sen markey bak

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">lcv top score Eight House members had perfect scores: Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Woolsey (D-Calif.), Stark (D-Calif.), Honda (D-Calif.), Capps (D-Calif.), Polis (D-Col.), Quigley (D-Ill.), Markey (D-Mass.).</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">now SENATE</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">html Hamburger</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">bak 4 23

=</font></p><p><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"We finally have a Senator who has committed to introduce the #WeThePeopleAmendment in the Senate. But there's a caveat: he is asking us to bring at least 5 other Senators on board, and specifically, to get one or more that serve&nbsp;in the Judiciary Committee.</font></span></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</font></p><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">an 4 23</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">no lnx twt</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) is calling on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to resign over allegations of corruption spanning more than two decades. He is the first sitting U.S. Senator to do so.</b></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“I will say what needs to be said: Clarence Thomas should resign from the Supreme Court of the United States. His reputation is unsalvageable,” Sen. Markey, flanked by U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA).</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">“It is evident that he cannot judge right from wrong, so why should he be judging the country’s most important cases on its highest court?” Sen. Markey asked.</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>The three Massachusetts Democrats spoke as they kicked off a 20-city bus tour Monday from Boston, focusing on strengthening ethics in the nation’s highest court, as the Boston Globe report</b>s.</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">“The court must take action in order to rebuild its legitimacy by enforcing its own recusal rules, adopting a binding code of conduct, strengthening restrictions on gifts of privately funded travel, and increasing the transparency of justices’ financial dealings and interests,” Markey also said.</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">READ MORE: Gorsuch Sold Land to Law Firm Head With Cases Before SCOTUS 9 Days After Being Confirmed – He Didn’t Disclose Buyer’s Name</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Senators Markey and Warren also called for expanding the Supreme Court by four seats, to 13,</b>&nbsp;which would more accurately represent the nation and its current judicial system.</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">”I don’t want to mess with the Supreme Court,” Senator Warren told reporters. “But the Supreme Court is messing with our democracy. Make no mistake, the Supreme Court faces a crisis of legitimacy. The Constitution gives Congress the ability to check the Supreme Court’s power, including by changing its size, no constitutional amendment.”</font></div><div>
</div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Rep. Pressely added, ”I’m here with my partners in government and community to organize and mobilize to enact common sense reforms to our highest judicial court.”</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“We deserve and demand a Supreme Court representative of the people and capable of upholding the law.”</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">READ MORE: Top Senate Democrat Goes After Clarence Thomas’ Billionaire Benefactor</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>The tour is being organized by a coalition of more than 30 progressive groups called the Just Majority campaign,</b>&nbsp;The New York Times reported, as more see the increasingly urgent&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">need for judicial reform in the wake of the Roberts Court’s rulings on abortion and its now-infamous shadow docket.</span></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">“This is new to us,” Mini Timmaraju, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, told The Times.</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Timmaraju “said her organization’s decision to join the campaign was driven in part by recent court decisions on abortion rights, gun control and other issues that run counter to well-documented public opinion.”</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">“We feel a special obligation to jump in now,” she also said. “It feels the time is right to start having this conversation about expansion. Everything has to be on the table.”</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Watch a clip of Senator Markey’s remarks, and the full event video below or at this link.</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Sens. Markey and Warren and Rep. Pressley Kick Off 'Just Majority' Campaign</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">www.youtube.com</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Dick Durbin already abandoned calling Clarence Thomas to justify accepting secret special gifts ›</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">John Roberts sidesteps Senate request to discuss Clarence Thomas scandals ›</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The Clarence Thomas 'cover-up' could lead to his downfall: watchdog ›</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Clarence Thomas didn't declare lavish gifts. But federal workers are ... ›</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Clarence Thomas says trips with billionaire didn't need to be ... ›</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">A Timeline Of Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill Controversy As ... ›</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.eenews.net/articles/7-years-later-failed-waxman-markey-bill-still-makes-waves/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>7 years later, failed Waxman-Markey bill still makes waves</b></font></font></font></font></div><div>By Amanda Reilly<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">, Kevin Bogardus | 06/27/2016</span></div><div>
</div><div>7 years later, failed Waxman-Markey bill still makes waves</div><div>
</div><div>It’s been seven years since the House passed major legislation to create a cap-and-trade system for heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions, and though that legislative attempt ultimately failed, the bill’s sponsors still say it sowed the seeds for other climate change efforts.</div><div>
</div><div>As is well-known, the Waxman-Markey bill was not taken up by the full Senate and never became law. But looking back over the last seven years, the bill’s sponsors and their former congressional aides reminisced with E&E Daily in interviews that the unsuccessful fight was worthwhile and that it has had important repercussions.</div><div>
</div><div>"It is always worthwhile to fight for what you believe in," former Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of California said in his office in Washington, D.C., "and if you don’t succeed at first, you keep trying."</div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>Waxman retired at the end of the 113th Congress, and early last year he joined his son’s public affairs and government relations firm, Waxman Strategies</b>. The bill’s other sponsor, Democratic Sen. Ed Markey, has been the junior senator from Massachusetts since 2013.</div><div>
</div><div>The two former House lawmakers introduced their bill, formally known as the "American Clean Energy and Security Act," on May 15, 2009. The 1,400-page bill would have established emissions caps through 2050 for several greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, and instituted a system for trading emissions allowances.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Waxman-Markey squeaked by the House seven years ago yesterday on June 26, 2009, by a vote of 219-212.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Phil Barnett, who was the Democratic staff director at the House Energy and Commerce Committee under Waxman at the time, said working on the bill was "demanding" and "challenging."</div><div>
</div><div>"We worked intensively on it for six months … seven days a week, long hours. The bill was a top priority for Chairman Waxman," said Barnett, now a consultant, adding, "The entire staff poured their hearts and souls into the effort because they thought it would do something to solve the climate problem as well as create economic opportunities and keep costs low."</div><div>
</div><div><b>Looking back, Markey pointed to work on the health care law, another priority for President Obama, for stymying the cap-and-trade bill’s momentum in the Senate.</b></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>"We finished Waxman-Markey in the last week of June of 2009. So we had finished our work," Markey said. "We were ready to go. And the politics of it then got much more complicated than anyone thought they would have."</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The political dynamics around health care reform became complex with the death of Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy in August 2009. When Republican Scott Brown won Kennedy’s seat in an upset victory in a special election in January 2010, the politics of passing major legislation became more difficult because<b>&nbsp;Brown gave Republicans a 41st seat in the Senate, thereby robbing Democrats of a filibuster-proof majority.</b></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) never brought the climate legislation, which was championed in the upper chamber by then-Sens. John Kerry</b>&nbsp;of Massachusetts and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, to a vote on the floor. Many people close to the legislation have since blamed a number of factors, including Republican opposition and concessions to special interests.</span></div><div>
</div><div>"It was a disappointment that we couldn’t get a bill all the way through, but we highlighted the issue," Waxman said. "We gave it our best effort. We tried to accomplish that goal. But I know from my own history as a member of Congress, I have to work sometimes decades before some of the proposals I made eventually became law."</div><div>
</div><div>He cited, for example, the 15 years it took for Congress to pass the 2009 Tobacco Control Act, which gave the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco products.</div><div>
</div><div>Genesis of executive branch efforts</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 51);">The collapse of the Waxman-Markey bill in the Senate in 2010 spurred the Obama administration to aggressively use the executive branch to issue regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. U.S. EPA issued its final&nbsp;<b>Clean Power Plan</b>&nbsp;for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants last August and helped negotiate the international climate change deal in Paris last December.</span></div><div>
</div><div>In the first term, "the administration really focused on trying to get a big legislative fix to the climate change problem. As you know, that effort fell short," John Podesta, who was a top adviser to Obama and helped drive White House climate policy from 2014 to 2015, said at a recent conference in California. "In the second term, there was more focus on organizing and coordinating the agencies and the White House offices on both the domestic and international side of the equation."</div><div>
</div><div>Podesta, who is now campaign chairman for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, said that, if elected, the former secretary of State would likely focus on executive actions instead of attempting to pass a "grand climate fix" through Congress, even if the Senate flips to Democratic control.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Obama’s experience was "illustrative," Podesta said.</b></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>"A successful climate agenda requires a senior, serious point person in the White House," he said, "who can drive the agencies to do all they can across the whole suite of federal authorities."</b></div><div>
</div><div>But for the Obama administration, starting with a grand climate fix was "absolutely the right thing to do," Waxman said.</div><div>
</div><div>And Markey credited the legislation for setting the stage for the Obama administration’s second-term actions by helping to create necessary alliances.</div><div>
</div><div>"Much of what the president has done since then, and even if you look at the Clean Power Plan, it’s based largely on what was inside of the Waxman-Markey bill that we passed," Markey said. "So we had worked out the partnerships, the coalitions, that were still there when the president decided to develop the Clean Power Plan. So I think it was actually a very helpful political process to have gone through."</div><div>
</div><div>Michael Goo, another former top congressional aide who worked on the bill, agreed with the Massachusetts senator, saying<b>, "Waxman-Markey is still the yardstick by which to measure climate programs."</b></div><div>
</div><div>"It was economywide, it set reduction pathways based on what the science was telling us, and it showed us how, by working together with industry, we could craft an effective climate program consistent with a growing economy," said Goo, now with AJW Inc. "And I think, sooner or later, we will return to something like it. "</div><div>
</div><div><b>Clinton vs. Trump</b></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>Markey called a potential Hillary Clinton administration paramount to the United States "continuing to be the world leader" on climate change.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Obama promised the globe in the time before the Paris climate negotiations that the United States would reduce its greenhouse gas emissions between 26 and 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025. In Paris last December, more than 190 nations agreed to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius and to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5 C. The agreement also commits countries to periodically revisiting their pledged domestic emissions reductions.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Both Waxman and Markey are optimistic that Clinton will become the next president of the United States.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">"I think she would be wise to follow the example of President Obama in trying to put this as a high priority to work with the rest of the world to reduce the greenhouse gases that cause climate change," Waxman said. "I believe she’s committed to it."</span></div><div>
</div><div>Markey is harshly critical of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s inconsistent views on climate change. In 2009, before international climate talks in Copenhagen, Denmark, Trump signed an open letter calling global warming a problem; he’s since claimed that it is a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese to hurt American business.</div><div>
</div><div>Trump has more recently vowed to undo the Paris climate pledge, which Obama officials are hopeful will go into force before the beginning of the next administration. Once entered into force, which happens when at least 55 countries representing at least 55 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions formally adopt it, the withdrawal process for a nation takes four years.</div><div>
</div><div>Markey compared Trump’s claim that climate change is a hoax to the businessman’s former claim that Obama was born in Kenya and not the United States.</div><div>
</div><div>If Trump is elected, Markey said, "every single promise we made to the rest of the world [on climate change] will be broken."</div><div>
</div><div>A campaign issue?</div><div><b>Markey also predicted that climate change would become a more hotly debated issue this presidential election compared with the 2008 race</b>, when both parties’ candidates expressed support for addressing greenhouse gas emissions, and the 2012 race between Obama and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) when climate change was largely a nonissue.</div><div>
</div><div>"It’s going to become a larger and larger issue that goes right to [Trump’s] credibility as a leader in our country," Markey said. "So the more he says it, the better for us because suburban swing Republicans and independent voters believe the science of climate change."</div><div>
</div><div>Others have said the same.</div><div>
</div><div>"The Clinton campaign is going to push these issues, and their allies in the clean energy business sector are going to push these issues forcefully, especially in swing states," said Paul Bledsoe, a former climate adviser for the Bill Clinton administration and an energy consultant. "I think they see it as a profound political vulnerability for Trump and the Republicans generally."</div><div>
</div><div>Still, a recent Gallup poll found that, of 17 policy issues, the issue gap for climate change is greatest among voters. The poll found that 72 percent of Democrats say that the issue of climate change is "extremely" or "very" important in how they vote for a presidential candidate. Just 25 percent of Republicans say that the issue is important.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Waxman lamented the hyper-partisan nature of Congress and that "compromise" has become a "dirty word" in D.C</b>. He said he’s surprised that supporters of cap and trade were unable to harness the business community in attracting more Republican support for the legislation.</div><div>
</div><div>"It has been a difficult time that we’re going through in getting a more reasonable way to compromise," he said, "because so many of the Republicans that have been elected to office in the last four, six years think that their role is to say no to anything that the Democratic president, Democrats want."</div><div>
</div><div>Greg Dotson, who was the chief environmental staffer on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee at the time of Waxman-Markey, said that Republican support did not materialize despite support from companies in the oil and chemical sector.</div><div>
</div><div>"The assumption and hope was that if you got businesses on, you got Republicans on," said Dotson, who is now the vice president for energy policy at the Center for American Progress. "So we did a lot of work to address business concerns, and we got a lot of business support, and that did not translate to broad Republican support.</div><div>
</div><div>"For an incoming president," Dotson added, "that’s a pretty scary precedent."</div><div>
</div><div>At a recent hearing in the Environment and Public Works Committee, Markey said it was ironic that coal-industry allies who are complaining about EPA greenhouse gas regulations’ impact on jobs didn’t support the cap-and-trade legislation.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">He complained that the&nbsp;<b>coal industry rejected an offer of billions of dollars for carbon capture and storage technology</b>&nbsp;via the Waxman-Markey bill. Markey argued that the bill attempted to help coal companies stay alive in a way that works "for all the interests."</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"We were trying to give them a bridge to the future," he said. "Do you think they wish they could go back to 2009 and grab that money?"</span></div><div>
</div><div>Waxman said that he was hopeful that the dynamic would change in Congress to allow for more collaboration between the parties. He predicted a disaster for Republicans at the polls in November.</div><div>
</div><div>"I think it’s going to change because I think they’re going to go down the tubes in this next election, and that’s going to be a lesson to them," Waxman said.</div><div>
</div><div>He added: "But I don’t know. I’m giving you my wishful thinking."</div><div>
</div></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">s</font><a class="widgetheadline-text custom-post-headline" href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/11/dan-crenshaw/" aria-label="Sen. Ed Markey applauded for silent dismissal of Texas Republican Dan Crenshaw's lame attack" open="Open" sans="Sans" sans-serif="sans-serif" word-break="word-break" break-word="break-word" overflow-wrap="overflow-wrap" font-size="font-size" px="px" line-height="line-height" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">en. Ed Markey applauded for silent dismissal of Texas Republican Dan Crenshaw's lame attack</a></font></p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div class="social-author clearfix" style="margin-top: 10px; display: inline-block; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="social-authorname" href="https://www.alternet.org/author/walter-einenkel" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.4; display: inline; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;">Walter Einenkel</a>&nbsp;<a class="social-authorname" href="https://www.alternet.org/author/daily-kos" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.4; display: inline; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;">Daily Kos</a></font></font></font></font></div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;</span><div class="social-date" style="margin-top: 8px; display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;<span class="social-datetext" style="top: 3px; position: relative; line-height: 1; left: -3px;">November 23, 2020</span></div><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body css-listicle-body-2649014604" style="margin-top: 10px; -webkit-box-orient: vertical; text-overflow: ellipsis; display: -webkit-box; -webkit-line-clamp: 4; overflow: hidden; line-height: 31px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body-description"><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sen. Ed Markey is the Massachusetts Democrat who has continued to move towards the more progressive wing of the Democratic Party, and the voters have rewarded him, first by defeating the strange&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/9/1/1974295/-Sen-Ed-Markey-wins-renomination-after-hard-fought-Massachusetts-primary-battle" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; overflow-wrap: break-word;">Pelosi-supported primary bid by Rep. Joe Kennedy III</a>&nbsp;and then</font></p></div></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/trump-is-bulldozing-democracy-and-democrats-have-no-plan-to-stop-him/">https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/trump-is-bulldozing-democracy-and-democrats-have-no-plan-to-stop-him/</a></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">take senate abol fillib&nbsp;</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"When Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court," Sen.&nbsp;Ed Markey of Massachusetts&nbsp;</span><a href="https://twitter.com/EdMarkey/status/1307122232850870274" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><u>tweeted over the weekend</u></a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, a call supported by House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York.</span></font></p><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/07/how-the-so-called-champion-of-american-business-fought-to-protect-profiteering-and-endangered-millions"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/07/how-the-so-called-champion-of-american-business-fought-to-protect-profiteering-and-endangered-millions</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As hospital intensive care units overflow again, and delays in COVID-19 testing reports reach record levels in many cities, a conversation I recently with Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, reminded me that I had forgotten something utterly critical:&nbsp;<b>Donald Trump’s decision to unilaterally disarm America in the face of the coronavirus invasion was urged upon him by an ostensible defender of American business: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When the pandemic reached America, we weren’t ready — any more than we were ready when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. But Trump had the tools to do what the U.S. has often done: make up for lack of preparedness. The crucial gaps to fill in March were supplies for testing to limit the spread of the virus, and medical equipment to treat those who got sick — testing kits, swabs, reagents, masks, gowns and gloves — by the billions. Government health agencies estimated that if the pandemic took hold, the country would need, for example, 3.5 billion N95 medical masks. We had 12 million.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Presidents have available, and have routinely used, the Cold War-era Defense Production Act to overcome such critical supply shortages&nbsp;</b>— not just in wartime, but also to ensure adequate relief supplies after natural disasters. DPA can be used to put emergency purchases at the head of a supply chain, but also to require factories to convert their output to provide needed equipment in adequate volumes. Members of Congress urged Trump to appoint a military official as DPA czar to coordinate production and distribution of essential pandemic-related medical supplies, as was done in the Korean War.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">In March, Trump was leaning towards robust use of the DPA, fashioning himself as a wartime president and the battle against the coronavirus as America’s “big war.” He invoked the DPA to require General Motors to speed up its production of ventilators. But he quickly discovered that he had an enemy within — not the virus as such, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Within days of Trump’s announcement that he would mobilize as if for war and use the DPA, the Chamber of Commerce’s lobbying army swung into action. Among the Chamber’s arguments: DPA would impose “red tape on companies precisely when they need flexibility to deal with closed borders and shuttered factories.” Unstated: if the government took charge of the supply chain for tests, masks and gowns, it could also prevent bidding wars from competing hospitals and states that would, and did, drive prices — and profits — through the roof.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In response, labor unions representing nurses, hospital staff and other frontline workers who were unable to be tested, or to obtain masks or gowns, protested and urged the Chamber to join a national mobilization</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;to defeat the coronavirus. The appeal was not answered. On March 23,&nbsp;</span><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Markey&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">and his Massachusetts colleague, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, wrote to the Chamber demanding an explanation. The Chamber’s response: Defense Production Act reliance was unnecessary, because “American companies will do whatever it takes to support America’s response to the pandemic and shore up the economy.”</span></b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But what the workers had feared — insufficient production, soaring prices and profits, chaotic delivery mechanisms — took over the health care market during the first wave of virus spikes in the Northeast. Some hospitals were paying 15 times the usual price for masks.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The Chamber continued its strenuous opposition to enabling the government to ensure an adequate supply of tests and PPE. Even Trump conceded that profiteering had taken over the market, and ultimately he did invoke the DPA to prevent it — but when it came to the export market.</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Supplies increased, but often at exorbitant prices. Only when the shutdowns of most of the American economy brought the number of hospitalizations down sharply did supply and demand come into temporary balance. Americans believed that if there was a second wave later in the year, at least health care workers on the front lines would have the tools they needed.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Trump, denied by Chamber opposition of an easy pathway to acting like a heroic wartime president, seemingly lost interest. By June his focus had shifted from fighting the virus to reopening the economy and then reigniting the culture wars. Media headlines proclaiming his lack of interest didn’t even provoke “fake news” tweets from the East Wing of the White House.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The virus had a longer attention span. With major states like Florida, Texas and Arizona opening rapidly and prematurely, the holes in the jerry-built testing, tracing and quarantine systems each state had fashioned without federal guidance gave the virus its chance.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Cases — although not, initially, fatalities — began to soar. Suddenly, what any nationally coordinated effort would have been tracking and resolving all along — that the nation had stepped up production of tests, masks and gowns to meet the needs of an economy in shutdown, but had nowhere near the level of supplies for a massive second wave — came home to roost. By early July, new cases were flooding the hospital capacity of even some of the nation’s major health care centers, such as Houston.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In New Orleans, testing centers had to close eight minutes after they opened. In 100-degree heat in Phoenix, lines at testing centers were eight hours long. San Antonio and Austin were forced to limit testing to those with symptoms, leaving the system utterly unable to detect asymptomatic cases, when research suggests that to 40% of infections take place. Wait times for test results soared with caseloads, so that even those who got tested might not find out they were positive until they were well past the contagious stage.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Nurses were again forced to use one N95 mask for weeks at a time.</b>&nbsp;Prices for what was actually available soared. States reported they could only fulfill 10% of their orders. Even now, in July, the U.S. has nothing like the 3.5 billion N95 masks that we knew in January we would need. Indeed, how could we? No manufacturer could have guessed in March how severe the crisis would be by fall. With no one managing the system, it was clearly foolish for any private company to produce, on speculation, several billion masks. Market signals cannot prepare America for the massive increase in possible scale required by such a pandemic. Nor can individual cities and states trigger the necessary ramp-up of supplies. Only a systematic national plan designed to ensure that we were ready for the worst-case scenario could have protected us.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Inevitably, the “market solutions” favored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have failed America not once but twice. In failing, they have taken the nation’s economy over the precipice into a deep, long, economic decline. That the loudest voice claiming to represent U.S. business chose to defend profiteering, embrace short-term thinking and risk the collapse of the American health care system and economy is both shameful and shocking.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>And that most Americans, including me, had already forgotten this is scary. This is not the first time the Chamber has successfully pursued policies that put us enormously at risk — for years it has been one of the major forces preventing Washington from adopting even the most modest efforts to accelerate a transition off fossil fuels to save lives and protect the climate. But if the Chamber can get away once again with having caused massive economic damage while risking the health of millions, and with its public reputation unscathed, it’s unlikely to change its behavior.</b></font></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
<font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong>N EXCUSE TO RECUSE:</strong>&nbsp;A trio of Democratic senators is asking&nbsp;<span class="rollover-people" data-behavior="rolloverpeople"><a class="rollover-people-link" data-nid="261287" href="https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump">President Trump</a></span>'s ambassador to the United Nations to recuse herself from dealing with the Paris climate accord as the White House prepares to formally withdraw from the landmark agreement.</font></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A letter to Kelly Craft questions if she has too many conflicts of interest to be involved given her financial and personal ties to the industry.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Craft has $63 million invested in coal, oil and natural gas, according to the letter, and she's the wife of Joe Craft, CEO of Alliance Resource Partners, one of the largest coal companies in the U.S.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Given your extensive family ties to the coal industry, and given that decisions about climate inherently involve decisions about the future of coal, we urge you to agree to recuse yourself from any actions to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement," wrote Sen<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">s.&nbsp;<span class="rollover-people" data-behavior="rolloverpeople"><a class="rollover-people-link" data-nid="188283" href="https://thehill.com/people/jeff-merkley">Jeff Merkley</a></span>&nbsp;(D-Ore.),&nbsp;<span class="rollover-people" data-behavior="rolloverpeople"><a class="rollover-people-link" data-nid="188277" href="https://thehill.com/people/ed-markey">Ed Markey</a></span>&nbsp;(D-Mass.) and&nbsp;<span class="rollover-people" data-behavior="rolloverpeople"><a class="rollover-people-link" data-nid="188177" href="https://thehill.com/people/sheldon-whitehouse">Sheldon Whitehouse</a></span>&nbsp;(D-R.I.).</span></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The State Department did not immediately respond to request for comment.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump has often bragged about withdrawing from the Paris accord, making an announcement in the Rose Garden in 2017 to say he intended to do so.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the agreement doesn't allow him to begin the formal yearlong withdrawal process until Monday. The U.S. would officially be out of the deal the same date in 2020 -- just one day after the presidential elections.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">All signs indicate the White House is gearing up for a formal withdrawal...</font></p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font><div><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=&nbsp;
</font></span></div><div><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/trump-administration-seeks-to-unleash-a-pillage-of-arctic-refuge-but-indigenous-groups-vow-to-fight-it/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/trump-administration-seeks-to-unleash-a-pillage-of-arctic-refuge-but-indigenous-groups-vow-to-fight-it/</font></a></span></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Trump administration seeks to unleash a pillage of Arctic Refuge — but indigenous groups vow to fight it</b></font></div><div><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Andrea Germanos / Common Dreams September 13, 2019</font></span></div><div><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Indigenous leaders vowed Thursday to protect their Alaskan lands from fossil fuel exploitation after the Trump administration moved closer to allowing drilling along the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge—a move the House just tried to block.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“The Gwich’in are protectors,” said Bernadette Demientieff, executive director of the Gwich’in Steering Committee, “and we will not give up.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The pledge from the Gwich’in—who call the coastal plain “the sacred place where life begins”—came in response to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for oil and gas leasing, which was released Thursday by the Bureau of Land Management.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The announcement, said Interior Secretary&nbsp;</span><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">David Bernhardt in a press statement, represents “a big step to carry out the clear mandate we received from Congress to develop and implement a leasing program for the Coastal Plain,” referring to&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-Alaska</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">) provision in the “tax scam” of 2017 requiring the sales for drilling rights in the area.&nbsp; Bernhardt is a former fossil fuel lobbyist.</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In the new analysis, the administration, as The Washington Post reported, chose “the most aggressive development option for an area long closed to drilling.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The FEIS unlawfully opens the entire coastal plain to leasing,” wrot<b>e NRDC</b>&nbsp;staff attorney Garett Rose. “It fails to even consider an approach that minimizes damage to the refuge’s unique environment, violating our bedrock environmental review law.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But that choice came to “no one’s surprise,” according to Adam Kolton, executive director of Alaska Wilderness League, who said the Trump administration was “not even pretending that this is about restraint or meaningful protection.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“With an eye on developing the entirety of the fragile coastal plain,” Kolton continued, “the administration has been riding roughshod over science, silencing dissent, and shutting out entire indigenous communities.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Demientieff, whose community has highlighted the potential catastrophe the exploitation could unleash on the calving and nursery grounds for the Porcupine caribou herd, also criticized the FEIS for disrespecting “the Gwich’in Nation and all people in the Arctic and world who suffer the impacts of climate change and nonstop exploitation, while formally scratching the backs of those who seek to desecrate land and dishonor human rights to fill their pockets.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The FEIS, as The Hill noted, is “one of the final steps before leases can be sold,” as bidding may begin after 30 days.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The timing of the release of the environmental impact statement also raised the eyebrows of Kolton, who noted that it came “literally hours” after the Democratic-controlled House voted 225-193 to block the mandate for the ANWR drilling.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Passage of that bill was welcomed by its author, by Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.),</b>&nbsp;who said the measure “reflects a very simple proposition: there are some places too wild, too important, too unique to be spoiled by oil and gas development.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Huffman praised lawmakers voting in favor of the measure for “protecting not just the beating biological heart of the largest wildlife refuge in the United States, but the Indigenous people who depend on this sacred, natural landscape.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The vote was also celebrated by Indigenous and environmental groups.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Alex Taurel, head of&nbsp;<b>League of Conservation Voters</b>’ Conservation Program, called the vote “a resounding victory for the Gwich’in people, their sacred traditions, and the invaluable wildlife of the majestic Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The majority of people in the U.S. oppose oil and gas drilling in the Arctic Refuge—we will continue to stand up against special interest big polluters as long as it takes,” said Taurel, urging the Senate to follow suit.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Democratic Senators including Ed Markey (Mass.) and Michael Bennet (Colo.)&nbsp;</b>took to social media this week to ramp support for their legislation to block the ANWR drilling—though its fate is likely doomed in the Republican-controlled chamber.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ed Markey</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@SenMarkey</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We can’t let the Arctic Refuge, one of the last pristine wildernesses in America, be permanently destroyed by oil and gas drilling. That’s why today, we’re intro'ing the Arctic Refuge Protection Act to designate this delicate region as wilderness and prevent all future drilling.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Embedded video</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></span></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">February 7<b>, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) introduced a Green New Deal resolution</b>. The resolution outlines what they plan to include in formal legislation down the line.</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Over the following five days, primetime cable news coverage of the Green New Deal&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://click.e.mediamatters.org/?qs=1d01b59d9ef0a9f30c58dd004f73e1ebd714f0d3bb0ff061dd36d346c464865672795bdaf8958db52354d88ae3fdeb28981268172e9205ef" title="Fox News dominated prime-time cable coverage of the Green New Deal">was dominated by Fox News</a>. Fox News aired a total of 34 segments on the resolution, more than three times the combined total of MSNBC (8 segments) and CNN (3 segments).</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Obviously, the Fox News coverage of the legislation was terrible. Many segments did not even mention climate change.</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is not the only example of cable news discussion of a policy issue being dominated by the right. In the weeks leading up to the State of the Union, Fox News aired&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://click.e.mediamatters.org/?qs=1d01b59d9ef0a9f3d70aaf9ab9df8a14423161bcb0cd049d28d454c74fd1919455003b260c76185526f1f71323f790d50f66a369fdd48d7f" title="Fox News almost single-handedly manufactured anti-abortion outrage before Trump’s State of the Union">nearly seven hours</a>&nbsp;of coverage of state abortion measures, while CNN and MSNBC covered the same stories for less than 15 minutes combined.</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fox News dominating policy discussions of progressive initiatives has real consequences: They are immediately caricatured, with outright lies getting a massive head start. A large number of people get their first impressions through this distorted coverage, including many in the media.</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When one of these issues&nbsp;does eventually jump to mainstream media, myths and lies often make the jump alongside. At minimum, the mainstream debate is partially about debunking the lies that have already happened.</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><i><b>Sunday shows fail again:</b></i>&nbsp;America is in desperate need of an adult conversation about how to address climate change. Instead of that, the Sunday shows talked about climate change and the Green New Deal&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://click.e.mediamatters.org/?qs=1d01b59d9ef0a9f32a6d2344d776c95571b4747f13cba4c2641f6cfbf6c19f364a737090928dc9f230b4abb72d17fd2e11f9dd1bec2bfdfa" title="Major Sunday shows discuss climate change and Green New Deal, but through narrow lens of political horse race">only through</a>&nbsp;the narrow lens of the political horse race. Maybe we can prioritize fending off a massive destabilizing rise in sea level instead of worrying about whose poll numbers go up or down as a result of endorsing a resolution.</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><i><b>Meanwhile:</b></i>&nbsp;Right-wing media are somehow worse than useless on the Green New Deal, as they've repeatedly&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://click.e.mediamatters.org/?qs=1d01b59d9ef0a9f38a60a0aca9370aa3bb29ee8bbf780335f4549cddf57dfc96b35dd10a40ec8ebf758414de6d3d0cbb8d73acc8a683d9b1" title="Conservatives invoke murderous dictators to attack Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the Green New Deal">invoked murderous dictators</a>&nbsp;to complain about the initiative. Michael Savage, who has partied with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, even said of Ocasio-Cortez, "“This is a Stalinist in a skirt; this is a Hitler in high heels.”</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.alternet.org/environment/senators-and-movement-leaders-introduce-100-percent-clean-energy-bill</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
&nbsp;</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></p><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/07/31/following-desmog-s-revelations-spectra-pipeline-ma-senators-demand-more-answers-ferc-alleged-conflict-interest"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Following DeSmog’s Revelations on Spectra Pipeline, MA Senators Demand More Answers from FERC on Alleged Conflict of Interest</font></a></span></div><div class="views-field views-field-body"><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Massachusetts Senators...</font></p></div><div class="views-field views-field-view-node"><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/07/31/following-desmog-s-revelations-spectra-pipeline-ma-senators-demand-more-answers-ferc-alleged-conflict-interest"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Read more</font></a></span></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; line-height: normal;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></span></span></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; line-height: normal;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/02/03/senators-introduce-merchants-doubt-amendment-energy-bill-call-fossil-fuel-industry-end-denial-and-deception">http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/02/03/senators-introduce-merchants-doubt-amendment-energy-bill-call-fossil-fuel-industry-end-denial-and-deception</a>
</span></span>&nbsp;</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Democratic&nbsp;<span class="caps">U.S.</span>&nbsp;Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (<span class="caps">RI</span>), Ed Markey (<span class="caps">MA</span>) and Brian Schatz (<span class="caps">HI</span>)&nbsp;</b>introduced an amendment into the energy bill yesterday intended to express Congress’s disapproval of the use of industry-funded think tanks and misinformation tactics aimed at sowing doubt about climate change&nbsp;science.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The&nbsp;<a target="blank" href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/2016-02-02%20Merchants%20of%20Doubt%20Energy%20Bill%20Amendment%20%28%233200%29.pdf">amendment</a>&nbsp;evokes the history of notorious anti-science efforts by the tobacco and lead industries to avoid accountability for the damage caused by their products, focusing similar ire on the fossil fuel industry’s decades-long climate&nbsp;cover-up.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Although it doesn’t name specific companies, the amendment is surely inspired by recent revelations about ExxonMobil’s early and advanced knowledge of the role of fossil fuels in driving climate change — which was followed by the company’s subsequent, unconscionable climate science denial&nbsp;efforts.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Just as tobacco and lead companies sowed doubt about the dangers of their products through the use of front groups and third-party experts, so did ExxonMobil — through its funding of a sophisticated network of denialists — work to deceive the public about climate science and the need for political action to end the fossil fuel&nbsp;era.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The most recent and damning #ExxonKnew revelations were published late in 2015 in investigative articles by both&nbsp;<a target="blank" href="http://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken">InsideClimate News</a>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<a target="blank" href="http://graphics.latimes.com/exxon-research/">Los Angeles Times</a>&nbsp;in collaboration with the Columbia School of&nbsp;Journalism.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="line-height: 17.6px;">Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-<span class="caps">VT</span>) joined the amendment as a co-sponsor once it was&nbsp;introduced.</span></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</font>&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">A effort to increase kids’ scientific knowledge of climate change&nbsp;<a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/248068-senate-rejects-climate-change-education-amendment" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">failed in the Senate</a>&nbsp;on Wednesday, after one senator expressed concern that the measure would result in a lot of “wasted paper.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Put forth by Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), the measure would have created a competitive grant program for public school districts to “develop or improve” climate change education curricula. It was put forward as an amendment to&nbsp;<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/education/2015/07/16/3681268/voting-no-child-left-behind-fix-ends-democrats-hope-win-universal-pre-k/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">a bill to reform No Child Left Behind</a>, the controversial federal education policy implemented under former President George W. Bush.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Markey argued that the grant program would help equip the next generation to deal with the effects of human-caused climate change, a burden they are likely to bear.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“The children of our country deserve the best scientific education they can get on this topic,”&nbsp;<a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/248068-senate-rejects-climate-change-education-amendment" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">he said</a>. “They are the future leaders of our country and our world. They must be equipped for this generational science.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Republican author of the reform bill, however, opposed the amendment on the grounds that it gave the federal government too much power in guiding what kids are learning.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“If you like Washington, D.C., getting involved in Common Core in your state, you’re going to love this amendment,” said&nbsp;<b>Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN).</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">If the amendment passed, Alexander argued that kids would be subject to frequently changing curricula regarding climate change depending on the president at the time. If the next president is a Republican, for example, he or she may choose to remove climate education entirely from federal education guidance. That would result in textbooks that are constantly changing, Alexander said — which is, ironically, bad for the environment.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“Just imagine what the curriculum on climate change would be if we shifted from President Obama to President Cruz and then back to President Sanders and then to President Trump,” he said. “There would be a lot of wasted paper, writing and rewriting textbooks.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Markey’s amendment failed by a vote of 44-53.&nbsp;</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The vote fell mostly on party lines, but two Republicans — Sens. Kelly Ayotte and Mark Kirk — voted for it, and three Democrats — Sens. Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Manchin, and Jon Tester — voted against it.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Of course, the amendment’s failure does not mean schools are not allowed to teach the science of climate change — just that the federal government won’t provide incentives for schools that do. What public schools can and can’t teach is most often the decision of states, many of which have policies regarding climate education. So far, 13 states have adopted the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nextgenscience.org/lead-state-partners" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Next Generation Science Standards</a>&nbsp;(NGSS) as guidance, and those standards recommend climate change education begin in middle school.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Other states have resisted efforts to include climate science in public school curricula. Last year, Wyoming<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/17/3412131/wyoming-rejects-ngss/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">rejected the NGSS</a>&nbsp;after the state’s Board of Education chariman said he did not “accept, personally, that [climate change] is a fact.” That rejection was&nbsp;<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/02/27/3628008/wyoming-repeals-science-standard-ban/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">reversed earlier this year</a>, and the state now is free to adopt those standards if it wants.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</font>&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><a href="http://www.globalpossibilities.org/senate-rejects-effort-to-teach-kids-about-climate-change-in-schools/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 18px;">http://www.globalpossibilities.org/senate-rejects-effort-to-teach-kids-about-climate-change-in-schools/</font></a></p><p><b><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></font></b></p><p><b><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">udall, say it ain't so:</font></b></p><p><b><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5/15</font></b></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">What do you get when you let the chemical industry write a “chemical safety” bill?</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A bill that protects chemical companies, not consumers.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The last time Congress passed a chemical safety bill — the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) — was in 1976. The TSCA “was&nbsp;<a href="http://www.ewg.org/key-issues/toxics/chemical-policy" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">broken from the start</a>,” according to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), because it grandfathered in thousands of chemicals already on the market. It was so “broken and weak,” says EWG, that it didn’t even allow the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban asbestos, a known cause of cancer.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Now, 39 years later, tens of thousands of new chemicals have been introduced, the majority of which have never been safety tested by the EPA. These chemicals, more than 80,000 of them, are in the food we eat, the clothes we wear and the homes we live in.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">It’s time for reform. But unfortunately, S.697 — which still doesn’t address asbestos — falls far short of accomplishing that. That could have something to do with the fact that the chemical industry has&nbsp;<a href="http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2015/03/chemical-industry-spending-surges-support-sham-reform" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">spent $190 million</a>&nbsp;lobbying for this bill.&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Democratic Sponsor Tom Udall’s (D-N.M.) campaign received $49,050 from the Chemical industry in the 2014 cycle, plus $23,500 from lobbyists employed by the American Chemistry Council. Republican sponsor David Vitter’s (R-La.)&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">campaign received $20,600 in the 2014 cycle, and $14,300 from American Chemistry Council lobbyists. We need your voice to stop this bill.</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On April 27 (2015), the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved a rewritten version of S.697, sending it to the Senate floor for a vote. The revised bill gave slightly more protection to state chemical safety laws, by changing the grandfathered date to Jan. 1, 2015, instead of Aug. 1, 2015. The new version also no longer allows federal chemical rules to preempt state clean water and clear air laws.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the bill is still inadequate, according to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.):</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"The legislation does nothing to ensure that terrifying disease clusters of children's cancers are addressed, and the killer of 10,000 Americans a year — asbestos — was entirely left out of the bill," Boxer said. "I will continue to call attention to the flaws of the bill and the improvements that are needed to protect our families."</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Boxer and her colleague Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) have introduced an<a href="http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/Boxer-Markey.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">opposing bill</a>,</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;which&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=dbec8491-c006-4e04-9e44-416e78622e83" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">they say</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;offers far better protection than S. 697, which they say cripples state efforts to regulate toxic chemicals, while leaving the federal government without the resources needed to properly safety test them.</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One of the bill’s biggest shortcomings is that it allows the EPA to review no more than 25 chemicals in the first three years. At that pace, it would take more than a century to address the backlog of chemicals in need of review. We already know that some chemicals, such as Bisphenol A (BPA), are&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960076011001063" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">hormone disrupters</a>, yet BPA is still found in baby food containers. As for thousands of other unregulated chemicals, the effects are unknown.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In the absence of federal action, states have taken the lead in monitoring toxic chemicals and setting safety standards for industry — 33 states have passed laws to include some form of monitoring or restrictions to harmful chemicals like formaldehyde, mercury, asbestos and BPA. S.697, though it will grandfather in many of these state laws, will hinder states from taking stronger action in the future.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More on how chemicals are regulated&nbsp;<a href="http://photo.pds.org:5012/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2009012300" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">here</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="http://photo.pds.org:5012/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2014071800" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">here</a>.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></p><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That means l<span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294);">iberal dark money in 2013 makes up 70 percent of all the dark money spent so far. &nbsp;At this point in 2011, liberal money accounted for less than 6 percent of the dark money spent, and in 2009, the total was a little higher, at 6.5 percent.</span></font></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The top spender, the League of Conservation Voters,&nbsp;has already reported laying out&nbsp;<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/recips.php?cmte=C90005786&cycle=2014" style="outline: none;">more than $800,000 in direct support for Ed Markey's</a>&nbsp;(D-Mass.) successful run for the Senate seat vacated by John Kerry -- almost twice as much as all dark money groups combined had spent at this point in the 2012 cycle.&nbsp;</font></span></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294);">LCV's pro-Markey efforts account for&nbsp;nearly half of the liberal dark money spent so far in 2013, and a third of all dark money spent. &nbsp;</span></font></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Last February, when Markey came under fire for&nbsp;<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/02/21/rep-ed-markey-compares-citizens-united-to-dred-scott-case/" target="blank" style="outline: none;">comparing</a>&nbsp;the&nbsp;<i>Citizens United</i>&nbsp;decision to the infamous 1857 Dred Scott Supreme Court decision -- which denied citizenship to anyone of African descent and provided a legal framework for slavery -- his campaign responded by saying, "Karl Rove, the Koch Brothers and anonymous special interests have no place in our elections and no place in this Senate race." Yet once the race was over, it was clear that the vast majority of the anonymous money&nbsp;<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/indexp.php?cycle=2014&id=MAS2" style="outline: none;">spent in the race</a>&nbsp;favored Markey.</font></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">LCV's efforts in support of Markey were entirely positive, an aberration in dark money spending. Most outside groups use their resources to attack their favored candidates' opponents.</font></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So far this cycle, more dark money has been spent supporting candidates, rather than opposing them -- a departure from both the 2010 and 2012 cycles at this point in time.</font></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">

opposes oil subsidies&nbsp;<a href="http://grist.org/news/can-we-afford-40-billion-gift-to-oil-companies/?utm_campaign=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter">http://grist.org/news/can-we-afford-40-billion-gift-to-oil-companies/?utm_campaign=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter</a></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Edward John Markey</b>&nbsp;has been a&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/United_States_Democratic_Party" title="United States Democratic Party">Democratic</a>&nbsp;member of the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/U.S.House_of_Representatives" title="U. S. House of Representatives" class="mw-redirect">U. S. House of Representatives</a>, representing the 7th District of&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Members_of_the_U.S.Congress_from_Massachusetts" title="Category:Members of the U.S. Congress from Massachusetts">Massachusetts</a>, since 1977. (<a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/preview/congdist/ma07_109.gif">map</a>)</font></p><table id="toc" class="toc"><tbody><tr><td><div id="toctitle"><h2><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Contents</font></h2><span class="toctoggle"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;[<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#" class="internal" id="togglelink">hide</a>]&nbsp;</font></span></div><ul><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Record_and_controversies"><span class="tocnumber">1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Record and controversies</span></a></font><ul><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Iraq_War"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Iraq War</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Abortion"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.2</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Abortion</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-4"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Environmental_record"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.3</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Environmental record</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-5"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Energy_and_Fuel_Economy"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.4</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Energy and Fuel Economy</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-6"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Support_for_gun_control"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.5</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Support for gun control</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-7"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Calls_for_arrest_of_security_researcher"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.6</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Calls for arrest of security researcher</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-8"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Network_neutrality_legislation"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.7</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Network neutrality legislation</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-9"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#The_COPE_Act"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.8</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">The COPE Act</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-10"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Chemical_security_legislation"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">1.9</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Chemical security legislation</span></font></a></li></ul></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-11"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Bio"><span class="tocnumber">2</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Bio</span></a></font><ul><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-12"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Congressional_career"><span class="tocnumber">2.1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Congressional career</span></a></font><ul><li class="toclevel-3 tocsection-13"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#2006_elections"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">2.1.1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">2006 elections</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-3 tocsection-14"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#2008_Electtions"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">2.1.2</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">2008 Electtions</span></font></a></li></ul></li></ul></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-15"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Money_in_politics"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">3</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Money in politics</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-16"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Committees_and_Affiliations"><span class="tocnumber">4</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Committees and Affiliations</span></a></font><ul><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-17"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Committees"><span class="tocnumber">4.1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Committees</span></a></font><ul><li class="toclevel-3 tocsection-18"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Committee_assignments_in_the_109th_Congress.282005-2006.29"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">4.1.1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Committee assignments in the 109th Congress (2005-2006)</span></font></a></li></ul></li></ul></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-19"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#More_Background_Data"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">5</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">More Background Data</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-20"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Contact"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">6</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Contact</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-21"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Articles_and_Resources"><span class="tocnumber">7</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Articles and Resources</span></a></font><ul><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-22"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Sources"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">7.1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Sources</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-23"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Resources"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">7.2</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Resources</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-24"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Articles"><span class="tocnumber">7.3</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Articles</span></a></font><ul><li class="toclevel-3 tocsection-25"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#Local_blogs_and_discussion_sites"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber">7.3.1</span>&nbsp;<span class="toctext">Local blogs and discussion sites</span></font></a></li></ul></li></ul></li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table><h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Record_and_controversies"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Record and controversies</font></span></h2><div style="margin: 0.5em 0.75em; border-collapse: collapse; background: rgb(220, 232, 248); border: 1px solid rgb(92, 121, 181); padding: 0.25em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">General information about important bills and votes for can be found in Congresspedia's&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:U.S.legislation" title="Category:U.S. legislation">articles on legislation</a>. You can add information you find on how Ed Markey voted by clicking the "[edit]" link to the right and typing it in. Remember to&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Help:References" title="Help:References">cite your sources</a>!</font></div><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Iraq_War"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Iraq War</font></span></h3><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Markey voted for the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Iraq_Resolution_of_2002" title="Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002">Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002</a>&nbsp;that started the Iraq War.<sup id="cite_ref-0" class="reference"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#cite_note-0">[1]</a></sup></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On January 9, 2007, Rep. Markey introduced a House version (H.R. 353) of Sen.&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Ted_Kennedy" title="Ted Kennedy" class="mw-redirect">Ted Kennedy</a>'s (D-Mass.) bill to restrict Bush from committing more troops to Iraq unless Congress approved the move.</font></p><dl><dd><i><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Main article:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Congressional_actions_regarding_President_Bush%E2%80%99s_2007_proposed_troop%E2%80%9Csurge%E2%80%9D_in_Iraq" title="Congressional actions regarding President Bush’s 2007 proposed troop “surge” in Iraq">Congressional actions regarding President Bush’s 2007 proposed troop “surge” in Iraq</a></font></i></dd></dl><div style="margin: 0.5em 0.75em; border-collapse: collapse; background: rgb(220, 232, 248); border: 1px solid rgb(92, 121, 181); padding: 0.25em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For more information see the chart of&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/U.S.House_of_Representatives_votes_on_the_Iraq_War" title="U.S. House of Representatives votes on the Iraq War">U.S. House of Representatives votes on the Iraq War</a>.</font></div><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Abortion"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Abortion</font></span></h3><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">His beliefs on Abortion are not consistent with his beliefs on Environmental issues. He openly believes abortions should be legal when the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape and when the life of the woman is endangered.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=26900#409">[1]</a>&nbsp;Usually, a view like this on the issue of abortion is considered quite conservative. His interest group ratings are mostly 100%, and the things he is in support of contrast his beliefs on abortion.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=26900">[2]</a></font></p><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Environmental_record"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Environmental record</font></span></h3><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Markey stands strong for the environment. His actions that he takes to save our world cry out, “I’m a liberal.” Markey has introduced new legislation to not drill off Georges Bank&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3448&Itemid=191">[3]</a>.</font></p><pre><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He also introduced a revolutionary Global Warming bill. <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3378&Itemid=191">[4]</a>

</font></pre><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A majority of his interest group ratings range between 95 and 100%, showing his compassion for our world.</font></p><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Energy_and_Fuel_Economy"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Energy and Fuel Economy</font></span></h3><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Markey has fought hard in the fight for energy independence since the beginning of his days in Congress. A long-time advocate of shifting away from a dependence on foreign oil, Markey has been a captain and determined leader of increasing fuel economy standards for automobiles. He has introduced a proposal to increase the minimum fuel economy to 35 miles per gallon by 2020, and became a law in December 2007.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=com_issues&task=view_issue&issue=19&parent=7&Itemid=152">[5]</a>&nbsp;His interest group rating of the Campaign for America’s Future is 100%, however, the group is comprised of conservative views.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?category=29&go.x=7&go.y=12&can_id=26900&type=category">[6]</a></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Markey calls on the house to pass energy bill, here is a link to the video.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3234&Itemid=88">[7]</a></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
&nbsp;</font></p><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Support_for_gun_control"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Support for gun control</font></span></h3><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In 1991, Markey cosponsored H.R. 3104, which would have amended title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the importation and the manufacture of firearms designed to accept a silencer, bayonet, grenade launcher, flash suppressor, or folding stock, of certain ammunition feeding devices, and of related devices, and to provide for the imposition of enhanced penalties for the possession or the use of any such item in a crime of violence or in a drug trafficking crime.<sup id="cite_ref-1" class="reference"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#cite_note-1">[2]</a></sup></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">He also cosponsored H.R. 1312 (Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005) on July 28, 2005.<sup id="cite_ref-2" class="reference"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#cite_note-2">[3]</a></sup></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">He also cosponsored H.R. 1022 (Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2007) on March 13, 2007.<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#cite_note-3">[4]</a></sup></font></p><dl><dd><i><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Main article:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/U.S.gun_legislation" title="U.S. gun legislation" class="mw-redirect">U.S. gun legislation</a></font></i></dd></dl><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Calls_for_arrest_of_security_researcher"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Calls for arrest of security researcher</font></span></h3><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In 2006, Markey called for the arrest of Christopher Soghoian, a security researcher at Indiana University. Markey indicated on the floor of the House that he wanted Soghoian arrested for exposing security problems related to the potential to use counterfeit boarding passes at US airports.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2006/10/congressman_ed.html">[8]</a>&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,72023-0.html?tw=wn_index_2">[9]</a>&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=2611432">[10]</a></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Later, Markey commented that rather than being jailed, Soghoian should be "put to work showing public officials how easily our security can be compromised."&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=2336&Itemid=125">[11]</a></font></p><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Network_neutrality_legislation"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Network_neutrality_legislation" title="Network neutrality legislation"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Network neutrality legislation</font></a></span></h3><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="The_COPE_Act"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The COPE Act</font></span></h3><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>The Communications Opportunities Promotion and Enhancement (COPE) Act</b>&nbsp;became the main vehicle for the network neutrality battle in 2006. On April 26, 2006, the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/House_Committee_on_Energy_and_Commerce" title="House Committee on Energy and Commerce">House Committee on Energy and Commerce</a>&nbsp;debated the Act and several amendments. The most relevant of these with regard to net neutrality was sponsored by Rep. Markey. He introduced an amendment which would have specifically given the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Federal_Communications_Commission" title="Federal Communications Commission">Federal Communications Commission</a>&nbsp;the authority to prohibit discrimination and enforce network neutrality. The amendment was co-sponsored by Reps.&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Rick_Boucher" title="Rick Boucher">Rick Boucher</a>&nbsp;(D-Va.),&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Anna_Eshoo" title="Anna Eshoo">Anna Eshoo</a>&nbsp;(D-Calif.) and&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Jay_Inslee" title="Jay Inslee">Jay Inslee</a>&nbsp;(D-Wash.).<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#cite_note-4">[5]</a></sup>&nbsp;The amendment was defeated, 34-22.&nbsp;<sup id="cite_ref-5" class="reference"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#cite_note-5">[6]</a></sup>&nbsp;The committee eventually approved the Act by a vote of 44-12 and sent it to the House floor.</font></p><dl><dd><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Main article:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Network_neutrality_legislation" title="Network neutrality legislation">network neutrality legislation</a></font></dd></dl><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Chemical_security_legislation"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chemical security legislation</font></span></h3><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In January, 2007, Markey announced that he would introduce legislation requiring manufacturers to replace the most toxic chemicals used in production with safer substitutes. One of the primary motivations for the bill was the danger faced by trains which transport the toxic materials. Ed Hamberger, president of the American Association of Railroads, said that more than half of his industry's insurance costs stem from delivering dangerous chemicals. With a $1 billion liability cap on a terrorist event, Hamberger said an attack could literally bankrupt a railroad company.<sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Edward_J.Markey#cite_note-6">[7]</a></sup></font></p><dl><dd><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Main article:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Chemical_security_legislation_%28U.S.%29" title="Chemical security legislation (U.S.)">Chemical security legislation (U.S.)</a></font></dd></dl><h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Bio"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Bio</font></span></h2><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Markey was born July 11, 1946 in Malden, Massachusetts. He was educated at Malden Catholic High School, Boston College and Boston College Law School, served in the United States Army Reserve, and was a lawyer and member of the&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_House_of_Representatives" class="extiw" title="w:Massachusetts House of Representatives">Massachusetts House of Representatives</a>&nbsp;before entering the House.</font></p><h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Congressional_career"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Congressional career</font></span></h3><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In 2004 he announced that he would run for&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/John_Kerry" title="John Kerry" class="mw-redirect">John Kerry</a>'s seat in the United States Senate if Kerry were to be elected President of the United States. Kerry, however, lost the election, and Markey will continue to serve in the House, to which he was reelected easily in 2004 over Republican&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Chase" class="extiw" title="w:Ken Chase">Ken Chase</a>&nbsp;and independent&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Hall" class="extiw" title="w:Jim Hall">Jim Hall</a>&nbsp;by a margin of 74%-21%-5%.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Since May 2005 he has been a contributing blogger at&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Huffington_Post" class="extiw" title="w:The Huffington Post">The Huffington Post</a>.</font></p><h4><span class="mw-headline" id="2006_elections"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2006 elections</font></span></h4><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
&nbsp;</font></p>