Home Blog Page 3224

Will Your Elected Officials Stand Up For Academic Freedom?

0

In light of Attorney General Cuccinelli’s abuse of his power to intimidate climate scientists who produce research that he finds politically convenient to attack, I have two questions for every single one of my Virginia elected officials:

1) Do your support or oppose Cuccinelli’s assault on academic freedom?

2) If the latter, when will you make a public statement announcing your position?

Sorry, no mealy-mouthed evasions of the issue allowed this time.  Freedom of thought, inquiry, and expression is not some minor issue – it is the lifeblood without with democracy cannot function.  And it is by no means merely a progressive or Democratic issue.  Conservative Supreme Court Justices in recent years have demonstrated such a strong commitment to the First Amendment that they have chosen to protect even such repugnant forms of speech as flag burning, videos showing violence against animals, and depictions of child pornography.  Considering that, how can conservatives not support the freedom of scientists to conduct their research free from bullying by government officials?

Republicans, Tea Partiers, and other right-wingers talk endlessly about freedom and liberty.  So let’s put all of Virginia’s elected Republican officials on record to see if – when faced with a case where academic freedom is openly threatened by state power – they will put their money where their mouth is.  Governor Bob, of course, needs to be questioned most relentlessly, but all the officials below him need to be heard from too.  

Virginia Democrats, led by Delegate Mark Herring, have taken a strong stand on this issue.  But we cannot allow them to take their eyes off the ball.  We need every Democrat in Virginia to speak out publicly against this outrageous act in order to keep the pressure on the McDonnell-Cuccinelli Administration and continually ratchet it up – until they back off.

I strongly encourage you to contact your own elected officials and ask these same questions.  You can find contact information and links for all of them here.

We elect our leaders to safeguard our freedoms.  Will they come through for us this time, or not?

Mark Warner on Offshore Oil Drilling: Pause, But Not “Never Ever Again”

2



I agree with Mark Warner regarding offshore oil drilling that we should pause, I just believe that “pause” should be “forever.” Instead, we need to focus on energy efficiency, offshore wind, wave, solar, even nuclear power.  The bottom line, though, is that we need to wean ourselves off of polluting fossil fuels and move to the next generation of carbon-free, clean energy. Offshore oil drilling certainly does not put us on that path.

P.S. Instead of more disastrous oil spills, how about “The Five Percent Solution?”

Cooch’s Health Care Lawsuit: No “Standing,” No Clue

5

If there was any doubt that Ken Cuccinelli is wasting the Attorney General’s office’s time and resources (aka, Virginia taxpayer dollars) on his frivolous lawsuit against health care reform, I’ve got some material for him to read.

Specifically, I refer Cooch to this:

…neither of the courts handling these cases, nor any other federal court, is likely to address-let alone resolve-the merits of the issue in the context of an attorney general’s lawsuit. Instead, these cases are all but sure to be promptly tossed out of court for procedural reasons obvious to a first-year law student.

The first problem is that state governments are the wrong plaintiffs to challenge the individual insurance mandate. No state will ever have to pay a penny in taxes or be told to take out health insurance: The law applies only to individuals. The attorneys general might have attempted to plug this gap by adding individual plaintiffs to their complaints. But even if they found those people, the AGs couldn’t sue on their behalf right now, because the mandate does not take effect until 2014. Between now and then, all kinds of things could cause plaintiffs to lose their standing to sue: Their health could deteriorate and they could actually need health insurance; they might get a job with health benefits; or they might just have a change of heart. Any or all of these contingencies are quite likely, if a Massachusetts state government survey showing that only 2.6 percent of Massachusetts residents do not comply with the mandatory insurance requirement in that state’s law is any indication. In lawyers’ language, not only will the state attorneys general never have standing to bring these claims on their own; even the claims of real individuals are not yet “ripe.”

So, no “standing,” not yet “ripe,” utterly clueless. Other than that, Cooch’s lawsuit is a great idea! Heh.

By the way, I checked with Chap Petersen – a far better attorney than Ken Cuccinelli will ever be, and that is not meant as a “backhanded compliment” –  and he said “I agree with it in respect to the fact that the Fed law does not take effect til 2014 so the issue is not yet ripe.” Chap added that, “[i]n the meantime, the requirement could be amended or repealed — or the state law (like Virginia’s) that prohibits the requirement could be repealed.” In other words, Cooch’s lawsuit is premature from a legal perspective and should be promptly thrown out of court. If only we could throw Cooch out office for gross incompetence and overall insanity…

Maddow Talks About “Typing Error” and Its Effect on Stock Market’s Erratic Behavior

10

This discussion explores the Stock Market’s erratic behavior Thursday (yesterday).  It apparently occurred because of a typing error.

Update: Though there will be an investigation, it is now believed that automatic trade programs underlie the problematic erratic behavior.

BREAKING: Senate Votes with Wall Street and Against Breaking Up Too-Big-to-Fail Banks

1

Well, it seems the Senate CAN get something done if it wants to.  And it can garner 61 votes for or against something, if it wants to, particularly when it’s to rally on behalf of Wall Street. That’s right. The gutless Senate refused Thursday night to force too-big-to-fail banks to be broken up. According to Huffington Post,  


The amendment, sponsored by Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Ted Kaufman (D-Del.), would have required megabanks to be broken down in size and capped so that their individual failure would not bring down the entire system.

Under Brown-Kaufman, no bank could hold more than 10 percent of the total amount of insured deposits, and a limit would have been placed on liabilities of a single bank to two percent of GDP.

The vote was 61 against 33 for.  And, by the way, Virginia, Mark Warner and Chris Dodd spoke against the amendment. They had dubious company. According to Huffington Post, Judd Gregg said this:


“Basically, what it says is if you’re successful…you’re going to break them up? I mean, where does this stop? Do we take McDonald’s on?”

 

Yeh, I can’t believe the “high” (snark) level of Judd’s thinking either.  This is one of the so-called deficit commission members? Does he really think McDonald’s is equatable to our financial system? Although a company as large as McDonald’s could have implications for the economy, it alone does not have the potential to bring down the country’s, and possibly the world’s economy all at once.

Without the ability to force too-big-to-fail banks to divest themselves, thus reducing their relentless push toward excessively leveraged buyouts and monopolistic practices, there is little hope that the banking system can be secure. Of course, there is much more to do to shore up our banking sector than the focus of this one amendment, including the re-installing of Glass- Steagall. But this amendment was an important one.  It’s pitiful that when it comes to our economy our Senate can come together for destructive purpose, to defeat reform, but not to build it.  

Prince Mark votes against Brown/Kaufman Amendment to limit bank size. Webb votes for it.

1

Doesn’t that tell you everything you need to know about these two.

Webb followed his hero, Andrew Jackson, who killed the Second Bank of the United States, by voting to reduce the concentration of financial power in just 6 banks and force them to reduce the portion of the financial system each controls.

Warner, who was made a rich man by the investment bankers of Wall Street funding his winning ticket in the cellphone lottery, was loyal to his paymasters and protected their “too big to fail” status. First, Mark protects his friends at United Healthcare and now his dear pals on Wall Street.

Both of these guys are Democrats, really?

What Really Happened to “Kal-i-forn-nee-a” (A Lesson for the Rest of America)

2



People are all a-Twitter, even here at BV, about how Arnold is appearing to look “independent” again.  Not so fast. I say, no political stars for Arnold! Arnold now opposes further gas exploration off the Santa Barbara coast.  But there is already extensive oil drilling there, and not without incident either.  So his new-found oppo doesn’t halt gas drilling off the otherwise beautiful coast.

Ka-li-for-nee-a has had a bumpy ride. A good deal of it was the vast conspiracy by energy barons, and possibly even Arnold Schwarzenneger, to rig California markets, bring Gray Davis to his knees and then recall him. What the emboldened energy robbers put California through foretold the banking collapse, and numerous other lesser collapses which caused untold harm to people nonetheless.

Ever since Ken Lay and the energy market extortionists in the Enron mold got through with California, we knew this collapse of California’s economy was coming eventually.  Many remember that initial round of market rigging.  But many are unaware that Ken Lay and the energy pirates conspired to further loot California’s treasury by a second round of energy deregulation, causing energy prices to further skyrocket, plunge people into darkness and even laugh at what they were doing to Grandma (again).  The  players were already laughing. This skulduggery began before Arnold announced his run to replace Gray Davis in the notorious California Recall, normally reserved for real wrongdoing.

We still do not know Arnold’s role in the energy market scandal.  But we do know that…  

Enron orchestrated a meeting on May 17, 2001, to which, at the behest of Ken Lay, Republican LA Mayor Robert Riordan invited Arnold and other high-powered leaders.  The thing is, though, that at the time, Arnold was just an actor. Why invite Arnold?  Most of all why do so in the midst of an energy crisis in California?  What is not widely known is a crucial fact, revealed in a piece by Juan Gonzales here. Just a few weeks before, Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante filed a $9 billion civil suit alleging price gouging by California’s major electric utilities. This may be why, later during the recall movement, the corporate media, Republican recall candidates and Republican operatives come down upon Bustamonte with a vengeance. It wasn’t just Bustamante.  Gray Davis requested the FERC investigate the big power companies, including Enron, and force it to return the $9 billion stolen from California.  In the spiraling upward and contrived energy “market,” power companies forced a poison-pill energy contract upon he state, or the lights might go out.  Indeed they had been manufacturing blackouts and brownouts to bring the state begrudgingly to its terms.  Exposed for their fraud, energy companies could not be surprised that the state of CA wanted the money back.  The federal government wouldn’t help (surprise).  When Arnold was sworn in, talk of the FERC investigation and the return of the 9 billion extorted from the state of California disappeared.

So, to rewind a bit, shortly after the worst of the early blackouts, Arnold, who later feigned amnesia about the meeting, did meet with about 11 others, including Ken Lay, Enron officials, Mayor Riordan, and some business leaders.


Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights worries that Schwarzenegger has been swayed by Ken Lay, the former Enron Corp. chief executive who pushed for California’s 1996 electricity market reforms. Schwarzenegger was among the 12 men and one woman who met with Lay at a Beverly Hills hotel in May 2001. The meeting was organized with the help of then-Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, a Schwarzenegger friend who was a leading Republican candidate for governor at the time. Heller thinks Schwarzenegger should “come clean” about the Lay meeting before he is inaugurated. Schwarzenegger has said he doesn’t recall the meeting, but appears unapologetic about his Enron connections – his transition team includes a former Enron adviser, Robert Grady, now a San Francisco venture capitalist.

There are more references here, here and here. The last one, from the Contra Costa (CA) Times, says this:


In 2001, he met with business leaders, including the future governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to push a “solution” to the energy crisis that would keep the state on track to deregulation.

During a second round of proposed deregulation eagerly pushed by Ken Lay, Arnold was right in the thick of it endorsing, supporting the furthering of the deregulation free-for-all which was laying waste to California’s and citizen’s household budgets.  And then there was the recall.  

As the Enron tapes revealed here everyday people, the rate payers of California, were mercilessly exploited by the energy thieves, who mostly got away with it. The short summary is this:

So, to sum up, Enron and a number of other energy companies engineered a rigged energy market in California.  They held Gov Gray Davis hostage to negotiating for an energy “deal” which bound Calif to high prices on into the future.  Faced with months of blackouts and brownouts and millions of customers screaming for relief, Davis did what he thought he had to do for his customers to have lights on.  And then some of the same people bringing Davis to his knees, used their own Machiavellian tactics as an excuse to get rid of Davis.  This was a take-down of a lawfully elected governor, one more in the Tom Delay/Karl Rove Playbook. That was Chapter 1 of a figurative throwing “the book” at Arnold and his state’s (including the legislature) mismanagement. Chapter 2 involved the 2/3 rule implemented in California guaranteeing that because a 2/3 vote was needed for any tax or budget issue, CA would be ground to a halt. Chapter 3 ushered in the Car Tax Cut, which hurt Virginia, but was embraced by Arnold, and then decimated state revenues. Chapter 4 tells of unrestrained spending.  In Chapter 5, enter Wall Street to cause a bubble no one, least of all a state burdened by the above, could survive.  The whole sorry tale reads like a work of bad fiction, except that it happened.  

Washington Post: UVA Should Fight Cooch’s “politically tinged witch hunt”

1

For once, I completely agree with the Washington Post editorial board on something.

By equating controversial results with legal fraud, Mr. Cuccinelli demonstrates a dangerous disregard for scientific method and academic freedom. The remedy for unsatisfactory data or analysis is public criticism from peers and more data, not a politically tinged witch hunt or, worse, a civil penalty. Scientists and other academics inevitably will get things wrong, and they will use public funds in the process, because failure is as important to producing good scholarship as success. For the commonwealth to persecute scientists because one official or another dislikes their findings is the fastest way to cripple not only its stellar flagship university, but also its entire public higher education system.

That’s why the university should immediately challenge the attorney general’s “civil investigative demand” for documents, which the law allows, and which a university spokeswoman says it is considering. It’s also why Mr. McDonnell should condemn the attorney general and aid the university, making it clear that Mr. Cuccinelli speaks only for himself.

Further, I strongly agree with the Post that UVA needs to fight back against Cooch’s “war on the freedom of academic inquiry,” and that Bob McDonnell needs to “repudiate Mr. Cuccinelli’s abuse of the legal code.” As the Post writes, if UVA and McDonnell don’t fight back against Cooch, “the quality of Virginia’s universities will suffer for years to come.” That’s completely unacceptable.

P.S. The next 3 years, 8 months under Grand Inquisitor Cuccinelli are going to be a nightmare. Whoever thought that Cooch would make a better AG than Steve Shannon needs to have their heads examined, pronto.

UPDATE #1: It looks like UVA will not resist Cooch’s subpoena. That’s very unfortunate.

UPDATE #2: Science Magazine publishes a letter from 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences decrying “the recent escalation of political assaults on scientists in general and on climate scientists in particular.”  With regard to climate science, the letter asserts (correctly), that “there is compelling, comprehensive, and consistent objective evidence that humans are changing the climate in ways that threaten our societies and the ecosystems on which we depend.”  It adds (also correctly) that “recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers, are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence.” Very true.

Auditing the Fed: Where’d Our Money Go?

3

Hear Senator Bernie Sanders’ (VT-I) fiery speech on the floor of the US Senate in support of the Sanders-DeMint bipartisan amendment requring transparency at the Federal Reserve and mandating a GAO audit. Senator Sanders asks a simple question: Where did all the taxpayers’ money go? Who was involved, and were there conflicts of interest? He says at one point, the entire process looks like a scam to him, and he quotes chapter and verse. Example: the Fed gave billions at near-zero interest to big banks to restore liquidity and the flow of loans to small businesses, but it appears the banks used the money instead to buy US government Treasuries paying higher interest to them, and then used the money to pay themselves billions in bonuses—- the audit will find out for the American people. It is impressive, and frightening when you hear even this boiled-down history, and the most frightening thing is that apparently there is a rumor that President Obama will either veto the audit of the Fed, or present an alternative, watered-down version. My question: Do the banks really own our government? Listen to Bernie Sanders.