There has been an exponential growth of small commercial and recreational drones flying all over our airspaces. Recognizing that this needs some regulation before someone gets hurt, the government is working on a plan to register and regulate these pet drones -- even though there have not yet been reported deaths.
Thus it is a bit ironic that we can, without great outcry or outrage, impose sensible regulation of drones -- but can't pass sensible laws to regulate guns, which are actually used in over 30,000 human deaths a year in the U.S.
Ralph
Saturday, October 24, 2015
House Speaker-in-Waiting Paul Ryan has the support he asked for -- at least for now.
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) sought and got the support of (as Daily Kos put it) "the GOP right, the far right, and the OMG far right." His support among Republicans is wide-spread, even though he didn't get unanimous support in the OMG right, just two-thirds.
Still, this indicates some promise of at least trying to unite and cooperate among themselves. What remains to be seen is how this works out in practice. The OMG right -- meaning the Freedom Caucus, aka Tea Party affiliated ultraconservatives -- will have to learn to accept less than the 100% their way that they have been demanding.
So, I would say this is a promising development. . . . and we'll see how it works out.
Paul Ryan and Democrat Patty Murray did work out a bipartisan budget deal last year; but Ryan is a "cut taxes/don't spend" kind of Republican. The difference is that he is at least open to compromise.
Ralph
Still, this indicates some promise of at least trying to unite and cooperate among themselves. What remains to be seen is how this works out in practice. The OMG right -- meaning the Freedom Caucus, aka Tea Party affiliated ultraconservatives -- will have to learn to accept less than the 100% their way that they have been demanding.
So, I would say this is a promising development. . . . and we'll see how it works out.
Paul Ryan and Democrat Patty Murray did work out a bipartisan budget deal last year; but Ryan is a "cut taxes/don't spend" kind of Republican. The difference is that he is at least open to compromise.
Ralph
Friday, October 23, 2015
Republicans attempt to take down Hillary Clinton. . . . . She won.
A quote from Kurt Eichenwald's Newsweek article about the Benghazi hearings with Hillary Clinton testifying on Wednesday:
"The historical significance of this moment can hardly be overstated, and it seems many Republicans, Democrats and members of the media don’t fully understand the magnitude of what is taking place. The awesome power of government—one that allows officials to pore through almost anything they demand and compel anyone to talk or suffer the shame of taking the Fifth Amendment—has been unleashed for purely political purposes. It is impossible to review what the Benghazi committee has done as anything other than taxpayer-funded political research of the opposing party’s leading candidate for president."
From watching about 6 hours of the testimony myself, I agree. Hillary was the clear winner. After 11 hours of testimony, even Chairman Trey Gowdy admitted that they had not come up with anything new.
Ralph
"The historical significance of this moment can hardly be overstated, and it seems many Republicans, Democrats and members of the media don’t fully understand the magnitude of what is taking place. The awesome power of government—one that allows officials to pore through almost anything they demand and compel anyone to talk or suffer the shame of taking the Fifth Amendment—has been unleashed for purely political purposes. It is impossible to review what the Benghazi committee has done as anything other than taxpayer-funded political research of the opposing party’s leading candidate for president."
From watching about 6 hours of the testimony myself, I agree. Hillary was the clear winner. After 11 hours of testimony, even Chairman Trey Gowdy admitted that they had not come up with anything new.
Ralph
Could-be good news #7 . . . if only our politicians would expand Medicaid in Georgia
Georgia's Republican governor and legislature remain adamant that they will not expand Medicaid because, they say, we can't afford it -- even though the federal government would have paid 100% of the cost for three years and more than 90% of it thereafter. But here are the facts:
1. 300,000 more Georgians would have health care.
2. $33 billion dollars would flow into the state. At present, our federal tax dollars go to help pay for it in other states.
3. 80,000 new jobs would be created in the next decade.
4. The state would be relieved of paying for mental health treatment that would be covered by these patients' individual Medicaid insurance.
5. Rural hospitals would not have to close because of huge costs of treating indigent patients who would now be covered by Medicaid.
So a "good news" story has to remain "could be." Shame on Georgia's Republicans.
Ralph
1. 300,000 more Georgians would have health care.
2. $33 billion dollars would flow into the state. At present, our federal tax dollars go to help pay for it in other states.
3. 80,000 new jobs would be created in the next decade.
4. The state would be relieved of paying for mental health treatment that would be covered by these patients' individual Medicaid insurance.
5. Rural hospitals would not have to close because of huge costs of treating indigent patients who would now be covered by Medicaid.
So a "good news" story has to remain "could be." Shame on Georgia's Republicans.
Ralph
A very sobering view of the Democratic Party -- beyond the White House
Making the point that "Democrats have been obliterated at the state level," Matthew Yglesias, writing for Vox, says: "The Democratic Party is in much greater peril than its leaders or supporters recognize, and it has no plan to save itself."
Referring to the thousands of critically important offices all down the ballot, Yglesias points out that "70 percent of state legislatures, more than 60 percent of governors, 55 percent of attorneys general and secretaries of state — are in Republicans hands. And, of course, Republicans control both chambers of Congress."
These are rather dismal indicators that the Democratic Party is in serious trouble and seems to have "nothing at all in the works to redress their crippling weakness down the ballot. . . . Instead, the party is focused on a competition between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton over whether they should go a little bit to Obama's left or a lot to his left, options that are unlikely to help Democrats down-ballot. . . . The GOP might be in chaos, but Democrats are in a torpor. . . .
"Elections for state legislature rarely make the national news, but they are the fundamental building blocks of American politics. Since they run the redistricting process for the US House of Representatives and for themselves, they are where the greatest level of electoral entrenchment is possible.
"And in the wake of the 2014 midterms, Republicans have overwhelming dominance of America's state legislatures. . . .
"Winning a presidential election would give Republicans the overwhelming preponderance of political power in the United States — a level of dominance not achieved since the Democrats during the Great Depression, but with a much more ideologically coherent coalition. Nothing lasts forever in American politics, but a hyper-empowered conservative movement would have a significant ability to entrench its position by passing a national right-to-work law and further altering campaign finance rules beyond the Citizens United status quo."
And I would add the worst outcome of all: Having a Republican president appoint the next three or more Supreme Court Justices.
I'm sure someone could write a rebuttal to this pessimistic view -- but we should recognize the truth and listen to this wake-up call. The Democrats have become a top-down party, while the Republicans have rebuilt themselves as a bottom-up party.
Referring to the thousands of critically important offices all down the ballot, Yglesias points out that "70 percent of state legislatures, more than 60 percent of governors, 55 percent of attorneys general and secretaries of state — are in Republicans hands. And, of course, Republicans control both chambers of Congress."
These are rather dismal indicators that the Democratic Party is in serious trouble and seems to have "nothing at all in the works to redress their crippling weakness down the ballot. . . . Instead, the party is focused on a competition between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton over whether they should go a little bit to Obama's left or a lot to his left, options that are unlikely to help Democrats down-ballot. . . . The GOP might be in chaos, but Democrats are in a torpor. . . .
"Elections for state legislature rarely make the national news, but they are the fundamental building blocks of American politics. Since they run the redistricting process for the US House of Representatives and for themselves, they are where the greatest level of electoral entrenchment is possible.
"And in the wake of the 2014 midterms, Republicans have overwhelming dominance of America's state legislatures. . . .
"Winning a presidential election would give Republicans the overwhelming preponderance of political power in the United States — a level of dominance not achieved since the Democrats during the Great Depression, but with a much more ideologically coherent coalition. Nothing lasts forever in American politics, but a hyper-empowered conservative movement would have a significant ability to entrench its position by passing a national right-to-work law and further altering campaign finance rules beyond the Citizens United status quo."
* * *
And I would add the worst outcome of all: Having a Republican president appoint the next three or more Supreme Court Justices.
I'm sure someone could write a rebuttal to this pessimistic view -- but we should recognize the truth and listen to this wake-up call. The Democrats have become a top-down party, while the Republicans have rebuilt themselves as a bottom-up party.
Ralph
Thursday, October 22, 2015
Norway is leading the conversion to electric cars.
Norway is exceeding its own expectations in converting to electric cars and is well ahead of every other country in converting fossil fuel energy to electricity. Norway's goal had been 50,000 electric cars by the end of 2017. Instead, they already up to 66,000 by the end of September 2015.
That may not sound like a lot of cars by U.S. standards, but Norway's population is just over 5 million. The U.S. equivalent would be 3.8 million electric cars. That's a lot of Leafs, folks !
How are they doing it? First, they are not bogged down by climate-denying politicians bought off by oil industry lobbyists. As Lars Andreas Lunde, a Conservative Party politician, put it: “It has to be more expensive to pollute than to use environmentally friendly fuels.” Can you believe this came from a conservative politician ?!?!?
Norway is one of those democratic socialist countries that Bernie Sanders wants to emulate. Their political climate is vastly different from ours: less influenced by money and corporate lobbyists. In fact, Norway is the 7th biggest oil exporter in the world; but their system of government doesn't make politicians depend on corporate money to win elections. They put people first.
So the government provides incentives to buy electric cars by making them exempt from the high sales tax and registration taxes imposed on other vehicles that can amount to more than ten thousand dollars.
The other big factor comes from Norway's natural environment. The electricity for recharging the batteries in electric cars has to come from somewhere. If you have to use fossil fuels to generate the electricity, you're still polluting to reduce your pollution.
Not so in Norway, which is blessed with fast moving rivers all over, so that 95% of the energy to run these electric cars originates in hydroelectric plants that convert moving or falling water into electricity with virtually no pollution.
An additional advantage: Electric cars are more efficient. They transfer 60% of their energy to the cars' wheels, while gasoline motors waste much of their energy in the form of heat, transferring only 20% to power the car.
OK, next Republican debate moderator. There are a couple of good questions here to ask of the climate deniers in the next debate.
Ralph
[Information source: articles from the Huffington Post and the New York Times.]
That may not sound like a lot of cars by U.S. standards, but Norway's population is just over 5 million. The U.S. equivalent would be 3.8 million electric cars. That's a lot of Leafs, folks !
How are they doing it? First, they are not bogged down by climate-denying politicians bought off by oil industry lobbyists. As Lars Andreas Lunde, a Conservative Party politician, put it: “It has to be more expensive to pollute than to use environmentally friendly fuels.” Can you believe this came from a conservative politician ?!?!?
Norway is one of those democratic socialist countries that Bernie Sanders wants to emulate. Their political climate is vastly different from ours: less influenced by money and corporate lobbyists. In fact, Norway is the 7th biggest oil exporter in the world; but their system of government doesn't make politicians depend on corporate money to win elections. They put people first.
So the government provides incentives to buy electric cars by making them exempt from the high sales tax and registration taxes imposed on other vehicles that can amount to more than ten thousand dollars.
The other big factor comes from Norway's natural environment. The electricity for recharging the batteries in electric cars has to come from somewhere. If you have to use fossil fuels to generate the electricity, you're still polluting to reduce your pollution.
Not so in Norway, which is blessed with fast moving rivers all over, so that 95% of the energy to run these electric cars originates in hydroelectric plants that convert moving or falling water into electricity with virtually no pollution.
An additional advantage: Electric cars are more efficient. They transfer 60% of their energy to the cars' wheels, while gasoline motors waste much of their energy in the form of heat, transferring only 20% to power the car.
OK, next Republican debate moderator. There are a couple of good questions here to ask of the climate deniers in the next debate.
Ralph
[Information source: articles from the Huffington Post and the New York Times.]
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
Paul Ryan will be Speaker -- but only if his party will unite behind him
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told his Republican colleagues in the House that he is willing to be Speaker but only on the condition that he gets support from all wings of the party and that they unite behind him. Otherwise, he is happy to remain as chair of the House Ways and Means Committee.
The conditions that he stipulated are that the Republicans stop being "an opposition party [and] update House rules so everyone can be a more effective representative. . . . We have become the problem. If my colleagues entrust me to be the speaker, I want us to be the solution."
Ralph
The conditions that he stipulated are that the Republicans stop being "an opposition party [and] update House rules so everyone can be a more effective representative. . . . We have become the problem. If my colleagues entrust me to be the speaker, I want us to be the solution."
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
