Climate Change and Sustainable Development Goals in Latin America

E120, e130, e145,

cambridgeforum | Thursday 10-16-2014 This Changes Everything

http://www.cambridgeforum.org/?p=2464

E120, e130

cambridgeforum | 10-1-2014 Carbon Tax to Combat Climate Change

http://www.cambridgeforum.org/?p=2476

E120, e130, e145,

Chris Hedges: The Last Gasp of Climate Change Liberals – Chris Hedges – Truthdig

http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/the_last_gasp_of_climate_change_liberals_20140831

E120, e130,

Experts clash on Fukushima radiation effects

http://m.aljazeera.com/story/201482912519236690

E120, e130, nuclear,

How to Talk Like a Politician: Propaganda Dictionary of Buzzwords and Double-Talk (1992)


The Film Archives

Published on Apr 26, 2014

As a freelance reporter, Solomon worked for a number of years for Pacific News Service. In 1988, Solomon worked briefly as a spokesperson for the Alliance of Atomic Veterans in Washington, D.C.. He was hired in August 1988 to run the new Washington, D.C., office of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.

In 1997, Solomon published The Trouble With Dilbert, in which he said that the popular comic strip Dilbert is a capitalist tool that promotes the evils of corporate America. Dilbert author Scott Adams responded in his 1999 book The Joy of Work, which included an imaginary interview between Norman and Adams’ canine character Dogbert.

A book of Solomon’s collected columns, The Habits of Highly Deceptive Media, won the 1999 George Orwell Award for Distinguished Contribution to Honesty and Clarity in Public Language. Jonathan Kozol’s introduction to the book noted “the tradition of Upton Sinclair, Lincoln Steffens, and I. F. Stone does not get much attention these days in the mainstream press … but that tradition is alive and well in this collection of courageously irreverent columns on the media by Norman Solomon….”

In 2000, Solomon teamed up with fellow investigative reporter Robert Parry to write a series of investigative reports on George W. Bush’s Secretary of State Colin Powell, published on consortiumnews.com.[5]
His book Target Iraq: What the News Media Didn’t Tell You (co-authored with Reese Erlich) was published in 2003 and translated into German, Italian, Hungarian, Portuguese, and Korean. War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death appeared in 2005. The Los Angeles Times called the book “a must-read for those who would like greater context with their bitter morning coffee, or to arm themselves for the debates about Iraq that are still to come.”[6] A documentary based on the book was released in 2007.
Solomon is the founder and former executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy, an organization founded in 1997 “as a national consortium of independent public-policy researchers, analysts and activists.”[4][7] According to its web site, the mission of IPA is to increase “the reach and capacity of progressive and grassroots organizations (at no cost to them) to address public policy by getting them and their ideas into the mainstream media”.

On April 13, 2011, Solomon officially announced his candidacy for what the open House seat in the newly created 2nd congressional district of California.[8][9] Representative Lynn Woolsey—the incumbent from the former 6th congressional district, which was geographically expanded into the new 2nd district via redistricting—announced her retirement later in June, setting up a competitive Democratic primary in one of the more liberal districts in the country.[10][11]
Observers expected Solomon to position himself to the left of his competitors and as the “philosophical heir” to Rep. Woolsey, a leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.[12][13][14] In announcing his campaign Solomon himself argued, “After so many years of progressive leadership from Lynn Woolsey, her successor in the House should have a proven commitment to a wide range of progressive values.”[9] Solomon emphasized his strong environmentalist background and particularly his opposition to nuclear power, which he used to differentiate himself from his primary opponent Assemblyman Jared Huffman.[14]
As of late June 2011, Solomon had raised over $100,000 for his campaign.[12] His overall fundraising strategy was patterned after those of Howard Dean and Barack Obama, as he sought to finance his campaign via small but continuous contributions from a large donor pool.[14]
Solomon failed to reach the general election, running third, with 14.9% of ballots cast, in the California state elections, June 2012 behind Democratic Assemblyman Jared Huffman (37.5%) and Republican Daniel Roberts (15.0%). In California’s newly implemented nonpartisan blanket primary, the top two vote recipients, regardless of party, proceed to compete in the general election.

Global Climate Change
Environment Ethics
Environment Justice

How Corporate Money Influences Politics: Can Corporations Be Stopped? Financing Campaigns (2007)


The Film Archives

Published on Aug 29, 2014

The Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), also called the McCain-Feingold bill after its chief sponsors, John McCain and Russ Feingold. The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on February 14, 2002, with 240 yeas and 189 nays, including 6 members who did not vote. Final passage in the Senate came after supporters mustered the bare minimum of 60 votes needed to shut off debate. The bill passed the Senate, 60-40 on March 20, 2002, and was signed into law by President Bush on March 27, 2002. In signing the law, Bush expressed concerns about the constitutionality of parts of the legislation but concluded, “I believe that this legislation, although far from perfect, will improve the current financing system for Federal campaigns.” The bill was the first significant overhaul of federal campaign finance laws since the post-Watergate scandal era. Academic research has used game theory to explain Congress’s incentives to pass the Act.

The BCRA was a mixed bag for those who wanted to remove big money from politics. It eliminated all soft money donations to the national party committees, but it also doubled the contribution limit of hard money, from $1,000 to $2,000 per election cycle, with a built-in increase for inflation. In addition, the bill aimed to curtail ads by non-party organizations by banning the use of corporate or union money to pay for “electioneering communications,” a term defined as broadcast advertising that identifies a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or nominating convention, or 60 days of a general election. This provision of McCain-Feingold, sponsored by Maine Republican Olympia Snowe and Vermont Independent James Jeffords, as introduced applied only to for-profit corporations, but was extended to incorporate non-profit issue organizations, such as the Environmental Defense Fund or the National Rifle Association, as part of the “Wellstone Amendment,” sponsored by Senator Paul Wellstone.

The law was challenged as unconstitutional by groups and individuals including the California State Democratic Party, the National Rifle Association, and Republican Senator Mitch McConnell (Kentucky), the Senate Majority Whip. After moving through lower courts, in September 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case, McConnell v. FEC. On Wednesday, December 10, 2003, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 ruling that upheld its key provisions.

Since then, campaign finance limitations continue to be challenged in the Courts. In 2005 in Washington state, Thurston County Judge Christopher Wickham ruled that media articles and segments were considered in-kind contributions under state law. The heart of the matter focused on the I-912 campaign to repeal a fuel tax, and specifically two broadcasters for Seattle conservative talker KVI. Judge Wickham’s ruling was eventually overturned on appeal in April 2007, with the Washington Supreme Court holding that on-air commentary was not covered by the State’s campaign finance laws (No New Gas Tax v. San Juan County).[6]

In 2006, the United States Supreme Court issued two decisions on campaign finance. In Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., it held that certain advertisements might be constitutionally entitled to an exception from the ‘electioneering communications’ provisions of McCain-Feingold limiting broadcast ads that merely mention a federal candidate within 60 days of an election. On remand, a lower court then held that certain ads aired by Wisconsin Right to Life in fact merited such an exception. The Federal Election Commission appealed that decision, and in June 2007, the Supreme Court held in favor of Wisconsin Right to Life. In an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court declined to overturn the electioneering communications limits in their entirety, but established a broad exemption for any ad that could have a reasonable interpretation as an ad about legislative issues.

Also in 2006, the Supreme Court held that a Vermont law imposing mandatory limits on spending was unconstitutional, under the precedent of Buckley v. Valeo. In that case, Randall v. Sorrell, the Court also struck down Vermont’s contribution limits as unconstitutionally low, the first time that the Court had ever struck down a contribution limit.

In March 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments about whether or not the law could restrict advertising of a documentary about Hillary Clinton.[7] Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was decided in January 2010, the Supreme Court finding that §441b’s restrictions on expenditures were invalid and could not be applied to Hillary: The Movie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign…

Global Climate Change
Environment Ethics
Environment Justice