Washington shellfish initiative: Is it sustainable?

by Cameron Woodworth and Eli Penberthy

When Governor Chris Gregoire announced a $4.5 million state-federal initiative to boost shellfish production in Puget Sound and clean up the environment last December, it was met with both praise and criticism.

A handful of private interests that stand to profit are thrilled. But some environmental and coastal community advocates are fighting mad, saying benefits are exaggerated and the costs externalized to the public. Gregoire's plan sharpens this debate.

(April 2012) — The initiative is backed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and calls for increasing shellfish aquaculture in Washington. It "streamlines" the permitting process, making it easier for shellfish operations to expand into public waters and tidelands.

"Shellfish always have been an essential part of who we are as Washingtonians," Gregoire said in announcing the initiative. "Our shellfish industry helps sustain our families and communities."

The initiative will allow more recreational shellfish harvesting and claims it will restore shellfish habitat and improve water quality. It includes a $200,000 federal grant for restoring native Olympia oysters in nearly 20 locations around Puget Sound, and a $560,000 grant to restore native Pinto abalone populations. $2 million in federal funds will fund local government programs to identify and treat water pollution from failing septic systems, farm animals, pets and boats.

Coal Trains EIS hearings

For Immediate Release
March 20, 2012


Contacts:

Walter Kloefkorn, Spokane area farmer, (509) 828-2817

Ed Gulick, Montana resident, architect, (406) 259-7618

Matt Krogh, RE Sources, Bellingham, (360) 820-2938

KC Golden, Climate Solutions, (206) 443-9570

Kimberly Larson, Climate Solutions, (206) 443-9570x36, cell: (206) 388-8674

GROUPS CALL FOR COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF COAL EXPORT LOCAL, REGIONAL AND GLOBAL IMPACTS

Letter to agencies says EIS scoping hearings should be accessible to all affected communities

Bellingham, WA – Late yesterday, SSA Marine submitted a permit application to build a coal export facility capable of exporting 48 million tons per year. Community and environmental leaders are calling on decision makers and agencies leading the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process to study the full range of community, environmental and economic impacts of the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT) at Cherry Point. The increase in rail traffic would impact public health and safety and pose economic risks to communities across the region from Whatcom County to eastern Washington and Montana. Coal export would also fuel climate change and add to global mercury pollution, a dangerous toxin produced by burning coal.

"This permit application is a direct threat to our farms, property values, and quality of life in eastern Washington," said Walter Kloefkorn, a small farmer and Sierra Club volunteer in Springdale, Wash. "Adding 18 or more dirty coal trains to Spokane’s rail lines every day would foul our air and water with diesel pollution and toxic coal dust, hurting farms and small businesses on Main Street."

Coal trains are of particular concern for communities like Spokane which would experience the additional train traffic needed to feed all of the currently proposed coal export facilities in Oregon Washington, which together add up to 160 million tons of proposed coal export annually. Find a map of the rail corridor from mines in Montana to Cherry Point here.

Deep Thanks to an Incredible Cast in Get the Money Out...

I am so deeply grateful to the people who brought their skills and passion to our event yesterday in Tacoma, at the Museum of History Auditorium.  The amount of work that went into this and the last minute changes were a bit...stressful.  But the overall event was really enjoyed.

Catherine Keys, stage director, put together a powerful street theater skit, complete with colorful characters:  Supreme Court Justices, with Kennedy and Stevens going at it, using real lines from the lengthy "obfuscated" ruling.  (Have you tried reading it?  Not an easy read!) The lines were beautifully spoken, followed by Justice Clarence Thomas, a 20 foot high puppet, the Ladies Justice and Liberty, corporate goons, corporate robots with electronic voices...and an awesome Artesian Rumble Arkestra.  The Olympia band led off with a funeral dirge, as the goons "buried" the Ladies, in coffins filled with dollars...and then Bill Yake read his eulogy (below) "In Remembrance of Democracy."  Following this well delivered, speech, the Arkestra broke into swinging Dixieland, and the Ladies were brought back:  the re-birth.

Bob Wickline, both mc and talented musician, taught us lyrics, and engaged us all in songs illustrating further the corporate personhood issues.  All of the musicians were wonderful, and we promise to soon have videos available to share.  For now, I really want to extend a huge thanks to this entire cast.

John Hargis, you are not only talented, but patient.  The Careless Hunters are a very very good blues band--don't miss them live!  I'm going to post next show they're playing.

Sharon Abreu joined us from Orcas Island (where residents are working on a Resolution to Amend!) with her lovely soprano voice, great lyrics.

Very special singing from Lorraine Hart and guitarist/songwriter Teri Wolf, performing their original work, "Occupy Song - So Many, So Wrong."  Very special voicing, again outstanding performance.

If you have a penchant for Dixieland swing, look for the Artesian Rumble Arkestra, my favorite Olympia band.

In all, a wondrous event.  Will soon post videos, stay tuned!

Get the Money Out of Politics! March 17

EVENT HAS MOVED INDOORS TO WA STATE HISTORY MUSEUM, 1911 Pacific Ave!

Move to Amend - Olympia, Occupy Tacoma, Involved Democracy, League of Women Voters Tacoma-Pierce, Washington Public Campaigns, and Sustainable Tacoma-Pierce

present:

"Get Money Out of Politics"

Citizens to Occupy the Streets of Tacoma

“I love the fact that people are finally mad enough to be uncomfortable. I’ve been wondering for the last ten years just how bad it had to get before people would act.” 
Terri Baker, President of the League of Women Voters of Tacoma-Pierce County.  

What, Where and When- March 17^th, 2012 at WA State History Museum, 1911 Pacific Ave. in the Auditorium

12:00 pm – Gather at the History Museum Auditorium, where a 30-foot banner of the Bill of Rights provides the backdrop to powerful street theater, Supreme Court justices, Ladies Liberty and Justice; corporate robots.  Incredible New Orleans Dixieland goes from funeral dirge to swing.  Special guest, Bill Yake, nationally reknowned, will read a poem not to be missed.

1:00- Local speakers will highlight the numerous ways our communities are impacted by these so called “corporate rights”- environmental threats, disappearing access to housing, healthcare, education and American jobs.

2:45- Find out what you can do to stop “corporate personhood” and protect your right to participate in the voting process. Groups are forming weekly statewide, we'll share what we are hearing from them!  Get the recent hopeful news: An effort by the dissenting justices is underway to re-visit Citizens United.  We must keep the pressure growing.  Join with the 80 communities nationally who have passed a municipal or state “We The People” Resolution to amend the Constitution.

Guest Speakers and musicians between 1 and 2:30 pm:

Dorli Rainey, Lifelong Social Justice Advocate and “Good Citizen”: Speaks to the parallels between Government Media Power and Corporate Media Power today, with the impact of Citizens United. “We have to do more than voting…Officials have failed us and we must act democratically...”

Ryan Mello, Tacoma City Council member; Executive Director, Pierce County Conservation, Cascade Land Conservancy, District Director. Speaks to the impact of corporate personhood on environmental regulation and protection.

James McNeil, Occupy the 'Hood. James speaks to the impact of corporate personhood in the Hilltop neighborhood, and awakening of citizen activism.

Patricia Lecy-Davis, Proprietor, Embellish Salon, Coordinator, GO-Local! Patricia describes the barriers to success for small business owners today, and how Go-Local is empowering these businesses to thrive in an alternative economy.

Eric Flynn, Owner, Ezell's Chicken, Tacoma. Eric describes the impact of corporate power on local businesses, and his community.

Martin Nyberg, Farmer, Internet and mobile marketing consultant, and WPC Pierce County Chapter Chairperson. Martin will inspire us with how WPC has engaged the Seattle City Council with a ballot initiative to both abolish corporate personhood and reverse Citizens United. (He looks forward to supporting a similar effort organized by all of you!)

Jake Carton, Organizer, Washington State Jobs with Justice. Jake will speak about the impact of development decisions on local Tacoma residents, and the Hilltop neighborhood.

Pastor Spencer Barrett, Allen AME Church. Pastor Barrett describes specifically how members of his congregation are faring under corporate personhood.

Rep. Mark Miloscia, Federal Way, and candidate to become Washington’s Next State Auditor. Mark describes his 25 years of experience & passion and how he will use that to make expenditures reflect the values of the 99%.

Sue Gunn, Progressive Independent candidate, 10th Congressional District. Sue will speak to the need to build a progressive social movement to transform corporate governance and liberate our government from corporate control so it will serve the common good.

Rep. Tami Green, 28th Legislative District. Tami will speak to Campaign Reform and Health Care for all. She will address how we can support these issues.

Mike Collier, Former US Congressional candidate, former chair Micah project of First United Methodist Church. Mike will describe what was required to run for Congress a few years back, and what is required today, as well as the impact on our local politics.

Molly Gibbs, Organizer, Move to Amend, Olympia. Molly will summarize what the impact of corporate "personhood" is locally, and encourage all to take specific simple actions prior to leaving. The challenge is: to get a LOCAL Resolution passed! Lots of support is available.

Bob Wickline, MC, singer, songwriter!

Bill Yake, poet cum laude, a Northwest gem

John Hargis, Sound Engineer, Michael Compton, Assistant Engineer

Musicians:

Artesian Rumble Arkestra, David Moseley, band leader with New Orleans-style funeral dirge, and swing Dixieland!

Singer/Songwriter/Author Lorraine Hart and guitarist/songwriter Teri Wolf, performing their original work, "Occupy Song - So Many, So Wrong," which is dedicated to the protesters and hard working people of the Occupy and 99% movements.

The Careless Hunters, John Hargis, Gene Barkin, Scott Troutman, Gary Way; one of the South Sounds' finest Blues bands. Their musical lineup includes songs chosen specifically for today's event.

KEXP Interview with Molly Gibbs, Katie Keys: Get the Money Out of Politics

http://www.radio4all.net/files/talkingsticktv@yahoo.com/218-1-031012cf.mp3

The Great Vermont Uprising Against Corporate Personhood

John Nichols on March 8, 2012 - 12:49 PM ET (John's a friend, good to hear his voice)

Vermonters went to their town meetings this week to settle questions about dump fees, snowplowing contracts and utility meters.

They also decided to take on the corrupt campaign system that is steering the republic toward catastrophe.

And they have done so in a voice loud enough to be heard all the way to Washington.

By Thursday morning, sixty-four towns reported they had moved to amend the US Constitution to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United ruling—as well as the false construct that says, in the words of Mitt Romney, “corporations are people, my friend.”

“Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, Town Meeting Day voters understood that corporations are not people,”declared US Senator Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, a champion of his state’s uprising against corporate personhood. “The resounding results will send a strong message that corporations and billionaires should not be allowed to buy candidates and elections with unlimited, undisclosed spending on political campaigns.”

A Public Exit from Goldman Sachs Hits a Wounded Wall Street

Kerri G. submitted this:

Today is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm — first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London — I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.

To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.

[More from NYTimes.com: A Public Exit From Goldman Sachs Hits at a Wounded Wall Street]

It might sound surprising to a skeptical public, but culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs’s success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients. The culture was the secret sauce that made this place great and allowed us to earn our clients’ trust for 143 years. It wasn’t just about making money; this alone will not sustain a firm for so long. It had something to do with pride and belief in the organization. I am sad to say that I look around today and see virtually no trace of the culture that made me love working for this firm for many years. I no longer have the pride, or the belief.

The Numbers Don't Lie: If you aren't sure Citizens United...

The Numbers Don’t Lie
If you aren’t sure Citizens United gave rise to the super PACs, just follow the money.
By Richard L. Hasen|Posted Friday, March 9, 2012, at 2:56 PM ET

The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court

Photograph by Tim Sloan/AFP/Getty Images.

Most of what you hear about Citizens United v. FEC is negative. By opening the door for

corporations to spend unlimited sums in elections and to allow for the creation of super PACs, the Supreme Court has made a campaign finance system that was already flooded with money much worse. But Citizens United obviously has its defenders, and they have advanced a number of arguments to try to blunt criticism of the Supreme Court’s controversial decision: The public actually learns from the flood of negative advertising coming from these super PACs; super PACS increase competition; The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision didn’t create super PACs, so stop blaming the court for the flood of dollars and the negative campaign ads they buy.

This last argument has recently gained a lot of traction, and has been made by First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams, his son the legal commentator Dan Abrams (who accused the media of “shameful, inexcusable conduct” in describing the Citizens United-super PAC connection), columnist George Will, and the Atlantic’s Wendy Kaminer. The argument goes like this: The Supreme Court back in 1976 held that individuals had a constitutional right to spend unlimited sums on elections. And before Citizens United, rich individuals like George Soros gave large sums of money to so-called “527 organizations” (named after an obscure section of the tax code) with innocuous names like “Americans Coming Together.” These 527 organizations were just like super PACs, so there’s nothing new here.

State Powers can Hold Monopolies Accountable

Thanks to Occupy Oly Political Action Work Group for sharing this.

Corporate monopolies can only exist through government intervention. Government ‘assistance’ can include corporate welfare subsidies, tax breaks, insider contract deals that eliminate competition, crooked kangaroo court rulings and government regulations.

An example of government regulations that exclude competition are contracts that have very narrow requirements so only the favored corporations fit the criteria. Another trick that is used to prop up corporate monopolies is the federal permitting process that may absolve corporations from accountability.

Commerce Clause

The commerce clause is the most common excuse that the federal government uses to foist unsafe or unnecessary regulations on the States and the People.

Simply put, the commerce clause was created to keep trade flowing and to prevent tariffs on trade between the states. Over time, the federal government usurped power from the states and and now controls commerce, which means that they have control over everything that may cross state lines.

You can view a full constitutional explanation from Judge Napolitano about how the commerce clause has been distorted.

An example of this is chemical herbicide and pesticide manufacturers claiming that states may not ban their dangerous products because it could place undue burdens on commerce — and their profits. However, the court case National Agriculture Chemicals Association v. Rominger established that states may impose stricter constraints on pesticides than the EPA, despite EPA approval and labeling.

Additionally, states may require the manufacturer to compensate for all injuries resulting from use of a pesticide, without any barriers from federal law. And states are entitled to hold manufacturers liable for injuries that could have been prevented by a more adequate label (See paragraph 54).

George W. Bush tried to subvert States’ power for protective and strict consumer laws when he gave corporations immunity from responsibility by way of pre-emption. The goal of pre-emptive federal laws was to grant immunity that superseded state laws. The federal immunity strategy was an end run around Congress because they refused to approve pre-emption.

Bush’s strategy used pre-emptive language in federal oversight agencies’ rules. EPA and FDA approval, for example, removed liability (responsibility) from the chemical and drug makers.

By 2005, seven federal agencies wrote 60 rules with preemptive preambles.

Bush’s pre-emptive strategy worked against consumers who were hurt by dangerous products like pesticides/herbicides and pharmaceutical drugs in product liability cases, and left consumers with zero recourse within the courts.

But Bush’s alarming plot was overturned in 2 Supreme Court cases explained below.

EPA Immunity Case: Bates vs Dow AgroScience 

Bush promoted the policy that if a chemical product had been granted EPA approval, it had a federal shield from being sued, even if the product did not work as advertised. This pre-emptive theory was knocked down in the 2005 case against Dow.

The case involved Texas peanut farmers whose crops were killed by Dow’s ‘Strongarm’ weed killer because Strongarm had a different reaction in alkaline soil, but Dow failed to warn of this in the label. The argument was that if the EPA approved an herbicide, then the manufacturer was immune, despite any existing state laws that were more strict.

Justice Stevens noted that the EPA neglects to test products for effectiveness and merely relies on manufacturer data. Plaintiffs must still prove that the product is defective or made inadequately.

Interestingly, Justice Scalia (who pretends to be a states’ rights conservative) dissented on the ruling saying that the scales were now tipped in favor of the states and against the federal government.

FDA Immunity Case: Wyeth v Levine 

Diana Levine was a professional guitarist who was injected with the drug Phenergen manufactured by Wyeth for a migraine headache. Levine had to have her right arm amputated because the drug had reached her arteries due to the method of injection. Wyeth failed to instruct that the injection method used increased the risk of contact with arteries even though they were aware of this fact.

According to the American Association of Justice, pre-emptive preambles for new regulations were implemented under the radar by Bush. But in the case Wyeth vs. Levine, the Supreme Court case rejected pre-emptive immunity because Congress had not given that authority to the FDA.

Drug maker Wyeth used the pre-emptive defense claiming that FDA regulations for the drug wiped out any state injury law for ‘failure to warn’ of potential danger of injury. Wyeth argued that the Bush administration declared that ‘failure to warn’ claims would violate the FDA’s authority as a regulator.

Justice Thomas said that such a sweeping approach to pre-emption leads to unconstitutional invalidation of state laws.

‘We Can’t Wait’ 

Obama is circumventing Congress and handing unprecedented power over to rogue executive agencies.

Executive federal agencies have zero accountability. Obama recently ramped up his “We Can’t Wait” campaign to bypass Congress and expand authority of the alphabet agencies.

Obama said, “We can’t wait for Congress to do its job. So where they won’t act, I will. We’re going to look every single day to figure out what we can do without Congress.” Our government was designed to represent the People with elected officials and a balance of power.

Obama is pushing speedier regulatory reviews by the USDA to benefit GMO producers like Monsanto and Dow.

Conclusion

Under the Tenth Amendment States’ Rights, states can do anything they want as long as it is not a power that is:

• Delegated to the federal government in the Constitution
• Prohibited to the states by the Constitution
• Prohibited to the state by its own constitution

And the Supreme Court has upheld that states may impose consumer protection laws that are more strict than approval granted by the EPA. The Supreme Court also ruled that state consumer protection laws may not be pre-empted by FDA approval of a drug.

Furthermore, States can also require pesticide manufacturers to compensate for all damages from their products.



Explore More:

1. Under Federal Threat, Wash. State Gov. Vetoes Medical Marijuana Dispensary Bill 

2. FDA Claims Power to Seize Food Without Evidence of Contamination  

3. Reclaiming Health: BPA Ban Passes California State Senate

4. USDA Steps Back and Gives Monsanto More Power Over GMO Seeds 

5. South Carolina Challenges Upcoming Federal Ban on Incandescent Light Bulbs 

6. Medical Marijuana Legalized in Delaware, Sixteenth State to Pass Legislation 





Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/state-power-can-hold-corporate-monopolies-accountable/#ixzz1ov9zD893

Why Corporate Lobbying is Freaking out Shareholders

This election season has been known for a lot of things, but perhaps foremost is the rise of super PACs as a political force. The forthcoming presidential election comes two years after the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which held that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting political expenditures by corporations.

Since the decision, there have been various attempts by lawmakers to address the rising influence of money in politics, including proposals to amend the U.S. Constitution so that giving money is not deemed speech and that outside groups can’t spend unlimited sums on lobbying. There are pending bills that would require super PACs to disclose where all their money is coming from. Democrats recently re-introduced the so-called DISCLOSE Act with 117 co-sponsors for debate.

But just as importantly, corporate shareholders are demanding that even without changes in law, companies need to step up and disclose their lobbying expenditures anyway.

According to a report put out this past week by The Proxy Review, one-third of all shareholder-filed resolutions relate to corporate spending disclosures. Investors are demanding proxy votes on whether companies should reveal what they spend on politics now more than ever. The 109 shareholder resolutions this spring is double the amount from three years ago. Here’s a pie graph put together by the Smart Planet “Business Brains” blog, based on the Proxy Review’s data of the types of shareholder resolutions these past couple of months:

Why exactly are activist shareholders concerned about companies cutting checks to political campaigns?

Part of the reason, of course, is they might disagree with the companies’ political stance. Even if they don’t, they could be concerned about how political spending interferes with a company’s public perception among consumers. For example, Target’s $150,000 support in 2010 of Republican Tom Emmer’s candidacy for Minnesota governor gathered headlines and unfurled a wave of protest.

According to one survey, a whopping 95 percent of respondents say they disapproved of Target’s donation, with nearly 90 percent pledging to spend less at the retail chain.

But it isn't purely about politics. Shareholders also have a legitimate financial concern here, too.

Recent academic studies suggest that companies that spend heavily on politics tend to have their stock price suffer in the markets. According to one paperpublished in December by Harvard Law School professor John Coates, firms that were politically active in 2008 “experienced an average 8 percent lower increase in their industry-relative shareholder value” during the market recovery over the following two years.

And what’s to explain that?

Researchers have all sorts of theories. Coates himself notes that companies that spend more on politics tend to be less frugal in other ways. For example, his research reveals that the most politically active companies tend to have CEOs who make much greater use of expensive private jet travel. Other researchers, like Deniz Igan, Prachi Mishra and Thiery Treseel at the IMF, have investigated whether companies that donate to political campaigns exhibit risky financial behavior in other ways. Their research revealed that from 2000 to 2007, when the U.S. experienced a real estate bubble amid imprudent mortgage lending, the real estate companies that originated mortgages with higher income-to-loan ratios were the same ones spending a lot on politics. Needless to say, these politically active corporations hit rock bottom in subsequent mortgage foreclosures.

Thus, it’s not a terrible surprise that shareholders like Trillium Asset Management and Green Century Capital Management, which filed resolutions with Bank of America, 3M, and Target, are speaking up now.

Besides the heavy activity on the proxy front, other watchdog groups are telling businesses to mind their wallets as well. Both Common Cause and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group recently sent letters to all 500 of the companies in the S&P 500, asking each to sign a public pledge renouncing political spending. And the Center for Political Accountability has also been working with companies, and hasreportedly gotten 90 major US corporations to voluntarily adopt policies and board oversight on political spending.

Most companies aren’t yet pledging to refrain from political lobbying. But a few at least are starting to feel the heat from large institutional investors and willing to put a higher priority on disclosure. For example, Thomas DiNapoli, the comptroller of New York State, who controls a pension fund with $140 billion in assets, just got three large corporations -- Safeway, Pacific Gas & Electric and Sempra Energy – toagree to transparency. The coming proxy votes will further put pressure on other companies to follow suit. Two years ago, many of these disclosure resolutions were defeated, but not by many votes. Studies show that support has been rising steadily, and now shareholders will be voting on resolutions, having just witnessed a Republican presidential primary campaign without firm limits to political donations.

Finally, although many corporate campaign contributions these days happen in the shadows, there’s still plenty of check-writing that happens fairly blatantly in full public view. Here’s a look at the 20 biggest donors sending money directly to political campaigns:

Support Thurston County Commissioners! Mar 10

Please support the Thurston County Commissioners and attend this public hearing on Saturday.

The Board of County Commissioners has scheduled a public hearing for Saturday, March 10, 2012 at the County Courthouse. The subject of the hearing is Ordinance No. 14706, which establishes protections for prairie and Oregon white oak habitats. This ordinance protects the last of Thurston County's remaining prairies, an ecosystem that supports hundreds of unique plants and animals, including several being considered for listing as endangered. See below for more information, or go to http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/planning/prairieoak/prairieoak_interim.htm .

Corporate takeover of WA State finalized 2 am Sat March 3

We now have a Republican Senate. Let's get the word out and show the legislators that we care what happens to our State. There is plenty of money in Washington State, we are being taxed less and less each year with bigger populations to serve. We must raise revenue...or at least begin the process now. Our State is fast becoming the Mississippi of the West.

Pat Holm

9:30 Update. Here are some of the Republican cuts (relative to the Senate Democrats' budget) in their hostile takeover budget proposal. A small example of what you can expect under a McKenna Administration:

-$37 million for low-income housing
-$4 million crime victims
-$30 million for disaster recovery
-$12 million for children's services
-$14 million food assistance (food stamps)
-$150 million for low-income families and childcare
-$20 million for drug treatment
-$85 million for the disabled
-$9 million for the homeless with substance abuse problems
-$6 million for family planning
-$21 million for environmental/public health
-$36 million to clean up toxic sites
-$8 million in fish hatcheries and marine enforcement
-$15 in K-12 programs including Running Start and Navigation 101
-$30 million in education reform (including national board bonuses)
-$41 million to higher education
-$206 million to public employee health insurance and pensions
+$7 milion in mental health (the only improvement)

These are the additional cuts to these areas. Wake up Washington. Scott Walker, Grover Norquist, and Rush Limbaugh already govern and it's called the new Washington State Senate!

‎1:00 AM. They are pressing on with the takeover. Now they will crush public employee pension options by forcing all new employees into an inferior plan. Don't forget this people. Scott Walker was just the beginning. Zarelli is a Norquist signer. LOOK IT UP!! He has pledged total cuts to government, no revenue, all cuts. He is now in control and the war on public service is happening right before your eyes. WFSE are you awake? SEIU are you watching? I have warned about this repeatedly. Let me be clear, Zarelli is a good person. I respect the man, but his paradigm for government is very dangerous. It is the total embrace of privatization in every way. You can like the person and fight the vision. Time to fight the vision in very new ways! The gauntlet has been thrown down. This is a gift for those who want to defend the value of the public sector. Will you take a stand?

‎1:13 AM Now to put the cherry on top of the Costco takeover of liquor. Removing all revenue sharing with local governments. The march to privatization continues.

‎1:21 AM update. Now they will move the solid waste collection tax to the General Fund. This will help defund the Public Works Trust Fund. More attack on local government infrastructure. Grover, your servants have honored you well tonight. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist

Three Senate Democrats have joined the Senate Republicans to take over the Senate a few moments ago. Senators Tom, Sheldon, and Kastama joined the Republicans. They bring bills to the Senate floor now that have NEVER had a public hearing. Transparency in government is crumbling right now at the hands of the Republicans. Are the newspapers paying attention, or will they stay silent to protect their two beloved tax breaks. . . . Tune in to TVW now to continue watching the drama.

Opponents of coal terminals in Bellingham, Longview delivered petition Wednesday

PHILIP A. DWYER   THE BELLINGHAM HERALD

A coal train heads north through the site of the former Georgia-Pacific mill on the Bellingham waterfront. More trains could be coming if SSA Marine's plan to build the Gateway Pacific Terminal coal and bulk cargo export terminal at Cherry Point is realized.

Published: 02/28/12 2:25 pm 

0 Comments

LONGVIEW, Wash. — Opponents of two proposed coal terminals in Washington state say they've gathered thousands of signatures from citizens protesting the projects.

The Longview Daily News reports that a group organized by the Washington Environmental Council will deliver 40,000 petition signatures on Wednesday, Feb. 29 to Public Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark.

The petition highlights the group's concerns about health, economic and environmental impacts of the two terminals, which would be the two largest in North America if approved.

In Whatcom County, developer SSA Marine hopes to export 48 million tons of coal annually at the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point. Coal would be shipped via rail from the Powder River basin in Wyoming and Montana for export to Asia.

Last week, Millennium Bulk Terminals filed permits to build a $600 million terminal at a former Reynolds Metals Co. site west of Longview. The company plans to export 44 million metric tons of coal annually. It says it would employ 135 full-time workers at the completed terminal.

Supporters say the projects would create thousands of jobs and generate millions in tax revenue for the state. Opponents worry about health and environmental impacts.

Goldmark's state agency regulates the use of state-owned aquatic lands.

see our interview with Rev. Kathleen Pattin, Episcopal priest in Longview on Audio page

Local involvement in possible coal train route

I've been shocked to hear that the proposed coal train fiasco could actually run through the Nisqually area, and have a direct impact here.  Stay tuned, we are trying to get a route mapped out to post.


SEATTLE -- Three Washington areas are being mentioned as possible coal export terminal sites, but environmentalists say they'll fight to keep that from happening.

Among the potential sites is Cherry Point, but some commercial fisherman, such as Jeremy Brown, worry the coal could hurt Cherry Point's herring grounds, which Brown said are critical to the health of salmon runs.

"Those railway lines cross every single salmon stream in eastern Puget Sound," he said. "The burning of coal is the worst thing we can do for climate change."

Brown helped collect 40,000 signatures protesting the coal trains and coal shipment. Dr. Ginny Wolf of Bow helped him. She worries about the mile-long coal trains and how they could affect patients.

"We don't have the infrastructure, the overpasses and underpasses to allow emergency vehicles free passage," she said.