There are 10 nuclear power plants across the United States that are relying on faulty materials to protect against catastrophic fires. Seven of these plants are located in the South -- and all are owned by companies based in the South.

That's among the alarming findings of a special inquiry conducted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office of Inspector General. The IG's report [PDF] faults NRC staff for not acting more promptly in investigating the ability of the material, called Hemyc, to protect critical electrical systems.

Progress Energy's Shearon Harris plant, located in North Carolina's fast-growing Research Triangle Park region, uses more Hemyc than any other nuclear power plant in the nation. In fact, new documents show the Harris plant contains more Hemyc than previously disclosed. The NRC has long known that the material is vulnerable to failure but has not required the plants to replace it with something more reliable.

Other plants relying on Hemyc for fire protection are:

* four owned by New Orleans-based Entergy (the Arkansas Nuclear plant in Russellville; the Waterford plant in St. Charles Parish, La.; the Indian Point plant near New York City; and the Fitzpatrick plant near Oswego, N.Y);

* two owned by Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke Energy (the Catawba plant near York, S.C. and the McGuire plant near Charlotte);

* Dallas-based Energy Future's Comanche Peak plant southwest of Fort Worth, Texas;

* Raleigh, N.C.-based Progress Energy's H.B. Robinson plant near Hartsville, S.C.; and

* the St. Lucie plant near Fort Pierce, Fla. that's owned by Florida Power & Light.

"It appears that NRC is more concerned about providing a fire wall from its own regulations than requiring effective fire protection at U.S. nuclear power stations," said Paul Gunter of Beyond Nuclear, a Washington-based watchdog group that's been leading efforts to draw attention to the nuclear fire safety problem

The IG's report now goes to Congress, with hearings planned for April. U.S. Rep. David Price of North Carolina also helped initiate a separate, broader Government Accountability Office investigation into the NRC's enforcement of fire regulations; its findings are expected to be released this spring.

Labels: nuclear power, public safety

In his State of the Union speech this week, President Bush went after his favorite political whipping post: Congressional earmarks -- "special interest projects that are often snuck in at the last minute, without discussion or debate."

Congressional pork does add up -- last year, Congress approved some 11,700 totaling $16.9 billion (more here).

But such pet projects are chump change compared to that great wasteland of taxpayer dollars, the defense budget. The same day as the State of the Union, Bush signed a $696 billion military spending bill -- and while signing, promised to defy key provisions that would heighten oversight of how the money is spent.

And, as usual, the bill is loaded with budget-busting boondoggles.

Consider, for example, the F-22 air fighter. Last Sunday's Dallas Star-Telegram featured a devastating analysis by three military experts, Pierre Sprey, James Stevenson and Winslow Wheeler that shows the futility of this weapons scheme that will cost taxpayers a minimum of $65 billion -- $355 million per aircraft:

On Dec. 12, the Air Force announced with considerable fanfare at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia that its F-22 fighter had reached “full operational capability.” Air Combat Command commander Gen. John Corley called it a “key milestone.” Brimming with pride, a spokesman for the manufacturer, Lockheed, stated: “The F-22 is ready for world-wide operations”–and then added, “…should it be called upon.” His afterthought makes the point: There are, of course, two wars going on, and the F-22 has yet to fly a single sortie over the skies of Iraq or Afghanistan. Nor has the Air Force announced any intention of sending the F-22 to either theater. The Air Force is quite right to keep the F-22 as far as possible from either conflict. The airplane is irrelevant to both, and were it to appear in those skies, it almost certainly would set U.S. and allied forces back.

The piece ends by saying that perhaps "Congress' lust for pork, and the perverted thinking that jobs and profits (not the threat) should drive defense spending, will determine the size of the F-22 fleet."

How come that didn't make it into the State of the Union?

(H/T Ken Silverstein at Harper's)

Labels: militarism, peace and security

According to a new report by the National Bankruptcy Research Center, Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama have the top three highest bankruptcy rates in the nation. Arkansas, Mississippi, and Kentucky round out the top ten.

According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, the number of bankruptcy filings in 2007 increased 40% nationwide. Factors cited include people trying to save their homes from foreclosure, small business failures, and staggering medical debt.

Labels: economy

Katrina lawsuit vs. Army Corps dismissed

U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval ruled Wednesday that the Corps should be held immune over failures in drainage canals that caused much of the flooding of New Orleans in August 2005. He cited the Flood Control Act of 1928, which protects the federal government from lawsuits when flood control projects like levees break.

There is a silver lining, though. There is now a court ruling on the record about what the Corps of Engineers knew and how they failed to act on it:

The judge issued a stinging condemnation of the Corps, saying the agency "cast a blind eye" in protecting New Orleans and "squandered millions of dollars in building a levee system ... which was known to be inadequate by the Corps' own calculations."

The judge said "it is not within the Court's power to address the wrongs committed. It is hopefully within the citizens of the United States' power to address the failures of our laws and agencies."

Labels: economic justice, Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch

Bucking a national trend away from coal-burning power plants, North Carolina regulators yesterday issued a permit allowing Duke Energy to build a massive new coal-fired unit at its Cliffside plant in the western part of the state. The company plans to begin construction on the $2.4 billion project immediately and hopes to have the facility up and running by 2012.

The decision to permit the new unit comes despite serious concerns raised about its impact on climate, public health, and air quality in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. It also comes amidst an ongoing lawsuit brought against the Charlotte-based company by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over its failure to meet pollution control requirements.

Environmental advocates who had been fighting the project denounced North Carolina's decision and criticized what they called misleading statements made by Duke and state regulators about the facility's environmental impact. According to a statement issued yesterday by N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network Director Jim Warren:

"The State and Duke Energy seem to be working in tandem to put lipstick on a pig, based on their coordinated announcements today. Despite their withering campaign of distortion, building the Cliffside power plant is a losing strategy for the climate crisis, air quality and mercury poisoning of the North Carolina public."

Warren pointed out that the final permit included only a "slight, token" reduction in mercury limits over the draft version -- and the reduction was based on a recalculation of mercury emissions rather than any required changes to controls. This means the planned facility will be out of compliance with federal rules limiting mercury emissions, Warren said.

He also blasted Duke's and North Carolina's claims that Cliffside will be "carbon neutral" by 2018. He called that a "meaningless statement" based on "vague promises" of carbon offsets elsewhere in the company's operations. In fact, the new Cliffside unit is expected to emit more than 6 million tons of carbon dioxide each year, which is 12 times more than what's emitted by the four smaller units the company plans to retire. It's also expected to emit 405 pounds of mercury, a potent neurotoxin, each year, and use 120 million gallons of water a day in a region that's suffering from an extraordinary drought.

Cliffside opponents have also raised concerns about Duke Energy's enormous political influence in the state. Indeed, the company's political action committee consistently ranks among the 10 largest in the state and among the five largest sponsored by a single company, according to a recent study [PDF] by Democracy North Carolina. Duke Energy also ranked in the top 10 energy-industry contributors during the 2004 and 2006 election cycles, according to a recent study [PDF] by the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

The Canary Coalition, a clean air advocacy group based in western North Carolina, has called for protests against Cliffside to continue until the plans are abandoned. The group is promoting weekly boycott actions against the company, with concerned citizens asked to turn off their lights every Sunday at 8 p.m. and to place an LED candle in the window in solidarity.

(Photo courtesy of the Canary Coalition.)

Labels: coal, energy policy, north carolina

UPDATE: I cross-posted this at DailyKos and it's generating some interesting discussion.

It's fitting that former N.C. Senator John Edwards will be heading to New Orleans today to announce his exit from the presidential race. With Edwards' departure, the still-ravaged Gulf Coast will lose its most passionate -- maybe its only -- advocate in the 2008 campaign.

I remember talking with dozens of community leaders in New Orleans and Mississippi last summer, when we were compiling research for our in-depth study on the two-year anniversary of Katrina.

When the conversation turned to national politics, the only politician who got Gulf Coast residents excited was Edwards. "He didn't forget," said one community leader in Biloxi, Mississippi. "He's the only one who gets it," said a neighborhood activist in New Orleans. These were people who had largely given up on politics; living in poverty all their lives, and living in the devastation of the post-Katrina failed recovery, had convinced them it didn't matter. But Edwards had lit a spark.

That's exactly what Edwards hoped to do when he went to the Ninth Ward of New Orleans to announce his candidacy in December 2006 -- here's a video clip:



This past summer, Edwards showed it was more than just a campaign gimmick when he launched his "One America" tour in New Orleans and released a compelling platform for Gulf Coast recovery, which included many key proposals the Institute had been advocating.

Perhaps most importantly, though, Edwards was the only candidate who tried to show that what's happening in the post-Katrina Gulf Coast is everyone's issue.

Edwards' message was that Katrina is a symbol for a larger breakdown in our social contract. Just as the Gulf Coast has been left behind, millions of Americans sinking deeper in economic quicksand: inequality is among the highest it's been in our country since World War II.

Why didn't Edwards do better? Some factors he couldn't control, such as facing two media-savvy, fundraising-juggernaut, establishment-embraced campaigns in Clinton and Obama.

Despite his compelling message, Edwards and his campaign also had their own limitations (writer Bob Moser explored some of these in a 2005 piece in The Nation). I think Edwards often failed to make a compelling case about why his campaign to end poverty should matter to all voters.

The country has changed a lot since Lyndon Johnson and Robert Kennedy launched their crusades against "The Other America" in the 1960s. One of the great ironies is that today, even the poor think of themselves as "middle class." Over 30 years of conservative ideology have enshrined the idea that we have no obligation to help what the bible calls "the least among us."

But whether or not it was a winner at the polls doesn't change the importance of Edwards' message: that we have a historic mission to help those left behind and struggling the most -- in New Orleans and beyond -- and that our country is stronger when everyone is doing well, not just the wealthy few.

For that alone, the 2008 campaign -- and the public debate about poverty and our country's political vision -- will be less in Edwards' absence.

Labels: Election 2008, Hurricane Katrina, john edwards

Two House subcommittees have sent letters to the Department of Homeland Security and the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry asking why the Federal Emergency Management Agency interfered with a heath report on formaldehyde in trailers housing people displaced by Hurricane Katrina -- and why ATSDR complied with FEMA's demands that it not consider long-term exposure impacts including cancer.

According to information obtained by the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee and the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment of the U.S. House Committee on Science and Technology, FEMA allegedly sought to insure that the health consultation would not include any long-term formaldehyde exposure considerations such as cancer, even though people living in the trailers were subjected to long-term exposure to the chemical, which is present in materials used to construct the trailers. The Environmental Protection Agency has classified formaldehyde as a probable human carcinogen.

Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.), chair of the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee, said in statement:

"The evidence that FEMA ignored, hid and manipulated government research on the potential impact of long-term exposure to formaldehyde on Katrina victims now living in travel trailers is hard to ignore. Honest scientific studies don't start with the conclusion, and then work backwards from there."

The subcommittees' investigation is continuing. Meanwhile, FEMA has denied any attempt to suppress information on the formaldehyde problem:

The health and safety of residents has been and continues to be our primary concern. FEMA has not and will not attempt to, nor will it condone any effort to, suppress or inappropriately influence any report from the Center for Disease Control's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) or any report from any agency, including any related to the effects of formaldehyde on residents in its direct housing program.

The agency has come under fire for being slow to act to protect public health after learning about high levels of formaldehyde in temporary housing for Katrina survivors. Trailer residents have also faced other problems including toxic mold and exploding propane tanks.

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, public health

Yesterday, President Bush signed this year's bill for military spending. But as Congressional Quarterly reports today (sub required), he did so only while promising to ignore measures in the bill to ensure accountability for spending and promote self-determination in Iraq:

President Bush signed the fiscal 2008 Defense authorization bill into law Monday, but not before stating that he reserves the right to disregard several sections.

One such provision sets up a commission to probe contracting fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan. Another expands protections for whistleblowers who work for government contractors. A third requires that U.S. intelligence agencies promptly respond to congressional requests for documents. And a fourth bars funding for permanent bases in Iraq and for any action that exercises U.S. control over Iraq’s oil money.

The Institute has long been calling for a "Truman Commission" to ensure oversight of contracting dollars, and it was a major victory for this language to be included in the bill. It's also the first piece that Bush has pledged to side-step, according to CQ:

The first statute Bush considers optional is a provision written by Democratic senators Jim Webb of Virginia and Claire McCaskill of Missouri that would set up a latter-day version of the Truman Committee to look into “waste, fraud and abuse” in contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. One area of inquiry would be private security contractors such as Blackwater Worldwide.

Labels: peace and security, politics

As Facing South readers know, the Gulf Coast recovery is still a live and burning issue for thousands of people. But it has yet to come up in any of the 2008 presidential debates.

On January 30th and 31st, CNN, the L.A. Times and Politico.com are hosting Democratic and Republican presidential debates. At Politico.com you can vote for questions to be asked of the candidates. ColorOfChange.org and other advocates are mounting an online campaign to get a question asked about the Gulf Coast Civic Works Act (H.R. 4048), the plan we've written about before that would create 100,000 good-paying jobs in the Gulf Coast and help people rebuild their communities.

Go here to vote to get this question in the debates. For more about the Gulf Coast Civic Works Project, go here.

Labels: Election 2008, Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch

During his final State of the Union Address delivered last night, President Bush announced that this April's North American Leaders' Summit will be held in New Orleans:

Tonight the armies of compassion continue the march to a new day in the Gulf Coast. America honors the strength and resilience of the people of this region. We reaffirm our pledge to help them build stronger and better than before. And tonight I'm pleased to announce that in April we will host this year's North American Summit of Canada, Mexico, and the United States in the great city of New Orleans.

Started in 2005 as part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, the inaugural summit was held at Baylor University in Waco, Texas, with subsequent annual meetings taking place in the Mexican resort city of Cancun and the Canadian capital of Ottawa. The leaders of the three nations also met for a second time last year in August in Quebec. The president offered no details on exactly when or where the New Orleans summit would take place.

The news has been greeted with enthusiasm by political leaders, earning a standing ovation from Congress and the praise of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who told the New Orleans Times-Picayune that it was a sign "New Orleans is open for business." Louisiana Recovery Authority Chairman Norman Francis noted that the gathering will give Louisiana a chance "to highlight both our progress and our remaining needs to the nation and world."

The summit is also likely to test New Orleans' police force. Last August's gathering in Quebec drew hundreds of labor, trade and environmental activists, with police using tear gas and pepper spray against some protesters who were throwing rocks and branches. The Security and Prosperity Partnership has been criticized as undemocratic and for promoting a corporate-driven agenda --- much like the Bush administration's Katrina recovery efforts.

New Orleans' appearance in the president's speech comes after he faced criticism over last year's address, which made no mention of the Gulf region's continuing struggle to recover from the 2005 hurricanes. In another nod to the region, jazz trumpeter and New Orleans native Irvin Mayfield Jr. sat in Laura Bush's guest box during the speech. The Times-Picayune reports that the 30-year-old artist and educator also played a concert at the White House prior to the speech with a bejeweled instrument dubbed the "Elysian Trumpet" in honor of Irvin Mayfield Sr., whose body was found on New Orleans' Elysian Fields Avenue after Katrina's floodwaters receded.

(White House photo by David Bohrer)

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, new orleans, politics

The following states will have primiaries or caucuses on Feb. 5th (number of Democratic delegates in parenthesis):

Alabama (60), Alaska caucuses (18), Arizona (67), Arkansas (47), California (440), Colorado caucuses (70), Connecticut (60), Delaware (23), Georgia (103), Idaho caucus (23), Illinois (185), Kansas caucus (41), Massachusetts (121), Minnesota caucuses (88), Missouri (88), Montana caucus (GOP), New Jersey (127), New Mexico caucus (38), New York (281), North Dakota caucuses (21), Oklahoma (47), Tennessee (85), Utah (29), West Virginia (GOP)

Here are the states for which a recent poll could be found as of yesterday, and the projected delegates if that were the outcome:

	Clinton	Obama	Edwards
Alabama	31%	28%	8%
Arizona	37%	27%	15%
California	43%	28%	11%
Georgia	35%	41%	13%
Illinois	22%	51%	15%
Missouri	43%	24%	28%
New Jersey	49%	32%	10%
New York	47%	26%	9%
Tennessee	34%	20%	16%
Delegates	570	446	76

Labels: Election 2008

Yesterday's Raleigh News & Observer ran a terrific story on last week's surprise victory by the grassroots movement fighting the U.S. Navy's plans to build an outlying landing field for fighter jets in one rural Eastern North Carolina community. The OLF was to be sited near critical habitat for migrating water fowl, and on land farmed by families for generations. Reporter Jerry Allegood recounted how OLF opponents met in farm garages, raised money at pig pickings, and drove to rallies in tractor convoys. As No-OLF leader Doris Morris told the paper:

"We would just sit around the table and try to come up with ideas about what to do and how to do it," Morris said. "We were often told we were not following protocol, but we were fighting with all our hearts and souls."

It's an inspiring story, and that inspiration is needed -- because as a leader of the N.C. Coastal Federation points out, the battle to keep the OLF out of other rural Eastern North Carolina communities will continue.

(Photo from Citizens Against OLF.)

Labels: militarism, north carolina, organizing

Ex-lefty curmudgeon Christopher Hitchens has a piece in Slate -- echoing our blog post earlier today -- about Bill Clinton's history with racial politics.

He also points to the case of Ricky Ray Rector, the severely mentally retarded black man that Clinton rushed to Arkansas to see executed in January 1992:

I never quite understand how the Clintons' initial exploitation of racism was overlooked the first time around and has been airbrushed from the record since. After falling behind in the New Hampshire primary in 1992, and after being caught lying about the affair with Gennifer Flowers to which he later confessed under oath, Clinton left the campaign trail and flew home to Arkansas to give the maximum publicity to his decision to sign a death warrant for Ricky Ray Rector. Rector was a black inmate on death row who had shot himself in the head after committing a double murder and, instead of dying as a result, had achieved the same effect as a lobotomy would have done. He never understood the charge against him or the sentence. After being served his last meal, he left the pecan pie on the side of the tray, as he told the guards who came to take him to the execution chamber, "for later." Several police and prison-officer witnesses expressed extreme queasiness at this execution of a gravely impaired man, and the prison chaplain, Dennis Pigman, later resigned from the prison service.

It's not just me and Hitchens. A guest diarist at TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime cites this quote from a 2002 editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle:

A date which ought to live in infamy for the Democratic Party is Jan. 24, 1992. That's the day Ricky Ray Rector was executed in Arkansas while Gov. Bill Clinton stood by and did nothing. On that day in Arkansas, the Democratic Party also died. Its body is still with us, to be sure, but its heart and soul died 10 years ago.

Labels: bill clinton, Election 2008, race and racism

Finally (well, at least for today), there's new research out from The Brookings Institution that claims worries over the security of electronic-voting technology are overblown and that points out paper ballots present serious problems of their own, Governing.com reports:

"Recent history is clear," said Paul S. Herrnson, a University of Maryland political scientist and the study's principal investigator. "The election problem most likely to tilt a close race is not security but the inability of voters to cast their ballots the way they intended."

Labels: voting rights

We recently reported briefly on the disparity in the results between ballots counted by Diebold machines and those counted by hand in the New Hampshire presidential primary, and the fact that candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) officially requested a recount "in the interest of public confidence in the integrity of the election process and the election machinery."

The folks over at The Brad Blog have been following the story closely, and there are a few updates. First of all, the partial recount requested by Kucinich was suspended last week after the money ran out -- just two days before Kucininch withdrew from the presidential race. But in a letter sent to the N.H. Secretary of State on Jan. 22, Kucininch requested a complete recount due to concerns about the physical chain of custody of the ballots prior to the recount, and because of "significant percentage variances in four voting districts in Hillsborough County" -- including one where the variance between the original machine count and the hand re-count was 10.6 percent. That's not enough to change the ultimate outcome of the election, but it certainly does raise questions as to why the machines are not counting the votes accurately.

For complete coverage of the ongoing saga -- which, interestingly enough, includes another N.H. recount underway at the request of one Albert Howard, a Republican presidential candidate who claims an angel appeared to him in 1992 to report that he and Hillary Clinton would run against each other and she would lose -- click here.

Labels: Election 2008, voting rights

The Florida Fair Elections Center released a report last week into the cause of the uncounted votes in the 2006 Congressional District 13 race in Sarasota County, and its conclusions deserve the attention of everyone who cares about the integrity of the U.S. electoral system.

To refresh your memory, the contest pitted businessman Vern Buchanan, a Republican, against banker Christine Jennings, a Democrat. Buchanan won by 369 votes, but 14.9 percent of the ballots cast in Sarasota County -- a total of 17,846 ballots -- showed no vote for either candidate. By way of comparison, the undervote rate in neighboring counties was only about 2 percent. At the time of the 2006 election, Sarasota County employed iVotronic direct recording electronic (DRE) machines supplied by Nebraska-based Election Systems & Software Inc.

The uncounted votes led to two lawsuits challenging the election. While Jennings has dropped hers to try again for the same seat this year, a nonpartisan suit to overturn the race is still ongoing. The problems with the election also led to a joint investigation by a U.S. House committee and the Government Accountability Office, with an October 2007 GAO report [PDF] on its preliminary probe cautiously concluding that additional tests "would not provide absolute assurance that the iVotronic DREs did not cause the large undervote in Sarasota County."

The Florida Fair Elections Center conducted its own investigation, spending a year examining numerous records from Sarasota as well as other counties that used the same touch screen systems: ES&S Release 4.5, Version 2, with 12.1-inch screens and iVotronic firmware version 8.0.1.2 -- a type of firmware, by the way, that was never federally qualified and certified only in Florida. The Center draws a less tentative conclusion than the GAO about the ES&S equipment:

What we uncovered in our investigation is shocking: The iVotronic voting system failed to count over 100,000 votes in various races across the state of Florida in the November 2006 election. Furthermore, we have completely refuted the theories that substantial numbers of voters intentionally withheld their votes in the CD-13 race or that so-called "poor ballot design" was responsible for the uncounted votes. By process of elimination, the only remaining possible cause of the high undervotes is the catastrophic failure of the iVotronic voting system ... .

Most important, we found a badly designed, shoddily-built, poorly maintained, aging voting system in a state of critical breakdown.

Among the problems the Center found were large-scale and multiple machine malfunctions, evidence of unapproved and unauthorized firmware and software installation, and misconduct of elections officials that included nondisclosure of problems and access to voting equipment granted to unauthorized persons. The Center also found that Florida Department of State auditors ignored evidence of these problems and omitted essential areas of investigation that would have offered evidence of widespread machine failures.

Since the troubled election, Sarasota County has ditched the iVotronic system for optical scanned paper ballots, and Florida as a whole plans to switch to paper ballots after the upcoming election. But ES&S still provides almost half of all electronic voting machines used in the United States -- and Florida is not the only state that's experienced serious problems with the company's products:

* In August 2006, ES&S agreed to a $750,000 settlement in a lawsuit brought by the Indiana government after software problems resulted in delays for voters during the state's primary.

* Six counties in Illinois are currently experiencing problems with ES&S equipment that are forcing elections officials to work overtime to get ready for Election Day.

* Wharton County, Texas recently decided to do away with the ES&S iVotronic machines and turn to paper ballots after a voter in last November's election on state propositions complained -- and election officials confirmed -- that the equipment switched his choices from yes to no or no to yes.

* Last month, the Colorado Secretary of State decertified all of ES&S's current hardware and software -- as well as equipment from two other manufacturers -- after it failed state reliability tests.

* Just last week, ES&S and San Francisco announced a settlement in a lawsuit over the company's AutoMARK ballot machines after malfunctions necessitated a handcount that cost the city $400,000. In addition, California has filed a $15 million lawsuit against the company for illegally supplying 972 non-certified machines to five counties.

* A recent report by the Ohio Secretary of State on three electronic voting systems used in that state found serious problems with all of them -- including one system manufactured by ES&S.

* And during the Jan. 19 Republican presidential primary in Horry County, S.C., ES&S iVotronic equipment malfunctioned in some 80 percent of precincts due to programming problems -- and officials then ran out of paper ballots, leading some citizens to cast their votes on scraps of paper. Fortunately, there were no widespread problems during the state's Democratic primary on Saturday.

ES&S has rejected criticism of its equipment, dismissing the report by the Florida Fair Elections Center as biased and insisting that its systems are reliable, accurate and secure. One wishes the company were right, since -- as the Center warns -- nearly one-third of Florida's voters will cast their ballots on ES&S equipment in the Jan. 29 presidential primary.

(Image of iVotronic unit from the ES&S Web site.)

Labels: Election 2008, voting rights

Pundits are shocked -- shocked! -- about former president Bill Clinton's remarks this weekend, dismissing Sen. Barack Obama's victory over Sen. Hillary Clinton in the South Carolina primaries as a mere re-play of Jesse Jackson's victories there in 1984 and 1988.

The media has gone full tilt, accusing Mr. Clinton of dangerously fanning the flames of race -- from "America's first black president," no less. But is it really a surprise?

Not to those who study the history of presidential campaigns.

It was almost exactly this time of year 16 years ago that then-Gov. Bill Clinton, eager to break away from a tight pack of 1992 Democratic primary hopefuls, decided crime would be one his big-ticket issues. Democrats should "no longer feel guilty about protecting the innocent," he would proclaim from the campaign trail.

How did candidate Clinton choose to show he was "tough on crime?" By flying down to Arkansas, mid-campaign, to personally preside over the execution of Ricky Ray Rector, a mentally retarded African-American man.

It was only the third death sentence carried out in Arkansas since 1973, and Clinton made a point of being on hand for the TV crews when Rector was killed by lethal injection on January 24, 1992.

In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that executing persons who are mentally retarded is "cruel and unusual punishment." And in the court of public opinion, many African-Americans judged that Clinton -- far from being a "black president" -- was in reality another white president who was all too willing to use race when it suited him. Here's what Margaret Kimberley of The Black Commentator had to say:

[R]icky Ray Rector became world famous upon his execution in 1992. Then Governor Bill Clinton left the campaign trail in January of that year to sign the warrant for Rector’s execution. Rector’s mental capacity was such that when taken from his cell as a “dead man walking” he told a guard to save his pie. He thought he would return to finish his dessert.

I try to remember this story when I am told that all Black people love Bill Clinton or that he should be considered the first Black president. Clinton wasn’t Black when Rector needed him. He was just another politician who didn’t want to be labeled soft on crime.

Labels: bill clinton, Election 2008, race and racism

Mardi Gras is starting early in New Orleans this year -- the earliest anyone I talked to in New Orleans over the last two weeks could remember. The official start date was January 8, but the revelry will really get going tonight and keep going until Fat Tuesday on Feb. 5.

Krewe de Vieux, one of the most irreverent Mardi Gras crewes, kicked things off last Saturday. But starting at 6 pm tonight, six crewes will start their 2008 parades.

The early parades -- the neighborhood events that take place before the drunken tourists start stumbling in (not that New Orleans can't use their money!) -- remain a source of pride and inspiration for a city that, in many quarters, is still mired in crisis.

Talking to community leaders in the Big Easy as we released our new report on how human rights are still being breached in the Katrina aftermath, one constant theme was how hard it is to keep the Gulf Coast crisis on the national radar.

"People want to think everything is fine," said one leader in the Central City district. "But in some ways, things are getting worse."

Mardi Gras is one time when the nation DOES look south to New Orleans. To paraphrase Mother Jones, let's use Mardi Gras 2008 as a time to not only remember the victims of Katrina -- but to fight like hell for the living with a new agenda for a just recovery.

Labels: Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, mardi gras

Fans of Southern roots music are in for a special treat this weekend, courtesy of National Public Radio.

First up is the legendary Doc Watson, the inimitable singer, songwriter and guitar player from Deep Gap, NC and spans musical genres from folk and bluegrass to country and blues. NPR will be featuring a live concert on Jan. 27, starting at 7:30 pm EST.

For those who can't make it to Merlefest -- my favorite Southern music gathering -- this spring, it might be a good way to hear the master.

If that wasn't good enough, the next day NPR and WFUV are bringing us the Blind Boys of Alabama, arguably the country's premier gospel group. You can listen to the full Blind Boys concert live here.

Enjoy!

Labels: Music, southern culture

The presidential primary candidates are facing their first tests in the South ahead of Mega Tuesday on Feb. 5th.

The outcome of South Carolina's Republican primary last week was a disappointment for Huckabee, who found little Southern Comfort with his Bible thumping, Confederate flag waving campaign. John McCain edged out a win, and goes full throttle with NH and SC afterburners on to engage Romney in Florida. Fred Thompson drew a "line in the sand" that not many voters crossed, and ambled off the stage to the boos and catcalls of Tennessee supporters and voters who had already voted early for him.

Many polls had McCain and Huckabee close or virtually tied going in, and both had big surges in the days leading up to the primary. But Huckabee leveled off before McCain, who pushed through for the win. According to some analysts, undecided voters decided it in the voting booths at the end.

The Democrats face their first Southern test tomorrow in South Carolina's Democratic primary. All the polls show Obama in the lead, some more substantially than others. The most recent, a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll of 811 likely voters concluded yesterday, shows Obama (38%) with a 13 point lead over Clinton (25%) and Edwards at 21% with only 7% undecided. But the poll also shows Obama's lead shrinking (down from 43% on 1/22) with support moving to Edwards (up from 15% on 1/22) and Clinton holding steady.

This suggests that the infighting between Clinton and Obama is helping Edwards, who had a good showing in the SC debate that positioned him as the self-styled "adult" in the campaign and got him some much needed media attention. Settling for whatever she can get there, Clinton has conceded SC to Obama and moved on to campaign in California for Feb 5th. Edwards sees SC as a "must win" or at least a "must have a strong showing" and is still there making his case in BBQ joints and diners all around the state. Obama maintains a commanding lead among African-American voters, who represent about half of the SC Democratic primary voters, and also among women and younger voters. Obama also has a slight lead among seniors, suggesting an across the board appeal that will be tough for Edwards to overcome. The closing arguments are in, and voters will render their verdict tomorrow.

Unlike Thompson, Edwards has not drawn a line in the South Carolina sand, and indications are that he will likely do better than some expected and that he's in it through at least Feb. 5th. Beyond that will depend on how well he does then (and possibly on how badly Clinton and Obama beat each other up). Either way, speculation is that he will get as many delegates as he can and if he isn't the nominee he will do some horse trading, possibly at a brokered convention in Denver.

Florida's primary next Tuesday is turning in to quite the spectacle, with Rudy Giuliani racing his campaign bus around the track at Daytona International Speedway and Mitt Romney caught on camera posing with black kids while rapping "who let the dogs out?," an awkward moment to say the least.

The polls are showing a close race between McCain and Romney, with McCain showing a surge after NH and SC and Romney, who skipped SC, showing a boost after Michigan and Nevada. Huckabee is out of gas and out of money and hoping to pick up a few Thompson stragglers in Florida, but it appears he will be finished after Feb. 5th. Giuliani's "one state strategy" isn't working out for him, and he will be competing with Huckabee for third place in Florida after peaking out late in November. It's not clear what's after Florida for Giuliani -- probably not a NASCAR ride, but maybe Fred Thompson can get him a recurring bit part on Law and Order.

Labels: Election 2008, Florida, South Carolina, Southern Politics

I just came back from a trip to New Orleans, this time to meet with leaders of the Interfaith Disaster Redevelopment Finance Fund -- a terrific initiative based at Mennonite Mutual Aid that is injecting badly-needed funds from faith groups in the the Katrina recovery to fill the gaps where Washington has fallen short.

A hot topic in New Orleans was the South's role in the 2008 elections. Many DC political strategists continue to write off the South: GOP operatives because they think of it as safe territory; Democrats because "experts" keep telling them they can't win.

But the South is like that stubborn old aunt that just won't stand to be ignored. Last week's GOP South Carolina primary -- which for two decades has been an essential stepping-stone for Republican hopefuls -- single-handedly resuscitated the campaign of John McCain (and knocked out Fred Thompson).

Why was this big? Because McCain won a state that reflects the GOP's conservative base, while maintaining his bona fides as a cross-over to independents -- no small feat.

South Carolina is shaping up to be critical for Democrats, too. Not just because of the 54 delegates in play this weekend, but because how campaigns fare among the half-black SC primary electorate will reveal how well they'll do in turning out (not just polling well among) African-American voters in November -- the most reliable base of the Democratic Party.

All of which will set the state for the show-down in Florida -- a state that looks a lot more like the South's future -- next Tuesday. For Republicans, Florida could knock out Giuliani while being a decisive boost for either McCain or Romney.

For Democrats, the fact that the state's delegates are still in contention -- punishment for moving up their primary to Jan. 29 -- makes the picture more complicated. The Democratic contenders have been banned from campaigning in the state, but their surrogates -- especially labor -- are hard at work working for their candidates.

What happens if the Democratic National Committee changes its mind and allows Florida's delegates to count -- as Florida leaders are pleading? Then Florida -- the 4th-most populous state in the country, and holder of 57 delegates -- could be in the position of swinging the primaries later in the season.

Next installment: Why the South's political clout is only getting bigger ... stay tuned

Labels: Election 2008, Southern Politics

The nuclear industry's hoped-for renaissance is facing big problems in the South.

For one thing, the historic drought that's been afflicting the region since early last year could force even existing reactors to cut back production or temporarily shut down due to the drying up of rivers and lakes that provide the plants with the enormous amounts of cooling water they need to operate, according to an Associated Press investigation:

An [AP] analysis of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors found that 24 are in areas experiencing the most severe levels of drought. All but two are built on the shores of lakes and rivers and rely on submerged intake pipes to draw billions of gallons of water for use in cooling and condensing steam after it has turned the plants' turbines.

Because of the yearlong dry spell gripping the region, the water levels on those lakes and rivers are getting close to the minimums set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Over the next several months, the water could drop below the intake pipes altogether. Or the shallow water could become too hot under the sun to use as coolant.

The drought has already been causing problems for Southern nukes. In August, the Tennessee Valley Authority was forced to shut down one reactor at the Browns Ferry nuclear plant in Alabama and scale back production at the plant's two other reactors because of overheated water in the Tennessee River, which is used to cool the facility.

This past fall, officials with North Carolina-based Progress Energy warned that the drought could force it to shut down the Shearon Harris nuclear plant near Raleigh due to low levels in adjacent Harris Lake, the AP reports. And water levels at Lake Norman next to Duke Energy's McGuire nuclear plant near Charlotte, N.C. are less than a foot above the minimum set in its license.

For every three units of energy produced by a nuclear power plant, two units are discharged to the environment as waste heat, according to a recent issue brief by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). As the AP reports, this translates into an enormous demand for cooling water. For example, Progress Energy's Harris reactor takes in 33 million gallons of water a day, with 17 million gallons of that lost to evaporation.

And the water shortage is not the only problem for the region's nukes. Security is another serious concern.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission this week proposed a $208,000 fine against Florida Power & Light for security violations at its Turkey Point nuclear plant 35 miles south of Miami. The fine is for four violations -- two incidents in which armed security officers willfully disabled weapons by removing or breaking firing pins, a failure to make a 1-hour report to the NRC as required, and providing the NRC with incomplete and inaccurate information.

Security for Turkey Point is provided under contract with Miami-based Wackenhut, which has been under fire for an incident in which its guards were caught on videotape sleeping at Exelon's Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania. As a result, Exelon terminated Wackenhut's security contracts at its 10 nuclear plants last month, replacing them with an in-house security force.

Wackenhut is not the only security company under fire for problematic performance at nuclear power plants. My own investigation into conditions for officers employed by Securitas to guard Progress Energy's Harris plant uncovered numerous problems with plant security, including malfunctioning protective equipment and widespread cheating on qualification exams, which guards say was encouraged to keep Securitas from losing trained employees to high turnover. Last year the NRC fined Progress $65,000 for the violations, a relatively small amount for a company with more than $9 billion in annual revenue.

Jim Warren, executive director of the Durham-based N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network -- one of the groups that originally brought the Harris security problems to the attention of regulators and the press -- says that the bigger fine against FP&L seems to suggest that NRC is getting tougher on security infractions. But, Warren adds, "U.S. nuclear plants remain lightly defended relative to the level of a variety of plausible attacks that could cause catastrophic radiation releases."

A UCS report released last month on risks to nukes in a warming world found that federal security standards are inadequate to defend plants against all-too-real terrorist threats. For example, nuclear power plants are not currently required to defend against air attacks, attacks using readily available rocket-propelled grenades, or an attack by more than about five terrorists at once (the exact number is classified). The report recommended that the Department of Homeland Security -- not the industry-friendly NRC -- identify threats to nuclear power plants.

Labels: nuclear power

American universities are putting their academic integrity at risk by giving oil and gas firms and other polluting industries unprecedented influence over the research those companies fund on campus.

That's the conclusion of a new report from the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which surveyed nine major universities -- including two based in the South -- that recently launched industry-funded research programs on biofuels and other issues related to global warming. It found that in return for accepting industry money, universities are letting corporate representatives sit on governing boards, giving companies first rights to intellectual property, or allowing companies to review and possibly delay publication of studies.

"It’s a cheap subterfuge for carbon-emitting companies," says Merrill Goozner, director of the CSPI’s Integrity in Science Project. "They get the prestige of associating themselves with major respected universities, yet can control the direction of research and get first rights to intellectual property while delaying any finding that doesn’t help the bottom line."

Among the examples cited in the report, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s five-year, $12 million biofuels research grant from Chevron gives company officials final review for every project funded by the program. And at Rice University in Houston, the Shell Center for Sustainability -- which received $3.5 million from the oil giant in 2002 -- has two company representatives on the seven-person committee that makes funding decisions.

CSPI offers recommendations to help universities protect their and their researchers' independence. They include prohibiting representatives of corporate donors from sitting on research programs' governing boards, prohibiting industry donors from controlling the content and direction of research programs, eliminating "first rights" intellectual property clauses from donor agreements, and ensuring that company representatives can't make significant editorial changes in manuscripts or delay their publication.

Labels: higher education

In response to a recent study by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that found widespread perchlorate contamination of food and beverages, environmental health advocates are calling on the federal government to set a strict tap-water safety standard for the toxic chemical, which is used in the manufacturing and firing of rockets and missiles.

The problem of environmental perchlorate contamination is particularly pressing for young children, who eat and drink relatively more food and water for their size compared to adults. According to an analysis by the Environmental Working Group, levels of perchlorate in tap water even as low as 4 parts per billion (ppb) will cause the average two-year-old to exceed the Environmental Protection Agency's safe exposure level. That's why EWG is calling for tight limits on the contaminant, which can be controlled through filtration and cleanup of spills.

"Every final or proposed water standard for perchlorate fails to provide adequate protection for children," Dr. Anila Jacob, an EWG senior scientist, said in a statement. "The EPA has issued a clean up standard of 24 ppb, nowhere near a level protective of children."

Besides being at risk for higher exposures, children are especially sensitive to perchlorate's effects. The chemical can block the thyroid gland's access to iodine and decrease production of hormones necessary for maintaining normal growth and brain development in children.

A May 2005 study [PDF] by the U.S. Government Accountability Office found widespread perchlorate contamination across the United States, including the South. According to the GAO, there are seven facilities and sites affected by perchlorate contamination in Alabama, four in Arkansas, six in Florida, three in Georgia, two in Louisiana, one in Mississippi, seven in North Carolina, four in South Carolina, two in Tennessee, four in Virginia, one in West Virginia -- and a whopping 118 in Texas, where GAO found more contaminated sites than any other state.

While many of the perchlorate-contaminated sites are on or near military installations, they also include municipal water systems in densely populated areas. For example, drinking water from the the city of Levelland in Hockley County, Texas is contaminated with perchlorate at levels of 123 ppb, while drinking water from the Atlantic Beach municipal system in Duval County, Fla. contains 200 ppb.

Labels: environment, public health

Supporters of presidential candidate Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Congressman from Texas who recently finished second in the Nevada Republican caucuses, used the occasion of yesterday's Martin Luther King Jr. holiday for another fundraising extravaganza, collecting $1.85 million for the campaign. Last month Paul's supporters raised more than $6 million in a 24-hour period to set a new one-day fundraising record.

There's more than a little irony in the campaign's latest accomplishment, given that Paul voted against the creation of the King holiday. And then there are those unflattering remarks made about the slain civil rights leader in past issues of various Paul newsletters, as revealed by reporter James Kirchick in his recent story about Paul for The New Republic magazine:

* King was "a world-class adulterer" who "seduced underage girls and boys" and "replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration," according to the November 1990 issue of Paul's Political Report.

* King was a "world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and a "flagrant plagiarist with a phony doctorate," according to the January 1991 edition of Political Report.

* A February 1991 Paul newsletter criticizes "The X-Rated Martin Luther King."

Paul has blamed those statements on his associates, saying he has "always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character, not the color of their skin." He has also said that he takes "moral responsibility" for not paying closer attention to what went out under his name.

But those remarks serve to spotlight Paul's alliances with characters such as Lew Rockwell, who served as his congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982 and often ghostwrote the politician's newsletters. As Kirchick reports, Rockwell founded the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Auburn, Ala. that has published books by Paul and for which the congressman has taught seminars. The Institute has a history of romanticizing the Confederacy; for example, faculty member Thomas E. Woods Jr. is among the founders of the pro-secessionist League of the South and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, a pro-Confederate work published in 2004.

Among those who provided blurbs for Woods' book? None other than Paul, who says the work "heroically rescues real history from the politically correct memory hole."

Labels: Election 2008

Thompson quits presidential race

"Today, I have withdrawn my candidacy for president of the United States. I hope that my country and my party have benefited from our having made this effort," the former Tennessee senator said in a brief statement.
Thompson's fate was sealed last Saturday in the South Carolina primary, when he finished third in a state that he had said he needed to win.

So that leaves Huckabee and Paul for the Republicans and Edwards for the Democrats as the only Southern candidates left in the race. (Although some might consider Hillary Clinton an honorary Southerner.)

If the eventual nominees aren't from the South, how will they balance their tickets and fine tune their message to appeal to Southern voters? And don't think they aren't thinking about it.

From this Sunday's New York Times Magazine:

It has been in vogue throughout the Bush years for Democrats to assert that the South is unredeemable and politically unnecessary. I remember seeing Kerry speak at Dartmouth College in the days before the 2004 New Hampshire primary, when he flatly told the audience that a Democratic nominee could win the presidency without worrying about the South. [..] In “Whistling Past Dixie,” Schaller marshaled a pile of statistics to argue, essentially, that the region’s long legacy of prejudice left it hopelessly blind to the nobility of the Democratic cause.

[..] Other Democrats, like Mark Warner, the former Virginia governor, short-lived presidential hopeful and now Senate candidate, have argued that if the party aspires to build a real governing majority like the one it enjoyed for much of the 20th century, it will have to at least compete seriously in the South. [..] What’s more, as some of the sharper Democratic strategists have realized, reaching voters down South isn’t only about the South. Culturally and ideologically, there isn’t much that separates most Southern, independent white voters from those who live in exurban Ohio or in rural Missouri.

Read the whole thing for some interesting thoughts on the New South as a testing ground for candidates and strategies that will work in swing states all across America.

Labels: Election 2008, politics

The Texas Supreme Court last week declined to intercede in a dispute between presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich and the state Democratic Party over Kucinich's refusal to sign a party loyalty oath. As a result, Texas will be allowed to print primary ballots without the candidate's name.

Kucinich objected to the oath stating that a presidential candidate would "fully support" the party's eventual nominee, crossing it out when he filed for a spot on the primary ballot. Kucinich has said he would not support any nominee who would use war as an instrument of foreign policy. After the party excluded him for his refusal to sign, Kucinich sued for ballot access with the help of a rather surprising co-plaintiff: longtime Texas voter and country music legend Willie Nelson, who had this to say about the brouhaha:

"Dennis Kucinich is a strong defender of the Constitution, the national security, and the civil liberties of the American people. He's right to challenge a blind loyalty oath to the Democratic Party because it's un-American. The irony is that the state Party is trying to exclude him from the ballot even though he's the one Democrat who's been the most loyal to this country and to what the Democratic Party should stand for. Dennis's loyalty is to the Constitution of the United States and to the American people -- not to the Texas Democratic Party."

The case now goes before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. Kucinich's battle for the Texas ballot is the latest setback to his progressive candidacy. Last week NBC shut him out of its televised Democratic debate, even though it initially invited him to participate. Kucinich blasted the network -- and its corporate ownership -- in his latest Campaign Weekly Update video posted to YouTube:

"General Electric owns NBC, and General Electric is one of the largest nuclear power contractors in the world. They build nuclear power plants, and they also of course want to make sure that Yucca Mountain in Nevada remains a site for the dumping of nuclear waste so they have a place to put the waste that is created by the plants they want to build. GE also owns Raytheon, which is a major defense contractor, and of course they benefit and profit from war. That they have a major network in their portfolio only gives them an opportunity to enhance their power of being able to promote war -- even a war that was based on lies a few years ago -- and being able to promote an energy policy that has been proven to be very expensive and has cost us a lot of jobs, particularly in the industrial Northeast. GE, Raytheon and NBC have also contributed to candidates who are in the debate today. So they have an interest in excluding someone who disagrees with the promotion of war and the promotion of nuclear power, and they have an interest in narrowing the field to those who believe in their policies. This is a real danger to our democracy."

(Photos courtesy of dennis4president.com and www.willienelson.com.)

Labels: Election 2008, texas

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."

-- Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love, 1963