There are reports of confusion and anger at FEMA trailer parks today over the agency's unclear policy on the parks' future.

Earlier this week, the Associated Press reported that a number of the parks would be closing today as part of the effort to move residents into permanent housing. But now the agency is saying that the parks will stay open as long as there are residents who have not found apartments or houses to rent, according to the Baton Rouge Advocate. That has upset some trailer residents like Celeste Jackson, who packed up her belongings yesterday despite not having anywhere to go.

FEMA officials said the agency passed out fliers two months ago notifying residents of the pending closing and encouraging them to contact their FEMA case workers. However, only some residents responded, according to a FEMA spokesperson.

The agency has said that it wants all the Katrina parks closed by the end of next May. But concerns remain about where the more than 6,000 households still living in those parks will go, given the dearth of affordable housing in New Orleans, where fair-market rents have risen 45 percent since the storm.

Meanwhile, the state's political leaders remain at an impasse over legislation that would boost the number of affordable housing units available for displaced people who want to return to New Orleans and other Gulf communities.

As we've reported here previously, the Gulf Coast Housing Recovery Act sponsored by Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) had the support of the entire state's delegation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development -- until September, when HUD and Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) suddenly withdrew their backing. Vitter has incorrectly accused the bill of attempting to re-create New Orleans' troubled public housing complexes exactly as they were before Hurricane Katrina, when in fact it allows those complexes to be torn down and replaced by either subsidized public housing, partially subsidized units, or vouchers to offset rent in privately owned housing.

There's been much speculation over Vitter's sudden about-face on the measure, especially since he's been reluctant to disclose his objections in much detail. A story about the controversy in the latest Congressional Quarterly Weekly offers partisan politics as one explanation for his actions:

...[P]olitical experts say the senatorial flap is not unexpected, given Louisiana's rough-and-tumble politics and Vitter and Landrieu's chilly relationship. Landrieu is up for re-election next year and has emerged as the GOP's top target among incumbent senators, in part because of the state's rightward shift in recent elections.

"The fact that Mary Landrieu is widely identified as the most vulnerable Democrat coming into the next election cycle, you certainly don't want to give her big victories in helping the state," said Kirby Goidel, a professor of political science at Louisiana State University. "He probably feels safe enough to hold it up as long as it's not too obviously political and he has some policy-related cover. He's a pretty hardball political player."

The story notes that political insiders have pretty much given up on any chance of Vitter's support, and the bill probably can't move without his approval. If the only victims of the senator's obstinacy were his low-income constituents, we could almost understand his cold political calculus. But what makes Vitter's position particularly puzzling is that he's also bucking business groups like the Chamber for Southwest Louisiana and Greater New Orleans Inc., who recognize that the region's reconstruction is imperiled by workers' inability to find affordable housing.

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, housing, politics

Why did Mississippi's Trent Lott decide to bid adieu to U.S. Senate before year's end? Of the many theories out there, Slate's Timothy Noah deserves credit for being the first to look at an intriguing possibility -- his ties to now-indicted attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs (Noah posited the theory before the indictment; read Sue's post here at Facing South yesterday for more on the case).

(Sidenote: Noah incorrectly labels me as promoting the "Still Clueless About [Strom] Thurmond" theory to explain Lott's exit, based on my Wednesday post -- in reality, I said Lott is worn down by a whole series of affronts to his career since his "gotcha" moment glorifying segregation. But I digress.)

The connection between Lott and Scruggs is unclear, but it makes more sense than the notion that Lott is resigning early to escape an extra year of "cooling off" time before he can rake in millions through direct lobbying. Lott clearly wouldn't be the first to spin through Washington's revolving door between the Capitol and K Street -- you can find a nice long list of lawmakers cashing in on their political connections here -- but the lobbying restrictions are too weak to explain Lott's abrupt walk.

As for Scruggs, the Los Angeles Times has a good piece on his bribery indictment here. Scruggs has a storied history as a trial lawyer, taking on big guns like the tobacco industry. Scruggs could face up to 75 years if convicted, but the Times points to potentially bigger losers: the Mississippi homeowners depending on Scruggs' class-action lawsuit against State Farm Insurance for their alleged negligence after Hurricane Katrina.

Labels: mississippi, Southern Politics, trent lott

Sometime over the last week, in a flurry of posts about New Jersey, Mike Huckabee, HUD scandals and sandhill cranes, we passed an important landmark here at Facing South.

Since launching in spring 2005 with the vision of offering a fresh new take on Southern life and politics, we have put up 2,014 posts.

By my rough calculation, that comes out to roughly two posts a day -- a steady stream of thought-provoking coverage about the South that you won't find anywhere else.

Thank you to my co-conspirators at Facing South, Sue Sturgis and R. Neal -- as well as dozens of guest contributors over the last two-and-a-half years -- for helping turn Facing South into a "must read" resource for thousands of Southerners and South-watchers.

And thanks to you, our loyal readers, for your time, interest and ideas (keep the tips coming at facingsouth [@] southernstudies.org). We have some exciting plans in the works for greatly expanding Facing South and the Institute's online presence this spring.

So come on back now, ya hear?

Labels: facing south

We recently brought you the story of how the John Locke Foundation of North Carolina has been leading the attack on states' efforts to regulate greenhouse gases while failing to disclose that it's funded by business interests with a financial stake in stopping such regulations. Well, this week the market-fundamentalist think tank fired another shot in its war against efforts to address global warming with a report on how cap-and-trade programs for carbon dioxide emissions -- one of the options being considered by state lawmakers -- would "hurt consumers and the poor disproportionately."

After we recovered from the shock of hearing an organization that's defended post-disaster price gouging and balancing the state budget with human-service program cuts expressing concern for consumers and the poor, we decided to check out their claims.

As it turns out, they're not completely accurate. Whether carbon cap-and-trade will hurt the poor depends on how those programs are designed.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities -- a Washington-based think tank that analyzes policies for their impact on low- and moderate-income families -- recently turned its attention to cap-and-trade programs. The conclusion of their report, released earlier this month? The government can reduce greenhouse-gas emissions with cap-and-trade programs in a way that does not increase poverty or otherwise harm low-income households:

Higher energy prices affect households with limited incomes the most. They spend a larger share of their budgets on energy than better-off households do. They also are less able to afford investments that can reduce their energy demand, such as a more efficient car or heating and cooling system.

Fortunately, well-designed climate-change policies can provide sufficient revenue to cushion the impact on vulnerable households and meet other legitimate public needs, such as expanded research on alternative energy sources. A carbon tax can accomplish these goals. So can a "cap-and-trade system" -- as long as it treats the emission allowances as a resource to be auctioned off for public purposes rather than handed to energy companies free of charge. In contrast, giving away the allowances would provide "windfall profits" for energy companies, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and would amount to "corporate welfare," according to Greg Mankiw, the former chairman of President Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers.

If policymakers do not adequately protect vulnerable households from the increase in energy prices, many low-income Americans will slip into poverty and those who are already poor will grow poorer. Alternatively, if policymakers address these and other public needs but do so through deficit spending because they fail to auction enough of the emission allowances to cover the costs, the federal budget deficit -- already on course to reach unsustainable levels in future decades -- will grow still larger.

Well-designed climate-change policies can avoid both of these outcomes. In other words, they can slow global warming without increasing poverty and hardship among low-income households and without enlarging the deficit.

The CBPP report notes that policymakers need to reserve only an estimated 14 percent of the total value of the emission allowances under a cap-and-trade system to fund so-called "climate rebates" that protect vulnerable households from higher energy costs. It puts forth a number of principles for doing this, which include providing relief through existing systems rather than creating new bureaucracies, focusing not only on utility bills but also taking into account higher prices for gas and other products, and adjusting relief to reflect changing needs over time. The organization is now developing policy options based on these principles.

Meanwhile, a United Nations Development Programme report released this week points out that doing nothing to rein in carbon emissions would itself have a devastating impact on the world's poor. Said UNDP Administrator Kemal Derviş in a statement announcing the report:

An increase of a worldwide average of 3 degrees centigrade (compared to pre-industrial temperatures) over the coming decades would result in a range of localized increases that could reach twice as high in some places. The effect that increased droughts, extreme weather events, tropical storms and sea level rises will have on large parts of Africa, on many small island states and coastal zones will be inflicted in our lifetimes. Increased exposure to droughts, floods and storms is already destroying opportunity and reinforcing inequalities. Thus, while climate change is a challenge for all, it is primarily and most immediately a challenge for developing countries in the lower latitudes which will face the impact of global warming not within centuries, but within decades.

Labels: climate, john locke foundation

Citing concerns about investments in sub-prime mortgage backed securities, Florida local governments have withdrawn billions of dollars from a State of Florida investment fund, including withdrawals of $3.5 billion in one day. The run on the State Board of Administration operated Local Government Investment Pool has resulted in a freeze on withdrawals from the fund.

The Orlando Sentinel reports:

The State Board of Administration -- the governor, attorney general and chief financial officers -- voted unanimously to at least temporarily halt a run on the fund, which has reported withdrawals totaling $10 billion in the past several weeks. That's more than one-third of the fund's assets of $28 billion.

This could put local governments who "park" money in the investment pool in a bind:

Alarmed local officials said the move by the SBA could jeopardize local governments' payrolls, if they are not able to take money out of the fund to pay employees.

The freeze on withdrawals may be partly in reaction to a Bloomberg report yesterday that said the fund had invested $2 billion in "sub-prime tainted debt" and that $900 million (5%) of the fund's asset-backed securities were in default. The article noted that Orange County (Orlando) had withdrawn its entire $370 million from the fund. Pinellas County (St. Petersburg/Clearwater) withdrew its entire $300 million, and Miami-Dade County and Pompano Beach have also withdrawn funds.

The Florida State Board of Administration responded with a "recommendation to the Board of Trustees to formally adopt a plan to provide investors in the Local Government Investment Pool (Pool) with assurance that the Pool will continue to provide safety of principal in the midst of an unprecedented absence of market liquidity."

The plan would seek protection from default for $1.5 billion in securities, including securities issued by Countrywide Mortgage, and restructure the plan to be "more liquid and conservative."

The Florida SBA also noted that the Bloomberg article was incorrect with regard to securities being in default:

"It is important that every investor in the Pool has an accurate understanding of the facts regarding our holdings, not misinformation" said Stipanovich. A November 28, 2007 article by Bloomberg News erroneously stated that: "The Florida pool's $900 million of defaulted asset-backed commercial paper now amounts to almost 5 percent of its holdings." In fact, certain Pool investments have been downgraded below purchase credit rating guidelines, but they have continued to pay principal and interest. The Pool has collected approximately $64 million in principal and interest payments since August on these downgraded investments.

Earlier in the month, the FSBA issued a report entitled "Update on Sub-Prime Mortgage Meltdown and State Board of Administration Investments" which outlined the sub-prime exposure of the various funds managed by the FSBA. The report states:

The SBA can take pride in the fact that its investments have held up well through periods of financial crisis and economic downturns. This report lays out our current exposures and responses to date dealing with the sub-prime meltdown. Although past performance is no guarantee of future results, and the financial environment may become even more challenging, we believe the SBA is positioned to deal with the current financial stress at least as well as we have with prior events."

One of the funds managed by the SBA is the Florida Retirement System Pension Plan.

An expert contacted by Bloomberg stated:

Should the withdrawals continue, Florida's [Local Government Investment Pool] may have to consider filing for bankruptcy protection, says John Coffee, a securities law professor at Columbia Law School in New York. "A bankruptcy could handle these kinds of problems if they feel they'll become insolvent," he said.

Coffee predicts the pool will likely file lawsuits to recover losses. "I'd expect the pool is going to sue the people who sold them the commercial paper, saying the risks were hidden," he said.

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. sold Florida most of its now- default-rated asset-backed commercial paper. Lehman spokesman Randall Whitestone declined to comment.

Bloomberg also quotes Joseph Mason, professor of finance at Drexel University:

"The first people in the withdrawal line get 100 percent of their money,'' he said. "The loss is suffered by the people behind them in line. Since nobody wants to be at the end, you get a run on the pool."

Mason says while the state of Florida has a moral duty to cover any losses suffered by the pool participants, its own shaky finances will make that difficult. The fourth most- populous state, hurt by the housing slump, cut its revenue projections by 3.9 percent for the fiscal year ending June 30, and 5.2 percent for the following year.

"The state appears to have breached the trust of the investors by putting money in new kinds of debt its managers didn't fully understand, in their search for higher yields," Mason said.

It sounds as though Florida local governments and taxpayers are the latest victims in the ongoing sub-prime lending scandal.

Labels: economy, Florida

Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, the Mississippi attorney who became rich and famous by taking on the asbestos and tobacco industries, has been indicted on federal charges of bribing a judge in a lawsuit over Hurricane Katrina insurance claims, the Clarion-Ledger reports.

Scruggs and four associates -- his son Zach, attorneys Sidney Backstrom and Timothy Balducci, and former State Auditor Steve Patterson, who works for Balducci's firm -- allegedly paid Lafayette County Circuit Judge Henry Lackey $40,000 in cash to resolve a dispute over $26.5 million in legal fees in favor of Scruggs' firm, according to the paper. Lackey reported the proffered bribe -- which was to eventually total $50,000 -- to federal authorities and cooperated with the FBI in the ensuing investigation.

TPMMuckraker has posted the indictment from the U.S. attorney for Mississippi's Northern District to its Web site here. Among the damning allegations the indictment contains is this account of a conversation between the judge and Balducci, an attorney who Scruggs allegedly hired for $10,000 to carry out the actual dirty work:

"On or about May 9, 2007, TIMOTHY R. BALDUCCI had a conversation with Judge Henry Lackey wherein BALDUCCI stated that 'my relationship with Dick [Scruggs] is such that he and I can talk very private [sic] about these kinds of matters and I have the fullest confidence that if the court, you know, is inclined to rule ... in favor ... everything will be good ...' 'The only person in the world outside of me and you that has discussed this is me and Dick [Scruggs].' '... We, uh, like I say, it ain't but three people in the world that know anything about this ... and two of them are sitting here and the other one ... the other one, uh, being Scruggs ... he and I, um, how shall I say, for over the last five or six years there, there are bodies buried that, that you know, that he and I know where ... where are, and, and, my, my trust in his, mine in him and his in mine, in me, I am sure are the same.'"

The case has raised new questions about the resignation of Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) -- Scruggs' brother-in-law -- who made his announcement the day before the indictment was handed down. The feds said at a news conference earlier today that Lott wasn't involved in the affair. But as the New York Times points out, Scruggs represented Lott and U.S. Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.) in settlements with State Farm after the company refused to pay claims on their homes, which were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. Lott and Taylor then championed legislation to investigate how State Farm and other insurers handled claims following the storm.

The insurer denies wrongdoing and has sued the Mississippi attorney general to block a criminal investigation into its post-Katrina operations. But just one day before the surprise indictment against Scruggs was handed down, his firm filed paperwork with the court charging that engineering firms involved in claims work for State Farm were financially beholden to the insurer and thus had motivation to minimize the company's losses, the Sun-Herald reports:

The amended complaint proposed by the Scruggs team says State Farm essentially acted as a "mob boss," with the vendors serving as "hit men" in a scheme to make money. It alleges destruction of documents, perjury, obstruction of justice and fraud.

Labels: criminal justice, Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, mississippi

Raymond Seed, a civil engineering professor at the University of California at Berkeley, has sent a 42-page letter [PDF] to the head of the American Society of Civil Engineers alleging that the organization colluded with the Army Corps of Engineers to undermine his and other independent investigations into the failure of New Orleans' levees after Hurricane Katrina:

I would never have imagined that I would live to see select elements of two of the world's pre-eminent civil engineering organizations, two organizations with tremendous public trust and responsibility, be caught behaving so badly. These past two years, both the USACE and ASCE have been dishonored by the unacceptable, and even unfathomable, actions of a few. These are two of the most important civil engineering organizations in the world. If that cannot be reversed and repaired, and if recurrence cannot be prevented, then the ethics and the very soul of the Profession are in peril.

Among Seed's allegations are that the Corps' investigation was flawed and attempted to let the agency off the hook for its role in the levee failures, which in turn led to mistakes in the rebuilding of those levees and other protective structures. He also criticizes the close relationship between the Corps and ASCE, calling the Corps' $2 million funding of the ASCE investigation a conflict of interest.

In addition, Seed documents a number of attempts by the groups to prevent independent investigators from gathering evidence at the site of levee failures and from speaking publicly about their findings. He describes a meeting his investigative team had during their first week in Louisiana with ASCE Deputy Director Larry Roth and Corps Senior Scientist Paul Mlakar, alleging they tried to prevent them from speaking at a news conference the next day. During the four-hour argument that ensued, one of Seed's team members passed a note around the table:

It was handwritten by one of the two foreign representatives, and contained a single word: Coverup!!

An editorial in today's New Orleans Times-Picayune calls the charges "deeply troubling" and says they "deserve serious attention." We would agree.

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch

Their annual migration is underway, and Sandhill Cranes are beginning to arrive at the Hiwassee Refuge.

The 1000 acre Hiwassee Refuge, operated by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, is located at the confluence of the Tennessee and Hiwassee rivers at the center of the former Cherokee Nation. It is a stopover for tens of thousands of Sandhill Cranes migrating their way to Florida from their summer breeding grounds in Wisconsin and points further north in Canada.

Sandhill Cranes are believed to be one of the oldest known species of birds, with fossil records dating back ten million years or more. Although they are common, they require specific wetland habitat that is under constant threat from development.

Each year, TWRA sponsors the Cherokee Indian Heritage and Sandhill Crane Viewing Days (recently renamed the "Annual Cherokee-Crane Days"). During the event, wildlife experts with spotting scopes man an observation deck at the refuge, where visitors can watch cranes in their natural habitat and learn about their annual migration. This year's event will be held January 19-20, 2008. More information can be found here. Local info, directions, and an overview map can be found here, and a more detailed map (PDF format) is here.

It's a truly amazing and awe-inspiring sight to look out over the river and mud flats and corn fields and see tens of thousands of cranes and to watch huge flocks arriving and departing. The racket they make is pretty incredible, too. The official observation area is off Blythe Ferry Road near Birchwood TN, but you can drive any of the back roads in the area and see thousands of Sandhill Cranes around the farms and cornfields.

The Hiwassee Refuge plays another important role as a stopover for the few remaining Whooping Cranes. Closely related to Sandhill Cranes, Whooping Cranes were nearly extinct, but thanks to the efforts of conservationists, and particularly Operation Migration, they are slowly being reestablished.

Each year, Operation Migration leads Whooping Cranes hatched in captivity on the migration South. Using ultralight aircraft, Operation Migration teaches the cranes safe migration routes in hopes they can learn to survive in the wild.

Tragedy befell the "Class of 2006" Whooping Cranes last year, when nearly the entire group was killed by a violent storm at their Florida wildlife refuge.

This year's migration is underway, but one Whooping Crane has strayed and gone missing. Wearing a green leg band, crane number 733 was last seen Northeast of Louisville, KY. Anyone spotting the crane is asked to call 1-800-675-2618.

A visit to the Hiwassee Refuge is well worth the trip for outdoor and nature enthusiasts. You can see cranes there starting any time in December, with peak activity occurring around the viewing days event in January. If you're lucky, you might even spot one of the rare Whooping Cranes during the event.

Labels: conservation, nature, wildlife

Sierra magazine recently looked at the nation's colleges and universities and picked 10 schools that are leading the way in promoting environmental responsibility. Of those 10, three are in the South: Warren Wilson College in Swannanoa, N.C., where a sustainably managed farm, garden and forest provide food and lumber for the campus; Durham, N.C.'s Duke University, which offers ambitious green building, recycling and sustainable energy programs; and Berea College in Berea, Ky., where there's a passive-solar housing complex for students and campus-raised produce and meat in the dining halls. The other schools that made the final cut are Oberlin College, Harvard University, the University of California system, Middlebury College, Penn State (my alma mater -- I'm so proud!), Tufts University and Carnegie Mellon. Congratulations to all of them, and to students everywhere who are working to build a more environmentally sustainable future.

Labels: environment, higher education

Speculation is rampant about what caused Mississippi's Trent Lott to up and announce his plans to depart the Senate by the end of the year.

The leading theory -- and one of the best -- is that, for Lott, being in the Senate just hasn't been as fun as it used to be with Republicans out of power and future prospects grim.

The other suspected motive -- put forward by liberal bloggers like Christy Harden Smith at Firedoglake and Ari Berman at The Nation -- is that Lott stands to make a bundle as a lobbyist on K Street, and wants to get out before new lobbying rules go into effect which double the "cooling off" period before ex-Congressfolks can lobby their former colleagues.

Maybe -- although as the Los Angeles Times points out in an editorial today, the new lobbying rules hardly have enough teeth to affect the ability of seasoned deal makers like Lott to buy friends and influence people:

If you think the new ethics law will curb such activities, you haven't been reading the fine print. It's true that the law will ban lawmakers-turned-lobbyists from personal contacts -- letters, telephone calls and meetings -- for two years after leaving office. But nothing prevents them from sitting in a conference room and telling subordinates exactly how to play their former colleagues. True, lobbyists won't be allowed to buy congressmen so much as a $25 lunch. But that's a surmountable problem when they are allowed to bundle millions of dollars in contributions to the lawmakers' re-election campaigns.

Lobbying law or no, Lott will be making millions. That can't explain the sudden departure.

My take: the 2000s have been hard on Lott. The GOP's recent decline in the Senate caps a disappointing five-year run, that started with Lott being outed for waxing nostalgic about the Southern Confederacy in 2002, and seeing his oceanfront home demolished by Hurricane Katrina -- and getting very little help from Washington -- in 2005.

Quite a fall from grace for a man legendary for his political clout and who had eyes on being ringmaster of the Senate. He had enough.

But back to that "innocent and thoughtless remark" Lott made in 2002, when at an event honoring former arch-segregationist Strom Thurmond, he declared that our country "wouldn't have had all these problems over the years" if we'd just kept the races separate. In his 2005 autobiography, Herding Cats, Lott was still bitter about the episode -- and his subsequent dethroning as Senate majority leader -- saying Congress had "sunken to a level that really bothers me."

And in a way, he had a point. As I pointed out in an editorial at the time, that wasn't the first time that Lott had revealed his less-than-enlightened views about race in America -- the only difference was that, this time, his Senate colleagues turned on him. But the pattern was always there:

In 1992, Lott was keynote speaker at the Council's national board meeting, ending his speech by enthusing that "the people in this room stand for the right principles and the right philosophy." Throughout the 1990s, Lott maintained his intimate relations with the CCC, hosting a private meeting with Council leaders in 1997, writing a column for the CCC magazine Citizen's Informer for eight years, and attending at least two CCC banquets in his honor.

In a comical and disturbing move, when confronted with evidence of these close associations, Lott claimed he had "no firsthand knowledge" of the CCC. CCC officials curtly responded that Lott was a "friend" and a "paid-up member."

It doesn't stop there. There's also Lott's 1984 address to the Convention of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Biloxi, Mississippi, in which he claimed "the spirit of Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican Platform." The statement was covered in the winter 1984 issue of the right-wing Southern Partisan magazine, in which Lott also explained that he opposes civil rights legislation, and said that the Martin Luther King Jr. national holiday is "basically wrong."

The Jefferson Davis reference was telling. Lott has something of an obsession with the former President of the breakaway Confederate States of America. In the late 1970s, Lott spearheaded a successful campaign to have Davis' citizenship retroactively restored. More recently, Lott fought to gain custody of the desk Davis used during his Confederate reign, so that it could furnish Lott's Senate offices in Washington.

As Lott's "racism-gate" gains steam, more questionable antics will certainly surface. The onset of the Reagan era, for example, seems to have excited Lott's bigoted passions. We know, for example, that at a 1980 Republican campaign rally for Reagan, Lott -- in a statement eerily similar to his "lighthearted" musings last week --announced that if the country had elected the segregationist Strom Thurmond "30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today." The rally and Lott's statement were covered by the Jackson Clarion-Ledger on Nov. 3, 1980, and again by the Washington Post this week.

Yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle also highlighted Lott's well-known fight in 1981 to restore the non-profit tax status of South Carolina's Bob Jones University, which the IRS had revoked due to the school's prohibition of inter-racial dating. At the time, Lott issued a "friend of the court" brief arguing that "racial discrimination does not always violate public policy."

It will keep coming -- how he voted to de-fund the Martin Luther King, Jr., Holiday commission in 1994 and opposed the King holiday in 1983; how he voted against extending the Voting Rights Act, designed to ensure ballot access for African-Americans, in both 1982 and 1990; on and on.

The pattern is clear: Republican Senator Trent Lott has done more than flirt with racism-it's a long-term relationship. And such a love affair with bigotry is intolerable for one of the most powerful political figures in America.

Labels: mississippi, Southern Politics, trent lott

The Washington Post published an excellent report in yesterday's paper on the deep divide in the post-Katrina recovery along the Mississippi coast, where beyond the bright lights of the newly built casinos working-class neighborhoods remain in darkness and more than 10,000 displaced families are still stuck in FEMA trailers. The story also examined the controversy we've reported on here over the state's plans to divert $600 million in federal housing aid to pay for improvements at the Port of Gulfport.

The Post story was just the latest in a series of recent reports and other media coverage on Mississippi's recovery and the the state's plan to divert housing funds to the port. On Nov. 16, Bill Moyers' Journal profiled the Steps Coalition, an alliance of South Mississippi community leaders and social justice advocates that's heading up the People Before Ports campaign. Also that same day, the New York Times ran an article examining how the poor are lagging in recovery aid in Mississippi, the only state where the Bush administration waived the rule that 50 percent of Community Development Block Grants be spent on low-income programs. And on Nov. 20, the NPR talk program "Tell Me More" aired a segment on how recovery funds are being spent in Mississippi.

For more details on the problems facing Mississippi's rebuilding, read the Step's Coalition's recent report titled "5 Barriers to Recovery" (PDF).

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, mississippi

More than 40 human rights organizations sent a letter last week to federal officials protesting the planned demolition of some 3,000 public housing units in New Orleans. The letter -- which went to U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson -- came less than a week after a federal judge refused to stop the Housing Authority of New Orleans from razing the city's four largest public housing developments. The tear-downs are set to begin as soon as next month.

The protesters charge that demolishing the complexes without replacement affordable housing stock violates international human rights standards protecting people displaced by disasters. They report that contractors have already begun emptying apartments and discarding residents' personal property -- including photographs, letters and Social Security cards -- without their knowledge or consent. Bill Quigley, a Loyola University law professor and attorney for some former public housing residents, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune that he plans to appeal the judge's ruling.

The advocates' letter is part of a national campaign to press for passage of the Gulf Coast Housing Recovery Act, sponsored by Rep. Waters and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.). Though Vitter and HUD officials were initially supportive of the legislation, which passed the House earlier this year by a vote of 302 to 125, they have since come out against the bill over a provision that requires the replacement of any affordable units that are torn down.

Also as part of that campaign, leaders of more than two dozen political action, faith-based and human rights organizations marched to Vitter's office in Metairie, La. last week to deliver more than 130,000 petition signatures calling on him to drop his objections to the housing bill, which has also been endorsed by the New Orleans City Council, Mayor Ray Nagin and more than 100 business groups, non-profits and religious organizations.

Further complicating the politics surrounding affordable housing in New Orleans is the ongoing FBI probe of HUD chief Jackson over revelations that Jackson's friend and golfing partner -- South Carolina-based construction contractor William Hairston -- got $485,000 worth of no-bid work at the Housing Authority of New Orleans in 2006 with Jackson's help. HANO is currently under HUD receivership. The probe is reportedly focusing on whether Jackson lied when he told a Senate panel in May that he never intervened in awarding department contracts.

Hairston and his wife, Starletta, together have donated at least $3,500 to Republican politicians and party committees exclusively since 2005, after previously supporting Rep. James Clyburn, a South Carolina Democrat, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's about the same time the Hairstons' annual income plunged from $500,000 to $70,000 after the undocumented immigrants William Hairston previously hired for his stucco business started their own companies and began undercutting their former boss with lower bids, the Wall Street Journal reported last December:

To stay afloat, the Hairstons remortgaged their house twice and sold a condominium and a plot of land. Mr. Hairston now hustles for jobs in Charlotte, N.C., and beyond, looking for better opportunities. Meanwhile, Starletta Hairston, 53, won election to the Beaufort County Council, where she has joined a wave of local officials around the country trying to pass new laws cracking down on illegal immigrants.

The FBI's probe of Jackson comes on the heels of an April 2006 incident in which the HUD secretary was speaking before a group of minority real estate executives and discussed quashing a contract award because the contractor had spoken unfavorably of President Bush. A subsequent investigation by the HUD inspector general found that while Jackson ordered aides to consider the partisan political views of contractors in awarding department business, there was no evidence they complied. Awarding contracts on the basis of party affiliation violates federal law.

In another development that raises questions about HUD's and HANO's commitment to helping New Orleans' low-income residents with affordable housing, the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center recently filed a motion to enforce a consent degree and for contempt sanctions against the housing authority. The motion comes in response to HANO's failure to provide updated contact information for former residents of the St. Thomas Public Housing Development, which was shuttered in 2001 and later torn down. St. Thomas residents were supposed to be given preference for units at the replacement River Garden mixed-income development. HANO initially updated the mailing information for only 378 names out of a total of 1,132 -- even though HANO has access to HUD and FEMA databases of displaced people receiving housing assistance. Said GNOFHAC Executive Director James Perry:

"HANO's duty and purpose is to provide housing for indigent New Orleanians. The failure by HANO to provide updated contact information for these residents is a clear abdication of that duty, as well as its obligations under the Consent Decree. HANO's failure is of grave concern because it calls into question HANO's claim that it has open units at other developments and that it is unable to fill these units with HANO clients. The failure also frustrates New Orleans' attempt to conduct an equitable and open rebuilding process inclusive of all New Orleanians.

(Photo by Craig Morse courtesy of Survivors' Village Web site.)

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, housing, politics

Last January, Florida implemented a new law that requires the state to reject voter registration applications if the information provided doesn't match driver's license or Social Security records. The law was crafted with help from Hans von Spakovsky, who has been accused by his former Justice Department colleagues of being "the point person for undermining the Civil Rights Division's mandate to protect voting rights."

This week, the Southwest Florida News-Press published an analysis of the law's impact, finding that it resulted in the rejection of voting applications from 14,000 Floridians over the past 21 months -- three-quarters of them minorities:

Blacks were 6 1/2 times more likely than whites to be rejected ... Hispanics were more than 7 times more likely to be failed.

Though state law requires notification of these "lost" voters, most contacted by the paper said they were unaware of the problem.

The same month Florida's new voting law went into effect, President Bush named von Spakovsky to the Federal Elections Commission by recess appointment. But his official confirmation to the post is stymied in the Senate due to the vocal opposition of Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who have called his nomination "just another example of this administration putting the fox in charge of the hen house."

Labels: Florida, race and racism, voting rights

The U.S. Supreme Court is halting executions by lethal injection until deciding whether the practice is cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the 8th Amendment. Executions in Kentucky, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas are effectively on hold until a Kentucky case is decided.

The current de facto death penalty moratorium can be traced back to November of 2006, when the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled that the procedure is not cruel and unusual:

While conceding that the chemicals used to execute death row inmates in Kentucky might cause needless pain, the state’s Supreme Court ruled yesterday that using them did not violate the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

"Conflicting medical testimony prevents us from stating categorically that a prisoner feels no pain," Justice Donald C. Wintersheimer wrote for the unanimous court. "The prohibition is against cruel and unusual punishment and does not require a complete absence of pain."

In September, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case on appeal:

The Supreme Court agreed yesterday to hear a Kentucky case that challenges the constitutionality of the mix of drugs used in lethal injections.

This will be the first time the high court will consider whether such injections violate the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment.

The decision to hear the case is likely to have an immediate impact beyond Kentucky, said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit organization based in Washington.

"Virtually all executions are by lethal injection," Dieter said. "It will at least hold up all executions in the country for a time and may require broad revisions in the law."

A week earlier, a federal judge blocked executions by lethal injection in Tennessee:

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked next week’s scheduled execution of a prisoner in Tennessee, ruling that newly revised lethal injection procedures were unconstitutional.

Judge Aleta A. Trauger of Federal District Court here ruled that the state cannot execute the prisoner, Edward J. Harbison, 52, because Tennessee’s use of a three-drug lethal injection would present "a substantial risk of unnecessary pain."

Facing South previously reported on the disturbing inconsistencies in Tennessee's "newly revised" lethal injection procedures, which instruct the executioner to "engage the automatic rheostat" (a rheostat controls the voltage flowing to an electric chair), direct the facility manager to disconnect the electrical cables in the rear of the chair before allowing a doctor to check whether the lethal injection was successful, require shaving the condemned inmate's head, and require fire extinguishers to be on hand.

In an even more bizarre twist, Tennessee's Attorney General issued an opinion last week that the electric chair cannot be used as a "backup" method of execution unless requested by the condemned inmate:

Tennessee cannot currently use the electric chair on prisoners unless they chose that method of death, the state attorney general said Tuesday in a written opinion.

Prosecutors have been calling on the state to use the electric chair as a back-up after a U.S. District Court in September found Tennessee’s lethal injection procedures to be unconstitutional.

But in his six-page written opinion, state Attorney General Bob Cooper said that the law "does not allow substitution based on rulings of a federal district court or a state trial court." The law says that the chair back-up is triggered only if the Tennessee Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court find or let stand rulings that hold lethal injection unconstitutional, the opinion said.

Along with the previous ruling against lethal injections, this effectively leaves Tennessee without any approved method of carrying out the death penalty. (Ironically, in September a Tennessee inmate requested death by electrocution, the first use of the electric chair in Tennessee since 1960.)

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed an execution in Florida hours before the condemned inmate was to be put to death:

A Florida death row inmate has been granted a stay of execution by the US Supreme Court in an action that offers further evidence that a de facto national moratorium on executions is in place.

The stay, announced Thursday afternoon, came four hours before Mark Dean Schwab was scheduled to be executed by lethal injection at 6 p.m.

Lawyers for Mr. Schwab asked the justices to intervene in light of the Supreme Court's decision in late September to hear a Kentucky case challenging that state's use of a three-drug protocol to carry out executions by lethal injection.

The Schwab case represents the latest showdown over whether pending executions should be postponed until after the Supreme Court has heard and decided the Kentucky case, Baze v. Rees.

In late October in Alabama, a federal appeals court blocked the execution of a terminally ill prisoner:

A federal appeals court panel unanimously ordered a stay of execution on Wednesday for a terminally ill prisoner who was scheduled to die by lethal injection in Alabama on Thursday.

Lawyers representing the prisoner, Daniel L. Siebert, 56, filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta after Judge Mark E. Fuller of Federal District Court in Alabama refused to stop his execution. Defense lawyers said the drug mixture used by the state could interact with Mr. Siebert’s cancer medications and cause excruciating pain.

The three-judge appeals panel, following a pattern set by other courts in recent weeks, said the execution would have to wait until the Supreme Court decided in the coming months whether lethal injections violated Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

Alabama Republican Gov. Bob Riley made an unsuccessful and bizarre argument for allowing the execution to proceed, claiming the state had changed its procedures to insure a painless death:

Officials said those changes largely amounted to checking whether a condemned prisoner was conscious after anesthesia had been administered by calling the prisoner’s name, brushing a finger against the eyelashes and pinching an arm. The state did not change the chemicals or the order in which they are administered, said Brian Corbett, a public information officer with the Alabama Department of Corrections.

Georgia's State Supreme Court is also blocking executions:

For the second time in four days, the Georgia Supreme Court on Monday ordered a stay of execution for a condemned prisoner, citing the United States Supreme Court’s decision to review the constitutionality of lethal injection as a method of execution.

The prisoner, Curtis Osborne, who was sentenced to death for killing two people in 1991, had been scheduled to die on Oct. 23 by lethal injection.

His execution will probably be delayed until the Supreme Court issues its ruling on lethal injection, expected next spring.

The U.S. Supreme Court has also intervened in Mississippi:

The Supreme Court halted an execution in Mississippi on Tuesday, less than an hour before the convicted killer was scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection.

The last-minute reprieve for Earl Wesley Berry is the third granted by the justices since they agreed late last month to decide a challenge to Kentucky's lethal injection procedures. Tuesday's order was the latest indication that most, if not all, executions by lethal execution will be halted at least until the justices decide the Kentucky case.

Arkansas executions are also on hold:

Attorney General Dustin McDaniel will not seek to lift the court-ordered stays of any executions until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on a Kentucky lethal injection challenge, a spokesman for the office said Wednesday.

The announcement came a day after the nation’s highest court stayed a Mississippi execution about an hour before it was scheduled, and a federal judge in Little Rock cited the Kentucky case in granting condemned killer Don William Davis’ request to stop his scheduled Nov. 8 execution.

[..]

"Although the Supreme Court still has not specifically said so, the attorney general believes the (Mississippi) ruling sends the clear signal that the majority of the court intends to stay all executions until the Kentucky case is decided," [Gabe Holmstrom, a spokesman for Attorney General Dustin McDaniel] said.

Gov. Mike Beebe’s spokesman Matt DeCample said Wednesday that the governor supports the attorney general’s decision.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hear the Kentucky lethal injection case in January and issue a ruling in the summer. The way the court is currently stacked, it is difficult to imagine a finding that lethal injections are cruel or unusual.

But, a ruling last year allowed inmates to challenge lethal injections on 8th Amendment grounds, sending mixed signals but opening the door for the current appeal. On the other hand, the court refused to block a Texas execution just hours after agreeing to hear the Kentucky case.

In addition to questions about the constitutionality of death by lethal injection, in late October the American Bar Association renewed its call for a death penalty moratorium on other grounds:

The American Bar Association said on Monday it was renewing its call for a nationwide moratorium on executions, based on a three-year study of death penalty systems in eight states that found unfairness and other flaws.

The lawyers' group said its study identified key problems, such as major racial disparities, incompetent defense services for poor defendants and irregular clemency review processes, making those death penalty systems operate unfairly.

Facing South reported on the ABA study earlier this year, and on an investigative report by McLatchy Newspapers into serious problems with death penalty cases around the South.

Labels: criminal justice, death penalty

The campaign of Republican presidential candidate and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee got a boost recently from Outdoor Life. The hunting and fishing magazine with more than 5 million readers named Huckabee one of the 25 "most positively influential people in hunting and fishing." He was the only presidential candidate who made the list, which also includes Ted "Motor City Madman" Nugent and the Cabela brothers of the eponymous outdoor retail empire.

The magazine praised Huckabee for his efforts after becoming governor of Arkansas to pass Amendment 75 -- also known as "The Conservation Amendment" -- designating a portion of the state's general sales tax for the Arkansas Fish and Game Commission. Huckabee and his wife, Janet, traveled down the Arkansas River in their bass boat to draw attention to the proposal, which soon after became law. The amendment sends about $26 million each year to the Game Commission, which has used the money to build nature centers. The magazine also praises Huckabee for improving public access for hunters and angler, and for launching programs to promote fishing among children.

This isn't the first outdoorsman honor for Huckabee. In 1997, the American Sportfishing Association named him its Man of the Year, and in 2005 a small recreational lake in Hope, Ark. was renamed the Mike and Janet Huckabee Lake.

Also adding to Huckabee's conservationist cred of late is a Salon article that details his plan for energy independence, which is inspired by his Christian belief that he has a biblical responsibility to protect the planet from climate change. Unfortunately, Huckabee has fallen for the myth of "clean" coal, when in fact coal is the dirtiest fuel there is and any technological attempts to clean it up only end up moving its inherent filth -- including heavy metals and radionuclides -- from one waste stream to another.

(Photo of Huckabee with Danny and Zoe Caywood from the Web site of Caywood Gunmakers of Berryville, Ark.)

Labels: Southern Politics

The Movement Vision Lab at the Center for Community Change -- a special project that aims to "bring together grassroots organizers and social justice advocates to share and debate long-term, visionary ideas for the future" -- has launched an interesting blog. Each week has a special theme; this time it's "race and racial justice."

Two long-time Southern organizers weigh in on the discussion: Gerald Taylor, who heads up the Southern division of the Industrial Areas Foundation, and Scott Douglas of Greater Birmingham Ministries in Alabama.

Douglas brings a valuable Deep South perspective to the debate, arguing that Hurricane Katrina and the failing Gulf Coast recovery are more than just an isolated problem -- they are a symbol and yardstick for looking at our country's priorities. Some excerpts:

Across entire Gulf Coast, stretching from Texas to Alabama, affordable housing and living wage job opportunities are scarce. Thousands of families are still housed in FEMA trailers that contain deadly levels of formaldehyde.

Yet the federal government manages to scrounge up $3 billion per day to “rescue” Iraq. Those of us in the Gulf Coast need to be rescued, too!

Why do we tolerate this injustice? In my opinion, many progressives have become so focused on individual campaigns that we have lost sight of the bigger picture, the larger frame.

What is the larger frame? Think about inclusive, informed and accountable democracy. [...]

Where we’re going will be defined by how our government and America as a nation reacts to Katrina, Rita and Wilma. There is no truer test of our character, strength, awareness and courage.

This disaster surpasses September 11th both by scale and its long lasting impact. Perhaps if we had blamed Katrina on Al Queada, we might have gotten some help. But our government would rather dominate and destroy people of color in Iraq than help people of color here at home.

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, social movements

Last week we brought you news of the excellent database launched by the Center for Global Development showing carbon dioxide emissions from the world's power plants. Now a British newspaper has used that database as a starting point to illustrate the close ties between a major greenhouse gas polluter and the Bush administration, which has been reluctant to take strong steps to curb global warming pollution -- and has even tried to deny the reality of the problem despite the scientific consensus that the threat is real and demands immediate action.

The CARMA database shows that the top carbon dioxide-polluting company in the United States -- and the sixth-worst in the world -- is the Atlanta-based Southern Co., which serves more than 4 million people throughout the Southeast. One Southern Co. coal-fired plant in Juliette, Ga. releases more carbon dioxide each year than Brazil's entire power sector, according to CARMA. Not surprisingly, the company does not support mandatory caps or taxes on carbon emissions, which it claims are likely to slow economic growth.

A story in today's Independent UK points out that Southern in turn is one of the largest financiers of the Republican Party, whose leadership has also resisted carbon caps and taxes. Reports the Independent:

Southern's employees handed George Bush $217,047 to help him get elected twice, and they and the company have contributed an extraordinary $6.2m to Republican campaigns since 1990 according to the Centre for Responsive Politics.

The Independent also notes that one of the main lobbyists for the Southern Co. when Bush took office was none other than Haley Barbour, former chair of the Republican Party and the recently re-elected governor of Mississippi. Barbour "played a crucial role in persuading [Bush] to back away from his original campaign promise to reduce CO2 emissions when he first ran for president in 2000," the paper reports.

On Friday, the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its fourth report, which summarizes the global warming problem for policy makers. Citing concerns over species extinction and the growing risk of extreme weather events, it argues strongly in favor of taking immediate action to mitigate and adapt to a climate that's already changing.

And in a rebuke to Southern Co. and others who argue against taking action on economic grounds, the IPCC summary says that combating greenhouse gas pollution would not lead to economic ruin. "There is high agreement and much evidence of substantial economic potential for the mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions over the coming decades," the report says -- if governments adopt the right policies and incentives now.

Labels: campaign finance, climate, energy policy, politics

There are many, but USA Today points to one particularly relevant to workers in search of a holiday this week:

For the first time in at least three decades, New Jersey will be one of 18 states open for business on the Friday after Thanksgiving, while state workers in Louisiana are under executive order to take a four-day weekend.

States like Louisiana that shut down for the day known as "Black Friday," one of the biggest shopping days of the year, cite factors such as family time and saving energy. [...]

New Jersey state employees have made more than 5,500 phone calls this month to Gov. Jon Corzine's office after protesting his executive order revoking the Friday after Thanksgiving as a state holiday. None of them has gotten the answer they wanted.

That contrasts to the approach Louisiana is taking this year. In October, Gov. Kathleen Blanco signed executive orders granting state workers three four-day weekends: Thanksgiving Friday, Christmas Eve (a Monday) and New Year's Eve (also a Monday).

New Orleans is much more in line with the rest of the world when it comes to vacation time. Having time off for rest and family is part of the "social wage" that most industrialized countries guarantee for workers, but has been gradually chipped away in the U.S. As David Moberg reported earlier this year:

Nearly one-fourth of American workers have no paid vacation or holidays, according to a recent study from the D.C.-based Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), and nearly half of all private sector workers have no paid sick days. [Workers in every] other industrialized country [are] legally guaranteed at least two weeks paid vacation and—in 136 countries—from seven to more than 30 paid sick days. The United States is the only rich country that does not mandate paid vacations and paid sick days, and Americans who are afforded such benefits enjoy far less time off than workers in other wealthy nations.

Fortunately, many Southern states give workers a break after Thanksgiving; as USA Today notes, employees in two states can thank a Confederate general and the regional religion known as football for getting a day off:

• Georgia celebrates Robert E. Lee's birthday on the day after Thanksgiving.

• In Virginia, state employees start the holiday with a paid half-day off on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, as well as having Friday off, according to Michael Salster of the state Department of Human Resource Management.

• Texas made Thanksgiving Friday a holiday in 1991, in part because of the traditional University of Texas vs. Texas A&M University football game formerly scheduled on Thanksgiving, according to state auditor John Keel.

• In Tennessee, the governor has the discretion to swap Columbus Day and the Friday after Thanksgiving as holidays. Given the option since 1987, the governor has done that every year.

Labels: Work and Community

Leslie Eaton of the New York Times follows up on a story we covered last August -- that despite billions of dollars spent on post-Katrina recovery, few dollars are reaching those most in need. Eaton looks at Mississippi:

Like the other Gulf Coast states battered by Hurricane Katrina, Mississippi was required by Congress to spend half of its billions in federal grant money to help low-income citizens trying to recover from the storm.

But so far, the state has spent $1.7 billion in federal money on programs that have mostly benefited relatively affluent residents and big businesses. The money has gone to compensate many middle- and upper-income homeowners, to aid utility companies whose equipment was damaged and to prop up the state’s insurance system.

Just $167 million, or about 10 percent of the federal money, has been spent on programs dedicated to helping the poor, mostly through a smaller grant program for lower-income homeowners.

And while that total will certainly increase, Mississippi has set aside just 23 percent of its $5.5 billion grant money — $1.25 billion — for these programs. About 37 percent of the residents of the state’s coast are low income, according to federal figures.

Remember that this is Mississippi, site of Gov. Haley Barbour's much-heralded "miracle" recovery -- but which we showed this spring has been failing many of the state's residents all along.

UPDATE: Reader RM gives us a heads-up that Bill Moyers Journal tonight will feature a piece on the Mississippi recovery, including a look at the grassroots efforts of the STEPS Coalition.

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, mississippi

If you don't live in the coalfields of Appalachia, you may not think that mountaintop coal removal has much to do with your life.

Think again -- with help from the folks at Appalachian Voices.

The Boone, N.C.-based nonprofit has unveiled a new online tool that reveals whether and how your electric company is connected to mountaintop removal, the nasty practice of blasting away the tops of mountains and dumping them into neighboring valleys and streams in order to reach the coal below. The site also tells you what you can do to bring an end to the devastation.

As Scott Gollwitzer, in-house counsel for Appalachian Voices, noted in an e-mail announcing the new site:

The coal companies want you to believe that mountaintop removal is just a local issue. But nearly every American is connected to mountaintop removal in some way, and ending this practice is our shared national responsibility.

Labels: coal, environment

The Institute's special report released this week -- exposing the NC-based John Locke Foundation's crusade against state climate policy, and the corporate interests backing them -- continues to rage on.

See, for example, the spirited discussion over at Ed Cone's blog. Once you get past the odd food-fight debate tactics -- like John Hood of the Locke Foundation trying to link us to Fidel Castro (huh?) -- there's a useful debate developing about the importance of disclosing one's funders, and the role financial backers play in shaping politics.

There's more coverage over at NC Public Radio's policy blog Isaac Hunter's Tavern, although writer Laura Leslie bypasses these key issues and focuses on one narrow aspect of the study:

What's missing from the [Institute for Southern Studies] report is the fact that JLF took in somewhere north of $8.5 million in that timeframe. That puts the allegedly oil-tainted money at less than 1.5 percent of its budget, which would be a fire-sale price for a major policy position.

Leslie is overlooking the central thrust of our report, which is about disclosure: the fact that the John Locke Foundation has publicly gone after the Center for Climate Strategies for taking money from "environmentalist foundations" -- which, in Locke's eyes, undermines the credibility of the entire operation -- yet it has taken a series of steps to obscure and conceal many of its own funders.

Yesterday, my colleague Sue Sturgis elaborated on several ways in which the Locke Foundation has been less than forthcoming with such information. When Locke is so secretive and disingenuous about their funding -- and other issues like their sponsorship of the Climate Strategies Watch website, their connection to the Heartland Institute, etc. -- the question looms: what are they trying to hide?

Second, in our report we clearly note that there are other corporate interests that give money to Locke who have an interest in defeating global warming legislation, beyond the $126,000 in energy-related funding. We devote two paragraphs to Art Pope -- far and away Locke's leading backer -- and explain why he also has a "dog in the fight" of defeating energy regulations. Further down, we note both the energy industry AND automotive industry money tied to Sen. Robert Pittenger, Locke's leading advocate for defeating climate policy in the NC legislature.

Finally, does it really make sense to measure the impact and influence of corporate contributions to an outfit like Locke in terms of the percentage of its annual budget? The history of politics is filled with seemingly small contributions that exert a major influence; for example, deposed North Carolina House Speaker Jim Black received only $8,000 from video poker PACs in 2004 (pdf) -- a miniscule percentage of his total haul -- but it was symbolic of a relationship that was central to his operation (and downfall).

My quick estimate is that roughly 5-10% of the Locke Foundation's overall program relates to climate issues -- which means that $126,000 of money tied to energy interests isn't small at all. It's at least enough to bankroll one in-house climate skeptic "expert" -- even if this "expert" happens to occasionally fall for hoaxes published in non-existent science journals.

But such percentages really don't tell a useful story. A better question to ask might be, if energy interests really thought their contributions weren't having any impact in shaping the policy direction of anti-regulation think tanks like Locke, why would they keep making them?

Big Energy and other corporate interests are not giving John Hood money because of his good looks. As the Union of Concerned Scientists report we cite and others have documented, energy companies have devised a thoughtful, national strategy to help defeat efforts to curb global warming pollutants. This includes investing money in think tanks who will make the needed arguments -- largely based on scant evidence -- that global warming doesn't exist, that regulations will destroy the economy, etc.

The energy companies, shrewd strategists that they are, clearly think they are getting something for this investment -- and I think they'd know best.

The fact that Locke goes to such great lengths to conceal its relationship to this larger effort only bolsters the case that Big Energy and other corporate interests are putting money into the John Locke Foundation for a reason. That's the central point to remember.

Labels: center for climate strategies, climate, energy policy, john locke foundation

Anyone interested in understanding how much carbon dioxide pollution is being emitted by the world's power plants has a terrific new resource to turn to: the Carbon Monitoring for Action database, or CARMA.

A project of the Confronting Climate Change Initiative at the Center for Global Development, an independent and nonpartisan think tank located in Washington, D.C., CARMA offers details about carbon emissions for power facilities around the world, whether they're fueled by coal, nuclear or renewable resources.

CARMA includes data on more than 50,000 power plants, 4,000 power companies, and nearly 200,000