Monday, September 6, 2021
WE NEED PUBLIC CONTROL OF OUR ENERGY SYSTEMS
By Thomas M. Hanna,
In These Times.
September 4, 2021
https://popularresistance.org/we-need-public-control-of-our-energy-systems/
The Power Is Still Out In New Orleans After Hurricane Ida.
The Damage From Hurricane Ida Is The Latest Reminder That The Climate Change Era Requires Public Ownership Of Infrastructure.
On Sunday August 29, New Orleans and neighboring areas were hit by Hurricane Ida, one of the strongest storms to make landfall in Louisiana’s history. The rebuilt levy system in the city held, preventing the large-scale flooding wrought by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Yet the damage caused by Ida has been “catastrophic,” according to Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards. This includes the total collapse of the city’s privately-owned electric grid, leaving the predominately Black city, which was already reeling from the Covid-19 pandemic, completely without electricity.
All told, more than one million people in the region lost power during Hurricane Ida, and Entergy — the Fortune 500 corporation that owns and operates New Orleans’ grid — has warned that service in some areas might not be restored for weeks. As a result of this grid failure, water and sewer facilities were knocked off-line (leading to water outages and boil water advisories), schools and universities have been shuttered, and communications services have been badly interrupted.
When natural disasters like Hurricane Ida occur, policymakers often wave away the damage and devastation as an unavoidable “act of god” (to use common insurance language). However, these types of response ignore deep structural deficiencies and inequities in the way critical infrastructure systems are often designed and operated in the United States. Specifically, they obscure the role of private, for-profit ownership and control of these services.
In the case of New Orleans’ electric grid, for instance, Entergy has long been accused of neglect, poor maintenance and manipulative business practices in the pursuit of profit. In 2019, advisers to the New Orleans City Council recommended fining the company up to $2 million for failing to maintain the city’s aging transmission system, concluding that the company’s “actions, inactions and delayed reactions caused adverse impacts on tens of thousands of ratepayers, both commercial and residential.”
Earlier that same year, the City Council fined the company $5 million for using paid actors to pose as supportive residents during council hearings on a proposed new power plant in New Orleans East. And in March of this year, the Louisiana Public Service Commission, the Arkansas Public Service Commission, and the New Orleans City Council filed a federal complaint against Entergy asserting that the company overcharged (and should refund) customers to the tune of $1.1 billion related to its shoddy attempts to refurbish the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station in 2012.
While these types of issues are endemic to privatization and for-profit ownership and control, the era of climate change is bringing them into stark relief. Last year, for instance, the large California for-profit utility Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) pled guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter in conjunction with the devastating 2018 “Camp Fire,” which was caused by a combination of climate-related drought conditions and profit-seeking corporate malfeasance. Prior to the plea, a grand jury report found that the company had failed to maintain and upgrade its aging power lines (one of which started the fire) despite multiple warnings to do so. At the same time, the company was spending millions of dollars lobbying state officials, and had distributed $4.5 billion in profits to shareholders over just five years.
Similarly, in February 2021, Texas’ highly privatized and marketized energy system totally failed under pressure from stronger than usual winter weather. As in New Orleans, the resulting effects from climate change fueled the disaster, which disproportionately and inequitably impacted communities of color and low-wealth people. For its part, Entergy has a long track record of bitterly opposing any efforts to address climate change (despite knowing about it since the 1980s).
There is an alternative to this extractive, ecologically unsustainable, and racially and economically inequitable model of private control over our vital infrastructure: public ownership. In the electricity sector, for instance, roughly 28 percent of customers in the United States already get their power from a publicly owned utility or cooperative. These locally controlled, not-for-profit entities often charge significantly lower rates for electricity than their for-profit counterparts and, in the case of publicly owned utilities, return a greater percentage of their revenue back to the local community.
They also do not have the same incentives (namely short-term profits) to defer maintenance, reduce service quality, and fail to invest in climate resiliency. For instance, on repeated occasions over the past several years, Sacramento’s publicly owned electric utility, Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), has kept power on for their customers during heat waves and wildfires, while, nearby, PG&E was cutting off power for millions of customers under orders from the California Independent System Operator, which supports the three large, for-profit utilities in the state. Part of the reason SMUD is able to do this when for-profit utilities cannot is that, rather than squeezing out as much profit as possible, they have chosen to invest in mitigation and reliability measures.
Public ownership of infrastructure and services is not a guarantee of more equitable, democratic and ecologically sustainable outcomes. For instance, while publicly owned utilities in general generate significantly more of their energy from renewable sources than for-profit utilities (mostly due to high concentrations of hydropower), many have a long way to go in transitioning to renewable forms of energy. Similarly, many publicly-owned enterprises and services are severely lacking when it comes to genuine participation, transparency and accountability to democratic structures.
However, what public ownership and control does provide is an opportunity and a tool for communities at various scales to democratically and collectively determine and implement priorities, goals, and timelines — such as climate resiliency, a just energy transition, and an equitable recovery from crises — that go beyond a single-minded pursuit of short-term profits. It is an opportunity that simply does not exist with for-profit, fossil-fuel addicted corporations in control. At a briefing to discuss the difficulty of restoring power after Hurricane Ida, President Biden neatly and unknowingly summarized the problem. “They’re all private providers,” he said. “We don’t control that.”
From hurricanes and polar vortexes to wildfires and pandemics, recent events across the country demonstrate that decades of privatization, corporatization and marketization have left our communities — especially those most marginalized and under-resourced — fragile and highly vulnerable to disasters. As we enter into what is likely going to be a period of increasing and intersecting economic, ecological and social crises, it is imperative that we reclaim democratic public ownership and control over our infrastructure and vital public services.
WHISTLEBLOWER SHARES PERSPECTIVE ON END TO AFGHANISTAN WAR
By Kevin Gosztola,
The Dissenter.
September 4, 2021
https://popularresistance.org/australian-military-whistleblower-shares-perspective-on-end-to-afghanistan-war/
“We knew it was a debacle.”
“Everybody knew. There was a culture of silence to cover it up, and the politicians were never really trying to win the war.”
David McBride is a former military lawyer in the Royal Australia Regiment and Australia Special Forces. He completed two tours in Afghanistan and submitted an internal complaint against what he witnessed in the war. He immediately faced scrutiny and harassment.
A few years later, David found journalists with the Australia Broadcasting Corporation, who were willing to listen to him. They accepted classified documents that showed the reality of Australia’s involvement in the war.
What David had to reveal was published as “The Afghan Files.” It was a “quite a big story in Australia,” according to him. But the Australia government responded by raiding the ABC and targeting David with a prosecution for an espionage offense.
In this episode from the “Unauthorized Disclosure” podcast, which Kevin Gosztola typically co-hosts with Rania Khalek, Kevin speaks with David about his deployments to Afghanistan. He shares his view on the last several weeks, when the United States withdrew forces and mounted an unprecedented evacuation effort with a mostly cooperative Taliban.
“I was born in Australia, but I spent a lot of my life in the U.K. I went to Oxford University in England, and then I joined the British Army,” David recalls. “I came back to Australia and I started practicing as a lawyer, and I got a job being a legal officer.” (In the U.S., these are known as JAGs.)
“You wear a uniform, but you’re meant to make sure people comply with the rules of engagement. If people get in trouble, you’re meant to make sure that the law is followed,” McBride adds.
In 2011, David grew concerned with how the Australia Army was lying to politicians. They were saying everything was going well. If you spoke to soldiers, they would say “everybody knew it wasn’t going well, but the idea was to put out false messages to say it was going well.
“I came back in 2013 for my second tour with the Special Forces, which do a lot more direct action which is attacking the enemy with missiles and going to their houses and killing them. I could see again the false messaging was getting out of control.”
After returning to Australia, David made his internal complaint. He attempted to “gently prod the organization” to recognize “we’re not following the law, and we’re not even doing a good job. We’re just trying to win the war by saying we’re winning the war, even though we know we’re not.”
“We’d become very politicized in that we were really just an arm of the politicians, and we would say whatever the politicians wanted us to say, which of course was good news.”
The complaint was not well received. It resulted in scrutiny. “I had a very good career up to that point, and then my career stalled. I was moved sideways. I was given a lot of psychological reviews.”
David recounts, “I was gaslit by the organization, who said it’s all in your imagination. They sent me to a psychiatrist who said that I was nuts and it was all a sense of my own entitlement.”
“Eventually, after four years of trying to get people to care, I found some media people who took the classified documents, which I think proved my case, and they made something called the Afghan Files, which was quite a big story in Australia which was one of the first stories to expose the war crimes and coverups and general fact that we weren’t telling the truth about the war.”
The police came after David, and he took off for Spain. He says he was kind of on the run, but he had a daughter in Australia and came back to face the music, where he was arrested in 2018.
“Since then, I have been fighting a charge similar to Julian Assange. It’s an espionage charge, even though I’m a whistleblower. They’re saying I damaged national security.”
David claims he could face over 100 years in prison if they want to put him in prison for that long because the penalty can be severe. “I’m very much treated as if I’m a terrorist.”
While awaiting trial (which was postponed again to 2022), David has followed recent developments in Afghanistan closely.
“These latest events in Afghanistan have been very helpful to me, even though they’re tragic for the people of Afghanistan, because it shows what I’ve been saying all along. That we knew it was a debacle.”
“Everybody knew. There was a culture of silence to cover it up, and the politicians were never really trying to win the war,” David contends. “I believe, as Julian Assange said, they just wanted to keep it going because it was a big money spender for the corporations. It was a big money spender for the political parties because the corporations would make donations to them. And it was a vote-winner.”
“Dropping bombs on Islamic people in the mountains won a lot of votes off that section of the population that equates dropping bombs and shooting people up as strong leadership.”
As David puts it, “Australia’s got a lot to answer for—and Britain—because the U.S. cannot carry out these military adventures without some sort of allies.”
He also reacts to a news report about “Captain Louise,” who was attached to the Australia Special Forces and at one time had a partner in the Special Forces. She is a key witness in an Australia war crimes inquiry and had her home bombed.
“It’s a big deal. I was as surprised as anybody by that story,” David says.
Her partner apparently told her his unit was out on patrol. They shot someone in a group of 11 farmers by mistake and panicked. They did not want any witnesses so everyone was murdered, including children. They claimed they were Taliban.
David suggests a stun grenade was thrown at her house. It was likely intended not to kill her but to scare her into recognizing if she gives evidence against certain people then bad things will happen.
“I’ve got two daughters. I got veiled threats to say that everything that you hold dear could be taken away from you,” David shares. “They know I’m pretty nuts, and I’m not going to worry about it too much. But obviously everybody’s got a weakness, and the idea that my daughters would be harmed because I’m giving evidence against certain people, yeah, it’s pretty scary.”
Louise was relocated and now is under witness protection. The attack made her even more determined to tell investigators whatever they need to know.
WILL A SUMMER OF CLIMATE CRISES LEAD TO CLIMATE ACTION?
By Marianne Lavelle,
Inside Climate News.
September 4, 2021
https://popularresistance.org/will-a-summer-of-climate-crises-lead-to-climate-action-its-not-looking-good/
It’s Not Looking Good.
A $3.5 Trillion Budget Bill Is Faltering In The Senate, And In America At Large, Well, As One Expert Put It: “It’s Really Hard To Get People To Change Their Way Of Life.”
This summer, the climate crisis has roared into basement apartments in Brooklyn, leaped across the dry tops of the Sierra Nevadas and kicked over the towers that held up the power and communication networks of Louisiana. It has shredded homes in New Jersey and poured into the underpasses of Philadelphia, turning a cross-town expressway into a murky, swirling river.
But as fall approaches, bringing the best opportunity in years for Congress to act on global warming, prospects are dimming for the package of investments that make up President Joe Biden’s plan to jump-start a clean energy transition.
In the Senate, where Biden will need every Democratic vote to pass a $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill that contains the bulk of his climate plan, party unity is fraying. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) placed an editorial in the Wall Street Journal calling for Democrats to “pause” the package, because of concerns over inflation and the national debt. Less noticed, but just as lethal to the package’s chances was a statement by a spokesman for Sen. Krysten Sinema (D-Ariz.) in Politico on Aug. 23: She will not support a $3.5 trillion budget bill, he said.
There are many reasons that Washington, D.C. remains at a standstill on climate change, even as its impacts become more apparent and the costs rise for cities and smaller communities. Certainly, the structural advantages of conservatives in the U.S. political system, with the Senate diluting the power of the nation’s most populous regions, is a factor. (The youth-led climate group Sunrise Movement issued a three-word riposte to Manchin’s editorial: “Abolish the Senate,” said Communications Director Ellen Sciales).
But another important factor is psychological and sociological, according to the research of a number of experts on U.S. climate inaction. Even though polls show that a majority of U.S. citizens want to see action on climate change, clean energy proponents have not come together as a force strong enough to overcome the political obstacles and the entrenched interests defending the fossil fueled-status quo. Instead of spurring citizens to band together to demand action, the extreme weather impacts could create a hopelessness that works against political progress.
“Climate change is going to be extremely scary and disturbing no matter what,” said Kari Marie Norgaard, a professor of sociology at the University of Oregon. “It is significantly more scary and disturbing if we think there is nothing that can be done, if we think that apocalypse is inevitable. Then, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
‘It’s About Resilience’
Hurricanes, floods, and wildfires are nothing new, of course, but the velocity and force of natural disasters in the United States in the warmest weeks of 2021 were in many ways record-setting and tracked perfectly with the warnings scientists have been giving for years. “More frequent and intense extreme weather and climate-related events, as well as changes in average climate conditions, are expected to continue to damage infrastructure, ecosystems, and social systems that provide essential benefits to communities,” said the most recent National Climate Assessment, released by the federal government in 2018.
The remnants of Hurricane Ida brought enough moisture and atmospheric instability to the northeast to trigger the first-ever flash flood emergency in New York City and first-ever tornado emergency in New Jersey. Dozens of people in four states perished, some trapped in cars, some in the basement apartments that have been a feature of life in New York for decades. More than three inches of rain fell in an hour in Central Park, breaking a record set just eight days earlier when Hurricane Henri grazed the city.
In Louisiana, the state’s power grid took a hit from the full force of Hurricane Ida’s Category 4 winds—at 150 miles per hour, tying for the fifth strongest hurricane ever to hit the U.S. mainland. More than 800,000 customers remained without power on Friday, and the utility Entergy said it might take weeks to restore all electric service.
Meanwhile in California, only twice in history have wildfires burned from one side of the Sierra Nevada mountain range to the other: Both occurred this August. Usually the snow-topped peaks provide enough moisture to slow fires eventually. But not this summer, when snow cover was close to zero in June. Of the top 20 wildfires in California record books that date back to 1932, three occurred this year and five were last year.
Biden pointed to the extreme events Friday as he made a pitch for his two-part legislative plan—a bipartisan infrastructure bill and a much larger spending package that contains his main initiatives to drive carbon emissions out of electricity and transportation.
“It’s historic investment in roads, in rail, in transit and bridges, in clean energy, in clean water,” said Biden. “It’s going to modernize our energy grid. You need not go any further than look what’s happening across the country now in terms of the energy grids. It’s about resilience. Make our roads and highways safer. Make us more resilient to the kinds of devastating impacts from extreme weather we’re seeing in so many parts of the country.”
But Manchin, who as chairman of the Senate Energy Committee will have a key role in shaping some of the most important climate aspects of the legislation, including its Clean Electricity Payment Program, could single-handedly block the budget bill. He could relent after extracting concessions that reduce the overall cost of the package, as he did with the Covid relief bill earlier this year. But critics blasted Manchin’s approach as designed to draw attention rather than achieve a compromise. “Manchin once again opts for the performative centrism of an op-ed over picking up the phone and telling Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders his specific concerns and changes,” tweeted Jon Favreau, a former speechwriter for President Barack Obama and co-host of the podcast Pod Save America.
Manchin, who is fiercely protective of his home state coal industry, has always been seen as the point man on energy in this Congress. He is one of Congress’ top recipients of campaign funds from the oil, gas, and coal industries, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, and his remarks come just as corporate coalitions, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have begun a lobbying blitz to stop at least some provisions of the bills, according to The Washington Post.
Is Change Just Too Hard?
Robert Brulle, a sociologist who has written extensively on the fossil fuel industry’s influence in U.S. politics, said that industry lobbying certainly has been an obstacle to climate action. But he does not think it is the only factor at play in the “social inertia” on climate, a term that he and Norgaard used in research they were co-authors of two years ago.
Referring to fossil fuel industry lobbying and public relations, Brulle said, “These organizations and efforts are a great big roadblock in the middle of the road.” But he added, “I’m not sure we can go down the road very far with the truck we’ve got.”
Brulle notes that although polls show two-thirds of Americans think the United States should do more on climate change, he feels it is telling that other polling shows far fewer are willing to pay as much as $40 per month to address it.
“It’s really hard to get people to change their way of life and existence,” Brulle said. “It causes a great deal of anxiety. People don’t want to deal with it, and they come up with rationalizations or magical thinking. In other words, they deny the science or believe a technological solution will come to the rescue.
Norgaard, author of the 2011 book “Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life,” argues that the problem is especially acute in the United States, where the culture extols individual freedom and we don’t have a history of discussing societal solutions on climate.
“When people start bringing up climate change, there isn’t a cultural repertoire of how to talk about it,” she said. “The fact that we don’t have a way to collectively talk about it is a major hindrance. And it is also not a coincidence. It’s a function of our political economic structure.”
In Norgaard’s views, wildfires, floods and other manifestations of climate change will only translate into political action if they lead to more conversations—starting at the family and community level—about the large-scale changes that are needed to address warming.
“When we have community, that is when we can feel more powerful, especially when we are up against a collective problem,” she said. “We are talking about a much larger structural change, but we’re not actually having conversations about how that can happen. That is a big part of why people are so afraid and so helpless, and feel like nothing we do is going to work. I don’t think that’s necessarily true, but it becomes true if we can’t start talking about it.”
September 4, 2021
https://popularresistance.org/will-a-summer-of-climate-crises-lead-to-climate-action-its-not-looking-good/
It’s Not Looking Good.
A $3.5 Trillion Budget Bill Is Faltering In The Senate, And In America At Large, Well, As One Expert Put It: “It’s Really Hard To Get People To Change Their Way Of Life.”
This summer, the climate crisis has roared into basement apartments in Brooklyn, leaped across the dry tops of the Sierra Nevadas and kicked over the towers that held up the power and communication networks of Louisiana. It has shredded homes in New Jersey and poured into the underpasses of Philadelphia, turning a cross-town expressway into a murky, swirling river.
But as fall approaches, bringing the best opportunity in years for Congress to act on global warming, prospects are dimming for the package of investments that make up President Joe Biden’s plan to jump-start a clean energy transition.
In the Senate, where Biden will need every Democratic vote to pass a $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill that contains the bulk of his climate plan, party unity is fraying. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) placed an editorial in the Wall Street Journal calling for Democrats to “pause” the package, because of concerns over inflation and the national debt. Less noticed, but just as lethal to the package’s chances was a statement by a spokesman for Sen. Krysten Sinema (D-Ariz.) in Politico on Aug. 23: She will not support a $3.5 trillion budget bill, he said.
There are many reasons that Washington, D.C. remains at a standstill on climate change, even as its impacts become more apparent and the costs rise for cities and smaller communities. Certainly, the structural advantages of conservatives in the U.S. political system, with the Senate diluting the power of the nation’s most populous regions, is a factor. (The youth-led climate group Sunrise Movement issued a three-word riposte to Manchin’s editorial: “Abolish the Senate,” said Communications Director Ellen Sciales).
But another important factor is psychological and sociological, according to the research of a number of experts on U.S. climate inaction. Even though polls show that a majority of U.S. citizens want to see action on climate change, clean energy proponents have not come together as a force strong enough to overcome the political obstacles and the entrenched interests defending the fossil fueled-status quo. Instead of spurring citizens to band together to demand action, the extreme weather impacts could create a hopelessness that works against political progress.
“Climate change is going to be extremely scary and disturbing no matter what,” said Kari Marie Norgaard, a professor of sociology at the University of Oregon. “It is significantly more scary and disturbing if we think there is nothing that can be done, if we think that apocalypse is inevitable. Then, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
‘It’s About Resilience’
Hurricanes, floods, and wildfires are nothing new, of course, but the velocity and force of natural disasters in the United States in the warmest weeks of 2021 were in many ways record-setting and tracked perfectly with the warnings scientists have been giving for years. “More frequent and intense extreme weather and climate-related events, as well as changes in average climate conditions, are expected to continue to damage infrastructure, ecosystems, and social systems that provide essential benefits to communities,” said the most recent National Climate Assessment, released by the federal government in 2018.
The remnants of Hurricane Ida brought enough moisture and atmospheric instability to the northeast to trigger the first-ever flash flood emergency in New York City and first-ever tornado emergency in New Jersey. Dozens of people in four states perished, some trapped in cars, some in the basement apartments that have been a feature of life in New York for decades. More than three inches of rain fell in an hour in Central Park, breaking a record set just eight days earlier when Hurricane Henri grazed the city.
In Louisiana, the state’s power grid took a hit from the full force of Hurricane Ida’s Category 4 winds—at 150 miles per hour, tying for the fifth strongest hurricane ever to hit the U.S. mainland. More than 800,000 customers remained without power on Friday, and the utility Entergy said it might take weeks to restore all electric service.
Meanwhile in California, only twice in history have wildfires burned from one side of the Sierra Nevada mountain range to the other: Both occurred this August. Usually the snow-topped peaks provide enough moisture to slow fires eventually. But not this summer, when snow cover was close to zero in June. Of the top 20 wildfires in California record books that date back to 1932, three occurred this year and five were last year.
Biden pointed to the extreme events Friday as he made a pitch for his two-part legislative plan—a bipartisan infrastructure bill and a much larger spending package that contains his main initiatives to drive carbon emissions out of electricity and transportation.
“It’s historic investment in roads, in rail, in transit and bridges, in clean energy, in clean water,” said Biden. “It’s going to modernize our energy grid. You need not go any further than look what’s happening across the country now in terms of the energy grids. It’s about resilience. Make our roads and highways safer. Make us more resilient to the kinds of devastating impacts from extreme weather we’re seeing in so many parts of the country.”
But Manchin, who as chairman of the Senate Energy Committee will have a key role in shaping some of the most important climate aspects of the legislation, including its Clean Electricity Payment Program, could single-handedly block the budget bill. He could relent after extracting concessions that reduce the overall cost of the package, as he did with the Covid relief bill earlier this year. But critics blasted Manchin’s approach as designed to draw attention rather than achieve a compromise. “Manchin once again opts for the performative centrism of an op-ed over picking up the phone and telling Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders his specific concerns and changes,” tweeted Jon Favreau, a former speechwriter for President Barack Obama and co-host of the podcast Pod Save America.
Manchin, who is fiercely protective of his home state coal industry, has always been seen as the point man on energy in this Congress. He is one of Congress’ top recipients of campaign funds from the oil, gas, and coal industries, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, and his remarks come just as corporate coalitions, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have begun a lobbying blitz to stop at least some provisions of the bills, according to The Washington Post.
Is Change Just Too Hard?
Robert Brulle, a sociologist who has written extensively on the fossil fuel industry’s influence in U.S. politics, said that industry lobbying certainly has been an obstacle to climate action. But he does not think it is the only factor at play in the “social inertia” on climate, a term that he and Norgaard used in research they were co-authors of two years ago.
Referring to fossil fuel industry lobbying and public relations, Brulle said, “These organizations and efforts are a great big roadblock in the middle of the road.” But he added, “I’m not sure we can go down the road very far with the truck we’ve got.”
Brulle notes that although polls show two-thirds of Americans think the United States should do more on climate change, he feels it is telling that other polling shows far fewer are willing to pay as much as $40 per month to address it.
“It’s really hard to get people to change their way of life and existence,” Brulle said. “It causes a great deal of anxiety. People don’t want to deal with it, and they come up with rationalizations or magical thinking. In other words, they deny the science or believe a technological solution will come to the rescue.
Norgaard, author of the 2011 book “Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life,” argues that the problem is especially acute in the United States, where the culture extols individual freedom and we don’t have a history of discussing societal solutions on climate.
“When people start bringing up climate change, there isn’t a cultural repertoire of how to talk about it,” she said. “The fact that we don’t have a way to collectively talk about it is a major hindrance. And it is also not a coincidence. It’s a function of our political economic structure.”
In Norgaard’s views, wildfires, floods and other manifestations of climate change will only translate into political action if they lead to more conversations—starting at the family and community level—about the large-scale changes that are needed to address warming.
“When we have community, that is when we can feel more powerful, especially when we are up against a collective problem,” she said. “We are talking about a much larger structural change, but we’re not actually having conversations about how that can happen. That is a big part of why people are so afraid and so helpless, and feel like nothing we do is going to work. I don’t think that’s necessarily true, but it becomes true if we can’t start talking about it.”
SHADOW DOCKET SUPREME COURT DECISIONS COULD AFFECT MILLIONS
By Gary Fields,
Associated Press.
September 4, 2021
Traditionally, the process of getting an opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court takes months and those rulings are often narrowly tailored. Emergency orders, especially during the court’s summer break, revolve around specific issues, like individual death penalty cases. But that pattern has changed in recent years with decisions coming outside the court’s normal procedures.
https://popularresistance.org/shadow-docket-supreme-court-decisions-could-affect-millions/
Washington — Traditionally, the process of getting an opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court takes months and those rulings are often narrowly tailored. Emergency orders, especially during the court’s summer break, revolve around specific issues, like individual death penalty cases.
But that pattern has changed in recent years with decisions coming outside the court’s normal procedures. That has been especially true in the past two weeks. Since Aug. 24, that truncated process known as the shadow docket has moved at astronomical speed, producing decisions related to immigration, COVID-19 and evictions and, most recently, abortion. Those three decisions, with the conservative wing of the court in the majority, have the potential to affect millions of people, in a fraction of the time and outside the normal scrutiny signed opinions can bring.
“My memory is, typically, if the Supreme Court was acting in July and August, it was really that quintessential emergency appeal, dealing with something like a death penalty situation. It wasn’t like: What is immigration law going to be in our country? It wasn’t: Will tenants have certain rights? It wasn’t the big substantive questions,” said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School.
What Is The Normal Process?
Participants petition the court to hear cases. If accepted, there are oral arguments before the justices, although during the coronavirus era that has meant via telephone. Before this happens, a case usually has gone through a full review and appeal in lower courts. Those deliberations are part of the material the justices reference. Amicus briefs are submitted by parties interested in the case.
Once the arguments are heard the judges meet in conference, discuss the cases and take preliminary votes. Opinions are assigned to be written and draft opinions are exchanged and often amended and changed.
The overall process is deliberative and one where the justices justify their conclusions in somewhat lengthy written legal opinions. The process between oral argument and issued opinion takes months.
What Happens On The Shadow Docket?
The shadow docket, a phrase coined by University of Chicago Law School professor William Baude, skips many if not all of those steps. The biggest element: It does not possess the transparency and disclosure of a typical docket. Outside of a flurry of court filings between the plaintiffs and defendants in the three recent, prominent cases, there was little interaction between the court and the participants. None of the orders issued by the majority in the three cases was signed, although at least one of them ended the protection for roughly 3.5 million people in the United States who said they faced evictions in the next two months, according to Census Bureau data from early August.
What Are The Cases?
The first decision dealt with the Biden administration’s attempt to end a Trump-era program that forces people to wait in Mexico while seeking asylum in the U.S. With three liberal justices in dissent, the high court refused to block a lower court ruling ordering the administration to reinstate the program informally known as Remain in Mexico.
Days later the court’s conservative majority said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lacked the authority to reimpose a moratorium on evictions, a temporary ban that was put in place because of the coronavirus pandemic.
And this past week, the court allowed a new Texas law to go forward that bans most abortions in the state and is the biggest curb to the constitutional right to an abortion in decades, despite the fact the justices said there are serious questions about the constitutionality of the law.
Do Any Justices Oppose The Abbreviated Process?
The liberal wing of the court has been vocal, but Chief Justice John Roberts’ comments in the abortion law case may have been the most straightforward in indicating a desire for the traditional process to give courts time to examine the “not only unusual, but unprecedented” statutory scheme.
“We are at this point asked to resolve these novel questions — at least preliminarily — in the first instance, in the course of two days, without the benefit of consideration by the District Court or Court of Appeals,” Roberts wrote. “We are also asked to do so without ordinary merits briefing and without oral argument.”
Justice Elena Kagan joined Roberts in his dissent in the abortion law case and wrote one of her own specifically about the shadow docket. “Today’s ruling illustrates just how far the Court’s ‘shadow-docket’ decisions may depart from the usual principles of appellate process,” she wrote. “That ruling, as everyone must agree, is of great consequence.”
She added that the majority ruling was missing guidance from the appeals court, included only cursory review of party submissions, and was done hastily and with little explanation for its conclusion. “In all these ways, the majority’s decision is emblematic of too much of this Court’s shadow docket decision making,” Kagan wrote.
STOP THE TERROR OF THE US DRONE KILLING MACHINE
https://popularresistance.org/stop-the-terror-of-the-us-drone-killing-machine/
STOP THE TERROR OF THE US DRONE KILLING MACHINE
By Toby Blome,
Shut Down Creech.
September 4, 2021
RESIST!
Why We Go to Creech…
Shut Down Creech, Fall Action Week
Sun, Sept 26th – Sat, Oct 2nd
Please Join Us!
September 4, 2021
RESIST!
Why We Go to Creech…
Shut Down Creech, Fall Action Week
Sun, Sept 26th – Sat, Oct 2nd
Please Join Us!
Did you hear about the 3 Afghan toddler girls whose flesh was ripped to pieces by a U.S. Drone Strike last Sunday? Striking in a Kabul NEIGHBORHOOD the attack also killed 4 other children, including 2 more under 6 years old! The grief on Amal Ahmadi’s face tells it all! 10 civilian family members dead, 7 of them children, body parts everywhere, and bodies unrecognizable. It was a horrific and tragic scene.
And then there was last Friday’s U.S. drone strike in Nangarhar Province that U.S. officials claimed killed two “high profile” ISIS-K targets.” A witness reported, “…rickshaws were burning. Children and women were wounded and one man, one boy and one woman had been killed on the spot.”
OFFICIALS LIE…CHILDREN, WOMEN AND MEN DIE!
WE MUST UNITE TO STOP THIS RACIST U.S. DRONE TERROR IN THE SKY.
Please consider joining us for a week of nonviolent resistance at Creech Killer Drone Base! Stopping Drone Terror, One Blockade at a Time! Co-sponsored by VETERANS FOR PEACE.
Come for part or all of the week.
REGISTER HERE!
Help Us Better Prepare by Registering Early!
FMI: ShutDownCreech.blogspot.com
Join the Creecher Community at CAMP JUSTICE….Working Toward Peace & Justice Together!
More information about SDC:
Check out creative & impactful past actions: Scenes from Creech: Resisting Drones One Blockade at a Time (5 min.
Transportation: We are using the registration form to help organize carpools and caravans to Shut Down Creech. Offering rides or need a ride to/from SDC? Contact Casey: casey@veteransforpeace.org. Need a ride to/from Las Vegas airport or bus station to/from Camp Justice? Contact Eleanor: eastbaycodepink@gmail.com
COVID Safety: In times of the COVID pandemic & more virulent strains, we are taking your well being very carefully. Vaccinated and unvaccinated people are both welcome, as we respect the mindful choices people have made. Please contact us for concerns or read our COVID-safety guidelines.
Exciting plans or SDC Fall 2021:
Meet 3 of the newest Veterans For Peace Staff at SDC! (Exec. Director Garett Reppenhagen, Jules Vaquera & Chris Velazquez ) Chris is overseeing the rapidly expanding Gamers For Peace campaign and Jules is the new membership coordinator (and is overseeing music at SDC).
Music: Nightly drumming and music circles (bring your instruments!)
Nonviolence Training
Daily morning stretch & meditation by VFP Casey Stinemetz
Evening Talent Show: Bring your poetry, music, and other gifts to share.
Evening Talent Show: Bring your poetry, music, and other gifts to share.
Film Showings and discussion: Freedom Riders Sir No Sir
Nature Excursions: wild horses, desert walks, Desert National Wildlife Refuge
Nature Excursions: wild horses, desert walks, Desert National Wildlife Refuge
Las Vegas Street Theater (TBD)
Bring your favorite animal costume for: CREECHERS FOR THE PLANET vigil….a playful attempt to communicate the urgency of ending global militarism for the survival of the planet.
Friday Goodbye Vigil at Creech: FLY A KITE NOT A DRONE.
We need more volunteers/helpers. Reach out to us: What can you offer?
We are going to have a BLAST in the Nevada Desert! We really appreciate everyone’s participation in Shut Down Creech, helping to create a more peaceful and just world.
Contact Us Here.
We need more volunteers/helpers. Reach out to us: What can you offer?
We are going to have a BLAST in the Nevada Desert! We really appreciate everyone’s participation in Shut Down Creech, helping to create a more peaceful and just world.
Contact Us Here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)