Home Blog Page 55

Sunday News: “Israelis rally for hostage deal as ceasefire talks continue”; “Trump’s bombardment of dishonesty: Fact-checking 32 of his false claims to Time”; “New Claim Puts ‘WaPo’ Boss in Crosshairs of Murdoch Scandal”; “Using riot shields and chemical irritants, police clear demonstration at [UVA]”

12

by Lowell

Here are a few international, national and Virginia news headlines, political and otherwise, for Sunday, May 5.

FiveThirtyEight’s New “8 Types Of Democrats And Republicans In The House” Analysis Is In *Stark* Contrast to Progressive Punch’s Scores

3

Over at post-Nate-Silver, now-owned-by-ABC-News FiveThirtyEight.com, they’re out with a new analysis, “8 Types Of Democrats And Republicans In The House.” Now that certainly *sounds* intriguing, so I took a look, focusing in on the Virginia delegation, since that’s my area of focus/expertise. I also showed the scores to other Virginia politicos, such as Sam Shirazi, to see what they thought.  A few of my/our takeaways from looking at the analysis include:

  • First of all, there really aren’t any “moderate” Republicans left in the US House of Representatives at this point, given that they’ve pretty much all been purged in Republican primaries (from their right) or have read the writing on the wall (that, over the past 15 years – and certainly since Trump’s nomination in 2016 – the Republican Party has lurched to the MAGA/far-right) and decided not to run for reelection.
  • On point #1, obviously that includes Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA02), who FiveThirtyEight puts into its “Moderate Republicans” group (which, FiveThirtyEight argues, has 39 members) but who definitely is NOT a moderate. Again, the entire Republican Party has moved hard right, so that while there really used to be moderate Republicans, there simply aren’t anymore – they’ve all been purged or quit. As for Rep. Kiggans, see below for Progressive Punch’s scores for Virginia’s U.S. House delegation, and note that Kiggans ranks LAST (!), with a miniscule/godawful 1.91% “lifetime crucial votes” progressive score, and an “F” rating relative to her (purple) district’s lean. In other words, just based on the fact that VA02 is a competitive, “swing” district won narrowly by Joe Biden in 2020, Kiggans theoretically COULD be more “moderate,” but instead, she’s thrown in her lot with the Elise Stefaniks of the world, endorsed Donald Trump for president this year, and racked up a super-low progressive vote percentage.
  • Another issue with FiveThirtyEight’s analysis is that it acts as if there’s a symmetry between Ds and Rs, when in fact the Democratic Party is a broadly centrist/center-left party, while the Republican Party by almost any metric (comparison to its own past, to other conservative parties around the world, etc.) has lurched to the far, far right – what Norm Ornstein and Thomas Mann correctly identified back in 2012 as “an insurgent outlier in American politics...ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.” And it’s only gotten worse – MUCH worse – since 2012, with the Trumpified Republican Party now broadly rejecting the legitimacy of any election it doesn’t win, denying climate science, pushing to ban abortion and even contraceptives, doing Putin’s bidding, etc, etc. So…nope, there really aren’t any “moderate” Republicans, and it’s questionable whether there are any “Compromise Conservatives” either. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party remains a normal, liberal party, similar to the Liberal Democrats in the UK, the Liberal Party in Canada, etc.
  • As for the ratings of Virginia’s U.S. House Delegation, if you compare FiveThirtyEight’s categories — Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA07) as a “Moderate Democrat,” Reps. Gerry Connolly (D-VA11), Bobby Scott (D-VA03) and Don Beyer (D-VA08) as “Progressive Democrats,” Rep. Jennifer Wexton (D-VA10) as a “Core Democrat,” Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA01) as an “Old Guard Republican,” Reps. Ben Cline (R-VA06) and Bob Good (R-VA05) as “Far-Right Obstructionists,” Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA09) as “Far-Right Estabishment,” Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA02) as a “Moderate Republican” — to Progressive Punch’s scores, they really don’t match up.
  • According to Progressive Punch, these are the ratings (in descending order in terms of progressive lifetime crucial votes %, along with their ratings compared to “district lean”) for Virginia’s U.S. House delegation:
    • Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D-VA04): 95.89% lifetime crucial votes %; “A” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA08): 90.63% lifetime crucial votes %; “B” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA03): 86.72% lifetime crucial votes %; “B” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Jennifer Wexton (D-VA10): 84.43% lifetime crucial votes %; “C” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA11): 78.60% lifetime crucial votes %; “F” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA07): 73.51% lifetime crucial votes %; “F” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA09): 11.68% lifetime crucial votes %; “F” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Bob Good (R-VA05): 4.06% lifetime crucial votes %; “F” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA01): 3.35% lifetime crucial votes %; “F” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Ben Cline (R-VA06): 2.89% lifetime crucial votes %; “F” rating compared to district lean
    • Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA02): 1.91% lifetime crucial votes %; “F” rating compared to district lean
  • So…according to Progressive Punch, basically ALL the Republicans in Virginia’s U.S. House delegation – Griffith, Good, Wittman, Cline and Kiggans – are really on the far right, whether “far-right establishment” or “far-right obstructionists.” As for the Democrats, Progressive Punch would presumably agree with FiveThirtyEight.com that Rep. Spanberger is more of a “moderate Democrat,” but it’s much harder to understand how Rep. Wexton would be a “Core Democrat” vs. “Progressive Democrats” Reps. Beyer, Connolly and Scott (note: FiveThirtyEight.com doesn’t put Rep. McClellan in a “type,” because they argue she doesn’t have enough voting data yet to classify her). Also note that if you’re in a more “purple”/competitive district, again, you theoretically can afford to vote in a more “moderate” manner, which makes Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA02)’s hard-right voting record stand out even more.
  • So, what do you think? Do the FiveThirtyEight.com “types” make sense, or are you more with Progressive Punch (and Sam Shirazi and me) on this?

P.S. Here are Progressive Punch’s scores looking only at “crucial votes” in *this* Congress

Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA03): 97.35%
Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D-VA04): 95.89%
Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA08): 95.82%
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA11): 93.56%
Rep. Jennifer Wexton (D-VA10): 85.38%
Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA07): 80.68%
Rep. Bob Good (R-VA05): 4.96%
Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA09): 4.20%
Rep. Ben Cline (R-VA06): 2.65%
Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA02): 1.91%
Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA01): 0.00%

 

Ivy Main: Yes, “Virginia can stay on track to carbon neutrality” – BUT “Asking Dominion’s lobbyists to help make energy policy is like recruiting burglars for a task force on crime prevention”

3

Great stuff as usual from the brilliant Ivy Main, cross posted from her website, “Power for the People VA

Following the General Assembly’s failure either to rein in the explosive growth of power-hungry data centers or to remove obstacles to increasing the supply of renewable energy in Virginia, a lot of people are wondering where we go from here.

Dominion Energy Virginia’s answer, as described in its 2023 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), is “build more fossil fuels.” The utility is pushing forward plans to build new methane gas generating units in Chesterfield. Dominion argues that although its IRP calls for dramatically increased carbon emissions, it sort of complies with the Virginia Clean Economy Act anyway because the VCEA has an escape clause when reliability is at risk.

Dominion does not acknowledge that its own actions contribute to the problem. To be fair, though, it’s a huge problem, and even if our utilities were on board with the VCEA’s carbon-cutting agenda, we would need stronger legislative policy than we have now. Rejoining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is an important priority that Democrats are rightly pursuing, but the need for action goes much further.

Sen. Dave Marsden, D-Fairfax, convened meetings the week before last to hear from utilities, industry members, environmental groups and others to get suggestions on ways to reform the VCEA. The interest groups met separately, and members of one group were not allowed to attend other group sessions to hear what those stakeholders had to say. The meetings were closed-door and confidential, with the express purpose of preventing a nosy public from learning anything through Freedom of Information Act requests.

That secrecy makes me queasy, so I declined the invitation to attend the environmentalists’ session. I’d have cheerfully jettisoned my scruples, though, if I could have been in the utility session to hear what Dominion’s lobbyists were whispering in the senator’s ear. Alas, that was not on offer.

But Marsden is asking the right questions, and of course, I always have answers, even when no one is asking. In my view, Virginia can stay on track to carbon neutrality by adopting four basic principles: data centers must pay their own way, both literally and carbon-wise; solar must be easy to build and interconnect; utilities must not build new fossil generation for “reliability” before exhausting non-carbon solutions; and efficient buildings must be added to the strategy.

Let’s start with the elephant outgrowing the room.

Data centers are sucking up all the energy

Without action, data centers will soon overtake residential customers to become Dominion’s largest category of customer. Already, they are driving the utility’s decision-making, as we saw from Dominion’s IRP. This year, the General Assembly deferred action to address the energy crisis until it sees the results of a study being undertaken by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC).

It now appears that study won’t be published before the 2025 session convenes, and in fact there does not appear to be a deadline of any kind. Yet we already know enough about data center energy demand and its consequences for everyone else that legislators will be derelict in their duty if they put off all action until 2026.

The General Assembly must choose from three options if it still cares about the energy transition: stop the growth of the data center industry in Virginia, put the onus on data centers to source their own clean energy from the grid, or dramatically increase renewable energy generation and power line construction.

Lawmakers show no desire to stop all data center growth, but as I’ve urged before, they can and should establish a joint state-local task force to choose appropriate sites for growth based on energy and transmission availability, water resource adequacy and good-neighbor factors, like distance from residential communities and parkland.

Legislators should also require data centers to meet industry-best standards for energy efficiency, use alternatives to diesel generators for backup power and source carbon-free energy from facilities located on the grid that serves Virginia. They could buy this power either on their own or through a specially-designed utility tariff, as long as it meets all of their needs on a 24/7, hourly basis. In no case should other customers see higher electricity bills for infrastructure that’s only needed because of data centers.

These measures will take time to put in place, yet data center development is proceeding apace while the General Assembly takes its nap. There is no avoiding Virginia’s need for a lot more carbon-free generation, pretty much right away. A couple of small modular nuclear reactors ten years from now aren’t a solution.

Don’t expect climate leadership from Dominion

Dominion’s fossil-heavy IRP marked a sharp break away from the climate report that the company released just months before, which projected solar dominating the grid by 2040. Whether the IRP should be dismissed as political pandering to a conservative governor, or taken in earnest to mean the utility has thrown in the towel on renewable energy, is something of a Rorschach test for Virginia leaders.

When Dominion releases its 2024 IRP this fall, we may get more clarity about what the company really thinks. More likely, we will still be left guessing. Dominion has a long history of playing to both sides to get what it wants, and what it wants is profit.

There’s nothing wrong with a company making a profit, of course, as long as the company isn’t also allowed to make the rules it plays by. Asking Dominion’s lobbyists to help make energy policy is like recruiting burglars for a task force on crime prevention.

Make it easier to build solar

While Virginia counties vie with each other to attract data centers, some are notably less keen on solar farms. Sprawling developments of windowless warehouses that suck power? Yes, they say. Grassy fields lined with rows of solar panels that produce power? No. Such is the horror with which some people view solar that localities have adopted moratoriums, acreage caps and other limits designed to keep projects at bay. The result is that an already-slow process for siting solar projects is getting even slower, more unpredictable and more expensive.

Lawmakers rejected legislation this year that would have allowed the State Corporation Commission to overrule local permit denials. Yet it seems doubtful whether, in a Dillon Rule state like ours, local governments actually have the authority to enact blanket prohibitions and caps on specific kinds of land use. Legislators may want to ask the attorney general to clarify this point rather than waiting for landowners to challenge in court a locality’s refusal to let them put solar panels on their property.

If the AG (or a court) rules these barriers illegal, localities would have to go back to evaluating the merits of project applications on a case-by-case basis — hardly a bad result. But it would be wiser and more orderly to pass legislation spelling out under what circumstances a local government may reject a solar project, and what the landowner’s recourse should be.

New gas plants are the wrong solution for reliability

Though Dominion’s 2023 IRP didn’t win approval from the SCC, Dominion is going ahead with plans to build new methane gas combustion turbines in Chesterfield. Given that these “peaker” plants generate dirty power at a high price, Dominion should not be permitted to build gas combustion turbines if other alternatives are available.

Which they are. Demand-response programs, advanced grid technologies and batteries charged by renewable energy are superior to gas peakers for reasons of cost, air quality and climate impact.

Dominion is building some large batteries and testing long-duration battery storage technologies (and of course, Virginia already has the largest pumped storage facility in the world), but our utilities have not even begun to tap the potential of batteries in homes and businesses. Subsidizing the purchase of batteries by homeowners and businesses in exchange for the ability to draw on the batteries for peaking power, as some utilities do, would also build resilience into the grid and address power outages more cheaply than burying lines.

Imagine: If data centers had installed batteries instead of the 11 gigawatts of diesel generators at Loudoun and Fairfax County data centers, Virginia would already have more battery storage capacity than any country in the world.

Let everyone build solar

The VCEA calls for 35% of its solar target to be satisfied by third-party developers. The purpose of this set-aside is two-fold: to attract more private capital, and to use competition to keep a lid on prices. Unfortunately, the SCC accepted Dominion’s argument that 35% should be read as a ceiling as well as a floor, to the detriment of ratepayers and solar developers. With Dominion now reneging on its solar commitments, it’s more important than ever that private developers be allowed to step in. One bill in the 2024 session would have corrected this problem by explicitly making 35% the minimum. The General Assembly should adopt that measure.

Fix interconnection

Possibly the most inexplicable failure of the General Assembly this year was failing to pass legislation to resolve the dispute between Dominion and commercial customers over interconnection requirements. The onerous requirements that Dominion adopted in December of 2022  — imposed even in the face of a contrary SCC ruling — have wreaked havoc on plans by local governments to put solar on public buildings and schools. That is fine with Dominion; though the goal of the new requirements was to acquire upgraded distribution infrastructure at no cost to itself, its monopolistic lizard brain is equally satisfied with the result of shutting down competition from small solar companies.

Legislators should not accept this result, though. The General Assembly adopted net metering years ago because encouraging residents and businesses to go solar is good for the economy and makes communities more resilient. Support for distributed renewable energy is even written into the Virginia Code as official policy.

And distributed solar is hugely popular. Indeed, the very people who oppose utility-scale solar projects almost inevitably argue that society should maximize rooftop solar instead. In this they are at least half right: If we are really going to meet the energy challenge ahead of us, the very least we can do is milk every kilowatt-hour from sunshine falling on rooftops.

Customers have always paid to interconnect their solar to the utility’s grid. The dispute between Dominion and its customers is about whether Dominion can insist they pay the entire cost of expensive new fiber-optic wire and other cool technology that could make the distribution grid better for everyone, but which any one customer can’t afford. These upgrades could enable not just more solar but also electric vehicle charging in our communities, vehicle-to-grid technology and programs allowing utilities to make use of customers’ battery storage. But if the technology really is that valuable (a determination that should be made by the SCC, not Dominion), then getting it shouldn’t depend on how deep a customer’s pocket is — especially when that customer is a local government and, therefore, effectively, the Virginia taxpayer.

This year’s interconnection bill would have allowed a utility to recover the costs of these grid upgrades from ratepayers, with SCC oversight. Even Dominion would have been better off with the bill, something it would have recognized if its lizard brain weren’t in charge at the time. The General Assembly should pass the bill.

An untapped three gigawatts of energy are waiting off our coast

Dominion’s 2,600 megawatt Virginia offshore wind project is due to begin construction this year, but it is not the only game in town. The Kitty Hawk offshore wind area situated off North Carolina can deliver up to 3,500 megawatts of energy through a cable that will come ashore at Virginia Beach. All that is holding up the project is the lack of a customer.  Offshore wind is more expensive than solar, but we have a lot of power-hungry data centers who could pay a clean energy tariff that would include Kitty Hawk wind.

Maximize efficiency in buildings

Possibly the best piece of energy legislation to pass this year was the bill that directs local governments and schools to build to higher efficiency standards and incorporate renewable energy, as appropriate. The language could have been even stronger, but as it is, it will deliver significant cost savings for taxpayers.

In fact, local governments will now build to better standards than most homeowners get for themselves when they buy a house.  That’s because Virginia’s residential building code is pathetically behind the times when it comes to energy efficiency. Home buyers and renters would save more than enough money on utility bills to cover the upfront cost of better housing construction, but builders won’t voluntarily meet higher standards because it reduces profits. That should not be acceptable.

Legislation passed in 2021 directed the Board of Housing and Community Development to consider amendments that would strengthen the building code. BHCD, which is dominated by builder and real estate interests, simply ignored the law. The matter is now in litigation (and the governor is trying to weaken the code even further), but the General Assembly could resolve the matter by directing BHCD to adopt efficiency measures at least as strong as the national standards set by the International Building Code Council (itself under fire for allowing builder interests to weaken efficiency standards), and to allow local governments to adopt stronger “stretch codes” to help residents save even more money and energy.

Going further, new and renovated buildings should be required to use electricity in place of methane gas, oil or propane for heating, cooling and appliances wherever practicable. Though building electrification increases electricity consumption, electricity is a more efficient technology than burning fossil fuels in the home, so it contributes to lower energy costs for residents and a smaller carbon footprint for the state overall.

It’s a shame the General Assembly settled for simply not going backwards this year, but it is a good sign that Marsden and others are not waiting for next year to consider ways to get us back on the carbon-cutting wagon. With the climate clock ticking, we have no more time to lose.

 

A version of this article appeared in the Virginia Mercury on April 29, 2024.

Saturday News: “G-7 Eyes Plan on US-Led $50 Billion Aid Package for Ukraine”; “It’s Time to Tax the Billionaires”; “Hope Hicks’ testimony was a nightmare for Trump”; “Meet the candidates: Twelve Democrats run to succeed Rep. Jennifer Wexton”

16

by Lowell

Here are a few international, national and Virginia news headlines, political and otherwise, for Saturday, May 4.

VA Lt. Gov. Winsome Sears Decries Protesters “Destroying Your Buildings,” “Showing Up With Helmets…Gas Masks…Bear Sprays,” Assaulting Police. Nope, She’s Not Talking About the 1/6/21 Violent Insurrection.

3

Earlier today, Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Sears was on Fox “News” (actually, right-wing propaganda 24/7). In the following video clip, Sears decries the college campus protesters (and yes, people have the right to express their views, but NO – vandalism, destruction of college property, hate speech, etc. are 100% unacceptable, as President Biden stated yesterday).

As you listen to what Sears has to say, it’s hard not to flash back to what Trump-supporting violent insurrectionists did on January 6, 2021. To her credit, on the evening of that terrible day, Sears decried the violence, tweeting, “Folks, this is not the way to fight. Come home to your families! Let the courts decide! We survived the Civil War; we will survive this!

So now that the evil, criminal, treasonous individual – Donald Trump – who incited those violent insurrectionists, is yet AGAIN – disgustingly – the Republican nominee for president, perhaps it’s time for Republicans to recall how horrified many of them were on 1/6/21 and to act accordingly, by rejecting Trump and forming a temporary pro-democracy coalition with Democrats and small-d democrats of all types. Might someone like Winsome Sears, who hasn’t endorsed Trump, be willing to join such a coalition?  Doubtful, for sure, but it certainly would be a powerful, pro-American thing to do at this perilous point in our history.

With that, see below for video of Sears’ comments, followed by some images from January 6, 2021.

“You don’t negotiate with people who are destroying your buildings. You don’t negotiate with people who have, you see them showing up with helmets, they’re showing up with gas masks. We have seen here in Virginia where you have a pickup trucks dropping off rocks and sticks, bear sprays and all of that. Police were assaulted. Have we not learned anything?”

“You don’t negotiate with people who are destroying your buildings.”

“You don’t negotiate with people who have, you see them showing up with helmets, they’re showing up with gas masks.”

“you have a pickup trucks dropping off rocks and sticks, bear sprays and all of that.”

“Police were assaulted.” 

Video: Biden-Harris 2024 Launches New Latino Media Blitz With Ad Focused on Trump’s Attacks on Reproductive Freedom

2

asdf

NEW AD: Biden-Harris 2024 Launches New Latino Media Blitz With Ad Focused on Trump’s Attacks on Reproductive Freedom

“A guy like Donald Trump that attacks women, takes away their freedom, and brags about it? That’s not tough.”

Senator Padilla: “Taking away women’s rights doesn’t make you tough, but that’s exactly what you would expect from a wannabe dictator who has spent his entire political career tearing other people down.”

This morning, Biden-Harris 2024 is launching a new Latino paid media blitz in battleground states with a new ad in English and Spanish, “Tough.”

In “Tough,” Marine Corps veteran and Las Vegas union carpenter Cesar Carreon who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan slams Donald Trump for his attacks on women and their rights and freedoms. Carreon hits Trump for bragging about his attacks on women, while making clear Biden will protect his daughters and their freedoms.

This ad is part of the campaign’s new, seven-figure paid media blitz targeting Latino voters, and will run in English and Spanish on TV, radio, and digital platforms across the battleground states, and will have both 15 and 30 second versions.

“Tough” comes the day after the two-year anniversary of the leaked Dobbs decision and on the heels of the launch of the new ad “Prosecute” underscoring Trump’s plans to ramp up attacks on reproductive freedom if he wins in November.

The following is a statement from National Advisory Board Member Senator Alex Padilla on Trump’s attacks on women and reproductive rights:

“Taking away women’s rights doesn’t make you tough, but that’s exactly what you would expect from a wannabe dictator who has spent his entire political career tearing other people down. When it comes to the ongoing assault on women’s reproductive freedom by MAGA Republicans, the stakes for Latinos, and especially Latinas, couldn’t be more clear.

“Donald Trump is betting against the knowledge and power of the Latino community. It’s a bad bet. Come November, we will be decisive in reelecting President Biden and Vice President Harris, two leaders who trust women, who respect our community, and who fight every single day for our rights.”

Reproductive freedom is under attack for millions of Latinas across the country, with nearly 6.5 million Latinas (42% of all Latinas ages 15-49) living in the 26 states that have banned or are likely to ban abortion, and Latino voters consistently list abortion as one of the top issues they will vote on.

WATCH “TOUGH” HERE

WATCH “FUERTE” HERE

CESAR CARREON: I’m a Marine. I served in Iraq and Afghanistan. I know what tough is. And a guy like Donald Trump that attacks women, takes away their freedom, and brags about it? That’s not tough. If he wants to take any more freedoms away from my three daughters, he’ll have to come through me first. Me? I’m with Joe Biden, because he’ll give my daughters their freedom back.

PRESIDENT BIDEN: I’m Joe Biden and I approve this message.

###

Paid for by Biden for President

Friday News: Asia Sweltering Under “by far the most extreme event in world climatic history”; Trump “using campus protests to stoke right-wing violence for the election”; “Stunning moment” in Trump Trial; Virginia Early Voting Starts Today

30

by Lowell

Here are a few international, national and Virginia news headlines, political and otherwise, for Friday, May 3.

Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Project Moving Forward On Schedule

1

From the Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN):

Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Project Moving Forward On Schedule

Baseless claims from fossil-fuel-linked groups repeatedly disproven by scientists

Richmond, VA — Construction of the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Project (CVOW) remains on schedule following a routine order from a federal judge requesting supplemental documentation from Dominion Energy. This documentation will assist Dominion in dismissing a baseless petition from a Koch-funded disinformation group, the Heartland Institute, most famous for a decades-long effort to deny the negative health impacts of smoking.

Contrary to repeatedly debunked claims perpetuated in the Heartland petition, there is no scientific evidence that offshore wind construction has any negative impact on whale populations. Surveying tools used to geophysically map the area during pre-construction use high-frequency sources that are absorbed by the water and do not reach the whale population. Marine conservation scientists at Duke University recently concluded there is “zero chance” of a link between the surveying technology and whale deaths.

“The Coastal Offshore Wind Project has gone through extensive environmental review from federal and state agencies and has checked every box for responsible development and wildlife management. This will be the biggest offshore wind project in the United States, and an essential step to tackling the single greatest threat to wildlife, our economy, and human health – climate change. We look forward to celebrating this monumental achievement when the turbines start to spin in 2026,” said Victoria Higgins, Virginia Director for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

Upon completion, the CVOW project will produce enough clean, renewable energy to power 660,000 homes.

#   #   #


Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. Founded in 2002, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC.

Detailed Elections Data Since 2008 Shows Which CDs in Virginia Have Been Moving in the “Blue” or “Red” Directions

1

Very interesting stuff from the UVA Center for Politics/Sabato’s Crystal Ball/J. Miles Coleman – nice job!

  • “After being a single-digit Republican-won district for the 2008, 2012, and 2016 cycles, the Virginia Beach-area 2nd District gave Biden 51% of the two-party vote in 2020.
  • “VA-10, which is centered in Loudoun County, began as a light blue district in 2008, barely backed Mitt Romney in 2012, but has since voted more Democratic than the state overall.”
  • “On the other end of the state, a similar trend in the opposite direction can be seen in Virginia’s 9th district. In 2008, McCain carried the southwestern VA-9 by less than a 20-point margin. By 2016, Trump had more than doubled that advantage, carrying it by 43 points, and lost only a little ground there in 2020. Though the movement has been less pronounced, VA-6, which contains the Shenandoah Valley and the Roanoke area, has followed a similar path—over the four elections since 2008, GOP margins there have gone up by about 8 points. Aside from those two Appalachian districts, the only other district in the state that became redder since 2008 was the 5th District.”
  • “Though the Biden-won, but Republican-held, VA-2 is obviously the Democrats’ most realistic target in the state, VA-1, a consistently Republican district, has become steadily less so since 2008. In 2020, Trump’s 6.7-point margin there represented a double-digit decline from McCain’s 17% margin in the district. This makes VA-1 the bluest trending Republican-held seat in the state.”

In sum: it looks like VA05, VA06 and VA09 are lost causes for Democrats over the foreseeable future, but VA01 could have hope in a few cycles. As for VA02, it’s definitely moved in the “blue” direction, as have VA07 and VA10. So let’s make sure we win VA02 this November (and ditch the deplorable Jen Kiggans) – and of course hold VA07 (where Rep. Abigail Spanberger isn’t running for reelection) and VA10 (where Rep. Jennifer Wexton is retiring due to serious, tragic health issues).

Video: Biden Nails It – “As President, I will always defend free speech and I will always be just as strong in standing up for the rule of law.”

5

President Biden nails it:

“Before I head to North Carolina, I wanted to speak a few moments about what’s going on on our college campuses here. We’ve all seen images and they put to the test two fundamental American principles – the first is the right to free speech and for people to peacefully assemble and make their voices heard; the second is the rule of law. Both must be upheld. We are not an authoritarian nation where we silence people or squash dissent. The American people are heard. In fact, peaceful protest is in the best tradition of how Americans respond to consequential issues. But – but – neither are we a lawless country. We are a civil society. And order must prevail.

Throughout our history, we’ve often faced moments like this, because we are a big, diverse, freethinking and freedom-loving nation. In moments like this, there are always those who rush in to to score political points. But this isn’t a moment for politics, it’s a moment for clarity. So let me be clear – peaceful protest in America, violent protest is not protected; peaceful protest is. It’s against the law when violence occurs. Destroying property is not a peaceful protest; it’s against the law. Vandalism, trespassing, breaking windows, shutting down campuses, forcing the cancellation of classes and graduations – none of this is a peaceful protest. Threatening people, intimidating people, instilling fear in people is not peaceful protest – it’s against the law. Dissent is essential to democracy, but dissent must never lead to disorder or to denying the rights of others so students can finish the semester and their college education.

Look, it’s basically a matter of fairness, it’s a matter of what’s right. There’s the right to protest, but not the right to cause chaos. People have the right to get an education, the right to get a degree, the right to walk across the campus safely without fear of being attacked. But let’s be clear about this as well – there should be no place on any campus, no place in America for anti-Semitism or threats of violence against Jewish students. There is no place for hate speech or violence of any kind, whether it’s anti-Semitism, Islamophobia or discrimination against Arab Americans or Palestinian Americans – it’s simply wrong. There’s no place for racism in America. It’s all wrong, it’s unAmerican.

I understand people have strong feelings and deep convictions. In America, we respect the right and protect the right for them to express that. But it doesn’t mean anything goes. It needs to be done without violence, without destruction, without hate, and within the law….Make no mistake, as president, I will always defend free speech and I will always be just as strong in standing up for the rule of law. That’s my responsibility to you, the American people, my obligation to the Constitution. Thank you very much.”

Question: “Have the protests forced you to reconsider any of the policies with regard to the region?”
President Biden: “No.”
Question: “Do you think the National Guard should intervene?”
President Biden: “No.”