Election: Here's how it's gonna be

At least we can still smile:

<http://www.clowntech.com/win04/vote.htm>

The Props: NO on 62 -- Primary Elections YES on 60 -- Political Parties in Elections

By limiting choice in the general election to the top two vote-getters from the primaries, Prop 62 all but guarantees that third parties will never have a fair shot at gaining power.

In a community where one party possesses the allegiance of a significant portion of registered voters, it is not unlikely, if this initiative passes, that the selection of candidates on election day will be reduced to two of that party. Similarly, a low turnout in an uncontested primary could result in the top candidates from a hotly disputed but closely decided race among the opposition being the only choices in the general election, even if the disputatious party is not normally the favorite of a majority of voters in that district.

Prop 62 also allows any citizen, no matter how registered, to vote for any candidate of any party. But primaries are the mechanism the parties employ to choose their candidates and, by extension, most of their leaders. If it passes, this "reform" will lead inevitably to weaker party loyalties. And weaker parties make it harder for voters to judge candidates and to hold them accountable.

Also, when one party is particularly settled in its candidates -- this would most frequently be the case of a party that already holds a particular seat, its members will be released to make mischief for its competitors. As a Democrat, I am not especially pleased with the idea of Republicans and Independents picking my representatives. It's to be hoped that Republicans, Greens, Libertarians, and so on, feel the same.

In addition, there are sometimes factors at work other than the relative merit of the Democratic and Republican nominees. For example, if control of a legislature is in balance, you may wish to vote for the delegate from the party you hope will win the majority of the body in question, regardless of the individual merits the candidates on the ballot. Better a mediocre Democrat in your district and control of the House, than a fabulous Republican (should there be such) in your district and minority status in the House.

Here in California the incumbent Democratic Senator, Barbara Boxer, is running against a nonentity, but in a state where the question is closer, the matter of the Senate's role in consenting or not to the next several appointments to the Supreme Court ought to weigh heavily in the Democrat's favor, even if he is, to take an example so extreme as almost to undermine the argument, of the caliber of a Zell Miller. As you choose your senator this year, you may want to give a thought to the prospect of Chief Justice Scalia.

There is another factor. On occasion, you may not wish to vote for either of the top two primary vote-getters, whether they are both Republicans, both Democrats, or one from column A and one from column B. For some voters, the major parties too often serve up a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. If Prop 62 is successful, your menu of candidates will be even narrower than it is already. Surely, no one save the most partisan Republican and Democrat can want that.

"Reform" nearly always is the code word applied by its backers to any change of procedure that seeks to put a limit on democracy. From charter cities to term limits, political reforms commonly have the effect of weakening the power of the people's representatives while concomitantly increasing the influence of ruling elites, special interests and bureaucrats. If we're going to have reform, let's have it target power not indulge it.

As an aside, if we consider greater choice to be a desirable goal, why not create a primary in which candidates who do not wish to be affiliated with a party can run and voters who do not wish to be affiliated with a party can vote? The top winner in this primary could then appear on the general election ballot along with the victors in the partisan races; Democrat, Republican, Peace & Freedom, Libertarian, Green, et al, now joined by an "Independent."

As for Prop 60, it would deserve to lose, too, if 62 weren't on the ballot and in danger of winning approval. The "Election Rights of Political Parties" initiative assures that any candidate who wins a primary gets a position on the general election ballot. No one can be excluded for receiving an insufficient number of votes in the primaries. Thus 60 will thwart 62's ambition to exclude all but the top two primary vote-getters. Prop 60 would fail for being needless if the possibility of a win by Prop 62 didn't acquire it relevancy; if 62 passes, then at least Prop 60 preserves the citizenry's current range of choices; if 62 fails, the passage of Prop 60 leaves us no worse off, something too rarely possible to say of a California referendum.

The Props: 66 YES -- Limits on the Three Strikes Law

Under Three Strikes, as it has been applied in California, thousands of people have been condemned to unconscionably long prison terms for non-violent, petty crimes.

There are Californians serving life in prison for shoplifting a package of flashlight batteries. Or holding $2 worth of pot. Or helping somebody steal baby formula.

Baby formula.

In April, 52-year-old Delbert Meeks, who has AIDS and was homeless at the time of his arrest, and whose last felony, a robbery, was in 1991, had his 27 years-to-life sentence for failure to register as a sex offender upheld because it was his third strike.

Draconian prison stays for nonviolent crimes disrupt families and communities, worsen the effects of poverty, and generate more crime. Since California prisons make almost no attempt at rehabilitation and amount to little more than brutal training camps for criminals, many who were sent to jail for making trivial mistakes eventually return to the community bitter and hardened.

Third Strike is also grotesquely expensive. To house an inmate in the California penal system for 25 years costs about $600,000. The drain on California taxpayers is in the hundreds of millions of dollars, money that could be far better spent on keeping people out of jail.

Using scare tactics, ads by opponents of 66 charge that passage of the measure will spring thousands of violent criminals -- "murderers and rapists " -- from jail. Not true. The measure would simply require that inmates who are serving life terms imposed by non-violent third strike convictions be re-sentenced within six months of passage; some prisoners will be released, others will have sentences reduced; prosecutors can file new charges based on the original crime if they're dissatisfied with a particular outcome. Dangerous criminals will not be returned to the streets.

The bottom line is that Prop 66 returns to judges some of the discretion they need to make the punishment fit the crime. It's about time. YES.

Election: Keep the Protest Alive -- Trade Your Vote

If you live in California, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland or the District of Columbia, instead of holding your nose while you vote for Kerry, consider trading votes with someone in a swing state. Trading your Kerry vote with a Nader, Cobb or Badnarik supporter in a state that is still in play will do more to help defeat Bush than will casting your ballot for the senator in one of the indelibly blue states. A significant third party turnout will help to strengthen alternative politics and remind the Democrats, even in the face of victory, that there is a large block of Americans who want change. <http://www.votepair.org/>

The Props: 59 YES -- Public Records, Open Meetings

To one living in a town where the city council routinely veils itself in closed sessions and "hides in plain site" by holding seven-hour "public" meetings that extend long past the witching hour, when all good citizens have taken to their beds, Prop 59 seems long overdue. The California Sunshine Amendment strengthens public access and open meeting requirements by embedding them in the state constitution. The so-called Brown Act and other statutes enacted since the 1950s have proved inadequate to the job of securing open access to government information and assuring that the public business is conducted in public. In Santa Monica, for example, the burden falls generally on the public to make a fuss when the government secretes itself; by establishing a constitutional guarantee to open access and public meetings, Prop 59 puts the onus on the government to defend secrecy. Legal experts suggest that 59 will encourage the courts to be less forgiving of policies and procedures that restrict access. The initiative would have existing laws that grant access be interpreted broadly and restrictions narrowly, and allows only a handful exceptions for such things as confidential proceedings of the Ledge, matters of personal privacy, and information about the performance and qualifications of peace officers. YES.

The Props: 69 NO -- DNA Collecting

Here's a referendum in keeping with our times. Prop 69 would empower government agencies to take DNA samples involuntarily from all current incarcerees and anyone arrested anytime anywhere for anything in the future. The data could be stored forever. And note that's arrested, whether or not the individual is actually charged and tried for a crime. This data would become part of what they used to like to call in grammar school your permanent record, even if you were completely innocent.

Although language in the proposal says that an investigating agency must notify the medical lab that a person is no longer a suspect and that the specimens of DNA, blood, fingerprints, etc., must be expunged, this provision kicks in two years after the sample is submitted, so a person who was arrested and immediately cleared could still have samples floating around for up to two years. And that's if you believe the government will follow its own procedures. Not only are there no penalties if it doesn't, but the measure specifically says that matches made after the data should have been removed would still be valid for warrants and other actions by police and prosecutors. There are no penalties for mistakes, either, so authorities needn't worry about being careful.

The information collected from the guilty and the innocent alike would be stored in a single database. It isn't hard to imagine a scenario in which would occur the kinds of "mistakes" that, in Florida in 2000 and, apparently, again this year, caused thousands of guiltless citizens to be falsely labeled as felons and thus to wrongly lose their right to vote.

When it comes to police power, it is better to err on the side of too little than too much. Intrusive government access to the DNA data of ordinary citizens is a power we are safer not granting to the state, at least until there are absolutely ironclad safeguards in place to prevent misuse. Prop 69 comes nowhere near meeting that criterion. NO.

Election: Feinstein and Katz for City Council

If the goal of creating a more efficient, fair and unified community is to be realized, for this election only one strategy makes sense: bullet vote for Michael Feinstein and Herb Katz.



That both Katz and Feinstein have shown themselves to be independent-minded and conscientious during their city council incumbencies is beside the point. They are the only candidates, besides Bobby Shriver, with a reasonable chance of winning against the divisive and elitist politics of Richard Bloom and Ken Genzer.



Shriver, with heavy spending and a brand name, is a shoo-in, even though no one has a clue what he will do in office.



The remaining seats will be occupied by three of the four incumbents. If we are going to begin to develop a new politics in this town, Bloom or Genzer must go (that will still leave Bloom or Genzer, plus Pam O'Connor and Kevin McKeown to represent SMRR's interests on the council).



The only way a new majority can emerge is if Feinstein and Katz are returned. Shriver has run on the promise of bringing a new civility to the council, and O'Connor, Katz, Feinstein and Bob Holbrook, despite very different political values, have a demonstrated ability to work together in a spirit of compromise. With five of seven members bent of solving the city's problems without rancor, as John Edwards might put it, hope would be on the way.



It may seem counter-intuitive to suggest reelecting incumbents as a way of assuring change, but unless Katz and Feinstein are sitting with Shriver on the new council, then the Bloom/Genzer-dominated majority that has presided over so much resentment and unhappiness in our town will still be in place. It will be business as usual in Santa Monica.



You get to pick four. Don't. Bullet vote for Katz and Feinstein. It's the surest way, indeed, the only way, to set Santa Monica on a new direction.

The Props: Health Care 61 YES -- 63 YES -- 67 NO -- 72 YES

-> Selling the bond proposal as "for the kids" and with a promise that "it won't raise taxes," the campaign for Prop 61 is as cute as a baby's bum, despite the fact that only one of the arguments favoring it is true (a tax by any other name, etc.).

If 61 passes, the state will be authorized to sell $750 million in bonds to fund the construction, renovation and outfitting of pediatric hospitals. Repaying the measure will have cost us about $1.5 billion by the time the loan is repaid with interest in 30 years.

Prop 61 is not a close call despite the cost. We need more and better hospitals -- actually it's the boomers who are going to face a truly catastrophic hospital crisis -- and capital improvements are the one thing that bond measures are actually designed to do, even if it is preferable in general to pursue a policy of pay-as-you-go. YES.

-> Proposition 63 would levy an extra 1% tax on personal incomes over one million dollars. It will affect about 30,000 people out of 36 million.

The money is to be used to expand county mental health programs and is likely to have a positive impact on costs related to crime, health care and other public services.

It's estimated that the tax would raise about $275 million in the current fiscal year, with the annual return increasing to $800 million by 2006-07. That's if the economy doesn't tank, of course, or that rich people don't move away or not come here because of high taxes.

In general, making tax policy by plebiscite is a bad idea. And watching the majority gang up on a tiny minority isn't a pretty sight, either. But the four decades-long campaign by the rich to avoid their tax obligations has left the progressive tax structure a shambles. Prop 63 is a not very elegant attempt to restore some balance.

Soak the rich? Why not? We so rarely get the chance. YES.

-> To fund the 911 system, the state currently adds a surcharge to telephone bills for calls within the state. Proposition 67 would add another 3% to the surcharge. The tax has a $.50 limit per month for residential phones and "Lifeline" customers are exempted entirely, but there's no limit for cell phone or business users.

Because public hospitals and emergency rooms are insufficiently compensated, caring for uninsured patients is causing some private hospitals and many emergency room doctors to go broke, so it is intended that most of the expected $500 million in added yearly income from Prop 67 will be used to reimburse the doctors and hospitals for the cost of emergency and trauma care.

Opponents of 67 are lying about the cost, but unfortunately this particular formula is a pretty bad idea anyway, if for another reason. Taxing one area of the economy to patch up another helps to produce a crazy-quilt of tax regulations that makes planning nearly impossible.

At first blush, this proposal narrowly passes muster because at least telephone service is nearly universal. Unlike Prop 63, Prop 67 hits almost everyone and even builds in a little progressivity by exempting "lifeline" subscribers.

But in practice it is too likely that small businesses and cell phone users will end up paying considerably more than their fair share. The big corporations are making their calls from huge phone banks in Omaha and Uttar Pradesh. For small business, the phone's still on the desk. And, increasingly, since it's usually pointless for an individual to have more than one phone, small businesses and residents alike are replacing their landline device with a cell phone they can have with them everywhere. Neither group is protected by a cap.

We need those emergency rooms, though. So vote NO on 67, but get on your legislator's case. It's not that we can't afford to have a hospital system that's the envy of the world. It's only that we lack the political will. NO.

-> Prop 72 is a referendum on a law signed last year by Gov. Grey that requires employers with 200 or more workers to provide them with health insurance. Beginning in 2006, these businesses must pay at least 80 percent of the cost of employees' coverage. Companies with 50 to 199 workers would have to cover workers beginning in 2007. Employers with 20 to 49 workers would be required to provide insurance only if the state provided a tax credit to make up for the cost.

While not a substitute for a single-payer national health plan, Prop 72 is better than nothing, and will help to cover some people until the national Democratic Party gets back on track. And, although it seems like business is being asked to carry the burden for society, in fact, because the law will negatively impact company bottom lines (although there will be positive effects on productivity), the state will lose several hundred million dollars a year in tax revenue that will have to be made up by the rest of us in higher taxes or reduced services. YES.

The Props: Prop A NO -- Public Safety, Emergency Response and Crime Prevention

The use of a regressive 1/2 cent rise in the sales tax negates the desirability of a measure that unexpectedly seeks to provide some funds for programs to prevent crimes, rather than just to apprehend perpetrators. But many of these dollars are required to meet unfunded federal mandates in the war on terror. Let the grandstanders in the beltway come up with ways to pay for these measures, instead of forcing local governments to squeeze a few more pennies out of the poor. NO.

The Props: 65 NO -- 1A NO -- Local Government Revenues

Municipalities, counties and special districts providing such services as schools, libraries, water, sanitation, police and fire protection, etc., are funded by dedicated revenue streams from sales and property taxes, vehicle license fees, etc. Not so dedicated, as it turns out, though, since over the past dozen years Sacramento has been able to raid these funds to the tune of $40 billion. Too often left short of dollars for essential services, the local entities struck back by sponsoring the petition drive that secured Prop. 65 a place on the ballot.

The measure would force the state to give back to local governments $2.9 billion that it has taken just during the last two years. The loss of these funds has seriously weakened essential city and county services and kept local governments in a constant state of uncertainty and crisis. Giving the money back to the cities and counties sounds like a good idea, until you consider the fact that the practical effect would be to throw the state into financial chaos.

In addition, 65 includes no workable mechanism to deal with real fiscal emergencies, such as a major earthquake, instead requiring the calling of a state-wide special election at which an impossible-to-meet (and anti-democractic) two-thirds minimum number of votes would be needed to pass an override.

Prop 65 is a very bad solution to a very real problem. 1A is a weaker version of the same idea, with fewer guarantees to local authorities, cooked up when the Governator and the Ledge freaked out over the prospect of the passage of 65. NO and NO.

The Props: 64 -- NOLimit on Private Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws

In an attempt to gut California's vital consumer protection laws, Big Business is exploiting the natural outrage inspired by the exploits of gang of unethical lawyers who exploited a loophole in those laws to bully small businesses into settling fraudulent claims without a fight. Big corporations too often engage in exploitive, unfair and dishonest business practices and, despite the good intentions of some public regulators, it is ultimately the threat of lawsuits by private attorneys that keeps many corporations on the straight and narrow. The law firm that is the justification for this proposition is out of business, by the way, and the attorneys have all been disbarred. Prop 64 is a bad idea. NO.

The Props: 60A -- Government Property -- NO

Prop 60A's answer to California's ongoing fiscal crisis is to auction off California's long-term assets for short-term gain. The initiative also prohibits the profits from the sale of old and obsolete equipment (e.g., computers, copy machines, desks, vehicles, etc.) from being used for any other purpose than paying off the debt. Measures like this are designed to limit the authority and flexibility of our elected officials, and that's exactly what it will do. NO.

The Props: NO on 68 & 70 -- Indian Gaming

Prop 68 is being sold as a 25% tax on Indian gaming revenue. This is not money we'll ever see.

The tax is supposed to be negotiated between the governor and the tribes within three months of passage, but if the parties fail to make a deal -- and there's no reason the Indians should agree to anything, plus the 90-day deadline makes an agreement almost impossible anyway -- a provision kicks in that amends the state constitution to allow the owners of existing card clubs and race tracks to deploy 30,000 gaming devices throughout the state.

Even more cynically, this scam will give the gangsters promoting it a permanent monopoly on gaming in California.

Voters opposed to legalized gambling may be persuaded this measure sets limits, but it is intended to do the opposite. If it passes, those 30,000 gaming "devices" will mean anything goes in the already licensed card clubs and race tracks. The only "limitation" is that profits will be reserved to those already in the business.

Prop 68 is the initiative process at its scummiest: besides the bait and switch character of the ballot measure itself, it is being promoted with a smarmy "just make them pay their fare share" rhetoric that encourages resentment toward Native Americans.

There's no question that Indian casinos should be required to pay taxes -- their businesses depend on the upkeep of the same roads, power grid, etc., as the rest of us, but Prop 68 is not the mechanism to do the job.

The governor has indicated he is serious about getting a tax commitment from the tribes; he should be held to it. Indian gambling can always be revisited in another referendum, if necessary.

Like 68, Prop 70 expands the reach of gaming while purporting to rein it in.

Prop 70 would allow Indian tribes to negotiate 99-year agreements with the governor, but the state and the sovereign nations can negotiate any arrangements they want already. In exchange for whatever payments/taxes they commit to, the Indians would be handed a monopoly to run Vegas-style casinos in the state. The payments to the general fund would cease, however, if the state permitted non-tribal casino-type gambling to be established off the reservation.

Under current law, Indian casinos are limited to slots and a few games of cards. With the passage of 70, they can add craps, roulette and the full panoply of Vegas-type devices for fleecing the public.

While the tribes' statewide gaming monopoly would seem to protect communities that oppose gambling from the instrusion of massive casinos, it's important to remember that there are tribal lands throughout the state, including the middle of urban regions like the Coachella Valley and the Bay Area. Still, if you're opposed to legalized gambling you may want to vote for Prop 70 because it does limit somewhat the extent to which gambling casinos can be built anywhere.

Prop 70 is a much better proposition -- for the state and the tribes -- than the despicable 68. At least 70's backers are honest about their intentions. But the initiative unnecessarily ties the hands of the governor and legislature. The state is in a strong position to work out a fair payment plan with the sovereign nations; Prop 70 does nothing to strengthen its hand.

Some voters appear to believe that they must choose between 68 and 70, but that isn't so. The most desirable outcome is that both fail. NO and NO.

The Props: NO on 71 -- Stem Cell Research

An issue that shouldn't be decided by referendum, but here it is. The initiative would create $3 billion in bonds to fund stem cell research that has been stalled by the religious fanatics in the White House and Republican-controlled Congress. Government, through publicly funded research by public and private institutions, is the best mechanism to encourage pure research, but matters like this should be decided by the legislative and executive branches and shouldn't be locked in place by humungous bond issues. Prop 71 commits the California taxpayer to costly spending even if stem cell research turns out quickly to be a dead end scientifically or if the most promising avenues of research turn out to run through Toronto or New Jersey. A NO doesn't put an end to exploration into the potential benefits residing in stem cells, just kicks the decision-making back to the governor and legislature and -- after next Tuesday, it is to be hoped -- to the federal government where responsibility belongs. Vote NO, then write a note to your representatives telling them that you want stem cell research to proceed.

2004: Fraud and other electile dysfunction

"VotingLive.com [is] a public forum and database of news articles related to election fraud and voting problems. All articles are organized by state, category, and date of publication. Registered Members can comment on these articles, or leave links for others to followup on...[Topics include] Disinformation, Voter Fraud, Registration Fraud, Bureaucratic Snarls, Vote Suppression, TechnicalDifficulties, Broken Ballots, Lost /Missing Votes, [and] Vexing Votecounts." -- from the website. <http://www.votinglive.com/>

Public Policy: Ballot Measures -- threat or menace?

The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center has information on over 160 referenda in 34 states. The site provides a short description of each measure, as well as links to sites in support and opposition. <http://www.ballot.org/>

And, by the way: No on 68 and 70!

Election: Video Repository

Fascinating and diverse: debate footage from C-SPAN, depressing quantities of campaign advertising by candidates and interest groups, political rap videos, etc., sorted by the Internet Archive staff into a Spotlight Movie; a collection of videos with "high batting averages" (i.e., "the percentage of people who downloaded the item after visiting its details page" -- the What's happened to George W. Bush after 10 years video sent to the LOL list a while back is #1); and a menu of the "most viewed films." Number one among the latter is Constitution Class taught by Libertarian Michael Badnarik, the most qualified of the candidates for president this year <http://tinyurl.com/7yrql> (this guy would wipe the floor with Bush and Kerry). An RSS feed is available or search by keyword: title, creator, date, date range, description, etc. Uploads are welcome "from official candidates and their campaigns, journalists, students, and anyone with video materials related to the upcoming Presidential Election," so it's still possible for your video to affect the outcome of the election. All contributions "are provided under a non-commercial Creative Commons license."
<http://www.archive.org/movies/collection.php?collection=election_2004>

Media: TruthOut.Org

There are any number of worthwhile news digests on the left, but few that compare to TruthOut. Edited by spirited essayist William Rivers Pitt (author, with Scott Ritter, of War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know), the easy-to-navigate site is rich with news and editorials drawn from official sources and mainstream and alternative media, but the focus on issues -- specifically voting rights, the environment, the federal budget, the welfare and safety of children, the impract of politics on the process of governing, indigenous survival, renrewable energy, defense, health, the economy, human rights, labor, trade, women, campaign finance reform, and related global developments -- provides a very different perspective on the news than the car-chase and political horse race world depicted in corporate media. TruthOut publishes email summaries and bulletins, usually bandwidth-friendly links, that are clearly labeled for easy handling; subscribe at <join-three-to@news.truthout.org>. The website is <http://www.truthout.org/>.

Environment: More than 300 Crimes against Nature

Here's the record of the last administration, before Bush received his fanciful "mandate." Get ready for worse. It's going to be a bumpy ride:

Source: Natural Resources Defense Council

SIERRA magazine, September/October 2004

http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra

January 20, 2001 White House freezes all rules set at end of
Clinton term - including tougher ones for raw sewage

January 20, 2001 Bush proposes opening Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling

February 12, 2001 Energy Department puts off enforcing new
efficiency standards for air conditioners

February 15, 2001 EPA delays new rule protecting wetlands
from mining and development

March 7, 2001 Fish and Wildlife Service withdraws report
calling for protection of endangered salmonids

March 9, 2001 Bush appoints oil and mining lobbyist as deputy
secretary of Interior

March 13, 2001 Bush reneges on campaign promise to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions

March 16, 2001 Bush administration refuses to defend in court
rule protecting 58 million acres of wild forest

March 20, 2001 Bush withdraws proposed stricter limits on
arsenic in drinking water

March 28, 2001 Bush administration rejects Kyoto Protocol on
Climate Change

April 9, 2001 Bush budget proposal cuts $500 million from EPA

May 10, 2001 Bush administration refuses to name industry
participants in Cheney energy task force

May 12, 2001 Bureau of Land Management allows continued
grazing on endangered-tortoise land in California

May 17, 2001 Bush releases energy plan heavily favoring
fossil fuels and nukes

May 17, 2001 Forest Service reduces citizen and scientific
participation in decision-making

May 22, 2001 EPA officially suspends stricter limits for
arsenic in drinking water

June 19, 2001 States and others sue Energy Department over
air-conditioner rules (see February 12, 2001)

June 21, 2001 Timber lobbyist Mark Rey appointed to key post
in Forest Service

July 2, 2001 Oil drilling off Florida coast proposed by Bush
administration

July 23, 2001 Bush budget proposes cutting 270 EPA inspector
jobs

August 2, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers kills plan to protect
Missouri River wildlife by changing stream flows

August 8, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers weakens wetlands
protections by slackening permit requirements

August 12, 2001 National forests opened to roadbuilding and
logging by Forest Service rule changes

August 14, 2001 EPA delays tougher rules for toxic power-
plant emissions

August 17, 2001 Federal judge's decision to ban drilling off
California's coast appealed by administration

August 27, 2001 Cattle still grazing on tortoise habitat in
California, despite BLM agreement to move them

August 28, 2001 Bush administration proposes missile-defense
test installation in Pacific; environmentalists sue

August 28, 2001 Bush administration reconsiders ban on
recycling radioactive metals into consumer products

September 13, 2001 EPA lies about Manhattan hazards after
9/11, calls area safe despite extreme toxic pollution

September 20, 2001 Forest Service proposes further reduction
in citizen participation in policymaking

October 25, 2001 Interior Department weakens environmental
rules for mining operations

October 31, 2001 Arsenic flip-flop: Under public pressure,
EPA adopts higher standard after all (see May 22, 2001)

November 2, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers retreats from policy
of "no net loss" of wetlands

November 5, 2001 Bush signs bill to boost spending for
national forests, but with harmful logging riders

November 29, 2001 Minnesota's Voyageurs National Park reopens
winter lakes to snowmobiles

December 3, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers decides not to
decommission Snake River dams in Pacific Northwest

December 14, 2001 Administration announces weaker standards
for nuclear waste storage at Nevada's Yucca Mountain

December 14, 2001 Forest Service announces more roadbuilding
on undeveloped forestlands

January 9, 2002 Administration backs hydrogen-car research,
but most hydrogen to come from fossil fuels

January 10, 2002 Study shows big drop in enforcement of
environmental laws under Bush

January 10, 2002 Bush administration fights in court for new
oil drilling off California coast

January 14, 2002 Report shows Interior secretary squelched
her own agency's criticism of weaker wetlands rules

January 14, 2002 Wetlands protections weakened nationwide in
flip-flop from Bush campaign promise

January 14, 2002 Park Service okays more oil drilling in
Florida's Big Cypress National Preserve

January 21, 2002 BLM preliminarily approves gas drilling in
Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument, Montana

January 22, 2002 Forest Service sues to overturn ban on
salvage logging in Montana's Bitterroot National Forest

January 28, 2002 Bush supports Cheney's refusal to release
secret energy-task-force records

February 4, 2002 Bush slashes environmental-education
spending

February 4, 2002 Bush budget proposes cutting $1 billion from
environmental spending

February 4, 2002 Bush budget proposes $404 million to support
timber sales in national forests

February 11, 2002 Environmentalists sue Park Service for
allowing motorized vehicles in Georgia wilderness

February 14, 2002 Bush gives power plants ten more years to
cut mercury and sulfur dioxide emissions

February 14, 2002 White House unveils global-warming plan
that lets C02 emissions continue at present rate

February 15, 2002 Bush endorses plan to store 77,000 tons of
nuclear waste in Nevada's Yucca Mountain

February 15, 2002 Forest Service approves mining exploration
in Missouri's Mark Twain National Forest

February 16, 2002 Bush administration asks court to delay
endangered-species protection in California

February 19, 2002 Phaseout of snowmobiles in national parks
delayed

February 22, 2002 BLM proposes to let states allow vehicles
in previously off-limits federal lands

February 23, 2002 Bush's budget asks that taxpayers pay for
Superfund cleanups instead of polluters

February 27, 2002 Top EPA official resigns to protest Bush's
effort to weaken rules for polluting industries

February 27, 2002 Federal judge orders Bush administration to
release Cheney's secret energy-task-force records

March 12, 2002 Bush administration belatedly complies with
court order to protect desert tortoise

March 18, 2002 EPA exempts large category of power plants
from lawsuits for Clean Air Act violations

March 25, 2002 Discovery that White House misspent $135,612
of clean-energy funds to print its energy plan

March 29, 2002 Pentagon seeks exemption from environmental
laws

April 1, 2002 Deadline passes for administration to set first
new fuel-economy standards since 1996

April 11, 2002 Army Corps of Engineers approves mining
limestone in 5,400 acres of Florida's everglades

April 14, 2002 White House kills program that funded
environmental research for graduate students

April 22, 2002 EPA citizen-watchdog resigns in protest,
charging that agency |officials muzzled him

May 3, 2002 New EPA rules allow mining operations to dump
waste in waterways

May 13, 2002 Administration asks judge not to limit waste-
dumping from mountaintop mines

May 13, 2002 Bush signs farm bill that pays big subsidies to
polluting agricultural operations

May 21, 2002 Ban on mining in and around Oregon's Siskiyou
National Forest ends

May 23, 2002 Energy Department cuts air-conditioner
efficiency standards

May 24, 2002 Bush-Putin summit produces nuclear treaty that
puts no long-term limit on nuclear weapons

May 24, 2002 Bush administration drops plan |for contractors
to put environmental protection into projects

June 3, 2002 Oil drilling leases on more than 500,000 acres
in Alaska signed by Interior Department

June 7, 2002 Interior secretary rejects proposal to limit
offshore oil drilling in California

June 13, 2002 Missouri River restoration halted indefinitely
by Army Corps of Engineers

June 13, 2002 EPA proposes weakening clean-air rules for
17,000 power plants

June 13, 2002 Judge halts Bush administration move to end
habitat protection on 500,000 acres in California

June 17, 2002 Judge rejects Army Corps of Engineers plan to
allow mine-waste dumping

June 24, 2002 EPA abandons plan to clean up storm-water
pollution

June 25, 2002 Bush administration blames wildfires on
environmentalists

June 25, 2002 Snowmobiling allowed to continue in national
parks, though with some restrictions

June 25, 2002 EPA ombudsman testifies Bush administration
pressured him to halt study of radiation standards

July 1, 2002 Bush administration cuts funding for toxic
cleanups to half of that requested by EPA

July 2, 2002 Bush administration rescinds 4 million acres of
protection for endangered California frog

July 10, 2002 Judge orders administration to protect 400,000
Calif. acres for endangered Alameda whipsnake

July 15, 2002 Navy given permit to use low-frequency sonar, a
known threat to whales

July 17, 2002 Bush administration opposes Senate bill to
require 10 percent renewable energy by 2020

July 22, 2002 Bush's State Department says it will withhold
$34 million from UN family-planning program

July 25, 2002 Another top EPA official quits in protest

July 26, 2002 Bush administration backs congressional
proposal to exempt companies from disclosing hazards

August 7, 2002 EPA proposes weakened water-cleanups; asks for
"voluntary" efforts

August 15, 2002 Conservatives praise Bush for skipping United
Nations summit on sustainable development

August 22, 2002 Interior Department claims new power plant
won't harm air at Mammoth Cave National Park, Ky.

August 22, 2002 Bush calls for increased logging in name of
fire prevention

August 27, 2002 U.S. opposes targets for renewable energy use
at World Summit on Sustainable Development

August 29, 2002 Interior Department approves billion-dollar
plan to store water under Mojave Desert

August 30, 2002 Foe of ecological restoration Allan
Fitzsimmons named head of federal wildfire prevention

September 3, 2002 White House asks exemption from Freedom of
Information Act in energy-task-force suit

September 4, 2002 Federal officials reject call to add white
marlin to endangered list

September 9, 2002 States' EPA air-quality inspections shown
to have dropped by 34 percent

September 13, 2002 EPA weakens proposed anti-pollution
standards for off-road vehicles

September 15, 2002 EPA deletes global-warming section from
pollution report

September 17, 2002 Bush replacing most scientists on
chemical-hazard panel with those tied to chemical industry

September 18, 2002 Bush executive order cuts citizen
involvement in review of road and airport projects

September 21, 2002 Killing of 34,000 salmonids results from
federal diversion of Klamath River water in Oregon

September 27, 2002 Interior secretary okays gold mining on
sacred Indian site in California

September 30, 2002 New EPA water-quality report shows U.S.
waters are getting dirtier

October 1, 2002 Fish and Wildlife Service reverses order to
increase Missouri River flow to protect species

October 3, 2002 Conservationists urge White House to release
$36.5 million in conservation funds for farmlands

October 4, 2002 Bureau of Land Management approves largest
oil and gas drilling exploration ever in Utah

October 8, 2002 EPA water administrator says war on terror
leaves little money for water cleanup

October 8, 2002 Bush stacks panel on lead poisoning with
people tied to the lead industry

October 8, 2002 Federal workers reveal memo from EPA chief
encouraging them to support president when off-duty

October 9, 2002 Bush administration sides with auto industry
in suit against California's emission rules

October 10, 2002 Administration failed to assess
vulnerability of chemical facilities to terrorists, GAO says

October 15 2002 Superfund cleanups drop to 42 per year from
average of 76 under Clinton, report shows

October 16, 2002 Judge finds Forest Service violates
Endangered Species Act by not protecting spotted-owl habitat

October 17, 2002 Bush administration told by federal judge to
release energy documents in Sierra Club lawsuit

October 31, 2002 EPA halts funding at seven Superfund sites

November 1, 2002 Bush administration threatens withdrawal
from historic UN population accord

November 5, 2002 Polluters paid 64 percent less in fines
under Bush than in last two Clinton years, report shows

November 11, 2002 Bush administration supports renewed
elephant-ivory trade

November 12, 2002 National Park Service proposal would allow
1,100 snowmobiles a day in Yellowstone, Grand Teton

November 21, 2002 Natural-gas drilling at Padre Island
National Seashore in Texas approved

November 22, 2002 EPA proceeds with weakening Clean Air Act
rules for power plants

November 27, 2002 Forest Service proposes rule changes to
increase logging, grazing, mining on 192 million acres

December 2, 2002 Bush administration plan for oil drilling
off California coast ruled illegal by federal judges

December 4, 2002 Bush administration asks for five more years
of study before acting on global warming

December 12, 2002 Federal court rules against administration,
upholds roadless rule for 58.5 million acres

December 12, 2002 White House proposes tiny increase in
automobile fuel economy: 1.5 mpg in five years

December 13, 2002 Federal judge blocks Army Corps of
Engineers' Snake River dredging plan in Pacific Northwest

December 16, 2002 EPA's new factory-farm rule favors big
agribusiness polluters

December 18, 2002 White House budget office values elderly
lives 63 percent less in environmental cost-benefit analysis

December 20, 2002 Federal judge blocks Interior Department
from permitting oil exploration in eastern Utah

December 30, 2002 EPA proposes two-year exemption of oil and
gas industry from storm-water pollution rules

January 6, 2003 Bureau of Land Management rule change gives
states leeway for new roads in wildlands

January 10, 2003 Bush budget requests $6.4 billion for Energy
Department's nuclear weapons activity

January 10, 2003 Bush administration proposes pulling federal
safeguards from 20 percent of U.S. wetlands

January 13, 2003 Pentagon plans to ask for exemption from
environmental laws on millions of acres

January 16, 2003 Environmental personnel scratched from USAID
policy bureau

January 17, 2003 Interior Department proposes oil exploration
on up to 9 million acres of Alaska's North Slope

January 19, 2003 Pentagon continues lobbying for exemptions
from environmental laws

January 21, 2003 EPA refuses to ban weed-killer atrazine, a
possible carcinogen

January 22, 2003 EPA retains unsafe limits for toxic
perchlorates

January 24, 2003 Manatees get federal protection, thanks to
lawsuit settlement

January 27, 2003 Bush administration proposes privatizing
thousands of National Park Service jobs

January 27, 2003 California's giant sequoia threatened by
Forest Service proposal to resume logging nearby

January 29, 2003 Bush administration wins court ruling that
legalizes mountaintop-removal mining permits

January 30, 2003 Bureau of Land Management proposes rollback
of Clinton-era restrictions on grazing

January 30, 2003 Exemptions to phaseout of ozone-destroying
methyl bromide planned by Bush administration

February 11, 2003 EPA drafts new rules to relax toxic-air-
pollution standards

February 20, 2003 National Park Service finalizes rules
allowing snowmobiles in national parks

February 25, 2003 National Academy of Sciences panel strongly
criticizes Bush's global-warming plan

February 27, 2003 Bush's "Clear Skies" plan allows much more
pollution than if Clean Air Act were enforced, critics charge

February 27, 2003 Transportation Department speeds up
environmentally harmful road projects

February 28, 2003 Oil drilling in Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge his "greatest wish," says high-ranking Interior
official

February 28, 2003 Wilderness protection for millions of acres
in Alaska's Tongass forest rejected by Forest Service

March 4, 2003 National Park Service slaughters 231
Yellowstone bison

March 7, 2003 Paul Wolfowitz tells military leaders to find
reasons to exempt military from environmental rules

March 10, 2003 EPA exempts oil and gas industry from
President Clinton's tighter water-pollution rules

March 13, 2003 EPA withdraws another Clinton-era water-
pollution cleanup rule

March 13, 2003 EPA official testifies in Congress in favor of
exempting military from environmental laws

March 18, 2003 EPA allows sludge dumping in Potomac River to
continue for seven more years

March 18, 2003 Fish and Wildlife proposes removing
protections from endangered wolves

March 18, 2003 Federal judge orders Interior Department to
continue protecting manatees

March 18, 2003 GAO again criticizes Bush administration for
failing to reduce security risks at chemical plants

March 25, 2003 Park Service adopts plan for Yellowstone/Teton
allowing1,100 snowmobiles a day

April 1, 2003 Bush administration drops court battle to allow
California offshore drilling

April 1, 2003 Bush administration barely raises SUV gas
mileage requirements, to 1.5 mpg more by 2007

April 3, 2003 Bureau of Reclamation again diverts water from
Klamath River, where salmonid kill occurred

April 4, 2003 New U.S.-Mexico pollution treaty signed, but
lacks funding

April 7, 2003 Bush administration asks UN to remove
Yellowstone from endangered world heritage status

April 8, 2003 Protection plan for 76-mile stretch of
California coast abandoned by National Park Service

April 9, 2003 Interior Department paves way for new roads on
federal lands in Utah

April 10, 2003 U.S. Fish and Wildlife signs off on plan to
reopen Imperial Sand Dunes to off-road vehicles

April 20, 2003 Toxic cleanups still lagging: 41 percent fewer
Superfund sites cleaned up by EPA, report says

April 21, 2003 Sharp criticism of Bush administration air-
pollution policies by independent panel

April 24, 2003 White House unveils pro-industry chemical
security bill

April 28, 2003 White House bans EPA from discussing
perchlorate pollution

May 2, 2003 Vehicle fuel economy drops to 22-year low of 20.8
mpg, says EPA report

May 2, 2003 Permits for cross-border power lines from Mexican
power plants illegal, says federal judge

May 5, 2003 Navy's use of sonar causes "stampede"–and
possibly death–of marine mammals in Puget Sound

May 7, 2003 EPA drops "senior death discount" calculation
(see December 18, 2002)

May 13, 2003 Fish and Wildlife Service signs off on mining in
Montana's Cabinet Mountains Wilderness

May 14, 2003 White House's $247 billion transportation plan
slashes environmental protection

May 14, 2003 EPA proposes easing, delaying smog-control rules

May 21, 2003 Christine Todd Whitman, embattled EPA chief,
resigns

May 30, 2003 Park Service opens Maryland and Virginia's
Assateague Island National Seashore to Jet Skis

May 30, 2003 Forest-fire plan eliminates environmental review
of logging projects under 1,000 acres

June 2, 2003 Energy Department announces$2 billion to $4
billion plan to build new "mini" nukes

June 3, 2003 Energy Department funds study on how to ease
effects of global warming for Alaska oil drillers

June 5, 2003 Forest Service plan would triple logging limits
in California's Sierra Nevada

June 9, 2003 USDA reverses Clinton ban on most logging and
roadbuilding on 58.5 million acres

June 20, 2003 Defense Department reneges on plan to test for
perchlorate pollution at U.S. bases

June 23, 2003 Bush administration again deletes references to
dangers of global warming from EPA report

June 27, 2003 Federal judge halts timber sale in Montana's
Kootenai National Forest

July 1, 2003 Autopsies link Navy sonar to porpoise deaths,
environmentalists charge

July 8, 2003 Federal court rejects Cheney's argument for
keeping energy-task-force records secret

July 12, 2003 EPA refuses to regulate perchlorate and other
drinking-water contaminants

July 17, 2003 Energy Department lobbies Congress for law to
get around court ruling on nuke waste

July 17, 2003 Federal judge rules administration must redo
water plan for Oregon/California Klamath River

July 22, 2003 Army Corps of Engineers ruled in contempt for
defying order to change Missouri River flows

July 24, 2003 Bush administration softens demand for
outsourcing of federal jobs, including at national parks

August 8, 2003 Bush administration settlement of timber suit
could double logging in Northwest

August 11, 2003 Bush taps anti-environmental Utah governor
Mike Leavitt to head EPA

August 26, 2003 New EPA rules ignore mercury pollution from
chlorine plant

August 27, 2003 EPA excludes 17,000 facilities from upgrading
pollution controls when installing new equipment

August 29, 2003 U.S. court rules against EPA's loopholes in
mountaintop-removal-mining regulations

September 2, 2003 EPA weakens ban on selling polluted sites
by reinterpreting law

September 2, 2003 EPA refuses to regulate ballast-water
discharges from ships

September 4, 2003 EPA finds 274 violations of laws for
dumping mountaintop-mining debris

September 22, 2003 White House's own study concludes benefits
of environmental regulations far outweigh costs

September 23, 2003 Forest Service estimates $2 million lost
in timber sale from Alaska's Tongass

September 24, 2003 White House recommendations would
undermine public participation in environmental planning

September 25, 2003 EPA proposes deal that would let polluting
factory farms avoid prosecution

October 1, 2003 Bush fails to renew energy-conservation
program that saved government $300 million a year

October 6, 2003 EPA rules that farmers can't sue pesticide
makers if chemicals fail to meet stated claims

October 10, 2003 Interior Department overturns limits on
acreage where gold mines can dump waste

October 10, 2003 Judge orders Interior Department to stop
stalling on owl habitat protection

October 10, 2003 EPA proposal to allow warmer waters behind
Oregon dams threatens salmonids

October 10, 2003 EPA inspector general criticizes agency for
lax enforcement

October 13, 2003 Bush administration proposes lifting ban on
importing endangered species

October 13, 2003 $18.6 million Forest Service study says
outsourcing its jobs would rarely be cost-effective

October 17, 2003 EPA announces it will not regulate dioxins
in sewage sludge dumped on land

October 31, 2003 EPA declines to restrict use of pesticide
atrazine

November 4, 2003 Superfund cleanups lag for third straight
year

November 4, 2003 Environmentalists criticize revised
everglades-recovery plan for failing to ensure natural water
flow

November 13, 2003 Park Service workers charge that Bush
policies will "destroy the grand legacy of our national
parks"

November 14, 2003 Bush administration loses bid to increase
ozone-depleting methyl bromide

November 18, 2003 Administration admits blame for kill of
34,000 salmonids in Klamath River (see September 21, 2002)

November 18, 2003 EPA proposes looser regulations on dumping
low-level radioactive waste in landfills

December 3, 2003 Bush signs "Healthy Forests" bill: more
logging, less species protection on millions of acres

December 4, 2003 EPA seeks to reclassify mercury as
"nontoxic"

December 5, 2003 Bureau of Land Management proposes weakening
rules for grazing livestock on federal land

December 9, 2003 Federal violation notices to polluters down
almost 60 percent; almost 30 percent fewer fines

December 16, 2003 White House abandons plans to weaken Clean
Water Act protections for wetlands

December 17, 2003 Defense Department urged to protect
endangered tortoise during robot race

December 17, 2003 Federal judge overturns administration
decision not to protect orcas in Puget Sound

December 19, 2003 Forest Service opens grizzly bear habitat
to snowmobiles in Montana's Flathead National Forest

December 23, 2003 Forest Service continues to allow logging
in Tongass, world's largest temperate rainforest

December 24, 2003 Federal court blocks EPA plan to weaken
Clean Air Act by exempting power plants from review

January 1, 2004 Only 50 companies agree to Bush
administration's voluntary plan to cut global-warming
emissions

January 8, 2004 $175 million Superfund shortfall prevents
cleanups at 11 sites, slows down others

January 7, 2004 White House proposes overturning ban on
mining near streams

January 9, 2004 Pentagon to seek more environmental
exemptions

January 9, 2004 Forest Service limits citizens' right to
challenge logging plans by appeal or in court

January 13, 2004 Federal court overturns Bush
administration's weakening of energy efficiency for air
conditioners

January, 21 2004 Interior secretary asks to triple number of
gas-drilling permits in Wyoming

January 22, 2004 EPA scales back monitoring of smokestack
pollution

January 22, 2004 Interior Department opens 9 million acres on
Alaska's North Slope to oil drilling

January 23, 2004 Forest Service plans to boost logging on up
to 3.2 million acres of Appalachian forests

January 27, 2004 White House says EPA doesn't have to study
pesticide effects on imperiled wildlife

January 29, 2004 Bush administration proposes letting
contractors police federal nuclear-plant safety

January 30, 2004 Parts of EPA's mercury-pollution plan lifted
verbatim from industry memos

February 2, 2004 Bush budget proposes $10 million cut in
funds for endangered species

February 5, 2004 EPA admits twice as many children (630,000)
in danger from mercury exposure

February 6, 2004 Clean Air Act changes undermining
enforcement, says former EPA official

February 9, 2004 Energy development allowed inside Colorado
and Utah's Dinosaur National Monument

February 11, 2004 Forest Service plan allows mining, drilling
in Alabama's national forests

February 13, 2004 EPA no longer to require "worst case
scenarios" from industry

February 15, 2004 Forest Service allows poisoning of prairie
dogs in four states

February 16, 2004 White House ignores threat from gasoline
additive MTBE

February 18, 2004 U.S. Navy plans to dredge endangered turtle
habitat in Key West

February 18, 2004 20 Nobel Prize-winning scientists say
administration distorts science for political gain

February 24, 2004 Federal mine-safety official demoted after
questioning mine accident investigation

February 27, 2004 Missouri River management plan ignores fish
protections

March 3, 2004 Administration proposes to relax rules on
killing wolves in Idaho and Montana

March 9, 2004 358 conservation scientists urge administration
to halt plan to import endangered species

March 10, 2004 Forest Service hires PR firm to promote Sierra
Nevada plan that would triple logging

March 11, 2004 EPA inspector general says agency's rosy
drinking-water assessments used false data

March 12, 2004 Forest Service relents: no snowmobiles in
grizzly habitat in Montana's Flathead National Forest

March 15, 2004 Court rules BLM illegally opened Montana area
to off-road vehicles

March 16, 2004 EPA approves plan to inject toxic waste
underground in Michigan wells

March 19, 2004 FDA warnings on mercury in tuna not strong
enough, scientists charge

March 24, 2004 NRDC sues Bush administration for withholding
records on perchlorate in drinking water

March 25, 2004 BLM suspends plans for energy development at
Dinosaur National Monument, Colo. and Utah

March 26, 2004 Delay in phaseout of dangerous methyl bromide
pesticide negotiated by United States

March 30, 2004 Federal court orders Bush administration to
release forest-planning documents

March 31, 2004 Federal judge orders Energy Department to
release more Cheney energy-task-force records

March 31, 2004 EPA prosecution of environmental crimes even
weaker under new administrator

April 1, 2004 Bush administration worked behind scenes to
weaken European Union chemical safety rules

April 1, 2004 Mining whistleblower accuses Bush
administration of cover-up in huge coal-sludge spill

April 2, 2004 Bush administration sells 155 acres in Colorado
to Phelps Dodge Corporation for $875

April 6, 2004 EPA weakens safety rules for rat poison at
industry's behest

April 7, 2004 White House downplays effects of mercury from
coal-fired power plants

April 8, 2004 Interior secretary allows aerial hunting of
Alaska wolves to continue

April 9, 2004 Interior Department blocks release of data on
oil drilling to Environmental Working Group

April 11, 2004 Bush administration budget asks for $35
million cut in lead-poisoning prevention

April 13, 2004 Administration spending more on nuclear
weapons research than in Cold War, report says

April 15, 2004 Fish and Wildlife Service rejects protection
for Yellowstone trumpeter swans

April 19, 2004 39 state attorneys general urge denial of
Pentagon's request for environmental exemptions

April 20, 2004 Yellowstone Park employees advised to wear
hearing protection from snowmobile noise

April 22, 2004 National Council of Churches strongly
criticizes Bush's air-pollution policies

April 28, 2004 USDA weakens organic-food standards, allowing
hormones, feed raised with pesticides

April 28, 2004 Interior Department limits designations of
critical habitat for endangered species

April 29, 2004 Report shows that more than half of all
Americans live in areas with hazardous levels of smog

May 3, 2004 Power companies have raised $6.6 million for
Bush, Republicans, report says

May 12, 2004 Scientists say Yucca Mountain nuclear facility
could leak far sooner than Energy Department claims

May 21, 2004 Whistle-blowing federal biologist quits over
politicized decision-making

May 21, 2004 EPA officials with timber ties weaken toxic
formaldehyde standards for plywood industry

May 26, 2004 USDA backs down, keeps organic-food standards
(see April 28, 2004)

May 27, 2004 U.S. Army retracts order to cut some
environmental-protection practices

May 28, 2004 Army Corps lets sewers, ditches "mitigate" loss
of streams to mountaintop-removal mining

May 28, 2004 A dozen major national parks hit by cutbacks to
visitor services and staffing

June 1, 2004 Federal court rejects EPA's proposed snowmobile
standards

June 1, 2004 Administration delays greater protection for
marbled murrelet to benefit timber industry

June 2, 2004 Exemption of military from migratory-bird-
protection rules proposed by administration

June 2, 2004 New EPA rules allow more fine-particle pollution
from 1,000 industrial plants

June 3, 2004 Bush's 2005 budget zeroes out funding for
research on abrupt climate change

June 7, 2004 Bush wins ruling to allow Mexican trucks into
U.S. without meeting clean-air standards

June 8, 2004 Reduction in Snake and Columbia River water
releases, harming Northwest salmon, announced

June 15, 2004 Administration's pro-oil, pro-nuke energy
proposal stalled in Congress

June 24, 2004 Supreme Court ruling allows Cheney to keep
energy-task-force secrets until after election

July 8, 2004 Bush team pushes one of biggest timber sales in
U.S. history under guise of fire protection

July 12, 2004 Administration proposes forcing states to pay
2.5 times more for public transit than for roads

July 12, 2004 Administration to eliminate Clinton-era
roadless rule, ending protections for 58.5 million acres

July 16, 2004 Fish and Wildlife Service to end protection for
eastern wolves and abandon reintroduction plans

July 16, 2004 Bush refuses to release $34 million for
international family planning appropriated by Congress

The Election: Why Bush Must Not Win Reelection

Ron Suskind, who was the senior national-affairs reporter for The Wall Street Journal from 1993 to 2000 and is the author most recently of The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House and the Education of Paul O'Neill, has written a crucially important article for the NYTimes Sunday Magazine revealing why George W. Bush's reelection threatens the continuation of our democracy.

Without a Doubt by Ron Suskind: "Bruce Bartlett, a domestic policy adviser to Ronald Reagan and a treasury official for the first President Bush, told me recently that "if Bush wins, there will be a civil war in the Republican Party starting on Nov. 3." The nature of that conflict, as Bartlett sees it? Essentially, the same as the one raging across much of the world: a battle between modernists and fundamentalists, pragmatists and true believers, reason and religion...." <http://tinyurl.com/6ta4y>

Politics: We Have Nothing to Fear but Fear Itself

How to Run a Campaign on a Record of Failure: http://home.earthlink.net/~houval/gopconstrm.mov

Congress: Abdication of Oversight Responsibility

Congressman Henry Waxman (D-California) has made available a fact sheet on Congressional oversight, or more pointedly the lack thereof:

"One of Congress' main constitutional responsibilities is to conduct oversight to check abuses of power by other branches of government...[here is a] fact sheet detailing the Republican leadership's four-year failure to conduct investigations into allegations of misconduct involving Bush Administration officials, including:

* The role of the White House in promoting misleading intelligence about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and ties to al-Qaeda;
* The responsibility of senior Administration officials for the abuses at Abu Ghraib;
* The role of the Vice President's office in the award of Halliburton contracts;
* The role of the White House in withholding the Medicare cost estimates from Congress;
* The identity of the energy industry campaign contributors that met with the Vice President's energy task force;
* The role of White House officials in leaking the identity of a covert CIA agent;
* The influence of industry lobbyists in writing EPA regulations;
* Allegations of conflicts of interest at multiple federal agencies and the White House;
* The role of Attorney General Ashcroft in illegal campaign finance activities."

Read the complete fact sheet (pdf): <http://democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20041001120136-07195.pdf>

Trends: Fascism Anyone?

Contemplating a mixed bag of regimes from Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain and Salazar’s Portugal to Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile and Suharto’s Indonesia, political scientist and novelist Lawrence W. Britt looks for characteristics shared to varying degrees by fascist regimes. These include:

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
9. Power of corporations protected. A
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14. Fraudulent elections.

"Does any of this ring alarm bells?" Britt asks. "Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not."

The rest of the story: Fascism Anyone? by Laurence W. Britt

National Health -- Why It's Needed

In the last three and half years, during the reign of George W. Bush, the number of Americans without health care has increased by about five million. The cost of health care has metastasized at about 7% a year. That is twice the growth rate of the GNP. The longer this trend continues, the more people there will be without health insurance at all.

The injury to the economy is staggering. Already, at least 15% of GDP is absorbed by health care. Premiums for health insurance provided by employers have risen by more than 11% this year alone. Few employers can bear a hit like that, especially year after year, and many are forced to eliminate health coverage, to cut it back, or to shift the burden onto employees in the form of higher co-payments and deductibles.

Of the uninsured, more than 20 million are working full time.

The strain of covering workers also has led would-be employers to hold back on hiring, slowing the economy further.

Candidate Bush has reluctantly addressed the issue by proposing to offer tax credits to low-income people to help pay the cost of health insurance; and by calling for an expansion of the Health Savings Accounts program passed by Congress earlier this year to enable participants to put pre-tax money into savings plans similar to 401(k)s.

People using the shelter are forced to buy health insurance with high deductibles (at least $1,000 a year for an individual, $2,000 for a family). High deductibles, which shelter insurance companies from paying for routine medical care, are intended to hold down premiums (if you are paying a high premium on a policy carrying a high deductable, you're permitted to enquire if this works), but by discouraging doctor visits for minor illnesses and preventive care they end up adding to the cost of health care in the long run.

In theory, money from a tax-free savings account would be used to pay deductibles, and could build up over time, but the idea begs several questions, most notably where it is low-income people are going to get the money for their premiums, let alone how they will be able to find resources to build up savings. Bush says he wants to make premiums tax deductible as well. And he'll tackle the soaring cost of malpractice insurance with tort reform, long-sought by sectors of the business community, by for example capping awards for pain and suffering, fine unless you're the one experiencing the pain and suffering.

Bush's plan is expected to cost about $90 billion over 10 years, small potatoes compared to the cost of his war.

Candidate Kerry's proposal will cost 10 times as much or more, but it will cover 10 times as many people, as many as 27 million who aren't protected now.

Kerry would cover these expenditures by rolling back the Bush giveaways to taxpayers making more than $200,000 a year.

Kerry will create a government insurance pool to cover 75% of the cost of any individual claim that exceeds $50,000. Lower premiums for employers, it is hoped, will encourage more businesses to offer coverage, but there is no guarantee. Also, the senator would allow ordinary citizens to subscribe to the health coverage enjoyed by federal employees, such as members of Congress. And he would broaden Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

It goes without saying that Kerry's plan is a non-starter without Democratic control of both houses of the legislature, looking not likely as we make the turn into the home stretch of the campaign.

How much effect either plan would have on the heath care cost spiral is questionable.

The politicians focus on the price of health care, ignoring the fact that there are always more products and procedures to pay for and for much longer periods. Once upon a time, if you had hypertension, say, or high cholesterol, you lived with it -- without taking expensive drugs for decades on end -- until it killed you, that turn of events acting as a further brake on health costs.

The number of tests ordered by doctors has increased exponentially in the past decade. Whether this is because doctors are fearful of litigation for being "negligent" or because they're feathering their nests hardly matters here; the point is, the price to the consumer of the individual components of health care is only one factor affecting the cost.

If your health care is more costly but the length and quality of your life is also vastly improved, it does occur to you to wonder about the ROI. Though making health care affordable is vital to this country's continued progress, it may help to temper the tone of the debate if it is kept in mind that, given the extraordinary progress in the improvement of health care, it isn't extraordinary that it costs more than it used to.

Calculating the worth of health care is not easy. If your roof is leaking, you can figure out what it is costing you in damaged possessions or lost value, get estimates from a few reputable contractors, and make a reasonable decision about how fix it.

Most medical problems are far more subtle than a leaky rook, but even when the need is evident and immediate, as in the case of a broken leg, say, there is no way that you can be expected to shop sensibly either for the best price or even the best contractor. If you're insured you have no motivation to get the best price -- that's the insurer's problem, and they have probably made the decison about who you can hire to do the repairs.

It's clear that, in this as in most things, the enlightened and responsible choice in November is Kerry, not Bush. But it is equally clear that health care is not an issue that is going to be decided by the election. On the Wednesday after voting day, it will be time to start a new round of debate -- and, one hopes, on the part of the MoveOn.Orgs and True Majoritys a renewed enthusiasm for organizing -- on national health.

Murals on Ocean Park

Before we had the chance to thank the Santa Monica city staff for finally cleaning up the artworks under the Fourth Street overpass on Ocean Park Boulevard -- and before the restorers could provide the paintings with protective sheathing, both works were attacked anew by taggers.



It will be a shame if again this situation is left unaddressed for ages, as it was until the city's recent effort. Leaving a couple of tags unchallenged on these murals resulted the last time in an explosion of activity that included not only dozens of assaults on the pieces themselves, but also in the vandalization of homes, walls, sidewalks, cars and storefronts throughout the neighborhood.



Already, on the murals themselves, the situation is worse than it was before the cleanup. The three or four scripts of a month ago have been joined by a dozen more, including three the size of golf carts that will be very difficult and expensive to repair. Together, these calamities might as well be an advertising billboard announcing that the neighborhood is ripe for vandalizing.



Someone -- the city, the Main Street Merchants, OPCO, art activists, this newspaper -- should take up the cause of these murals before it's too late. The work on the north side, depicting the escape of the horses from the carousel on the Santa Monica Pier, is a treasure that especially deserves protection. Let's turn photographs of the new tags into wanted posters, offer a cash reward for turning the perpetrators in. And when the little monsters responsible for these desecrations are finally caught, let's hold them -- and their parents -- responsible for the cost of restoration.Appeared as a letter to the editor in the Santa Monica Daily Press, also inspiring the paper to run a front page picture of the mural graffiti earlier the same week. (For these and other comments on the issue, visit SM Daily Press, June 26-27, 2004).

"I call it my...I-Feel-Your-Pain...Plan"

Last year's congressional financial disclosure forms reveal that among the 100 senators at least 40 admit to being millionaires (of course, these figures don't take into account those who will become rich after their internships in Washington, once they are promoted to positions as lobbyists and executives for the industries they currently are charged with overseeing).

Although the magoos are fairly evenly divided between the parties (22 in the GOP, 18 from the so-called Party of the People), the three wealthiest solons are Democrats: John Kerry, whose net worth of at least $164 million makes him the richest (and who, being married to the mega-rich Theresa Heinz Kerry, should probably be listed, rock star-style, as "number 1 with a bullet"); Wisconsin Senator Herb Kohl, who has at least $111 million; and John "Jay" Rockefeller of West Virginia, worth at least $82 million.

The House of Representatives, whose sessions also might be accomplished more fittingly at Bohemian Grove, similarly includes no fewer than 123 millionaires, or nearly a third of its 435 members. [To make a parochial aside, for those of you who have wondered why Venice, California Representative Jane Harmon so often takes positions contrary to the interests of her district, it may help to know that she is the wealthiest person in the lower body, with Kerry-esque assets reportedly worth more than 160 million dollars.]

No one begrudges these worthies their fortunes. Aside from those staked by ancestors, many worked hard to build up their car dealerships, extermination companies and mortuaries to where they could afford to retire to cushier environs.

It's just that their good fortune tends to put them at a distance from the too-much-month-at-the-end-of-the-money condition of so many Americans. That is, to take only one example, if we judge by the length of time, now more than half a century, that it has taken not to achieve a national health insurance policy (an inalienable "...right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health..." -- FDR, State of the Union, Jan. 11, 1944. See Impractical Proposals 9/2/2004).

Can we really expect stewards who have legislated themselves full health care coverage, huge expense accounts and ample retirement benefits, who work shortened weeks and only part of the year, and who have no need to balance checkbooks, meet payrolls or, for that matter, take out the trash, to effectively represent the interests of regular people?

You, too, would probably find an issue such as national health less pressing if you were similarly fixed.

There is, however, a simple reform that would transform congressional attitudes toward many of the issues that bedevil ordinary citizens: Elected officials should be paid an amount equal to the average wage of the folks who live in the area they represent.

Call it the I-feel-your-pain...Plan.

There are several ways to calculate what an average person makes.

Arbitrarily, let's take Oakland, California. According to government estimates, the median income for a household in that city is $40,055, and the median income for a family is $44,384 (we can only guess that the difference between a household and a family is children). The median income for males is $37,433 and $35,088 for females. The per capita income in the city is $21,936. 19.4% of the population and 16.2% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total people living in poverty, 27.9% are under the age of 18 and 13.1% are 65 or older.

Whether legislative delegates receive $44,000 annually or $40,000 or $37,433 or $35,088 or $21,936 will make little difference in the overall impact of the I-feel-your-pain...Plan, especially if they have to take care of their own health costs, travel expenses, etc., out of whatever, after taxes, they take home.

Nobody is trying to be unreasonable here. It's not as though anyone is suggesting they try to live on the minimum wage.

The positive impact on public policy should be obvious. Now, under I-feel-your-pain..., when they meet to consider such issues as trade policy, the minimum wage, health insurance, child care, public safety, schools, transportation, parks and rec, etc., members will do so with an immediate not to say visceral appreciation of the effect of their actions on average lives.

How many days from the convening of the first Congress after this plan is adopted do you think it will be before the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill, say, or the Bush tax cuts are up for sober reconsideration?

The plan won't be difficult to organize administratively (although, with self-interest being the chief animator of public policy, it might be harder to enact even than national health). Upon certification of election, newly chosen pols will relinquish control over their finances to blind trusts (as you probably thought is already required, and as some indeed do). From then on, each will receive a salary equal to that of the average inhabitant of his or her district.

Nothing extra will be provided, although members will of course have the same access as the rest of the populace to food stamps, low cost hot lunches at community centers, usurious short term loans against future paychecks, and the many other advantages enjoyed by the poor.

Regrettably, new delegates to Congress will almost certainly have to move to more modest digs (they might even be forced to live in the District of Columbia!), but the experience of looking for the apartment they can now afford will offer them valuable insights when they come to legislate housing and lending policies. In fact, under I-feel-your-pain, not a few representatives will qualify for public housing, though waiting lists will in all likelihood preclude their moving into accommodations before their term is up.

Unfortunately, meager as the salaries of most congresspersons will be under the plan, a majority probably won't qualify for food stamps (to be sure will take a visit to the local Social Security office, where additional useful insights await).

Those fortunate enough to arrive in their new job already covered by health insurance will find more food for thought when they try to continue coverage with their new employer.

New members may need to scope out a way to get to the Capital by public transportation and they might want to educate themselves about the location of the nearest emergency room should, god forbid, they have an accident or fall ill.

Spouses will have to work, of course, and even members themselves may want to consider taking a second job.

It will probably be advisable at first to take a little extra time helping the kids adjust to public school.

Admittedly, for some members the transition will not be easy. Not to pick on poor John Davison Rockefeller IV (his not being responsible for the sins of the fa-, well, great-grandfather, and all), but let's say you are a senator from West Virginia. In 2002 (and wouldn't you know, you'll have to rely on figures that are a little behind increases caused by inflation), the per capita income in your state was $21,738, or $81,978,262 less than the cushion you're used to.

Going from a life of privilege to the life of the common man might take adjusting (it's possible some sort of counseling is available at a clinic in your new neighborhood, especially if a local benefactor has been found to fund it), but surely living on $30,000 a year will be less traumatic knowing you will go back to your old life when your term is up.

To take a more randomly chosen example, the representative from Illinois' 15th Congressional District will be living, like his average constituent, alas, on the district's per capita income of $19,524. In Oregon's 5th District, similarly, the per capita annual income is $22,307. Worst off will be the member from a largely Hispanic-immigrant district in Los Angeles where the per-capita income is $6,997 a year, although on the bright side the district will be rich in potential candidates among that portion of the citizenry who will perceive of the job as an opportunity to get ahead.

On the other hand, in a few cases being in Congress might not be bad at all: the member from Manhattan's Upper East Side will be raking in $41,151 per year, the average income in New York's "silk stocking" district. No doubt representatives from places like Carmel, Shaker Heights and Greenwich, Connecticut will do all right for themselves, too, or at least better than the US per capita income of $27,857 (among senators under I-feel-your-pain, Joseph Lieberman and Christopher Dodd will make the most -- $43,173 -- and Trent Lott and Thad Cochran the least -- $23,448, which seems only fair given their relative contributions to the public weal).

By comparison, the current salary for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $158,100 per year. The leaders of both houses do better, $176,600 except the speaker who gets $203,000. A cost-of-living increase takes effect annually unless Congress votes to not accept it (here's another comparison: the purchasing power of the aptly named minimum wage peaked in 1967). In addition, by their own hands Members of Congress receive generous retirement and health benefits. They can retire with 80% of their salary at 50 if they've served at least 20 years, and they can retire anytime after 25 years in office or their 62nd birthday.

This is not to single out the legislative branch. No part of the government comes near mirroring the economic makeup of the country. The Bush cabinet is the wealthiest in history, over 80 percent millionaires and nearly half with fortunes of more than $10 million, according to the Guinness Book of World Records. The members of the Supreme Court are not shopping at Wal-Mart, either.

Having demonstrated its efficacy at the highest level of government, the I-feel-your-pain...Plan can be applied to all elected offices: the Governor of Mississippi, for example, would earn $21,120 per year, a far cry from the next Mississippi ceo's $125,500. Being mayor of sunny Long Beach, California might seem like a pleasant enough job even at $19,040 per annum until you realize the current mayor gets $93,283.93.

Of course it can be contended that the I-feel-your-pain...Plan will discourage America's best and brightest from public service. But it can be argued with equal force that the proposal will make running for office more attractive to idealists and the public spirited. In any event, the point of I-feel-your-pain is not to address the sagacity of elected officials (there is an abundance of intelligence at every level of society), but their compassion (not so much); less about the qualities of governors, more about the integrity, the righteousness, of governance.

Election Fun: The "Give Bush a Brain" Game

Funny, frightening and addictive!
<http://www.beatgreets.com/view.pd?i=178792028&m=1361&rr=y&source=bg999>

I'm just saying...

If you're a true Republican, you'll vote for Kerry (headline, article by Pete McCloskey, San Jose Mercury News, 2004-09-10).

Reform: Progressive Democrats of America

From a position of powerlessness at the Democratic Convention springs this proposal:
"We are committed in word and action, both personally and politically, to justice and democracy at all levels, and to the preservation and restoration of natural ecosystems in America and worldwide....We are specifically committed to the realization of new models for achieving local, national and global security that redirect the current wasteful and obscene levels of military spending toward the uncompromising and effective funding of: health and education programs; an end to discrimination; the provision of full and meaningful employment; and an end to poverty for all people....To achieve these goals, we dedicate ourselves to work within the general framework of the Democratic Party and with sister organizations to create a new, democratic, grassroots-based, nationally federated organization." -- from the website. <http://www.pdamerica.org/>

Contact Kerry-Edwards

The Kerry campaign can probably use your advice. To send them a message, go to
<http://www.johnkerry.com/contact/>. In a box on the right, look for "Policy and General Campaign Comments." The campaign is well-organized, so you should get a quick answer about Kerry-Edwards positions on your issues, and you can tell them what they might do better. There is list of offices for most states, and you can also write/call the national campaign at Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc., P.O. Box 34640, Washington, DC 20043; 202-712-3000 (voice), 202-712-3001 (fax).

"Rain is the best policeman." - Police motto

Memo to Kerry Campaign:
Buy up available supplies of galoshes, rainhats and umbrellas;
hand out to voters as part of the "get out the vote" effort.
Seed the clouds over the red states on election day.

Be All That You Can Be

"Besides, since [Jenna and I] graduated from college, we're looking around for something to do for the next few years." -- George W. Bush's daughter Barbara, addressing the Republican Convention. GoArmy.com

Quote: "...the excuse presidency..."

"His (Bush) is the excuse presidency -- never wrong, never responsible, never to blame ... no, it's not our fault; no, there's nothing wrong; no, we can't do better; no, we haven't made a single mistake." -- John Kerry (spotted on the energetic political blog, "I'm just sayin'..." <http://krupsjustsayin.blogspot.com/>)

Economic Bill of Rightsproposed by Franklin Roosevelt

In his State of the Union message to Congress on January 11, 1944, at a time when we were a much smaller country in terms of population and economic strength and were in the middle of fighting a world war, President Franklin D. Roosevelt called for an “Economic Bill of Rights.” It is difficult to imagine a "serious" Democratic leader (i.e., not a Kucinich or a Sharpton) making such a policy address today:

"It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people -- whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth -- is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

"This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights -- among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

"As our nation has grown in size and stature, however -- as our industrial economy expanded -- these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. 'Necessitous men are not free men.' People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all -- regardless of station, race, or creed.

"Among these are:

"The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

"The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

"The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

"The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

"The right of every family to a decent home;

"The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

"The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

"The right to a good education.

"All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

"America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens."

Source: The Public Papers & Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Samuel Rosenman, ed.), Vol XIII (NY: Harper, 1950),

12 How. 152: “Necessitous men,” says the Lord Chancellor, in Vernon v Bethell, 2 Eden 113 (1762), “are not, truly speaking, free men; but, to answer a present emergency, will submit to any terms that the crafty may impose on them.”

I am grateful to Gary Gordon of The Fictional Times for drawing attention to this document. 40-42.

See, also: “One Third of a Nation”: FDR’s Second Inaugural Address