TGIF 6/3/22

Hip hip hooray - it's Friday, and time for our weekly list making. I'm going to change things up a little, and do every story from the 'good week' side of the ledger, no matter what. Ready to dive in?

This first one's an easy 'good week' entry: goats are clearing brush, weeds, grass, and more in West Sacramento, CA, and it's helping lessen the damage from wildfires. According to the city's public information officer, "About 400 goats can clear two acres a day and get in places mowers can't reach," and they've already protected a housing complex by creating a firebreak. You can watch the goats being herded across a street here. Pretty cool, and much more interesting than brooms and rakes. 

Speaking of brooms, it seems finally the DOJ is cleaning up a desk or something. Former Trump Administration trade guru Peter Navarro, was indicted and charged with contempt of Congress for refusing to comply a request from the House January 6th committee to have a chat and turn over relevant documents. 

Navarro, who wrote a book on overturning the 2020 election, thinks he has executive privilege or something. He's wrong, and it could cost him two years in prison and $200K in fines if he's convicted. Should that happen, he'll probably face a much less significant penalty, but it's nice to dream...

Speaking of dreams, a boat made by New Hampshire middle-schoolers washed ashore in Norway, over 460 days after it was launched. The boat was badly damaged during its 8,000-mile journey, "losing its hull, mast and keel." Sheila Adams, the kids' science teacher, said

This project tapped into so much more than the science curriculum. The students needed to use their writing skills to inform others about their miniboat project, describe our school and town to people of other languages, just in case, and write requests to get the boat deployed."

All that, and I'd say some pretty powerful dreams to help keep their little boat together long enough to make it across the ocean.

Keeping both oars in the water, there's a non-profit that's turning mining pollution into pigments that are used in paint. Rural Action, based in Ohio, works "to create environmental change in rural Appalachian communities." Contaminated water is collected, then a base and oxygen are added, creating pigments that are being used to make paint. You can see some of the artwork created with the paints here. This isn't 'new' news, but it's new to me and it's pretty cool.

This one is new news, and it comes from Lake Tahoe. 

A scuba dive team has completed an extraordinary clean-up of Lake Tahoe after a full year of work, pulling up more than 12 tons of submerged trash. 

Organized by the nonprofit Clean Up The Lake, the team restored every inch of 72 miles of the crystal blue lake’s shoreline and sub-shore, collecting 24,797 pieces of litter weighing a total of 25,281 pounds.

Among the things they team found? Wallets and engagement rings. Which is a really good thing for the people who lost them, who probably never dreamed they'd see their belongings again.

TGIF, everyone.

Email of the Week 10/1/20

Not unexpectedly, most of the political emails I received this week were all about the Benjamins - after all, yesterday was September 30th, and the end of the all important third-quarter fundraising period. 

A couple of the emails weren't just straight-out asks for donations. For example, Papa Joe spoke about the debate a little, as a preface for a $25 donation request, to "make this fund-raising hour huge"  and, of course, to meet the quarterly fund-raising goal. 

Here are Biden's quick thoughts on the debate:

Sue, I just stepped off the debate stage.

It was a real battle out there, but I hope I made you proud by calling out Donald Trump's lies and failures, and by letting the American people know what I - and everyone who is a part of this campaign - stand for.

And it goes on to talk about a 'debate night contest.' I must have missed that email, so I wasn't disappointed that I didn't get a phone call from Biden himself, which was the prize. There was also mention of the great fundraising that the debate inspired, and

...Sue, I'm serious. We're in this thing to win - together. 

And we're in it to win because American can't afford four more years of Donald Trump. It's time to build back better than we were before. 

I can't afford to give $25, but I'll still keep reading the emails. 

The other, more compelling debate-related email was from Tom Steyer, the billionaire activist who dropped out of the Democratic primary race on Sadie Hawkins Day. Take a look.

Susan,

 Last night's presidential debate was chaotic. Mr. Trump refused to follow the rules of a moderated discussion. He then spewed lie after lie - resulting in 90 minutes of desperate, incomprehensible bluster.

I was proud to watch Vice President Biden's thoughtful responses and detailed answers in spite of the mayhem all around him. He reminded us all of the very clear choice this election, between  a wannabe despot and a compassionate statesman.  

Thanks to you and the thousands of people who demanded climate coverage, we had the first direct question on climate change from a moderator in 20 years and the first sustained debate on climate ever. You did that.

And it couldn't be more important. While Trump strung together 17 lies about the climate crisis and continued his dangerous denial, Biden laid out his urgent, bold climate plan not only to deal with the crises we're facing right now, but to also address environmental justice and create millions of well-paying union jobs.

If you took anything away from last night's debate, let it be this: We must do everything in our power to elect Joe Biden.  Please sign up to volunteer with NextGen America today and help us build turnout for a Biden-Harris victory. 

Mr. Trump's dangerous comments were not limited to climate change. In addition to refusing to accept the election results, he refused to denounce white supremacists and gave orders to domestic terrorists to "stand by." These comments are not to be taken lightly.  

 If you took anything away from last night's debate, let it be this: We must do everything in our power to elect Joe Biden.  Please sign up to volunteer with NextGen America today and help us build turnout for a Biden-Harris victory. 

Thank yo for being in this fight. 

Tom 

For not asking me for money, for asking me to volunteer (even though I'm not a young person, which is the demographic NextGen America speaks to), for not taking his eyes off the prize - beating Donald Trump - and for staying true to his passion, dealing with climate change,  Steyer earns the coveted Email of the Week.

What's in your inbox?

OrangeVerse XLVII: An Orange Flush

Ah, a meeting with cameras and the press - it just brings out the poetry in the president, doesn't it? I know it set my free verse-loving heart all a-flutter, that's for sure.

And that's exactly what happened recently when the president, vice president, and some cabinet members and other dignitaries gathered to talk about reducing the regulatory burden on small businesses.

Let's pick up where the poet talks about the administration's battle against California's emissions standards, lightbulbs, and toilets.

Much, Much, Much
We can make cars much less expensive and

much better and much stronger and about the same

from an environmental standpoint. Very close. But then 
when you realize they don't want to buy new cars because

frankly, they don't work very well. But the cars are much safer.

Our cars are much safer. They're much cheaper. They're much better.

And the reason they're safer is because they can be heavier because right 
now the cars are made out of  papier-mâché. (laughter) 
And ours are actually, we allow steel content (laughter)
But just remember: our cars are safer and they are 
much safer, by the way - and they're better. 
They operate better. And in every way 
we think it's going to be terrific. 

The Lightbulb Goes Off
The lightbulb: they got rid of
the lightbulb that people got used to.
The new bulb is many times more expensive 
and I hate to say it, it doesn't make you look as
good. And we’re doing other things. Of course being
a vain person, that’s very important to me. (Laughter.) 
It’s like a - it gives you an orange look. I don't want an
 want an orange look. (Laughter.) Has anyone noticed that? 
(Laughter.) So we’ll have to change those bulbs in at least a
couple of rooms where I am in the White House. (Laughter.)
But we are going back to the - - it’s a double standard. We
have a standard of the new bulbs and we have the old bulbs
And they’re already making the old bulbs. Many people
were complaining that the new bulbs were much much
more expensive. Many times in some cases more
expensive and the other thing they are considered
hazardous waste that because it's largely, a gas
 gas technology, when the bulb is disposed
of you're supposed to bring it to a haz-
ardous waste site. I said how many
people do that? Nobody does it
and you know that's a bad
thing. So you have proba-
bly heard about it You 
probably read about it.
And you'll be able to
to buy lightbulbs that
are better lighting in 
the opinion of many
and I tell you in my
opinion - and for a
lot less money. And
so we're doing that
but you'll also be a-
ble - if you want -
you can buy the
other bulbs also. 
And I'll tell you,
the bulb compa-
nies are - very - 
happy about that.

One Flush Two Flush
We're defending the American
workers we're using common sense.
We have a situation where we're looking
very strongly at sinks and showers and
other elements of bathrooms when you turn the
faucet on - in areas where there's tremendous amounts
of water where the water rushes out to sea because you could never
handle it - and you don't get any water. 
You turn on the faucet; you don't get any water. 
They take a shower and water comes dripping out.
It's dripping out - very quietly - dripping out.
People are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times
as opposed to once they end up using more water.
So the EPA is looking at that very strongly at my suggestion.
You go into a new building or a new house or a 
new home and they have standards.
 "Oh, you don't get water."
 You can't wash your hands, practically, there's so little water
comes out of the faucet. And the end result is you leave
the faucet on and it takes you much longer to wash your
hands you end up using the same amount of water
So we're looking at, very seriously, at opening up
the standard and there may be some areas where we'll
go the other route - desert areas. But for the most part
you have many states where they have so much water
that it comes down - it's called rain (laughter) - that
they don't know - they don't know what to do with it.

Alternative Facts

So we're going to be opening that up I believe and we're looking

looking at changing the standards very soon, and that's a

little bit like the lightbulb where you get a bulb that's

better for much less money, We go back - but you

have the other alternative. And you'll keep the

other alternative with sinks and showers et

cetera too that's been a big problem so

a lot of the things we do are based 

on common sense... In so many -

so many of the things we do

it's based on common sense

like the car the car will

end up with that net

tremendous saving environmentally

when you think of all the cars the

old cars that will come off the road

you'll end up with a very - a better

car and you'll end up environment-

ally it will be ultimately much better.

Wondering on Wednesday (v164)

The weeks, they go by so fast, don't they?

Just last Wednesday, we were reviewing the president's SOTU (something I never really finished doing, I realize - so I'll get to that soon, I promise), and worrying about the potential for another shutdown, and a bunch of women in white and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's random standing around.

And here we are a week later worrying about the potential for another shutdown, we've got more Dem women running for president, and well, the Speaker is  - well, the Speaker is the current Queen of the Meme for her clapback of the president.

On the possibility we'll have another #Trumpshutdown, which his team has said remains on the table, we know that a bipartisan agreement was reached the other day, and we hear that the president is "not happy" with the compromise that was reached, but is expected to sign it if it gets to his desk. He's suggesting that there'll be some $23B for border security when all is said and done, some part of it to be found by juggling money from department budgets that may keep him from having to declare a national emergency to get at funds.

He's also proclaimed that no president has ever worked harder and I have to wonder, where's the data for that? Bueller? Anyone?

Quick Takes (v24): The Erosion of Science

Quick Takes

We had another rocket science moment in Congress recently - there should be as little surprise about that as there was about another school shooting, right?

Republican Representative Mo Brooks of Alabama tutored a scientist from the Woods Hole Research Center (WHRC) about rising oceans.

The gentleman from Alabama wanted to know, at a meeting of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology (which, under the current state of things, is kind of a science denying committee),  if there were things other than climate change, which is melting ice, causing the oceans to rise.

What about erosion! Every single year that we're on Earth, you have huge tons of silt deposited by the Mississippi River, by the Amazon river, by the Nile, by every major river system - and for that matter, creek, all the way down to the smallest systems. And every time you have that soil or rock whatever it is that is deposited into the seas, that forces the sea levels to rise. Because now you've got less space in those oceans because the bottom is moving up.

What about the White Cliffs of Dover? California, where you have the waves crashing against the shorelines and time and time again you have the cliffs crashing into the sea. All of that displaces the water which causes it to rise, correct?

Um, well, from a scientific perspective, that's ridiculous. Philip Duffy, president of WHRC, noted.

I'm pretty sure that on human time scales, those are minuscule effects.

In fact, according to folks who did the math using long-accepted theories on measuring the displacement of water, it would require the top five inches of the 9.1 million squares miles of the US land mass  - about 6.6 quadrillion pounds worth - to be dropped into the ocean to create the same change in all of the world's oceans as we currently see.

Not just one time dropping that 6.6Q pounds of dirt, and rocks, and and asphalt, of plastic bags and Styrofoam cups and disposable diapers and cat litter and manure and tires and cans and bottles and whatever else we have in the first five inches of the earth -- all of that, every year - to equal what we're seeing in ocean level rise. All of that and more, actually, since the level of ocean rise is increasing each year.

There was a scathing editorial on AL.com, which said, in part, about the rocks falling into the ocean comment,

It would have been comical if it had come from a middle school science fair, but it didn't. It came from a guy on a committee making decisions for the most powerful country on earth about the future of the planet. 

In his response, Brooks used additional logic about increasing ice in one part of the earth but not mentioning decreasing ice somewhere else, logic that one person described along the lines of figuring out how much money you have in the bank by only counting deposits and not withdrawals.

About that particular bit of logic Politifacts waves a 'mostly false' flag.

Random Thoughts: The Time is Now

Random thoughts, sitting on the porch listening to a gentle rain falling, watching the dust wash away from the garden, smiling at reflections in the puddles on the street (until a car comes through and ripples the heck out of everything):

We had another school shooting a couple of days ago. Ho hum, right? We sent out compassion, our "we're with you forever" messages right on schedule. And while our "thoughts and prayers" are floating over a small Texas town, just like they've floated over a small Florida town, a small Connecticut town, a small Colorado town, a small Pennsylvania Amish town, and more, our real thoughts and prayers focus on what to do about it, or what not to do about it.

Because guns don't kill people, people kill people. Guns don't bully people, people bully people. And guns don't wear black trench coats in the heat of a spring Texas day, people wear trench coats in the heat of a spring Texas day. Guns don't get overly upset when someone shuns their advances, people do...  You know the drill.

Similar vein, different subject: plastic bags.

There's a movement to ban the plastic bags we get when we pick up groceries, or clothes, or plant food or convenience items, or prescriptions - they're ubiquitous, the darn things. (And without them, we'd not have a convenient way to get our cat litter into the trash - unless of course we start leaving it on the yards of people who don't pick up after their dogs on our yard, maybe?)

The big blue states of California (which saw a 72% drop in plastic bag waste on a cleanup day the year after the bill was passed) and New York, where the governor is being forced to the left by an actress, are in the thick of it.

Retailers say it's unnecessary, expensive, paper bags aren't viable replacements, yadda yadda yadda...
And this morning on a news report, I heard the ultimate shutdown of these attempts at protecting the environment: plastic bags don't cause pollution, people do.

Another story I heard talked about a requirement, also in California, that soon new home construction will have to include solar panels.  Locally, builders are not excited about that, concerned that the added costs of installing the panels could price people out of the new home market.

So, builders don't price people out of the market, solar panels do?  That doesn't make any sense: solar panels, which are inanimate objects, cannot price anyone out of the housing market, that would have to be the builders, right?

I'm sure I could find many more examples of this stuff, where no 'things' are bad, only people are bad.
Except - -think about it:

• autonomous cars, where there's a driver who fails to take control of the car and allows it to crash? We don't blame the person, we still blame the car...
• technological assistants that spy on us, track us, all that stuff:  we don't blame the person who bought the darn things, we blame the devices... 
• failing airbags? They're supposed to protect us if we get into a crash, but we don't blame the driver who has the accident...
• costs of prescriptions, costs of  air ambulance trips, other health care costs? Blame the companies who make the items, operate the items, sell the insurance, but not the people who are getting sick...

So, then, what is the logic?  Are we supposed to blame the thing when it costs people money, but we blame the people when it takes the lives of others?  Well, no, that's inconsistent - because guns. 

Do we blame the thing when it harms people in some way, outside their control? That works on air ambulance and health care stuff, but it doesn't work on guns when children get shot in schools, people get shot in churches, and movie theaters or medical offices or on Army bases or college campuses or in Walmart parking lots... 

Do we blame people when they're stupid, such as with pollution?  Well, that doesn't work either - because isn't a person who blindly trusts an electronic spy in their homes and then is shocked when something goes wrong also stupid? Or when the autonomous car fails to do what it's supposed to, and so does the person?

I think it's clear. No matter what, there's a person behind everything that's either good, bad or indifferent. And the stuff that we think is good or indifferent can turn out to be bad when put in the hands of the wrong person. And of course, something that can be bad, if used differently, can turn into something good.

But that relies on people to identify the options, understand the implications, and make good decisions, with the best of intentions. And we've seen how that goes, right?

I think we have to protect ourselves from all of those people, and there's really only one solution.

We're stuck with the people we have, kind of like we're stuck with school shootings and environmental issues and science deniers and sexual harassers and religious zealots of any faith who can not just Joe Biden literally but actually literally justify anything and everything by finding a verse in their religious book of choice, and terrorists of any stripe and unethical politicians and and and...

So we have to ban more people.

And we have to start right now. 

Meanwhile Back in Albany (v14)

Nathaniel Brooks/NY Times

New York's Sonofa Governor Andrew Cuomo gave his eighth State of the State (SOTS) address last Wednesday.

He chose a much more traditional route this year - no dog and pony shows across the state, just a "Castro-esque" speech about all of the things he wants to do as president in 2020 governor in 2018. The Castro comment, which I love, came from Colgate University professor Tim Byrnes; it comes near the 20-minute mark in this video.

So what's on the gov's wish list this year? He starts with sexual harassment, and a laundry list of proposals:

• no taxpayer funds should be used to pay for any public official's sexual harassment or misconduct;
• no state or local government enter into a secret nondisclosure agreement; 
• companies doing business with the state disclose the number of sexual harassment; adjudications they have, and the number of nondisclosure agreements they've executed;
• state pension funds only be invested in companies the Comptroller determines have adequate female and minority representation in management or on the board of directors.

And, he asked for enactment of the contraceptive care act and state legislature approval of Roe v. Wade. And a new independent, government-wide whistleblower process. And a strict, uniform code of sexual harassment policies that would be binding on all employees, all branches and agencies, all authorities, and all local governments.

Then came criminal justice reform, starting with the bail process. We need to be color-blind and wealth-blind, he said, and so unless the person poses a significant flight risk or threat to public safety, bail is out of the picture and everyone is released on their own recognizance. And a full work week for trial parts of our courts, judge performance used as a consideration for advancement, more timely filling of judicial vacancies, and speedier trials.  Legally binding corrective action plans for out-of-compliance jails is also on the table.

Then, after some talk about youth unemployment and non-specific requirements that local governments meet the same MWBE goals as the state does, Cuomo tackled homelessness.

What does it say about us as a society? That we now pass men and women lying on the streets with the same ease that we pass light poles and mailboxes. It has become part of our new normal, but it is abnormal and it is wrong...

New York state will ensure that every local government is effectively reaching out to homeless people, or they will not receive state funding. Period. I'm also directing the MTA and Port Authority, Centro, CDTA, the RGRTA, the NFTA and all our cities to do the same.  

And, for those who would say that they're unable to help the mentally ill homeless because the law doesn't let them, Cuomo vowed to change the law.

And speaking of changing the law, Cuomo dropped a little ethics reform into the mix here, vowing to ban all outside income for legislators. This may be a non-starter, since his commission to give legislators a pay raise (on the theory that they're full time, not part time) failed in 2016. You can read about that process here, here, here, and here.

Next up? The environment. Finally tackling the threats to our water, including toxic algae and the Grumman Plume. And,

• ending any investment in  fossil fuel-related activities in the state pension fund;
• two new RFPs for offshore wind, enough to power 400,000 households;
• suing the federal government if they release GE from any further obligation to clean up the Hudson River.

Opioids? He hit on that too, promising a "comprehensive solution: more prevention, more education, more enforcement, more treatment"  -- and more lawsuits.

But we also want to advance a new approach this year, the ultimate 'follow the supply chain' strategy. Big corporations may own Washington, but they don't own New York...

The opioid crisis was manufactured, literally and figuratively. Unscrupulous distributors developed a $400B industry selling opioids, and they were conveniently blind to the consequences of their actions. They pumped these pills into society. And they created addictions. Like the tobacco industry, they killed thousands, and they did it without warning.  We will make them pay for their illegal and reprehensible conduct. We will sue them, and we will stop the spread of opioids because too many innocent lives have been lost and the time for action is now before we lose another single life.

I was surprised not to see another call out on pension investments here. Big Pharma companies seem like an easy target, I would think, for a governor who seems particularly litigious this year.

Maybe dropping everything tied to 'fossil fuel-related activities' (which seems to mean no more oil and gas companies, no more chemical companies that are involved in any kind of research or development on petroleum products, or any companies having anything to do with fracking, or staffing and supporting oil rigs, or any of the oil and gas distribution companies and possibly any of the utilities, for starters), coupled with dropping companies that don't have an 'adequate' number of women in leadership roles in the company or the boardroom, is enough pain to suffer on behalf of all the over one million members, retirees and beneficiaries in the nation's third largest pension fund?

I'm going to stop here -- going back to Professor Byrnes' comment on Castro-esque, this has gotten us not quite to the bottom of page eight of the governor's nineteen-page SOTS address. We'll pick up in another post this week.

I Hereby Proclaim: November 2017

Like his predecessors, president Trump has a penchant for proclamations. I last looked at some of them he made in June, and thought it was time to drop in and take another look.

Here are a few of the ones relating to the month of November.

It's National Entrepreneurship Month!

National Entrepreneurship Month celebrates one of our Nation's proudest qualities: our innovative, hardworking, entrepreneurial spirit. American entrepreneurs invent and sell fascinating and endlessly useful new products and services, creating millions of jobs and driving American global leadership along the way.... we must ensure that entrepreneurs have access to the capital, markets, and networks they need to get off the ground, to finance and build helpful innovations, and to export their products and services around the world. My Administration will continue its work to eliminate unnecessary, burdensome regulations and to fight for a simpler, fairer tax code that eases the burdens on doing business and enhances access to capital... this month, I call upon Americans to recognize the entrepreneurs who strengthen our economy, drive creativity, and increase the vibrancy of our great Nation.

We should absolutely celebrate entrepreneurs, ensure they have access to capital, and do something about our problematic regulatory environment that at times makes it hard for businesses large and small to function well. Although, next month, when it's expected that net neutrality will be wiped out, it might get more difficult for many of our small businesses to function. But heck, forcing service providers to allow everyone equal access to the internet? That's just not vibrant.

Similarly, November is Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience Month!

During Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience Month, we emphasize the importance of safeguarding our Nation's infrastructure. Critical infrastructure systems are those physical and virtual assets that are essential to our physical security, economic security, or public health.  We need resilient, well-maintained critical infrastructure so that all Americans have access to safe food, reliable electricity, clean water, convenient transportation systems, quality public health and medical services, and instant communication every day... Our critical infrastructure also faces threats from capacity-induced strain, terrorist attacks, accidents, pandemics, space weather, and cyber attacks... My Administration will help our businesses invest in needed capital and research and development by reducing burdensome regulations and enacting comprehensive tax reform.

Except, of course, for having a freely accessible internet. But having ready access to capital, no burdensome regulations, and comprehensive tax reform will help secure our infrastructure. Or something.

And, November is National Native American Heritage Month!

My Administration is committed to tribal sovereignty and self-determination. A great Nation keeps its word, and this Administration will continue to uphold and defend its responsibilities to American Indians and Alaska Natives. The United States is stronger when Indian Country is health and prosperous. As part of our efforts to strengthen American Indian and Alaska Native communities, my Administration is reviewing regulations that may impose unnecessary costs and burdens This aggressive regulatory reform, and a focus on government-to-government consultation, will help revitalize our Nation's commitment to Indian Country.

Dakota Access pipeline, anyone?  Removing national monuments that protect Native heritage sites? Denying climate science? Abandoning environmental protections?  Let's do more to revitalize our commitment to 'Indian Country' -- or, are all of these things happening outside Indian Country? And where or what exactly is 'Indian Country' anyway?

I hope you celebrated November 13 through November 19, 2017 as National Apprenticeship Week.

During National Apprenticeship Week, we recognize the important role apprenticeships play in unleashing the American workforce... our Nation can renew one of our greatest assets - the American worker.

My Administration has taken important steps to promote and expand apprenticeships. The Department of Labor is fully implementing my Executive Order on Expanding Apprenticeships in America, which direct it to work with other Federal Departments and agencies to make it easier for companies to create and grow apprenticeship programs...

This week, I challenge businesses, educational institutions, and government entities to expand apprenticeship opportunities and other quality job-training programs to help open more doors for more Americans... Together, we will build an even stronger workforce and provide new and exciting opportunities for generations of Americans to learn, earn and succeed. 

I'm a big fan of these programs, and a bigger fan of companies starting them on their own, without burdensome regulations directing multiple governmental departments and agencies to make it happen. Creative, innovative companies who need skilled people are free to collaborate with high schools, BOCES and similar programs, technical colleges, state universities, unions - to develop the kind of programs that will help create the workforce we need. We shouldn't have to encourage them to make this investment in their future.

At almost the same time, we were celebrating November 12 through 18, 2017 as American Education Week.

During American Education Week, we recognize that the foundation of the American Dream is a quality education that instills lifelong skills and develops strong character... As parents, teachers, and advocates, we recommit to ensuring that all children in American have a meaningful opportunity to harness their full potential...  Parents and guardians are the best advocates for their children's success. Through engagement with teachers and local school boards, parents have the power to shape their children's education. The importance of family and community involvement is why I signed an Executive Order earlier this year to protect and preserve State and local control over the curriculum, administration, and personnel of our country's schools... By promoting lifelong learning and continuing to ensure relevant post secondary education is more accessible to students, we can help all Americans achieve their dreams... There can be no greater investment than into the success of our children.

There's a lot to unpack in there, as they say, but I'll only say this: complete local control over curriculum will not help ensure the success of our children, it will create a giant, unwieldy patchwork quilt of regulations which might actually hinder our children and the efforts at getting a relevant post secondary education. So I guess it's good that the federal government is helping to develop apprenticeship programs -- we're going to need them if the Department of Education is successful with its reforms.

Syria, Nicaragua, and US?

Late last night, the Tweeter in Chief sent this message out, signaling an end to his game of Will We? Won't We? Stay in the Paris Accord.

Pretty  much everyone thinks we're going to back out of the voluntary agreement, and join only Syria and Nicaragua as non-participants - I haven't seen anything suggesting we're going to stay in, even though Trump "learned a lot" when we met with world leaders on his #MAGAWorldTour.

A bunch of Republican senators -- illustrious leaders all -- sent a letter to the president encouraging him to back out, so that we can grow our economy (see the discussion with Scott Pruitt there) and become so flush with #winning and #jobs and #deregulation that we won't even realize we have #crappyhealthcare and we won't even be able to see all of the #oilrigs and #miningscars in our #NationalParks -- it'll be great! 

We have been encouraged by the steps you have taken to reduce the regulatory burdens facing this country. From your many Executive Orders to the signing of 14 laws rolling back regulations from the previous administration, it is clear that you share our commitment to reducing the regulatory burdens our businesses face in order to create jobs and grow the economy.

One of the most important executive orders you signed is EO 13783 Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth wherein, among other things, you instruct the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to unwind President Obama's Clean Power Plan regulations.

We applaud this objective and encourage you to take every action necessary to ensure it is accomplished.

A key risk to fulfilling this objective is remaining in the Paris Agreement. 

The stated reason? Litigation under the terms of the Paris Agreement could prevent the Trump administration from fulfilling its duty to destroy the environment and obscure our purple mountain majesties and all those amber waves of grain. The hell with the fruited plain too -- that's all out the window.

If all goes according to plan, this afternoon the president will stand in the Rose Garden -- yes, a garden -- likely with the 22 Republicans who sent him that letter - to announce we're joining Syria (an international pariah not allowed to travel because of sanctions, and, you know,  kinda busy with that little war thingy that's been tearing that country apart for the past several years), and Nicaragua (the fourth most at-risk country, which didn't sign on because the Paris Agreement is voluntary, not mandatory) and not participate.

North Korea does. Russia does. China does. Afghanistan does. Libya does. Venezuela does. Japan does. And Germany, Iran and Iraq, Norway and Switzerland and Swaziland and everyone except Syria, Nicaragua, and ...

Trump in Transition (v16)

Ah yes, the First 100 Days. The honeymoon, when the leader of the free world is typically at his most popular, with the support of the people in ways not likely to be seen for the rest of his term.

Some honeymoon.

President Trump has the lowest approval rating of any president in recent memory, with barely 41% of us supporting him. He maintains the rock-solid support of his base, even in the face of actions that run counter to his promises, but that doesn't seem to matter much.

Trump told us that the 100 day measure is a 'ridiculous standard' while he touted his accomplishments of the first 90 days  - screw those last ten -  and at the same time he's told us how great he has done: strong borders, a SCOTUS pick, jobs, jobs, jobs, economic confidence, cleaning up the mess left him by the Obama administration and so on. And Executive Orders - 30 of them, more than any president since Truman - from the president who poo-pooed them on the campaign trail.

I want to not use too many executive orders, Executive orders sort of came about more recently. Nobody ever heard of an executive order, then all of a sudden Obama - because he couldn't get anybody to agree with him - he starts signing them like they're butter (ed. note: #whatthesniff) so I want to do away with executive orders for the most part. 

Maybe he'll stop issuing one every three days or so after he finishes dismantling the Obama legacy; after all, that's why Trump ran for president in the first place. Obama had a birth certificate the whole time, the bastage, and then there was the 2011 White House Correspondents' Dinner...

While president Trump thinks the 100 days thing is ridiculous, candidate Trump took it very seriously, even issuing a 100 Day Contract with America, full of promises against which he should be measured. Here's a scorecard from Quartz.com that uses Trumpian measures of success for their ratings, with these results for the 28 promises in the Contract:

• Tremendous! -- a complete success (5)
• Nice! -- a good result (0)
• Politics! -- something done/compromise made (3)
• Failing! -- little done/minimal success (2)
• Sad! -- nothing done/disappointing result  (13)
• Total Disaster! -- things are worse than before (5)

My scorecard will contain no surprises for regular readers, who know I'm a 'strongly disapprove' in polls. Let's take a look.

Cleaning up corruption and special interest collusion in Washington: A generally meaningless hiring freeze, a lobbying ban for the political class, and a two-for-one regulation trade off were put out there, but it's laughable to believe that special interests and 'corruption' in Washington will decrease under this administration.

This administration thinks running the country from the dining room of the president's private, for-profit club is OK. And hired POTUS' daughter and son-in-law as special advisers, antagonizing even Alex Jones, the administration's Conspiracy Theorist in Chief.

We did not elect Ivanka Trump to be the 45th President of the United States. I think she's talented, she's beautiful, I think the dresses she wears, the clothing line are cool. I have nothing against her personally. Or Jared Kushner, but we didn't elect him to be the president either. He's a Democrat...

And hired disgraced General Michael Flynn  for his strident anti-Obama stance; he's now under investigation by the Pentagon for taking money from foreign governments. (Trump tells us Flynn is Obama's fault; I wonder what two regulations were dropped for this new one requiring vetting someone after you fire them?)

And that won't release the president's taxes. Or the White House visitor logs. But boy, they have proudly met with all kinds of special interest groups and CEOs, promising who knows what beyond massive regulatory rollbacks, tax cuts, and, apparently, unfettered access to the administration.  Collusion? Corruption? Don't be silly.

Congressional term limits was on the list; that was actually a meaningful change. We knew it was going nowhere, but the Only I Can Fix This president should have at least given it shot, don't you think?

Protecting American workers. NAFTA; TPP; China; identify and immediately eliminate foreign trading abuses; lift restrictions on traditional energy production; allow energy infrastructure projects to go forward; cancel payments for global climate change and fix our own water and energy infrastructure were the promises here.

On NAFTA, he and his team have said both that we'll going to pull out (tradus interruptus) or renegotiate better terms (more foreplay, please) - I think in the same day. Looks like renegotiating has the upper hand, today.TPP is out. Like most Americans, I can't speak to the implications of that, so I don't know if it's a win or a loss.

On energy, he's been busy. The administration said yes to the Keystone XL pipeline (size matters and XL is way more bigly than a plain old ordinary pipeline). He said yes to the Dakota Access Pipeline. He ordered a review of national monuments, for ways to take the shale, oil, coal and natural gas from them. He overturned a number of the Obama climate change and environmental protections, preferring that the states control what happens within their own borders. He just issued additional orders for an America First Offshore Energy Strategy which includes the Atlantic coast, the Gulf Coast and the Arctic coast.

He's definitely keeping his word to energy companies, and for construction jobs, for sure, if anything comes from his orders. There could be millions or billions of jobs, who knows? There could also be millions or billions of desert, mountain, glacier, forest, and coastal acres destroyed in our job-creating assault on the environment, too - from the administration of a man who fought to keep less than two hands full of wind turbines from being built within eyesight of one of his resorts.

For Earth Day, he told us this:

My Administration is committed to advancing scientific research that leads to a better understanding of our environment and of environmental risks. As we do so, we should remember that rigorous science depends not on ideology, but on a spirit of honest inquiry and robust debate.  

This April 22nd, as we observe Earth Day, I hope that our Nation can come together to give thanks for the land we love and call home.

His policies, to date, don't lend themselves to what he said. There is simply no balance here.

Restoring security and the constitutional rule of law. Cancel all of Obama's "unconstitutional" orders; begin the process of filling the Scalia seat on the Supreme Court; cancel federal funding to sanctuary cities; begin removing two million criminal illegal immigrants and cancel visa if their countries won't take them back; and do the Muslim ban and institute extreme vetting.

Regardless of their constitutionality, which would be decided under the vaunted 'constitutional rule of law,' Trump will continue his assault on the last eight years of government, we know that.

He did fill the seat left open by the obstructionist Republican majority in the Senate who believed "eight is enough" unless and until there is a Republican president, and the seat got filled only after the rules were changed, something that was poison unless and until there was Republican president.

Trump proudly told us he's the first president in 136 years - 136 years!!!- to fill a SCOTUS seat in the first 100 days. He failed to mention that only he and Richard Nixon entered their terms with an open seat, but hey, who's counting?

To his credit, illegal border crossings are way down, and that's a good thing. And we are getting rid of people with drunk driving convictions. I'd rather see them getting the gang members and drug dealers and rapists and murderers he told us about out of our country, but I'm sure that will come with time once they figure out how to vet and prioritize.

The Muslim ban - sorry, travel ban, has been rejected twice by the courts; sanctioning sanctuary cities  has also been nipped in the bud temporarily; time will tell on these as well.

Some of the promised legislation he would "introduce and fight for" in the first 100 days that was included in the Contract have not really come to fruition, either.

• Repeal and Replace Obamacare - sorry, not yet. Stymied by Republicans, Paul Ryan's fault, trying, but not enough votes to bring it to the floor.
• Middle Class Tax Relief and Simplification - sorry, a bulleted list of priorities released on day 97 is not sufficient. His promise here, by the way, was a 35% reduction for a middle class family of four, and a corporate rate of 15%. That last one is on the list we saw last week. 
• American Energy and Infrastructure Act - sorry, not yet. Lots of talk and Executive Orders and stuff, but no deal for this trillion-dollar plan, or how the public-private thing will work.
• School Choice and Education Opportunity Act - sorry, not yet. This one will pay parents to take their children out of public schools, and end Common Core. 
• Affordable Child Care and Eldercare Act -- sorry, not yet. This one seems like a no go (sorry, Ivanka) since he's getting rid of all tax deductions other than mortgage interest and charitable contributions.
• End Illegal Immigration Act - aka The Wall - sorry, not yet. This one is so fraught with issues that it was pulled from the table last week so that the government would not be shut down.
• Restoring Community Safety Act - he gets a partial thumbs up on this; after all, they did roll out the hot line to report crime by illegal aliens and I think the task force is somewhere in the West Wing. Maybe 'he went to Jared' on this?

Importantly, over the first 100 days, it's become clear our allies can't be sure what we stand for, or what we're going to do, because it changes daily. Because it changes tweetly. Because it changes depending on who's talking at the time.  Just ask Canada, Mexico, China, Taiwan, and South Korea, to name just a few. 

We - you and me, American citizens -  can't depend on what the Administration says, either, for the same reasons noted above. But we do know that every crowd is a record, everything is wonderful, the media is fake and failing, polls are bad and Trump is great and everyone loves him.

Unless, of course, those things are not true? 

Helluva great first 100 days. Just ask anyone.

Sidebar: Trump in Transition (v6)

In my most recent Trump in Transition (TiT) post, I talked about the POTUS-elect tapping Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to dismantle, er, I mean, to head the EPA. At about the same time that news came out, there was another bit of news regarding the EPA and what we can expect during the Trump Administration.

As reported by the Washington Post and others, the Celebrity Transition Team is looking to do some data-mining over at EPA - sort of like their version of clean coal, or something:

Donald Trump's transition team has issued a list of 74 questions for the Energy Department, asking agency officials to identify which employees and contractors have worked on forging an international climate pact as well as domestic efforts to cut the nation's carbon output.

Brrrr.... that's a chilling howdy-do, don't you think?

Actually, it looks like there are only 65 questions (one page was included twice in the document) and some of them are logical questions an incoming administration, with limited 'in the weeds' knowledge would ask for, such as:

• a list of open positions
• a list of all Presidential employees requiring Senate confirmation
• a list of reports due to Congress or other external parties in 2017

Nothing too nefarious in that type of question, I don't think. Here are a couple of the ones that garnered attention:

• Can you provide a list of all Department of Energy employees or contractors who have attended any Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Carbon meetings? Can you provide a list of when those meetings were and any materials distributed at those meetings, emails associated with those meetings or material created by Department employees or contractors in anticipation or as a result of those meetings?
• Can you provide a list of Department employees or contractors who attended any of the Conference of Parties (under the UNFCCC) in the last five years? (Note: the UNFCCC is commonly referred to as the Paris Agreement, something Trump has said the US will withdraw from, not participate in.)
• Is there a readily available list of any products or technologies that have emerged from DOE  programs or the labs that are currently offered in the market without any subsidy?
• Which programs within DOE are essential to meeting the goals of President Obama's Climate Action Plan?
• Does the Department have any thoughts on how to reduce the bureaucratic burden for exporting US energy technology, including but not limited to commercial nuclear technology?

There are also questions that raise issues with the reliability and independence of reports coming from the Energy Information Agency (EIA), including these somewhat passive-aggressive ones:

• EIA is an independent agency within DOE. How has EIA ensured its independence in your data and analysis over the past eight years? In what instances do you think EIA's independence was most challenged?
• In the Annual Energy Outlook for 2016, EIA assumed the Clean Power Plan (CPP) should be in the reference case despite the fact that the reference case is based on existing laws and regulations. Why did EIA make that assumption, which seems to be atypical of past forecasts? (Note: implementation of the CPP was stayed by the Supreme Court in February 2016)
• EIA's assessments of levelized costs for renewable technologies do not contain back-up costs for the fossil fuel technologies that are brought on-line to replace the generation when those technologies are down. Is this a true representation of levelized costs?

There other questions seeking info on offshore wind generation, something we know Trump does not like (eagle-killing, ugly, China, monsters, etc.).

There are questions about Yucca Mountain, the nuclear waste repository outside Las Vegas; funding for that project was stopped by the Obama Administration. Now that Harry Reid is out of the Senate, there's opportunity for this issue to be pressed forward.

• Are there any statutory restrictions to restarting the Yucca Mountain project?
• Does DOE have a plan to resume the Yucca Mountain license proceedings?

There's more - some of the questions only a Department or Congressional insider, or an energy lobbyist, would understand. But it seems like the transition team is honing in on things that the current administration liked,  that are global in nature, or that are not fossil fuel and nuke friendly. 

Brrr, I say again. 

Trump in Transition (v6)

In this picture, Trump looks like he's ready to unleash the mother of all f-bombs -- and in a way, that's what he did this week.

Yeah, he and FDOTUS Ivanka met with Al Gore, the guy who invented the Internet, er, I mean, the guy who has been championing environmental issues for years, which resulted in Gore calling it a "lengthy and very productive session" and saying, according to the press pool report

It was a sincere search for areas of common ground. I found it an extremely interesting conversation, and to be continued, and I'm just going to leave it at that

Apparently that search for common ground was fruitless, because it wasn't all that much later that the POTUS-elect named his choice to run the Environmental Protection Agency: Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma's Attorney General.

Pruitt has a long history of not being a fan of regulations related to energy and climate issues, having frequently joined or supported from the sidelines cases against the Obama administration's efforts.

The OK Attorney General's media page is full of references to clean energy, clean water, fossil fuels, and the like; pretty generally, if the current Administration is for something, looks like Pruitt and his office are against it.

He co-authored, along with Alabama's AG Luther Strange, an article published in the National Review a few months back, in which it was noted

Healthy debate is the lifeblood of American democracy, and global warming has inspired one of the major policy debates of our time. That debate is far from settled. Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind. That debate should be encouraged — in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress. It should not be silenced with threats of prosecution. Dissent is not a crime.

According to an investigation by the NY Times back in 2014, Pruitt in his official capacity as AG, sent a letter to the EPA that was written by energy lobbyists, and they've helped with drafts of other letters to multiple federal agencies; he and other AGs are collaborating with corporations to craft legal strategy against the Administration; and industries regulated by his office have joined lawsuits filed by his office.

There's really no surprise in the choice. Here are just a few of the bullet points in his energy plan:

• Make America energy independent, create millions of new jobs, and protest clean air and clean water. We will conserve our natural habitats, reserves and resources. We will unleash an energy revolution that will bring vast new wealth to our country.
• Unleash America's $50 trillion in untapped shale, oil, and natural gas reserves, plus hundreds of years in clean coal reserves.
• Open onshore and offshore leasing on federal lands, elimination moratorium on coal leasing, and open shale energy deposits.
• Encourage the use of natural gas and other American energy resources that will both reduce emissions but also reduce the price of energy and increase our economic output.
• Rescind all job-destroying Obama executive actions. Mr. Trump will reduce and eliminate all barriers to responsible energy production, creating at least half a million jobs a year, $30B in higher wages and cheaper energy.

Promises of millions of high paying energy jobs in Trump's plan seem to assume that prices of domestically produced energy will go high and stay high indefinitely as we pump drill and dig and frack our brains out - which seems unlikely to be the case, doesn't it?  And if it is in fact unlikely, those jobs and all that economic input will disappear, just as they have over the past year or so, in Texas, and in North Dakota, when the price dropped and there was nothing in it for the energy companies to keep working. (Hey - when the price goes down, production goes down, employment goes down, economic input goes down. Is that what trickle-down economics is all about?)

Trump is no fan of the EPA, and I think this choice only adds clarity to what we can expect going forward.