Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Reality

Polluters and their good buddies in our Congress are trying every legislative tactic to block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from protecting our health by reducing global warming emissions.

Last month, Representative Poe (R-TX) introduced legislation that would have stopped the EPA from addressing global warming under the Clean Air Act.

The Senate succeeded in temporarily blocking that action, but the U.S. House of Representatives will soon vote on another bill, sponsored by House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI), which would do exactly the same thing strip the EPA of its climate authority.

Unfortunately, certain senators are also redoubling their own efforts to undermine the Clean Air Act.

In the next week, Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and John Rockefeller (D-WV) will try to attach legislation to an unrelated small business bill that would either halt or delay EPA climate action.

Sure, do something to help jobs, but tie some evil bullshit to it. These aren't representatives, they're sideshow illusionists.

The Upton, McConnell, and Rockefeller measures ignore the EPA’s science-based

It also ignores the recent statement signed by more than 2,500 scientists and economists urging Congress to allow the EPA to reduce these harmful emissions. Please write to your legislators today and tell them to stand up for science and public health by opposing these attacks on the Clean Air Act.

Representative David Price, (D., NC) gets it, 


as do scientists...

NASA gets it.


Yale gets it...And they've recognized 6 distinct Americas within America who respond to climate change in very different ways...



And they have shown who else in America gets it, and who doesn't.... 







Anyone still not getting it?????

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

What's Fair: CUT ALL CONGRESS SALARIES BY 25% IN 2012

What's Fair:
CUT ALL CONGRESS SALARIES BY 25% IN 2012
CUT THEIR PENSION BY 50%

Dramatic? Hardly. As U.S. workers have suffered layoffs, pay cuts, benefit contribution increases, insurance rates skyrocketing, and union busting over the past two years, While Congress has actually been spending more money than ever!!

In fact, if it hadn’t been for a bill that Kirkpatrick supported, Kirkpatrick and her colleagues in the U.S. legislature would have gotten automatic pay raises, as they did in 2008 and 2009.

Yes, U.S. Rep. Kirkpatrick (D, AZ) actually sponsored legislation that would cut congressional salaries a modest 5%, saying it was high time that Congress shared the pain with the rest of America, as did Gabby Giffords.

The House voted to cut the office budgets for members of Congress by 5 percent, said Giffords. I strongly support that cut. But our salaries should not be exempt. Members of Congress must set an example and there’s no better way to do that than by cutting our own salaries. Office budget cut of 5% is a joke too.
Sorry, Gabby, just calling a spade a spade.
Legistorm, based on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, has been around since September 2006 has been dedicated to providing a variety of important information about the US Congress. LegiStorm's first information product was a database of congressional staff salaries but have now added other valuable information, such as the most comprehensive database of all privately financed trips taken by members of Congress and congressional staffers. The information is provided in a strictly factual, non-partisan fashion.

Cutting salaries of members of Congress is supported by numerous taxpayer groups, like Americans for Tax Reform, Citizens Against Government Waste and the National Taxpayers Union. Could this be a true conservatism, the true conservatism that makes sense, and nearly everyone can get behind?

In a Wisconsin Town Hall Meeting Representative Sean Duffy (WI-07)Complains about his $170,000 Congressional Salary: "I Struggle" complaining about that $174,000 Congressional salary to constituents at a townhall meeting in Amery, Wisconsin, a salary that is nearly four and a half times more than the average Wisconsin FAMILY earns annually in his district. Representative Duffy told a constituent who identified as an out -of-work builder and bus driver, "I’m not living high off the hog."
FACT: Even when Representative Duffy was a District Attorney, he consistently made more than double what working Wisconsin families earn. He claims he didn't take a salary for seven months during his campaign, yet he took a taxpayer funded salary as District Attorney for the majority of campaign for Congress, for nearly a year. Representative Duffy received a salary of more than $90,000 in 2009. In 2010, for the seven months he was campaigning without a taxpayer-funded salary, Duffy reimbursed himself over ten thousand dollars for everything from mileage to miscellaneous expenses. Awww... Don'tcha feel so sorry for the poor guy?

Constituent: I’m a builder. I haven’t been building too many things in the last couple years with the economy down. My wife is a teacher. I’m fortunate enough to take a bus driving job. Love it. Just love it. But it’s not very much money of course. It’s working for us. I’m just wondering, what are Congressman’s, Senator’s wages? My wife is going to have to take a cut if this bill goes through and I’m just wondering what your wage is and if you guys would be willing to take a cut?

Duffy: So the question is, what is my wage? And I’ll answer your question and I’ll get to it in one second. I was the Ashland County DA and uh I decided to run for Congress. And as this race heated up in the first part of June, I resigned as the Ashland County DA because I didn’t want to campaign on your tax dollars and so I didn’t and I resigned. I have 6 children and I’ve gone for roughly 7 months with 6 kids and no paycheck. It was worth it for me to do that because I believe in what I was doing. I get the Congressional salary is 174 thousand dollars. I didn’t vote on that . I got there on January 5th. I came into it without a play in it.

Constituent: "But a hundred and seventy-four thousand, that’s three times... that’s three of my family’s...three times what I make."

Duffy: Well our budget, I moved to cut by 5 percent. I did. You know what, I have no problem..let’s have a movement afoot. I walked into this job 6 weeks ago..um that I worked incredibly hard for. And I can guarantee you or most of you, I guarantee that I have more debt than all of you. With 6 kids, I still pay off my student loans. I still pay my mortgage. I drive a used minivan. If you think I’m living high off the hog, I’ve got one paycheck. So I..I struggle to meet my bills right now. Would it be easier for me if I get more paychecks? Maybe, but at this point I’m not living high off the hog.

Interesting to note that Representative Duffy, a fairly young man who holds degrees in both Marketing and Law, is a former participant of MTV's "The Real World", Road Rules: All Stars in 1998, (where he met his wife Rachel). Then at age 29 appeared on Real World/Road Rules Challenge: Battle of the Seasons, which aired in 2002. Both he and his wife appeared in a filmed segment on 2008's The Real World Awards Bash, while Duffy served as district attorney.

He is clearly just getting started in Washington D.C., and he'll likely fit right into the bizarre reality of the GOP sideshow.

So you might have noticed by now... our congress as it stands does not represent their constituencies. Oh, sure, they try to bring home pet pork projects to make it look like they are doing something, but the average Congressman has over 700,000 constituents. Is he likely to even meet a fraction of them face-to-face? How much does he actually care about their interests anyway? The likeliest outcome in districts of this size is for Representatives to focus their efforts on organized interest groups who lobby him and donate the most to his campaigns. With Citizens' United, a huge blow to the voice of American People, it's a corporatocracy, and tax dollars is funding it.

The notion of cutting Congressional pay is wildly popular. A recent survey by the Rasmussen Reports found that 75% of Americans think members of Congress should cut their pay until the budget is balanced. And nearly one in eight think members of Congress should not be able to get a raise unless taxpayers vote for it.

But in order to get legislation passed, you must first get it heard in committee. Then the bill is brought to the floor of the House for a vote. Then, of course, it will be known who voted against it, and if it's brought for a vote in an election year, it's a bit difficult to squirm out of doing the right thing. Follow?

So when congress doesn't want to present something so politically unpopular, it is simply not scheduled for a hearing, and it never gets voted on. The term of art for this process is called letting a bill die in committee. The dead bill languishes in the halls of congress like a bad odor.

Giving themselves generous raises generates public ire, so legislators passed a bill to make annual pay hikes for Congress automatic. Nice, huh? This requires members to vote against getting a raise. Otherwise, the increase takes effect automatically. It was signed in May 2010 by President Barack Obama and was the second consecutive year lawmakers opted not to receive their automatic cost-of-living increase. This nixed Congress' automatic 2011 pay raise.

The base pay for House and Senate lawmakers is $174,000, though leaders earn a higher salary. Another cost-of-living increase would have given lawmakers a $1,600 raise in 2011. By rescinding the increase, lawmakers saved taxpayers $850,000 for next year.

Reps. Harry Mitchell (D-Ariz.) and Jim Matheson’s (D-Utah) bill, while Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) led the charge to halt the pay increase in the upper chamber.
"To raise congressional pay at a time when so many families are still struggling to make ends meet would be unconscionable and glaringly out of touch", said Mitchell.

With passage of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, lawmakers authorized themselves the automatic, "no debate, no vote" annual cost-of-living raise, unless they specifically pass legislation rejecting or reducing it. Congress has voted to reject the automatic raise six times since then, most recently in 2007. In 2008, lawmakers accepted a $4,100 raise.

Members of Congress set their own pay and they’ve been quite generous. Rank and file members of congress now earn $174,000 annually — more than about 97% of the rest of the country. That’s up 23% over the past decade. Cutting Congressional pay would still be generous!

In addition to their $174,000 annual salaries ($193,400 for House and Senate leadership), all members of Congress have discretionary office accounts worth roughly $1.5 million and travel at the public’s expense. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.Congressional perks, though scaled back bit over the past decade, are still generous enough to make you drool.

If Kirkpatrick’s legislation passed, it would have been the first Congressional pay CUT in 77 years since the Great Depression.

So what happened to cutting Congressional pay? Nothing. Because "Congress" happened, of course. Members of Congress did what they always do when there is a popular bill that they want to kill. They ignore it, thus allowing a bill to die quietly of neglect so that no elected leader faces the unpleasantness of telling the American people with actions (which speak louder than than words): "We don’t feel your pain and we don’t have to."

Saturday, March 26, 2011

What companies are you investing in to fund your retirement?

In a Corporatocracy, you really do vote with your dollars, and that is all that counts. We are there. This is the new reality... corporations have power and control, and our government is just a broker for their interests, facilitating our consensus of this control by keeping We the People uninformed, and thinking that we still have power to vote for someone who can make a real difference. You see anyone making a difference these days? If they try, they are marginalized. Called "socialists" or some such ridiculous accusations designed to keep us thinking all is as it was, so this Corporate governance can continue status quo. We are a frog in a pot of water... and we are in hot water... Many people know this... yet feel kind of helpless, not really fully able to grasp the true nature of the problem we face. Don't we need corporations to provide things for us? Well, to some extent, yes we do... but we don't need to have huge corporations that pay a select few in their ranks tens of millions of dollars a year, while their employees at the bottom rungs, oftentimes in a 3rd world country, are making $2. a week...
And we don't need them to have government subsidies (the government gives them our tax dollars)... only to have them "tax exempt", as you are hearing in the news lately about GE and others. There is a group who is monitoring and protesting the government's allowing these corporations to get away without paying taxes called US Uncut.

There are more groups protesting the state of things than you can shake a stick at.... Environmental issues, Food Safety issues, Gay rights issues... Lots of people have issues.... and there are a lot of people talking the talk these days, but they may only know half the story.

If you're interested in knowing how America is ever going to find her way out of this Corporatocracy that the Republicans have built, start with looking at any investments you might have in companies to which you might not want to lend your support...
Do some resarch to be sure you're investing is ethical.
Stocks in many of the largest companies are spread piecemeal throughout mutual funds and investment packages.

Stocks like Haliburton, Monsanto, NewsCorp.

Anyone can invest directly in any publicly traded companies. And you can investigate these businesses for yourself, and choose with some conscious awareness. This article in the Vancouver Sun is a brief description of how and why ethical investments are becoming more important to more people...

The Internet is a great tool to discover if the companies have any shady issues that you don't wish to support. Of course their OWN websites will tell you all the good news, so it's best to do some general searching, digging into past news articles, and others' accounts of their business dealings.
Once you find solid companies you feel good about loaning your money to, then it's easy enough to e-mail them from their websites, or give a call and ask for their investment department to send you the forms needed. Some companies have minimum initial investments, normally $500., but many do not. If you use a service like Sharebuilder, or E-trade, the minimums required may not be an issue since investments are pooled by the service.

If you are a business owner, you can have an employee from your business help you learn to do this, or to have them do this on your behalf, and some types of business structures (corporations) are able to invest in other companies' shares.

It may seem daunting to learn about investing, when it should be as common knowledge as having a checking and savings account. Certainly it's much easier to have money taken automatically from your paycheck each week and sent into to some mysterious "mutual funds" to directly fund various and insidious corporate interests, who will do what they like with your money without checking with you first (unless you're William Buffet). This strategy makes you an investment zombie. The corporate world's favorite type of person.... right next to the zombie voter.

Your company gives you the information about your retirement, but it's a lot of booklets with a lot of small print and a lot of financial mumbo jumbo, designed to put a zombie curse on you if you should dare read it. True story.

If you're worried about corporate interests trumping those of "We The People" in America, then do NOT mindlessly send your hard earned money to the very corporations you complain about.

Last time I checked, this makes you a hypocrite.

It's no different for the products you buy (or boycott)...
Here's an illustration from 2008 put together by Phil Howard, an assistant professor of Community, Agriculture, and Recreation and Resource studies at Michigan State University. This gives you an idea of the cluster-fuck of health food labels that you may not realize are under a corporate umbrella you aren't willing to support (knowingly)...

So what can be done? Well,I don't use Wikipedia much, it's too unreliable... (always look at the references and the discussion portion of wikipedia entries!) but there are some good resources referenced here...
Consider it a starting point
to learn more about the local food movement.


The worst thing you can do?? Is to sit around complaining and feeling helpless!!

Friday, March 18, 2011

Catch tomorrow night's "super perigee moon"

Tomorrow night's "super "perigee moon" will appear in the eastern sky larger than any moon in almost 20 years.

Full moons appear to vary in size is due to the oval shaped orbit in which it travels where one side of the ellipse (perigee) is about 50,000 km closer to Earth than the other (apogee).

The perigee moon on Saturday night will be a mere one hour from perigee, so it will appear about 14% bigger and 30% brighter than times when it occurs on the apogee side of the Moon's orbit.

Perigean ocean tides are a mere few centimeters higher than usual. Topography can add to the effect by perhaps 15 centimeters, so the effects are not dramatic.

It often appears larger as it rises over the horizon and the perspective causes it to seem much larger next to close objects objects, so photographers might like to take advantage of this occasion. In my neck of the woods, the forecast may thwart the view, but I've been out this evening and it's 72 degrees and clear, and
it was pretty impressive sight coming over the horizon just over an hour or so ago.

Enjoy!