Friday, January 29, 2010

In Honor of Lilly, Take Action Now to Pass the Paycheck Fairness Act

Posted by American Forum at 4:02 PM


AMERICAN FORUM
By Linda Meric

A year ago, dozens of women’s and civil rights activists gathered at the White House to watch President Barack Obama sign his first piece of legislation into law: the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act.

The signing was a triumphant moment – especially with its namesake, Lilly Ledbetter, standing with us. The bill restored the ability of workers to seek redress for ongoing pay discrimination and its importance to ending inequity cannot be overstated.

But another year has passed, and pay discrimination persists.

The most recent U.S. Census statistics show that the pay gap between men's and women's earnings actually widened slightly between 2007 and 2008, from 77.8 (generally rounded to 78 percent) to 77 percent. Based on the median earnings of full-time, year-round workers, women's earnings were $35,745 and men's earnings were $46,367.

The gap in median earnings for women of color is even wider. In 2008, the earnings for African American women were $31,489, 67.9 percent of men's earnings (a drop from 68.7 percent in 2007), and Latinas' earnings were $26,846, 58 percent of men's earnings (a drop from 59 percent in 2007). In fact, if you look at The National Committee on Pay Equity's “The Wage Gap Over Time” table, you’ll see how little the gap has changed in this century. There’s still a battle to make things right.

Lilly Ledbetter thought she had won her battle years ago. As a manager at the Goodyear Tire plant in Gadsden, Alabama for nineteen-plus years, she received the top performance award and was one of four area managers -- and the only woman -- selected to initiate light truck production at the Gadsden Plant.

Then, the plant was about to close. Lilly Ledbetter decided to retire. Just before she left, someone slipped her an anonymous note that compared her salary to that of three male counterparts. Though she had always suspected pay discrimination, when she was hired she had agreed to never discuss salaries with other workers. Until the note, she had no way of knowing she was being underpaid because of her gender.

Ledbetter filed suit. She won, but on appeal, the Supreme Court ruled against her in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber, overturning her original jury award, because she hadn’t filed a charge of discrimination within 180 days of her first discriminatory paycheck. The Court’s 2007 decision against Ledbetter reversed more than 40 years of employment law interpretation and implementation.

Although she received no monetary awards for her fight against pay discrimination, her story led to the introduction of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act in 2007, which passed the House and Senate in January 2009 and was signed into law by the President on January 29, 2009.

Lilly Ledbetter has become an icon of the movement for fair pay.

Still, the Ledbetter Act was only the first hurdle.

Passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act is the critical next step to build on the Ledbetter bill. It is comprehensive legislation that updates the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and strengthens penalties courts may impose for violations of existing equal pay laws. It also prohibits retaliation against workers who inquire about or share wage information, a critical protection for women to be able to find out if they’re being paid fairly and to do something about it if they’re not.

While Ledbetter restored the law, Paycheck Fairness strengthens it and plugs loopholes in the 1963 Equal Pay Act. The Paycheck Fairness Act was passed by the House of Representatives alongside the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2009 with more votes than even the Ledbetter Act. But action by the Senate is pending.

In these tough economic times, no one can afford to be shortchanged by pay discrimination. But pay discrimination is more perilous now than ever, when so many more families depend on the wages of a woman to make ends meet.

In honor of Lilly, the time to speak out and take action is now.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Meric is executive director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women. For information about our efforts to close the pay gap, visit www.9to5.org.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 1/10

Listen to Camille Bright-Smith's tribute to Lilly Ledbetter!

 

1 comments

Rewriting History: Politics and Social Studies Standards

Posted by American Forum at 3:48 PM


AMERICAN FORUM
By Kathy Miller

During this month’s State Board of Education debate concerning new social studies curriculum standards, sound scholarship once again took a back seat to politics and personal agendas.

At one point, for example, board members voted to delete Dolores Huerta from a standard because the co-founder of United Farm Workers of America is a socialist. The same board members apparently didn’t realize that Helen Keller, who remains in the same standard, was also a staunch socialist. Nor did they seem to know that W.E.B. Du Bois, who helped found the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), had joined the Communist Party the last year of his life. The board had added Du Bois to the standards the day before.

Of course, social studies students should learn about contributions of all three of these important Americans, regardless of their political beliefs. But board members clearly looked misinformed as, during just two days, they made wholesale revisions to standards that teachers, scholars and other community members had spent nearly a year debating and drafting. And many of the changes were based simply on board members’ personal beliefs or knowledge, however limited.

Teachers in the audience watched the board’s votes with growing alarm. They wondered how in the world to teach ill-considered new standards or squeeze a long laundry list of added names into their limited class time. Board member Pat Hardy, R-Fort Worth, herself an award-winning former social studies teacher, begged her board colleagues to stop.

Many of the additions, Hardy said, were not grade-appropriate or overloaded the standards with unnecessary detail. On occasion she pointedly asked whether board members actually knew much about a person or event they wanted to add. They often did not.

The board had set the stage for this farce by deciding to proceed on the standards revision without further guidance from teachers and academic experts. They then voted to end a public hearing on the standards even though dozens of people, including veterans from the American GI Forum, hadn’t yet spoken.


So, with no outside input, board members worked late into the evening to rewrite history according to their own points of view. Of course, this is a terrible way to make education policy. And sure enough, the standards are beginning to look more like a political manifesto than a curriculum document.

For example, a revised high school U.S. history standard implies that Joseph McCarthy’s political smear campaign in the 1950s was somehow justified. Another requires students to learn about Phyllis Schlafly, the Moral Majority and other conservative icons – not because of their historical accomplishments, but because of their roles in promoting conservative philosophies. There is no similar standard asking students to study individuals or groups that simply promoted liberal philosophies.

One board member succeeded in deleting concepts of justice and responsibility for the common good from a standard on citizenship. And the board is considering a standard that suggests the civil-rights movement brought about “unrealistic expectations of equal outcomes.” That’s a political belief – like many other revisions the board approved at the meeting – not a view backed by scholarship. Even so, some board members want to weaken another standard that has students learn how women and minorities worked to overcome obstacles to equality and civil rights.

Last spring, the Texas Legislature refused to rein in the heavily politicized State Board of Education’s authority over curriculum and textbook content. To understand how foolish that failure was, lawmakers need only to have watched what happened at the state board meeting this month.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miller is president of the Texas Freedom Network, a nonpartisan organization that supports public education and religious freedom.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Texas Lone Star Forum. 1/10

 

0 comments

What Workers Want:Paid Sick Days

Posted by American Forum at 3:40 PM


AMERICAN FORUMBy Linda Meric

Last year, in our tough economy, many of us asked for necessities and basics as holiday gifts. Among the gifts that would mean the most to families is the passage of the Healthy Families Act, introduced by the late Senator Edward Kennedy, along with Representative Rosa DeLauro, in the 111th Congress this past May.

It wasn’t the first time that federal legislation guaranteeing workers a minimum number of paid sick days had been introduced. Previous efforts were unsuccessful. But now, the Healthy Families Act has 145 Congressional co-sponsors and has been endorsed by the Obama administration.

So health professionals, civil rights groups, labor unions, educators, faith organizations, elected officials and women’s groups like 9to5 are optimistic about its passage.

There’s something wrong when workers have to choose between keeping a job and taking care of themselves or their families when someone gets sick. There’s something wrong when going to a routine medical appointment or other preventative care could result in a pink slip. There’s something wrong when a domestic violence survivor seeking help or services is punished with the loss of her job.

There is so much at stake for women and their families here.

Women are still the ones who most often serve as caregivers when children, elderly parents, spouses or other relatives are ill. It is often mom who takes the children to get immunized or to other routine medical appointments. And, domestic violence disproportionately affects women. But taking the time off to care for our families or ourselves puts us at risk for losing our jobs. A survey widely reported this year showed that 1 in 6 respondents had been fired, suspended, reprimanded or threatened on the job for taking time off when they or a loved one was sick, or they knew someone who had faced those dire consequences.

9to5 members without paid sick days, like Latisha Carter in Milwaukee, report going to work with H1N1 flu rather than staying home to get better – and Latisha was pregnant at the time – for fear of losing their jobs. Those like Tahirah Foster in Denver report being forced out of good jobs because of a lack of paid sick days. In Tahirah’s case, her employer refused to allow her to balance her obligations at work with her obligations as a parent of a toddler with asthma. Those like Angel Warner in northern California report struggling mightily to stay well – using hand sanitizer constantly and wearing a protective mask at work. Angel doesn’t have paid sick days on the job and fears she’ll get sick with H1N1 as some of her co-workers have, losing pay or even her job as others have. Angel just can’t afford that in these tough economic times.

No one should have to work under those conditions – especially since paid sick days are not only good for employees but good for employers, too.

When federal paid sick days legislation passes, the huge cost to employers of workers coming in sick, lowering productivity and spreading contagions to other workers and customers, will be mitigated. When federal paid sick days legislation passes, employers will no longer be saddled with the turnover, human resource and retraining costs associated with firing some employees and hiring new ones.

When the Healthy Families Act passes, it will be a win for workers, a win for their employers, a win for our schools and communities, and a win for all of us.

We must speak out. Contact our members of Congress. Remind them that we’re moving into an election year and they must voice their support for this basic labor standard now. Tell them you want them to finish Senator Kennedy’s work by making the gift of paid sick days a reality for the 50 million workers who lack paid sick days and the 100 million workers who don’t have a sick day they can use to care for an ill child or other family member.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meric is executive director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 1/10

 

0 comments

Supreme Court Increases Corporate Political Power

Posted by American Forum at 3:31 PM



AMERICAN FORUM
By Barbara Powell

When the Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment protecting free speech, they were fresh from the Revolutionary War, during which the vast wealth and power of England were overcome by 13 small colonies intent on governing themselves. The First Amendment was meant to protect a citizen’s right to dissent and to ensure that the minority is protected from the tyranny of the majority.

In the stunning Jan. 21 Citizens United ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that, contrary to years of state and federal law stretching back to Teddy Roosevelt’s crusades against the power of money in politics, corporations should be able to spend as much as they want to support or oppose candidates in national elections.

Here in Mississippi, just as in other states, we have seen first hand the corrupting influences of money in political campaigns. An egregious example was the 2000 Mississippi Supreme Court race in which Lenora Prather, a sitting justice, objected to attack campaign ads run supposedly in her behalf. She couldn't get the ads stopped, and even the secretary of state was unable to help. Prather lost the race. This, of course, is nothing in comparison to what Big Tobacco, Wall Street and the behemoths of the banking industry can do now that campaign spending regulations have been dismantled by the high court.

In its 5-4 ruling, the Court decided, in essence, that more money in political campaigns does not make it appear that elected officials are being bought, does not undermine the faith of people in their government, does not contribute to a proliferation of smear campaigns designed to besmirch a candidate's integrity in order to defeat him or her. The justices in the majority were unconcerned that ads financed by money from huge corporations might drown out the voice of ordinary Americans.


The Citizens United decision was made possible by the appointments of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice


The Citizens United decision was made possible by the appointments of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, who advertised themselves during confirmation hearings as judicial conservatives. The definition of a conservative is one who wants most things to stay the same. The judicial expression of conservative decision-making is stare decisis, a fundamental tenant of constitutional law that cautions against overturning longstanding law. Citizens United is instead a glaring example of judicial activism.

Justice John Paul Stevens, in a stinging dissent, said, “The court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation.”

Stevens further said, “The court operates with a sledgehammer rather than a scalpel when it strikes down one of Congress’s most significant efforts to regulate the role that corporations and unions play in electoral politics … . Congress crafted [current campaign law] in response to a virtual mountain of research on the corruption that previous legislation had failed to avert. The court now negates Congress’s efforts without a shred of evidence.”

Common Cause Mississippi and many other citizens’ groups believe the path from here is clear: Congress must free itself from Wall Street’s grip so that Main Street can finally get a fair shake. Congress is now considering proposals to change the way we pay for elections by blending small donor fund raising with public funding to reduce the pressure of fund raising from big contributors.

Mississippians want less, not more, of big money influencing elections. It’s time to give us the best Congress money can’t buy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Powell is the legislative liaison for Mississippi Common Cause.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Mississippi Forum. Letters should be sent to the Forum, P.O. Box 3515 Jackson, MS 39207-3515

 

0 comments

The Earnings Report for Main Street

Posted by American Forum at 2:16 PM


AMERICAN FORUM
By Prakash Laufer

To add insult to injury to working America, in came the earnings reports from Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase. At these mega banks, balance sheets are healthy, profits are up and bonuses for top executives are bigger than ever. JPMorgan Chase just reported $11.7 billion in profits and $26.9 billion in compensation and bonuses. Goldman Sachs made a record-high profit of $13.4 billion in 2009 and is slated to hand out $16.2 billion in compensation and bonuses.

These are some of the same institutions whose predatory and unethically risky actions brought our economy to its knees. But, thanks to billions of dollars in government resuscitation, they seem to be recovering nicely from their near-death experiences.

The “earnings report” for the rest of the U.S., however, includes – drum roll, please – higher unemployment and continued foreclosures, with no relief in sight. It sounds like a raw deal because it is. Big banks and Wall Street financiers ignited the foreclosure crisis, setting our economy ablaze, resulting in the loss of millions of homes and jobs.

While Americans everywhere are suffering, not all are suffering equally. Communities of color are, once again, experiencing the brunt of this recession. The unemployment gap between African-Americans and whites has grown wider this past year, jumping from a 5.4 percent spread to 7.2 percent. The unemployment rate among African-Americans now stands at 16.2 percent, higher than any annual rate in 27 years. The unemployment rate among Latinos is 12.9 percent. Both are far higher than the 9 percent rate among whites.

While these racial disparities are deeply troubling, inequality is a challenge facing every American. It weakens our nation’s economic foundation and tears communities apart. Before this recession even began, income inequality was at its highest level since just before the Great Depression.

As of two years ago, the top 1 percent of Americans took home as much income as the bottom half of Americans together. These inequalities are likely to grow as mass layoffs continue and homes are lost in unprecedented numbers.

Unfortunately, the policies coming out of Washington are not targeted well enough to support those struggling the hardest. Most job-creation projects to date, including those in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), have been broad-spectrum, “universal” initiatives like rebuilding transportation infrastructure and core funding for schools.

Despite the merit of these investments, the jobs being created are disproportionately in areas where they are least needed. One study showed that communities with the lowest unemployment rates were getting 50 percent more per capita in job creation funds than communities with the highest rates of unemployment. But, while an un-targeted approach to job creation is failing to adequately serve communities in the direst straits, the big bank bailouts are proving to be even less effective.

The evidence is clear – a rising tide does not lift all boats, and it never will. When Congress bailed out the banks, the understanding was that by returning them to solvency, they would start lending again and all Americans would benefit. Instead, the banks cleaned up their books, patted themselves on the back, stuffed their pockets with fat bonuses, and then failed to provide significant lending to working Americans. The stock market posted huge gains last year and bank profits are up, but foreclosures and unemployment continue to grow at alarming rates. So far, the rising tide has lifted a few gilded yachts, while others are left gasping for air.

A new report by United for a Fair Economy, entitled State of the Dream 2010: Drained, documents the need to prioritize and target economic recovery spending toward communities hardest hit by joblessness and foreclosures. The Put America to Work Act is one bill that aims to do just that. Even with limited recovery dollars available, we still have choices. We know what doesn’t work – putting our trust in the big banks and Wall Street in the hopes that by helping them, they will in turn help the rest of America. And, while the large-scale job-creation programs of ARRA for “shovel-ready” projects are certainly a step up from the bank bailout strategy, they are still not focused enough to reach those communities needing it most.

A targeted strategy offers our best hope for a robust economic recovery. It will help ensure that communities in greatest need are receiving the greatest support. At the same time, it will help narrow the vast disparities of income and wealth -- including those drawn along lines of race -- and will strengthen our economic foundation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prakash Laufer is President of the board of United for a Fair Economy (UFE) and Executive Director of The Brick House Community Resource Center. UFE’s new report, State of the Dream 2010: Drained – Jobless and Foreclosed in Communities of Color, is available on-line at http://www.faireconomy.org/dream/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2009 by the American Forum. 12/09

 

0 comments

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Dr. King Would Cry that Coal Plants "Trample" Georgia and its Children

Posted by American Forum at 11:54 AM


GEORGIA FORUM

By Rev. Dr. Joseph E. Lowery

Somehow the forces of justice stand on the side of the universe, so that you can't ultimately trample over God's children and profit by it. - Martin Luther King, Jr., "The Birth of a New Nation," April 7, 1957

As a "chaplain of the common good", I am persuaded that Martin would join in the cry against environmental injustice wherever it seeks to pursue its assault against God's children.

I believe that he would be crying out against any coal-fired plants, rising anew or already operating because they spew dangerous pollutants into the air and drain our precious waters. I believe he would be a mighty force in convincing us that coal plants are no longer needed in our beloved Georgia - or anywhere else. He would preach that coal plants today represent injustice; that they are trampling over God's children.

In his final years with us, well before the first Earth Day in 1970, Martin expanded his good work to include the pursuit of environmental justice for all. Environmental justice is the simple truth that rich and poor people of all races have the right to clean air and clean water. Environmental justice examines how corporate greed and government policies unfairly harm minority and disadvantaged communities.

We are all grimly aware that inequality and discrimination remain potent in all walks of life, from job pay to matters of common decency. But too many are unaware of the injustice placed on low-income communities and people of color in rural areas.

Pollution from coal mining and coal-fired power plants cause serious illnesses: asthma and other respiratory afflictions, kidney and heart disease, and cancer. Mercury released by coal fumes enters our lakes and rivers and accumulates in fish, making them dangerous to eat.

When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, militarism and economic exploitation are incapable of being conquered...." - MLK, Jr., April 30, 1967, Ebenezer Baptist

In 2002, the Coalition for the People's Agenda, along with other groups, published "Air of Injustice." This report detailed how African-Americans are harmed by coal pollutants. It revealed that 68 percent of African Americans live within 30 miles of a coal plant, and noted that new power plants are most likely to be sited in African-American communities.

Already, African-American children are five times more likely to die from asthma than white children. And while coal plants everywhere are being abandoned or readapted for cleaner alternatives, Martin's beloved native Georgia is taking foolish leaps into its dangerous and destructive past. Georgia has two new coal plants in planning stages (in central Georgia's Washington County and in the southwest corner of Early County). Still another coal plant is being quietly talked about for Ben Hill County in south-central Georgia.

The “granddaddy” investor behind two of these plants (those for Washington and Ben Hill counties) is Cobb Electric Membership Corporation, which chiefly serves Cobb County residents. (Power4Georgians is the actual developer of those two sites and is made up of several EMCs, the largest being Cobb EMC). This EMC has never put a coal plant in Cobb County itself. But it has no problem placing huge, billion-dollar coal plants in minority communities many miles away. Out of sight, out of mind. That is social and environmental injustice!

We have learned about an investigation by the Cobb District Attorney's office into alleged racketeering, theft and mismanagement by Cobb EMC officials. My hope is that newly elected directors on the Cobb EMC board will pull the plug on all coal investments.

Georgia doesn't need to be the last irresponsible place on Earth choosing coal. We must all rise to the challenge of thoughtful stewardship of what has been entrusted to us, to care for "the fish of the sea...the birds of the air...the cattle, and all creatures upon earth." (Genesis 1:26).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lowery is president emeritus of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and convenor of the Coalition for the People's Agenda. In 1957, Lowery and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. He is the recipient of the 2009 Medal of Freedom from President Obama.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Georgia Forum. 1/10

 

Labels: , , 0 comments

Health Security for Tennesseans Must be a Top Priority

Posted by American Forum at 10:53 AM


TENNESSEE EDITORIAL FORUM

By Tony Garr

We are facing tough times. We’ve faced them before and pulled our neighbors and ourselves through by making people a priority. This is what the state needs to do now.

More than a quarter million Tennesseans have lost their jobs and their health insurance since the recession began. It is estimated that more than a million Tennesseans are uninsured and have few options for changing that in the near future. Yet, the state seems determined to continue to whittle away at public health programs that combine to serve as the medical safety net. It’s time to get our priorities straight.

Times are tough in each state, yet Tennessee is the only state to cease enrollment in the Children Health Insurance Program, which we call CoverKids and is viewed as a good program by policymakers from both the Right and Left. Forty-nine other governors understand that this is not time to be blocking health care coverage for children of low- to moderate-income working families. Tens of thousands of Tennessee children are eligible for CoverKids and Tennessee gets three federal dollars for each state dollar it invests in the program, so closing it to enrollment is simply penny-wise, pound foolish.

The state has promised since 2005 to reopen the Medically Needy (aka Spend Down) TennCare program. This program is designed as a bridge, like COBRA, for eligible children, elderly, caregivers and those with disabilities to get a year of TennCare after they spend a significant portion of income toward medical bills; thus, they “spend down” to eligibility. It’s estimated that this program would help about 100,000 Tennesseans facing medical debt and lacking coverage.

Also, the state must not continue viewing county jails as part of the mental health safety net. Cuts to state mental health programs passes a huge burden onto local governments, which have neither the financial nor medical means to deal with the complexities of mental health services. State cuts to mental health result in a system that is throw-back from a century ago, with people with mental health challenges being locked up rather than receiving the compassionate and effective care we have come to know as a basic human right.

Tennessee has a $400 million TennCare Reserve and $700 million Rainy Day Fund. For too many years the state has siphoned the TennCare Reserve to shore up other areas of the state budget while losing out on the 2-to-1 federal match. This year the state must get its priorities straight and use monies designated for TennCare to reopen the Medically Needy category which the administration has been promising to do this since 2005.

It has been raining on Tennessee’s working poor for a long time, now is the time to provide families and individuals with some shelter from rain. Let’s invest some of the Rainy Day fund into the medical safety net to help communities with physical and mental health services.

A state budget, like any budget, is about priorities. This year, let’s make vulnerable Tennesseans a priority. The good news is that, despite tough times, we have a TennCare Reserve and a Rainy Day Fund, both designed to be there to meet human need in tough times. So, let’s do the wise and decent thing and use them for their intended purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Garr is executive director of the Tennessee Health Care Campaign.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Tennessee Editorial Forum. 1/10

 

Labels: , , , 0 comments

The Importance of Protecting Tennessee’s Environment in 2010

Posted by American Forum at 10:32 AM


TENNESSEE EDITORIAL FORUM

By Chris Ford

As we begin a new decade, Tennesseans look to elected leadership that will both understand and honor two facts that should appear self evident: Tennessee is both a land mass in which we are blessed and privileged to live and a unique and diverse people who call the land within these boundaries home.

Our state is home to many of the most biologically diverse and beautiful pieces of the planet anywhere on Earth. From the mountains of the east to the mighty Mississippi in the west, we both cherish and rely upon the beauty and bounty of these resources for economic stability, healthy living and a way of life that is unique and worth protecting.

In order to maintain this sustainable balance, we must both rely upon and call upon our elected leadership to begin to protect these resources in a sustainable manner that does not divorce strong economic development from strong environmental protection. Weakened environmental safeguards and shortsighted economic gains will seek to sell our birthright for the proverbial bowl of stew if we do not advocate a sustainable future for those futures of generations that inherit our state.

This year we begin a new decade that calls upon the Tennessee General Assembly to consider with all seriousness and due diligence conservation and environmental priorities including:

• Restoration of dedicated funds from real estate transfer tax. These funds are dedicated by law to go to the Wetlands Fund, State Land Acquisition Fund, Local Parks and Recreation Fund, and the Agriculture Resources Trust Fund.

• Preserving water quality and opposing efforts to weaken protection of streams and rivers. We will fight to maintain selenium regulation and the right to sue for nuisances

• Banning mountain top removal by restricting issuance of coal-mining permits relative to altering ridgelines and polluting streams, an obviously needed protection with bi-partisan support whose time has come. We have seen with sadness this unnecessary devastation of our Appalachian neighbors to the northeast. Our Tennessee economy’s second largest sector is tourism from our natural beauty---coal does not even rank in the top 100.

• Improving air quality by supporting measures to regulate open burning and aerial spraying and to promote helpful energy bills that play important roles in improving air quality. Our asthma rates and poor air quality consistently rank among the worst in the nation, with many of these negative effects harming the most vulnerable----our children, the elderly and minority populations.

• Safeguarding environmental funding and fighting to keep enforcement, parks and other conservation positions and budget items funded in a difficult economy. Our residents’ ability to enjoy these state parks and to be protected from pollution even in difficult economic times should be a fundamental priority and right of each Tennessee citizen.

As always, we will continue furthering proposals positive to our cause and working to defeat ones harmful to our goals, not only in the five priority areas above, but also relative to: billboard regulation; recycling and solid waste reform; balanced composition for environmental boards; maintaining local options banning guns in local parks; landfill protections including radioactive waste issues and coal ash landfills; public transportation; and government authority to apply smart growth principles and efficiency.

We ask Tennesseans to work to protect our way of life for the future, one that will include positive economic growth, strong environmental protection and a sustainable life for future generations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ford is executive director of Tennessee Conservation Voters in Nashville. A former mainline minister and father of one daughter, he hails from ten generations of East Tennesseans in Cocke County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Tennessee Editorial Forum. 1/10

 

Labels: , , 0 comments

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Nuclear ‘Renaissance’ or ‘Retreat’? France is not the Example

Posted by American Forum at 3:47 PM


AMERICAN FORUM

By Linda Gunter

It is perhaps no accident that the nuclear power industry chose a French word – “renaissance” – to promote its alleged comeback. Attached to this misapplied moniker are a series of fallacious suggestions that nuclear energy is “clean,” “safe” and even “renewable.” And, in keeping with its French flavor, a key argument in the industry’s propaganda arsenal is that the U.S. should follow the “successful” example of the French nuclear program.

France serves as a convenient sound bite for politicians and others advocating a nuclear revival (hypocritically evoked by many of the same people who insisted on “Freedom Fries” at the start of the Iraq War). A failure to challenge this facile falsehood has cemented the myth of a French nuclear Utopia in the minds of the public. It masks a very different reality.

France gets 80 percent of its electricity from nuclear power. However, this alone does not constitute a success. Rather, it results in the production of an enormous amount of radioactive waste that, as is the case for all other nuclear countries, has nowhere to go.

France has no operating geological repository for nuclear waste. To date, therefore, it has resorted to reprocessing, a highly contaminating chemical process that separates uranium and plutonium while releasing large quantities of liquid and aerial radioactivity into the environment. These wastes have rendered the seabed near the French La Hague reprocessing center on the Normandy coast equivalent to radioactive waste. Liquid radioactive contamination from La Hague has been found in the Arctic Circle, while radioactive gases such as krypton 85 have been tracked around the world.

However, contrary to myth, reprocessed French waste is not “recycled.” The hottest waste, about 4 percent of the total, is stored at La Hague, along with about 81 tonnes of separated – and proliferation-friendly – plutonium (1 percent of the total). The remaining 95 percent, mostly uranium, is stored at another nuclear center, Pierrelatte, in southern France. Rather than “recycled," this waste is simply transferred from La Hague operator, Areva, to the French electricity utility, Électicité de France (EDF). France does not have the technology to re-enrich this uranium, but some of it is exported to Russia, which does.

Nuclear energy has not gained France energy independence. France imports all uranium used in its 58 reactors – having abandoned the last of its 210 uranium mines in 2001. These latter also produced a large waste stream, including tailings (radioactive rocks and soils) that have been used to pave children’s playgrounds and public parking lots.

Today, French uranium is imported largely from Niger where Areva – which, despite its corporate appearance, is 90 percent government-owned – has mined for 40 years. Its legacy in one of the poorest countries on the planet is one of depleted and contaminated water, wide dispersal of radioactive dust and discarded radioactive metals that have been sold in local markets and used in homes.

Nor can nuclear meet all French electricity needs. France imports coal-powered electricity from Germany at peak times, because of its heavy use of electric home-heating. During heat waves and droughts, the French have been forced to power down or close more than a third of their nuclear plants, which rely on water sources such as rivers and lakes for cooling.

None of this has deterred Areva or EDF from driving aggressively into new nuclear markets, especially the U.S., where Aerva is promoting its huge Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR), with seven targeted at six U.S. sites. Since new reactors are too expensive to build unless federally funded, EPRs in the U.S. could result in American tax dollars flowing to the French government.

However, French nuclear success overseas has proved as elusive as it is at home. All but two of the U.S. EPRs are now on the back burner or canceled altogether. A recent joint report from the British, Finnish and UK nuclear safety authorities challenged the safety of the unproven EPR design. The two EPR flagship construction sites in Finland and France have experienced cost overruns and delays. The Finnish Olkiluoto site is more than three years behind schedule, with cost estimates soaring from $3.6 billion at pre-construction to more than $8 billion currently. Technical errors have plagued both sites.

These problems are by no means unique to the French nuclear industry. They typify the nuclear “renaissance” as a whole, which resembles more of a retreat, a word with decidedly less positive connotations when applied to France.
There are some fine French fashions to be followed – from camembert to haute couture. Nuclear power just doesn’t happen to be one of them.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gunter is co-founder of Beyond Nuclear and specializes in researching the French nuclear sector. She is also the media and development director for Beyond Nuclear.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 1/10

 

0 comments

Thursday, January 7, 2010

What Workers Want: Paid Sick Days

Posted by American Forum at 1:50 PM


By Linda Meric

Last year, in our tough economy, many of us asked for necessities and basics as holiday gifts. Among the gifts that would mean the most to families is the passage of the Healthy Families Act, introduced by the late Senator Edward Kennedy, along with Representative Rosa DeLauro, in the 111th Congress this past May.

It wasn’t the first time that federal legislation guaranteeing workers a minimum number of paid sick days had been introduced. Previous efforts were unsuccessful. But now, the Healthy Families Act has 145 Congressional co-sponsors and has been endorsed by the Obama administration.

So health professionals, civil rights groups, labor unions, educators, faith organizations, elected officials and women’s groups like 9to5 are optimistic about its passage.

There’s something wrong when workers have to choose between keeping a job and taking care of themselves or their families when someone gets sick. There’s something wrong when going to a routine medical appointment or other preventative care could result in a pink slip. There’s something wrong when a domestic violence survivor seeking help or services is punished with the loss of her job.

There is so much at stake for women and their families here.

Women are still the ones who most often serve as caregivers when children, elderly parents, spouses or other relatives are ill. It is often mom who takes the children to get immunized or to other routine medical appointments. And, domestic violence disproportionately affects women. But taking the time off to care for our families or ourselves puts us at risk for losing our jobs. A survey widely reported this year showed that 1 in 6 respondents had been fired, suspended, reprimanded or threatened on the job for taking time off when they or a loved one was sick, or they knew someone who had faced those dire consequences.

9to5 members without paid sick days, like Latisha Carter in Milwaukee, report going to work with H1N1 flu rather than staying home to get better – and Latisha was pregnant at the time – for fear of losing their jobs. Those like Tahirah Foster in Denver report being forced out of good jobs because of a lack of paid sick days. In Tahirah’s case, her employer refused to allow her to balance her obligations at work with her obligations as a parent of a toddler with asthma. Those like Angel Warner in northern California report struggling mightily to stay well – using hand sanitizer constantly and wearing a protective mask at work. Angel doesn’t have paid sick days on the job and fears she’ll get sick with H1N1 as some of her co-workers have, losing pay or even her job as others have. Angel just can’t afford that in these tough economic times.

No one should have to work under those conditions – especially since paid sick days are not only good for employees but good for employers, too.

When federal paid sick days legislation passes, the huge cost to employers of workers coming in sick, lowering productivity and spreading contagions to other workers and customers, will be mitigated. When federal paid sick days legislation passes, employers will no longer be saddled with the turnover, human resource and retraining costs associated with firing some employees and hiring new ones.

When the Healthy Families Act passes, it will be a win for workers, a win for their employers, a win for our schools and communities, and a win for all of us.

We must speak out. Contact our members of Congress. Remind them that we’re moving into an election year and they must voice their support for this basic labor standard now. Tell them you want them to finish Senator Kennedy’s work by making the gift of paid sick days a reality for the 50 million workers who lack paid sick days and the 100 million workers who don’t have a sick day they can use to care for an ill child or other family member.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meric is executive director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Forum. 1/10

 

Labels: , , , , , 0 comments

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)