This week at progressive state blogs is designed specifically to focus attention on the writing and analysis of people focused on their home turf. Here is the Feb. 10 edition. Inclusion of a blog post does not necessarily indicate my agreement with—or endorsement of—its contents. |
At Blue Virginia, A Siegel writes—Here comes the sun … though Virginia remains solar straggler:
Former Governor Terry McAuliffe exclaimed, more than once, that Virginia was a true leader in solar power, with growth rates that should amaze one and all. While McAuliffe deserves credit for a number of actions, recognizing the reality of a GOP run legislature and heavy Dominion Power opposition to solar, reality didn’t seem to match the rhetoric.
Pulling back the curtains on Virginia solar left one scratching one’s head trying to figure out the justification for this. Yes, there was growth — primarily because of two things: the starting point (due in no small part to Dominion Virginia Power (primarily) working its magic in the legislature to suppress solar) was so low; and major players (such as Amazon data centers and universities) demanding solar (often, as with Amazon, as part of their choice to develop in Virginia). McAuliffe pointed to high percentage growth and then pointed to all the potential projects in the pipeline with wording that would make most casual observers think that those ‘maybe’ projects were done deals and, well, perhaps even already generating electrons. Show-barker exclamations, however, didn’t represent the reality of Virginia’s renewable energy world. [...]
While ’20th’ rank of current status with 13th in growth might not seem so bad, putting Virginia in the upper half of the 51 states and DC, we shouldn’t be fooled into any form of complacency.
Each year Solar Power Rocks, a firm that focuses on helping homeowners and small businesses go solar, analyzes those 51 as to solar attractiveness for those potential customers. [...]
At Eclectablog of Michigan, LOLGOP writes—Imagine what we could do with $1.5 trillion:
Republicans never gave a shit about the deficit, but they’ll definitely pretend they do again. Let’s be ready this time.
You may be shocked to learn Republicans are eagerly exploding the deficit after a decade of using fears of financial imbalance to stunt our recovery.
It’s shocking in the way the sun coming up or a Burrito Supreme giving you gas or Donald Trump defending a Republican accused of abusing women is shocking, in that being shocked by it requires pretending that it doesn’t happen all the time. With a few notable exceptions, Republican presidents have grown the deficit every chance they’ve gotten in the last 50 years.
You could say that this is cynicism and shows Republicans don’t have any coherent philosophy — but that would miss how central exploding the deficit is to the conservatism.
Cutting rich people’s taxes to drive up the deficit to justify destroying the government is the underlying principle of conservative governance. Republicans believe in exploding the deficit when it helps rich people and cutting it when it helps anyone else. And as soon as there is another Democratic president, the Universe willing they’ll pretend to care about it again, the way Rand Paul pretended to care about it just weeks after voting to increase the deficit by a margin larger than the GDP of all but three states.
Oh, it’s different because tax cuts let “me” keep ‘my money,” they say. Where cutting other forms of spending is taking money away from “them.” If you don’t think this is a racial dog whistle, just picture who Republicans are thinking about when they say “me” and who comes to mind when they talk about “them.”
At Indy Democrat Blog of Indiana, Jon Easter writes—Council Dems Say Bye Bye to Clay; Lawsuit Filed:
Stephen Clay is still President of the City-County Council, but, after a bizarre stunt, he's been removed from the Democratic Caucus.
Clay was punted from the Democratic Council Caucus after his news conference yesterday where he accused former President Maggie Lewis and Council staff of wrongdoing. Various media outlets and sources with the city quickly debunked his conspiracy theories. There are 14 Democrats on the Council, and 13 voted to boot Clay. In fact, it was a 13-0 vote.
Then, today, news came that Clay was being sued by eight fellow Councillors charging that he did not have the legal authority to fire now former Council Clerk NaTrina DeBow and former Council Attorney Fred Biesecker. The lawsuit seeks a court injunction to reinstate the employees.
The meeting of the Council on Feb. 19 could be Clay's last stand. Let's hope for the sake of the city, it is. We've seen enough of this ridiculousness. I believe the vote should be 24-1 to change Council Presidents. Vop Osili has been identified as the frontrunner to replace Clay, and the city comes out way way way way way way to the infinite power ahead in that exchange.
Of course, Clay could do us all a favor and just resign. Methinks he won't, though.
At the Green Mountain Daily of Vermont, Sue Prent writes—St. Valentine’s Day Massacre 2018:
“St. Valentine’s Day Massacre” has a whole new meaning this year. Was the connection intentional for the shooter who killed seventeen people and wounded fifteen others in one of the worst school shootings in history? We’re already learning of a white supremacist association with the shooter, so who knows what else is in his pathology? [...]
What is wrong with this country? For years now, the disfunction has been apparent to people all over the world. We Americans simply will not do anything about the availability of “weapons of mass destruction” in our own communities. [...]
The NRA has such a stranglehold over the GOP that even with a “normal” Republican president and congress, there would be absolutely no hope of any action on sensible gun control. They won’t even discuss it; and Donald Trump, always more of an instigator than a leader, is scared to even mention the word “gun” in his response to the horrific shootings…quaking-in-his-boots scared. [...]
Rational gun control isn’t rocket science. Strict permitting requirements should limit access to weapons like that AR-15, and the so-called “bump stock” modifications we heard so much about recently, to security professionals and sportsmen who have passed rigorous safety and mental health screening checks. All firearms should, at minimum, be registered every time they change hands. Why should the most lethal of our constitutional rights also give the broadest license to abusers?
At Appalachian Voices, Chad Cordell writes—West Virginians speak out against proposal to log state parks:
Legislation has been introduced in West Virginia at the request of Governor Jim Justice that would open up West Virginia’s state parks to commercial logging, abandoning a nearly 90-year legacy of protection and fundamentally changing the mission of our state park system from preserving unique and special natural areas to being just another place to be exploited for short-term profit.
Prior to the late 19th century, West Virginia contained millions of acres of old-growth ancient forests. These forests were abundant with wildlife, contained incredible diversity of flora and fauna, and supported healthy and abundant aquatic ecosystems. There were trees here nearly as big around as ancient redwood trees, and early accounts of the region marvel at its wildness and beauty. By about 1920, nearly all of these ancient forests had been cut to the ground.
In the late 1920s, the West Virginia legislature established the state park system to preserve unique natural areas. Today our state parks, which have been largely protected from development for many decades and allowed to naturally recover into diverse, mature forest ecosystems, contain some of the healthiest forests in our state.
Now, Justice intends to sell a $50 million bond paid for with timber revenue from cutting large high-value veneer lumber from our parks, liquidating a unique and irreplaceable public legacy in favor of short-term profits. This is a threat to the integrity of our state parks system and completely contrary to their purpose and mission.
The public response to this plan has been sustained and widespread outrage. In response, the governor, along with his appointed directors of Division of Commerce, Division of Natural Resources and Division of Forestry, have desperately and disingenuously attempted to reframe this bill as necessary for “forest health, wildlife, and recreation.”
Justice went so far as to claim in a January 29 press release that if we don’t allow commercial logging in state parks, “the wildlife will die a brutal death” and that commercial logging will “significantly increase all species of wildlife.”
At R.I. Future.org, Bob Plain writes—Rhode Island is as ready as any state if Russia attacks American election:
The bad news is Russia is probably going to try to disrupt the 2018 election as it did during the 2016 cycle. That’s according to US Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, who told the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, “There should be no doubt that Russia perceives that its past efforts have been successful and views the 2018 midterm US elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations.”
The good news is Rhode Island seems as prepared for another election attack as any other state in the nation. That’s according to the Center for American Progress, which released a report earlier this week called “Election Security in All 50 States.” Rhode Island was one of only 10 states to receive a B grade, “the highest grade given to any state,” noted a news release from Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea’s office, which touted the finding.
“In many ways, Rhode Island is leading the states in election security, receiving ‘good’ scores for the three most important categories due to its statewide use of paper ballots, its adherence to minimum cybersecurity best practices, and its new risk-limiting audit law,” said the report’s section on Rhode Island. [...]
The report was not without its criticisms of the Ocean State’s electoral readiness for another Russian cyber-invasion.
“Still, the state’s ballot accounting and reconciliation requirements need improvement, and Rhode Island’s allowance of voted absentee ballots being returned electronically leaves its elections vulnerable,” it said. “To improve its overall election security, Rhode Island should strengthen its ballot accounting and reconciliation procedures by requiring poll workers to reconcile any discrepancies between the number of ballots cast and number of voters who signed in at the polling place and by requiring counties to compare and reconcile precinct totals with countywide composite results to ensure that they add up to the correct number.”
At The Mudflats of Alaska, Jeanne Devon writes—Anti-Net Neutrality? Follow the Money:
It’s time for a field trip! Before we take a special excursion to the Political Olympics today, let’s try a little experiment. Listen carefully.
“Net neutrality.”
Did your eyes glaze over? Are you checking your phone? Hey, you in the back of the bus – eyes forward!
It’s a problem. And I’m going to resist the temptation to slip into wonkiness and lose you. Because it’s too important of an issue to lose you and there are plenty of places you can go if you want to get into the weeds of net neutrality.
The bottom line is that your Internet Service Providers would like to figure out how to make more money, which means that the money they want to make will come from somewhere, namely you. So, they’d like to charge you more to give you Netflix, or Hulu, or YouTube, or any number of sites. And they’d also like to be able to make your church’s website, or small local newspaper, or The Mudflats run slower than sites that can pony up big money to get fast speeds. Some sites could be blocked altogether. I don’t think most people want this – certainly not consumers, and not local businesses that can’t fork over those big bucks for access.
This issue, as you may realize, is not partisan. It’s not political. You may be agreeing that no one in their right mind would think that putting these limits on the internet is wise, particularly those who believe in any of the following: free speech, religious freedom, the marketplace of ideas, the free market, capitalism, public utilities, and the American dream itself.
Who would?
The answer is: those who stand to profit from these anti-democratic limitations, AND those who profit from those who profit. Need an example? I refer you to Representative Chris Birch (who is now attempting to become Senator Chris Birch). [...]
At Blue in the Bluegrass of Kentucky, Yellow Dog writes—Repugs Are Forcing Kentuckians to Freeze in the Dark:
If you wonder where all the market über alles worship of private corporations went, repugs never really meant it.
Now, they know damn well coal is a stinking corpse and natural gas is going down, too. But they still can't shake that fossil fuel monkey off their backs.
If Kentucky can't have coal, it can't have any energy at all.
From the Herald:
A controversial bill that would make it less financially attractive to install solar energy panels in Kentucky is going to the full House after it overwhelmingly was approved Thursday by the House Natural Resources Committee.
House Bill 227 would dramatically roll back the reimbursements paid to future homeowners with solar panels on their roofs when they sell surplus energy to utility companies, a practice known as “net metering.” Instead of getting the retail rate, homeowners would get the much lower wholesale rate.
Solar panel installers say the smaller payments could mean that homeowners would need 20 years to recoup the cost of putting panels on their roofs — an average of $20,000 — instead of the current nine years.
At Bleeding Heartland of Iowa, desmoinesdem writes—Dennis Guth: Profile in ignorance:
Word to the wise: don’t assign Republican State Senator Dennis Guth any task that involves fact-finding.
One of the loudest social conservative voices in the Iowa Senate GOP caucus, Guth is floor manager for the so-called “Religious Freedom Restoration Act.” Introduced as Senate Study Bill 3171, the bill cleared the Local Government Committee on a February 14 party-line vote.
The bill would legalize discrimination by creating a sweeping religious exemption to state laws, as Andrew Duffelmeyer explained here. But support for the idea is far from unanimous in religious circles: while the Iowa Catholic Conference, Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition, and FAMiLY Leader are registered in favor of the bill, the Iowa Annual Conference of United Methodist Church, Episcopal Diocese of Iowa, and Interfaith Alliance of Iowa Action Fund joined more than a half-dozen progressive or civil rights groups to oppose it. [...]
During the committee meeting, “Guth disputed arguments that the proposed legislation would hurt Iowa businesses, saying his research indicated no negative impact in other states that have passed similar laws,” William Petroski reported for the Des Moines Register.
What kind of research, senator? It took me less than 60 seconds to find multiple news reports about boycotts stemming from Indiana’s law. Nine months after then Governor Mike Pence signed that state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a leader of Visit Indy announced that Indianapolis had already “lost more than $60 million in future convention business as a result of the RFRA controversy.”
At The Montana Post, Nathan Kosted writes—Jon Tester Delivers Community Health Center Funding for Montanans — Pandering Daines and Gianforte Fail Montana:
Jon Tester is a hardworking Montana[n]. He knows about long hours as a Montana farmer and he’s willing to fight for us back in the swamp, even though I can’t imagine why anyone would want to deal with that place. That’s public service though, it’s about putting in the long hours and delivering for your constituents. Most folks wouldn’t want to live in DC or Helena to deal with this nonsense, but Jon Tester is willing to do just that. Fight for all Montanans and deliver for all Montanans, even if he has to deal with Mitch McConnell and the swamp monsters back there.
The fight over the last month that Jon Tester waged on behalf of all Montanans was about getting this funding for Community Health Centers. Jon Tester stuck to his guns on this issue and would not back down.
Daines and Gianforte played games to score political points, as Don wrote about here:
Senator Tester put in the hard work, before, during and after negotiations to ensure funding for Community Health Centers. Before the vote Senator Tester said:
“Community Health Centers provide health care that is effective and affordable,” Tester said. “It has been 130 days since Congress failed to fund Community Health Centers and put them in a world of hurt. Without long-term funding, these health care facilities could close down and lay off staff. It is time for Congress to quit kicking the can down the road and provide Community Health Centers with long-term certainty.”
On the other hand, before the vote, Daines and Gianforte crashed Senator Tester’s press conference in support of Community Health Centers.
That’s right these two guys showed up for a press conference to get their pictures taken with a cheesy fake grin and Gianforte’s evil stare. Then they voted against Community Health Center funding. Really, really disgusting behavior. Just bald-faced opportunism and pandering, hoping that no one would notice, but we all keep a close eye on Steve Daines as he does so little for Montana it is not hard to keep track of, we always keep an eye out for Gianforte too, but mostly just to keep our guard up in case a sucker punch is coming in hot.
At Juanita Jean’s of Texas, Juanita Jean Herownself writes—Well, At Least It’s Kinda Science:
Uh, we’re having fun now.
Trump just appointed his top science advisor.
Michael Kratsios is now the de facto head of the Office of Science and Technology Policy. He’s 31 years old, but at least he has a degree in science – political science, with an emphasis on Hellenic studies.
Close, Trump, but no cigar.
The Scientific American lets their feelings known about still not having anyone named to be head of Science and Technology Policy.
And it’s unlikely to change soon, observers say, leaving President Trump without a science adviser as the administration wrestles with a severe outbreak of the flu, lead-poisoned drinking water and record-breaking disasters that many scientists say are sharpened by rising temperatures.
But, instead we get Michael Kratsios, who is damn proud of his work with Steve Forbes and claims to have “a passion for technology, politics, Greece, and travel.” Yeah, but what can you tell me about physics or biology?
Cheeezzzzzz.
At The Bayou Brief of Louisiana, Lamar White, Jr. writes—With a $1 billion budget shortfall looming, Louisiana’s corporate lobbyists are scrambling to shift the spotlight:
On Thursday, Feb. 8th, the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI), the state’s largest and most influential trade organization, hosted its annual luncheon at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Baton Rouge. Laura Ingraham, the far-right talk radio host and Fox News contributor, had flown in to deliver the keynote address, hitching a free ride on a private jet owned by Lane Grigsby, one of Louisiana’s most prolific benefactors to conservative causes and campaigns and the founder of Cajun Industries, which had ponied up enough cash to earn an exclusive spot at the top of the marquee.
The decision to book Ingraham, it turned out, was a colossal mistake. Ostensibly, LABI’s president, Stephen Waguespack, had hoped to use the luncheon as an opportunity to drum up support for his latest project, Louisiana Checkbook, a proposed website that would track each and every dime spent by state and local governments. He’d even flown in the assistant treasurer of Ohio, which had created the model he hoped to emulate, to explain how it’d work.
But Ingraham’s incendiary remarks about the #metoo movement, her praise of Confederate monuments, and her disparaging and disrespectful comments about New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu and Gov. John Bel Edwards, who was in attendance, didn’t sit well with the audience. “When she finished talking, about two dozen people got up to give her a standing ovation, but well over a hundred others stayed in their seats,” Julia O’Donoghue of The Times-Picayune reported. “LABI then quickly sent out their statement claiming that they didn’t agree with all Ingraham had said once the event wrapped up.” [...]
Stephen Waguespack had misread his own organization, believing they would enjoy an incendiary and hyper-partisan act of political theater. At a time in which civil, bipartisan dialogue is desperately needed to prevent an impending $1 billion budget shortfall, he paid to host and promote a Fox News pundit who became a celebrity merely by being insulting.
In many ways, though, the decision to book Ingraham is a perfect illustration of the leadership that has led Louisiana to the brink of yet another fiscal cliff. As hard as he has tried, Waguespack cannot escape the fact that the primary reason we find ourselves, once again, debating how to plug a $1 billion budget shortfall is directly attributable to the decisions made during his tenure as Bobby Jindal’s chief of staff. For several years, Louisiana was led by an administration who cared more about pleasing Grover Norquist, “the human equivalent of pond scum” to quote James Carville, than being responsible stewards of the public fisc.
Indeed, Waguespack’s intransigent opposition to raising taxes, any taxes, is one of the main reasons why, when he was 38 years old, LABI poached him from the Jindal administration. Like Norquist, Waguespack has long argued, despite reams of evidence to the contrary, that the government can magically cut its way to prosperity.