Sunday, November 04, 2012
From DeSmogBlog's Steve Horn, Exclusive: Tea Party, Fracking Industry Launch Astroturf Campaign Against Mansfield, OH Community Bill of Rights Referendum
Exclusive: Tea Party, Fracking Industry Launch Astroturf Campaign Against Mansfield, OH Community Bill of Rights Referendum (via Desmogblog)
Ohio is referred to as a "battleground state" due to its status as a "swing state" in presidential elections. But another important battle is brewing in the Buckeye State, also set to be settled in the voting booth. This battle centers around a "Community Bill of Rights" referendum in Mansfield, OH…
Sunday, October 07, 2012
Are There Prospects for Democracy in Burma, Iraq, and the USA?
This is a talk delivered at the Asian American Heritage Conference, Northeastern Illinois
University, April 12, 2012 [delivered
only in part because of time constraints]
Telling
stories, especially the stories of those who are not often heard, can give us
the deepest understanding of the human condition. We don’t often read or see or
hear nuance in mainstream media. We are given one side, or two sides, and
expected to make decisions based on the information the media choose to give
us. But that’s hardly the whole story. As any student of history can tell you,
there are rarely only two sides to
any story, and never only one side.
And never just the government’s side.
That
is even more true when reporting about places and people living under conflict,
war, tyranny, and injustice.
In
nearly two decades in international journalism, I came to realize that true journalism
is a matter of finding the stories of real people and how they are affected by
the political or economic or social actions that generally grab the headlines —
the stories that are often neglected in mainstream, or corporate-run, media. It’s
giving voice to the voiceless, to the powerless and ignored who would not
otherwise be acknowledged as even deserving a place on the planet.
It’s
also exposing government corruption and of not allowing liars to get away with
their lies — whether the liars are elected officials, regulators, military
officers, police officers, corporate tycoons, community leaders, religious
figures, or anyone else who held a position of economic, political, social, or
technological power.
As
consumers of media, we cannot allow ourselves to buy into mainstream media’s
false idea of neutrality. We should be demanding the truth, not the company
line or the state line. Nor one party’s line or another party’s line. Nor the
Arabs over the Israelis, the Catholics over the Protestants. As the great
Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk says, “It is the duty of the
correspondent to be neutral and unbiased on the side of those who suffer,
whoever they may be.”
As
you’ll see just from this panel, we necessarily bring our own perspectives,
even as scholars and reporters, to our scholarship and our reporting; hence it
is important to follow many media, but ensuring that these media are truly
independent from corporate-state or control or from other biases that are
detrimental to the health and well-being of people and the environment on which
we all depend for survival.
Earlier
this week (April 10, 2012), in my role as the associate director of the Park
Center for Independent Media, I had the great good fortune to cohost the Izzy
Awards for achievement in independent journalism. The Award is named after the
great muckracking journalist I. F. “Izzy” Stone.
This
year we had two honorees. Sharif Abdel Kouddous, former producer and now Middle
East correspondent for Democracy Now!,
received the Izzy Award for his courageous and insightful reporting from
Egypt’s Tahrir Square during and since the 18-day popular uprising against
Hosni Mubarak’s regime that began on January 25, 2011. I’m sure many of you
watched and listened as he brought us those stories, even sometimes as bullets
and Molotov cocktails whizzed by.
We
also honored the Center for Media and Democracy for its in-depth analysis of
hundreds of formerly secret documents of the American Legislative Exchange
Council, or ALEC. CMD exposed how lobbyists of huge corporations and right-wing
special interest groups met and continue to meet in secret with primarily
conservative legislators to craft pro-business legislation on the federal level
and in virtually every state in the USA. If you have not visited the website
ALECExposed.org, I urge you to do so and see how this shadowy group has crafted
laws on everything from education to the environment to guns to voting rights
to workers’ rights — not all things one would expect corporations to be
involved in.
I begin with journalism because an
independent media is an absolute necessity for any kind of democratic society. Without its illumination of corporate-state-judicial-military
corruption, there is no chance for democracy, freedom, and equity. Journalism
is the only profession specifically protected under the U.S. Constitution, in
the First Amendment.
But
that protection is being ignored and subverted, journalists are regularly harassed,
intimidated, and arrested right here in the USA.
The
folks at the nonprofit FreePress.org have been tracking journalist arrests at
his site SaveTheNews.org. They have documented 76 journalist arrests in 12
cities since Occupy Wall Street began last September. http://www.savethenews.org/tracking-journalist-arrests-occupy-events
That
is clearly police intimidation — again, the kind the U.S. decries when it
happens in Egypt, Iraq, China, or Burma. But it’s happening here, and not just
to independent and citizen journalists, but to mainstream reporters from the
New York Times, PBS, the New York Daily News, the AP, and even international
reporters. The public seems ignorant of or indifferent to these vicious attacks
on the very lifeblood of democracy.
And it’s not just journalists. Those of you who have lived under a brutal regime,
perhaps suffered torture and incarceration or seen loved ones abused or even
killed, think of the United States as a safe haven, a bastion of right. It
certainly was on the way, with increasing civil rights, relative tolerance of
difference, and a seemingly prosperous middle class. But this is no longer our parents’
or even our own USA; in the last few years it has been sliding backward. Now we
are under an increasing military-police crackdown. Many activists I know
personally have been harassed with increasing regularity in recent months by
police/FBI/Homeland Security.
I
said I’d talk about how populist movements and evolving political and social
situations around the world, but especially in Burma, Iraq, and the United
States, might play out, and to do that I need a bit of setup.
With
my husband, George Sapio, I first visited Iraq
in January and February 2003, weeks before the U.S. invasion. At the time I
believed, as many of you probably did, that the unprecedented outpouring of
popular antipathy toward an invasion would halt the Bush rush to punish Saddam Hussein
for, well, who knows. In all, some 36 million people in 800 places around the
world were in the streets — including Rome, where 3 million people demonstrated
on February 15, and even Antarctica — as well as nearly every large city in the
USA. Thirty-six million people. Demanding that the U.S. and its “coalition of
the coerced” leave the people of Iraq alone.
But
once again the media made a difference. A big difference. Most notably, and
most heinously, the New York Times
beat the war drums, publishing story after story echoing whatever the
Bush-Cheney administration fed it, unquestioningly.
Those
who watched, read, and listened to independent reporting knew that Saddam
Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction nor any way of making them. His
country had sunk under 13 years of sanctions from a verge first world nation
(as Iraqis told us) to “third world” status (also their term). But the
mainstream media, in collusion with a corrupt government, fed the flames of war.
On March 20 the 36 million licked their wounds and went home to sulk, many of
them never again to engage in activism. This reminded me of how so many of the
Boomer generation that had protested the war of aggression on Vietnam in the
1960s and ‘70s sold out and moved to Wall Street in the Reagan years.
But
perhaps, with the inspiration from popular uprisings elsewhere — in Burma in
2007, Iran in 2009, and the 2011 Tunisia, Libya, Bahrain, Egypt, Yemen, Syria,
Greece, etc. movements — that is changing now. Perhaps the U.S.A. has a fighting
chance, as people begin to connect the dots.
In
Iraq, despite what Dr. Farzanah said earlier in this session about Iraqis’
harshness to one another over years, in my experience, that was primarily
driven from the top down, and not in evidence on the grassroots level. The
oppression was generally practiced by Saddam Hussein loyalists, the Ba’athists, who
were deeply resented by the people — not for their religious practices but for
their collusion in oppression and for their brutality and inhumanity to their
fellow Iraqis. During our time in Iraq before the invasion and until August
2003, we saw no evidence of a Sunni-Shia-Kurdish divide. In fact, a good third
of the many families we visited and interviewed were “mixed,” and Christians
were tolerated.
In
the early days after Saddam Hussein fled [April 9], the people were jubilant.
Small independent presses sprang up everywhere, many publishing in both English
and in Arabic. People felt real hope that things would change, despite the lack
of electricity, water, a reasonable currency, and especially jobs for Iraqis. But
just a few months later, that had all fallen apart. Criticism, quite
reasonably, grew of U.S. motives for the invasion, of the outrageous number of
attacks on civilians, and bumbling and corruption
during so-called reconstruction efforts by the Coalition Provisional Authority.
The U.S. coalition and its minions sowed seeds of discord as a way to keep the
public in check, but this tactic backfired. The divide became more dangerous
and deadly. Fear took over, and the people stopped publishing their papers for
fear the “other side” would exact revenge. Without a free press to keep people
informed, rumors fueled the fears and hatreds.
Divide,
conquer, and terrorize. That strategy has always been a mainstay of conquerors
and of repressive regimes. Now in Iraq, as in many other places, the sectarian
divide seems almost insurmountable. The other main reason the U.S. touted for
the invasion, to “sow democracy,” is an abject failure.
The
U.S. occupation is not really over, despite the mainstream reports — straight
from White House press releases. There are still thousands of mercenaries — corporate
soldiers, with little accountability to the taxpayers who employ them — and four
military bases.
So how can Iraqis overcome the
corruption and uncertainty? I just
took a look at a piece I wrote in various forms over the first two years of the
U.S. occupation of Iraq. I revised it a bit over the years, but for the most
part it remained solid, and it’s still what I recommend today.
1.
The United States and the United Nations must work seriously with Palestinians
and Israelis, not just the leaders but with grassroots groups that are already
working on the ground toward ending the occupation, building a lasting peace
between their peoples, and forming an internationally recognized and supported
Palestinian state. Other Arab states
have to recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli state as well. Internationally
recognized peace leaders like Desmond Tutu and Mary Robinson might be convinced
to take a major role in this effort.
2.
The United States must pledge to maintain no permanent military bases in Iraq
and to stop supporting the private mercenary corporations still in business
there.
3.
The United States and its “coalition partners” must provide reconstruction
money for Iraqi companies, hiring Iraqi
workers to rebuild infrastructure. The big multinationals have to be sent home
immediately. (Hah! I know that is
unlikely now, although in 2005, when I last wrote that, it might have been
possible.)
4.
As individuals, Americans still have the opportunity to lobby with their
wallets (those who have any money at all, that is). We have to stop patronizing
corporations — as customers and as investors — that follow practices that strip
people of their rights and sovereignty.
Since
I wrote that, much has changed, but for the Iraqi people, things are as
desperate as ever. Millions are still displaced. The infrastructure is still
broken. The government is still corrupt. And neighboring Syria is in turmoil,
Iran threatened. It’s time perhaps for a peaceful popular uprising in Iraq.
Now to Burma. As Kyi May Kaung has told us, Burma is opening up. Whether
or not democracy ensues is another question. But it’s a very critical time. Eighteen
months ago many observers thought there wasn’t a prayer that Aung San Suu Kyi
and her National League for Democracy party, or other longtime regime-defying
democracy groups, would be in the position they appear to be in today, with a
chance of actually participating in the governance of their country.
One thing I know for certain about
Burma: it is poised to be the next big resource colony for the big
multinational corporations that are running rampant across the globe,
despoiling lands, privatizing water and other commons resources, displacing
communities, and abusing workers.
If Burma is ever to have a viable
future, its democracy leaders, including the grassroots, need a solid plan to
build an autonomous government unshackled to these corporations, with unbreakable
economic and environmental protections codified in national law. They must
engage in long-term strategic planning so that the Burmese people don’t go from
being abused by one corrupt military regime to being abused by a soulless
conglomerate of capitalist marauders.
Those multinational conglomerates,
in cahoots with corrupt governments worldwide, are in essence the root of all
evil. In the United States, the entrenchment in law of this phony “corporate
personhood” that gives corporations more rights than individuals has brought us
to the brink of tyranny here.
Things
are so bad in both Iraq and Burma that my friends there tell me they live in
constant fear, despair, and depression. They say they’re ready to rise up, they
just don’t have the energy. Well, maybe for once the USA can help them — at
least the grassroots can help by serving as inspiration.
Occupy Wall Street and related social
justice movements get it. They see that
these things are all related [NOW I NEED
TO TAKE A BIG BREATH, here goes an incomplete list]: the offshoring of
jobs; chronic unemployment; rampant foreclosures; rising homelessness; the
assaults on education, workers, women, immigrants, voting rights, health care
rights, and every aspect of environmental sustainability; the drain on the
country’s coffers into military contractors’ pockets from the ongoing war on
Afghanistan and from the prolonged military occupation and subsequent privatization
of the war on Iraq. Threatened war on Iran. The so-called war on terror. Food
insecurity. Water shortages. The government’s self-imposed paralysis in the
face of catastrophic global climate change. And the greed, corruption, and
shortsightedness of a ruling class embedded with Big Banks, Big Gas, Big Oil,
Big Coal, Big Pharma, Big Chemicals, Big Insurance, Big Military — Big Business
in general.
Occupy
is active in scores of U.S. cities and states and in numerous cities worldwide.
If
you don’t understand Occupy, if you still think it needs a unifying message,
that’s because we’ve been so colonized that we’d hardly recognize democracy if
it bit us on the ankle. That’s understandable, given our systems and how they
are set up to keep us in check, to support them even as they suppress us.
Witness the nearly 50 percent of the population who voted for George W. Bush
and Dick Cheney, and the large numbers who turned out to elect Barack Obama in
2008, only to discover that he, too, is friendly with the very corporations
that are colluding with corrupt legislators in ALEC to squelch our civil rights
and liberties. It’s hard to recognize that our country is on such a swift
decline.
I
spent years in U.S. schools that assured me I lived in a democracy, and years
of working for democracy and freedom in several countries. But except for small
groups, I had never really experienced truly democratic process until I began
participating in Occupy General Assemblies. It’s poetry. It’s not perfect,
because it’s made up of people, but the General Assemblies and working group
meetings I’ve attended have been truly respectful, inclusive, yet effective in
meeting consensus.
Occupy
may not be the answer to democracy in the USA, but, if it can keep its purity
and not be co-opted by a political party or special-interest group for its own
ends, it is the most hopeful development I can remember in nearly 40 years as
an activist on various fronts.
There
has never been a more dangerous or less democratic time. There have never been
more compelling reasons to take to the streets here than hastening climate
change and the worldwide corporate-state malfeasance that is responsible for so
much usurpation of people’s rights. If the revolution does not now happen in
the USA, if people do not join in in numbers far greater than the 35 million of
us who took to the streets in 2003 to try to block the invasion of Iraq, I
guess all I can say is that we’ll get what’s coming to us.
We
all have the chance to begin taking part in this burgeoning movement and being
heroes in our own salvation. A national coalition of Occupy assemblies is
calling for a nationwide “Day without the 99%” on May 1, or May Day. (Do not
confuse this with the “99% Spring,” which is not approved by General Assemblies
of the Occupy movements and which has been largely co-opted
by the Democratic Party.)
This
is your chance to get involved and learn more about how democracy can work and
how peaceful uprisings can take shape. Those who work and study at universities
will say that’s too busy a time for you to participate. But I challenge all
faculty, staff, students, and administrators to engage on May Day. Worldwide,
May Day is traditionally a public holiday, a Labor Day with marches and
celebrations of workers — and of immigrants’ and migrants’ rights. This year,
the general strike is intended as a day away from school and the workplace, a
day away from shopping and banking, to shine a light on the “the way the system
has enslaved us and burdened us with unmanageable debt, incredibly long working
weeks, unfeasibly expensive healthcare.”
There are great educational benefits
to engaging in something outside the workplace and classroom on that day.
Administrators, deans, and chairs should give their blessing and encourage
everyone to participate in May Day alternatives; this will only help the
university in the long run, with the growing movement for more government
funding for education.
Faculty might give students an
assignment instead of requiring them to attend classes — perhaps an essay
reflecting on how the Occupy movement, or the “Day without the 99%,” matters to
their field of study, whether it be chemistry or accounting or music theory, as
well as disciplines for which the connection may seem more obvious. Learn more
about this important nationwide day of action at www.occupymay1st.org/
However you decide to mark that one
day, your actions and commitment should not end at midnight on May 2. It’s very
easy to get caught up in our work and home pressures, but in truth we need to
join with each other by the millions if we are ever going to change our unjust,
inequitable, and unsustainable systems. And time is short.
If we don’t work our hardest in
concert to restore freedoms and build democracy in the USA, and if the trend of
arresting and brutalizing peaceful protesters continues, in a few years we may
well be looking to the Burmese, Egyptians, Tunisians, and Iraqis to help us
out. And who knows if they’ll feel any compunction to help those who left them
out to dry when they needed food, water, medicine, electricity, and compassion
— not tanks, bombs, abuse, indifference, and abandonment.
Resources:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2011/mar/22/middle-east-protest-interactive-timeline
The First
Amendment of the United States: Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
grievances.
Fracking: We Know What We're Against. What Are We FOR?
Our message is very simple.
We say NO to fracking, you bet we do. We say NO to the heavy industrialization of bucolic and wild places. NO to poisoning our air, water, and our children's health and future. NO to poisoning our croplands, and thus our food supply. NO to permanently withdrawing water from our precious rivers, aquifers, lakes, and streams -- water that will never again return to the water-life cycle of the planet. NO to diminished (and in some cases completely negated) property values. NO to increased traffic, fumes, smog, and accidents. NO to dangerous pipelines running through our villages and countryside. NO to job promises that always -- always -- fall short. We say NO to toxins and fossil-fuel byproducts in our food, personal care products, and items we need for daily living. We say NO to the corporate-government collusion that is hastening catastrophic climate disruption and the kinds of weather calamities we are seeing all over the country, and the globe. We say NO to the corporate-government cabal that would force our communities to do their bidding to the detriment of our health, personal finances, and very way of life. And we say NO to municipal, state, and national elected officials who do not represent the best long-tern interests of the people and the natural world on which we all depend for survival.
But this does not mean we simply say NO. There are many things to which we say YES. Because we believe we can do better, as individuals, as neighbors, as communities, as a society, as a nation, as a species.
We say YES to government spending for energy conservation, creating jobs that will remain local. We say YES to community-based renewable energy options, which will create a whole new sector of learning and job opportunities. We say YES to rebuilding our crumbling infrastructures -- another job-creating initiative. We say YES to transforming fossil-fuel-extracting and -producing and -delivering corporations into energy-conservation and renewable-energy-producing and -delivering models. We say YES to job-creating energy efficient transportation options for rural, suburban, and urban populations. We say YES to 90 MPG automobile fuel standards.
We say YES to organic farming without genetically deformed seeds (and outrageous use of hormones, antibiotics, and toxic pesticides and herbicides). We say YES to national and state agriculture policies that help rather than hurt family farms and discourage CAFOs ("consolidated animal feeding operations," a gross misnomer), a.k.a. factory farms. We say YES to policies and practices that help farmers and other large landholders engage in sustainable forestry and woodlot management. We say YES to policies and programs that enable farmers and other large landowners to lease their land for wind farms, solar farms, and other renewable-energy operations to directly benefit their communities.
We say YES to cutting all use of fossil fuels in this country. If small countries like Germany, Sweden, and Denmark have already turned to solar, wind, and hydro power, why shouldn't the "greatest country on earth" be able to do so?
We say YES to community-owned and -operated wind farms and solar farms. (We say NO to corporate-run wind and solar farms that simply add endless more energy to the current grid.) We say YES to removing fossil-fuel and nuclear energy at the same rate we add renewable energy.)
We say YES to government and community welcome of clean manufacturing in New York State and other states, restoring all those jobs exported by corporations to foreign countries back to U.S. workers.
We say YES to accelerated research and development of plant-based alternatives to the mountains of plastic and mining-based products we are now forced to employ against our wishes.
We say YES to representation by governing officials who truly care about our communities and the individuals within them, over a long term and without personal prejudice or conflict of interest.
We say YES to halting climate disruption by making the choices WE THE PEOPLE demand -- we the informed, caring, forward-thinking people, not the selfish, greedy, or hoodwinked people who still believe that the corporate state might have their best interests at heart.
We say YES to healthy environments for our children, grandchildren, and future generations.
And as we work toward all these positive goals, we will continue to say NO FRACKING WAY with all our collective might.
We say NO to fracking, you bet we do. We say NO to the heavy industrialization of bucolic and wild places. NO to poisoning our air, water, and our children's health and future. NO to poisoning our croplands, and thus our food supply. NO to permanently withdrawing water from our precious rivers, aquifers, lakes, and streams -- water that will never again return to the water-life cycle of the planet. NO to diminished (and in some cases completely negated) property values. NO to increased traffic, fumes, smog, and accidents. NO to dangerous pipelines running through our villages and countryside. NO to job promises that always -- always -- fall short. We say NO to toxins and fossil-fuel byproducts in our food, personal care products, and items we need for daily living. We say NO to the corporate-government collusion that is hastening catastrophic climate disruption and the kinds of weather calamities we are seeing all over the country, and the globe. We say NO to the corporate-government cabal that would force our communities to do their bidding to the detriment of our health, personal finances, and very way of life. And we say NO to municipal, state, and national elected officials who do not represent the best long-tern interests of the people and the natural world on which we all depend for survival.
But this does not mean we simply say NO. There are many things to which we say YES. Because we believe we can do better, as individuals, as neighbors, as communities, as a society, as a nation, as a species.
We say YES to government spending for energy conservation, creating jobs that will remain local. We say YES to community-based renewable energy options, which will create a whole new sector of learning and job opportunities. We say YES to rebuilding our crumbling infrastructures -- another job-creating initiative. We say YES to transforming fossil-fuel-extracting and -producing and -delivering corporations into energy-conservation and renewable-energy-producing and -delivering models. We say YES to job-creating energy efficient transportation options for rural, suburban, and urban populations. We say YES to 90 MPG automobile fuel standards.
We say YES to organic farming without genetically deformed seeds (and outrageous use of hormones, antibiotics, and toxic pesticides and herbicides). We say YES to national and state agriculture policies that help rather than hurt family farms and discourage CAFOs ("consolidated animal feeding operations," a gross misnomer), a.k.a. factory farms. We say YES to policies and practices that help farmers and other large landholders engage in sustainable forestry and woodlot management. We say YES to policies and programs that enable farmers and other large landowners to lease their land for wind farms, solar farms, and other renewable-energy operations to directly benefit their communities.
We say YES to cutting all use of fossil fuels in this country. If small countries like Germany, Sweden, and Denmark have already turned to solar, wind, and hydro power, why shouldn't the "greatest country on earth" be able to do so?
We say YES to community-owned and -operated wind farms and solar farms. (We say NO to corporate-run wind and solar farms that simply add endless more energy to the current grid.) We say YES to removing fossil-fuel and nuclear energy at the same rate we add renewable energy.)
We say YES to government and community welcome of clean manufacturing in New York State and other states, restoring all those jobs exported by corporations to foreign countries back to U.S. workers.
We say YES to accelerated research and development of plant-based alternatives to the mountains of plastic and mining-based products we are now forced to employ against our wishes.
We say YES to representation by governing officials who truly care about our communities and the individuals within them, over a long term and without personal prejudice or conflict of interest.
We say YES to halting climate disruption by making the choices WE THE PEOPLE demand -- we the informed, caring, forward-thinking people, not the selfish, greedy, or hoodwinked people who still believe that the corporate state might have their best interests at heart.
We say YES to healthy environments for our children, grandchildren, and future generations.
And as we work toward all these positive goals, we will continue to say NO FRACKING WAY with all our collective might.
Monday, August 20, 2012
More Media Madness -- This Time It's CBS
Last night (August 19), a friend called to tell me he'd just seen a report on CBS News titled "New York State to Allow Fracking," in which a farm couple from the Southern Tier of New York, not far from my own home, were interviewed. They described how much they're struggling and said that fracking would keep them afloat (actually they expect it to make them rich). The woman said, "It's like sitting on top of a bank with $1 million dollars, and you can't access that money."
My friend complained that the only rebuttal to this story was from Dr. Sandra Steingraber, my colleague and fellow antifracktivist, an environmental biologist and author who has written and spoken so eloquently about the health implications of fracking as well as of many other industrial activities that contaminate our environment. And, my friend said, Steingraber was "talking about xylene and toluene and other chemicals nobody knows about. She couldn't hold a candle to that farming couple. Of course everyone would sympathize with them [the farm couple] and not her."
My friend, a smart, educated, antifracking investigator himself, concluded, "You should get another spokesperson [instead of Sandra Steingraber]"
Without having seen the "news" report, I knew exactly what had happened. The "reporter" or producer of the piece wanted to draw sympathy to the plight of the pro-fracking farmers and make the opposition to fracking seem arbitrary and useless. I asked my friend to think about how the story was presented and see how much time was devoted to the pro-fracking side versus how much was given to the pro-environment and pro-health side. He reflected for a minute and then said, "Yeah, right, they hardly showed anything about the antifracking movement. Most of the story and most of the camera time were spent on the farm couple, who were made to seem very likable and hard-working."
Then, chagrined, my friend said, "Wow. I can't believe it. I know how the mainstream media works, but I didn't pick up on that. Even I got sucked into this, thinking this was a balanced report. And of course it's not Sandra's fault. She's always great."
But not if edited in a deliberately misleading way.
The headline of the story was pretty horrifying, too: "New York State to Allow Fracking." The piece then opened with the claim that "CBS News has learned that New York is about to okay fracking, and will issue guidelines after Labor Day." There was no attribution, and apparently no attempt to speak to Governor Andrew Cuomo or DEC head Joe Martens.
The whole thing was a travesty of journalism, but alas, not in the slightest out of the ordinary. I looked at the video of this CBS "news" report and immediately found a dozen things to pick apart: the headline; the unsourced claim; the heartstring-tugging barn fire the family had suffered a few years ago; the darling baby calves; the quote from the farmers about the money being a "great blessing"; the benign cartoon making fracking operations look clean and safe; a quote claiming that the DEC would put in place the "strictest standards in the nation"; the wording of the "reporter's" question to Sandra Steingraber ("The energy secretary says fracking can be done safely. The president says fracking can be done safely. Are they wrong?") and his deliberately disparaging and supercilious look during the segment; the choice of quote from Sandra Steingraber, which out of context seemed weak; the final statement from the farmers saying "everything in Pennsylvania is great, just they have more new tractors"; and the kicker (ending) quote from the "reporter," that "There are more than half a million wells across the country" (implication being, those pesky antifrackers are talking out of their arses).
This segment was a joke. But unfortunately, many viewers, especially those less connected than my friend who at least was able to call me to throw out a question, couldn't distinguish between a good story and a bad.
This is the S.O.S. way the "news" media have been "telling the story" since fracking began. I think it was about three years ago when I first noticed and began writing about the misinformation and outright lies the mainstream/corporate media were propagating. I won't take the time here -- I have more important things to do, especially if there is any truth to the report that fracking is about to begin here in New York -- to debunk this particular CBS piece.
But watching something like this, it should be no surprise that so many New Yorkers and others believe the B.S. being fed them by the mass media, which is gobbling up and spewing out the B.S. being fed to it by the industry and corrupt politicians. And it's not just corporate media that are at fault here. The so-called "public" radio is also to blame and in many ways, to my mind, much more culpable because people expect that source to be more reliable. It is not.
Oh, and as a crowning gem, the CBS News story online ad is from BP about how important the environment is to it. It would be laughable if so many people and ecologies weren't suffering and wouldn't continue to suffer from that corporation's wrongdoings. There's nothing funny about that.
Here are a few prior pieces on the subject:
15 Gas Industry Claims and Why They're Wrong. They spend tens millions
of dollars a year to convince lawmakers and the public that "natural" gas is great. Let's take a look at the propaganda.
"Public" Media Joins "Gang Green" in Colluding with Frackers. NPR's serenades to the gas industry are getting more and more blatant. Let's pick apart some of these egregious transgressions from journalistic integrity.
How Mainstream Media Fuels Rabid Anti-environmentalism. The corporate-state collusionist framing is working. It's not just a few "Tea Party crazies" in Virginia who now think sustainable development is a plot against "the American way." And MSM isn't helping.
My friend complained that the only rebuttal to this story was from Dr. Sandra Steingraber, my colleague and fellow antifracktivist, an environmental biologist and author who has written and spoken so eloquently about the health implications of fracking as well as of many other industrial activities that contaminate our environment. And, my friend said, Steingraber was "talking about xylene and toluene and other chemicals nobody knows about. She couldn't hold a candle to that farming couple. Of course everyone would sympathize with them [the farm couple] and not her."
My friend, a smart, educated, antifracking investigator himself, concluded, "You should get another spokesperson [instead of Sandra Steingraber]"
Without having seen the "news" report, I knew exactly what had happened. The "reporter" or producer of the piece wanted to draw sympathy to the plight of the pro-fracking farmers and make the opposition to fracking seem arbitrary and useless. I asked my friend to think about how the story was presented and see how much time was devoted to the pro-fracking side versus how much was given to the pro-environment and pro-health side. He reflected for a minute and then said, "Yeah, right, they hardly showed anything about the antifracking movement. Most of the story and most of the camera time were spent on the farm couple, who were made to seem very likable and hard-working."
Then, chagrined, my friend said, "Wow. I can't believe it. I know how the mainstream media works, but I didn't pick up on that. Even I got sucked into this, thinking this was a balanced report. And of course it's not Sandra's fault. She's always great."
But not if edited in a deliberately misleading way.
The headline of the story was pretty horrifying, too: "New York State to Allow Fracking." The piece then opened with the claim that "CBS News has learned that New York is about to okay fracking, and will issue guidelines after Labor Day." There was no attribution, and apparently no attempt to speak to Governor Andrew Cuomo or DEC head Joe Martens.
The whole thing was a travesty of journalism, but alas, not in the slightest out of the ordinary. I looked at the video of this CBS "news" report and immediately found a dozen things to pick apart: the headline; the unsourced claim; the heartstring-tugging barn fire the family had suffered a few years ago; the darling baby calves; the quote from the farmers about the money being a "great blessing"; the benign cartoon making fracking operations look clean and safe; a quote claiming that the DEC would put in place the "strictest standards in the nation"; the wording of the "reporter's" question to Sandra Steingraber ("The energy secretary says fracking can be done safely. The president says fracking can be done safely. Are they wrong?") and his deliberately disparaging and supercilious look during the segment; the choice of quote from Sandra Steingraber, which out of context seemed weak; the final statement from the farmers saying "everything in Pennsylvania is great, just they have more new tractors"; and the kicker (ending) quote from the "reporter," that "There are more than half a million wells across the country" (implication being, those pesky antifrackers are talking out of their arses).
This segment was a joke. But unfortunately, many viewers, especially those less connected than my friend who at least was able to call me to throw out a question, couldn't distinguish between a good story and a bad.
This is the S.O.S. way the "news" media have been "telling the story" since fracking began. I think it was about three years ago when I first noticed and began writing about the misinformation and outright lies the mainstream/corporate media were propagating. I won't take the time here -- I have more important things to do, especially if there is any truth to the report that fracking is about to begin here in New York -- to debunk this particular CBS piece.
But watching something like this, it should be no surprise that so many New Yorkers and others believe the B.S. being fed them by the mass media, which is gobbling up and spewing out the B.S. being fed to it by the industry and corrupt politicians. And it's not just corporate media that are at fault here. The so-called "public" radio is also to blame and in many ways, to my mind, much more culpable because people expect that source to be more reliable. It is not.
Oh, and as a crowning gem, the CBS News story online ad is from BP about how important the environment is to it. It would be laughable if so many people and ecologies weren't suffering and wouldn't continue to suffer from that corporation's wrongdoings. There's nothing funny about that.
Here are a few prior pieces on the subject:
15 Gas Industry Claims and Why They're Wrong. They spend tens millions
of dollars a year to convince lawmakers and the public that "natural" gas is great. Let's take a look at the propaganda.
"Public" Media Joins "Gang Green" in Colluding with Frackers. NPR's serenades to the gas industry are getting more and more blatant. Let's pick apart some of these egregious transgressions from journalistic integrity.
How Mainstream Media Fuels Rabid Anti-environmentalism. The corporate-state collusionist framing is working. It's not just a few "Tea Party crazies" in Virginia who now think sustainable development is a plot against "the American way." And MSM isn't helping.
Thursday, March 01, 2012
How One Town Beat a Billionaire Bully
A shorter version of this appeared in Yes! magazine Feb. 29, 2012. This is the full version, but it was written before the Middlefield ruling.
The fight to keep the
destructive practice of fracking for “natural” gas is perhaps nowhere more
critical than in New York State. Megabillion-dollar corporations, not content
with the destruction they’re wreaking in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and 30
other states, have set their sights on drilling in rural communities in the
Southern Tier and central parts of the state. There the economy has been
sluggish for decades, farmers struggle, and people work hard yet barely make
ends meet — communities ripe for exploitation by an unscrupulous industry.
But the industry
didn’t bargain for Hilary Lambert, or Judy Pierpont, or Marie McRae, or any of
the tens of thousands of activists who have mobilized to ban fracking in
townships across the state before it begins. Or the pro bono attorneys who are
helping many of them.
This is the story of
one township, Dryden, New York, smack in the center of the state, where about
13,500 people occupy 95 square miles of rolling hills, deep glacial valleys,
small towns, and the larger metropolises of Dryden (population about 1,850) and
Freeville (500), all blessed by six watersheds.
The Town of Dryden has
just won Round One in a bout with Anschutz Energy Corporation, owned and run by
one of the richest men in the USA.
On August 11, 2011,
the Dryden Town Board unanimously passed an ordinance and zoning amendment that
bans all oil and gas exploration and development activities in the town. It
wasn’t the first New York State town or county to pass a ban or
moratorium—there are now about 82, with at least another 35 in the works—but
something about Dryden must have really irritated the guy who runs
Colorado-based Anschutz Energy Corporation, which had leased a lot of land in
the town, to the tune of almost $5 million.
The Argument
That guy is Philip
Anschutz, who’d built his $7 billion fortune on oil, railroads, telecomms,
sports, and entertainment. On September 16, 2011, Anschutz’s high-powered
Albany lawyers from the West Firm filed a lawsuit against Dryden to overturn
the ban. They claimed that the Oil, Gas, and Solution Mining Law, Article 23 of
the State Environmental Conservation Law supersedes all local regulations
relating to oil and gas activities except
as applied to local roads and real property taxes.
In other words,
Anschutz claimed that Dryden has no rights to make local law when it comes to
oil and gas, except to regulate road use and property taxes. It couldn’t
determine where, if at all, the drillers could place their equipment, toxic
waste impoundments, compressor stations, and the other heavy-industrial
paraphernalia the industry requires.
But Judge Phillip
Rumsey of the New York State Supreme Court ruled on February 21, 2012 that
Dryden does indeed have the right to prohibit fracking in the town.
“Judge Rumsey gave a
very reasoned, well researched, well articulated decision,” says Mahlon
Perkins, who has served as Town of Dryden attorney for 33 years. “I think it’s
going to stand up on appeal.”
Great Legal Minds
The activists who
worked so hard over nearly three years to pass the ban —most of whom had no
prior experience in politics or environmental activism before this — were
jubilant at the news, but not entirely surprised.
“I think it will
become clear that we’re standing on solid ground,” says Judy Pierpont, who
retired as a senior lecturer in English from Cornell University in 2009 and has
spent most of the time since then working to ban fracking. “We had great legal
minds working on this.”
Those great legal
minds are primarily those of Helen and David Slottje, whose research formed the
basis for the Dryden ban. Through their Ithaca law firm, Community
Environmental Defense Council, Inc., the couple has counseled more than 50 municipalities
around the state, doing all the work pro bono and relying on donations from
individuals and foundations to help support the efforts.
They’ve been vilified
by the gas industry along the way — that very industry that spends upwards of
$130 million a year on advertising and lobbying to sway the public and
legislators. Those attacks serve only to make this tenacious pair more
determined than ever to help towns fight for their rights.
A decade ago, says
Helen Slottje, she never would have imagined in her wildest daydreams that
she’d be where she is today, at the forefront of a people’s movement to wrest
control of their health, their communities, their government, and their future
from corporations run amok.
“David and I are the
least likely environmental activists you’d ever meet,” she laughs. “We were
evil little corporate lawyers. We believed in what we were doing. I was
president of my local Women’s Republican Club. When we first moved to Ithaca in
2002, I joined the League of Women Voters to meet like-minded people.”
But she didn’t fit in.
“They were Ithaca hippies,” Slottje says. “They didn’t think we should go to
war with Iraq unless the UN agreed. I thought that was ridiculous. Not that I
was pro war, but I didn’t buy any of those UN arguments. So I quit.”
But something changed
in both Slottjes, beyond just the influence of the famously liberal town they’d
moved to and any tie-dyed, Birkenstock-wearing people they encountered there.
“As time went on,”
says Helen Slottje, “I became increasingly disgusted with Bush-Cheney — the
backroom handshake deals, their arrogance, their assumption that they can do
whatever they want, no matter what the people think or what’s right. Remember
Cheney’s secret energy commission, with all those oil people? The recount in
Florida? It took a while, but I eventually realized it was insanity. The reason
we help with the towns now is that we hate bullies. And we know the quality of
thinking from the other side. Dryden and all these communities need to have the
best legal representation they can have — and not be bullied.”
The Dawning
In early 2009 people
in the Town of Dryden were just becoming aware of fracking, and that summer, a
group met for the first time, hosted by a family who lived on a CSA (community
supported agriculture) in an off-grid house with a wind turbine and orchards.
After that first meeting, a core group began meeting regularly, primarily
around the issue of fracking.
Dryden Resource
Awareness Coalition (DRAC) evolved; its 10 to 20 most active members would
become the core of the town’s efforts, but the organization has no real
hierarchy or structure. And that’s the way they like it.
“We set biweekly
meetings, reserved space in Town Hall, and people just started showing up,”
says Pierpont. “It’s a very loose group. People found their niche and
contributed in whatever ways they could. Anyone can participate. We have no
officers. Sometimes Marie [McRae] will get organized and make an agenda, and
we’ll add to it, or sometimes Joe [Wilson] will be organized. At our last
meeting we just made up the agenda on the spot. There are no specific
responsibilities. We work by consensus. People volunteer for things, and people
emerge as leaders.”
That was a new
experience for everyone, perhaps no one more so than Wilson, who retired in
2009 from his long-time role as high school principal; he’d previously been a
practicing lawyer and had lived in Baltimore and other cities before taking the
job of principal at Ithaca High School and moving to Dryden with his wife, Marty.
“All my experience,”
says Wilson, “had been in hierarchical organizations with formal planning. We
even had plans on how to execute plans. I learned that significant things can
be accomplished by people operating as a collaborative with virtually no
hierarchy, coming to consensus on both what’s the right thing to do and on how to get it done. I also
learned there’s power in such groups. It’s not futile to find grassroots groups
that want what you want, band together, and lean on elected officials to move
in the direction you favor.”
By early 2010, says
Jason Leifer, a town board member who has served since 2007, at least some
members of the board knew fracking was not something they wanted for Dryden. “I’d
been reading blogs by people from other shale plays, in Texas, Wyoming,
Colorado, who were writing about the bad things happening in their areas,” he
says. “Spills, too many trucks, the trend toward suburban drilling. This was
nothing like the old vertical wells.”
Leifer and town
supervisor Mary Ann Sumner began talking about how the town might deal with
fracking if it were to come to New York State. They thought vaguely about
zoning, but Leifer, an attorney in private practice, didn’t have time to
research the issue, and it lay dormant for a while.
“It seemed odd to
me that we could have a say in cell towers — which have far less of an impact
than a gas well,” says Leifer. “It made no sense. We should have some say in
where these things go, if they go anywhere. But I didn’t realize we could do a
ban.”
Making Connections
Meanwhile, activists
in the Town of Ulysses, 22 miles west of Dryden, were moving ahead with
door-to-door petitioning for a ban, based on the research done by the Slottjes
that showed while towns are not permitted within New York State law to regulate the industry, prohibiting the activity of the industry
in the first place avoids the problem of interfering in the industry’s conduct
of its business.
The DRAC folks had
connections with the Ulysses and with activists in other local towns who were
working toward a ban, especially Ithaca, Danby, and more distant Middlefield.
They were all trying something totally new, blazing new ground, and with the
Slottjes’ counsel, each community was trying to customize what would work for
its own unique character and needs.
“Initially, like the
other communities, we didn’t think we had a right to ban fracking,” says Marie
McRae, who owns and operates a small private horse boarding facility in Dryden
and was invited to that first session by her hay supplier. McRae had signed a
gas lease in 2008 after being “chased by a landman for nine months,” she says.
“He told me that all the other land around was leased, and if I didn’t sign
they’d come and take the gas from my land anyway. ‘This lease is your last chance
to have a say about what happened to your land,’ he told me. That’s a lie, as I
later learned, but I signed. Then I curled up in a fetal position, mentally,
for about six months.”
But then McRae, who
had never been remotely interested in, let alone involved in politics, woke
up—and she has long since made up for any lost time. She found the DRAC group
and joined, becoming a core member and frequent out-front spokesperson.
After Ulysses
activists came to Dryden and gave pointers about how to petition for a ban,
DRAC wrote a simple ban statement and began going door-to-door and collecting
signatures.
“We divided up the
town in a very unsystematic way,” recalls Pierpont. “I didn’t even know my
neighbors at the time, but I made the choice to be responsible for my own area
of the town. We started out with about eight of us, but then friends, and
friends of friends, and friends of friends of friends joined. We also had an
online petition, which was very helpful. If people weren’t home, or family
members weren’t all there when we were, we left a printout with the petition
online address, and we could send letters or e-mails to friends to let them
know about it. One of our members, Peter Davies, managed all this.”
The canvassers found
that 80 to 85 percent of those they approached were ready to sign the ban
petition. But if people’s minds were made up on the other side, some would not
even engage in conversation.
Media Role
“I relearned how
important perceptions are,” says Wilson, “and how instrumental various media
are in forming people’s perceptions.”
The people who
believed fracking is “safe, clean, and domestic” shared their views and
opinions in language that was straight out of gas company commercials, Wilson
noted. They’d heard industry ads and thought of them as news.
“What people see
on TV and in major publications is shaped by the gas companies’ ability to get
broadcasters and reporters to use a position favorable to energy companies as a
point of departure,” Wilson says. “They think they know facts, and therefore
they disagree with us. Mainstream media are very powerful in creating frames of
reference which we then have to deal with.”
During four
months of canvassing, DRAC was also hosting community forums on fracking, where
people could hear perspectives not generally available to those getting their
news from mainstream media. That helped change some minds, reports Wilson.
“Taking media at
its broadest to include the efforts of opinion shapers within communities, it
was clear that people perceived to be disinterested had more of an impact,” he
says. “People who seemed to move opinion best were the physicians and
scientists, considered bound by their professions to be even-handed, unbiased.
People were also ready to sign if they’d gotten their information from
[non-mainstream] sources, such as reading a letter to the editor from someone
trusted in the community, or if the veterinarian they’ve been going to for
along time says fracking will harm animals, or if [environmental scientist] Dr.
Bob Howarth says the methane leaks will have climate change effects.”
Taking It to the Board
And the Slottjes,
who patiently explained complicated legal matters over many visits to Dryden,
were influential on the residents and on the board. They recommended that Dryden
and other municipalities who wanted to keep control over land use and avoid
industrialization adopt a zoning law or amendment that specifically prohibits
high-impact industrial use, which should be defined as “encompassing
unconventional gas drilling and any other use they considered inimical to the
municipality’s character and goals.”
The Dryden Town Board
held two official public hearings, where the majority of speakers spoke against
fracking. On April 20, 2011, at a board meeting packed with more than 100
residents, almost all of whom supported the ban, DRAC announced that it had
gotten 1,594 signatures on the petition. Thirty of those signers got up to
speak for two minutes each. Longtime resident and former Dryden Planning Board
member Buzz Lavine said, as DRAC reported, “The federal and state governments
cannot protect us. The power to do that is right here in this room.”
At that meeting an
audience member warned that the town might be sued by a big gas company. David
Slottje assured the board and the crowd that long legal precedent existed for
towns to zone out undesired uses.
The Opposition
While all this
positive work was going on to protect the town from dangerous
industrialization, pro-drilling forces were hard at work in the town, led by
resident Henry Kramer. In July 2011, Kramer and a few allies formed a group
called “Dryden Safe Energy Coalition” (with the slogan “safe energy development
for jobs and prosperity”), purporting to be an educational, unbiased
organization but actually strongly pro-fracking. It claimed, using convoluted
math, that banning fracking would steal $175 million from the town.
It’s widely believed
among antifracking Dryden residents that Kramer and this group, who threatened
the town in a letter dated August 1,
2012, set the town up for the lawsuit by Anschutz. Certainly the presence of a
vocal pro-fracking group in town must have given the gas corporation some
reassurance.
In September the board
— consisting of four Democrats and Republican Steve Stelick — voted unanimously
for a fracking ban in the town, in full knowledge that a lawsuit might ensue
but determined to keep the town safe.
And elections heated
up, with three pro-fracking candidates, including one running against incumbent
Mary Ann Sumner for town supervisor, facing off against three antifrackers in
what would come down to an all-but-single issue election on November 8.
Days before the election, in a courtroom heavily
peopled with Dryden antifrackers and supporters from neighboring towns, Perkins
presented a strong case before Supreme Court Justice Phillip Rumsey. Using his
own research built upon work done by the Slottjes, he challenged the insistence
by Anschutz lawyer West that the state and its Department of Environmental
Conservation have power to interpret the State Environmental Conservation Law,
and claimed that only towns have land use management rights. Apparently West
argued well, too, as Rumsey complimented both sides before adjourning.
On November 8, all the antifracking candidates
won board seats, solidifying another solid 5-0 pro-ban town board makeup.
Three months later, the judge handed down his
decision, and many sighs of relief were heard around Dryden on the evening of
February 21.
Most DRAC members and the Slottjes think it’s
likely Anschutz will appeal within the 30-day time limit. And if it doesn’t go
after Dryden again, it will probably pick on a more vulnerable town that hasn’t
built such as strong activist network and governing board. That’s what bullies
do, pick on the weak.
And if there’s one thing Helen Slottje hates,
it’s bullies.
“These gas companies
are waging war on people, on communities,” she says. “You see this kind of
bullying all over. In West Virginia, Morgantown passed a ban, and Chesapeake
[Energy Company] took away the money they were donating for the school band.
They get communities dependent on them, and then they use that dependence to
buy silence. And towns don’t have good legal representation, so they get
bullied, beaten up. The gas companies launch smear campaigns and make people’s
lives miserable. That makes me angry. That’s what motivates me.”
Fortunately for many towns in New York State,
the Slottjes’ continued motivation —anger at ongoing gas industry bullying — will help them fight the some of the
most powerful corporations in the world.
And for Dryden activists, even while waiting to
see if Anschutz files an appeal, there’s plenty yet to do.
Hilary Lambert, who spent 20 years as a coal
activist in Kentucky before moving back to her childhood home in Dryden, is
steward of the Cayuga Lake Watershed Network. She’s keenly aware of how blessed
New York State is with its abundance of clean, fresh water.
Positive
Steps
“Some people say that to say ‘No’ to natural gas
makes you a NIMBY,” Lambert points out. “We’re very concerned about this. It’s
a crowded world, and it’s getting more crowded. We know we have to take care of
everybody’s water, everywhere. We work with everyone across borders, across
Appalachia and every other part of the country. Without clean water, we don’t
have anything.”
Beyond that, she and several other members of
the core group have pledged to change energy choices in their daily lives as
much as their means permit. “We need to move away from fossil fuel dependence
toward renewables,” she acknowledges, “even as we fight gas extraction.”
Through a project of the Tompkins County Cooperative Extension, which works
with self-selected neighborhood groups, they’re taking advantage of programs to
get energy assessments, home retrofits, and grants to help with conservation
and installing renewable energy sources.
At Wilson’s urging, DRAC members are also
planning to get the town board to put in place secondary protections, as a
security measure: road, air quality, critical environmental area designations,
rules about setbacks around wellheads. “Our county’s council of governments has
a spreadsheet that lists 15 or 16 different municipal tools to enhance the
protection of citizenry against fracking,” says Wilson. “We’ll be working on
model regulations for the so-called gathering lines, pipes taking the gas from
wellheads to compressor stations. No one regulates them now—not the feds, or
the state, or municipalities. Perhaps this is something municipalities can claim.”
McRae expects, as many in Dryden do, that
Anschutz will appeal. That process might take 12 to 18 months. “I see us
winning that,” she says. While waiting, the onetime quiet, politically
disengaged farmer won’t be sitting around. “I’ll be doing public educating,”
she says. “I’ll continue to help organize forums to teach people about the
legal and political process, and about corporations and what they want to do to
us. And, very important to me is helping farmers remain viable — getting young
farmers started and finding new ways for older farmers to use what they already
have.”
Pierpont has already been helping other towns
build their case for a ban, and plans to continue doing so as long as any
municipalities still need assistance. “We’ve learned so much,” she says. “I
want to use that knowledge to help other communities.”
Gratitude
In all this activity, would DRAC and friends
think about taking a little break to kick back and celebrate their success? As
it happens, Dryden’s first brew pub, with New York State’s only female master
brewer, has just opened, so they intend to pay a visit to Bacchus in the next
week or so.
There is much to celebrate, beyond the court
decision. “I’m grateful for our brave town board who voted to ban a heavy
industry, even knowing they might be sued,” says McRae. “I’m grateful to
Ulysses and the Slottjes. I’m grateful to town attorney Mahlon Perkins for
taking us through that first page and making the argument that would be
understood by Judge Rumsey.”
And all of the DRAC
members — who, except for Lambert, are all first-time activists over fracking —
echoed one theme, as articulated by Pierpont: “I’m so grateful for all the
people I’ve come to know, and all the work they’ve done for our community.”
Pierpont adds, “And it feels like affirmation
that when you have integrity in a legal system, things can work. We were
besieged by somebody with a lot of money and a certain ill will, and we were
lucky to get an honest, reasonable judge who looked at this very fairly. We’re
fighting to keep our communities safe, but also for the viability of our system
of democracy. If we don’t defend it, it goes down. In this case, it worked.”
Photos by Hilary Lambert
Signs seen around Dryden (top), and DRAC rally, October 2011
DRAC's Judy Pierpont with attorney Helen Slottje and Shaleshock leader Sara Hess at a neighboring town forum
Dryden Town Hall packed for the town board's unanimous decision to sign the ban
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
PA: Urgent Actions Thursday, but Don't Wimp Out
A bunch of people, including me, tried to get the word out to muster opposition to a heinous bill foisted hastily upon the Pennsylvania public and environment by the gas industry in collusion with its political cronies (and mainstream media).
Three “lunch hour” protests being held at offices of elected representatives who voted for HB1950, selling us out to the gas industry. Please go to the one nearest you!
Thursday, February 16
Noon to 1:00 pm – Near Senator McIlhinney'sOffice (215-489-5000): North Main and Court Sts., Doylestown, PA 18901
Noon to 1:00 pm -- Sen. Ted Erickson’s office, 5037 Township Line Rd., Drexel Hill, PA (noon to 1pm on Thursday)
11:30 am -- Sen. Tim Solobay’s office, 68 E. Pike St. Canonsburg (at the Canonsburg Borough Bldg.)
WE NEED YOU THERE: Please come join your fellow constituents to express your outrage and disappointment that the PA Legislature has now made HB1950 into law. This so-called "Impact Fee" law has gutted municipal controls of gas drilling and related operations by preempting municipal zoning, forcing municipalities to allow gas wells, frack waste pits, pipelines, and other gas-related operations anywhere in a municipality, even residential neighborhoods, next to schools and day care centers, reservoirs and parks. This complete takeover of municipal rights by the State and drilling interests was approved by a majority of the PA Legislature.
We’ve targeted a few elected representatives who voted for the Bill, some who pledged to vote against it like Senators McIlhinney and Erickson, to feel the heat of the public’s shock and disapproval. This travesty must be protested--join us to tell those who voted for this devastating law "Shame on you for selling us out to the gas industry!" Other events will follow wherever constituents want to speak up; please try to take your lunch hour with us at one of these protests on Thursday.
Please make and bring along signs to express your concerns: "Shame on you Sen ______", "PA Leg has sold our rights to drillers", "HB 1950 takes away rights", "polluters/frackers get free pass", etc.
Please also write a letter to your Representative - share your concerns with those who voted for this bad law and thank those who stood up for you and clean water and air: http://www.delawareriverkeeper...
You can see how your PA legislator voted here:
Senate roll call --- http://www.legis.state.pa.us/C...
House roll call --- http://www.legis.state.pa.us/C...
But Governor Corbett signed the bill, HB1950 (attached as a Word document), almost the minute it hit his desk yesterday. The bill is purported to be about taxes on the gas industry, but it holds some very disturbing, precedent-setting language that bolsters the gas industry's exemptions from oversight and its lack of liability for harms it causes. The mere passage of such a bill should send chills down your spine, whether you live in Pennsylvania, in a downstream state (NJ, DE, MD, DC, VA, WV), a neighboring state (NY, OH), or a little farther away, because air and water know no state lines.
Just read this short section, buried on page 98 (my bold):
(10) A vendor, service company or operator shall identify the specific identity and amount of any chemicals claimed to be a trade secret or confidential proprietary information to any health professional who requests the information in writing if the health professional executes a confidentiality agreement and provides a written statement of need for the information indicating all of the following:(i) The information is needed for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of an individual.(ii) The individual being diagnosed or treated may have been exposed to a hazardous chemical.(iii) Knowledge of information will assist in the diagnosis or treatment of an individual.(11) If a health professional determines that a medical emergency exists and the specific identity and amount of any chemicals claimed to be a trade secret or confidential proprietary information are necessary for emergency treatment, the vendor, service provider or operator shall immediately disclose the information to the health professional upon a verbal acknowledgment by the health professional that the information may not be used for purposes other than the health needs asserted and that the health professional shall maintain the information as confidential. The vendor, service provider or operator may request, and the health professional shall provide upon request, a written statement of need and a confidentiality agreement from the health professional as soon as circumstances permit, in conformance with regulations promulgated under this chapter.(c) Disclosures not required.‑‑Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a vendor, service provider or operator shall not be required to do any of the following:(1) Disclose chemicals that are not disclosed to it by the manufacturer, vendor or service provider.(2) Disclose chemicals that were not intentionally added to the stimulation fluid.(3) Disclose chemicals that occur incidentally or are otherwise unintentionally present in trace amounts, may be the incidental result of a chemical reaction or chemical process or may be constituents of naturally occurring materials that become part of a stimulation fluid.(d) Trade secrets and confidential proprietary information.‑‑(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a vendor, service company or operator shall not be required to disclose trade secrets or confidential proprietary information to the chemical disclosure registry.
There's more; fracking can now legally occur near residences, and there are fewer restrictions than ever.
Delaware Riverkeeper is planning a day of resistance in several towns THIS THURSDAY, February 16. Please join. This cannot be permitted to stand.
Delaware Riverkeeper's call to action is way too mild, though.
Shouting "Shame on you" at people who have no shame is a waste of breath. Don't be fooled into thinking that such wimpy action will affect anything.
Instead, vow to learn and use "nonviolent direct action" -- what I call creative peaceful resistance (CPR), a term that is very appropriate in this life-or-death situation.
We need to tell these "legislators" that we will actively work to remove them from office, and some citizens and attorneys have to start figuring out how to remove this abomination as soon as possible from Pennsylvania law -- to recall it, rescind it, override it, throw it out, replace it with a law that actually protects people and nature rather than lining the pockets of a few crooks. And do some research and find the laws these crooks are already breaking -- they surely are committing crimes in standing Pennsylvania law, and if they're not, Pennsylvania needs a new law that makes fracking -- and the poisoning of people and the environment on which they depend for survival -- a crime. A growing number of New Yorkers support the draft of a law that makes fracking a crime, introduced by FrackBusters NY and Sovereign People's Action Network (full disclosure: I contributed to its writing); Pennsylvanians should waste no time in drafting their own.
It's especially urgent that all physicians and health professionals commit what I call CIVIL DEFIANCE (not "disobedience," because that would assume these creeps deserve our obeisance for some reason) and refuse to abide by this immoral, disgraceful "law."
---------------
The following is from Delaware Riverkeeper Network.
Protest HB1950 and the Takeover of Municipalities by Gas Development.
Three “lunch hour” protests being held at offices of elected representatives who voted for HB1950, selling us out to the gas industry. Please go to the one nearest you!
Thursday, February 16
Noon to 1:00 pm – Near Senator McIlhinney'sOffice (215-489-5000): North Main and Court Sts., Doylestown, PA 18901
Noon to 1:00 pm -- Sen. Ted Erickson’s office, 5037 Township Line Rd., Drexel Hill, PA (noon to 1pm on Thursday)
11:30 am -- Sen. Tim Solobay’s office, 68 E. Pike St. Canonsburg (at the Canonsburg Borough Bldg.)
WE NEED YOU THERE: Please come join your fellow constituents to express your outrage and disappointment that the PA Legislature has now made HB1950 into law. This so-called "Impact Fee" law has gutted municipal controls of gas drilling and related operations by preempting municipal zoning, forcing municipalities to allow gas wells, frack waste pits, pipelines, and other gas-related operations anywhere in a municipality, even residential neighborhoods, next to schools and day care centers, reservoirs and parks. This complete takeover of municipal rights by the State and drilling interests was approved by a majority of the PA Legislature.
We’ve targeted a few elected representatives who voted for the Bill, some who pledged to vote against it like Senators McIlhinney and Erickson, to feel the heat of the public’s shock and disapproval. This travesty must be protested--join us to tell those who voted for this devastating law "Shame on you for selling us out to the gas industry!" Other events will follow wherever constituents want to speak up; please try to take your lunch hour with us at one of these protests on Thursday.
Please make and bring along signs to express your concerns: "Shame on you Sen ______", "PA Leg has sold our rights to drillers", "HB 1950 takes away rights", "polluters/frackers get free pass", etc.
Please also write a letter to your Representative - share your concerns with those who voted for this bad law and thank those who stood up for you and clean water and air: http://www.delawareriverkeeper...
You can see how your PA legislator voted here:
Senate roll call --- http://www.legis.state.pa.us/C...
House roll call --- http://www.legis.state.pa.us/C...
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Industry Colludes with Pennsylvania Legislature
Pennsylvania's state legislature has
effectively signed a death warrant for some number of residents, who knows how many. Corbett’s about to make it official. Pennsylvanians: Fight back — or suffer the consequences.
The
fracking industry has written a bill that gives itself legal permission to
poison Pennsylvanians—and keeps doctors who treat them once they’re poisoned
from telling anyone else what poisoned them. The bill also essentially
permits all gas drilling
and processing activities anywhere, including in residential areas.
It’s
all being sold as an “impact fee” bill. Counties that want the income will sign
on — and that probably means most counties will.
The
industry was helped in this covert operation by crooks in political office.
Those political criminals should be held accountable (more on this below).
The
174-page bill, HB1950,
was signed in both the House and Senate of the state’s General Assembly, and on
Friday (2/10/12) the Senate passed it to Pennsylvania governor Tom Corbett for
signature.
This
is yet the latest egregious example of industry-state denial of municipalities’
right to protect themselves. I’m not being hyperbolic when I say that this is
the legal permitting of murder — and legalization of coerced suicide.
There
can be no question that the legislators who signed it are in collusion with
industry. They are corrupt. There can be no other explanation. These people
have an obligation to protect the citizens of Pennsylvania, and not only are
they not doing so, but they are also denying citizens the right to protect
themselves—and denying physicians and nurses the ability to protect their
patients!
And
if this outrage does not get Pennsylvanians (and everyone) out in the streets,
in Harrisburg at the governor's mansion demanding a veto, and at the offices of
state legislators, demanding a reversal of the bill’s passage, I do not know
what will.
As Berks-Mont News reported on January 25, Pennsylvania
municipalities currently do “have the legal right to decide where and how gas
development occurs. Both the Municipalities Planning Code and the State
Constitution vest municipalities with the authority and responsibility to
address local environmental and public resources. State Supreme Court rulings
have also made it clear that the state Oil and Gas Act allows municipalities
the right to use zoning codes to restrict the location of gas wells.”
This law negates those rights and completely strips communities
of their rights to self govern. This is a blatant abrogation of the United
States constitution and all the hackneyed assertions that We the People have
any say any longer in crafting U.S. law.
The Guilty Parties
The
bill’s primary sponsor in the House (Assembly) was Brian
Ellis (R-District 11). The 19 cosponsors included Samuel
H. Smith (R-66), Mike
Turzai (R-28), Stan
Saylor (R-94), and Dave
Reed (R-62). But take special note of the three Democrats who cosponsored: Ken
Smith (D-112), Marc
J. Gergely (D-35), and Paul
Costa (D-34). (Contact info for some of them is below, but I hope someone
will take the time to create an easy-to-navigate, easy-click way to call these
creeps out all at once; I don’t have the time or technical expertise.)
If
Corbett signs this bill into law, he will simply confirm what anybody who’s
been paying attention already knows: He cares not for the people or future of
his state.
If
Corbett signs, Pennsylvania activists can kiss goodbye all the tens of
thousands of hours of hard work done by countless volunteers working to stop
fracking from further devastating their state, which until the recent arrival
of this industry was quite beautiful and relatively unpolluted. All those hours
spent in researching all aspects of fracking, from public health to physics,
from environment to economics; in planning forums and community meetings;
educating legislators; debunking industry lies; investigating and challenging unscrupulous politicians; exposing corrupt
NGOs (“Big Greens”); going door-to-door talking to neighbors; writing local
laws to protect communities; and forming coalitions across townships, counties,
states, and nations.
Dorothy Bassett Picks the
Bill Apart
I
learned about this from Dorothy Bassett (with my boldfaces and a couple
parentheticals), who read the bill in its entirety and synopsizes thus:
“[The
bill] includes verbiage that says that when a patient comes in, sick due to
exposure to chemicals, doctors have to request in writing info on [the
chemicals patients might have been] exposed to (think of the time — and
treatment delays involved in this process!) and then have to keep it confidential.
Also, the industry doesn't have to reveal compounds that have
formed when all these chemicals and materials from underground come together,
nor do they have to report exposure to heavy metals, radioactive substances,
etc., from below.
Given the
problems with airborne and waterborne carcinogenic and neurotoxic substances
from this industry's open pits of toxic wastes, compressor stations, and the
like, this means that entire communities will still be exposed to chemicals
that one or more people have had to see a doctor for, and that the doctors will
have to keep it quiet while the communities are at risk.
The fact
that the industry has included verbiage in this bill that prevents doctors from
revealing the chemicals their patients were exposed to:
1.
indicates that the industry knows that much of the substances they
are
using are a threat to public health
- enough so that emergency
room and
other physicians would see cases of toxic exposure to
fracking
and related chemicals and substances on a regular basis, i.e.
that this
is not a safe process;
2.
indicates that the industry wants to keep it quiet - they know that
if the
health risks of their activities due to chemical exposure (in
air and
water) were to become public there would be such enormous
outcry
that they would be - appropriately - shut down;
3. [shows
that industry knows fracking/ms] is a human rights and a civil
rights violation to the residents and workers affected, and would ultimately
contribute to a public health catastrophe;
4. would
guarantee that other individuals [and] families in the area would not be warned
that they are being exposed on an on-going basis to highly hazardous chemicals
that have made other individuals ill —
often seriously and irreversibly ill.
The bill
also says that the industry will NOT provide information on compounds created
by the chemicals or the interaction of the chemicals with things below ground
or any of the substances that come up from underground.
This
means that they'd provide info only on the frack fluids — which the doctor has
to keep confidential — NOT on what's sitting in frack pits, for example.
Considering that strontium. barium and arsenic are common problems, along with
naturally occurring radioactive substances, and brine, doctors won't know that
the health problem could be coming from these substances from below ground. If they
don't know this, they won't be able to test for or treat for exposure to
hazardous compounds formed by this soup of chemicals, heavy metals, NORMs,
brine and bacteria from far beneath the surface.
The
bill requires that local ordinances “Shall allow well and pipeline location
assessment operations, including seismic
operations and related activities.” Localities “may not impose conditions,
requirements or limitations on the construction of oil and gas operations . . .
” The bill makes sure that not only can municipalities not ban fracking, but
they can’t even regulate how the poisonous operations and their harmful side
effects will be situated and rammed down our throats.
Make Corbett Realize His
Political Future Is at Stake
Now
there is one option available under current law: GET TOGETHER AND STOP CORBETT FROM SIGNING THIS
HORRIFIC BILL.
Should he sign this bill, the governor
of Pennsylvania joins all the legislators who voted for this heinous
"bill" as party to murder — because people will die from fracking (in
fact, quite
a few already
have).
If he does sign, I see only one
alternative: civil defiance from as many people as can be mustered in
Pennsylvania, to occupy Harrisburg and dog these criminal politicians —
especially the three Democrats and 17 Republicans who cosponsored this bill and
Corbett — for the long haul. It must not be just a one-day event, but an
ongoing demonstration of our rejection of our government's collusion in our own
poisoning.
We need to tell all of these crooks in no
uncertain terms that they have lost the support of Pennsylvania voters and will
never get another term. And will be brought up on criminal charges. And we need
people to start building the legal case against them. Start with the Pennsylvania
Crimes Code Section 25, Section 2502, in which “Murder of criminal code, in
which “Killing by means of poison, or by lying in wait, or by any other kind of
willful, deliberate and premeditated killing, is considered “Murder of the
third degree.”
And that is a crime in any civilized society.
Slow poisoning or quick: The only difference is that it will be impossible for
you to prove the link between frackers and your kid’s cancer when it develops
five or seven or twelve years from now, and the frackers and politicians who
colluded with them will be off the hook.
Don’t let that happen, Pennsylvania. Your very
lives are at stake.
RESOURCES
RESOURCES
Governor Tom Corbett's contact info:
phone (717) 787-2500 fax (717) 772-8284
online form to reach Corbett
HB 1950 BILL Current Status
Passed (House
of Representatives) on Nov 17, 2011
First Reading
(Senate) on Dec 7, 2011
Second Reading (Senate) on Dec 12, 2011
Referred to
Committee (Senate) on Dec 12, 2011
Third Reading
(Senate) on Dec 14, 2011
Referred to
Committee (House of Representatives) onDec 14, 2011
Sent to
Executive on Feb 10, 2012
STAN SAYLOR (sponsor)
414 Main
Capitol Building Post Office Box 202094
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-783-6426
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-783-6426
District
15 South Main Street 2nd Floor
Red Lion, PA 17356
Ph: 717-244-9232
15 South Main Street 2nd Floor
Red Lion, PA 17356
Ph: 717-244-9232
Dave Reed
128 Main
Capitol Building Post Office Box 202062
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-705-7173
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-705-7173
District
550 Philadelphia Street
Indiana, PA 15701
Ph: 724-465-0220
550 Philadelphia Street
Indiana, PA 15701
Ph: 724-465-0220
Ken Smith (D-112)
28B East
Wing Post Office Box 202112
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-783-1359
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-783-1359
District
1414 Monroe Avenue
Dunmore, PA 18509
Ph: 570-342-2710
1414 Monroe Avenue
Dunmore, PA 18509
Ph: 570-342-2710
Marc Gergely (D-35)
325 Main
Capitol Building Post Office Box 202035
Harrisburg, PA 17120-2035
Ph: 717-783-1018
Harrisburg, PA 17120-2035
Ph: 717-783-1018
District
1540 Lincoln Way
White Oak, PA 15131
Ph: 412-664-0035
1540 Lincoln Way
White Oak, PA 15131
Ph: 412-664-0035
District
1705 Maple Street Suite 110
Homestead, PA 15120
Ph: 412-476-3046
1705 Maple Street Suite 110
Homestead, PA 15120
Ph: 412-476-3046
Paul Costa (D-34)
323 Main
Capitol Building Post Office Box 202034
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-783-1914
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Ph: 717-783-1914
District
519 Penn Avenue
Turtle Creek, PA 15145
Ph: 412-824-3400
519 Penn Avenue
Turtle Creek, PA 15145
Ph: 412-824-3400
Here’s the whole list of House cosponsors:
3 Democrats
Name
|
District
|
Ken
Smith 112
|
|
Paul
Costa 34
|
|
17 Republicans
Name
|
District
|
Dan
Moul 91
|
|
Dave
Reed 62
|
|
Jim
Marshall 14
|
|
Mike
Turzai 28
|
|
Mike
Vereb 150
|
|
Sandra
Major 111
|
|
Seth
M Grove 196
|
|
Stan
Saylor 94
|
|
Susan
C Helm 104
|
|
Will
Tallman 193
|
|
Labels:
#fracking,
Activism,
Corbett,
criminals,
crooks,
malfeasance,
Pennsylvania
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)