Archive for the ‘Politics – The Right Way’ Category

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear ‘Global Warming’ Case

Tuesday, July 25th, 2006

By Lora A. Lucero, AICP

On June 26, 2006, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear next term the “global warming” case brought by the state of Massachusetts and others against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Without a doubt, all eyes should be focused on this case, certainly the bellwether for how the Justices will respond to environmental challenges for many years to come. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito have both joined the Court this term, creating a new team with a very scant track record from which to make predictions.

The American Planning Association decided to join the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, and the City of Seattle to urge the Court to accept this case for review. Why? As local officials and planners, we will be the first responders for the variety of disasters that climate change may create, such as the deadly heat waves that strike with special force in urban areas and the storm surges that threaten heavily populated coastal municipalities. Local governments have a special responsibility to protect, rescue, and rebuild after natural cataclysms of the kind that are likely to increase as the earth warms. They also must grapple with the daily effects of climate change: unreliable municipal water supplies caused by droughts or flash floods and heat-induced air pollution that violates federal standards. Click here to read our amicus brief, prepared by Tim Dowling of the Community Rights Counsel.

What’s at stake in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency? The Clean Air Act requires the EPA administrator to set standards for emissions of any air pollutant from motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines “which in his judgment causes or contributes to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” [§202(A)1) of the Clean Air Act, 42 USC §7521(A)(1)]

Nearly 50,000 citizens submitted comments to EPA regarding the 1999 petition to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. In response, EPA declined to reveal its view as to whether greenhouse gases are reasonably anticipated to endanger the public health or welfare. Instead, it articulated a reading of the Clean Air Act that contravenes the exceedingly broad definition of “air pollutant.” When the EPA administrator decided not to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, some 30 parties — including 12 states with a combined total population exceeding 100 million people — appealed to the D.C. Circuit for review. That court issued a badly fractured ruling, with one judge affirming the EPA’s decision on standing grounds, another affirming on policy grounds nowhere mentioned in the Clean Air Act, and a third authoring a lengthy and blistering dissent. The dissenting judge wrote: “Indeed, if global warming is not a matter of exceptional importance, then those words have no meaning.”

More…

Research credit to: Kate G.

Amnesty Charges Web Companies

Thursday, July 20th, 2006

I’m not sure what category to put this item under. It fits ‘Politics – How not to do it’ if you consider what the Chinese authorities are doing. But, on the other hand, it fits ‘Politics – As it should be’ if you focus on what Amnesty is advocating here. And, finaly, if you think about what Microsoft, Yahoo and Google are doing by bending to the Chinese authorities for the sake of money – then I don’t think I have a category to hold that though perhaps I should. Read it for yourself and you decide.

Associated Press 07:34 AM Jul, 20, 2006

BEIJING — Amnesty International accused Yahoo, Microsoft and Google on Thursday of violating human rights principles by cooperating with China’s efforts to censor the web and called on them to lobby for the release of jailed cyber-dissidents.

The London-based human rights group also called on the internet companies to publicly oppose Chinese government requests that violate human rights standards.

“The internet should promote free speech, not restrict it. We have to guard against the creation of two internets — one for expression and one for repression,” said Larry Cox, executive director of Amnesty’s U.S. branch, in a statement.

The companies “have violated their stated corporate values and policies” in their pursuit of China’s booming internet market, the statement said. It appealed to them to “call for the release of ‘cyber-dissidents.'”

More…

US detainees to get Geneva rights

Tuesday, July 11th, 2006

All US military detainees, including those at Guantanamo Bay, are to be treated in line with the minimum standards of the Geneva Conventions.

The White House announced the shift in policy on Tuesday, almost two weeks after the US Supreme Court ruled that the conventions applied to detainees.

President Bush had long fought the idea that US detainees were prisoners of war entitled to Geneva Convention rights.

More…

Justices Agree to Consider New Case on Emissions

Sunday, July 2nd, 2006

It would be nice if the courts could get this country out of idle and into motion on the Global Warming issue.  One can only hope. 

WASHINGTON, June 26 — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether the federal government is required to control vehicle emissions of carbon dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas that scientists have linked to global warming.

In accepting a petition from states, cities and environmental groups, the justices agreed to hear arguments on whether the Clean Air Act requires the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate carbon dioxide and other gases as air pollutants that may affect public health or the climate.

More…

Research by John. Thx.

A Victory for the Rule of Law

Friday, June 30th, 2006

The Supreme Court’s decision striking down the military tribunals set up to try the detainees being held in Guantánamo Bay is far more than a narrow ruling on the issue of military courts. It is an important and welcome reaffirmation that even in times of war, the law is what the Constitution, the statute books and the Geneva Conventions say it is — not what the president wants it to be.

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni being held in Guantánamo, has been charged with conspiring to help Al Qaeda. The Bush administration has contended that he and the other prisoners there are not covered either by Congressional laws governing military trials or by the Geneva Conventions on treatment of prisoners of war. Instead, Mr. Hamdan was put on trial before a military tribunal where defendants can be excluded from the proceedings and convicted based on evidence kept secret from them and their lawyers. Prosecutors can also rely on hearsay, coerced testimony and unsworn statements.

More…

What a Concept

Thursday, June 22nd, 2006

What a simple and bold idea. And some states have already done it. If this would catch on, government might become truly responsive to the people rather than big money.

With the likes of Diebold on the voting scene, this idea may be rendered moot — but it does cause one to pause for a moment, realizing that we could, given enough political will, be free from the distorting influence of money in the electoral process.