Pacific Progressive

More Warming, More War?

This material was created by Campus Progress.

by Candice Bernd

Climate change could have more effects on the planet than just rising sea levels and higher temperatures—it could be promoting civil strife and wars in areas around the tropics.

A new study in the journal Nature found that the percentage of civil conflicts doubles during El Niño, a regular climate event that warms up the Pacific Ocean and surrounding tropics about every five years. The connection between El Niño and civil wars, as well as a link between the cooling period of La Niña and times of relative peace, is so strong that researchers believe it can be considered partly a cause of civil strife.

Another major factor? Poverty.

Many nations impacted by El Niño—such as Australia—don’t see the same rise in conflicts. It’s an issue researchers suspect might only worsen with time.

As food scarcity continues to be impacted by the drying out of arable farm land and the effects of globalization in an age of austerity, the poorest countries in the tropics will continue to feel the hunger and the heat. 

Big Oil’s Mountain of Cash - Oil Companies Cling to Tax Breaks While Hoarding Tens of Billions

This material was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Daniel J. Weiss, Valeri Vasquez 

View Big Oil's cash assets and profits (.xls)

On September 19 President Barack Obama announced his plan to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the next 12 years, including raising $1.5 trillion by closing special interest loopholes and other revenue raisers. This includes eliminating $41 billion in tax loopholes for the oil and gas industry (p. 63) over the next decade.

Big Oil is predictably opposed to losing its unnecessary tax breaks. The American Petroleum Institute, or API, the oil industry’s lobbying muscle, quickly claimed that “the Administration plan would hurt jobs and investment.”

But this claim ignores the fact that the big five oil companies—BP, Chevron, ConocoPhilips, ExxonMobil, and Shell—have ample financial resources that dwarf the value of these tax breaks. These companies enjoy billions in cash reserves, made nearly $1 trillion in profits over the past decade, and at least one company (ExxonMobil) pays a lower effective tax rate than the average American family.

In other words, Big Oil can readily afford to contribute its “fair share” to reduce America’s debt.

The Jobs Case for Conservation- Creating Opportunity Through Stewardship of America’s Public Lands

This material was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Jessica Goad, Christy Goldfuss, Tom Kenworthy

Download this report (pdf)

Download the introduction and summary (pdf)

Read the full report in your web browser (Scribd)

Most Americans know our public lands as the places we go to get away from it all and enjoy ourselves in the outdoors. Whether it is strolling through a national park, hiking in the backcountry, skiing, hunting, fishing, wildlife watching, or going boating, these places provide immense enjoyment. Conservation, however, also has enormous economic value, supporting a specific economy in recreation, restoration, and renewable energy development, all of which support numerous jobs. What’s more, these jobs in outdoor retail, the concessionaire business, outfitters and guides, and the construction industry to repair damaged lands and build renewable energy are frequently located in rural areas.

Americans are feeling the pinch of tough economic times and know that jobs are the key to supporting our families and lifestyles. They know what the August 2011 U.S. unemployment rate of 9.1 percent means to them, whether they have a job or not. And rural America, the location of the majority of public lands, was the hardest hit by the Great Recession, with many rural counties losing more jobs than the national average in late 2009 and early 2010. Rural America began to feel the effects of the recession early on, which was amplified by the fact that 90 percent of the poorest counties in the United States are rural. Luckily, public lands can provide a vast number of jobs that cannot be outsourced.

Growing Green Jobs in America’s Urban Centers

This material was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Jorge Madrid

Download this issue brief (pdf)

Read the issue brief in your web browser (Scribd)

While leaders in Washington, D.C., search for ways to create jobs and kick-start our struggling economy, urban centers are experiencing steady growth in the green economy, which is creating well-paid jobs in communities that have felt the worst of the recession, particularly those with large numbers of African Americans and Latinos. These urban centers are ideal for growing a strong and equitable driver of new business and jobs.

Defining green jobs and the green economy

The green economy is a sector of the broader economy producing goods and services that provide environmental benefit. This can include clean energy production, energy and water efficient design and construction, mass transit, conservation, waste management, and numerous other industries that are part of a general shift in the way we use and produce energy and eliminate waste.

Senators Support Cancer from the Skies While Raking in Big Campaign Cash

New Bill Prevents Regulations on Airborne Toxics for One Year, Helps Polluters

This material was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Daniel J. Weiss, Matthew Kasper 

On September 12, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) and 20 of her colleagues introduced theRegulatory Time-Out Act, S. 1538. This bill would establish a one-year moratorium on regulations from the executive branch and independent regulatory agencies. It also would benefit big energy companies by stopping controls on airborne toxic chemicals from major sources. Not surprisingly, these 21 senators received $20 million in campaign contributions from the energy and natural resources sector since 1989.

Sen. Collins said: “Under my bill, no ‘significant’ final rule that would have an adverse impact could go into effect during a 1-year moratorium.” It would apply to rules that cost business more than $100 million annually, which includes most major public health safeguards.

This moratorium would halt the implementation of rules to reduce mercury, dioxin, and other toxic chemicals from coal-fired power plants, industrial boilers, and cement manufacturing. The American Lung Association noted that allowing these sources to continue unchecked will inflict real harm on Americans, particularly children, seniors, and the sick:

These emissions can make breathing difficult and can worsen asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bronchitis and other lung diseases. These pollutants can cause heart attacks and strokes, lung cancer and other cancers, birth defects and premature death.

House Votes 'No' on Auto Jobs - GOP Leaders Continue Attack on Clean Car Jobs L

This material was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Daniel J. Weiss, James Barba Nazar 

The House Republicans’ assault on jobs continued last week, tucked into a bill to keep the government running after September 30. Early Friday morning the House passed a continuing resolution to fund the federal government through November 18 by a vote of 219-203. This bill includes $3.65 billion for emergency disaster relief but pays for it by cutting $1.5 billion for the Alternative Technology Vehicle Manufacturing loan program that helps domestic auto plants retool to manufacture the clean cars of the future. This offset—helping extreme weather victims by slashing auto jobs—was voted against by nearly all House Democrats and two dozen House Republicans.

The Senate immediately rejected this approach to disaster assistance by voting later that dayto table the House bill by a 59-36 vote. Senate Democrats support replenishing the nearly barren disaster relief cupboards but they oppose cutting the clean car jobs program to do it. The Senate could vote as early as Monday evening on funding the government and paying for disaster relief without disinvesting in clean car manufacturing and jobs.

Last week the Center for American Progress revealed that there are 18 pending ATVM loan applications in various stages of the approval process with a total request for $9.8 billion in loans. We identified these pending applications by state, loan request, and the type of project but we did not have more details about these proposals.

Truckers and Environmentalists Team Up to Clean Up Port of Seattle Working Conditions and Emissions

Laura ClawsonFollowforDaily Kos Labor

Short haul truck drivers at the Port of Seattle have to cope with low wages and long work days; "a Port study in 2006 found the median take-home pay was $28,500 for drivers, who reported working an average 11 hours a day." Environmentalists are also concerned about the truckers' working conditions, since the aging trucks that are the only option for such low-paying work are a major source of emissions.

So when the American Association of Port Authorities held its convention in Seattle the other week, it was met by a rally, as well as the flash mob you can see in the video above. Organizers also made a mock agenda slipped under all the doors in the hotel the convention was held in.

Port of Seattle officials are not pretending things are awesome for the drivers:

"The working conditions of the drivers are abysmal," acknowledges Port Commissioner Gael Tarleton. "Like in any labor force, any market, there are groups who enter at the lowest level and ... . You know why we have immigrant drivers? It's the one thing they can do where they don't need to speak the language well."

But that doesn't mean they're changing a thing, arguing that if they don't mistreat their drivers the most, Portland might take their business. And after all, these are the immigrants at the lowest level, so abysmal is apparently not a problem. That's even though, according to Change to Win, short-trip hauling accounts for less than 1% of retail prices, so a reasonable wage for drivers would have almost no effect on prices.

 

The Progress Report - Friday Sept 23 - New-Old GOP Plan: Kill Jobs, Stiff Disaster Victims

By ThinkProgress War Room 

This material was created for the Progress Report, the daily e-mail publication of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Click here to subscribe

GOP Hat Trick: Kill Jobs, Stiff Disaster Victims, & Shut Down the Government

On Wednesday, we reported on how Tea Party extremists within the House GOP caucusderailed the GOP leadership’s job-killing plan to fund disaster recovery efforts and keep the government running past Sept. 30 because it didn’t cut spendingenough. Democrats, of course, also opposed the plan en masse because it would kill tens of thousands of American jobs by cutting a jobs program to pay for emergency disaster relief funds. Two key right-wing business groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and National Association of Manufacturers, also announced their opposition to cutting the jobs program.

After the embarrassing defeat, Speaker Boehner added just $100 MILLION in additional cuts (from yet another clean energy jobs program) to the $1 TRILLION spending bill, which was otherwise identical to the one voted down Wednesday. This gimmick was enough to get 23 recalcitrant Tea Party Republicans to sell out their principles and the House narrowly passed the slightly revised job-killing plan just after midnight last night. Then, as it had earlier promised to do, the Senate today voted down the job-killing House plan, with seven Republicans joining all Democrats in opposing the measure.

Here’s a rundown of what’s a stake and how we can move forward.

After Raid, Gibson Guitar CEO Wants his Case Tried by the Tea Party, Not the courts

by Laura Clawson, Daily Kos Labor

The wild claims to martyrdom coming from Gibson Guitar CEO Henry Juszkiewicz are being challenged by an unusual coalition of environmental groups, U.S. hardwood industry groups and unions. On a Tuesday conference call and elsewhere, they have made a number of key rebuttals to Juszkiewicz's claims.

First off, Juszkiewicz is pushing the notion that Gibson has now been raided twice because the company was somehow being specifically targeted. In fact, the Environmental Investigation Agencynotes,

The affidavit indicates that the government did not realize that Gibson was the recipient of the ebony shipment in question when it was first held in Dallas due to irregular paperwork and suspicion of a Lacey Act violation; only upon investigation they found the parties in this shipment to be the same as those involved in the Madagascar ebony case already in process.

When they say "parties in this shipment," they mean parties plural: According to the EIA's Andrea Johnson, although the 2009 case involved Malagasy ebony and the 2011 case involves Indian ebony, the importer Gibson was using in 2011 was the same importer they had used in 2009. If you had been raided and were under continuing investigation for illegal activity and you really wanted to obey the law, wouldn't you start doing business with someone other than the company that had been supplying you with illegal goods?

Five Biggest Right-Wing Lies About Solyndra

By Dave Johnson for Campaign for America's Future

Oil-backed conservatives have been absolutely ecstatic over the collapse of American solar-power company Solyndra and the rise of China as the dominant country in green energy, because they think they can turn this into a story that makes President Obama and government look bad. It also gives them a bonus opportunity to attack alternatives to coal and oil.

So is there really a "scandal" behind what happened to Solyndra? Or is this just one more conservative smear, made up from whole cloth and spread around conservative outlets, talk radio and FOX News, hoping the "mainstream media" will be tricked into propelling the propaganda out to the public?

The Smear Machine

When Bill Clinton was president, conservatives developed and refined a "smear machine" technique of making up accusation after accusation after accusation (after accusation after accusation), repeating them endlessly and hysterically in conservative-funded outlets, and working to get major media outlets to pick up and repeat them. Unfortunately they were often successful at driving phony smears into the public arena. Even though the stories were invariably refuted after investigation, by the time each smear was refuted many, many more were circulating. After a while people began to believe "where there's smoke there's fire."

EPI Reports Clarify Economic Impact of New EPA Rules as House Begins Debates on Regulations

This material was published by the Economic Policy Institute.

The Combined Effect of the Obama EPA Rules, the only comprehensive tally of the combined costs and benefits of the new major Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules, debunks arguments that their cumulative impact would harm the struggling economy.  The paper, by Economic Policy Institute (EPI) Director of Regulatory Policy Research Isaac Shapiro, released today by EPI, shows the regulations formulated by the Obama Administration will be of tremendous benefit to public health, and the combined compliance cost of the rules – both finalized and proposed – amounts to only about 0.1 percent of the economy, and thus are not a significant factor in the overall economy’s direction. 

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, among others, has characterized many of these new EPA rules as “regulatory burdens to job creators” and has scheduled a series of votes, beginning this week, aimed at halting them. This latest research from EPI explains that this characterization of these rules is inaccurate.  EPI’s research finds that the dollar value of the benefits of the major rules finalized or proposed by the EPA so far during the Obama administration exceeds the rules’ costs by an exceptionally wide margin. Health benefits in terms of lives saved and illnesses avoided will be enormous.  EPI also finds that the costs of all finalized and proposed rules total to a tiny sliver of the overall economy, suggesting that fears that these rules together will deter economic progress are unjustified.  

House Continuing Resolution Puts Brakes on Clean Vehicle Jobs Program - States Need Investments and Jobs from Projects

By Daniel J. Weiss

This material was published by the Center for American Progress.

This week the House of Representatives plans to vote on a continuing resolution for fiscal year 2012, H. J. Res 79, to fund the government from October 1 to November 18 while Congress debates and passes comprehensive spending bills for all of FY 2012. The CR includes “a total of $3.65 billion in disaster relief funding to provide much-needed assistance to the thousands of people affected by Hurricane Irene, recent wildfires, the devastating floods and tornados in the Midwest and South, the Mid-Atlantic earthquake, and other natural disasters.” This is partly funded, however, by robbing $1.5 billion from the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing loan program. It is run by the Department of Energy and provides loans to auto and part supplier companies to help them retool their factories to produce significantly more efficient cars.

Providing assistance to the families and businesses harmed by recent disasters is essential for their lives and our economy. Unfortunately, stripping funds from ATVM would hurt employment. The ATVM loans to six companies have already created up to 42,000 jobs. Taking some of the unspent funds from ATVM for disaster relief shouldn’t affect these loans but it will make it impossible to fund the 18 pending loan applications worth a total investment of $9.8 billion and cost up to 43,500 jobs.

The Debt Deal and Budget Process Threaten Critical Climate Aid Funding

Shortsighted Budget Conversations Mean Cuts to Climate Assistance, Humanitarian Aid, and Disaster Response

This material was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Rebecca Lefton

This summer all eyes in Washington were focused on whether Congress would reach a deal on the debt ceiling and the doom that would immediately fall if the United States was unable to meet all of its obligations. Though an agreement was reached just 48 hours before the deadline in early August, the process and final package reflect an ideologically driven political discourse that fails to address major long-term problems that ultimately will be more destructive to our nation’s well-being, such as poverty and inequality. The deal does nothing to address unemployment and it may be more damaging for long-term economic growth. And the debate overshadowed one of the greatest challenges of our time: climate change.

Evidence of climate change is mounting as impacts are already being felt here at home and in developing countries that have contributed the least to the cause. The acceptance by all major economies that global temperatures should rise no more than 2 degrees Celsius was a major milestone in the international climate change negotiations process in recent years, but scientists are advising that reductions will need to be higher. Here in the United States, Congress has still not passed comprehensive climate and energy legislation, and climate deniers are unwilling to tackle problems that they don’t believe even exist.

Drilling Down on Fracking Concerns: The Potential and Peril of Hydraulic Fracturing to Drill for Natural Gas

This article was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Tom Kenworthy and Daniel J. Weiss with Lisbeth Kaufman and Christina C. DiPasquale 

Download this brief (pdf)

A widely used oil-and-gas drilling technique, hydraulic fracturing, is spreading rapidly to develop vast reserves of natural gas trapped in deep underground shale formations. Hydraulic fracking, however, is coming under more rigorous oversight by the press and state and federal agencies because of its contribution to air and water pollution. This attention is welcome, both to ensure that health and safety will be protected if gas is to be more widely used as a cleaner replacement for coal in electric plants and foreign oil as a transportation fuel. We must also more accurately measure carbon dioxide and other pollution from the combustion of gas compared to coal and oil.

This issue brief explores the ecological and economic issues of “fracking,” as it is increasingly coming to be known in the areas of the country where natural gas is tapped due to the technology. Cutting to the chase, our conclusion is this—hydraulic fracturing needs to be done carefully and be well-monitored, with particular attention paid to the full scope of carbon dioxide released into our atmosphere to gauge accurately the consequences of global warming due to the expanded use of natural gas.

What is fracking and what does it do and cause?

Not so long ago, the subject of hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells to stimulate production from deep rock formations was largely the province of petroleum engineers, drilling companies, and a small number of environmental activists.

Why the EPA Is Important for Latino Families: Agency Regulates Harmful Pollution that Threatens Them

This article was published by the Center for American Progress.

By Jorge Madrid, Valeri Vasquez 

Léalo en español

Download this issue brief (pdf)

All air is not equal in the United States. Low-income and minority Americans tend to live and work in areas where they are disproportionately exposed to pollution that harms their health. Latinos are a particularly vulnerable population: Two-thirds of Latino families reside in areas that do not meet the federal government’s air quality standards.

The Environmental Protection Agency has been a “thin green line” of defense between big polluters and public health since 1970. But that line is in danger of being erased. Conservative politicians are ignoring the desires of their home districts, and leading efforts to attack, defund, and in some cases even abolish the EPA.

GOP representatives are using the budget deficit as an excuse to go after the EPA. In a fiscal climate that forces government to cut spending they are choosing to keep subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and tax breaks for the rich, but slash measures that protect their constituents from polluted air and water.