White House Alters Scientific Evidence; Commits Fraud

Even in July 2008, when the extreme negative effects of global warming are well established and accepted as scientific fact, Cheney and the Bush Administration are trying to downplay the environmental report indicating such -- even going so far as to physically alter scientific documents and government agency findings before they are released.

Unfortunately, these actions are nothing new. As early as 2002, there were documented instances in which White House officials altered a government climate research draft, and in the following document, Phillip Cooney, then the White House chief of staff of the Council on Environmental Quality (formerly a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute), severely edited findings warning of extreme consequences to finally be no more than suggestions of possibilities.

View the drafts appearing in Sierra Magazine here.

View the drafts uncovered by the New York Times here.

After his editing became highly publicized, Cooney resigned and joined ExxonMobil.

One of the individuals at the center of outing Cooney's actions and brining the Bush Administration's desires to alter and restrict scientific findings on global warming was Rick Piltz -- a former senior associate on the U.S. Climate Change Science Program who resigned in 2005 in protest to interference in the program's reports.

The news blitz sparked by his resignation and by his congressional testimony on the matter has created much headway in exposing the scientific fraud being commited by the Executive Branch of the American government.

Read Piltz's memo describing his reasons for resignation here.

Read Piltz's testimony before the U.S. Congressional hearing here.

However, despite the continuing legal battles and negative publicity, it is surprising that the Bush Administration continues to try and alter public scientific documents on climate change. Even more surprising is that their actions are really not widely reported and realized. Unfortunately, probably due in part to the lack of general knowledge of the administration's action, it is entirely plausible that the White House's fraudulent activities aren't relegated to just climate change documents.

According to the deposition of Jason K. Burnett, a senior advisor on climate change at the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), Vice President Dick Cheney and "the Council on Environmental Quality were seeking deletions to the CDC testimony (concerning)... any discussions of the human health consequences of climate change." According to CNN, Cheney's office pushed for major deletions out of fear that the information, if released, would make it harder to avoid regulating greenhouse gasses."

Why the same legal ramifications are not in place for Cheney and his office as they are for Cooney, one can only guess.

What's more frustrating is that, even when faced with unalterable and undeniable evidence, the White House refused to act on the effects of global warming.

In a recent Supreme Court decision (ironically staffed by conservative judges, a couple of whom were themselves appointed by President Bush), the Court ruled 5-4 that if the EPA were to find evidence that global warming did indeed pose a threat to the public health and future of humans as whole, that the EPA under the White House must act to enforce restrictions on the harm.

(The Supreme Court, as the Judicial branch of United States Government, tells the President's Office, known as the executive branch, what laws to enforce and how. The White House is obligated to follow the Court's directions.)

In a surprise twist, the White House refused to act on the EPA's warnings -- by NOT OPENING THE EMAIL sent by the EPA. They simply refused to read it because if they did, they would be legally obligated to act.

According to the New York Times, "The White House succesfully put pressure on the EPA to elimate large sections of the original analysis that supported regulation. including a finding that tough regulation of motor vehicle emissions could produce $500 billion to $2 trillion in economic benefits over the next 32 years."

The obstinacy of the Bush Administration is simply amazing.

E-Waste: The Quiet Catastrophe

TIME magazine recently published an online article about E-waste and the abhorrent conditions that it creates. Most people, as indicated in the article, stereotype the electronics industries as "clean" and "environmentally friendly;" after all, just think of all the paper that the digital age saves! Or so they say.

As the digital age progress and newer and faster; better, electronics debut, the consumerist culture in industrialized nations discards their older electronics -- now at an ever-growing rate.

Just what happens to the computers, old mp3 players, cell phones, and other devices that we discard? Just try getting rid of your old CRT computer monitor (those really BIG ones that have been mostly replaced by the flat-panel LCD ones) at your local recycling center or even in trash. It's considered toxic waste.

The United States has a horrible tendency to ship their waste overseas to countries that will take it -- mainly those with largely impoverished sections, as they will do practically anything for U.S. dollars.

In the YouTube video below, Michael Zhao describes and shows us some of the footage from these countries and describes the paths that our trash takes. A journalist with ties to the Asia Society (which is "working to strengthen relationships and promote understanding among the people, leaders, and institutions of Asia and the United States), Zhao visited firsthand one of the small Chinese towns that has been ravaged by their own industry: E-Waste processing.

In those towns, one might imagine a factory-like building in which workers come to disassemble electronic waste in a controlled and safe environment; but that is not the case. Without clothing protection, eye goggles, or even a mask, the town's citizens burn leftover parts on home stoves, attempting to salvage the tiny amounts of gold within the product.

The toxic fumes are simply inhaled by the workers. Their town is surrounded by mountains of trash. Their waterways are BLACK, like sludge; full of dumped toxic waste. And yet the workers continue to welcome E-Waste imports, for it is a small yet steady stream of much-needed money.

I would agree with some critiques that the United States electronics companies that ship the waste to these impoverished countries are guilty of long-range dumping. They simply export the toxic waste to a location far from their own, and leave the mess for the poor to clean up.

Why? Because it costs less to ship the trash halfway around the world and pay people to take it, rather than dispose of it as best as possible here in the United States.

As an American citizen, I am glad that the toxic waste is not dumped in my country (and am somewhat somewhat guilty myself -- having written this post from my Dell laptop amidst a host of other elctronics), but we have NO RIGHT to expect the rest of the world to deal with our garbage. Even if it is "their" country rather than ours, it is still "our" world -- and our only one at that.

In 1989, the United Nations adopted a treaty to control the stream of hazardous waste that was then flowing from wealthy countries to impoverished ones (See the "Basel Convention on the Control of Trans boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal). But there is one problem: the United States (one of the main exporters) never agreed to it, and poor importer countries (like China) continue to accept the waste for the few dollars that accompany it.

 

This disgusting irrelevance for the environment and for our fellow humans, this love for the bottom line, and this irresponsible industry behavior is abhorrent! I don't know what can be done, especially with so much toxic waste-to-be still in American households, but we must end the dumping  -- yesterday.

 

WATCH THE BELOW VIDEO FOR MORE INFORMATION:

The TIME article referenced above is available here: Your Laptop's Dirty Little Secret

Most of Ohio’s Seniors FAIL Graduation Test

Having just graduated high school myself, I was shocked when I noticed this story floating around the internet. Living in Michigan, I am used to the poor socio-economic conditions of the ailing state exacerbated by the struggling auto industry, upon which Michigan's economy is largely based – and the subsequent suffering of our schools. And Detroit's public schools aren't exactly a very good role model. But what's with Ohio?!

Let me quote a part of the article:

Nearly three-quarters of the public high school seniors who took the high-stakes Ohio Graduation Test in March failed at least one part of the test and will be denied a diploma next month, according to state data released yesterday.

Statewide, 12,387 high school seniors took the Ohio Graduation Test in March. It was the last chance for the class of 2007 to pass all five sections of the high school exit exam before the traditional commencement this year.

Of those who took the test, 8,956 - more than 72 percent - failed one or more sections they took.

It goes on to mention that these same students have been retaking the same test since they were sophomores - at least those that didn't pass the first time. I would like to know how exactly Ohio's school system can't pass their own students through their own tests – after "teaching" them for four years.

I'll post more information and commentary later – for now, you can read the whole article for yourself here: http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070523/NEWS04/705230397 .

I can't imagine spending four years of my life trusting the state to educate me and then being told that I can't graduate – due to their poor tutelage (C'mon! 70% of Ohio's students can't be slack offs!).

Comments, anyone?