Citizens' Daily Lobby

In co-sponsoring a bill to exempt agricultural pesticides sprayed over water from the Clean Water Act, Senator Blanche Lincoln had this to say:  “Congress never intended for agricultural chemicals to be regulated under the Clean Water Act.” (NYT).  Oh, of course not.  Everybody knows agricultural chemicals are completely safe, and spraying them over water is really no big deal.   On this issue, as on so many, many others, the Senator has sided with her Republican counterparts.  The bill is co-sponsored by Saxby-Chambliss, Rep, Ga.  One begins to wonder  which of the two is really leading the Senate ag committee.

The bipartisan duo argues that regulating pesticides sprayed over water places an undue burden on farmers.    Pesticide residues in drinking water place an undue health burden on the men, women, and children who drink water (everyone, last I looked), but who’s counting?  Maybe if we don’t look for pesticide residues in drinking water, we won’t find them, and the problem will just go away.  Out of sight, out of mind.

Growing food is expensive.  Continuing to ignore the very real human health and environmental problems associated with pesticide use may keep food prices artificially low, but it only delays the inevitable.

Are you feeling guilty about the amount of water you’re putting on your lawn this summer?  That’s healthy guilt.  Deal with it rationally by making plans now to convert some of your landscaping to native plants and herbs next summer.  Wildflowers and herbs (lavender and rosemary are beautiful additions to any garden) are hardy and require less water than many other plants.   Native plants have evolved in the Arkansas heat and will survive the punishment of a hot, dry summer.  You can check out options for native plantings at  Arkansas Plant and Resources .  Your new landscaping will require watering until it’s established, but you can look forward to a guilt-free garden for years to come.

Vinegar and baking soda will not save the world.  Or even my bathroom.  You heard it here.  I am not a fan.

Almost every well-intentioned greenhorn of the green movement picks up a “natural” cleaner at the grocery store.  This may well be the third pillar of green-ness (following use of fluorescent lightbulbs and recycling).  The end result of all this reliance on plant-based detergents and essential oils is dirtier houses or more shapely arms, or both, because, frankly, elbow grease plus green cleaners works about as well as elbow grease alone.   At least in my home, with its real hard water, genuine soap scum, and honest to goodness pet grime.   

I consider this while scrubbing (and scrubbing, and scrubbing, and scrubbing) the master bath.  It occurs to me that I am using medieval housekeeping technology.  Last week, I almost bought a washboard just to get the laundry clean, coconut-based detergents notwithstanding.  I hate phosphates and petrochemicals as much as the next person, so what’s an environmentalist to do? 

“Try vinegar and baking soda” say the gurus of go-lightliness.   Cue the angelic choir and radiant beam of light.  One solution to rule them all.

I want to believe in the magical mystical power of acid and base, yin and yang, but I am skeptical.  Vinegar does work on lightly soiled windows, it’s true.  Baking soda, on the other hand, is good for deodorizing refrigerators and making tasty baked goods and not much more.    Together…well, together they make a warm, foaming volcano.  And you know what?  Baking soda plus vinegar plus elbow grease is about as effective as elbow grease alone.

Baking soda and vinegar will not save the world.  Neither will fluorescent lightbulbs or recycling or buying organic.   It’s going to take elbow grease.  It isn’t always easy, but every step we take as individuals contributes to a better planet. 

(In the meantime, could we please have a few more engineers wrapping their heads around the creation of effective but harmless cleaners? )

If you are interested in hearing first-hand accounts of the oil spill tragedy in the Gulf,  come out on Thursday to the Gulf Voices Fly Out event at the Oyster Bar.   From Audubon Arkansas:

Clean Energy Works is hosting the Gulf Voices Fly-Out in order to share the personal stories of the devastating effects of the Deepwater oil disaster with communities and members of the press across the country.

Four Gulf Coast residents directly affected by the disaster will be traveling to Arkansas for approximately 24 hours in order to educate the people in the state about the effects of the oil disaster on business, health and ecosystems. The public is encouraged to attend.

The disaster in the Gulf affects real people whose stories resonate across the country. These Gulf Coast residents are seeing firsthand how America’s dependence on oil and other fossil fuels hurts our economy, our environment and their unique way of life in the Gulf. The worst environmental disaster in our nation’s history is happening in our backyards. The environmental, economic and human costs that come with our continued dependence on dirty fossil fuels is too high for our communities to bear any longer.

What: A roundtable discussion and media availability.
When: Thursday, July 15th at 11:00 AM
Where: The Oyster Bar
3003 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72205-5853
Who: Rick Roberts, Executive Director, Snook Foundation (Sarasota, FL)
Linda Hawkins, Health Care Professional (ret.) (Abita Springs, LA)
Linda Schuch, Owner, Island Seafood Market (St. Petersburg, FL)
Joe Morris Doss, Bishop, Episcopal Church (New Orleans, LA)

Genetically modified alfalfa, marketed by agri-giant Monsanto, will likely be planted in the near future, following a ruling by the Supreme Court that overturned a California-court ban on the plants pending a full environmental impact study.  According to the AFP, the ball is now firmly in APHIS’ court.  (APHIS = Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service).

“Until such time as the agency decides whether and how to exercise its regulatory authority, however, the courts have no cause to intervene,” the ruling said.

In the age of unbridled corporate influence in government, it’s fairly clear that the agency will not choose to exercise regulatory authority.

Proponents of further study prior to introducing such modified organisms point to the very real possibility of cross-contamination of the introduced gene into wild-type alfalfa stock.  Because the gene makes the plant resistant to a proprietary Monsanto herbicide,  use of the crop will promote heavier application of the chemical.  That will likely lead to more environmental contamination as well as more chemical residues on alfalfa products.

Monsanto may have the Feds in their pocket, but consumers can still fight back.  Refuse to buy GMO products, or meat products from animals fed GMOs.  This means buying organic or from local, trusted growers.  Consumer pressure can and does effect change.

Progressive groups like CREDO are calling on the Obama administration to take action against BP for the alleged negligence and incompetence that led to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.    Although the current liability cap is set at a measly $75 million, less than BP makes in profits in a single day, the EPA could sanction the oil giant by suspending its contracts to the tune of billions of dollars in lost revenue.    There’s ample reason to do so, according to CREDO.

Prior to the current Gulf spill, EPA had linked BP to at least four instances of criminal misconduct and BP has paid tens of millions in fines for environmental crimes. According to the public interest investigative journalists at Pro Publica, the EPA is considering re-evaluating BP and determining whether the company’s actions leading up to and following the Deep Horizon spill are evidence of an institutional problem inside BP that would qualify for debarment action.

You may sign a petition here urging the EPA to sanction BP.

BP isn’t the only company that should be in the spotlight.  TransOcean, the company running the Deepwater Horizon rig at the time of the explosion, is planning to pay out dividends worth a billion dollars to shareholders.   18 Senators, including our own Mark Pryor and Blanche LIncoln (yes, that’s Murkowski Amendment Blanche) signed a letter demanding an investigation of TransOcean, which, incidentally, will make an additional $270 million dollars in profit off the insurance policy on the rig.  The Senators claim the rig was insured for more than it was worth.  Full story at Politico.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is balking at Democratic requests to raise the liability cap on  oil-drilling corporations to $10 billion or higher, according to the Huffington Post. Decisive action by President Obama on this issue would resound with voters of all but the most rabid Right persuasion.  Sainthood would be within his grasp if he assumed leadership and demonstrated that the United States is in control of the Louisiana Gulf Coast and clean-up efforts, not BP.  Handing over the Louisiana beaches, the livelihood of thousands of Gulf-coast families, and the welfare of a fragile ecosystem to a trasnational corporation isn’t helping his image right now.

With all the well-deserved negative press BP is getting over its irresponsible behavior in the Gulf, one would think the company would give 100% effort to resolving the problem.   Not so.  Shareholders still rule, and getting the job done cheaply is still more important than getting the job done well.  Think Progress reports that BP chose to buy an oil dispersant known to be among the least efficient and most toxic.

Of 18 dispersants whose use EPA has approved, 12 were found to be more effective on southern Louisiana crude than Corexit, EPA data show. Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on Gulf of Mexico crude, while the two Corexit products rated 56 percent and 63 percent effective, respectively. The toxicity of the 12 was shown to be either comparable to the Corexit line or, in some cases, 10 or 20 times less, according to EPA.

So far, the company has put over 400,000 gallons of this stuff in the water.   The product comes from Nalco, a former BP subsidiary, and a company that still has close executive ties to BP.   To make matters worse, the formula for Corexit is proprietary, and it’s difficult to predict what long-term effects may be.

It’s time not only for a boycott of BP, but for consumers to take back the environment and their health from megacorporations.  Consumers have a right to know what’s being put into the Gulf of Mexico.  We have a right to know what’s being put into the ground closer to home here in Arkansas, in natural gas fracking operations around the state.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 16, 2010

Contact:  Neil Sealy, Arkansas Community Organizations, 501-346-9617

RECENT POLL SHOWS THAT ARKANSAS AFRICAN-AMERICANS SUPPORT CLIMATE CHANGE LEGISLATION

A MAJORITY SAY IT IS IMPORTANT TO THEIR DECISION

ON WHO TO VOTE FOR

Pine Bluff – A recent poll conducted by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies was released yesterday in Washington, DC and found that 52% of African-Americans surveyed in Arkansas consider climate change to be very important in deciding which US Senate candidate to vote for.  The study shows that 55% of the Arkansas African-American respondents said that Congress should pass legislation reducing greenhouse gases before the 2010 elections.

The poll was part of a larger study entitled, Opinion of African-Americans on Climate Change and the 2010 Elections, that surveyed people in four states:  Indiana, Missouri, South Carolina and Arkansas.  A copy of the full study is attached.

The survey also found that 57% of the Arkansas respondents said they would be willing to support climate change legislation even if it meant that energy costs would increase by $10 per month and that 94% had a favorable view of President Obama.

“We are very pleased to see this survey come out.  While the economy and health care are our top concerns, we want to see Congress take action to reduce greenhouse gases and address the issue of global warming.  People in my neighborhood are very supportive of the President’s agenda, and we will evaluate the candidates on their level of support for initiatives coming out of the White House,” said Maxine Nelson, chair of the West Side Community Organization in Pine Bluff.

“The vote from our community will be important in both the Primary and the General elections this year.  We hope that the Democratic candidates for US Senate will take a look at this poll.  Their position on Climate Change legislation will be a factor in the decisions we will make on May 18,” added Ms. Nelson.

Recently Arkansas Community Organizations circulated a letter addressed to Senator Lincoln that expressed concern over her opposition to the EPA’s effort to regulate greenhouse gases.  The letter was signed by more than 50 African-American community leaders and elected officials.

Fresh-faced Patrick Kennedy, lately of the Clinton School, now Democratic candidate for Congress in AR-02, unlike most of his competition, is not afraid to state his position on the issues.    There are ideas aplenty in the  9 pages his website devotes to a range of issues.   Health care reform?  He’s for “non-traditional competition” to private insurers and supports the mandate for preventive coverage.   Fiscal responsibility?  How about corporations pay their  fair share?  National lottery?  More donations to charity?  Innovation prizes for research?

Where does Patrick stand on environmental issues?  He supports modified cap and trade and tighter regulations on wetlands, the gradual end of subsidies for oil and natural gas, and innovation prizes (again with the prize money).  Civil rights?  He supports a woman’s right to choose, the overturn of the Defense of Marriage Act, and the repeal of “Don’t ask, don’t tell.”  It’s good to know someone out there is willing to separate himself from the Conservatives on these  issues.

Like many Americans on both Left and Right, Patrick thinks the US should pull out of NAFTA, and he adds the World Trade Organization as well.   Many believe taking these steps will strengthen our exports.  It will also likely loosen the stranglehold that multinationals currently have on governments the world over and limit the “race to the bottom” that results when they move jobs and production to countries with the lowest labor costs and least stringent environmental regulations.

His website is well-done and informative, and he seems a solid Democrat in the old sense of the word.   And, oh, yeah, he would like you to know he’s  not one of those Kennedys.

Last week I was asked by CREDO to vote for my favorite of three anti-Lincoln billboards, one of which will ultimately be erected here in Blanche Lincoln country.  The billboards aim to call the Senator out for her stance on the Murkowski amendment that would take the teeth out of the Clean Air Act regarding CO2 emissions.  The billboard contest was created by CREDO Action and Friends of the Earth.    None of the three proposed billboards is exactly what I would call a triumph of political advertising, and, let’s face it, none of them would exactly resonate with Arkansas voters.  I have said it before, and I’ll be happy to say it again:  if you’re going to mess with Arkansas politics, you should probably know Arkansans.

Billboard number 1, “Senator Lincoln:  Don’t Choke Our Razorbacks.  Hands off the Clean Air Act” comes complete with a non-official Hog cartoon.    Even if the hog were a genuine, NCAA-approved, legitimate Razorback, the billboard would still strike me as condescending.  Not only that, but it’s just not an effective message.   What the creators of this particular billboard probably do not know is that a football coach from the Fayetteville area once famously declared during a public hearing that his high school team “bows down” to the smokestack of a local coal plant and thanks God for that plant.  Money talks.

Billboard number 2,  “Arkansans Love Clean Air, Why Doesn’t Senator Lincoln?” is better.  The problem with this one is that the photo of Senator Lincoln is virtually unrecognizable.  Judging by the photo, the text should read something like “B-r-a-i-n-s…B-r-a-i-n-s.”

Candidate number 3 is simply an official-looking photo of the Senator with the phrase “Corporate Polluters, I support you-Blanche Lincoln.”  Too detached.   Arkansas voters are simply not concerned about “corporate polluters.”

I think I may be able to help these people out.  Here are two billboards that are almost certain to resonate in Arkansas: