tagged w/ Health
-
The Cornwall Alliance calls environmentalism "one of the greatest threats to society."
A conservative religious organization with ties to the oil industry is lashing out at health-conscious evangelical leaders for supporting new federal rules on mercury. They assert that protection of the unborn from toxic pollution cannot be called pro-life because the term does not mean “quality of life.”
The Cornwall Alliance is a group of conservative evangelicals devoted to spreading disinformation about climate change through its mission of “free-market environmental stewardship.” In its Declaration on Global Warming, the organization says “we deny that carbon dioxide … is a pollutant” and that “we deny that alternative, renewable fuels can … replace fossil and nuclear fuels.”
Think Progress conducted a lengthy investigation of this pollution-pushing evangelical group in 2010.
Responding to a new video and radio ad campaign from the Evangelical Environment Network that encourages lawmakers to support new mercury standards in order to “protect the unborn,” the Cornwall Alliance issued a statement explaining its view that being pro-life does not denote “quality of life.”
The term pro-life originated historically in the struggle to end abortion on demand and continues to be used in public discourse overwhelmingly in that sense. To ignore that is at best sloppy communication and at worst intentional deception. The life in pro-life denotes not quality of life but life itself. The term denotes opposition to a procedure that intentionally results in dead babies. (Bold not our emphasis.)
This doesn’t mean we should ignore environmental risks. It does mean they should not be portrayed as pro-life. Genuinely pro-life people will usually desire to reduce other risks as well—guided by cost/benefit analysis. But to call those issues “pro-life” is to obscure the meaning of the term.
The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the new mercury rules will prevent 11,000 premature deaths and 130,000 asthma attacks each year. And the impact of high levels of mercury in unborn children are well documented:
For fetuses, infants, and children, the primary health effect of methylmercury is impaired neurological development. Impacts on cognitive thinking, memory, attention, language, and fine motor and visual spatial skills have been seen in children exposed to methylmercury in the womb.
Outbreaks of methylmercury poisonings have made it clear that adults, children, and developing fetuses are at risk from ingestion exposure to methylmercury. During these poisoning outbreaks some mothers with no symptoms of nervous system damage gave birth to infants with severe disabilities, it became clear that the developing nervous system of the fetus may be more vulnerable to methylmercury than is the adult nervous system.
A growing number of religious leaders — including the U.S. Conference of Bishops — has come out in favor of reducing mercury emissions because of their impact on the health of children.
“A new national standard to reduce mercury and toxic air pollution from power plants is an important step forward to protect the health of all people, especially unborn babies and young children, from harmful exposure to dangerous air pollutants,” said the U.S. bishops’ domestic policy chairman in response to the proposed rules on mercury emissions.
In stark contrast to mainstream religious leaders, the fringe Cornwall Alliance has called the environmental movement “one of the greatest threats to society and the church today.”
Perhaps they are referring to the leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI? Dubbed the “Green Pope,” Pope Benedict has been a vocal supporter of strong environmental standards, renewable energy, and action on climate change in order to protect “the whole of creation.”
Watch the video ad campaign from the Evangelical Environment Network below:
Update
The Evangelical Environmental Network continues to defend its ads from political attacks against prominent politicians, including Oklahoma Republican Senator Jim Inhofe. “We believe protecting the unborn from mercury poisoning is a consistent pro-life position. An issue that impacts the unborn – that’s where we resonate as a pro-life organization,” said Alexei Laushkin, an EEN spokesman, in an interview with The Hill Thursday.
More at the linkThe Cornwall Alliance calls environmentalism "one of the greatest threats to... more
-
-
By David Edwards
Friday, February 10, 2012 11:31 EST
Former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee on Friday said that President Barack Obama had turned evangelicals into Catholics by requiring private health insurance plans to cover contraception for women.
Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Huckabee gave “a great big thank you to President Obama.”
“You have done more than any person in the entire GOP field, any candidate has done to bring this party to unity and energize this party as a result of your attack on religious liberty and the attack on the personhood of every human being in America,” the former Arkansas governor declared.
“The fact that Catholic hospitals– and not just Catholic hospitals, but any hospital, any organization — would be required to provide not just contraceptive services, but Plan B abortion pills and other services that are outside the conscience of people of faith is, in fact, a direct violation of the First Amendment,” Huckabee, who is an ordained Southern Baptist minister, insisted.
“I remember very vividly when John F. Kennedy said that we are all Berliners. Well, in many ways, thanks to President Obama, we are all Catholics now.”
He added: “Growing up a Baptist in the South, I never thought I’d see the day when I would stand in front of several thousand people and say, ‘We’re all Catholic!’ Praise the Lord, pass the offering plate. It’s time to get serious.”
Reports on Friday said the Obama administration would move to accommodate Catholics in a way that would make still contraception available to all women.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/10/huckabee-tells-cpac-we-are-all-catholics-now/
Watch this video from CNN, broadcast Feb. 10, 2012.
"They folks just can't figure out who they will Pander to day to day!!!"By David Edwards
Friday, February 10, 2012 11:31 EST
Former Republican... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
23 hours ago
- |
-
The people of Hawaii are standing up against years of GMO poisoning and open field testing with lack of regulation and labelling. This is not just an issue of democracy but of culture and morality.
University of Hawaii students assembled a stone platform with a wooden statue known as a "ki`i" on the grounds of the state Capitol to speak to politicians regarding the bills in legislature that are being held up by the Agriculture chairman.The people of Hawaii are standing up against years of GMO poisoning and open field... more
-
-
A newly released hidden video is available for unrestricted use by the members of media at a new website http://occupy-monsanto.com. Occupy Monsanto is calling for protests on September 17, 2012, at Monsanto facilities across the globe to demand GMO labeling and the elimination of cancer causing toxic chemicals in our food supply.
During a face-to-face encounter caught on hidden video, Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant is challenged on how his company has an "artificial buffer" of acceptance in the consumer marketplace because "people don't know if what they are eating is GMO."
In the video GMO Labeling campaigner Adam Eidinger also speaks before the entire shareholder meeting, urging acceptance of GMO labeling. He decries the agrichemical giant's contribution to the rise of "Superweeds" and "Superpests" that develop resistance to ever more toxic chemicals sprayed on them. Despite the challenge of Monsanto to "reform," no shareholders challenged Eidinger on the facts except for Grant. Eidinger also asks Grant from the podium how much the company will spend fighting GMO labeling efforts in 2012.
When pressed by Eidinger a second time on the labeling issue Grant asserts that Monsanto complies with and supports US laws regarding labeling. He admits, "There is an increasing category of GMO-free as well, so we would support the overarching umbrella of labeling."
Eidinger responded that his question addressed efforts to change the laws to mandate labeling. "Is the Company going to oppose these labeling efforts wherever they take place?" he asks. Grant relents, "We would be absolutely open and willing to engage in a dialog with our broad industry peers," when it comes to the question of labeling GMOs.
Currently, Monsanto faces new lawsuits from organic farmers, while in California a GMO labeling ballot proposition is under review. More than 550,000 people have signed onto the JustLabelit.org citizens' petition to the Food and Drug Administration for GMO labeling and last fall for the first time about 100 people marched in a GMO Right2Know March from New York to the White House to demand President Obama keep his campaign promise to label GMO foods. (Video of the promise can be seen here. )
About Occupy-Monsanto.com
The Monsanto Annual Shareholders' Meeting concluded official activities of the Right2Know March for GMO labeling which was sponsored by the Non-GMO Project and many other organizations and businesses. Some coordinators of last year's march have set their focus on Monsanto. In March of 2012 a new "Occupy Monsanto" campaign will be formally launched to focus on changing Monsanto's business practices and support the principles of the Occupy movement.
More at the linkA newly released hidden video is available for unrestricted use by the members of... more
-
-
There are no hospitals in space. The closest E.R. is back on Earth, and astronauts can't exactly jump in a cab to get there. So what happens if the sun burps out a massive blast of radiation while an astronaut is space-amblin' by?
The NASA Biocapsule—made of carbon nanotubes—will be able to "diagnose" and instantly treat an astronaut without him or her even knowing there's something amiss. It would be like having your own personal Dr. McCoy—implanted under your skin. It represents one of the most significant breakthroughs in the history of medicine, and yes, it'll work on Earth, too.
Out of all the amazing things we saw during our NASA visits, nothing blew our minds as much as this tiny little bundle of carbon. The Space Biosciences Division at NASA Ames creates medical technology for astronauts. They essentially provide healthcare for outer space. Dr. David Loftus is the man who invented the NASA Biocapsule and has been awarded a patent for it.
Picture this: An astronaut is going to Mars. The round-trip journey will take between two and three years. During that time, the astronaut will not have access to a doctor, and there's a lot that can go wrong with the human body in space. So, prior to launch, the astronaut is implanted with a number of NASA Biocapsules. A very small incision is made in the astronaut's skin for each Biocapsule (probably in the thigh), which is implanted subcutaneously. It's outpatient surgery that requires only local anesthetic and a stitch or two to close the wound. But after it's complete, the astronaut's body is equipped to deal with a whole host of problems on its own. More Here:There are no hospitals in space. The closest E.R. is back on Earth, and astronauts... more
-
-
(NaturalNews) The latest scam to enter the debate about so-called "global warming" involves spending billions of dollars to spray the atmosphere with tiny particulate matter for the alleged purpose of reflecting sunlight back into space, and thus cooling the planet. But research into this controversial practice of "chemtrailing," which has actually already been going on for quite some time now, is largely funded directly by Mr. Vaccine himself, the infamous Bill Gates.
The U.K.'s Guardian paper reports that Gates, who is a huge advocate of global intervention programs that forcibly affect large people groups whether they like it or not, has been spending untold millions of dollars from his own personal fortune to fund research into geo-engineering programs. These funds are being used to study things like how much it will cost every year to blast the skies with tiny particles of sulfur dioxide, a toxic industrial byproduct linked to serious respiratory illnesses like asthma (http://www.epa.gov/air/sulfurdioxide/).
Gates and his small cadre of allies, which include co-founder of Skype Niklas Zennstrom and owner of the Virgin Group Sir Richard Branson, reportedly spend exorbitant amounts of cash every year trying to push geo-engineering initiative across the globe. They claim that if nations like the U.S. will not cut greenhouse gas emissions by tremendous amounts, the spraying of toxic poisons into the atmosphere will be necessary to thwart impending disaster.
The entire concept of geo-engineering to save the planet is utter hogwash, of course. This is true not only because "global warming" itself has proven to be a man-made scam, but also because literally blocking sunlight for the stated purpose of reflecting the warmth of its rays back into space makes no logical or scientific sense.
Geo-engineering does, however, give unprecedented control over the world's weather patterns to a select few, allowing them to manipulate the environment for their own gain in the name of saving the planet. And blocking the sun's rays with tiny particles also serves much more sinister purposes like preventing humans from absorbing much-needed ultraviolet B (UVB) rays from the sun, which are responsible for producing vitamin D in the body (http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/).
But while chemtrail advocates like Bill Gates act as though these poison plumes are a potential future intervention, evidence already points to the fact that chemtrails have already been in use for many years now. Be sure to check out the film What in the World are They Spraying? for more shocking information about chemtrails:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA
Sources for this article include:
http://www.guardian.co.uk
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034906_Bill_Gates_geo-engineering_chemtrails.html#ixzz1lwAJIHMH(NaturalNews) The latest scam to enter the debate about so-called "global... more
-
-
By David Edwards
Monday, February 6, 2012 14:24 EST
Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum on Monday asserted that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was “uniquely unqualified” for the GOP nomination because of the similarities between health care laws in Massachusetts and President Barack Obama’s health care reforms, including the repeatedly debunked claim that “death panels” would ration care to seniors.
Speaking at a ballroom across the street from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, Santorum pointed to a report (PDF) from the the non-partisan organization Families USA that found at least 15 major similarities between Obama’s Affordable Care Act and the reforms Romney enacted in Massachusetts.
“Both create government panels to dictate quality and cost containment,” Santorum explained. “Some of you may be familiar with the Independent Payment Advisory Board — which is a board separate from Congress, independent of Congress — that President Obama created to control health care costs. How? By cutting reimbursements to doctors and hospitals under the Medicare program. Well, Gov. Romney has a similar program called the Council on Health Quality and Costs.”
“Some people refer to these types of boards as death panels,” he added. “Why? Because they ultimately decide to ration care to those procedures and people because they don’t believe these procedures are effective in providing care, that the utilization isn’t worth the costs.”
“So, again, you have government making decisions and rationing and apportioning care based on research that shows what outcomes are dictated by the research that’s out there.”
In 2009, Politifact named “death panels,” a term thought to have been first used by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), as their “Lie of the Year.”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/06/santorum-romney-and-obama-both-created-death-panels/
Watch this video from CNN, broadcast Feb. 6, 2012.
"Funny how he says "Some people refer to these types of boards as Death Panels" to the best of my recollection only His Party does!!!"By David Edwards
Monday, February 6, 2012 14:24 EST
Republican presidential... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
5 days ago
- |
-
This site was created to inform people that there is a killer drug that makes people unwitting victim of a deadly drug.
www.lifestolen.comThis site was created to inform people that there is a killer drug that makes people... more
-
-
In 2010, 37 active Marines in the US Military committed suicide. Had Pvt. Lazzaric T. Caldwell been successful in his attempt, he would’ve been number 38.
Since discharged, Pvt. Caldwell has battled post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental illnesses. In his latest battle, however, he’s fighting the Armed Forces.
Pvt. Lazzaric T. Caldwell was stationed in Okinawa, Japan when he attempted suicide in 2010. Caldwell has survived thankfully and is still around, but so are his troubles. He is taking the Marines to court after the US Military sentenced him to 180 days in jail for his attempted suicide.
Caldwell argues that the military should be trying to help servicemen who have been driven to suicide due to active duty, not punish them. Taking into account the US Armed Forces as a whole, Marine suicides are only but a fraction. In 2009, the figure of active-duty suicide extended to 309, and the number of attempts — more than 1,000 — exceeded the number of battlefield casualties that year.
Although the Military insists that they are trying to bring that number down, Caldwell says sending their own men and women to jail for their actions isn’t the right way to do it.
"I thought it was unfair and I thought it was just kind of morally wrong to punish somebody for something of that nature," Caldwell tells The Associated Press. "Seeing the kind of state I was in, there should have been a way of getting help instead of just a punishment.”
Navy Lt. Mike Hanzel is representing Caldwell as the discharged Marine attempts to fight that sentence and agrees that this is something that should be highlighted. As more servicemen attempt suicide, the Military should be digging for solutions, not dishing out sentences.
"I think it definitely touches important issues which are affecting all the branches of the armed forces right now," Hanzel adds to the AP via email.
"(I)f you succeed in committing suicide your service is treated honorably and your family receives full benefits," Hanzel says. "(I)f you are unsuccessful in a genuine suicide attempt, you can receive a federal conviction and get a bad-conduct discharge and jail time, which is what happened to Pvt Caldwell."
Caldwell was not sentenced for his suicide attempt, per se. Instead, rather, he was brought to military tribunal with the charge of "intentional self-injury without intent to avoid service.” The government says this charge is in place to maintain discipline within the armed forces.
Retired Army Judge Advocate Victor M. Hansen tells the AP that cases such as Caldwell rarely make it to court. "It happens but it doesn't happen a lot," he says.
Despite the government’s insistence that the rule is good for the armed forces, the Marine Corps experienced a record number of suicide attempts in 2011. In the last year, a total of 175 active servicemen attempting to take their lives.
http://rt.com/usa/news/suicide-attempt-caldwell-military-461/In 2010, 37 active Marines in the US Military committed suicide. Had Pvt. Lazzaric T.... more
-
-
The use of the paste first came to light when reality star and leading chef Jamie Oliver demonstrated the paste on his television show "Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution." Oliver noted that the paste is made of discarded beef cuts and treated with ammonium hydroxide, a process the USDA actually considers "generally safe."
http://veracitystew.com/2012/02/06/mcdonalds-ends-use-of-pink-slime-meat-paste-video/The use of the paste first came to light when reality star and leading chef Jamie... more
-
-
This is really powerful!!!
A Fellow poster has informed me this video isn't working, if you have a problem viewing
this video, please click on the link....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002260692This is really powerful!!!
A Fellow poster has informed me this video isn't... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
8 days ago
- |
-
Myths about marijuana convince people that alcohol is safer, but science shows pot is the healthier choice.
Alcohol kills approximately 70,000 people per year. Prescription pills, which have helped overdose become the leading cause of accidental death in America, result in more than 20,000 deaths per year. Marijuana has never killed anybody.
Although scientific research is available to show that pot is relatively harmless, and in fact medically beneficial, myths and propaganda about the plant’s alleged harm lead to marijuana laws so severe they often have the unintended consequence of driving people to drink alcohol, a much more dangerous substance than pot.
Many people do not understand just how harsh some marijuana legislation is. In America, pot possession so minor it is not even a misdemeanor can cause caring parents to lose custody of their children, because welfare offices may charge them with neglect, regardless of how good a parent they are. The legal ramifications of pot use may make parents who want to smoke marijuana more likely to drink alcohol, which is much more likely to create abusive or otherwise harmful behavior.
http://www.alternet.org/story/153870/do_harsh_pot_laws_create_a_dangerous_drinking_culture_5_reasons_to_get_stoned_instead_of_drunk?akid=8177.198739.Cgqv4p&rd=1&t=15Myths about marijuana convince people that alcohol is safer, but science shows pot is... more
-
-
Chinese researchers at Nanjing University have found small segments of rice ribonucleic acid (called microRNA or miRNA for its tiny size) in the blood and organs of people who eat conventional rice. The study does not address how the assimilation of plant RNA into human bodies could affect the debate over the next generation of genetically modified food crops, but the revelation that miRNA can likely survive digestion and take up residence in human cells certainly will provide ammunition for the anti-GMO camp, the most liberal of whom have been calling for toxicological and safety testing of patented plants since the inception of the biotech industry over a decade ago.
In the Chinese study, rice genetic material influenced the uptake of cholesterol from the blood by binding itself to receptor cells in the human liver. If confirmed, this would be the first time scientists have witnessed ingested plant miRNA that actually alters human physiology by regulating cell functions in this way, says AlterNet contributer Ari LeVaux in a recent piece. What’s more, it calls into question the doctrine of “substantial equivalence” – a dogma the biotech industry has clung to since 1991.
Under substantial equivalence, companies such as Monsanto Co. have built a body of case law that shields GMOs from the same rigorous safety testing that patented drugs must undergo. The reason: GMOs are assumed to be essentially the same as their whole-food counterparts. This reasoning works well enough where products such as Bt-corn are concerned. This is because GM corn and alfalfa are spliced with specific herbicide resistant genes from bacteria that are themselves assumed to be safe and natural in their isolated form.
“There is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans,” declares Monsanto’s website. “DNA (and resulting RNA) is present in almost all foods. DNA is non-toxic and the presence of DNA, in and of itself, presents no hazard.” Interestingly, this reasoning seems to undermine the legitimacy of plant patenting if nothing “novel” is being created, but that’s a whole other can of worms.
However, substantial equivalence might not sit so well with consumers faced with a new generation of GMOs that use miRNA sequences to shut down or turn down a targeted gene in an insect predator. The difference now, and this miRNA study supplies the evidence, is that our genetically-altered food could very well be genetically altering us.
The argument for the safety testing of GMOs can now go something like this: because humans and insects share some very similar proteins that process miRNAs (source), the small RNAs from GMO plants could adversely regulate genes in humans.
Proponents of little to no regulation of biotechnology agree that safety testing would only encumber the shared utopian dream of producing as much food as cheaply as possible for a booming world population. If that’s the case, anti-GMOers are going about this “crusade” all wrong. Maybe a more effective tactic would be to scrutinize more closely the real world performance of GM crops.
Monsanto is now the largest seed company in the world. Pointing out that their business model is antithetical to time-tested agricultural practices developed over thousands of years of human history, namely the ability of farmers to save seeds and breed new heirloom varieties to keep genetic diversity at optimal levels, might also bolster the naturalist case. Indeed, there is research to suggest that a path to bounty for the food-insecure populations of the world won’t come through new agricultural products or methods, but a revival of pre-industrial farming practices.
That’s not to say there isn’t a happy medium where scientists can be scientists without having to alienate large groups of agriculturalists and consumers. Critics argue this can’t occur until geneticists attach a higher ethical value to the business of natural plant breeding than setting the stage for a fully-patented biosphere.Chinese researchers at Nanjing University have found small segments of rice... more
-
-
The fungal-fantastical. Emerging from their axial homes, fungi are beginning to be understood as nutrients to the human consciousness and ecological sustainability. Paul explores mycology and compels support for your own good nature and our fungal allies. This is the first in a collaboration of Louie Schwartzberg of Blacklight films (Movingart.tv) and Paul Stamets of Fungi Perfecti (fungi.com). More to come!The fungal-fantastical. Emerging from their axial homes, fungi are beginning to be... more
-
-
By David Edwards
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul doesn’t want to abolish the Department of Transportation, but he said on Tuesday that the agency really only needed “one guy and a computer.”
During a town hall event in Spartanburg, South Carolina, the Texas congressman made the case for “user fees” for national parks and the federal highway system.
“Ideally, you can come up with all sorts of schemes about private highways and all, but that’s not going to happen,” Paul explained. “But we do have a user fee with our gasoline tax. Trouble is, they take that money then they spend it on something else.”
“If you had a user fee for our highway, what you could do is have one person in the office. Oh, we got umpteen billions of dollars in gasoline tax and all they have to do is divide up the people in each state or, you know, the size of the state and send the money back.”
He added: “And you could do that with one guy and a computer. But instead, we have a Department of Transportation, probably has tens of thousands of people, you know, playing politics with it all.”
Paul has said that he wants to abolish at least five federal agencies, a list that does not include the Department of Transportation.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/17/ron-paul-dept-of-transportation-only-needs-one-guy-and-a-computer/
Watch this video from CNN, broadcast Jan. 17, 2012.
"Eeeesh!!! At his Age I am thinking Retirement???"By David Edwards
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Republican presidential candidate Ron... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
25 days ago
- |
-
If I eat preservatives doesn't that mean I'll last longer too? Incidentally I've heard that bodies these days actually do take longer to decompose, thanks to all the preservatives in the food we eat.If I eat preservatives doesn't that mean I'll last longer too? Incidentally... more
-
-
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced on Thursday its decision to deregulate two Monsanto genetically engineered (GE) seed varieties: a corn variety engineered to resist drought conditions and an herbicide-resistant soybean engineered to produce more fatty acids than regular soybeans.
Regulators legalized the seeds after reviewing risk assessments, public comments and data provided by Monsanto.
Monsanto is planning "on-farm trials" of drought-tolerant corn, known as MON 87460, during the upcoming planting season "to give farmers experience with the product" and generate commercial data, according to a statement from the company.
The corn contains a protein gene from a bacterium that reportedly limits yield loss when corn plants are stressed by drought conditions.
Earlier this year, Truthout exposed a controversial program in five African countries that involves putting Monsanto drought-tolerant corn in the hands of farmers facing drought conditions. The program is part of an effort funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is working to establish a "Second Green Revolution" in Africa.
Critics say such efforts could replace traditional and sustainable farming methods with American-style industrial agriculture and prevent African governments from effectively regulating GE crops.
Last week, Truthout revealed that the USDA is taking steps to speed up the approval process for GE crops after industry groups put mounting pressure on top officials in recent years.
The USDA also announced a public comment period for two additional GE crop seeds, including another Monsanto soybean that is engineered to provide omega-3 fatty acids. Regulators have submitted favorable assessments of the seeds and are expected to approve them sometime next year. The public comment period on both products runs until February 27, 2012.
More at the linkThe United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced on Thursday its decision... more
-
-
In a field in which all the candidates are weak in terms of protecting the environment, Ron Paul is unquestionably the worst. Here is his position (taken directly from his website):
"Eliminate the ineffective EPA. Polluters should answer directly to property owners in court for the damages they create – not to Washington."
OK, what’s wrong with this proposal? Here are a few things:
Why just property owners? Why not other people with health effects? Is there some reason why a tenant with asthma can’t sue, but a company with paint damage can go to court? Because property values matter, but not human health?
Who would be the defendants? If you live in a big city, how do you sue all of the polluters for damage? Do you sue everyone who has a car or truck for contributing to air pollution? How do you pay for the expert witnesses and legal fees?
Why only damages? If he truly believed in property rights, he’d allow injunctions to stop the harm from continuing.
How would courts handle the immense body of litigation? The pollution suits would be the world’s biggest class actions, with millions of plaintiffs, swarms of defendants, huge fees for expert witnesses, etc. Is that really what conservatives want?
We’ve already tried this approach, and it didn’t work. This is more or less where the law stood fifty years ago. We didn’t pass modern environmental laws because we loved regulation; we passed them because the old system led to massive air and water pollution.
This isn’t a policy proposal. It’s a libertarian fantasy. And a callous one at that.
Cross-posted from the environmental law and policy blog Legal Planet.
More at the linkIn a field in which all the candidates are weak in terms of protecting the... more
-
-
President Barack Obama's decision to require most employers to cover birth control and insurers to offer it at no cost has created a firestorm of controversy. But the central mandate—that most employers have to cover preventative care for women—has been law for over a decade. This point has been completely lost in the current controversy, as Republican presidential candidates and social conservatives claim that Obama has launched a war on religious liberty and the Catholic Church.
Despite the longstanding precedent, "no one screamed" until now, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law expert at George Washington University.
In December 2000, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that companies that provided prescription drugs to their employees but didn't provide birth control were in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prevents discrimination on the basis of sex. That opinion, which the George W. Bush administration did nothing to alter or withdraw when it took office the next month, is still in effect today—and because it relies on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, it applies to all employers with 15 or more employees. Employers that don't offer prescription coverage or don't offer insurance at all are exempt, because they treat men and women equally—but under the EEOC's interpretation of the law, you can't offer other preventative care coverage without offering birth control coverage, too.
"It was, we thought at the time, a fairly straightforward application of Title VII principles," a top former EEOC official who was involved in the decision told Mother Jones. "All of these plans covered Viagra immediately, without thinking, and they were still declining to cover prescription contraceptives. It's a little bit jaw-dropping to see what is going on now…There was some press at the time but we issued guidances that were far, far more controversial."
.Advertise on MotherJones.com
After the EEOC opinion was approved in 2000, reproductive rights groups and employees who wanted birth control access sued employers that refused to comply. The next year, in Erickson v. Bartell Drug Co., a federal court agreed with the EEOC's reasoning. Reproductive rights groups and others used that decision as leverage to force other companies to settle lawsuits and agree to change their insurance plans to include birth control. Some subsequent court decisions echoed Erickson, and some went the other way, but the rule (absent a Supreme Court decision) remained, and over the following decade, the percentage of employer-based plans offering contraceptive coverage tripled to 90 percent.
"We have used [the EEOC ruling] many times in negotiating with various employers," says Judy Waxman, the vice president for health and reproductive rights at the National Women's Law Center. "It has been in active use all this time. [President Obama's] policy is only new in the sense that it covers employers with less than 15 employees and with no copay for the individual. The basic rule has been in place since 2000."
Not even religious employers were exempt from the impact of the EEOC decision. Although Title VII allows religious institutions to discriminate on religious grounds, it doesn't allow them to discriminate on the basis of sex—the kind of discrimination at issue in the EEOC ruling. DePaul University, the largest Roman Catholic university in America, added birth control coverage to its plans after receiving an EEOC complaint several years ago. (DePaul officials did not respond to a request for comment.)
As recently as last year, the EEOC was moderating a dispute between the administrators of Belmont Abbey, a Catholic institution in North Carolina, and several of its employees who had their birth control coverage withdrawn after administrators realized it was being offered. The Weekly Standard opined on the issue in 2009—more proof that religious employers were being asked to cover contraception far before the Obama administration issued its new rule on January 20 of this year.
"The current freakout," Judy Waxman says, is largely occurring because the EEOC policy "isn't as widely known…and it hasn't been uniformly enforced."
More at the linkPresident Barack Obama's decision to require most employers to cover birth... more
-
-
– A federal judge’s ruling against a Houston mother who says she was fired after asking for a place to pump breast milk has highlighted a question left unanswered by higher courts: Is firing a woman because she wants to pump at work sexual discrimination?– A federal judge’s ruling against a Houston mother who says she was fired... more
-
-
joeeddy
-
added this
-
54 minutes ago
- |
