NEWTEKWORLDNEWS
Menu

Rock the Labour UK vote

29/4/2015

6 Comments

 
PictureLabour want to inspire people to vote

Brand vrs. Miliband: Rock the vote in the UK

Elections in the United Kingdom are fast approaching on May 7, and getting out the vote benefits all political factions, in particular a challenging entity like the Labor Party.  Ed Miliband represents Labor, and he believes voting is extremely important.  To voice his concern for prompters of apathy, he has challenged an infamous non-voter Russell Brand.

Mr. Miliband said the interview was a way to engage with millions of people not usually interested in politics, according to a BBC report.

His appearance received a mixed reaction on social media, with some complaining it was little more than an ego trip for the comedian and others mocking Miliband’s accent and choice of language.

Brand, known for his acerbic comedy, has been an outspoken critic of Britain’s political system and capitalism in general and said he “felt angry all over again” after watching a special screening of his documentary criticizing growing inequality between the rich and the poor in the country, reported in The Guardian.

Banks, tax avoidance schemes and austerity measures are all under attack in Brand’s film “The Emperor’s New Clothes.”

Following a special screening at the Hackney Picturehouse in east London on Tuesday night, Brand said engagement in political issues and change goes beyond the general election, which he said was irrelevant, which prompted Miliband to challenge him.

The interview with Russell Brand sent the message that voting matters, as least that is what Milibrand was attempting to tell Brand.

The YouTube Channel posted the 15-minute interview where Brand challenged Miliband over the inequality and tax avoidance by politicians. If the Conservatives win and David Cameron remains the Prime Minister, the prediction is tax credits will be cut. The Labor Party is opposed to the cuts. 

Brand was fairly adamant about why he has never voted. "The reason I have never voted in my life is that I think it does not matter," Brand, who has encouraged people not to vote and advocated a political revolution through action, he told the Labor leader.

"We all got excited by Tony Blair, we all got excited by Barack Obama and what happened."

I would challenge his reference to President Obama who inherited a nation in 2008 spiraling out of control in the Great Recession and unemployment was over 7 percent and much high in some states.  In 2015 it’s below 5 percent.  The country was on a course for a Depression, but thanks to President Obama it was avoided.  Also, millions of Americans were without health insurance, and the Affordable Care Act is covering more people every year and is a success. Are Americans better off in 2015 than they were in 2008?  Yes, and detractors would be hard pressed to deny it.

In response, Mr Miliband said he was the man to tackle powerful interests but was careful to not overstate the nature of government, which can appear to be slow or ineffective at times.  

"This is important. I am not looking for euphoria. I know that might sound a bit weird... You don't want politicians saying 'vote for me and on day one the world is transformed'. It ain't going to be like that. Change is hard. Change takes time," explained Miliband.

Voter apathy

One of the conundrums of our time is voter apathy in free world democracies. In countries where people have been denied free elections in the past, they not only take pride in being able to vote but some even risk their lives to vote or walk miles to a polling place. Women especially covet voting once they are given the right.

One of the ways to counter voter apathy in the US is by capturing the youth vote, so voting becomes a source of pride and civic duty.  Engaging popular culture and its icons to get out the vote in the United States has been in the forefront since 1990 when “Rock the Vote” was developed and reached out to youth to register to vote.  Since then millions of young people have been registered to vote as a result.  The organizers realized fusing pop culture, technology, and political awareness was a winning combination to attract first time voters, which could motivate them to participate in government as lifelong activists and voters.

The UK also struggles with low voter turnout and apathy and is well reported as being a serious problem in British politics.

Researchers found that a large segment of the British population do not vote and are not engaged with the political process.  Recent research by Survation on behalf of Lodestone Communications took a detailed look at the attitudes of non-voters on a wide range of issues (non-voters are defined as those who did not vote in the 2010 election; this figure includes those who were too young or otherwise ineligible to vote in 2010), reported by Survation. 

The findings provide valuable insights into the demographic profile of this group, their outlook on life, the issues they care about and their perspectives on power and politics. Moreover, the survey contains much that will be of interest for anyone trying to understand why people don’t vote, how to persuade them to vote, and the implications for future elections.

The findings reveal that voters are more optimistic than non-voters. Non-voters aged 18-34, which is the Russell Brand audience, are less optimistic about the future. On the other hand, voters in the same age group believed life would be better in the future.

In 2010 non-voters who said they would vote in the next election were, however, pessimistic about the future.

Economic worries were a concern for both voters and non-voters.  The top three concerns for young people were not having enough money, not being able to pay bills and fears of an uncertain future.  This is a good indication of the areas where politicians should be focusing and prioritizing.  

The researchers found that voters and the population as a whole seem more likely to want politicians to focus on getting Britain out of the EU (13% of all respondents said this was the one thing they wanted politicians to focus more on, but this figure is far lower for younger people taken separately). This issue is less important to non-voters, who showed greater relative concern for the economy, jobs, and tackling poverty.

In the US some believe that if one is not going to take the time to learn about the issues, candidates running for office and voting, then they should not complain.

Russell Brand has a unique opportunity to be a model for young voters by “re-branding” his rhetoric.  All votes count, and this writer applauds Mr. Miliband for confronting the notorious non-voter and bringing attention to responsible citizenship through government activism and voting.

Resources

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2015-32515075
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/apr/21/russell-brand-the-general-election-is-irrelevant-in-the-face-of-inequality
http://survation.com/apathy-in-the-uk-understanding-the-attitudes-of-non-voters/

6 Comments

Part two 2016 GOP battle of the governors

29/4/2015

1 Comment

 
Picture
This is part two of a two part series-part one can be found here.

The Wisconsin Act 10 basically made it more difficult for unions to collect dues and reduced the incentive for people to join unions by reducing the effectiveness of union bargaining.  The intent was clear and union membership dropped significantly.  Walker capitalized on the depressed economy by promising a little extra cash to workers for immediate gratification, rather than envision the long-term financial advantages of having collective bargaining over a lifetime of employment.   

But his invocation of classic “bread and circuses” and “austerity” did not end there.  He cut funding for public education by $1.6 billion. Wisconsin's technical college program that provided workers the training or re-training they needed to advance in an evolving economy was slashed. The safety net protecting seniors and the state's most vulnerable faced historic funding cuts.

The budget Walker introduced in 2011 was a model “bait and switch” with Medicaid in order to fool the casual follower of political economics.  He set a baseline for Medicaid of $1.2 billion, but then after what appeared to be fully funding the program—he reduced it.  

According to a report in the “Journal Sentinel, PolitiFact Wisconsin,” Charles Morgan, the top expert on health services at the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, explained:

"They first fully funded it but then reduced it. It depends on what you are comparing it to, the gross funding or the base. Total funding is up, but there is a funding reduction."

The cuts were aimed at federal programs that care for low-income families and children under 19, elderly and disabled.

Walker’s gamesmanship pits one group of the Middle Class Americans against another. The governor’s budget cut education costs and short changed public employee benefits equating to savings in his budget.

In 2011 Dennis Smith, Walker’s Health Services chief, explained Walker’s budget when it came out: "Despite a historic 23% increase to the Department's budget, Wisconsin's Medicaid program still faces a serious fiscal challenge over the next two years as we identify over $500 million in cost savings. To meet our goals, and balance the Medicaid budget, we have to find ways to be more efficient and cut costs."

Walker’s brand of austerity, which did not work for Greece, will be his plan for the Republican platform if he manages to capture the nomination.  Unlike Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney, Walker has not shown any indication that he will move to the center, which is the only way to win a national election.


This is what American governance might look like if Scott Walker were elected president:

Ease tax burden on the wealthy and corporations—but not for the Middle Class


Reduce regulatory practices that protect workers and ensure fairness and safety in the workplace.

Make eliminating collective bargaining a national agenda

Marriage is only between a man and woman

Supports the death penalty

Supports charter schools—this is one more way to lure the economically depressed into believing a voucher system benefits them instead of paid public education.  Vouchers, like not having to pay union dues, put cash in the hands of Americans, but it also erodes the quality of public education disadvantaging those with lower income and the poor.

Instigates voucher systems to eliminate Social Security and Medicare  

For me, Scott Walker is the king of “bait and switch,” which works for the casual, uninformed voter.  And his speech about “making a name for the future” sounds more like a blast from the Barry Goldwater past.  And we know how that ended.

In Goldwater’s book The Conscience of a Conservative, he builds the groundwork for an unwavering distrust of government. Then on the basis of distrust his arguments take root against graduated or progressive taxation and social welfare.  Phrases used back in 1964 suggesting “distrust of government” have now been euphemized with “putting money back into the hands of Americans” and “letting states decide issues, instead of the federal government.”  It’s the same conservative drivel repackaged to lure Middle Class voters struggling under the stresses of economic decline since the Great Recession—which they did not cause.    

Goldwater’s economic propositions, regarded by many as tea party values, are being recycled by Walker the conservative with no conscience. Even though he wants to appear somehow “new” and “revised,” in reality he spouts the same anti-government agenda that has never won a national election.    

Read part one here

Resources
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2015/02/the-rise-and-rise-of-scott-walker-the-note/
http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/02/02/3616140/scott-walker-university-students/
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/12/12682/walker-right-work
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-a-saunders/scott-walker-austerity_b_3326111.html
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/jun/24/scott-walker/governor-scott-walker-says-critics-are-wrong-he-cu/
http://www.ontheissues.org/Scott_Walker.htm
1 Comment

GOP 2016 hopefuls could be battle of governors

29/4/2015

0 Comments

 
Picture
This is part one of a two-part series-find part two here.

There is a children’s game called “Pin the Tail on the Donkey,” but when used in a political sense here called “Pin the Tail on the GOP Elephant.” After Mitt Romney bowed out of the presidential race last week, the number of potential GOP nominees began to feel like the game where predictors could blindfold themselves and just pick one as a possible candidate from the incredible field of would-be nominees.  At last count close to twenty GOP hopefuls were being floated by the media.    

The Republican field for presidential nominees will probably be narrowed to a battle of the governors.  In what seems like a cast of thousands of Republicans, some prominent governors’ names are rising to the top:  Jeb Bush former governor of Florida from 1999-2007, Chris Christi current governor of New Jersey, and the focus of this report governor of Wisconsin Scott Walker who received the most buzz recently.

In an interview with ABC news Martha Raddatz, Walker responded to an Iowa Poll caucus discussing potential GOP candidates saying, “ [P]eople want new, fresh leadership with big, bold ideas, and the courage to act on it. And if we’re going to take on a name from the past, which is likely to be former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, I think for the party we need a name from the future.”

Walker’s plans for Wisconsin provide a snapshot into the “future” he envisions for the US if he were elected president.  A report in “Think Progress” unveiled his proposed budget which he will formally reveal on Tuesday.  He plans to slash hundreds of millions of funding from Wisconsin’s public universities in the next two years, while simultaneously calling for close to $500 million to build a new basketball stadium in Milwaukee for the Bucks professional basketball team.

The cuts to Wisconsin’s public colleges are the deepest in the state’s history according to academics, students and state lawmakers, which he began two years ago as governor. Still, Walker suggests that budget cuts can be assimilated into the schools if “efficiencies” are implemented.  If efficiency and austerity sound familiar, it’s because Walker didn’t waste any time invoking his brand of those tenants in Wisconsin, all supported by conservatives and specifically tea party advocates.

Once elected Walker commenced to turn Wisconsin into the new Greece. His first act of governor was to get rid of fifty years of collective bargaining for fair wages, safe working conditions and more job training for public workers in state and local municipalities earning him the title of “union buster.”

He drained $850 million from the state's economy by cutting the pay of the average public employee by 10 percent -- taking money out of shops, restaurants and businesses all across the state reported in Huffington in 2013.  Walker was able to convince public union workers to vote against their own interests and give up collective bargaining. But how could this happen? 

In an era of stagnating wages, voters were looking for any way to put more money into pockets, and for Walker what better way than to tell voters you don’t have to pay union dues.

Read part two here


0 Comments

Does secret voting matter

27/4/2015

5 Comments

 
Picture
Voting:  Secret versus open voting

Preserving voting privacy is alive and well on both sides of the continent. The British editor of NEWTEK Eileen wrote a story recently about her voting experiences in the UK’s last election. Preserving her privacy at the poll was her right, which she expressed to a poll taker at the voting location when they asked if she would divulge for whom she was voting. She refused.  

During the mid-term elections in 2014, Kentucky candidate for the US Senate Alison Grimes was asked while campaigning if she voted for President Barack Obama. She refused. The Kentucky Constitution has a provision stating elections shall be conducted using a “secret ballot.”

Why do most countries have secret ballot voting?

Secret balloting protects the privacy of an individual voter in an election or a referendum.  The aim is to prevent voter intimidation and potential vote buying and preserve political privacy.  The secret ballot has a long history in Western Civilization, but some believe it has outlived its intent.


Picture
Conservatives in the US have been at the forefront of legislating voter identification laws in individual states. Proponents use the argument of preventing voter fraud, which is akin to buying votes, but the reality is less than one percent of US voters have ever been prosecuted for voter fraud.  So that leaves preserving the secret ballot to prevent voter intimidation and privacy, but does the secret ballot promote social justice and public responsibility?  

In modern times casting secret ballots is universally practiced and most voters would not consider any other methods in a general public election.  Other voting methods like in the US Congress, the voting takes place orally and in public using a roll call.  This is far from the ancient Greeks who used pebbles to cast votes.

The ancient Greek polis or city-state was considered inclusive because they allowed poor males born in the polis to vote despite their low socioeconomic status; however, women were not allowed to vote.  This kind of direct democracy meant citizens could vote directly on an issue, instead of through a representative. 

Greek voters deposited a pebble into one of two urns to mark their choice; after voting, the urns were emptied onto counting boards for tabulation. The principle of secret voting was established by at least the 5th century BCE, and Athenians may have used a contraption to obscure the urn into which a voter was placing his hand.

Do we need secrecy?

In the United Kingdom the use of numbered ballot paper has come under criticism because of the possibility that the number can be linked to the elector or voter.  On Election Day, a voter is given ballot paper and the number is noted on a counterfoil of ballot paper putting secrecy in question based on access to the ballot box.  Reportedly polling station officials could share voting results of individual electors with non-officials for dubious reasons.  

If there is an allegation of fraud or false ballots, the process of matching ballots to voters can be done if the “Election Court” deems it necessary. The main criticism is lax security when the authorities match ballot papers to voters without the court’s permission.

In the United States the US Constitution does not grant a right to a secret ballot.  That right is reserved to individual states. At polling locations as well as absentee mailed in ballots, the ballots are numbered which makes them traceable certifying that the ballot was cast by a registered voter and not fabricated.  A single ballot consists of a stub and the actual ballot in which a shared number is printed.  The numbered stub is retained as voting proof in case of a recount.

Considerations for “open voting”

There are pros and cons to secret voting and even proposals for “open voting.”  One group of academicians at the University of Amsterdam proposed “open voting” as beneficial.

In the paper “Against the Secret Ballot: A new proposal for open voting,” they argued together with others that people should not cast their vote to further their own interests—which is fostered by a secret ballot—but rather form judgments based on the common good.  Using the judgment ideal does not present the same issues as the “preference” ideal symbolized by secret voting. The secret ballot encourages personal, self motivated expressions about society.  On the other hand, open voting in aggregate encourages public-spirited behavior central to furthering the judgment ideal and the common good.

The reason they argue in favor of a public ballot, rather than secret, is to foster the desire for social good, and mutual consent in society that plays a larger role in how we ultimately cast our vote. In a pluralistic society the best way to win social acceptance is to vote in a public-spirited way that benefits the common good of everyone.  John Rawls’ political philosophy described in the principles of social justice teaches that society should function to benefit the least advantaged, which supports the concept of open voting encouraging social fairness.   

The cons for open voting are centered on public shaming and stigmatization. Social stigma could be attached to a person if they identified with a particular group such as a conservative or environmentalist as revealed by their voting practices. Similarly political views might need protection from public knowledge due to personal or professional affiliations.  Open voting might also encourage inaccurate caricatures. And some might feel inadequate exposing inability to articulate intelligent, cognitive and rhetorical arguments to justify their political views.

The Amsterdam researchers use the “observer effect” as one justification for open voting stating that the probability of being exposed can have an impact on behavior encouraging people to act for the common good, rather than self interests.

They proposed a Justification Day where voters are reminded at the polls they might be called on to participate in a justificatory assemble in order to trigger public-spirited ballot responses where they will be accountable for voting choices.

It’s fairly certain that despite its flaws, voting by secret ballot is not going to be overturned any time soon.  But there have been discussions for years among academics about a better, more socially responsible method for casting one’s vote. Open voting gives us something to think about particularly with the propositions for online voting becoming more popular and questions of privacy enter the conversation. 

Resources
http://blogs.getty.edu/iris/voting-with-the-ancient-greeks/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_ballot
http://www.academia.edu/4411987/Against_the_Secret_Ballot

5 Comments

Billions worth of food thrown away annually

25/4/2015

3 Comments

 
PictureDumpster full of humus
Documentary reveals $165 billion worth of food thrown away annually

The relationship between you and your refrigerator is one of the topics examined in the new documentary “Just Eat It.”  Few among us have not let food languish in the fridge until we have to toss it out.  Do we make use of leftovers or freeze items for future use? And it’s not only the personal habits of Americans that is scrutinized, but also how the food supply is handled and distributed beginning with the growers and retailers.

MSNBC showed the documentary “Just Eat It” premiering on Earth Day that focused on the astonishing amount of food wasted in the United States. An estimated 40 percent of all eatable food in the US is wasted every year. 

The waste is concentrated in several areas: 1) Growers only send the high grade produce to retailers because stores demand it—the remainder is left in the fields or discarded in landfills. 2) Retailers throw out food when the “use or sell by” label date is near expiration or fresh produce becomes blemished or discolored.  The packaging date is an arbitrary date and does not necessarily represent when food is uneatable. 3) American consumers’ waste food to the equivalent of 25 percent of purchases, or as dramatized in the documentary:  it’s like dropping one in four grocery bags in the parking lot after shopping and leaving it there.


The majority of the program followed two filmmakers Jen Rustemeyer and Grant Baldwin as they spent six months living on only “rescued” food.  They were not allowed to buy any food; instead, they bought or “rescued” culled produce from grocery stores, went through dumpsters, and re-discovered the ancient practice of gleaning fields.  A panel discussion at the end of the program, after the two filmmakers discovered the realities of living on rescued food, featured MSNBC’s Tom Colicchio who moderated a panel discussion to examine the price of food, the mysteries of food labeling and what we can do to curb food waste.
The reality portion of the documentary was candid and illuminating. Rustemeyer expressed her concerns about whether they would be able to find enough food to live on for six months when they began the experiment.  It did not take long for her and Baldwin to discover the incredible amount of good, eatable food that is discarded.  Initially, they started by going to grocery stores to request culled produce.  Some managers allowed them to buy the produce but others said they could not give it to them or sell it because of liability, and they had to throw it in the garbage. Later this fear of a law suit was discovered to be unfounded as there has never been a case where any store was sued over giving away culled produce, according to the documentary report.

Dumpsters proved to be one of the best sources for tossed food for the couple.  In a few instances they discovered huge amounts of food discarded in dumpsters eight feet deep loaded to capacity with all sorts of food from boxed and bottled drinks, organic packaged foods, canned goods, cheeses, milk, yogurt, sour cream and on and on.  The variety and quantity was astounding.  One time they found dozens of free-range eggs, which they tested in a glass of water to determine if they were still good, and they were.  And one of the biggest finds was a large capacity dumpster filled with hundreds of packages of humus.  The label date would not have expired for another week.

Picture
More wasted food
Picture
At the end of six months, they had collected hundreds of packages of dry goods food and almost never ran out of fresh refrigerated foods.  During the experiment they only spent $200 on food purchases, and estimated they rescued approximately $20,000 in good food.  They ate well and prepared nutritious meals that appeared to be gourmet quality, as they kept a photographic diary of the food they recovered and the meals they prepared.

Panel discussion  

The panel discussion at the end of the program lead by Tom Colicchio featured guests:

 Jonathan Bloom writes about why we waste food, why it matters, and what we can do about it. He is the author of “American Wasteland” which explores how we waste food and the impact it has on society and the environment. He also
writes the blog www.wastedfood.com.

Emily Broad Leib is a Lecturer on Law and Clinical Instructor, as well as Deputy Director of the Harvard Law School Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation. She co-founded and directs the Center’s Food Law and Policy Clinic, the first law school clinic in the nation devoted to providing legal and policy solutions to nonprofit and government clients in order to address the health, economic, and environmental challenges facing our food system.

Michael Curtin joined DC Central Kitchen in 2004.  Under his leadership, DC Central Kitchen’s Fresh Start Catering has expanded from traditional catering opportunities to include contracts to provide locally-sourced, scratched-cooked meals to schools in DC.

 They discussed the legal aspects surrounding the “use or sell by” date labeling of packaged goods.  First of all, there are no Federal regulations that require food to be date labeled, except that both month and year need to be printed.  If a calendar date is shown, then the words “sell by” or “use before” need to be expressed explaining the date.  Infant formula date labeling is ruled by federal regulations and is the only product requiring strict expiration dates.

Furthermore, the labeling dates we see on packaging are arbitrarily put there by the manufacturers, and most of the time does not represent a true expiration or determination whether the food product is safe to consume--as the couple who lived on rescued food discovered.

One of the problems in agriculture is no mechanism exists for growers to distribute the majority of the produce grown that never reaches retailers because it is not perfect quality.  In one stunning example, a celery grower focusing on selling celery hearts, stripped the majority of the outer stalks of celery in the field and cut off the top.  In this instance, only one third of celery bunch was actually used and rest sent to a land fill, which presents an additional problem in the environmental food chain.

Most of the food waste by growers and consumers ends up in landfills.  According to the Agriculture Department, Americans discard more than 25 percent annually of all domestically produced food. A 2009 study showed that a quarter of US water and 4 percent of US oil consumption every year go into producing and distributing food that ultimately ends up in landfills, which ultimately produces methane gas in the atmosphere.  Methane is a greenhouse gas 23 times as potent as carbon dioxide in trapping heat within our atmosphere. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, landfills account for 34 percent of all methane emissions in the US. The unused food or discarded leftovers you threw in the trash add to our collective carbon footprint.

Documentaries like “Food Inc.” and “Just Eat It” represent the beginning of a movement toward transparency in the food industry as well as greater consumer awareness of how food is grown, animals raised, and distribution mechanisms contributing to excessive waste.  Also, the negative impact on the environment and use of water and oil in the food cycle stimulates efficiency methodologies and conservation practices in the market place and at home. 

As consumers we can take stock of how we manage our food supplies.  Are we using all the food we buy effectively to prevent waste? Composting is back in the conversation, so it’s not just a “hippy communion” hold over from the 60s.  Composting as much as you can prevents sending food to landfills and reduces greenhouse gases.

Visit the “Just Eat It” website listed below for video clips and where the movie might be showing near you or available online. 

Resources
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch-just-eat-it-live-the-filmakers
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/food-safety-education/get-answers/food-safety-fact-sheets/food-labeling/food-product-dating/food-product-dating
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-talk-waste-land/
http://www.foodwastemovie.com/
3 Comments

World Earth Day should be reflective

23/4/2015

3 Comments

 
PictureSanta Barbara oil spill
World Earth Day:  A day for reflection  

Earth Day in some respects has been turned into a mega-event around the world, but has it lost the original intention of its creator in 1970?

Some might not even know the tragic event that spurred Democratic Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.). He saw the waters off Santa Barbara, California turn black in 1969 after what was then the worst United States’ oil spill.  Seeing pictures of oil-covered birds gasping for life and the seemingly ineffective attempts to soak up oil slicks with straw, he decided to build a coalition across political parties and the country to bring attention to planet earth, according to Washington Post.

On the fateful day in January in 1969 a Union Oil Platform off shore exploded, and it took 11 ½ days to stop the flow of oil covering beaches in Santa Barbara and killing an estimated 4,000 birds.  Union Oil's Platform “A” ruptured because of inadequate protective casing.

The oil company had been given permission by the US Geological Survey to cut corners and operate the platform with casings below federal and California standards. Investigators would later determine that more steel pipe sheathing inside the drilling hole would have prevented the rupture.

Nelson was in the forefront of the environmental movement in the 1970s that resulted in the creation of the Environmental Protection Act in 1970, the Clean Water Act 1972, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973.  These were landmark years plotting a course in US history to recognize conservation and preservation of the environment as a priority. 
Picture
How far have we advanced in the last 45 years, and is the planet cleaner, safer and its longevity ensured?  The founders of the landmark legislation had a vision for the future in which environmental impacts and factors would be considered in legislative decision-making processes and guide national policy.

National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA)

The preamble reads:

"To declare national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation; and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality."

NEPA contains three sections:
  1. The declaration of national environmental policies and goals
  2. The establishment of provisions for federal agencies to enforce policies and goals
  3. The establishment of the CEQ in the Executive Office of the President
The original intent and purpose of the NEPA guaranteed environmental factors would be considered when establishing public national policy. This includes a multidisciplinary approach for federal government agency decision-making, which is coordination among various federal agencies. The act provides for an annual report to the president with advice on national policy and promotion of environmental standards and quality improvement.

Clean Air Act

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Act programs have lowered levels of six common pollutants and particles in the air:  cut ground level ozone, lead, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide, and a number other toxic pollutants not itemized.

From 1970 to 2012 the aggregate national emissions of the six pollutants have dropped an average of 72 percent.  The progress, they say, is because state and local governments have cooperated with the EPA, private sector and environmental groups.

The emission reductions have led to improvements in the quality of the air we breathe.  Between 1980 and 2012, national concentrations of air pollutants improved 91 percent for lead, 83 percent for carbon monoxide, 78 percent for sulfur dioxide, 55 percent for nitrogen dioxide, and 25 percent for ozone. 

Where does global warming fit in to the EPA’s adherence to the Clean Air Act?  In 2007, the US Supreme Court ruled that global warming emissions are air pollutants and would be subject to EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act if a thorough scientific investigation showed that they endanger the public’s health and welfare. 

In 2009, the EPA released its scientific findings, concluding that global warming emissions presented a danger to public health (known as the “endangerment finding”). Citing extensive scientific research, the EPA found that global warming pollution is connected with:
  • hotter, longer heat waves that threaten the health of the sick, poor, and elderly;
  • increases in ground-level ozone pollution, linked to asthma and other respiratory illnesses; and
  • extreme weather events that can lead to deaths, injuries, and stress-related illnesses.
The EPA is required to reduce global warming emissions under the Clean Air Act to ensure American’s public health. The agency has started to move forward to reduce global warming pollution from cars, trucks, power plants, and other large industrial polluters (see Steps the EPA Must Take to Reduce Global Warming Emissions).

The Union of Concerned Scientists warns that the addition of global warming to the emissions limited by the Clean Air Act is under attack. Numerous attempts are being made in the US Congress and fossil fuel industries to stop or limit the powers of the EPA to act on its findings (see Attack on the Clean Air Act).

PictureCalfornia condor brought back from near extinction
Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The goal of the ESA is to prevent the extinction of imperiled plant and animal life and to recover and maintain populations by removing or lessening threats to their survival.

Criteria for Petition are as follows:
1. There is the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range.
2. An over utilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes.
3. The species is declining due to disease or predation.
4. There is an inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
5. There are other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.


Critics of the ESA contend only 1 percent of species under its protection have recovered, but as of 2012, there are 110 success stories where species were saved.  A comparison of the actual recovery rate of the 110 species with the projected recovery rate in their federal recovery plan was positive. The species range over all 50 states, include all major taxonomic groups, and have a diversity of listing lengths.

A study group found that the Endangered Species Act has a remarkably successful recovery rate: 90 percent of species are recovering at the rate specified.

Without the law, the bald eagle would have disappeared years ago.  The California condor would likewise have had a similar fate as the passenger pigeon. The Endangered Species Act has been successful. Few laws can boast a 90 percent success rate.  Still, some native wildlife species on almost every continent are at risk for extinction.

 Preserving all habitats including our own, the air we breathe, and soil we depend on for growing food are inextricably linked to saving wildlife. When habitats are threatened, so are the animals and people that live there. For example, wolverines and polar bears roam across vast distances, so when their habitat is broken up by roads, commercial development, or the disappearance of arctic ice their ability to survive is jeopardized. When water sources are polluted or exhausted and nutrients in the soil become depleted, all humanity is at risk for eventual extinction.

These considerations bring the conversation back full circle to the reason Nelson was inspired to create Earth Day in 1970.  The oil disaster in Santa Barbara, the Exxon Valdez in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, the California drought to mention a few remind us of the fragility of the planet and its inhabitants including all wildlife and plant life.   

Indeed, the survival of humanity is entwined with the preservation of the natural world in ways so subtle and gradual that for some its slow demise is easily ignored. The emphasis too often is on immediate gratification, rather than taking the long view on the power of reducing consumerism and active conservation.  Recently, when oil prices decreased markedly making gas cheaper than it had been in years, the sales in oversized SUVs soared again.  Oil is non-renewable and finite; therefore, the attitudes crafted now toward conservation and sustainability will have a direct impact on the quality of life for our progeny in 100 or 200 years from now when fossil fuel is gone.

In the 1970s visionaries created environmental legislation because they knew we were on a path to destroy the planet and ourselves with it.  We need to regain that sense of purpose and urgency when reasonably discussing climate change and what we can do as individuals and a nation to save the earth and all its inhabitants.       

Resources
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/22/why-earth-days-creator-might-not-celebrate-earth-day/
http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~jeff/sb_69oilspill/69oilspill_articles2.html
http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/progress.html
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/reduce-emissions/the-clean-air-act.html
http://www.defenders.org/habitat-conservation/defending-habitat

3 Comments

Women in the World Summit April 22

21/4/2015

1 Comment

 
Picture
Tina Brown, known in Britain as Lady Evens, noted journalist, magazine editor and author of The Diana Chronicles, a biography of Diana, Princess of Wales, is preparing for the sixth annual Women in the World Summit taking place at Lincoln Center in New York City on Wednesday, according to CBS News.  She launched this year’s event with an appearance on the CBS Morning Show. 

The three-day summit will highlight the struggles and triumphs of women around the globe.  High profile speakers include Hillary Clinton, Merle Streep, Jon Stewart, Barbara Streisand, Ava DuVernay,  Sister Rosemary Nyriumbe, Mary Robinson, Obiageli Ezekwesili, Diane von Furstenberg, Elif Shafak and Kennedy Odede.

Brown, the founder of the summit, was born in Britain but became an American citizen in 2005 since emigrating to the US in 1984 to become an editor for Vanity Fair.  Previously she was editor-in-chief at the Tatler, but then branched out to US media industry and stints at Vanity Fair and The New Yorker. As the recipient of numerous awards, she partnered with Barry Diller to found and edit The Daily Beast from which she launched Tina Brown Media.  Brown and woman like her have been able to break glass ceilings where men have dominated; however, many women still struggle for pay equity at all levels of income, corporate status, and gender equality.  

 The Women in the World Summit is important for all nations, but this year it’s particularly timely as Hillary Clinton is poised to possibly be the first woman president of the United States. In general women’s access, privileges and rights, however, deserve a closer look. In addition, it is noteworthy that over 70 countries have had either elected or appointed female heads of state, but the US is not among them.

A CNN report compared the US to other countries in terms of women’s roles and freedoms. The statistics paint a different image from what most Americans perceive as US gender equality.

The majority of Constitutions around the world guarantee gender equality WORLD Policy Analysis Center reports. Eleven constitutions, however, allow religious or customary laws to override parts or all of the constitution.

“Only 32 constitutions [out of 197 globally] do not include an explicit gender equality guarantee. The U.S. Constitution is one of them. Though parts of the Constitution -- like the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment -- may appear to protect women, even Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has said this isn't the case,” they said.

1 Comment
<<Previous
    Picture

    Dava Castillo

    is retired and lives in Clearlake, California.  She has three grown children and one grandson and a Bachelor’s degree in Health Services Administration from St. Mary’s College in Moraga California. On the home front Dava enjoys time with her family, reading, gardening, cooking and sewing. 

    After writing for four years on the news site Allvoices.com on a variety of topics including politics, immigration, sustainable living, and other various topics, Dava has more than  earned the title of citizen journalist. 

    Politics is one of her  passions, and she follows current events regularly.

    In addition, Dava has written about sustainable living and conservation.  She completed certification at the University of California Davis to become a Master Gardener and has volunteered in that capacity since retirement.

    Archives

    November 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015

Click to set custom HTML
Support NEWTEK - Like what we do here at NEWTEK? If so, you should consider supporting us…
Running a news based website is fun, time consuming and can be costly. If you would like to help the site keep afloat please use the donate button
​
Sections:
News:
Welcome
Front page
Specials:

One Woman So Many Blogs


The Jeremy Corbyn Effect
​
NEWTEKWORLDNEWS:
About Us
Contact Us
Terms of Service
Cookie policy
Picture
  • Welcome
  • Latest
  • Animal Welfare
  • Barbara McPherson
  • Robert Weller
  • Dava Castillo
  • Odd News
  • Environment, science and health matters
  • On this day in History
  • About Us
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Cookie Policy
  • Welcome
  • Latest
  • Animal Welfare
  • Barbara McPherson
  • Robert Weller
  • Dava Castillo
  • Odd News
  • Environment, science and health matters
  • On this day in History
  • About Us
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Cookie Policy