Monthly Archives: June 2014

The Week In Oil – Facepalm Edition

Governor Pat McCrory. By Hal Goodtree from Cary, North Carolina, USA (Pat McCrory) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

This last week saw a bumper crop of stories dealing with the oil industry, and most of them weren’t pretty. Some “highlights” from the last week:

On June 4, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory signed the Energy Modernization Act. This law will allow drilling permits to be issued 61 days after the state Mining and Energy Commission approves the final rules, which is expected to happen by next summer. It also makes disclosing the chemicals used in fracking a crime. And, of course, the companies doing the fracking will be subsidized by North Carolina taxpayers. I discussed why the North Carolina law doesn’t make sense in a post from a couple weeks ago.

Fire boat response crews battle the blazing remnants of the offshore oil rig Deepwater Horizon. A Coast Guard MH-65C dolphin rescue helicopter and crew document the fire while searching for survivors. Multiple Coast Guard helicopters, planes and cutters responded to rescue the Deepwater Horizon’s 126 person crew. Photo courtesy US Coast Guard (public Domain) via Wikimedia Commons

On June 6, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal signed into law a bill aimed at killing a lawsuit filed by a New Orleans area regional levee board against 97 oil and gas companies over environmental damage to the wetlands caused by the companies. In a written statement, Jindal stated: “This bill will help stop frivolous lawsuits and create a more fair and predictable legal environment, and I am proud to sign it into law,” However, the Louisiana Attorney General and local parish officials are concerned that the law could negatively affect state and government claims against BP over the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Also on June 6, the Bismarck Tribune reported that U.S. railways are asking states to sign agreements saying that they won’t disclose details of volatile oil shipments to the public. Federal officials last month ordered the railroads to disclose the information to the states after the recent accidents in various states and Canada. The disclosures include route details, volumes of oil carried and emergency-response information for trains hauling 1 million gallons or more of crude. BNSF, Union Pacific and CSX are claiming the information is security sensitive and that releasing it could be competitively damaging. State officials, on the other hand, said that communities need to know about the trains and that an agreement would violate open-records laws.

As I was reading the Bismarck Tribune article, I noticed more energy news links at the bottom of the page. An oil spill of 700 barrels, another of 300 barrels and a salt brine spill have all happened in the last three days in North Dakota. While these spills might not sound large, the oil industry is notorious in underreporting the size of oil spills. Furthermore, these are only the reported spills; North Dakota’s also notorious for the number of oil spills that go unreported.

Isn’t it about time that we say no to letting the energy companies write our laws?

The Price of Principle

Leave a reply

By U.S. Air Force photo illustration by Airman 1st Class Kenna Jackson [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Letting your mind be “occupied” means you consider the principle at play in most interactions you have in life. From the grocery clerk to the solicitor at the door, you must pause and ask yourself, “How does this align with the tenants and values of the Occupy movement?”

We operate our lives much like our vehicles. We have an assumed trust that the oncoming car will not cross the center line and enter our lane. We assume everyone will stop at a four-way stop, and that motorists will not go down a one-way street the wrong direction. By following the basic rules, we arrive at our destinations safely. It is a grand bargain that works for everyone on the road.

Sometimes there is a collision. Like the scene of any bad accident, you realize that every witness sees things differently. Even if the other driver was impaired, it does not change the fact that the “rules” were not followed and someone pays. Maybe it is as serious as the loss of life, maybe it is simply increased insurance premiums. But someone pays.

So it is when we find things that we may hold very dear to us but, for whatever reason, they no longer align with the tenants and values of the Occupy Movement, nor in the thinking of an “occupied mind.” This is when you pause and say “I must make a choice. What means more, this “thing” or the principles I value and the voice I have chosen? Will making a stand make a difference, and does it matter if I try, or can I just let this one go?”

One of the firmest stands I have made in my life is the solidarity I take with domestic violence and rape survivors. Unwavering in my commitment to educate those who live in ignorance of the cultures in our society that perpetuate these issues and generate more victims, I can not make exception even if I want to.

When I met my husband, he had been participating in a hobby/craft for decades. His involvement introduced me to a new world, where I made many friends and enjoyed myself immensely. It became the center of our social life and allowed us time with other couples with like interests.

Until.

Until we learned that one of the “members” of the group we were not as close to was a convicted felon who had beat the face of his then-wife in with the butt of a gun. He is serving his “extended supervision” portion of his sentence by violating the terms of the court every chance he gets in order to participate in the activities as though every thing is as acceptable as a speeding ticket. When he is arrested for his infractions, he blames his now ex-wife for reporting him, not recognizing it was his choice to violate the terms of his sentence in the first place.

As a result, I have felt forced to withdraw my participation and isolate myself from the group of friends I truly enjoy, all in order to first; teach them that this convicted felon’s behavior is not acceptable, and secondly, to prevent the PTSD and panic disorders triggered by this particular individuals’ actions from occurring. My husband is still considering if he can continue participation much longer.

Is this what I wanted? NO. Did I have a choice? NO.

But when when your principles means more than the things in life that humor you, it is worth the stand. When I know I affected at least one life with my decision, it is the start of change.

What change are you willing to stand up to make?

Contrasts In Climate Science

Leave a reply

Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons

On June 2, the EPA made the largest step yet towards regulating carbon emissions from power plants by releasing its proposed guidelines for limiting the amount of carbon pollution that existing power plants can dump into the atmosphere. The new guidelines call for cutting carbon emissions from existing fossil fuel power plants 25% from 2005 levels, and 30% from the same 2005 levels by 2030. The proposal calls for “state-specific rate-based goals for carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector, as well as guidelines for states to follow in developing plans to achieve the state-specific goals.”

By just cutting the carbon emissions from the electricity sector (the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.) by that 25% in six years, there would be 300 million tons less of CO2 emitted per year. One of the proposed methods for regulating carbon emissions calls for cap-and-trade clean energy incentives.

Carbon cap-and trade is when you place a hard cap on the overall amount of carbon participants in the system can emit in a given year, and then slice that cap up into permits — all worth a ton of carbon each — that emitters can then buy and sell among themselves. A working system along these lines called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is already in place in nine northeastern states. This past week, it held the most successful auction of carbon permits it’s had in the six years it’s been in existence, By aggressively lowering limits on carbon emissions from 165 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2013 to 91 million tons in 2014, the carbon permits sold fetched a record $5.02 per ton, up from the mandatory $2 per ton bottom that they’d been at since the program launch. The limit will continue to drop yearly, with a 78 million ton limit proposed for 2020.

Then there’s the other side. Just before the Texas Republican Party convention started on Thursday, the temporary party platform was released. The good news? Unlike the 2012 platform, there’s no longer a call for the EPA to be abolished, and climate change is mentioned. The bad news? It demands the elimination of “onerous environmental regulations”, and has this to say about climate change; “While we all strive to be good stewards of the earth, ‘climate change’ is a political agenda which attempts to control every aspect of our lives. We urge government at all levels to ignore any plea for money to fund global climate change or ‘climate justice’ initiatives.”

The contrast couldn’t be sharper. On one side, you have nine heavily industrialized states working together to combat carbon emissions, and on the other side you have a state that wants to deregulate the power industry and looks at climate change as a political agenda rather than as scientific fact. Climate change is real, and ignoring the facts isn’t going to make it go away.

Honor Them All

Leave a reply

Landing at Omaha Beach, June 6,1944. By Chief Photographer’s Mate (CPHoM) Robert F. Sargent. National Archives via Wikimedia Commons

Seventy years ago today, 160,000 American, British and Canadian troops landed on the beach at Normandy. On this, the first day of the largest seaborne invasion in history, the Allied forces suffered at least 12,000 casualties with 4,414 confirmed dead. And, while they didn’t achieve all the goals they had set for that day, they had established a firm beachead for future operations, By the end of the month, 875,000 troops will have landed in Normandy, Seven weeks after the initial landing, Operation Cobra broke through the German lines and secured northwestern France for the Allies.

When I was young, D-Day was more remembered than it is today for the most part. I was born ten years after the war had ended, and many people who I knew had been part of the landings. They came home after the war and went to school, bought a house or started a business with GI loans given to them by a grateful country. Others had served in Korea, and did the same as the returning WWII veterans. We were a country well acquainted with the horrors of war, and we realized the debt we owed to those who fought them for us.

These days, there’s hardly a mention of D-Day most years; maybe a fifteen minute segment on the evening news, and a couple filler stories during the day. Today is different in that regard, due to it being it’s the 70th anniversary. There’s ceremonies in Normandy, and media crews from all over the world. For this day, we put the few veterans left who were there that day on a pedestal, and honor them and the ones they served with. Then, the ceremonies are over, and the TV cameras are gone, and everybody settles into their normal routine with a feeling oh “Yes, we paid honor to those who served.”

Meanwhile, 22 veterans commit suicide every day; a majority of them having served in Vietnam, a conflict with which some of the more debilitating effects on veterans are finally covered by the VA 40 years after the war ended. Many of our veterans come home disabled from our recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. More and more veterans and their families need assistance such as food stamps to get by in today’s America. The unemployment rate for recent veterans runs at least three percentage points above the national average. The VA is understaffed, underfunded and overwhelmed by the number of cases, and thus is a bureaucratic nightmare. Yet, we have those in our government who are happy to send our young men and women off to war, yet are adamant against paying our side of the bargain we made with them when they went off to fight for us.

On this D-Day, Occupy World Writes remembers all our veterans, and salutes them. We realize the enormous debt each of us owes to them, and we will continue to fight for the benefits they’ve earned by their service.

Women May Vote in 1920

Leave a reply

By occupostal for Occupy World Writes

That was the subheader for a front page NY Times article of June 5, 1919 reporting that the U.S. Senate had just passed the suffrage amendment bill the day before, joining the U.S. House of Representatives.

The ratification process then began in the states, but it had already gained sufficient momentum to ensure that the amendment would become reality in time to add women to the roll of voters in the next year’s presidential election.

Photo via Wikipedia, from Outlook, 6/25/19 (copyright expired)

Photo via Wikipedia, from Outlook, 6/25/1919 (copyright expired)

Today we may think that it was about time for this event to happen, although given pre-contemporary communications and our own political foundering right now, it looks like a pretty quick ride from Congress through the two-thirds of states required for ratification. (Never mind that the last state to ratify the amendment long after its official adoption did so in 1984. That’s about 36 years after Mr. Orwell wrote his famous novel titled after the same date, when American women had been voting for nearly three decades. Whether or not there’s any irony to be found in this, it’s a striking juxtaposition.)

But we should remember that it was an even longer haul before June 4, 1919. The process of gaining suffrage had begun with the amendment’s text first drafted by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and then introduced to Congress in January 1878. The long haul to successful passage reflects social and cultural changes that we may now take for granted, but which had to happen and still continue to happen in many respects beyond the mere right to vote for both sexes to this day.

A year later and just before women’s participation first began with that year’s presidential election, a NY Times editorial from August 29, 1920 titled The Woman of Thirty asked:

“What is to be the upshot? It is doubtless true that women will divide much as men have done among the several parties. There will be no solid ‘woman vote.’ Having individual opinions and preferences, they will be individually swayed by them in respect to any given political issue or personality. But this is only half of the story. Even the democratic franchise cannot quite unsex either men or women. Hitherto the distinctively feminine instincts and aspirations have centered in winning the right of suffrage; but now that it is won, a vast, united force has been let loose. That political issues and leaders should continue to be merely man-made is inconceivable.”

“It is a fair guess, and indeed a fact already exemplified, that one distinctive interest of the woman politician will be in what is called welfare legislation – the regulation of the conditions of life and of industry with reference to the health and vigor of the nation, for the present and especially for future generations….”

Sometimes, the more things change, the more they seem to stay the same at the core. But we should celebrate today’s momentous change for American women, and celebrate that the core of our hopes and needs has been enlarged, enriched by many more voices to express our common experience.

Return To The Square

Leave a reply

Tiananmen Square. Photo via Wikimedia Commons

25 years ago today, the world watched in horror as CNN reporters told of the Chinese army opening fire on unarmed protesters in Tiananmen Square. This was the first time that a popular uprising was broadcast around the globe; the beginning of the now common coverage of revolutions and uprisings we’ve become accustomed to. But, what about the backstory? What led to the events of the night of June 3 and morning of June 4?

On April 15 of that year, Hu Yaobang died. Formerly the General Secretary of the Communist Party, The day after Hu’s death, thousands of university students gathered at Tiananmen Square to mourn his passing and called for government accountability, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and the restoration of workers’ control over industry. The next week, 100,000 marched to the Square in defiance of the authorities to watch the live broadcast of Hu’s funeral.

On April 22, rioting broke out in the cities of Changsha and Xi’an, with 350 being arrested. On April 23, the Beijing Students’ Autonomous Federation called for a student strike at Beijing universities. In Wuhan, students protested against the provincial government. The General Secretary of the Communist Party,

On April 26, People’s Daily (the official party newspaper) had a front page editorial calling the student movement an anti-government, anti-party revolt. Meant to scare the students into submission, it had the opposite effect. On April 27, 50,000 to 100,000 students marched to the Square, prompting the government to make slight concessions. On May 4, 100,000 students again marched to the square, and afterwards, the universities opened again.

On May 13, two days before Mikhail Gorbachev was to come to Beijing for a state visit, students started a hunger strike in the Square. As the welcoming ceremony for Gorbachev was to be held in the Square, the students hoped to use it as a bargaining chip with the government. By the afternoon, there were 300,000 students in the Square; the welcoming ceremony was moved to the airport. On May 17, over a million people demonstrated in the Square. On May 20, martial law was declared in Beijing, with 250,000 troops eventually being in Beijing. But, the army was stopped by the protesters, and retreated to bases around the city on May 24.

On June 2, Premier Deng Xiaoping and the remaining members of the Politburo (two had been ousted in May) agreed to clear the Square so that “the riot can be halted and order be restored to the Capital.” While acknowledging the need for clearing the Square as peacefully as possible, They authorized the troops to use force if the protesters didn’t cooperate. The rest is well known.

Yesterday, foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei told reporters: “The Chinese government long ago reached a conclusion about the political turmoil at the end of the 1980s, In the last three decades and more of reform and opening up, China’s enormous achievements in social and economic development have received worldwide attention. The building of democracy and the rule of law have continued to be perfected.”

But, while living standards have been dramatically improved, the suppression of protest has increased, if anything. The Chinese leaders haven’t forgotten what happened 25 years ago, and are quick to break up any movements, as well as keep an eye on dissidents. Social media such as Facebook is banned, and the government has tight control over the Internet in China. The government’s as corrupt as ever, and power’s in the hands of a very few.

There are protests – some estimate as many as 200,000 of over 50 people every year – but the local authorities are quick to quell them. And, the government still has enormous control over all forms of media.

Occupy World Writes remembers the events of 25 years ago at Tiananmen Square. We remember the courage exemplified in the famous picture of the lone student facing down the tanks in the Square. We remember the carnage – and we remember the hope. We call on the Chinese government to allow its citizens free access to the outside world, and to open a true dialog with the people it’s supposed to be serving. Only then will China be capable of being all it can be.

They Aren’t The Problem

Leave a reply

Photo via Twitter

Last week, between 20 and 30 teenage girls in the Labrador and Newfoundland provinces of Canada were sent home from school for wearing sleeveless shirts that exposed their bra straps. Emily Connors, one of the girls, told CBC News that the girls were told it was “because of our bra straps, and that it was inappropriate because some of the male teachers, and male students found it distracting for them.” Other students told the National Post that the school stated that their bare shoulders could “invite unneeded attention” from male students because “boys will be boys.”

It’s been unseasonably warm in Canada this spring, and the girls were dressing this way to be comfortable. And, they aren’t the only ones to get this response. In another example from last week, Lindsey Stocker, a 15 year old Quebec student, was told to change her shorts after the school decided they were too short. Lindsey described the incident; “In front of all my peers and my teacher they said I had to change. And when I said no they said I was making a bad choice. They kept shaking their heads. In front of everybody.”

“They continued to tell me would be suspended if I didn’t start following the rules. When I told them I didn’t understand why I had to change they told me that it doesn’t matter – I don’t have to understand the rules, I just have to comply by them. She also claims that the rules were meant to “target girls,” and that school officials “don’t really care what guys wear.”

And, the Canadians aren’t alone. In this country, a Virginia girl was kicked out of the Richmond Homeschool Prom because her dress was causing “impure thoughts” among the boys and male chaperones. In Evanston, Illinois, the Haven Middle School banned girls from wearing leggings, shorts and yoga pants because they’re “too distracting” for the boys. Then, there was the Utah school (Wasatch High School), that photoshopped girls’ yearbook pictures so it looked as if they had higher necklines and longer sleeves than they actually did.

Occupy World Writes rejects these schools’ rationales for their actions. The idea that boys or men can’t control themselves and that it’s up to the girls or women to prevent this is repugnant, and propagates the rape culture so prevalent in today’s society. We’ll let Lindsey Stoker speak for us, via a poster that she posted in numerous locations in her school:

“Don’t humiliate her because she’s wearing shorts. It’s hot outside. Instead of shaming girls for their bodies, teach boys that girls are not sexual objects.”

Five Years After

Leave a reply

Dr. George Tiller. Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons

On the morning of May 31, 2009, Dr. George Tiller, a Kansas physician and abortion provider, was murdered as he was serving as an usher in his church in Wichita, Kansas. His murderer, Scott Roeder, was arrested 170 miles away three hours later. He confessed to the murder and said he felt no remorse: “No, I don’t have any regrets because I have been told so far at least four women have changed their minds, that I know of, and have chosen to have the baby. So even if one changed her mind it would be worth it. No, I don’t have any regrets.”

I remember that day well. I remember the shock and outrage I felt over the fact that someone would walk up to a doctor in church and kill him because the doctor was providing a legal and Constitutionally protected health care service to women.

Saturday was the fifth anniversary of Dr. Tiller’s assassination. Over the last five years, we’ve seen a steady attack on a woman’s right to choose what she can do with her own body. Multiple states, including Kansas, have banned abortion at 20 weeks, despite such a ban being unconstitutional. Many clinics have been forced into closing their doors, thus severely limiting women’s access to reproductive services in some states. Six states are one clinic away from having no legal abortion providers. In all, there’s been 300 bills to restrict abortion access since 2010. And, I won’t even get into the personhood movement spreading across the country, which has been backing bills to not only outlaw abortion but also many commonly used means of birth control.

The violence is also ramping up. According to Vicki Sapota, the president of the National Abortion Federation (NAF), there have been at least 61 acts of vandalism, 14 assaults, six arsons, and a bombing in the years since Tiller was murdered, as well as ten death threats.

All is not doom and gloom, though. The doctors who continue to provide these necessary services aren’t backing down despite the threats and legal hurdles thrown at them. And last year, the South Wind Women’s Center opened in the same building where Dr. Tiller had his clinic.

Occupy World Writes salutes the bravery of the doctors and staff providing these much needed services. We feel that a person’s right to control what happens with his or her body is one of the most fundamental of human rights, if not the most. And, as we remember George Tiller, we vow to not quit fighting until that right is guaranteed to all.

Sudan Confusion

Leave a reply

Omar al-Bashir, the president of Sudan. By U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jesse B. Awalt/Released) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

By now, you’re more than likely aware of Meriam Yehya Ibrahim’s story. A Sudanese Christian, she was sentenced by a Sudanese court to death for apostasy and 100 lashes for adultery. I wrote a piece last week that told her story up until that time. However, it’s been a busy week since then.

First of all, she gave birth to her daughter Maya on Tuesday. This means she has two children in prison with her; her 20 month old son and her newborn daughter. This also started the clock ticking as far as her execution goes, as the death sentence was stayed for two years after her new child was born to allow time for Maya to be weaned.

Yesterday, both the BBC and Reuters ran stories saying that Foreign Ministry Under-Secretary Abdelah Al-Azrak had told each of them that Meriam would be freed “in a few days.” The BBC story claimed that Al-Azrak had said that Sudan guaranteed religious freedom and was committed to protecting the woman. The Reuters story had a different, direct quote from Al-Azrak: “The related authorities in the country are working to release Mariam (Yahya Ibrahim), who was sentenced to death for apostasy, through legal measures,.. I expect her to be released soon.”

Meanwhile, her lawyer, Mohaned Mostafa, said that neither he or Meriam’s husband had heard anything about the release. Furthermore, the Sudan Tribune ran a story in which Abu Bakr al-Sideeg al-Amin, a Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, made a statement to CNN denying Al-Azrak’s statement, and said he is unaware of any plans to release Meriam “before a ruling from an appeals court.”

Once again, Occupy World Writes calls on the Sudanese government to drop all charges and release Meriam, her daughter and her son immediately. And, once again, we furthermore call on all governments, religions, churches and people to stop discriminating against, hating, prosecuting and/or killing people who are different from you in the name of whatever God you claim to believe in.