Tag: politics

Categories
Living in Society

Politics is Still Local

State Capitol
State Capitol

LAKE MACBRIDE— Nothing has changed in the form of our state government. People get confused about this, due to an enthusiasm for the House of Representatives. There are three branches, the executive, legislative and judicial, although house enthusiasts say there are a different three, the house, senate and governor. They have it wrong.

I can understand why some get enthusiastic about the house. After all, it is our most representative chamber in a bicameral legislature. People get so enthusiastic, they sometimes forget about the bicameral part— that for a house bill to get to the governor’s desk for signature, the consent of the senate is required. Ditto in the reverse for senate bills. Behind the scenes, leadership is working on a budget, something they know has to get passed. Unlike the school aid formula, there would be consequences if the legislature ignored the statutory requirement to pass a budget before adjournment sine die. Bills without bicameral support are like so many necklaces and doubloons at Mardi Gras.

If people don’t have a relationship with state legislators, they could. The listening posts and forums are sparely attended, so anyone who shows up more than once is likely to get noticed. A visit to the Capitol? Even fewer constituents do that, garnering special treatment.

Guaranteed about any legislator is that a person will not always agree with their votes. In many cases, voting is predictable, but so much depends upon the specifics of the bill and and what leadership brings to the floor for debate. In more than twenty years, I have disagreed with every representative and senator I have had in Big Grove, although mostly I agreed with their votes. It hasn’t made much difference to which party they belonged, the nature of politics is no one gets what they want all of the time.

Iowa is currently in the filing period for state candidates, and a lot of people kick the tires on a run. Some have no idea what a campaign for the legislature involves. Others know well. I look forward to the March 14 deadline to see how our local races will shape up. With my newspaper work, I will be writing fewer letters to the editor than in previous years in an effort to avoid favoring elected officials and candidates to make an attempt at balanced news writing. I have an opinion, but will be expressing it infrequently in public. That is the price of working as a correspondent for a weekly newspaper.

What I do know and will say is that my public silence should not be mistaken for lack of engagement. Elections matter, and people should strive to be informed. I’ll be following the action in my community, and doing what I can to advance common interests. We all should be doing that… and that is an opinion I’m not concerned about expressing in public.

Categories
Environment

Common Ground on Keystone XL

State Capitol
State Capitol

Joint Statement by Senator Rob Hogg and Representative Bobby Kaufmann on Keystone XL Pipeline:

BIPARTISAN OPPOSITION TO KEYSTONE PIPELINE IN IOWA BECAUSE OF EXPECTED USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN

DES MOINES– Two Iowa state legislators– Senator Rob Hogg (D-Cedar Rapids) and Representative Bobby Kaufmann (R-Wilton)– joined today to call on Congress to oppose the proposed Keystone XL pipeline because of the expected use of eminent domain in the development of the project.

“I urge you to stand with those land-owners who do not want this pipeline running through their property,” wrote Rep. Kaufmann in a letter to Congressman Dave Loebsack of Iowa’s Second Congressional District.  “The interests in oil profits should not supersede the rights of property owners.”

“It is not in America’s national interests to allow a foreign oil company to condemn American farms and ranches to take foreign oil to the Gulf Coast for sale on the global market,” wrote Sen. Hogg in a letter to Congressman Bruce Braley of Iowa’s First Congressional District.  “The Keystone pipeline threatens America’s land, water, and wildlife – Congress should say no, the State Department should say no, and President Obama should say no.”

Senator Hogg and Representative Kaufmann’s letters were also submitted to the U.S. State Department in advance of the March 7 deadline for public comments on the Environmental Impact Statement on the proposal.  The public can submit comments at the following web address:  http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/

Download PDF of Senator Hogg’s letter to Rep. Bruce Braley here.

Download PDF of Rep. Kaufmann’s letter to Rep. Dave Loebsack here.

Categories
Environment Social Commentary Sustainability

Enjoying Life More

Snowstorm
Snowstorm

LAKE MACBRIDE— An article about James Lovelock was recently updated and is in the news again. “Enjoy life while you can,” said Lovelock in 2008. “Because if you’re lucky, it’s going to be 20 years before it hits the fan.” Whether enough people are listening to his admonition about the inevitability of catastrophic climate change is doubtful. Whether we should is another question.

While the U.S. has its share of doomsday preppers, by and large the potential for social unrest, like in Ukraine, Egypt, Syria and Venezuela, is discounted by most people I meet. If some are stocking up at COSTCO, it is the result of a mathematical calculation of price per serving, and how long that over-sized box of crackers will last. Preparing for Armageddon is the last thing on shopper minds. As Americans, we have a high level of tolerance for injustice… as long as we perceive that as individuals, we are being treated fairly.

Our public awareness is influenced by a media bought and sold by a few wealthy people. Corporations influence our lawmakers, agriculture, retail stores, our utilities, and anything we do that requires our participation. Seldom has there been a large scale outbreak of social unrest, nor is one likely without a wholesale breakdown of consumer society. The wealthy are smart enough to prevent that from happening unless it serves their purposes.

Perhaps the most recent American social movement was the political tide that swept Republicans out of power and inaugurated President Barack Obama. Discontent with our government increased once the abuses of presidential power became more widely known after Sept. 11, 2001. It was a peaceful movement, even if we had yet to end two wars, and continued our questionable use of drones to target people in countries with which we are not at war.

It would take a lot for wide-spread, violent protest to topple the U.S. government. For that matter, protests against drones, economic issues, taxation, the Keystone XL pipeline, nuclear weapons installations, mountaintop removal coal mining and other issues pass largely unnoticed by society. In the middle east, it took a widespread drought, a shortage of export crops from Russia and Ukraine and high food prices to activate citizens for social change. Of course now we are getting back to climate disruption caused by global warming.

Helping mitigate the causes of global warming is at the top of my to-do list. I wrote about it at this link, “climate change is real, it is happening now, it’s caused by humans, and is cause for immediate action before it is too late.” Of course, according to Lovelock, it is already too late. Climate change is not the only worry we have about survival of life on the planet.

The other threat is the lingering possibility of a nuclear weapons exchange. In our post-Cold War era, this borders on the absurd. The two countries with the largest number of nuclear weapons are the United States and Russia. The war is over, so disarm. We can’t afford the hundreds of billions of dollar we spend on the nuclear complex, so disarm.

The humanitarian consequences of a small-scale, regional nuclear war, like between nuclear states India and Pakistan, are unthinkable. Conservative organizations like the Red Cross/Red Crescent Society and Rotary International are signing on to abolish nuclear weapons for that reason. They are most active outside U.S. borders.

Americans are already looking to enjoy life more, oblivious to the tangible threats we face. It is possible to mitigate the causes of climate change, work toward nuclear abolition, and enjoy life more. Once one has read Sartre not much seems futile, and engaging in life becomes its own reason to live. Whether we can make a difference is a question the naysayers would answer for us, something we can’t let them do.

Categories
Living in Society

Political Funnel Cake

Funnel Cake
Funnel Cake

LAKE MACBRIDE— The storm let up, the driveway was dug out, and the second session of the 85th Iowa General Assembly began to shape up during its annual funnel week. The funnel means most non-spending bills must be passed out of committee or they are dead for the year. It’s not a firm rule, but it has implications.

The session starts to take shape the way a funnel cake does at the Iowa State Fair. Political funnel cake is nowhere near as tasty, and be ready to apply lots of powdered sugar to sweeten the underlying bitterness of this airy confection.

Some impossible bills have come forward, like the ban on telemedicine abortions, and a bill introduced by a gunsmith allowing silencers. Such extreme measures are unlikely to make it through the bicameral legislature. Senator Joe Bolkcom of Iowa City withdrew his medical marijuana bill the same day he filed it when no bipartisan support could be found. He seems smarter than others.

Legislators are busy with committee work, attempting to advance their priorities. Any analysis of this session seems premature until we at least get past the funnel.

There is an election this year, and political fundraising has been a recent topic at the coffee shop. We receive countless requests for donations in the mail and via the Internet. Funds are limited this year, and people who ask personally or by telephone are more likely to receive financial help.

Thus far, the following five people have asked me personally for a campaign contribution: State Senator Bob Dvorsky, who has represented me for almost 20 years; county supervisor candidates Janelle Rettig and Mike Carberry; Congressman Dave Loebsack; and candidate for the first congressional district seat, Anesa Kajtazovic. These are all busy people, so if they can call, any candidate not in a state-wide race should be dialing for dollars.

Political coverage takes a lot of work if it’s done right, and my coverage is more on the spotty side. Writing about politics forces me to think about it, something any normal human avoids like the plague. Honestly, I’d rather be at the fair.

Categories
Living in Society

The Band is Tuning Up

Capitol Dome
Capitol Dome

LAKE MACBRIDE— Grab your partner, the band is tuning up.

In Des Moines, the Iowa House passed two bills today. One favors the tobacco industry in it’s language for controlling e-cigarettes (HF 2109), and another prohibits termination of pregnancy using telecommunications technology (HF 2175). The former got more votes than the latter, although both were equally ill considered. We’ll learn who voted which way in the journal tomorrow, but the final votes were 72-22 for HF 2109 and 55-42 for HF 2175.

This curious explanatory language is part of HF 2175, “the inclusion of this explanation does not constitute agreement with the explanation’s substance by the members of the general assembly.” What the hell? If that’s the case, why not put in language like, “doctors will be smitten by god if they break this law?” Then they would really have something to write to constituents about in the weekly newsletter.

We are back to the good old days when the Republicans pass bills in the House because they can, messaging them exuberantly into the abyss also known as the Senate inbox. All that’s missing is anti-abortion activist Kim Pearson. I haven’t been following the Senate as closely but their six percent allowable growth proposal appears equally dead on arrival in the House. The only caveat here is the e-cigarette bill may have a chance in the Senate because of Democratic support in the House.

Let’s not forget the executive branch. Yesterday the state auditor reported the governor’s budget overspends state revenues by $144 million. Sounds like the governor is planning to pay for things using one-time money in the surplus, something he repeatedly criticized Chet Culver for doing as part of his 2010 campaign.

As a friend wrote this morning, “there is no budget surplus. We are underfunding nearly every category in the budget.” The legislature will have to work through this before leaving Des Moines for the midterm elections— or not. Well, who knows what they might do? There are good people in the Iowa legislature, but one wouldn’t know it by the work they produced this week. And, it’s only Tuesday.

Categories
Living in Society

Tobacco Control in 2014

Gauloises CaporalLAKE MACBRIDE— When I was in the military, I bought my first and only packs of cigarettes. I tried a few puffs, and never had another. Tobacco control is a complicated issue that affects much of society, and has little to do with one person’s choices about tobacco use. It is one where tobacco control advocates need to stick together.

Tobacco products are readily available to anyone who wants them today, despite restrictions on sales to minors. Tobacco is a legal, addictive substance, the use of which is widely accepted. The disease treatment costs of tobacco use have been quantified, and tobacco use presents a tangible, persistent and preventable threat to public health.

Both of my parents smoked tobacco when I was a child, and until the Iowa Smoke Free Air Act was passed in 2008, the air in many public places contained tobacco smoke. We don’t hear as much about tobacco issues these days, despite the ubiquitous presence of tobacco products in retail stores. The legal struggle between tobacco companies and tobacco control advocacy groups has continued, but has largely gone silent.

In Iowa, the coalition of tobacco control advocates includes the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Stroke Association, American Lung Association, the Iowa Tobacco Prevention Alliance (ITPA) and Clean Air For Everyone Iowa Citizen’s Action Network (CAFE Iowa CAN). I was previously a board member for the latter organization. The work of this coalition is focused on securing government funds for a comprehensive tobacco control program.

In a December 2013 letter to legislators, the group wrote,

Smoking cessation efforts are essential public health initiatives that both directly and indirectly impact our entire state.  Statewide programs that are funded through the Division of Tobacco Use Prevention and Control can help reduce the enormous financial toll attributed to tobacco related use, not to mention the 4,400 Iowans who die each year from usage. Annually, tobacco related disease costs Iowans nearly $3 billion, of which $301 million is billed to Medicaid. To substantially reduce this expenditure, the CDC recommends Iowa appropriate $36.7 million annually to properly implement a comprehensive tobacco control policy.  However, last year the division only received $5.3 million.

Governor Branstad’s budget proposal would reduce expenditures in the tobacco control program by $75,000, with reductions targeted to printed educational materials and social media funding. It is a small percentage of the total, and depending upon who the governor appoints to fill the vacant director of the Iowa Department of Public Health position, the proposed budget should have support. It is a modest budget compared to the CDC recommendation.

What is at issue during the remainder of the 85th Iowa General Assembly is regulation of e-cigarettes, which are currently unregulated. Tobacco control advocates want e-cigarettes regulated as a tobacco product, something the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would like as well. The tobacco industry is working toward creating an environment where e-cigarettes are socially acceptable, are widely available, and can be used everywhere.  At the beginning of the legislative session, the issue was largely off the radar of legislators who were focused on the youth prevention aspect of this issue. Tobacco control advocates are expected to change that, and are trying to pass legislation they can support.

There are at least three bills pertaining to e-cigarettes written by the tobacco industry (companies like Altria and RJ Reynolds). In parentheses are the tobacco control advocates’ concerns with the legislation as written. The bills were all introduced by Democratic legislators:

HF 2034, which will define e-cigarettes as other tobacco products, regulating them like most other tobacco products. (In this bill, e-cigarettes are not rolled into the Iowa Smoke Free Air Act).
SF 2038, prohibits the sale of e-cigarettes to minors. (The bill doesn’t define e-cigarettes as other tobacco products).
SSB 3101, prohibits the sale of e-cigarettes to minors. (The bill doesn’t define e-cigarettes as other tobacco products).

Like with any legislation, the pro- and anti-tobacco control lobbyists will advocate with legislators to get favorable wording in any potential law. I have lived in Iowa long enough to know that the probable outcome of the legislative initiative may be for Iowa to wait until the FDA rules on e-cigarettes, then deal with the regulatory issues. I’m not hopeful the legislature will pass any of these three bills this session. Preventing the tobacco industry wording in them would be a victory of sorts for tobacco control advocates.

Categories
Living in Society

Caucus Night in Big Grove

Off-Year Caucus
Off-Year Caucus

SOLON— If not careful, I will get sucked into partisan politics again. It’s physics. The general lack of interest in partisan politics, combined with party work needing to be done, creates a vacuum that sucks all willing volunteers into the chambers of events.

There is the Democratic county convention (March 8), the district convention (April 26) and the state convention (June 21), to organize and attend. In our precinct, there were seven caucus goers, and we elected one of two central committee members. We all know how much work is involved in being on the central committee, and for most of us, we have been there and done that, resulting in a position remained unfilled. I agreed to be on the committee on committees, mainly interested in the work of preparing for the county convention. All other committee slots went unfilled. Par for the course among experienced caucus goers in our rural part of the county.

A big part of the work at the caucus is signing the nominating petitions. There were more than 20 of them from federal, state-wide and local candidates. Bruce Braley is running to replace U.S. Senator Tom Harkin, Dave Loebsack is running for re-election to a fifth term in the U.S. Congress without a primary opponent, Jack Hatch was the only Democratic candidate for governor with nominating petitions, and it seemed that all of the state-wide offices had candidates. At the local level, county attorney Janet Lyness had a nominating petition for re-election, and four supervisor candidates had thrown their hats into the ring: Mike Carberry, Lisa Green-Douglas, Gerry Kuhl and incumbent Janelle Rettig.

David Johnson of West Branch, who is running for state representative in House District 73, spoke to the caucus cluster of five precincts. I spoke on behalf of supervisor candidate Mike Carberry. We were the only two speakers for candidates.

This year there were only three resolutions, so the most painful part of the caucuses went quickly. I made a motion to accept all resolutions. It was seconded, but during the discussion someone asked that they all be read. What was on our minds was support for the locked out CWA workers at South Slope Cooperative Communications in North Liberty, setting a minimum Social Security benefit of $1,000 per month, and bringing electronic cigarettes under the same regulatory umbrella as tobacco products. What little discussion there was was useful and brief. My motion passed.

Because of the caucuses, the Iowa legislature was not in session. I ran into both my state senator and state representative by chance in the district before arriving at the caucus. Naturally I covered an issue with each of them. Dump trucking more than one issue during a chance meeting diminishes chances of anything being heard, so I picked carefully. I had an email response from my state representative before I went to bed. They are both people committed to making Iowa a better place to live, and I enjoy working with them, even though I don’t always agree with them.

When I arrived home, a buddy called me and said he had been elected to the Republican party’s county central committee. His resolution to repeal the Patriot Act was accepted without discussion. He indicated the dynamic was the governor’s supporters were trying to limit the influence of the Ron Paul wing of the party, presumably to get out of the pickle they found themselves in during the 2012 cycle, and to prevent a challenge to lieutenant governor Kim Reynolds at their state convention. He offered to collaborate on shaking up both parties’ establishment, and I made a note.

After our conversation I made a post on twitter about the second district Republican congressional candidates, and eventually identified there may be three Republican primary candidates for the seat, state representative Mark Lofgren, third time candidate Mariannette Miller-Meeks, and Some Dude Matthew Waldren.

What I failed to mention is among the mostly grey-haired caucus goers are a lot of long time friends. Getting a chance to socialize with them was the best part of the evening.

Categories
Living in Society

Why I Like Dave Loebsack

Congressman Dave Loebsack
Congressman Dave Loebsack

LAKE MACBRIDE— Unlike many in my cohort of grade school classmates, I stay in touch with my elected officials and have written them on important issues. Dave Loebsack is my U.S. Congressman, I like him, and it’s no secret. Loebsack receives his share of criticism, but I have stuck by him and will for three simple reasons: who he is not, who he is, and who he could be.

Dave Loebsack is not a Republican. His predecessor, Jim Leach was. I had a long constituent relationship with Rep. Leach. He was elected while I was in the military, and my first letter to him in 1980 was about disposal of radioactive nuclear waste during the nuclear freeze movement. Our views met on a lot of issues over the years. Two things turned me against Leach: his participation in the Kenneth Starr investigations during the Clinton administration, and his authorship of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed part of the Glass Steagall Act. Leach’s role as chairman of the House Banking Committee during Whitewater was the turning point, with repeal of Glass Steagall being the topper.

According to Bill Clinton, “in the House Banking Committee, Chairman Jim Leach… trumpeted every bogus charge against Hillary and me, alleging that we had made, not lost, money on Whitewater, had used Madison Guaranty funds for personal and political expenses, and had engineered David Hale’s SBA fraud. He promised ‘blockbuster’ revelations, but they never materialized.”

I thought it was a ridiculous waste of time that Leach participated in this political witch hunt, and told him so in a letter. By the time I got active in politics again, I felt Leach had to go, and thankfully wasn’t the only one.

Who is Dave Loebsack? His biography is readily available, but from the beginning of my relationship with him, he has been concerned, humble, appreciative and direct in his approach to me and to the political world. This passage from a March 25, 2005 email from Loebsack in response to my questions about raising money for the campaign and gaining support of the political establishment depicts what I mean:

“At the moment, I am quite honestly not sure that I can raise tons of money. However, I think my extensive contacts in the area, the state, and beyond give me a much better chance to do so than many past candidates. Therefore, I am trying even now to raise funds in this ‘exploratory’ stage. And I am not afraid to ask for help. Indeed, you may write me a check (to Loebsack Exploratory Committee) and I will deposit it in an account specifically set up for ‘testing the waters.’

I am sure I have not fully eased your mind on these matters, Paul, but I hope this is a good start.”

I don’t receive personal emails from Loebsack anymore, and I’m okay with that because I see him several times a year in a variety of settings. I have a type of accessibility to my congressman that is part and parcel of why we get involved in politics. As one out of 762,000 constituents, that is pretty good.

The third reason I like Dave Loebsack is the most important, what he could be. I don’t know how he got his initial committee assignments, but as far as I’m concerned, his membership on Armed Services and Education and the Workforce made the effort to elect him worth it.

Over the years, I haven’t agreed with all of Loebsack’s votes, especially on Armed Services. At the same time, ordinary citizens like me understand that we do not elect drones to the U.S. Congress, nor do we want to. It is precisely his outlook and process in the congress, combined with his committee assignments, that make him a strong legislator, one who will hopefully serve for many more years. As time goes by, Dave Loebsack will gain seniority on two committees that are critical to the future direction of our country. Committees whose work is important to the lives of everyday citizens where I live.

As we enter the 2014 election cycle, it’s time to stand up and get to work. I know what I’ll be doing— working to re-elect Dave Loebsack to the U.S. Congress.

Categories
Social Commentary

Snow Fell in Town

Newspaper Office
Newspaper Office

SOLON— An inch of snow had accumulated while I was inside working on next week’s newspaper. When one is the proof reader for a small weekly paper, he gets a preview of what’s happening. There is some action, but not much.

The second session of the 85th Iowa General Assembly began last week, as evidenced by the multitude of newsletters from our state representatives and senators. Our circulation spans two senate districts, so there were a total of four in my folder. As a recovering political junkie, I had already read the four at home, and then some. There was little news, except to say it’s open season in the Iowa legislature. My state representative was holding two listening posts today in Bennett and Lowden. Had the weather been better, I would have driven over.

What was in the news was that J.C. Penney is closing 33 stores and laying off 2,000 employees. On Thursday I accepted a part time job requiring white shirts, and I didn’t have any decent ones. I went to Penney’s yesterday morning to buy them. (Note to self: throw the rags in the closet away, as they are not shirts any more).

Upon arrival, I was one of a small number of customers in the store. A gent greeted me close to the door, offering his assistance. My shirt is an oxford-style, buttoned down collar with long sleeves. The gent attempted to compliment me by suggesting a size smaller than I required, but the photo of the tag from my old shirt clarified the matter. He helped me find what was wanted in short order.

I am baffled by the pricing scheme at large box stores. The tag on the shirt said $30. There was no other price posted. The gent told the cashier to make sure I received the 25 percent unadvertised discount. When she rang it up, the computer/cash register gave me a 50 percent discount. While discussing payment terms, she asked if I had a J.C. Penney credit card. I explained that I do, but prefer to keep all my charges on a single card, so I would use my MasterCard. Another discount. My final cost was $12.75 plus tax per shirt or 42.5 percent of the listed price.

Keep in mind there was no visible price advertising in the store and when I mentioned the discrepancy to the cashier she said the amount was correct. Price was dependent upon the cashier’s entries, the bar code and the computer database. The personal shopping experience was compelling because the price seemed to get lower every step taken toward payment. How do they make money that way? They’ve taken logic out of the process, and one supposes they have their reasons.

I pointed out to the cashier that our store wasn’t on the list to close. She said they were rated number one in the U.S. for sales by size. She asked if I had ever been to the Muscatine store scheduled to close. She had been, and wasn’t surprised because they had so little merchandise in it. We had a nice conversation.

The whole shopping experience was engaging on many levels, but I don’t see how this store could be making any money with so few customers and the vagaries of pricing. If they stay open, I’ll be back if I need additional shirts.

When I got home from the mall, I ordered garden seeds— 26 varieties costing $122.75 including shipping. That plus herb seedlings to be bought at one of the farms and I should be ready for planting. As soon as the snow lets up, I’ll be ready to get outside and prepare the soil.

For now there is snow, and I’m okay with that.

Categories
Environment Living in Society

Defending Obama’s Climate Action Plan

Analysis of Peer Reviewed Scientific Articles
Analysis of Peer Reviewed Scientific Articles

On Thursday, Jan. 16, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will hold a hearing entitled, “Review of the President’s Climate Action Plan,” begging the question, if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

A well credentialed panel is scheduled to appear, including administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Gina McCarthy. The hearing is important mostly to generate interest in a conversation about climate change that is on life support on Capitol Hill. (For more information about the hearing, click here). Who will be listening?

There aren’t enough votes in the 113th U.S. Congress to put a price on carbon emissions, something that is essential to slowing them. Recently, U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) announced formation of a task force to revive talk about climate change in the Congress, and to defend President Obama’s Climate Action Plan.

The goals of the task force are modest— introducing some small-scale bills intended to “use the bully pulpit of our senate offices to achieve (a) wakeup call,” Boxer said. She added, “we believe that climate change is a catastrophe that’s unfolding before our eyes and we want Congress to take off the blindfolds.” What will come of this year’s task force is unclear, but anyone paying attention can see the disruptive effects of changing climate on our society. However, as a writer on Daily Kos pointed out, it is another task force in another year, and legislation mitigating the causes of climate change, or dealing with its effects, is expected to be dead on arrival because the votes aren’t there.

Boxer has it right that people on the hill, and in the public, are asleep about climate change. The reason is the money spent by climate deniers. In December, Drexel University released a study of 140 different foundations funding an effort to delay action on climate change. The so-called Climate Change Counter Movement (CCCM) spent more than $900 million from 2003 through 2010. Author Robert J. Brulle wrote that the study was, “an analysis of the funding dynamics of the organized effort to prevent the initiation of policies designed to limit the carbon emissions that are driving anthropogenic climate change. The efforts of the CCCM span a wide range of activities, including political lobbying, contributions to political candidates, and a large number of communication and media efforts that aim at undermining climate science.” The efforts of CCCM have been successful, insofar as “only 45 percent of the U.S. public accurately reported the near unanimity of the scientific community about anthropogenic climate change,” according to the study.

What does “near unanimity” mean? James Powell recently evaluated 2,258 peer-reviewed scientific articles about climate change written by 9,136 authors between November 2012 and December 2013. Only one article rejected anthropogenic global warming. This may not represent a consensus, but consensus is not the purpose of science. Science is to explain the world to us, and we don’t need to strike the word “near” to understand climate change is real, it’s happening now, human activity is causing it, and scientists believe that is the case.

I am not sure whether a group of rich politicians posturing in the Congress will make a difference. However, it’s the only game in town. They are willing to take positive action to support the president’s climate action plan, which doesn’t rely on new legislation that isn’t in the cards anyway. While not hopeful of meaningful action, fingers are crossed, and the game is on.

Following is this afternoon’s press release from the League of Conservation Voters:

WASHINGTON, D.C.– League of Conservation Voters (LCV) president Gene Karpinski released this statement on the creation of the Senate Climate Action Task Force, a group chaired by Senators Boxer and Whitehouse that includes more than a dozen senators committed to pushing for action on climate change:

“Big Oil and corporate polluters have worked with their allies in Congress to prevent action on climate change for far too long. This task force is the latest sign that environmental allies in Congress are fighting back, standing up for basic science and pushing for action on climate change. This is the type of strong leadership we need if Congress is finally going to get serious about addressing the climate crisis and meeting our moral obligation to future generations. We thank Senators Boxer, Whitehouse, Cardin, Sanders, Klobuchar, Merkley, Franken, Blumenthal, Schatz, Murphy, Heinrich, King, Markey, and Booker for speaking out on climate change today and look forward to continuing to work with them to address this vitally important issue.”

~ Written for Blog for Iowa