Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Sullivan is back on Palin watch



Vanity Fair’s Todd Purdum, as part of his long expose on Sarah Palin, a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/08/sarah-palin200908?printable=truecurrentPage=all"discusses the denouement of her pregnancy with Trig/a, and ventures the simple guess that she absolutely, positively, had to have Trig Palin born in Alaska.br /br /Purdum notes of the state and its mentality:br /blockquote John McPhee wrote, “Alaska is a foreign country significantly populated with Americans. Its languages extend to English. Its nature is its own. Nothing seems so unexpected as the boxes marked ‘U.S. Mail.’” That description still fits. The state capital, Juneau, is 600 miles from the principal city, Anchorage, and is reachable only by air or sea. Alaskan politicians list the length of their residency in the state (if they were not born there) at the top of their biographies, and are careful to specify whether they like hunting, fishing, or both. There is little sense of government as an enduring institution: when the annual 90-day legislative session is over, the legislators pack up their offices, files, and computers, and take everything home. Alaska’s largest newspaper, the Anchorage Daily News, maintains no full-time bureau in Juneau to cover the statehouse. As in any resource-rich developing country with weak institutions and woeful oversight, corruption and official misconduct go easily unchecked. Scrutiny is not welcome, and Alaskans of every age and station, of every race and political stripe, unself-consciously refer to every other place on earth with a single word: Outside./blockquotebr /Fine, Todd, but why did she drive out of Anchorage to Wasilla to go to a hospital surely unprepared for a complicated delivery, if a 44-year-old woman had one?br /br /Andrew Sullivan, after a long absence from Palin watch a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/and-the-story-the-msm-still-wont-touch.html"agrees with me/a, calling this a non sequitur. And, saying that the MSM not investigating this is an exemplar of why it’s in trouble.br /br /Meanwhile, the story has provoked a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24392.html"a new round of GOP infighting/a, and what’s wrong with that?div class="blogger-post-footer"There is no god and I am his prophet.img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7532871-7426498321377446957?l=socraticgadfly.blogspot.com'//div

technorati tags:
| |
More at: News 2 Cromley

Reframing climate change, part II



div align="justify"For years, climate realists have been concerned that, despite all the grim scientific evidence, the public is still not fully engaged with the debate or the action that will be needed to address climate change. One problem may even be the term “climate change”. Now a new report suggests that another term may shift the public’s dial. The term is, wait for it: "global warming".br /br /a href="http://scienceblogs.com/framing-science/2009/06/study_do_the_terms_global_warm.php"emFraming Science’s/em Matt Nisbet cites a new study/a that shows how using the terms "climate change" versus "global warming" has a real bearing on public perceptions. Published in the Jemournal Public Understanding of Science/em, it comes from Lorraine Whitmarsh of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and is based on a postal survey of 590 people in Portsmouth, Hampshire.br /br /Nisbet quotes from the study’s conclusion:br /br /blockquotep align="justify"em""Global warming" is more often believed to have human causes and tends to be associated with ozone depletion, the greenhouse effect and heat-related impacts, such as temperature increase and melting icebergs and glaciers. The term "climate change" is more readily associated with natural causes and a range of impacts. Furthermore, the term "global warming" evokes significantly more concern, and is rated as "very important" by more respondents, than the term "climate change." Finally, more people consider individual or public action to be an effective means of tackling "global warming than do so for "climate change"; while a higher proportion believe planting trees could mitigate "climate change" than it could mitigate "global warming.""/embr //p/blockquotebr /The political realities take us right back to a href="http://www.aspenlawschool.com/books/plater_environmentallaw/updates/02.6.pdf"the infamous memo produced in 2002 by the US conservative political strategist Frank Luntz/a. He advised the George W. Bush White House on how to neutralise global warming and the environment as political issues. br /br /blockquotep align="justify"em“It’s time for us to start talking about “climate change” instead of global warming . . . . “climate change” is less frightening than “global warming.” . . . While global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it, climate change suggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge.”/em/p/blockquotebr /br /All this suggests that climate realists should stop talking about “climate change” and start talking about “global warming”.br /br /But a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/drew-westen/speaking-with-americans-a_b_205598.html"Drew Westen and Celinda Lake/a, who are experts on the emotional and neurological drivers of public opinion, see it differently. They were involved with a recent comprehensive research project for the communications gurus ecoAmerica, which aimed to find new ways to persuade people who haven’t made up their minds about climate change / global warming. Westen and Lake contend that “global warming” may sound quite positive to some Americans and that they may be less inclined to believe it every time there’s a cold spell. In any case, they say, “global warming” may be too abstract a concept for most people.br /br /Last month, ecoAmerica produced their report a href="http://ecoamerica.net/press/media/090520/truths"Climate and Energy Reports: Our Common Future/a. Here’s their key suggestion:br /br /blockquotep align="justify"em"For climate change, leading with global warming, climate crisis or climate change tends to polarize and weaken the message. The language itself is especially problematic among swing voters. We should speak of deteriorating atmosphere and only after establishing connections with Americans’ other valuesbr /first . . .br /br / “The best new term is “deteriorating atmosphere” or “our deteriorating atmosphere”(personalizing the term) instead of ‘global warming’ or ‘climate crisis.’”/embr /br //p/blockquoteI agree with Westen and Lake on the need to get away from jargon and on the need for progressives and client realists need to speak to people in their language, speaking to their values. The ecoAmerica report makes many good points (example: don’t talk about “renewable” and “alternative” energy; instead, talk about energy sources that run out and ones that don’t run out.) It is worth reading in full. br /br /But their big idea, “our deteriorating atmosphere” isn’t the most catchy phrase I’ve ever heard. a href="http://thehill.com/mark-mellman/voters-act-on-global-warming-2009-05-12.html"The respected Democrat pollster Mark Mellman has argued that it lags a long way behind public American public opinion. /a He cites evidence that the vast majority of Americans believe global warming is real, is happening now and constitutes a serious threat, particularly to future generations. br /br /Likewise, four out of five people the UK are very or fairly concerned about the impact of climate change on the country. Most think that the UK is already affected. The vast majority believe that it may result in increased pollution, changing local weather and increased risk of skin cancer. Around three quarters believe that climate change is mainly or entirely a result of human behaviour. Four out of five people in the UK are very or fairly concerned about climate change. [click a href="http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/individual/attitudes/pdf/ccresearch-toplines7-0803.pdf"here/a] We should use these assets and build on the foundations. This isn’t the time to forget them. br /br /So where to now? "Climate change" is a more technically accurate term but, as a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/12/climate-change-copenhagen-monbiot"George Monbiot/a has said, it does not explain the full impact of what we are doing to the earth’s atmosphere. If the Tyndall research is correct, "global warming" is more emotive but it may not public support for the action that we all to take. But nobody has yet come up with a new term that really works. And, as Nesbit says, there is a risk trying to bring in new ones may simply annoy or polarise the public, who may feel they are being “sold to”.br /br /There may not be a silver bullet on climate communications. So let's keep working with the terms we know, such as "climate change" and "global warming". And we need more UK-based research (polls, focus groups) about these terms, some of the options, and what they really mean to people. br /br /The same applies to framing. UK climate realists have long used the “environmental disaster” frame. a href="http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/March-April%202009/Nisbet-full.html"There are others on offer/a, most notably the “economic development” frame, which usually translates into “green jobs” and the “public health frame”, which has some value too. All of these should help to target messages and tell stories, to build support with different sections of the public and persuade people to act. Yet there is still very little research about how these frames work or fail with British people. br /br /Most importantly, we shouldn’t pretend that any of these can be used in isolation from the evidence and arguments about climate change and global warming. Too many of the arguments over climate communications – especially those in the states – are carried out as if there is a direct choice between the science and the popular messages” / frames. But it doesn’t have to be that way. The climate realists can win on all these fronts. For some brilliant examples of how the jobs frame, the economic security frame and the climate message can work together, check out a href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/25/obama-waxman-markey-job/"this speech by Barack Obama, urging passage of the Waxman-Markey energy bill./a (hat tip: a href="http://climateprogress.org/"Climate Progress/a) Or a href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/16/obama-radio-address-for-the-first-time-utility-companies-and-corporate-leaders-are-joining-not-opposing-environmental-advocates-and-labor-leaders-to-create-a-new-system-of-clean-energy-initiati/"this post/a by Joe Romm showing how Obama uses rhetoric and metaphor, to push his climate change messages so brilliantly.br /br /If only there was a politician willing and able to apply those lessons in the UK./divdiv class="blogger-post-footer"img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7148608036370776702-2674107694382341962?l=neilstockley.blogspot.com'//div

technorati tags:
| |
More at: News 2 Cromley

PKFZ: Full Support to Stop Payment



We would like to express our fullest support to the PKA for witholding the RM660 million payment to Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd with regards to the a href="http://tonypua.blogspot.com/2009/05/pkfz-should-it-be-kept-alive.html"PKFZ project/a.br /br /The DAP Secretary-General, Lim Guan Eng has requested for the Transport Ministry to a href="http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/30877-guan-eng-wants-tee-keat-to-stop-paying-kuala-dimensi"stop payments to KDSB/a or any other parties, until the culprits responsible for the scandal are arrested and charged in court yesterday, and we are elated that the PKA has agreed with the suggestion made.br /br /The Transport Minister must now expedite the investigations into the various wrong-doings, abuse of power, conflict of interest, criminal neglect as well as possible corruption in the handling and management of the PKFZ project.span class="fullpost"br /br /Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat must now ensure that all 222 Members of Parliament receive the long-promised but still outstanding copies of the complete PKFZ audit report by Pricewaterhouse Coopers (PwC) before the current parliamentary session ends on Thursday, 2nd July. The delay and failure of delivering these key and critical documents signals the reluctance of the Government to reveal the truth and nothing but the whole truth to the public to ensure that the wrong-doers are duly punished.br /br /The Minister must also demonstrate his sincerity and ministerial responsibility by giving an full account of the various wrong-doings, abuse of power and other weaknesses as found by the Ministry to date to ensure that the Parliament as well as the overall Malaysian public is given full accountability of the PKFZ, instead of continuing to evade the very pertinent questions in the minds of the people at large./spandiv class="blogger-post-footer"img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/37045477-1886200310218304807?l=tonypua.blogspot.com'//div

technorati tags:
| |
More at: News 2 Cromley

No budget deal as Cali issues IOUs



If you were an outside vendor, would you accept a state of California IOU, backed in part by a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090701/pl_nm/us_economy_california_budget_2"a GOP-dysfunctional state Assembly and Senate/a? I’m thinking that even GOP businessmen who preach against taxes all the time are going to blink hard at what the anti-tax obstructionism in the Leaden State has now brought about.div class="blogger-post-footer"There is no god and I am his prophet.img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7532871-2401444767321004717?l=socraticgadfly.blogspot.com'//div

technorati tags:
| |
More at: News 2 Cromley

How Not to Organize a Country



One of the many things I find utterly fascinating about my adopted land is its unwritten constitution. Writing on the strength of an unwritten constitution, a a href="http://www.economist.com/books/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13895079"book review/a in the recent span style="font-style: italic;"Economist/span states it well enough:br /blockquoteThe constitution was not a set of fundamental and broadly unalterable rules but simply “what happened”. The fact that government’s workings could easily and unobtrusively be changed was accounted a virtue: Britain escaped the ancestor worship that fixed canons like America’s imposed. Its elusive constitution seemed to ensure both stability and freedom. It was envied abroad and taken for granted at home./blockquoteIts strength of flexibility and malleability is at once its primary weakness: while it does an admirable job of adapting in most respects, on occasion the lack of clear and precise principles beyond the sovereignty of Parliament (and technically the Monarch) can lead to a ludicrously botched state of affairs. The piece in span style="font-style: italic;"The Economist/span is rather quiet on the weaknesses inherent to the British constitution save for an observation attributed to the Queen herself: "The British Constitution has always been puzzling and always will be." It is perhaps at its most puzzling when it comes to devolution of some powers to some regions.br /br /I won't get into the history much, but England sort of ended up dominating this island I live on, and tried to dominate the island to the west as well (while they mostly failed in that project ultimately, there are some residual manifestations). Possibly as a result, some people who live in the non-English bits of these islands view the English with some reservation bording on disdain. Indeed, it strikes me as provincial that supporters of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland aren't merely unconcerned if England win or lose, they actively root, support, plot, and facilitate England's demise. Now I'll admit to generally not supporting UCLA, USC, or, god forbid, the Oregon freaking Ducks in their daily endeavours, yet when these teams reach the Rose Bowl at the expense of the University of Washington (a fairly safe bet these days unfortunately) I instinctively root for the Pac-10 against the heathens from the Midwest. Not so on these islands.br /divbr /The constituent nations, even, yes, a href="http://www.mebyonkernow.org/"span style="font-style: italic;"Cornwall/span/a, a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornish_self-government_movement"span style="font-style: italic;"/span/ahave also over the years appealed for a degree of, if not absolute, political autonomy. In a measured implementation, this I can appreciate and support (i.e. short of outright independence). However, in the tradition of the unwritten constitution lacking any set of guiding principles beyond what the Government of the day deems politically astute, the Labour implementation of devolution to Scotland and Wales was predictably botched.br /br /The first attempt at devolution to a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_devolution_referendum,_1979"Scotland/a and a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_devolution_referendum,_1979"Wales/a was held in 1979. Both failed in referenda, convincingly in Wales and technically in Scotland. The version of devolution we have with us passed overwhelmingly in a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_devolution_referendum,_1997"Scotland/a, barely in a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_devolution_referendum,_1997"Wales/a, in 1997, possibly one of the few referenda that Labour have promised in their various election manifestos that they have carried through on. The resulting Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly are close to powerless when contrasted with an American state, or even city in many cases. Scotland can vary the basic tax rate by up to three pence on the pound, which at least affords that body some democratic leeway (but, critically, not business tax, nor does the Scottish Parliament have any say over a href="http://www.energycurrent.com/index.php?id=2amp;storyid=18710"what remains/a of North Sea oil). Wales has neither the oil nor the taxation power. However, both Scotland and Wales do have a large say over how span style="font-style: italic;"certain /spanaspects of the budget allocated to them from Westminster, and it is here where some of the most striking anomalies arise.br /br /The key fault with the current implementation of devolution is its asymmetry span style="font-style: italic;"vis-a-vis/span the central government. Scotland has more power than Wales, they both have more and less than Northern Ireland, and everybody has more than any region in England. Tam Dalyell pointed out this anomaly back in 1977 with the so-called "a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Lothian_question"West Lothian Question/a". I assume that anybody who has read this far knows what it is, but in a nutshell, Scottish and Welsh MPs can vote on issues that affect England (and English voters), while English MPs are not eligible to vote on issues devolved to the Welsh Assembly or Scottish Parliament.br /br /The West Lothian Question is best illustrated, at least in my current setting in my office in the Politics amp; International Relations department at an English university, by variance in university fees. Universities in the UK are funded, and ultimately administered (albeit very loosely) by the state. The a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_Education_Act_2004"Higher Education Act of 2004/a basically tripled the tuition fee that students are responsible for paying, but not in Scotland, where higher education is a devolved power. It barely passed, by only five votes if I recall correctly. While there were obviously a large number of Labour rebels voting against the Blair Government, the overwhelming Labour majority in Scotland was critical in getting the Act passed. Remove these Scottish MPs from the equation, it fails. I often wonder how such an arrangement is consistent with basic democratic norms (and you can bet that I invite my students to consider this as they pay their fees).br /br /Alex Salmond, First Minister of Scotland and Leader of the Scottish National Party, has been getting a fairly easy ride through his term of office, due in large part to Scotland historically receiving a higher than average per capita spending from Westminster, now in effect a grant given to the Scottish Parliament to spend (on those policy areas not reserved to Westminster). No Scottish Government, Labour or SNP, have had to take advantage of the basic taxation rate. a href="http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13863407"This may change/a, which is a good thing.br /br /This is not meant to be a rant against the British "Constitution" per se, and as Walter Bagehot wrote in his brilliant Victorian treatise span style="font-style: italic;"The English Constitution/span, the American system is also far from perfect. Indeed, this paragraph made me chuckle this morning:br /blockquoteA hostile legislature and a hostile executive were so tied together, that the legislature tried, and tried in vain, to rid itself of the executive by accusing it of illegal practices. The legislature was so afraid of the President's legal power, that it unfairly accused him of acting beyond the law. And the blame thus cast on the American Constitution is so much praise to be given to the American political character. Few nations, perhaps scarcely any nation, could have borne such a trial so easily and so perfectly. This was perhaps the most striking instance of disunion between the President and the Congress that has ever yet occurred, and which probably will ever occur./blockquoteBagehot was writing about the impeachment of one Mr. Johnson. I also do not mean to suggest that there aren't similar anomolies in the U.S. (see the District of Columbia for a hilarious example) or that Scotland, Wales, or even Cornwall deserve some degree of autonomy.br /br /All I ask is that it be done right, and this clearly isn't.br //divdiv class="blogger-post-footer"img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7163938-5818007351044348388?l=lefarkins.blogspot.com'//div

technorati tags:
| |
More at: News 2 Cromley

OAS takes its turn at Honduras meddling



Interim President Roberto Micheletti and his country a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090701/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_us_honduras_24"have been threatened with suspension/a from the Organization of American States unless exiled ex-President Manuel Zelaya is restored to power within three days.br /br /Micheletti says he’s a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090701/wl_nm/us_honduras_26"ready to talk/a, whether with the OAS, Obama Administration or the UN, as protests I his favor continued to be larger than those for Zelaya, but nobody will dialogue.br /br /And, Micheletti a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124628267418867961.html"ready to talk/a defended the legality of everything done, and confirmed Honduras still plans a regular presidential election in November, as well as noting he would not run in that election and was only serving to fill out Zelaya’s term:br /blockquote“We are acting within the law,” said Mr. Micheletti, a member of Mr. Zelaya's own political party and leader of Honduras’s Congress, who was sworn in as president hours after troops stormed the presidential palace. Mr. Zelaya, he said, “is now suffering the consequences of having broken the law.” …br /br /Mr. Micheletti called for “understanding” from other nations, especially the U.S. “If [the U.S.] does not recognize us, it would be condemning to failure the aspirations of Hondurans.”/blockquotebr /Note also, in case you were unaware, that Micheletti is from Zelaya’s political party. This is not some reactionary.br /br /Meanwhile, Fausta’s blog (definitely right-conservative overall, but good on this issue), with translations of La Prensa articles, note a href="http://faustasblog.com/?p=13740"just how long in preparation/a Zelaya’s clearly illegal referendum had been. It’s been months.br /br /Fortunately, a few folks in the MSM, like a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/1120408.html"Miami Herald’s Glenn Garvin/a, also know this was not a coup. Like Garvin says, can’t Obama, the OAS and the UN take Micheletti and the Honduran Congress at their word, and just be patient until November?div class="blogger-post-footer"There is no god and I am his prophet.img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7532871-6879101128795284140?l=socraticgadfly.blogspot.com'//div

technorati tags:
| |
More at: News 2 Cromley

Disparate Treatment and Equal Protection



span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0"Scalia's/span a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-1428.ZC.html"concurrence/a in span style="font-style: italic;"span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1"Ricci/span /spanelaborated an alleged conflict between equal protection and the disparate treatment of the Civil Rights Act. I won't call this a false conflict, exactly -- as with many legal and constitutional values, there is potential tension in marginal cases. But I think Ginsburg's response gets it right:br /blockquotebr /Neither Congress’ enactments nor this Court’s Title VII precedents (including the now-discredited decision in iWards Cove/i) offer even a hint of “conflict” between an employer’s obligations under the statute’s disparate-treatment and disparate-impact provisions. Cf. iante/i, at 20. Standing on an equal footing, these twin pillars of Title VII advance the same objectives: ending workplace discrimination and promoting genuinely equal opportunity.br /br /Yet the Court today sets at odds the statute’s core directives./blockquoteI'll leave a discussion about how the Court's conservatives have used different standards of evidence to prove discriminatory intent for another post. But, in general, not only is paying attention to disparate impact consistent with enforcing civil rights and the equal protection of the law, it's necessary. To use the old analogy, it's silly to pretend (as the span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2"ahistorical/span formalism practiced by the Court's conservatives* demands) that a woman kept in chains and fed bread and water and a woman given a professional training regimen are in an equal position because they both start at the same line. The effects of history don't vanish when the law changes. Legacy admissions in formerly racist colleges, for example, perpetuate white span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3"supremacy/span span style="font-style: italic;"whether they are intentionally discriminatory or not/span, because they provide a benefit to some whites that are not available to black people. This isn't to suggest that dealing with a history of discrimination is span style="font-style: italic;"easy/span, of course, but there's a reason why virtually a href="http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2009/06/i-know-thurgood-marshall-and-john.html"nobody who supported civil rights contemporaneously/a thinks that John Roberts' empty homilies are an adequate response. br /br /*Of course, this applies only to approving discrimination against African-Americans. When you're asserting discrimination against an Italian-American firefighter, a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2009/06/justice-alitos-disgraceful-concurrence.html"any lurid, implausible, race-bating conspiracy theory/a is plenty good enough.div class="blogger-post-footer"img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7163938-3746448175324276807?l=lefarkins.blogspot.com'//div

technorati tags:
| |
More at: News 2 Cromley