Tag Archives: citizen

Global leaders are very worried about water shortages

A woman walks with donkeys carrying water gerry cans in Yemen’s volatile province of Marib. REUTERS/Ali Owidha

Global leaders are very worried about water shortages

By on 12 Apr 2016commentsShare

This story was originally published by Reveal and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Secret conversations between American diplomats show how a growing water crisis in the Middle East destabilized the region, helping spark civil wars in Syria and Yemen, and how those water shortages are spreading to the United States.

Classified U.S. cables reviewed by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting show a mounting concern by global political and business leaders that water shortages could spark unrest across the world, with dire consequences.

Many of the cables read like diary entries from an apocalyptic sci-fi novel.

“Water shortages have led desperate people to take desperate measures with equally desperate consequences,” according to a 2009 cable sent by U.S. Ambassador Stephen Seche in Yemen as water riots erupted across the country.

On Sept. 22 of that year, Seche sent a stark message to the U.S. State Department in Washington relaying the details of a conversation with Yemen’s minister of water, who “described Yemen’s water shortage as the ‘biggest threat to social stability in the near future.’ He noted that 70 percent of unofficial roadblocks stood up by angry citizens are due to water shortages, which are increasingly a cause of violent conflict.”

Seche soon cabled again, stating that 14 of the country’s 16 aquifers had run dry. At the time, Yemen wasn’t getting much news coverage, and there was little public mention that the country’s groundwater was running out.

These communications, along with similar cables sent from Syria, now seem eerily prescient, given the violent meltdowns in both countries that resulted in a flood of refugees to Europe.

Groundwater, which comes from deeply buried aquifers, supplies the bulk of freshwater in many regions, including Syria, Yemen, and drought-plagued California. It is essential for agricultural production, especially in arid regions with little rainwater. When wells run dry, farmers are forced to fallow fields, and some people get hungry, thirsty and often very angry.

The classified diplomatic cables, made public years ago by Wikileaks, now are providing fresh perspective on how water shortages have helped push Syria and Yemen into civil war, and prompted the king of neighboring Saudi Arabia to direct his country’s food companies to scour the globe for farmland. Since then, concerns about the world’s freshwater supplies have only accelerated.

It’s not just government officials who are worried. In 2009, U.S. Embassy officers visited Nestle’s headquarters in Switzerland, where company executives, who run the world’s largest food company and are dependent on freshwater to grow ingredients, provided a grim outlook of the coming years. An embassy official cabled Washington with the subject line, “Tour D’Horizon with Nestle: Forget the Global Financial Crisis, the World Is Running Out of Fresh Water.”

“Nestle thinks one-third of the world’s population will be affected by fresh water scarcity by 2025, with the situation only becoming more dire thereafter and potentially catastrophic by 2050,” according to a March 24, 2009, cable. “Problems will be severest in the Middle East, northern India, northern China, and the western United States.”

At the time of that meeting, government officials from Syria and Yemen already had started warning U.S. officials that their countries were slipping into chaos as a result of water scarcity.

By September 2009, Yemen’s water minister told the U.S. ambassador that the water riots in his country were a “sign of the future” and predicted “that conflict between urban and rural areas over water will lead to violence,” according to the cables.

Less than two years later, rural tribesmen fought their way into Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, and seized two buildings: the headquarters of the ruling General People’s Congress and the main offices of the water utility. The president was forced to resign, and a new government was formed. But water issues continued to amplify long-simmering tensions between various religious groups and tribesmen, which eventually led to a full-fledged civil war.

Reveal reviewed a cache of water-related documents that included Yemen, Nestle, and Saudi Arabia among the diplomatic documents made public by Wikileaks in 2010. Thomas Friedman, a columnist for The New York Times, found similar classified U.S. cables sent from Syria. Those cables also describe how water scarcity destabilized the country and helped spark a war that has sent more than 1 million refugees fleeing into Europe, a connection Friedman has continued to report.

The water-fueled conflicts in the Middle East paint a dark picture of a future that many governments now worry could spread around the world as freshwater supplies become increasingly scarce. The CIA, the State Department, and similar agencies in other countries are monitoring the situation.

In the past, global grain shortages have led to rapidly increasing food prices, which analysts have attributed to sparking the Arab Spring revolution in several countries, and in 2008 pushed about 150 million people into poverty, according to the World Bank.

Water scarcity increasingly is driven by three major factors: Global warming is forecast to create more severe droughts around the world. Meat consumption, which requires significantly more water than a vegetarian or low-meat diet, is spiking as a growing middle class in countries such as China and India can afford to eat more pork, chicken, and beef. And the world’s population continues to grow, with an expected 2 billion more stomachs to feed by 2050.

The most troubling signs of the looming threat first appeared in the Middle East, where wells started running dry nearly 15 years ago. Having drained down their own water supplies, food companies from Saudi Arabia and elsewhere began searching overseas.

By buying land in America’s most productive ground for growing hay, which just happens to be a desert, Saudi Arabia’s largest dairy company now can grow food for its cows back home — all year long.U.S. Geological Survey/NASA Landsat

In Saudi Arabia, the push to scour the globe for water came from the top. King Abdullah decreed that grains such as wheat and hay would need to be imported to conserve what was left of the country’s groundwater. All wheat production in Saudi Arabia will cease this year, and other water-intensive crops such as hay are being phased out, too, the king ruled.

A classified U.S. cable from Saudi Arabia in 2008 shows that King Abdullah directed Saudi food companies to search overseas for farmland with access to freshwater and promised to subsidize their operations. The head of the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh concluded that the king’s goal was “maintaining political stability in the Kingdom.”

U.S. intelligence sources are quick to caution that while water shortages played a significant factor in the dissolution of Syria and Yemen, the civil wars ultimately occurred as a result of weak governance, high unemployment, religious differences, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, in addition to water shortages.

For instance, the state of California has endured a record drought without suffering an armed coup to overthrow Gov. Jerry Brown.

But for less stable governments, severe water shortages are increasingly expected to cause political instability, according to the U.S. intelligence community.

In a 2014 speech, U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said food and water scarcity are contributing to the “most diverse array of threats and challenges as I’ve seen in my 50-plus years in the intel business.

“As time goes on, we’ll be confronting issues I call ‘basics’ resources — food, water, energy, and disease — more and more as an intelligence community,” he said.

These problems are not just happening overseas, but already are leading to heated political issues in the United States. In the western part of the country, which Nestle forecast will suffer severe long-term shortages, tensions are heating up as Middle Eastern companies arrive to tap dwindling water supplies in California and Arizona.

Almarai, which is Saudi Arabia’s largest dairy company and has publicly said it’s following the king’s directive, began pumping up billions of gallons of water in the Arizona desert in 2014 to grow hay that it exports back to the Middle East. Analysts refer to this as exporting “virtual water.” It is more cost-effective to use the Arizona water to irrigate land in America and ship the hay to Saudi Arabia rather than filling a fleet of oil tankers with the water.

Arizonans living near Almarai’s hay operation say their groundwater is dropping fast as the Saudis and other foreign companies increase production. They are now worried their domestic wells might suffer the same fate as those in Syria and Yemen.

In January, more than 300 people packed into a community center in rural La Paz County to listen to the head of the state’s water department discuss how long their desert aquifer would last.

Five sheriff’s deputies stood guard at the event to ensure the meeting remained civil — the Arizona Department of Water Resources had requested extra law enforcement, according to county Supervisor Holly Irwin.

“Water can be a very angry issue,” she said. “With people’s wells drying up, it becomes very personal.”

Thomas Buschatzke, Arizona’s water director, defended the Saudi farm, saying it provides jobs and increases tax revenue. He added that “Arizona is part of the global economy; our agricultural industry generates billions of dollars annually to our state’s economy.”

But state officials admit they don’t know how long the area’s water will last, given the increased water pumping, and announced plans to study it.

“It’s gotten very emotional,” Irwin said. “When you see them drilling all over the place, I need to protect the little people.”

After the meeting, the state approved another two new wells for the Saudi company, each capable of pumping more than a billion gallons of water a year.

Back in Yemen in 2009, U.S. Ambassador Seche described how as aquifers were drained, and groundwater levels dropped lower, rich landowners drilled deeper and deeper wells. But everyday citizens did not have the money to dig deeper, and as their wells ran dry, they were forced to leave their land and livelihoods behind.

“The effects of water scarcity will leave the rich and powerful largely unaffected,” Seche wrote in the classified 2009 cable. “These examples illustrate how the rich always have a creative way of getting water, which not only is unavailable to the poor, but also cuts into the unreplenishable resources.”

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Continue reading: 

Global leaders are very worried about water shortages

Posted in alo, Anchor, Anker, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Global leaders are very worried about water shortages

Here’s Why Capitol Cops Arrested a Bunch of Senior Citizens Today

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The day after more than 400 people were arrested on Capitol Hill, US Capitol Police on Tuesday arrested 85 mostly elderly activists who were blocking the south entrance of the Capitol. They were all participating in “Democracy Spring,” a weeklong series of rallies and marches on the Capitol aimed at bringing attention to the control of money over politics in Congress and what organizers say are unfair voting laws.

Each day of rallies focuses on a different theme. Tuesday’s demonstration was called “Elders Standing for Democracy Spring,” (Monday’s was “All On Board”). Events later in the week include “Racial Justice Day,” “Labor Solidarity Day,” “Youth and Student Day,” and finally, on Saturday, “Climate Justice Day.” Democracy Spring members include people from every state, backed by dozens of progressive organizations and endorsed by celebrities like Mark Ruffalo, Talib Kweli, and Sam Waterston. They are pushing Congress to pass four bills they say will begin the process of reducing money’s influence on legislation and ensuring voting access for more people.

“The reason that we are here is because our country has become a corpotocracy,” said Bil Lewis, from Cambridge, Massachusetts, who was dressed as President James Madison in the hopes of inspiring curiosity among bystanders. He participated in the 140-mile march from Philadelphia to Washington, DC. “The will of the people is no longer being done.”

Lewis said he spent the morning visiting offices in the Capitol and trying to talk to members about money in politics.

“Congress knows what’s going on,” he said. “They are forced to spend hours and hours making calls, asking for donations, and when they get those donations from the big corporation or rich donors, they then are virtually required to pass certain bills which benefit those people and hurt we the people.”

After a short rally outside of Union Station, several hundred people marched the several blocks to the Capitol, chanting, “We’re here, we’re elders, we’re fearless, get used to it,” and “Our country’s not for sale, we’re not too old to go to jail.”

As soon as the group arrived at the south entrance of the Capitol, several dozen sat down and the US Capitol Police encircled them. After being told that they would be arrested if they didn’t disperse, the police began an orderly and calm arrest process. In all, 85 people were picked up for “unlawful demonstration activity,” according to a Capitol Police statement provided to Mother Jones. They were processed on the scene and released.

Jill, an elderly election worker from New Jersey who was not arrested and asked that her last name not be used, said she was there to support efforts for less money in politics and for elections with candidates who are not in the pockets of wealthy donors.

“I think it’s become apparent to a lot of us that the whole political process in our country is really under the control of a handful of people, and by the time we get to make a choice in November, the fix is already in, because all of the candidates, typically, are ones who are going to do what the establishment, the oligarchy, wants from them,” Jill said. A supporter of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, she also expressed concern about irregularities at polling places, with electronic voting machines that don’t accurately record votes, calling the election process in many places “a travesty.”

After the rally, a group of Democracy Spring activists went to the Republican National Committee building to try to disrupt House Speaker Paul Ryan’s press conference, when he reiterated that he will not seek or accept a nomination to be the Republican candidate for president.

The activists made a circle around the building and tried to prevent the media from entering to cover Ryan’s press conference. They also tried to confront him when he left the building, but they weren’t successful on either front.

This article is from:

Here’s Why Capitol Cops Arrested a Bunch of Senior Citizens Today

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s Why Capitol Cops Arrested a Bunch of Senior Citizens Today

Spring is here! And so are the semen trees.

Spring is here! And so are the semen trees.

By on 30 Mar 2016commentsShare

People say Asheville, North Carolina, is a beautiful town, and its beauty lies mostly in the landscape. Nestled deep in the North Carolina hills, Asheville is especially lovely in the spring, as color comes back to the Blue Ridge Mountains. But there is a problem with Asheville in spring: It smells like shit.

Actually, it doesn’t smell like shit, per se. It smells more like the inside of a scrotum that has been trapped in tight pleather shorts for six to 12 months. On a recent visit to my hometown, my girlfriend, meeting my family for the first time, asked if Asheville has a public masturbation problem.

“Why does it smell like semen around here?,” she asked as we walked downtown with my family.

Advertisement – Article continues below

“Oh,” my sister said. “That’s just the Bradford pears.”

Bradford pear trees, also known as the Callery pear, have small, white petals that turn to dark green foliage as the petals drop. They are pretty, but they are also the bane of springtime in Asheville. Urban Dictionary describes it as a “cross between old semen, dirty vagina, and rotting fried shrimp. Common throughout the South,” the linguistic authority continues, “these trees are pleasantly located near eateries and other fine establishments.” This is certainly true in Asheville, where a lovely outdoor lunch is made all the more ripe by the stench of rotting semen.

And Asheville is hardly alone. A native of China, the Bradford pear is now an invasive species, spreading across the world to “almost every city and town to some degree or another,” according to horticulturalist Michael A. Dirr. Dirr also, seemingly without irony, writes that Bradfords “tend to develop rather tight crotches,” although their crotches are unrelated to the smell. According to the 2006 tree census, Bradford pears accounted for over 10 percent of New York City’s nearly 600,000 trees, making it the fifth most popular tree in the city. 

Bradfords were introduced to U.S. cities and suburbs in the 1964 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as a decorative tree prized for its appearance and fast growth, but quickly spread beyond where they were planted, as invasive species do. Now, these pretty but stinky trees outcompete other plants in many areas, taking valuable resources and edging natives out of their own ecosystems. Despite efforts to replace them from Missouri to Boston, the problem of Bradford pears and other invasive species will only grow worse in the era of climate change, with spring starting earlier and at warmer temperatures. Invasive species intensified by climate change is one of the leading causes of biological diversity loss worldwide, according to the National Park Service. And Bradford pears are now in an estimated 25 states and over 150 countries, stinking up the globe, and taking over land where they aren’t meant to be. “When you see those fields of white flowering trees, please don’t get giddy with excitement over pretty white flowers,” writes the Asheville Citizen-Times. “What you are looking at are Callery pears destroying nature.”

If it hasn’t already, the semen tree problem could soon reach a city near you, just like it has in my hometown. So remember this for the future: The stench of rotten ejaculate that wafts around you each April is just a tree reminding you that after the long winter, spring, finally, has come.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

See original article here:  

Spring is here! And so are the semen trees.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Spring is here! And so are the semen trees.

Native Americans Are Taking the Fight for Voting Rights to Court

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday night, the long lines of Arizona primary voters highlighted the potentially disastrous fallout from a 2013 Supreme Court ruling that gutted the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The specter of a new disenfranchisement controversy was all too familiar for a group of people who have been fighting for their right to vote in Arizona and much of the West for years: Native Americans. “What’s happening in Indian Country is reflective of what’s happening nationwide,” says Daniel McCool, political science professor at the University of Utah and coauthor of the book Native Vote.

Earlier this month, Indian Country Media Network reported that Native American and Alaska Natives have flagged voting-related problems in 17 states, via litigation or tribal diplomacy with local officials. For example, in Alaska—which will hold its Democratic caucuses Saturday—Alaska Natives scored a victory in September 2014, when a federal judge concluded that state election officials violated the Voting Rights Act when they failed to translate voting materials for Alaska Natives in rural sections of the state. After nine months of talks, they reached a settlement to get election pamphlets translated into six dialects of Yup’ik and Gwich’in through 2020, granting them language assistance ahead of the caucuses this weekend.

9 Facts that Blow Up the Voter-Fraud Myth

Meanwhile, congressional efforts to protect voting rights for Native Americans and Alaska Natives have come to a halt. Last July, Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) announced a bill that would prevent states from moving polling places to inconvenient locations, banishing in-person voting on reservations, and altering early voting locations. The bill, inspired by a voting access case in Montana that compelled three counties to open satellite offices on reservations, has stalled in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Here are a few other cases to keep in mind:

Poor Bear v. Jackson County: In September 2014, members of the Oglala Sioux Tribe from the Pine Ridge Reservation filed a lawsuit against Jackson County, South Dakota, alleging that county officials refused to create a satellite office where Sioux residents could register and file in-person absentee ballots. For tribal citizens, the closest place to submit their absentee ballots is the county auditor’s office in Kadoka, a town that’s 95 percent white and roughly 27 miles away. (Native Americans must travel twice as far as white residents in the county to submit ballots in person, according to the lawsuit.) Voters can also submit absentee ballots by mail, but they have to submit an affidavit to prove their identity if they lack a tribal photo ID card, a potential hardship for Native American voters.

The county commission declined to approve the office because “it believed funding was not available,” despite a Help America Vote Act plan that allowed the county to use state funds to create the office. After residents filed for a preliminary injunction, the commission agreed to open a temporary satellite voting office in the runup to Election Day 2014. Last November, in an agreement with South Dakota’s secretary of state, the Jackson County Commission approved a satellite site through 2023.

Brakebill v. Jaeger: In January, seven members of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians filed a lawsuit against North Dakota state secretary Alvin Jaeger, alleging that the strict requirements under the state’s voter ID law imposed a discriminatory burden on Native Americans. When the state enacted House Bill 1332 in April 2015, it limited the forms of permissible identification at voting booths, required forms of identification to display the voter’s home address and date of birth, and eliminated a provision that allowed voters to use a voucher or affidavit if they failed to bring an ID. The lawsuit alleges that the bill “disenfranchised and imposed significant barriers for qualified Native American voters by establishing strict voter ID and residence requirements.”

According to the lawsuit, Native Americans in North Dakota have to travel an average of nearly 30 miles to obtain a driver’s license. The lawsuit also claims that many Native Americans lack tribal government IDs with residential addresses, which is an alternative form of ID under state law. In February, Jaeger tried to get the case tossed out, arguing that the voter ID law was constitutional. The judge has yet to decide.

Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission v. San Juan County: Less than two years ago, prospective Navajo Nation voters in San Juan County, Utah—where Native Americans are nearly 47 percent of the population—had to travel an average of two hours to submit a ballot in the predominantly white city of Monticello, without access to reliable public transportation. That’s because in 2014, according to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and others in late February, the county closed polling places and switched over to mail-in ballots, placing a “disproportionately severe burden” on Navajo residents. The county has yet to respond in court to the case.

It wasn’t the first time San Juan County has been sued for violating the Voting Rights Act. In fact, the Navajo Nation claimed in a previous lawsuit that the county commission “relied on race” when it decided not to change the boundary lines for a largely Native American district in 2011, three decades after they were initially drawn. In February, US District Judge Robert Shelby ordered the county to redraw its election district lines after he ruled that its current boundaries, which were set after a settlement with the Justice Department in the 1980s, were unconstitutional.

Taken from:

Native Americans Are Taking the Fight for Voting Rights to Court

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Native Americans Are Taking the Fight for Voting Rights to Court

These Right-Wing Groups Are Gearing Up for an Onslaught on Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Wednesday, President Barack Obama picked Merrick Garland, a federal court of appeals judge with a stellar and moderate reputation, to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. His strategy was obvious: present obstructionist Republicans with a nominee with little or no baggage. But Senate Republicans immediately signaled that the Garland nomination would not change their calculations—that the fight to block any nominee was on. And prior to Obama’s announcement, conservative groups were already gearing up for this crusade, perhaps the last big battle of the right’s war on Obama.

The political players leading this effort are the usual suspects. The Republican National Committee had already announced plans to oppose Obama’s nominee—whoever it might be—and to run ads in competitive Senate races in Colorado, Ohio, Florida, New Hampshire and elsewhere, in addition to targeting Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The tea party group FreedomWorks is rallying grassroots voters to the cause. On the other side of political spectrum, liberal advocacy groups such as the Alliance for Justice and People for the American Way are girding for a massive fight.

Continue Reading »

Read the article: 

These Right-Wing Groups Are Gearing Up for an Onslaught on Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on These Right-Wing Groups Are Gearing Up for an Onslaught on Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee

Way more Americans are worried about climate change

Way more Americans are worried about climate change

By on 17 Mar 2016commentsShare

There’s good news and there’s bad news: More Americans are concerned about climate change now than at any time in the past eight years. But that’s because the consequences are getting harder to ignore.

According to a Gallup poll conducted in early March, 64 percent of Americans are worried about climate change a “great deal” or a “fair amount.” This is quite a jump over last year’s 55 percent.

However, as you can see from the graph above, the percentage of concerned citizens varies widely from year to year, and it actually peaked in the year 2000. What was going on in 2000? Well, the dot-com bubble burst, the Yankees won the World Series, yours truly finally cut off her ill-advised white-person dreadlocks, and — perhaps most notably — climate hawk Al Gore was running for president. So, big year. What followed was the Bush presidency, 9/11, the American invasions of both Iraq and Afghanistan, and steep declines in concern about climate change. Concern hit a low point in 2004, before rebounding for the next four years, starting right around the time Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth came out, and “Drop It Like It’s Hot” hit the airwaves.

Again, concern rose for the next four years, before dropping steeply and staying low until this year. What gives? Gallup has a theory:

A confluence of factors — the economic downturn, the Climategate controversy and some well-publicized pushback against global warming science — may have dampened public concern about global warming from about 2009 to 2015. However, Americans are now expressing record- or near-record-high belief that global warming is happening, as well as concern about the issue. Several years of unseasonably warm weather — including the 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2015-2016 winters — has potentially contributed to this shift in attitudes. If that’s true, continuation of such weather patterns would likely do more than anything politicians and even climate-change scientists can to further raise public concern.

In short, more people care about climate change now than they have in a long time. This probably has something to do with the fact that the effects of climate change are becoming increasingly apparent. From record-breaking wildfire seasons to the warmest year on record to the California drought to epic flooding in the South, it’s getting harder and harder to pretend that climate change isn’t already affecting us. The majority of us are paying attention.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Link: 

Way more Americans are worried about climate change

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Way more Americans are worried about climate change

Why Does the Supreme Court Matter to Environmentalists?

One of the hottest issues in any presidential race usually has to do with the Supreme Court, the highest court in the U.S. The 9 justices who sit on the court hold the fate of the nation in their hands. They decide lawsuits, interpret the Constitution and can change the way society is forced to behave, simply by reaching a majority decision on a case that’s brought before them.

The President nominates justices, and the U.S. Senate votes them in or out. Once appointed, a Supreme Court justice serves a life term that ends only when the justice dies or voluntarily resigns. Because a justice can stay on the court for 30 or 40 years, many people believe that of the thousands ofdecisions a president makes during his or her tenure, the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is among the most important.

Supreme Court decisions have determined whether and how the environment is protected for many decades. Here is a sample of some important decisions the court has made regarding the planet.

Endangered Species – Antonin Scalia, who recently died after 30 years as a justice, led the court’s conservative wing on limiting environmental groups’ ability to sue corporate polluters, protect public land and enforce federal water regulations.

Environmentalists use lawsuits to force polluters to obey state and federal laws on such issues as releasing toxic chemicals into the air or waterways or to protect endangered species. Scalia’s 1992 opinion in

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife

determined that Defenders (ergo, other environmental organizations) did not have “standing” to challenge endangered species protections. In other words, the Court essentially decided, in an

opinion written by Scalia

, that industry attempts to blockthe Endangered Species Act should be taken more seriously than environmental groups’ efforts to enforce it.

Clean Power Plan

– President Obama and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have issued a rule requiring states to develop plans to lower carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. The

CPP

is an attempt to reduce greenhouse gases that cause climate change as well as limit soot and other fine particles that contribute to air pollution.

The current court has

blocked

the government’s ability to implement the plan because opponents have filed a lawsuit in the D.C. Circuit Court, which will hear arguments about the law pros and cons June 2. If the D.C. Circuit Court upholds the constitutionality of the plan, opponents could stillappeal to the Supreme Court, which could decide the plan is unconstitutional. The fate of the Clean Power Plan remains to be seen.

Mercury Pollution – Coal and oil-fired power plants emit mercury and other air pollutants. In fact, coal plants are the largest single source of mercury in our environment.

The Environmental Protection Agency issued a federal rule aimed at reducing mercury emissions. That

rule was challenged

by twenty states that wanted the court to block the rule while the government decided how to calculate the cost of implementing it.

In a good move for the planet, Chief Justice John Roberts turned down their request and let the rule stay in effect while the costs are determined.

Citizens United

– In 2010, the Supreme Court decided in the

Citizens United Case

that corporations and labor unions can contribute unlimited amounts of money to candidates running for office. The Court also essentially gave permission to polluters todonate huge sums to sitting legislatorsin the hopes of influencing the votes they cast on new laws to protect the environment.

Here is one example of how Citizens United has played out. Richmond, California in the San Francisco Bay Area is the home of a Chevron oil refinery. Prior to Citizens United, perhaps around $100,000 would have been spent on local political races there. But in 2012, reports

Garnet Goes Green,

political action committees empowered by Citizens United poured $4 million into the races for three seats on the Richmond City Council. Of that, $2 million was contributed by Chevron.

Results? Two of Chevron’s three preferred candidates won their races in that year’s election.

Citizens United reaches far beyond the environment. The

U.S. Library of Medicine

, a division of the National Institutes of Health, has found that “corporations can now make unlimited contributions to election advocacy advertising…Candidates who favor public health positions may be subjected to corporate opposition advertising.” In other words, polluters can spend a fortune trying to defeat a candidate who wants to clean up the air or water or reduce the presence of toxic chemicals in everyday products.

“The ruling expands corporate rights to disproportionately influence the electoral process and thus health policymakers,” notes the National Library of Medicine. “The effects on public health may be catastrophic. For example, corporations could spend unlimited sums for advertising against candidates who support public health positions on issues such as taxation on sugar-sweetened drinks, air quality standards or access to reproductive services.”

The environment always seems to be under attack. Often, our only recourse is to sue to invoke protections afforded the planet by suchlaws as the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act or

NEPA

, the National Environmental Policy Act.

The buck stops with the Supreme Court. However justices interpret the law, whether to protect the environment or protect the polluters, will reverberate across the planet for decades to come. The Supreme Court can be our last best hopeor our worst one.

Related

What Pres. Obama’s Clean Power Plan Actually MeansSupreme Court Overturns California Ban on Slaughtering Downed Animals

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Visit link – 

Why Does the Supreme Court Matter to Environmentalists?

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Does the Supreme Court Matter to Environmentalists?

Should kids be able to sue for a safe climate? This federal court is about to decide

No Kidding

Should kids be able to sue for a safe climate? This federal court is about to decide

By on 10 Mar 2016commentsShare

This post was co-published with Moyers & Company.

EUGENE, Ore. — Courtrooms usually aren’t jovial places, but with 21 youth plaintiffs and two busloads of supporting junior high-school students in tow, the air in the U.S. District Courthouse here on Wednesday felt more field trip than federal court.

The occasion for the youthful energy was a hearing on a complaint filed on behalf of the plaintiffs, aged 8–19, by Oregon nonprofit Our Children’s Trust. The kids’ lawyers assert that their clients, and the younger generation as a whole, have been deprived of key rights by their own government. By failing to act on climate change, they argue, the United States government — including President Obama and a baker’s dozen federal agencies — has valued its own generation more than future generations, which will bear a greater burden with respect to the climate crisis.

Advertisement – Article continues below

The Justice Department filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, and Wednesday’s hearing had a federal judge considering that motion. The youth plaintiffs’ counsel sparred with government lawyers as well as attorneys representing fossil fuel interests. This kind of case might sound, well, juvenile, but trade groups with ties to the oil and gas lobby — the American Petroleum Institute, the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, and the National Association of Manufacturers — were concerned enough about it that they joined as co-defendants in November of last year. Now, the Oregon U.S. District Court will decide whether or not the complaint will proceed to trial.

Xiuhtezcatl Tonatiuh Martinez, a 15-year-old indigenous activist and a plaintiff on the case, summed up the kids’ perspective at a press conference after the hearing. “We are valuing our futures over profits,” he said. “We are valuing this planet over corporate greed.”

Xiuhtezcatl Tonatiuh Martinez (15) stands in front of his fellow plaintiffs and addresses the press.

Clayton Aldern

This isn’t the first time Our Children’s Trust has brought forth a youth climate lawsuit. Indeed, the group has at one time or another filed suit in all 50 states and currently has cases pending in five states. Back in November, in a case brought by a coalition of Seattle teenagers, a Washington judge ruled that the state was constitutionally obligated to protect its natural resources “for the common benefit of the people of the State” — a notable win for the young plaintiffs — but she did not go so far as to rule that the state’s carbon emissions-limiting standards in question needed to adhere to the “best available science.” A 2011 suit, which the youth plaintiffs ended up losing, also targeted the federal government for failing to keep the atmosphere safe for future generations. It perhaps goes without saying that these types of complaints are incredible long shots.

Julia Olson, a lawyer with Wild Earth Advocates and Our Children’s Trust who argued the plaintiffs’ case on Wednesday, is optimistic about the outcome of this complaint, though. “I believe in our Constitution, and I think it can work to address even the most systemic, intractable problem of our generation,” she told me.

The complaint alleges violation of the kids’ Fifth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection. By failing to act on climate change, it argues, the government discriminates against youth as a class. Without access to a healthy climate, they’re deprived of their fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property.

The complaint is also built on the public trust doctrine, a carryover from English common law that says a government has the duty to protect certain natural resources and systems on behalf of current and future generations. “It originated with Emperor Justinian in Rome,” Alex Loznak, a 19-year-old plaintiff, explained to the press. “It’s reflected in the Magna Carta, the writings of Thomas Jefferson, and cited in U.S. court decisions dating back to the 1800s.”

An important question at hand on Wednesday was whether the public trust doctrine applies to the federal government. The U.S. government and its fossil-fuel industry co-defendants argued that legal precedent only considers it to apply to states. That’s a crucial distinction, because it will help determine whether or not the plaintiffs even have standing in the federal court system.

Youth plaintiff Isaac Vergun (13) poses outside the U.S. District Courthouse in Eugene, Ore.

Clayton Aldern

The defendants also contend that if the federal court took on the case, it would amount to an egregious overstep of authority by the judiciary. “This is the type of problem that is designed to be solved by the political branches,” argued U.S. counsel Sean C. Duffy at the hearing. He said that denying the U.S. government’s motion for dismissal would effectively turn the judicial branch into a “de facto super-agency.”

Another core argument of the defense is that all cases addressing constitutional rights must demonstrate that the government, through its actions, has infringed upon these rights or exceeded its authority. Instead, the defense argued, the kids’ case alleges a failure to act, and you can’t require the government to simply “do more.” “Our Constitution is one that limits the power of government,” argued intervenor counsel Quin Sorenson, who represented industry interests at the hearing.

That’s not how Olson sees it, though. “What we have today is not just a failure to act,” she told the press after the hearing. “The government is not just sitting by and doing nothing. They are doing everything to cause this problem.” Indeed, the complaint calls out the government for its continued actions to “permit, authorize, and subsidize fossil fuel extraction, development, consumption and exportation.”

It’s also not unprecedented for a court to demand that the government meet a specific standard to ensure its citizens’ safety, she said. In Brown v. Plata, for example, a 2010 Supreme Court case concerning prison reform, the court required a mandatory limit on prison populations for the sake of health and safety. Summarizing the decision, she said that while the Supreme Court had no scientific standards to apply at the time, it ruled that it could rely on expert evidence. “The Court selected the number — it set the standard — to keep those prisoners safe.” And when it comes to determining the safe level of climate pollution in the atmosphere, “we have scientific standards,” she said.

Supporters of the youth plaintiffs assemble on the steps of the U.S. District Courthouse in Eugene, Ore., after the hearing. The banner reads, “Our future is a constitutional right.”

Clayton Aldern

“The way I hope it will go is that the judicial branch will say, ‘You’ve got to do something,’” said James Hansen, adjunct professor at Columbia University and former director of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Hansen’s granddaughter is a plaintiff in the case, and he’s formally listed in the complaint as the legal guardian of “Future Generations.” He continued, “Hopefully the court will ask for a plan: How are you going to ensure the rights of young people?”

In a time of gridlock and sorely needed climate action, the case couldn’t come soon enough, Hansen said. “It gets harder and harder to stabilize the climate if you go longer and longer without turning the curve.”

Advertisement – Article continues below

Addressing climate change is perhaps the greatest challenge of our time, and it necessarily causes us to ask some big questions. Is there a constitutional right to be free from climate change? Is there a constitutional right to a safe climate? Is youth a class, or simply a mutable trait? If the federal government takes actions that worsen the climate crisis, does that amount to an abuse of its power?

Said Olson: “We are not just in a climate crisis. We will have a significant constitutional crisis and a crisis in our democracy if this doesn’t work.”


The 21 youth plaintiffs, along with climatologist James Hansen (top, third from left) pose with Our Children’s Trust attorneys Phil Gregory (top left) and Julia Olson (bottom left).

Clayton Aldern

Watch Bill Moyers’ 2014 interview with youth plaintiff Kelsey Juliana:

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Link:

Should kids be able to sue for a safe climate? This federal court is about to decide

Posted in alo, Anchor, Casio, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Should kids be able to sue for a safe climate? This federal court is about to decide

Raw Data: Illegal Immigration From Mexico

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Are unauthorized immigrants “pouring across the southern border”? Since Donald Trump said it, there’s automatically a strong chance that it’s a lie, and sure enough, it is.

According to Pew Research, the population of unauthorized immigrants from Mexico peaked in 2007 at 6.9 million and has been dropping ever since. Currently it stands at 5.6 million. As the chart on the right shows, net migration from Mexico has been negative every year since 2008. But maybe the ones that are here are disproportionately murderers and rapists, as Trump also says. Nope. The number of unauthorized immigrants in US prisons is relatively small, and the bulk of the available research suggests that they’re incarcerated at lower rates than US citizens. It’s just another lie.

Source – 

Raw Data: Illegal Immigration From Mexico

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Raw Data: Illegal Immigration From Mexico

Donald Trump Goes to Bat for Planned Parenthood

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

During Thursday night’s GOP presidential debate, Donald Trump took a controversial stand for a Republican candidate: He vigorously defended Planned Parenthood.

“As far as Planned Parenthood is concerned, I’m pro-life, I’m totally against abortion having to do with Planned Parenthood,” the GOP front-runner said during Thursday’s CNN-Telemundo Republican debate from Texas. “But millions and millions of women, cervical cancer, breast cancer, are helped by Planned Parenthood. So you can say whatever you want, but they have millions of women going through Planned Parenthood that are helped greatly.”

View the original here: 

Donald Trump Goes to Bat for Planned Parenthood

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump Goes to Bat for Planned Parenthood