Wednesday, May 21, 2014
North Carolina Republicans Want Felony Charges for Those Who Disclose Fracking Chemicals
Transparency is the least
you could hope for if you’re against fracking for
energy. If North Carolina Republicans get their way, such transparency could
result in a felony.
Three state senators
introduced a bill late last week that would charge people with a felony if they
disclose what chemicals companies are using to extract dirty energy from shale
formations. That might even include the officials who respond to the explosions
and other emergencies caused by the dangerous process.
“The felony provision is far
stricter than most states’ provisions in terms of the penalty for violating
trade secrets,” Hannah Wiseman, a Florida State University assistant law
professor who studies fracking regulations, told Mother Jones.
[…]
“I think the only penalties
to fire chiefs and doctors, if they talked about it at their annual conference,
would be the penalties contained in the confidentiality agreement. But [the
bill] is so poorly worded, I cannot confirm that if an emergency responder or
fire chief discloses that confidential information, they too would not be
subject to a felony.”
However, Wiseman believes
“that appears to be the case” in some sections of the potential legislation.
“It allows for trade secrets
to remain trade secrets, it provides only limited exceptions for reasons of
emergency and health problems, and provides penalties for failure to honor the
trade secret,” Wiseman continued.
Earlier this month, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it is exploring requiring
companies to the exact opposite of the North Carolina state senators’
wishes—disclose those trade secrets to the government and the public. EPA
Administrator Gina McCarthy signed a prepublication of a proposed law that
would not protect the secrets.
“We want to be sure that
there is some agency that actually is collecting this information about what is
being used in these shale plays across the country,” Deborah Goldberg, a lawyer
at Earthjustice, told Salon. “The disclosure we are getting right now is spotty.”
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
Monday, May 19, 2014
Thursday, May 15, 2014
The Worst Ruling Since Citizens United
By Daniel I. Weiner May
13, 2014
http://news.yahoo.com/worst-ruling-since-citizens-united-094500798--politics.html
Whatever one thinks about
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and his policies, the decision last week by
federal judge Rudolph T. Randa to summarily halt an investigation into alleged
campaign finance violations by Walker’s campaign and supporters—and to order
prosecutors to destroy all the evidence they collected—was a striking instance
of judicial chutzpah. The accompanying opinion (PDF) is
laced with ideological rhetoric seeking to undermine many of the remaining
campaign finance laws on the books. Even following the Supreme Court’s
evisceration of campaign finance law in the Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions,
Randa’s ruling is a bridge too far. It should not stand.
2012’s Wisconsin recall
election was a $137 million affair. Groups claiming to act
independently of any candidate spent more than half of this total, roughly $70 million. Many of them drew their funding from out-of-state “dark money” organizations,
which can raise unlimited funds and keep their contributors secret. Under state
law, such spending could not be “coordinated” with Walker or another candidate.
Whether some of this spending was in fact coordinated—steered at the
candidate’s suggestion or with his cooperation—was the question at the heart of
the Wisconsin investigation.
Coordination, once the
obscure preserve of election lawyers, has become a hot topic.
In Citizens
United, a narrow majority of the Supreme Court took away from federal, state,
and local authorities the ability to place limits on how much corporations,
unions and other deep-pocketed interests can spend on elections, as long as
they don’t coordinate with candidates—based on the fanciful theory that such
“independent” spending cannot corrupt politicians. But the Citizens United majority
did reaffirm that it’s perfectly constitutional for the government to limit
non-independent spending.
Enter Judge Randa. According
to him, only spending on ads containing an unmistakable call to vote for or
against someone may be subject to restrictions on coordination. In other words,
an advertisement a few weeks before the election saying “Defeat Senator Jones
because he won’t stand with the troops,” cannot be coordinated with a
candidate. But one saying “Tell Senator Jones to stop hurting the troops,” can
be conceived, directed, and promoted by Senator Jones’s political opponent.
[...]
Climate Change Is Turning Your Produce into Junk Food
by Tom Philpott
Wed May 14, 2014
Higher CO2 levels caused a
"significant decrease in the concentrations of zinc, iron, and
protein" for wheat and rice.
[...]
The results: a
"significant decrease in the concentrations of zinc, iron, and
protein" for wheat and rice, a Harvard press release on the study reports.
For legumes like soybeans and peas, protein didn’t change much, but zinc and
iron levels dropped. For wheat, the treated crops saw zinc, iron, and protein
fell by 9.3 percent, 5.1 percent, and 6.3 percent, respectively.
These are potentially grave
findings, because a large swath of humanity relies on rice, wheat, and legumes
for these very nutrients, the authors note. They report that two billion people
already suffer from zinc and iron deficiencies, "causing a loss of 63 million
life-years annually."
According to the Harvard press release, the
"reduction in these nutrients represents the most significant health
threat ever shown to be associated with climate change." Symptoms of zinc deficiency include stunted growth, appetite loss,
impaired immune function, hair loss, diarrhea, delayed sexual maturation,
impotence, hypogonadism (for males), and eye and skin lesions; while iron deficiency brings on fatigue, shortness of
breath, dizziness, and headache.
[...]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)