Why Should Children In Puerto Rico Go To School?

Photo: USGS

Over the last few years of the Trump Presidency, Puerto Rico has been a topic of conversation which weighs heavily on the conscience of President Trump.  Why?  On the one hand, he would like to none other than ignoring Puerto Rico from a financial standpoint.  Simply because he believes that Puerto Rico is not part of the United States of America.  Whereas on the other hand, the reality is that he needs to show support for the people of Puerto Rico -- because the United States supports Puerto Rico.  Enough said -- right?



Recently, as in January of this year, so far, a devastating earthquake hit Puerto Rico.  This devastation is on top of the hurricanes which ripped through the island a few years ago and caused permanent damage to the country.  Over the last few years, Puerto Rico has managed to rebuild some of the infrastructures while being plagued with corruption on behalf of the politicians directing the workflow (i.e., through contracts, etc.).



On a more fundamental level, how have the people (i.e., the children) of Puerto Rico suffered throughout the rebuilding process?  What has happened to the educational system of Puerto Rico?  After this last earthquake, the realization that not all children would be able to return to school was a gut punch to the country.  The money needed is not being sent due to our President stopping the efforts - or trying to do so.


In light of reality, the question is raised: Do the children of Puerto Rico need to attend school?


Especially when the United States is supposed to be offering financial assistance to the country?



The devastation has obstructed the ability of students to return to school as briefly reported by Politico Education:

PUERTO RICO EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SLOWLY OPENS SCHOOLS AFTER DEVASTATING EARTHQUAKE: 177 schools that have been certified and inspected by engineers opened their doors on Tuesday and Wednesday to welcome back students after a 6.4 magnitude earthquake delayed the start of classes. On Monday, 51 more schools will also be ready, Puerto Rico Education Secretary Eligio Hernández Pérez said.

— "Engineers have inspected 561 of the island's 856 public schools, finding at least 50 too unsafe to reopen, leaving some 240,000 students out of school for now," the Associated Press reported. Engineers have been inspecting public schools since Jan. 8, according to the Puerto Rico Education Department.

— This could be the second time in less than three years that a natural disaster will prompt school closures on the island. Puerto Rico has seen a 44 percent decrease in enrollment in public and private schools since 2006, which accelerated after Hurricane Maria in 2017, according to a Centro Center for Puerto Rican Studies report. Hernández Pérez's predecessor, former Puerto Rico Education Secretary Julia Keleher, oversaw the closure of 265 schools.

— Hernández Pérez visited schools affected by the earthquakes with U.S. Education Department officials on Wednesday. In Spanish, he said on Twitter that he appreciates the support to restore the island's education system.

— House Democrats unveiled a $4.7 billion disaster relief package on Tuesday to help Puerto Rico. About $100 million would be directed to education recovery efforts.

— The bill, H.R. 5687, would allow flexibility to use the money to address unmet needs from previous and current disaster supplementals, and to shift funds to the most in-demand recovery programs and to speed up K-12 school recovery. However, it requires the Education secretary to submit a detailed spending plan.

— The White House has said it won't support the package. President Donald Trump has also complained about the cost of the recovery effort.

The United States should find monetary assistance for the infrastructure rebuilding process.  That is the type of nation that we are.  Simple as that.  Why not?



Related Blog Posts:


President Trump Proposes Student Loan Forgiveness for Severely Disabled Veterans

Thoughts: Education is the best possible route toward combating dangers to the public!

Hurricane Maria Destroys Puerto Rico's Science Programs Then Presents Unusual Research Opportunities?

What was the last book you read?

Puerto Rico Crops Devastated By Hurricane Maria

Why Can't The USDA Regulate The Pork Industry?

Photo: Food Business News

There is no doubt that President Trump is in strong favor of deregulating businesses.  That is to say, remove all obstacles of safety for the corporation in the hope that the bottom line for shareholders will be increased dramatically (increased).   More revenue for corporations translates to increasing the bottom line (i.e., direct profits) for shareholders.  Recently, a discussion of safety for workers in the pork industry was started in Congress. 



The Trump administration would love to remove all safety aspects for workers.  Speed the processing line up to run more pork through the facility.  Nevermind, that there are human beings on the line processing pork.  What could go wrong?  A worker might have to use the restroom in their pants?  Tainted meat could be missed and passed onto the consumer?  All of the above.  Reporting by Politico Agriculture shed light on the issue before Congress regarding the safety of workers in the Pork industry:

PORK SLAUGHTER RULE ON THE DOCKET TODAY: A federal district court in Minnesota will hold a hearing at 3 p.m. on the government's motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by labor advocates against a USDA rule that eliminates line-speed limits in pork slaughterhouses and shifts certain inspection tasks from federal inspectors to plant workers.

— The United Food and Commercial Workers and advocacy group Public Citizen argue the final rule should be thrown out because the agency didn't consider how the policy would affect worker safety, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

— USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service has repeatedly said it doesn't have the authority or expertise to regulate worker safety issues, although the agency did seek public comment on that specific issue during the rulemaking process.

The three UFCW local unions that filed the lawsuit represent slaughterhouse workers in Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri and Oklahoma, at plants that USDA expects will accelerate their processing line speeds and adopt new inspection methods under the final rule, according to the complaint.

How we got here: The government filed a motion to dismiss the case in December, arguing the union and its locals don't have standing to bring the suit because "no establishment that employs their members has adopted — or has concrete plans to adopt" the new inspection system. USDA also reiterates in its motion to dismiss that it doesn't have a statutory mandate to regulate worker safety.

The rule is also the subject of additional lawsuits, including a case recently filed by food safety advocates who argue the inspection changes will increase the risk of tainted meat reaching the marketplace. USDA's own inspectors have also warned "unsafe" pork would likely reach consumers under the new system, NBC reported last month.

Ask your Congressional leader to take action and throw out rules which throw out the safety of workers on the processing line.  Otherwise, profits trump safety -- which is both sad and very dangerous.


Related Blog Posts:



Mitigating Pollution from Slaughter Houses -- Why Not Try If Technology Exists?

Congress Gets Involved In Beef Recall


One Unknown Fact Which Should Cause Consumers To Be Careful About Handling Meat Before Cooking!


How Effective Are Poultry Corporations At Reducing Salmonella In Their Products?

What Are The Unsolved Problems In Chemistry?

Photo by Chromatograph on Unsplash

Chemistry is in every aspect of the universe. Why? Atoms and sub-atomic particles are the building blocks on a fundamental level. On a much larger scale, atoms combine in specific configurations to make a huge variety of molecules. From the molecules that make up the skin on our bodies to the exterior of a space shuttle, the span is vast and continually increasing. All with wildly different functions.

Technology has advanced our society beyond limits previously thought attainable. What are the problems which still plague chemistry? Below is a video from ACS Axial, which briefly introduces problems that are still beyond the reach of scientists. Some of which would seem attainable are still completely beyond our reach at the present state of technology. Enjoy!

The scientific pursuit is limitless. Meaning, there is no limit (as of yet we know of). Questions arise daily, which opens up more avenues to further problems. Technology must be available to be able either to ask such questions or even attempt to answer them. In this light, science is an open-ended adventure that many pursue daily.

On the other hand, many people outside of direct scientific investigations push science forward too by their indirect curiosity. As technology progresses, the human mind moves forward in seeking a greater understanding of itself. Outside of direct science, fields like science fiction writing/production move the needle forward in an indirect manner. The underlying momentum is the curiosity that drives us as a human race ahead.

The questions laid out in the video above are the current path forward for scientists. That is not to say that more problems are unanswered and await to be asked of society. The future is exciting, as is the present.



Related Blog Posts:



With Globalization, Scientists Should Be Minimizing Carbon Footprints


Climate Change Indirectly Hits Farmers: Increasing Crop Insurance Premiums


The 1% Give Donation To Solve Climate Change?


How is the Implementation Of the FDA's Food Safety Modernization Act Going?


Does a Scientist grieve differently than another person?


A Mass Shooting Is Not The Same As A Scientific Discovery -- Applying The Same Metric For News Worthiness Is Useless


National Academies Weigh In On Scientific Evidence For Climate Science

Ralph Nader to Speaker Nancy Pelosi: Why Not Broaden The Articles Of Impeachment?

Photo: CNN

A little over a week ago, House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi handed over the United States Senate, the articles for the impeachment trial.  The impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.  After the articles of impeachment have been sitting in the Senate waiting for a trial, critics argue that the articles of impeachment are too narrow.  Further, the articles could have been much broader to cover more topics to prosecute President Trump.  Although, other proponents have stated that the current articles are sufficient enough to impeach the President of the United States from Office.  

At the end of the blog post are other posts I have included which were written on impeachment by Ralph Nader.  He is an iconic consumer advocate who is a hawk on not just consumer issues but on the constitution in general.  Reading his newsletters on the subject has been a real eye-opener.  Without further ado, here is yet another analysis by Ralph Nader.

Ralph Nader recently released a newsletter in which the broadening of the articles of impeachment would have been appropriate were described:

Pelosi’s Choice: Enough for Trump’s Impeachment but not going All Out for Removal

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has her reasons for limiting her impeachment articles to offenses stemming from the abuses and violations related to Ukraine. Unfortunately, she declined to pursue a broader impeachment approach that recognizes multiple provable, serious violations of the Constitution. Speaker Pelosi overruled Chairs of Committees, including the Judiciary Committee, and other senior lawmakers who wanted to forward to the Senate a broader array of impeachable offenses.

Having lost four of the last five House elections to the worst Republican Party in history, Speaker Pelosi remains cautious. She is overly worried about the conservative Democrats who won congressional seats in 2018 in Republican, pro-Trump districts. Endangering their seats might, Pelosi fears, lead to the loss of the House in 2020 and, more immediately, risk not having the votes in the House to pass additional impeachable offenses.

Other knowledgeable House members think she is too reticent and guarded. They think Trump has huge downsides. It is no secret that Pelosi has called Trump “a crook, a thief, a liar,” and that “he should be in prison”— just for starters.

In addition, there is her well-known general distaste for the impeachment power, because she believes it divides the country. In 2007, Pelosi took off the table impeachment of the war criminals George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Regardless of her feelings on impeachment, Trump has been a belligerent, monarchical President with a history of constitutional violations and inciting violence. To our Republic’s founders, Trump’s dictatorial, flagrant behavior would only strengthen the necessity of impeachment and conviction.

Speaker Pelosi also believes turbulence of further impeachment proceedings in the House would spill over into the presidential primary elections, embroiling the Democratic candidates and distracting them from their chosen agendas and campaigns. The Speaker is very attentive to the polls, telling people that the Democrats went against Nixon when the polls were 60% against him – A CNN poll recently found that 51% of respondents want Trump removed from office. By contrast, in 1998 the Republicans impeached Bill Clinton with only 24% support in the polls.

Unfortunately for the country, the House sending the Senate narrow charges instead of ‘throwing the book’ at Trump assures, barring some “black swan” event, that the ditto-headed Republican Senators under “Moscow Mitch” McConnell will vote to acquit him. This is likely even if witnesses are called to make an airtight case even stronger. Trump has cleverly tethered the political future of the GOP to his re-election telling anyone straying to be ready for massive public intimidation.

Trump is lucky  that he avoided being charged both with “bribery” and across the board defiance of Congressional subpoenas of witnesses and documents by other House Committees. Donald will gloat that those two additional articles, which are Nancy’s publicly expressed beliefs, were not presented and passed because they’re all “lies, fake,” and that he didn’t do “anything wrong.” Before large crowds of Trumpsters he will say the same about other serious, continuing impeachable offenses that are stripping Congress of its major, exclusive authorities under the Constitution.   See the letter by me, constitutional law experts Bruce Fein, and Louis Fisher in the Congressional Record (December 18, 2019, page H 12197).

You can’t get more basic, lawless behavior than an imperial president who flouts the Congressional “power of the purse” by spending money not authorized by Congress and threatening and making war as if he is a King. Trump is defiantly and corruptly refusing to faithfully execute the laws, and is abusing “the public trust.” As Alexander Hamilton said, this is the very definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Trump is violating criminal statutes such as the Antideficiency Act, the campaign finance laws, and the anti-snooping law requiring judicial approvals.

By sending earlier a broad array of impeachable offenses to the Senate, including articles of impeachment that address Trump’s corrupt repeal of health, safety, and consumer protections of the American people, Pelosi could give the public a stake in impeachment.   A broader number of articles or counts of impeachment would also give citizens an informed sense of what Trump has done to harm people and would increase public support for impeachment. Important constituencies—women, patients, workers, minorities, environmental advocates, and protectors of defenseless children will understand why impeachment affects them directly. Despite the importance of the Ukraine extortion/bribery scandal, most people do not perceive themselves as having a personal stake there.

Speaker Pelosi missed known opportunities to throw the Republicans on the defensive in the Senate and tie them up in knots. Let Mitch McConnell’s gang try to defend, before tens of millions of television viewers, the crooked serial sexual predator, bigot/racist, chronic liar, and inciter of lawlessness. The raging, foul-mouthed, egomaniacal outlaw in the White House will only make it harder for the Republicans with his daily torrent of terrorizing tweets.

It looks like, as has been the case from his long, bankrupt-ridden business career to the Presidency, Donald Trump will again escape the rule of law.

Nancy Pelosi did just the minimum to impeach Trump in the House, but nowhere near enough for enlarging the public demand to remove him from office by the Senate. Maybe that was the limit of her expectation from the get go.

Surely, Speaker Pelosi at least wants to diminish Trump’s gloating that additional articles of impeachment were not presented to the Senate because these charges against him were “fake and lies.” There is still time for Pelosi to instruct her colleagues to immediately publicize the other ways Trump has shattered our Constitution and warn him that a second round of impeachments could be around the corner. For certain, Trump, showing no remorse or apologies, will continue to commit more constitutional outlawry to fuel a second coming of overdue Constitutional justice.

After all, he operates daily under his own self-impeachable declaration that, “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.”

Related Blog Posts:


Ralph Nader to President Trump: Making America Dread Again!


Ralph Nader: Full Impeachments for Trump will Shake Senate Republicans from Kangaroo Court

Ralph Nader: Letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi

Ralph Nader: Trump Should Be Impeached For Throwing U.S. Into Climate Chaos

Ralph Nader: “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” Really!


Ralph Nader: Will President Trump Implode with Lies Before He is Impeached?

Ralph Nader: Shame Of A Nation

Ralph Nader: Labor Day and the Lost Opportunities for Labor Discussions

Ralph Nader: Nader pays tribute to old Republican Paul Findley

Ralph Nader: How has Boeing avoided testifying in front of Congress for the 737 Max Airplane disasters?

 Ralph Nader: "What and Who Gave Us Trump?"


Ralph Nader: Youth Can Change Corporate View of Climate Crisis

What Are Activist Ralph Nader's Opinions On Radio News Organizations Such As NPR Or PBS?

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels


Ralph Nader: Post Election -- Next Step -- Open Up The Existing Secretive Congress


Ralph Nader: Warner Slack - Doctor for the People Forever


Ralph Nader: An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon


Ralph Nader: MAGA is really MADA?


Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?


Ralph Nader Says 10 Million People Could Change Healthcare Policy - That Few?


Ralph Nader Suggests To Consumers Reading 'Consumer Reports' Before Impulse Buying


Thoughts: Ralph Nader On A Cashless Economy

Coal Companies Are Dying Despite Efforts By Trump To Keep Open

President Trump has been tied to coal corporations throughout his presidential campaign and after.  Vowing to keep them open despite the changing tide from coal power plants to renewable energy. New reporting from Reuter's is cementing the reality that President Trump has not the power to keep coal power plants alive.  No surprise there to some.



As I have written in the past two years, the shift from fossil fuel investment toward renewable energy is a real happening.  The European Union has been offering loans to companies with low-interest rates to shift toward renewable energy investments.  This is a certain occurrence that has been happening and is real.



The large oil company Shell has signaled that even their investments are diverted toward renewable energy as they see the energy landscape changing too over time.  Early on in President Trump's time in office, the Paris Agreement was a hot ticket item -- with President Trump trying to pull out the U.S. of the Agreement.  Although, the rest of the world knew that only President Trump was under the impression that he could, in fact, pull out the U.S. of the Paris Agreement.  Amazing.



The take-home message here is that coal mining is a dying breed as the world shifts its energy dependence away from coal toward renewable energy. As the article suggests, based on evidence, the coal industry was the second-fastest closing industry in 2019.  With the transition of 15,100 MegaWatts of power (enough to power 15.7 million homes) transitioned, more is yet to come.  The amount of 15,100 MegaWatts is the second-largest from19,000 MegaWatts shutdown during the Obama administration.



That is the reality which President Trump ignores while going up on stage daily and announces the opposite (in the form of lies).  That is a terrible reality that each resident of the United States has to understand.  The time for change toward renewable energy is now and unstoppable.



Related Blog Posts:



Canada Comes Up With Energy Savings List For K-12 School Buildings


Parameters: Shells Oil Corporation Invests In Renewable Energy Infrastructure


President Trump Is Out Of Touch With The Transition Toward Renewable Energy


Thoughts: Trump Administration Realizes Renewable Energy Is Here To Stay?


Do You Need Clean Air To Breathe? An Introduction To Environmental Justice


Environmental Entrepreneurs Weigh In On Repealing The Clean Power Plan


EPA Blatantly Suppresses Scientific Results Regarding Climate Change?


EPA Director Finally Realizes Reality Of Trying To Roll-Back Obama Era Clean Air Act Regulation


How Can The Paris Climate Agreement Be "More Favorable To The U.S."???


Paris Climate Agreement Is A Start Toward The Renewable Energy Future


President Trump's Understanding of the Paris Agreement

"I did the Biggest Deal in the history of our Country yesterday - in terms of trade"

Photo: Fox Business

Just after an impeachment trial was initiated for the President of the United States in the Senate, President Trump finds himself mired in controversy over a witness interview (outside of the Senate) on national television.  Yes, Lev Parnas stated that he knew President Trump and the current scandal is not about corruption but about gathering dirt for the upcoming election in 2020.



In fact, during an interview in the White House, President Trump claims to not know anybody by that name.  Or at least, if a picture was taken, he does not know the person by name.  During the same interview, President Trump claims to have done the largest Trade Deal in the history of the United States -- with the recent passage of the USMCA Trade Agreement -- to replace NAFTA.



How does the USMCA Trade Deal look in comparison?  Reporting last week by Politico Agriculture shed a brief light on the benefits of the new (historic) Trade Deal:

Senate approval of USMCA will lock down one of Trump’s biggest achievements and hand him a political win to tout on the campaign trail this year. Replacing NAFTA was one of Trump’s signature promises in 2016.

Still, the new deal isn’t seen as a major departure from the current three-way framework, and it’s unlikely to significantly increase North American trade. USMCA would raise economic output by nearly $70 billion (or 0.35 percent) and create 176,000 jobs by its sixth year in effect, according to official estimates.

The USMCA would raise economic output by an astonishing 0.35%.  Wow!  What a disappointment.  Even Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was not thrilled with the plan.  In fact, if anything, the United States has lost provisions built into previous trade deals.  Provisions which are very important.  Therefore, a supposed victory is an actual step back in progress or lost.



This is dangerous for Americans who are watching or reading the news without realizing the actual outcome.  Trade deals take a long time to work out.  Not everyone benefits greatly from Trade Deals on face value.  Which is why our supposed lost with the previous Trade Deal was an actual benefit in disguise.



Related Blog Posts:


What is the potential adverse impact of Tariffs on GDP?


Climate Change Indirectly Hits Farmers: Increasing Crop Insurance Premiums


Farmer's Perspective on Trump's Trade War: Interview

Surprise! American Consumers will pay for Chinese Tariffs!

China Raises Ante In Trade War With Threat Of Cutting Off Rare Metals To U.S.

"Trade Not Aid" -- A Shout out from Farmers to President Trump again

Former FDA Director Asked Congress For Clarity Regarding CBD in Food Products


Soybean Farmers Are Storing Too Much Soybean, Although Chemical Industry Is Greenlighting Trade Deals?


How many cows are needed to generate 50,000 tons of beef exports?


Trade War Hurts Farmers -- From The Farmer's Mouth Directly


"Trade Not Aid" -- The Answer For Trade War!


Parameters: Tariffs Affect Trade In Both Directions -- In And Out Of The USA


Parameters: Steel And Aluminum Tariffs Are Not Isolated - They Are Tied To Trading Of Other Vital Goods

1) Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts


2) Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!

Ralph Nader to President Trump: Making America Dread Again!

Photo: Aljazeera.com

With the beginning of impeachment hearings starting in the United States Senate, President Trump must be feeling the pressure.  The trial is yet another example of the downward spiral which President Trump is leading us down.  Citizens should be worried about the leader who has the power and sits in the White House.  Where have we come from?  Below, Iconic Activist Ralph Nader writes President Trump a letter.



Ralph Nader recently wrote President Trump a letter (shown below):

Trump: Making America Dread Again!

January 14, 2019

President Donald Trump

White House

1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Trump:

The disabling and dismantling of the federal health and safety agencies under your cruel command has been leaving a trail of American fatalities, injuries, and property destruction without precedent even among past Republican Administrations. Your criminal negligence toward federal agencies like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is an impeachable offense. You are obsessed with corporate profits, obeisant to the corporate CEOs funding your campaigns. You deliberately selected corrupt henchmen to run these lifesaving agencies into the ground, under the guise of “deregulation.”

Constitutional law scholars declare that refusing to “faithfully execute laws” was seen by our Founders to be a major impeachable violation, sufficient for removal from office by the Senate. Your failure to appoint capable leaders, for required Senate confirmation, to head life-saving federal agencies is abhorrent and violates the appointments clause of the Constitution, Article II: Section 2, Clause 2.

Nonetheless, the media has not caught up with the full scope of your lawless commercial drive to “Make America Dread Again.”

Consider a recent address at Used Car Week 2019 in Las Vegas last November by Jerry Cox, a consultant to many businesses in trouble. Here is an excerpt from his remarks, elaborated in greater details in his forthcoming book, Killer Airbags:

Your government will do almost anything to protect the industry and nothing to protect you. At the start of 2020 – the final year of the first Trump Administration – NHTSA still had no Administrator. Instead, President Trump installed Takata’s lawyer [Steven Bradbury] as general counsel of the Transportation Department in 2017 and as Acting Deputy Secretary in 2019. Unbelievably, the guy who negotiated the sweetheart deals that allowed Takata executives to keep selling defective airbags and avoid criminal prosecution was put in charge of every government employee responsible for enforcing auto safety laws.

Shame and guilt on you, Donald Trump! You were willing to start an undeclared war with Iran last week, had their missile attack taken one American soldier’s life, but when American lives are threatened by crony capitalism, you do nothing. It is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s duty to save American lives on the highways from vehicle design and construction defects, yet under you the agency becomes even more toothless. You are leaving tens of millions of American motorists defenseless. Some will lose their lives if more Takata airbags disintegrate and hurl lethal shrapnel into their bodies. American drivers and passengers must receive protection by your Administration.

Will you stop your time-wasting 24/7 tweeting, and your prevaricatory assaults on the truth and reputations of innocent Americans? Will you pay attention to the Takata horrors and name a safety advocate to reinvigorate the enfeebled NHTSA?  Will you start doing your job?

Sincerely,

Ralph Nader

Some critics of President Trump say that he has done irreparable damage to our nation.  Time will tell.   Last week, he managed to reduce restrictions on the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which is the law in place requiring EIS -- Environmental Impact Statements -- before construction can begin on any infrastructure project in the United States.  I wrote a blog post about the issue.  



The take-home message is that if climate change (i.e., environmental impacts) are not considered at the beginning of a given infrastructure project, each American resident's insurance premium will be raised.  Or -- alternately, the cost of not considering climate change will be passed onto the taxpayer through our government.  What seems to benefit big business could eventually end up costing the average American consumer in the tax season.  Stay tuned.



Related Blog Posts:


Ralph Nader: Full Impeachments for Trump will Shake Senate Republicans from Kangaroo Court

Ralph Nader: Letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi

Ralph Nader: Trump Should Be Impeached For Throwing U.S. Into Climate Chaos

Ralph Nader: “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” Really!


Ralph Nader: Will President Trump Implode with Lies Before He is Impeached?

Ralph Nader: Shame Of A Nation

Ralph Nader: Labor Day and the Lost Opportunities for Labor Discussions

Ralph Nader: Nader pays tribute to old Republican Paul Findley

Ralph Nader: How has Boeing avoided testifying in front of Congress for the 737 Max Airplane disasters?

 Ralph Nader: "What and Who Gave Us Trump?"


Ralph Nader: Youth Can Change Corporate View of Climate Crisis

What Are Activist Ralph Nader's Opinions On Radio News Organizations Such As NPR Or PBS?

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels


Ralph Nader: Post Election -- Next Step -- Open Up The Existing Secretive Congress


Ralph Nader: Warner Slack - Doctor for the People Forever


Ralph Nader: An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon


Ralph Nader: MAGA is really MADA?


Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?


Ralph Nader Says 10 Million People Could Change Healthcare Policy - That Few?


Ralph Nader Suggests To Consumers Reading 'Consumer Reports' Before Impulse Buying


Thoughts: Ralph Nader On A Cashless Economy

Who Is Going To Pay For Ignoring Climate Change While Building Infrastructure In The U.S.?

Photo: ERO Resources

President Trump last week stood up at a podium in the White House and spoke about his new infrastructure building plan, which involves changing legislation to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  NEPA is an environmental law that ensures that any new construction or infrastructure change in the United States involves the following regulations (i.e., rules and restrictions).  Which is to say, the NEPA ensures that changes are regulated by laws which encompass the regulations put into place by various agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) along with others.

You may ask yourself the following question: What changes can President Trump make to NEPA that would cause significant concern?

If you consider environmental groups (for one example), you may be surprised to hear that the regulations set in place by NEPA mandate that corporations need to take into consideration 'climate change' as a factor when making infrastructure changes in the United States.  Sounds reasonable, right?



To give context to the above introduction, shown below is the opening introduction to the Wikipedia page for the National Environmental Policy Act:

  

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a United States environmental law that promotes the enhancement of the environment and established the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The law was enacted on January 1, 1970.[2] To date, more than 100 nations around the world have enacted national environmental policies modeled after NEPA.[3]

Prior to NEPA, Federal agencies were mission oriented. An example of mission orientation was to select highway routes as the shortest route between two points. NEPA was necessary to require Federal agencies to evaluate the environmental effects of their actions.[4]:2–3 NEPA's most significant outcome was the requirement that all executive Federal agencies prepare environmental assessments (EAs) and environmental impact statements (EISs). These reports state the potential environmental effects of proposed Federal agency actions.[5] Further the U.S. Congress recognizes that each person has a responsibility to preserve and enhance the environment as trustees for succeeding generations.[6] NEPA's procedural requirements do not apply to the President, Congress, or the Federal courts since they are not a "Federal agency" by definition.[5][7] However, a Federal agency taking action under authority ordered by the President may be a final agency action subject to NEPA's procedural requirements.[4]:117–118 A U.S. District Court describes the need for even the President to have the NEPA analysis information before making a decision as follows:

"No agency possesses discretion whether to comply with procedural requirements such as NEPA. The relevant information provided by a NEPA analysis needs to be available to the public and the people who play a role in the decision-making process. This process includes the President." "And Congress has not delegated to the President the decision as to the route of any pipeline."[8]

The above excerpts indicate that NEPA gave rise to the 'EIS' or 'Environmental Impact Statement.'  Any project in the United States needs an 'EIS' before the start or completion of the infrastructure project.  Imagine what the world was like before that requirement?  The 'Environmental Impact Statement' can vary and be weakened, which is what the Trump administration is trying to accomplish last week.  There are consequences, though, to that action.

As an example, take building the homes in Houston (Texas) on a flood plain before Hurricane Harvey.  Construction corporations should have been wary of building houses on an actual flood plain.  A location is known to flood.  Why would a corporation build homes and let a company sell them when the next flood would wipe them out?  President Trump gave the 'go-ahead' to the construction, and the disaster is what followed as a result of the destruction caused by Hurricane Harvey.  

First-time homeowners were sold homes without flood insurance (What are the chances this area will flood?).

Someone Has To Pay?

According to reporting by Politico Agriculture, depending on the amount of consideration of climate change in infrastructure proposals, the taxpayer can expect to pay the difference.  What?  Yes, insurance corporations will pass on the cost of not sufficiently accounting for climate change into new projects onto taxpayers.  

Any structure or project which is built by less than desirable regulated permits will be questioned by insurers.  If the project is found to have been created by not taking into account relevant climate change effects, the taxpayer will provide the difference in cost.  Why would we (as taxpayers) let corporations get by without paying (and planning) for expected climate change impacts in a given infrastructure project? Unbelievable.

Groups are speaking up in both directions!

Groups are coming out of the woodwork in support (or opposition) of the changes to NEPA.  Contractors and construction agencies love what the new changes entail.  While environmental groups are scared that the fall-out of not considering climate change into the policies and regulations will have dire consequences.  

The result will be that everyone's insurance policies will increase by an appropriate amount to make up for the lack of (financial) consideration for climate change in policies and regulations while building new infrastructure.  If you do not mind paying for the consequences of not considering environmental changes that would harm or danger new infrastructure, then there is no problem. 

On the other hand, if you are not comfortable with policies and regulations which lack the consideration of climate change, then the current changes should be worrisome.  Call your local state and federal elected official and express your concern. We tax-payers should not be on the hook for the misguided policies of the federal government.

Related Blog Post:




Pesticide Atrazine: Benefits Outweigh Potential Harm To People?


Hemp Growers Now Is Your Chance To Comment On USDA Regulations


Mitigating Pollution from Slaughter Houses -- Why Not Try If Technology Exists?

Pesticide Atrazine: Benefits Outweigh Potential Harm To People?

Photo: KCET

Are there instances in a society where the benefit to the people outweighs the dangers?  Especially when the consumer side of the community is considered?  For example, if a chemical performs very well.  But the threat to society is high by exposing people to this chemical.  What is the right avenue to proceed down?  As a regulator, should the compound be allowed to be incorporated into a given product?  If there are inherent dangers?  What if there is no alternative chemical to the dangerous one?



In brief from Politico Agriculture, the announcement that EPA will still renew the use of the dangerous pesticide Atrazine was reported on:

EPA PUTS ATRAZINE RENEWAL ON THE TABLE: In the same announcement, the agency slid in that it's preparing to re-approve and issue new guidelines for the widely used herbicide atrazine, which is mostly used on corn but also on sugarcane and sorghum. It's also used to fight broadleaf weeds on lawns and turf.

Some research links atrazine to birth defects and cancer, and it's commonly found in waterways and drinking water. Atrazine is banned or being phased out by 35 countries, including the European Union.

To reduce hazards to humans, the EPA said it's proposing a lower use rate for residential turf applications, new protective equipment and handling requirements, and label language intended to mitigate spray drift. The agency also proposed ending an ongoing atrazine water-monitoring program.

"Although there are potential risks of concern associated with the use of atrazine, with the adoption of the mitigation measures ... any remaining potential worker and/or ecological risks are outweighed by the benefits associated with use of atrazine," the agency wrote in its proposed decision.

Green groups were quick to criticize EPA's decision. "It's absolutely shameful that while other countries are banning atrazine, the Trump administration is opening up the tap," said Nathan Donley, a scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity, in a statement. "This disgusting backward step ignores decades of research and will inflict untold damage on people, wildlife and waters across the country."

Regulators need to jump on the EPA for press releases like the one shown above.  Here, a cancer-causing (in some cases) agent is not only being allowed to be used on crops.  The same dangerous agent is going to be discontinued for monitoring in the local water supply surrounding the geographic region of choice.  What?  No more tracking in the local water supply for a dangerous chemical?  Why is Congress not stepping in and taking action?  Is Congress even aware that the decision on behalf of the EPA has been made?



Unbelievable.  The regulation does not need to be overarching and restrictive in all cases.  But having little to none results in the behavior described above. The next time that an elected leader is visiting; ask why the decision by the EPA is let to stand?  Each of us should be entitled to clean water.



Related Blog Posts:


Low Carb Action Network Wants To Change Federal Diet Advice?


Ralph Nader: Boeing’s Perilous Bungling Requires New Leadership


With Globalization, Scientists Should Be Minimizing Carbon Footprints


President Trump Goes After SNAP Recipients to Save Money?


Hemp Growers Now Is Your Chance To Comment On USDA Regulations


Mitigating Pollution from Slaughter Houses -- Why Not Try If Technology Exists?

FDA Stance On PFAS: Study Findings and Survey Results

More Congressional Hearings on PFAS, when can Americans expect Action Taken by Regulators?


Update: EPA Throws Journalists Out Of PFAS Conference - Why?


Update: Congress asks Federal Agencies about Dangerous Chemicals -- PFOA and PFOS


Congress Asks Defense Department and Environmental Protection Agency about Dangerous Chemicals

Ralph Nader: Full Impeachments for Trump will Shake Senate Republicans from Kangaroo Court

Photo: Common Dreams

President Trump has once again endangered Americans by the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani last weekend.  I wrote a blog earlier this week discussing the fact that big oil companies stated that a few oil workers would stay in the Middle East. Although the United States of America has around 45,000 troops in the Middle East.  That figure is on the low end of the estimate.  While the President quickly targeted General Soleimani as a "terrorist," what he failed to recognize is that the single action set into play a series of steps.  Which would endanger any American in the Middle East.



These actions are based on the fact that the label of "terrorist" sets into play a breakdown of agreements.  Agreements that make up the 'rules of engagement' between the United States and other NATO countries along with Middle East Countries.  When the 'rules of engagement' break down, new rules have to be drawn.  What laws can the U.S. hope to bring when the leader of the free world has just assassinated a top Iranian General.  This action is one of many that President Trump has done to put the United States in danger.  Consumer Activist Ralph Nader has laid out appropriately, the egregious violations which have made him rise to the level of history's most Impeachable President in the history of the United States:

Full Impeachments for Trump will Shake Senate Republicans from Kangaroo Court

Many Americans have forecasted that the outlaw Donald Trump will commit even more illegal acts to increasing his support in the 2020 presidential year. Remember Wag the Dog, a film about using a fabricated war to draw attention away from presidential misdeeds. Those Americans have been proven right by Donald Trump’s attempt to provoke an unlawful war with Iran. Likewise, Trump has illegally ordered his staff or ex-staff to ignore Congressional subpoenas to testify and provide documents.

As the most impeachable president in American history, Trump continues to shred our Constitution and its critical separation of powers. Trump has repeatedly, brazenly seized Congressional authority in an attempt to turn the presidency into a monarchy.  Trump once went so far as to say, “I am the chosen one.”

Unlike Nixon, who slinked away because of the Watergate scandal, every day Trump is providing more evidence to the Congress about his impeachability. He never stops. He never expresses remorse or apologizes for violating the Constitution or federal criminal statutes, such as the Antideficiency Act. Likewise, Trump has shown no respect for international treaties to which the U.S. is a solemn signatory.

Trump’s mantra of usurpation is clear. He declared that because of Article II of the Constitution, “I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” Trump seems to have neglected Article I, which gives Congress the exclusive authority to declare war, to appropriate funds, and to conduct investigations of the Executive branch with the plenary authority, i.e. issue and enforce subpoenas. Congress is the primary branch of government, not a co-equal branch.

Trump has refused to turn over his tax returns, unlike previous presidents who released them every year. Trump has much to hide in terms of entanglements with foreign entities. He is a walking violation of the Emoluments Clause (Article I, section 9, paragraph 8), which prohibits any president from profiting from foreign interests. Trump profits when foreign dignitaries patronize his hotels and other properties.

The Constitution requires Trump to faithfully execute the law. Instead he is destroying health, safety, workplace, and environmental laws through his corrupt henchman. The Trump regime is dismantling congressionally mandated federal agency law enforcement programs and, in so doing, is removing lifesaving protections. At the same time, Trump is corruptly raising money from the corporate interests that want to dismantle these agencies, from Wall Street to Houston’s oil barons.

The most morally distinguishing impeachable offenses come under the heading of what Alexander Hamilton called “abuse of the public trust.”

Consider these abuses of the public trust:

1) Trump’s chronic, obsessive, pathological lying and falsifications (he has made over 15,000 false or misleading claims since January 21, 2017);

2) Trump’s history of being a serial sexual predator working to delay numerous court cases and escape demands for depositions under oath by many victims;

3) Trump’s endless racism and bigotry in words and deeds. Since becoming president, Trump has backed voter suppression aimed at minorities; and

4) Trump’s incitement of violence on more than one occasion.

5) Trump should be impeached and convicted. If the supine Republican-controlled Senate fails to convict Trump, the voters should landslide him in November.

It is almost as if Trump looks to setting records in how many parts of the Constitution he can violate. He interceded with the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu to prevent two members of Congress visas to Israel. Trump’s actions prevented these members of Congress from exercising their oversight responsibilities under the Speech and Debate Clause (Article I, section 6, clause 1). No president has ever dared such an intervention.

For the elaboration of twelve impeachable counts under one major Article, see the letter by me, constitutional law experts Bruce Fein, and Louis Fisher in the Congressional Record (December 18, 2019, page H 12197).

Speaker Pelosi must add some of these impeachable offenses, backed by constitutional law specialists, or Trump will trumpet that though she had the votes to do so, she didn’t because they are “fake, lies.” Exonerating him will prove to be a devastating precedent for future presidents behaving similarly, as the standards for presidential behavior keep dropping lower and lower into lawless immunity and impunity.

Conservative Fox News commentator, constitutional law scholar, and former Judge Andrew Napolitano has said if he were the Democrats, he would reopen the impeachment case “on the basis of new evidence. That would justify holding onto the articles of impeachment [from the Senate] the articles of impeachment [abuse of power and contempt of Congress] because there’s new evidence and perhaps new articles.”

Pelosi can strengthen her hand constitutionally by enlarging the impeachment case against Trump. This move would give millions of Americans a stake in impeachment because it would directly relate to protections and services they lost because of lawless Trump.  In addition, more articles of impeachment would make the Senate Republicans led by “Moscow Mitch” McConnell far less able to hold a hasty kangaroo court trial without witnesses.

Fein, Fisher, and I have written Speaker Pelosi and Senator McConnell urging that the trial’s procedures should be established by Chief Justice John Roberts, subject to Senate majority repeal, to assure not only fairness, but the perception of fairness (See the letter here). Right now in the Senate there is too much bias, prejudgment, and conflict to avoid a farce.

Moreover, when will the American Bar Association, with over 194,000 lawyer-members, insist on constitutional observance and the rule of law? When will all those original members of Trump’s cabinet, whom he fired in favor of “yes men,” stand up patriotically for America? When will Colin Powell, George Shultz, and other leading figures from past administrations stand tall and speak out? When will former President Barack Obama stand up to Donald Trump? All of these people are privately worried sick over what Trump is doing and will do to our country.

These are very dangerous times for our Republic, its democratic processes, and our freedoms. Trump is going to “wave the flag” and try to intimidate and bully his opponents and the citizenry. Don’t fall for it America!

Related Blog Posts:


Ralph Nader: Letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi

Ralph Nader: Trump Should Be Impeached For Throwing U.S. Into Climate Chaos

Ralph Nader: “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” Really!


Ralph Nader: Will President Trump Implode with Lies Before He is Impeached?

Ralph Nader: Shame Of A Nation

Ralph Nader: Labor Day and the Lost Opportunities for Labor Discussions

Ralph Nader: Nader pays tribute to old Republican Paul Findley

Ralph Nader: How has Boeing avoided testifying in front of Congress for the 737 Max Airplane disasters?

 Ralph Nader: "What and Who Gave Us Trump?"


Ralph Nader: Youth Can Change Corporate View of Climate Crisis

What Are Activist Ralph Nader's Opinions On Radio News Organizations Such As NPR Or PBS?

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels


Ralph Nader: Post Election -- Next Step -- Open Up The Existing Secretive Congress


Ralph Nader: Warner Slack - Doctor for the People Forever


Ralph Nader: An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon


Ralph Nader: MAGA is really MADA?


Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?


Ralph Nader Says 10 Million People Could Change Healthcare Policy - That Few?


Ralph Nader Suggests To Consumers Reading 'Consumer Reports' Before Impulse Buying


Thoughts: Ralph Nader On A Cashless Economy

How Many Civilians Does The U.S. Have In Iraq?

Photo: Dissolve.com

After last weekend's announcement of the assassination of the Iranian General Qassem Soleimani by the United States of America, the Middle East is now in a state of uncertainty.   A state of risk for any U.S. citizen.  Whether military or civilian.  Which is very concerning given our longstanding oil interests.  How many civilians are working in Iraq?  The answer is ambiguous, according to reports by various news outlets.

Although, the oil companies were willing to give some information about withdrawing civilians given the current state of uncertainty.  According to reporting by Politico Energy, the number of employees is not huge:

U.S. OIL WORKERS EXIT IRAQ: Rising tensions in Iraq following the U.S. killing of Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani has prompted Chevron Corp. to withdraw American staff from Iraq, Pro's Ben Lefebvre reports . The oil major's expat employees and contract workers have left the Kurdistan region in northern Iraq "as a precautionary measure," a company spokesperson said Monday. The spokesperson declined to say how many employees had departed, only adding that it "didn't involve lots of people."

The new departures come after Reuters reported last week that U.S. citizens working for foreign oil companies were leaving Iraq because of security fears. "We have local staff who are overseeing our ongoing operations in the [Kurdistan region of Iraq] and our related expatriate workforce will continue to work remotely from overseas," the Chevron spokesperson said. Chevron plans to start producing 20,000 barrels a day in the region by the middle of this year, Ben reports. Spokespeople for Exxon Mobil and BP, which also have operations in Iraq, declined to discuss staffing or security matters at their operations.

One significant realization that I learned while serving in the Middle East (along with the rest of the world) is that the U.S. government has workers (military and civilian) in all areas of the world.  And the number is not small.  Now, move that conversation to the number of oil workers in the Middle East.



In the excerpt above, the company spokesperson stated that Chevron did have plans to produce around 200,000 barrels of oil a day.  How many workers are required to pull/produce 200,000 barrels of oil a day?



Anyone who has seen an oil refinery knows that there is massive infrastructure. Undoubtedly, the number of employees required to produce 200,000 barrels of oil a day is significant rather than small.  Furthermore, the news above is regarding downplaying the number of employees that are actually in the Middle East.  Their safety is at risk because of the actions of the President of the United States.



The actions were surprising, to say the least.  Although, former security state officials say that the Iranian General has been a target for a decade.  There is a reason why that target has never been taken out.  I imagine the answer involves the safety of the oil workers in the Middle East.



Not to mention, the large numbers of U.S. military soldiers who are now at an elevated (dangerous) risk while carrying their mission out.  The danger is unneeded and is a ploy by the President to deflect attention from the impeachment hearings of the President of the United States.  Furthermore, the evidence for proceeding to distinguish the threat is razor-thin.  Which is extremely concerning.




Related Blog Post:


How many Goodyear Blimps can be filled 1.85 billion tons of Carbon Dioxide?


President Trump Tries To Open Up Arctic For Oil Drilling, Judge Says No


Congress Intervenes And Asks For No More Oil Drilling Off Of Florida


Parameters: Shells Oil Corporation Invests In Renewable Energy Infrastructure


Was The Recent Oil Spill in China The Largest In History?

Is 94 Million Barrels Of Oil A Large Amount? That Is The Global Daily Demand!

Iraq Has Enough Oil To Support The World For 4 Years -- What?