen once again a kind of evolution here. When Senator Obama ran for the Senate, he was for single-payer and said he was for single-payer if we could get a Democratic president and Democratic Congress. As time went on, the last four or so years…

CLINTON: As time went on, the last four or so years, he said he was for single payer in principle, then he was for universal health care. And then his policy is not, it is not universal. And this is kind of like the present vote thing, because the Chicago Tribune, his hometown paper, said that all of those present votes was taking a pass. It was for political reasons.

Well, when you come up with a universal health care plan and you don’t have any wiggle room left, you know that you’re going to draw a lot of political heat. I am not running for president to put Band- Aids on our problems. I want to get to universal health care for every single American….

(Obama)….“Now, it’s fine for us to have a debate about how the best way to get there is, but to suggest somehow that I’m not interested in having anybody covered, or to suggest, as Hillary just did, that I was in favor of single payer — I never said that we should try to go ahead and get single payer. What I said was that if I were starting from scratch, if we didn’t have a system in which employers had typically provided health care, I would probably go with a single-payer system.”

What’s evolved, Hillary, is your presentation of my positions, which is what’s happened frequently during the course of this campaign.]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/21/debate.transcript2/index.html

(Bolds above mine.) Well. We were never starting from scratch.

Dennis Kucinich said it best in June 2007:

New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate

Aired June 3, 2007 – 19:00   ET

[THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED….

…KUCINICH: I reject this whole approach.

And the American people should know that with half the bankruptcies in the country connected to people not being able to pay their doctor bills or hospital bills, premiums, co-pays and deductibles are going so far through the roof, 46 million Americans with no health care, another 50 million underinsured, there is only one way to get health care coverage for all Americans. And that is to have a universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care system, Medicare for all.

Wolf, I have written the bill. It is H.R. 676, with John Conyers, supported by 14,000 physicians.

And you know what? What Senator Clinton, Senator Edwards, Senator Obama are talking about, they’re talking about letting the insurance companies stay in charge. They’re talking about continuing a for-profit health care system. And I think…]

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0706/03/se.01.html

Not Obama, nor Clinton, nor Edwards thought single payer could be achieved now, even if they did believe in it. Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, on the other hand, was willing to fight for it.

Due to the corporate structure of the media, a whole lot of us never even saw or read the debates, because of the recession-based loss of financing for extras like newspapers, cable and dish. A bunch of us have never yet had access to broadband. We are awaiting the “Obama Version” of rural broadband access. That meant out of the many democratic debates, many of us had the potential to see only two. Those of us in this condition did our best, but how were we to clearly evaluate the candidates’ words as spoken from the mouths of others? In reading the transcripts every debate said pretty much the same. Obama says 95% of his plan is like Clinton’s. No one should be surprised, who was more connected, like for example, NetRoots.

If I believed that our vote had truly counted, I would have said so be it. This is what most of you wanted. The Congress we have is doing our job. However, I don’t think that. Someone took away electoral votes, Convention balloting, the right to present complaints in a court of law. Besides, someone paid 747.8 million dollars to elect the candidate of choice, 140.9 million more than all the Republican presidential candidates put together. Someone else paid the running tab of all those “congress critters”, as Blue Lyon likes to call them, along with River City Mud, FireDogLake and Corrente who articulated many of the deficits of the Senate bill.

At the last several came out against this bill; Naral, Now, Women Count: and others. These folks also:

“Physicians for a National Health Program” (PNHP) came out against the health reform bill, H.R.3590.

[Pro-single-payer physicians call for defeat of Senate health bill

Posted by Mark Almberg on Tuesday, Dec 22, 2009

Legislation ‘would bring more harm than good,’ group says

For Immediate Release

Dec. 22, 2009

Contact:

David Himmelstein, M.D.

Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H.

Oliver Fein, M.D.

Mark Almberg, PNHP, (312) 782-6006, mark@pnhp.org

A national organization of 17,000 physicians who favor a single-payer health care system called on the U.S. Senate today to defeat the health care legislation presently before it and to immediately consider the ad..]

The AFL-CIO and SEIU said they were disappointed but sticking to it.

AARP, when I checked had maintained their position, stated on the 16th, in favor of the bill. They are most concerned about closing the “Doughnut Hole” that the last Medicare fiasco produced. This bill, reportedly, will do that.

Plus, AARP does carry it’s own health insurance company.

Money is God. Money is power. We choose to support corporations, the least transparent of all, or we choose to support government organizations and single payer systems subject to scrutiny. Someone championed the former. Someone voted for the former. Had either Clinton or Edwards won the presidency, we would have still had some version of what we now are getting – a combination employer/private insurance system articulating with Medicare and Medicaid. Though the debate details might haven been different, they still would have been over line items. I struggle to imagine whether we would have had a better line item presidential advocate for women. I hope so. I think so.

The Republicans are equally to blame in this debacle. Disingenuous arguments about the quality of these bills are no recourse, when they would not have voted for a single payer system either. Nor does it profit them to be so obsessed with controlling women’s genitals. Ridiculous stuff about death panels hardly helps. 39 Senators voted against H.R. 3950, all Republican. Thirty years from now when this bill/act is finally acceptable, that vote will look stupid. The political left swing that will come will cast those votes in a different light. Despite the bill’s horrible faults, Democrats still have eleven months to make it work for the benefit of the party. Clinton’s primary debate comment is right in that Universal Health Care is a core Democratic value.

It was never going to be easy to get back in balance so quickly, much less that left swing, that some say our country does on a fifty-year pendulum. The ravages of “rightness” are yet too great, too raw and open. We have been off balance to the right for so long this time, we have raised forty years worth of youngun’s to live with one short leg. Understandable leftist desperation of this system has made us grasp for an untenable coalition with DINOs and worse, while we let the oligarchs gain even more power.

This Congress and this President have produced something entitled “Universal Health Care”, whatever that might mean. While some us are telling the benefits of this bill, we know as Democrats it could be much, much better. We are about to be stuck with it. If we want single payer we are going to have to work some more.  If we want equality for women, it doesn’t come in this bill. We have to beat at it’s line items and sections until they are forged into something more acceptable.  Then we have to work for equality elsewhere, so that it may someday apply.

Though the House is in Holiday Recess, some few are working on the Reconciliation of the House and Senate bills now. H.R. 3590 and H.R 3962 are about to merge, travel to the President, and become law of the land, sometime next year, five days after the President signs it. So, for those of you who do have insurance, think about sitting down with your companies and getting some direction.

The next health care battles are here.

Never, never, never give up!

Read Full Post »

Things are hopping in Iran:

Funeral for Iranian Cleric Turns Into a Vast Protest

By ROBERT F. WORTH and NAZILA FATHI

Published: December 21, 2009

[BEIRUT, Lebanon — The funeral of a prominent dissident cleric in the holy Iranian city of Qum turned into a huge and furious antigovernment rally on Monday, raising the possibility that the cleric’s death could serve as a catalyst for an opposition movement that has been locked in a stalemate with the authorities…]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/22/world/middleeast/22cleric.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

In California we are playing these games as we work to unscramble the mess of Prop 8. Human rights are possible to achieve, as this article indicates! In addition to Mexico City, this article says Uruguay has managed to legalize same sex marriage for the whole country.

Mexico City Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: December 21, 2009

Filed at 5:50 p.m. ET

[MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico City lawmakers on Monday made the city the first in Latin America to legalize same-sex marriage, a change that will give homosexual couples more rights, including allowing them to adopt children….]

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/12/21/world/AP-LT-Mexico-GayMarriag.html?ref=global-home

Ahh, the new pragmatism, even the birthers are screaming:

King: Nelson sold out anti-abortion movement

By JASON HANCOCK 12/21/09 8:35 AM

[Two days after praising U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., to Des Moines Register columnist Kathie Obradovich, U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Kiron, released a statement attacking the lawmaker for an abortion compromise in health care reform.

In order to garner Nelson’s support, Senate Democratic leaders included a provision in their version of health care reform that would allow states to ban abortion coverage for women receiving federal subsidies on proposed government-organized private insurance marketplaces, dubbed exchanges….]

http://iowaindependent.com/24126/king-nelson-sold-out-anti-abortion-movement?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+IowaIndependent+%28Iowa+Independent%29

This is article is an example of one of the darker and more serious sides of the education of young people. Don’t let this happen to your school board.

Revisionist History Dept

McCarthy 101.

DAVE MANN | DECEMBER 11, 2009 | POLITICAL INTELLIGENCE

[It takes serious revisionist thinking to believe that history has “vindicated” Joseph McCarthy, but that’s what some members of the State Board of Education contend. If they get their way, that’s how Texas schools will portray the late red-baiting U.S. Senator in social studies classes….]

http://www.texasobserver.org/pi/revisionist-history-dept

Read Full Post »

Update. Fixed link.

I think the way everyone has been flooding her email the last few days, Barbara Boxer wanted the chance to speak about the health reform bill we may be about to embark upon. As many of you know, I remain on dial-up, and try to keep my formating for others using the same method. In dial-up format, watching uTube is a lot like watching paint dry. However, For those of you with something faster:

Boxer Speaks on Historic Health Care Bill

If she does a text print of it I’ll send it around later. Otherwise, for those of you with something faster, let me know what she says.

Read Full Post »

Part seven of the continuing saga of H.R.3590.

On December 21 at 1:08 AM EST, the Senate voted to invoke cloture on H.R. 3590. This means they have decided to cut off further debate and vote on whether to pass the health reform bill, still known under it’s original title as the “Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009”, but amended to read: “ Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”.

This means the fifteen amendments and the agreed to tabling motions will stand. The remaining 459 amendments that were submitted will not be debated. There are, however, two additional new amendments that were submitted and agreed to as part of the motion to invoke cloture. They are: S.AMDT.3276, the so called “Manager’s Amendment”, introduced by Harry Reid, and S.AMDT.3277, an amendment as seen below, that directs the bill start date to be five days after it becomes an act by presidential signature.

S.AMDT.3276 contains the language directing the “compromise” on women’s rights over their bodies regarding abortion.  It also contains the language on Medicaid disbursement by the Federal Government for new Medicaid patients. There is an intriguing reference to ARRA on page 13500, which might mean something if they decide to extend it.

S.AMDT.3276 was only available on the Congressional Record pages, so I have cut, pasted and printed the pages to .pdf to produce the document S.AMDT.3276.  As with any pdf document it is keyword searchable. For your info, in the Record, 39 pages were used, however, when I printed it to .pdf, it took 178 pages.

The final vote, possibly turning this thing into an act, may come today.

Manager’s Amendment

S.AMDT.3276

Amends: H.R.3590, S.AMDT.2786

Amendments to this amendment: S.AMDT.3277

Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (submitted 12/19/2009) (proposed 12/19/2009)

AMENDMENT PURPOSE:

To improve the bill.

TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S13490-13529

STATUS:

12/19/2009:

Amendment SA 3276 proposed by Senator Reid to Amendment SA 2786. (consideration: CR S13477-13478)

12/19/2009:

Cloture motion on amendment SA 3276 presented in Senate. (consideration: CR S13477-13478; text: S13477-13478)

12/20/2009:

Considered by Senate.

12/21/2009:

Considered by Senate.

12/21/2009:

Cloture on amendment SA 3276 invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 60 – 40. Record Vote Number: 385.

COSPONSORS(3):

Sen Baucus, Max [MT] – 12/19/2009

Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] – 12/19/2009

Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] – 12/19/2009

Enactment Date Amendment

S.AMDT.3277

Amends: H.R.3590 , S.AMDT.3276

Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (submitted 12/19/2009) (proposed 12/19/2009)

AMENDMENT PURPOSE:

To change the enactment date.

TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S13529

STATUS:

12/19/2009:

Amendment SA 3277 proposed by Senator Reid to Amendment SA 3276. (consideration: CR S13478; text: CR S13478)

12/20/2009:

Considered by Senate.

12/21/2009:

Considered by Senate.

SA 3277. Mr. REID proposed an amendment to amendment SA 3276 proposed by Mr. Reid (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Harkin) to the amendment SA 2786 proposed by Mr. Reid (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Harkin) to the bill H.R. 3590, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

The provisions of this Act shall become effective 5 days after enactment.

Read Full Post »

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/the-stories-of-the-two-somalis-freed-from-guantanamo-by-andy-worthington/.

Read Full Post »

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/12/19/saudi-warplanes-rain-1011-missiles-on-yemen/.

Read Full Post »

Politico is reporting that the Senate has reached a compromise on the Health Care Reform Plan.

By CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN & CHRIS FRATES | 12/19/09 9:34 AM EST

Updated: 12/19/09 12:57 PM EST

POLITICO 44

Senate Democrats announced a deal Saturday morning on a wide-ranging overhaul of the nation’s health care system, setting a course for a vote by Christmas and delivering President Barack Obama a badly needed victory on his top legislative priority.

A 13-hour negotiating session that stretched into the night Friday finally clinched the support of the last Democratic holdout, moderate Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) The handshake deal cleared the way for a series of votes that could stretch until 7 p.m. Christmas Eve.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30807.html

Blue Lyon has a good synopsis of what the Health care reform might do to abortion as it relates to State exchanges. For a .pdf description of a health exchange go HERE.

Senator Ben Nelson’s snagging of 100% Federal funding for all new Nebraska Medicaid patients, is a perfect example of the argument expressed by EuandUs last week on the difference between Representatives and Senators – that being how Representatives represent people and Senators represent states.

To reach this bill’s passage they will have to do a lot of voting yet, and then send it to reconciliation with the House bill. It’s gonna take 45 million to make Senator Nelson make him king of his state. In the mean time, the Stupakians are plotting. Which persons actually are involved in the reconciliation anyway? Anyone know?

And what about all those remaining 459 amendments sitting there?

Read Full Post »

Revised 4:33 PM, PST

“Mitigation.  Transparency.  Financing.”

Politico says agreement of a sort has been reached at Cop15. Read their article. It sounds like everyone is going to go home to lick her/his wounds and figure out what to do next. Phrases like “a visibly angry Obama”, “no binding agreement”, “leaving before the last vote (Obama)” and “funds to poor countries remain on the table only as long as the Chinese submit to monitoring”, all lend credence to the idea that none of this is a done deal and a lot of posturing all around was needed. I suppose after eight years of Bushco, the refined US position was a pretty big change to take in for China and India.

POLITICO Breaking News:

—————————————————–

The U.S. China, India and South Africa have reached a “meaningful” climate change deal that sets a cap on worldwide temperature increases, according to administration officials.

For more information…http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30794.html

Ban Ki-moon’s entreaty for nations to get it together and commit, have common sense and move forward, I think, reflects in all of us.

The bottom line was introduced by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It has found “that to stave off the worst effects of climate change, industrialized countries must slash emissions by 25 to 40 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020, and that global emissions must be halved by 2050”.

Both China and India have been deeply and increasingly involved with trade negotiations in Africa for some time. If you think how our trade with Mexico has worked, you will understand the similarity; cheaper goods, fewer laws in place to protect environment and people, and cheaper labor. In particular, raw goods are wanted. As an example, China only has a little over 14% arable land, having lost one fifth to desertification, and a population of around 1.39 billion, as opposed to the United States with 18% arable land, and a population of a little under 308 million. At first glance, India seems in better shape with arable land of around 50%, however they live with yearly losses due to monsoons. Also, they have a population of just under 1.67 billion. One thing all three have in common is very large coal reserves, increasing the temptation to assign value to it’s use.

An interesting comparison of international environmental treaties signed and ratified by these three or any other countries can be found in the CIA World Fact Book. This is the list as of December 18th, 2009. The Fact Book is updated regularly and these may change as countries work toward further agreement.

USA
Environment – international agreements:
party to: Air Pollution, Air Pollution-Nitrogen Oxides, Antarctic-Environmental Protocol, Antarctic-Marine Living Resources, Antarctic Seals, Antarctic Treaty, Climate Change, Desertification, Endangered Species, Environmental Modification, Marine Dumping, Marine Life Conservation, Ozone Layer Protection, Ship Pollution, Tropical Timber 83, Tropical Timber 94, Wetlands, Whaling
signed, but not ratified: Air Pollution-Persistent Organic Pollutants, Air Pollution-Volatile Organic Compounds, Biodiversity, Climate Change-Kyoto Protocol, Hazardous Wastes
China
party to: Antarctic-Environmental Protocol, Antarctic Treaty, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Climate Change-Kyoto Protocol, Desertification, Endangered Species, Environmental Modification, Hazardous Wastes, Law of the Sea, Marine Dumping, Ozone Layer Protection, Ship Pollution, Tropical Timber 83, Tropical Timber 94, Wetlands, Whaling
signed, but not ratified: none of the selected agreements
India
Environment – international agreements:
Field info displayed for all countries in alpha order.
party to: Antarctic-Environmental Protocol, Antarctic-Marine Living Resources, Antarctic Treaty, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Climate Change-Kyoto Protocol, Desertification, Endangered Species, Environmental Modification, Hazardous Wastes, Law of the Sea, Ozone Layer Protection, Ship Pollution, Tropical Timber 83, Tropical Timber 94, Wetlands, Whaling
signed, but not ratified: none of the selected agreements

Read Full Post »

This is good news. So it’s voluntary; for now, this will help. If you have ever looked at the fine print on the arbitration clauses of your credit card, or tried to win a dispute, you’ll realize you signed your right to complain over to the arbiter that the bank chooses. Thank you, Representative Kucinch, and the House Domestic Policy Subcommittee! I don’t know how many of us can get a new credit card right now, or if any of these banks are really issuing new ones, but the change in the arbitration clause is worth planning around if you are in the market. Don’t give up your rights!

Kucinich Announces Credit Cards That Don’t Cost You Your Legal Rights

Kucinich 111th1

Washington, Dec 17 –

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) released the following statement:

“This holiday shopping season, consumers have the choice of using credit cards that don’t take away their legal rights.  Until now, all major banks have required their customers – through provisions hidden in the fine print of credit card agreements — to give up their constitutional right to their day in court. Those agreements have required customers to settle their disputes through a process called arbitration.  In July, the House Domestic Policy Subcommittee, of which I am the Chairman, held a hearing in which we showed that mandatory arbitration is arbitrary, and that results depend more on the arbitrator to whom the case is assigned than on the facts or the law that applies.

“Since that hearing, my staff has been communicating with all the major banks, and today I can announce that six of those banks will not have arbitration clauses in their new credit card agreements.   Those banks are JPMorganChase, CapitalOne, PNC Bank, TD Bank, Bank of America and Regions Bank.  I want to congratulate those banks for their decisions.

“I particularly want to congratulate JPMorganChase and CapitalOne.  Those two banks will be issuing new credit card agreements that also allow their customers the right to a jury trial and the right to participate in a class action.  I strongly encourage the other banks to follow their lead.

“For the first time in years, you can choose what credit card to use by considering all its terms—interest rate, minimum payment, fees, rewards, and whether it requires you to give up your right to use the courts that our state and federal Constitutions have created for you.”

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=163669

Contact: Nathan White (202)225-5871

Now, if we can just get rid of the usurious rates. Debt load is a magical thing. If it’s lower, we can breath a little life into the economy, and the banks get a write off on an artificial loan they should have never had.

Read Full Post »

Politico has a lot to say about Cop15 today:

By GLENN THRUSH | 12/17/09 7:20 AM EST

Updated: 12/17/09 10:23 AM EST

[COPENHAGEN — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton threw a climate change Hail Mary on Thursday in hopes of salvaging the Copenhagen talks from collapse – pledging U.S. participation in a multinational fund to provide poor nations with a $100 billion a year by 2020. This is considerably more than the 10 billion originally promised, though not as much as some would like the US to commit….]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30723.html

Since, however, President Obama is still planning to show up at the Conference on the 18th, we are all hopeful that she is again paving the way for one of his triumphant entrances.

Just in case you weren’t sure we had enough USAns rampaging through Copenhagen, Nancy Pelosi took 20 house members with various interests in Science, there on Thursday. Should I hazard a guess that this is the contingent of House members that will be expected to support the 100 billion pledge Clinton promised, to poor countries to keep from drowning when their islands disappear? Sub Saharan Africans, too are in the process of drowning in an ocean of sand, as skyrocketing maternal mortality rates, starvation, coastal fishing loss, and loss of water are enveloped by desperate and futile wars.

The consensus is that 90% of the new emissions will come from poor and developing countries, not China and the USA. We already reached close to our “full” capacity at production of airborne water and landborne garbage.

In counterpoint, certain senators, including one Ben Nelson, of recent abortion news fame, think that even though the US has been THE leading polluter, and therefore one of the MAIN causes of warming, the poor countries ought to just fix it themselves. After all, we are having such a difficult time at home, they ought to just give us a break. Can you believe this?

“They’ve got to come up with their own,” said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). “We’re not asking them for money, as far as I know.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30690.html

Why aren’t they suing us? Careful guys, your caste mentality is showing.

Finally, Dipnote sends a lovely factoid. Did you know that traditional cook stoves, per unit, are the considered the worst polluters in the world?

And who usually winds up slaving over them?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »