We hear in public forums that “climate is always changing,” or that “climate change is part of a natural cycle.” This is a form of misinformation intended to deflect from the existential fact Earth should be cooling according to natural cycles and it is doing the opposite. Action to mitigate the causes of planetary warming is necessary and urgent.
Climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe explains some scientific facts about natural cycles and misinformation about them in this short video.
In an effort to present a contrast with Joe Biden, Republicans insist upon elevating immigration as a top tier 2024 campaign issue. My issue with this is they lie, dissemble, and obstruct.
Are there are many “contacts” at the border. Yes. Is there a problem with illegal importation of the narcotic fentanyl? Yes. Are there 15 million undocumented persons inside the U.S. border right now? Probably yes. Why don’t politicians do something about this? Republicans decided that instead of legislating our country out of a potential problem, they would rather use immigration as one of three key issues to cudgel Joe Biden as president. (The other two are right to choose, and the economy).
On the April 5 edition of Iowa Press, Jeff Kaufmann was asked about abortion suppressing Republican voter turnout: “You know, I think it remains to be seen when you’ve got this overwhelming interest and these overwhelming numbers in terms of people’s disappointment on the border and with the economy. What is the bandwidth in terms — can you have three major issues? Can you have four? Is immigration going to overwhelm the issues debate? We’re ready for that debate.”
I don’t know anyone among my neighbors and friends for whom immigration is a significant issue. For Iowa Republicans, immigration is a top three issue.
Kaufmann explained the electoral calculus to Brianne Pfannenstiel of the Des Moines Register.
And quite frankly, Brianne, I’d like to say it’s all rallying around Donald Trump, but there’s also an element there too of if you have a choice between Donald Trump and Joe Biden, even people that are not necessarily thrilled about the personality of Donald Trump, they’re going to vote for Donald Trump.
When the founders wrote the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, immigrants were on their collective mind. Many of the founders were immigrants themselves, and no one asked native populations whether white immigrants from Europe were legal or could take the land and physically remove them. When the British began importation of slaves to North America in 1619, few people considered this human chattel to be immigrants, let alone have standing with the government. In short, white colonists began protecting their stolen and domineering rights with the 1790 Naturalization Act, which required two years of residence in the country, “good moral character,” and that an applicant must be a “free white person.” The bias toward white naturalization continued until 1965 when Lyndon Johnson opened the country’s doors to immigration from other parts of the world.
Current immigration policy, Iowa-style, is a reaction to liberal policies dating back to LBJ.
Anyone paying attention can see what’s going on:
I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. All the same, there are more important issues at stake in this election. The only way to overcome Republican hyperbole about the border is to elect Democrats.
Here is a link to the Iowa Democratic Party to get involved today.
Earth Day is Monday, so how are we doing? Is the news media helping us create a better environment?
Bill McKibben follows issues centered around the climate crisis better than almost anyone. Here’s the stark truth from his substack, The Crucial Years:
At the most fundamental level, new figures last week showed that atmospheric levels of the three main greenhouse gases—carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide—reached new all-time highs last year. Here’s how the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported the figures:
While the rise in the three heat-trapping gases recorded in the air samples collected by NOAA’s Global Monitoring Laboratory (GML) in 2023 was not quite as high as the record jumps observed in recent years, they were in line with the steep increases observed during the past decade.
The global surface concentration of CO2, averaged across all 12 months of 2023, was 419.3 parts per million (ppm), an increase of 2.8 ppm during the year. This was the 12th consecutive year CO2 increased by more than 2 ppm, extending the highest sustained rate of CO2 increases during the 65-year monitoring record. Three consecutive years of CO2 growth of 2 ppm or more had not been seen in NOAA’s monitoring records prior to 2014. Atmospheric CO2 is now more than 50% higher than pre-industrial levels.
Entirely unsurprisingly, the planet’s temperature has also continued to rise.
The Crucial Years, a substack by Bill McKibben, April 10, 2024.
Not long ago, McKibben headed an organization called 350.org, which advocated keeping average surface concentration of CO2 below 350 ppm. At 419.3 ppm, and increasing about 2 ppm per year, we are going the wrong direction.
How do news audiences perceive the climate crisis? A recent study explored this question. Why is it important? How we perceive and receive news about the climate crisis determines, in large part, whether and how we address it.
Around Earth Day, we expect to see more news stories about the climate crisis. Folks at Reuters Institute studied news use and attitudes about climate change, using data from Brazil, France, Germany, India, Japan, Pakistan, the UK, and the USA. The issues are similar to what we see in response to media on any topic: Should we trust scientists? What is misinformation and what isn’t? What news sources are trustworthy? Are direct action protests covered fairly by media? They found a lot:
- In most of the eight countries there has been a slight increase in climate change news use, with just over half (55%) on average using climate change news in the previous week.
- Climate news avoidance and trust in climate information from the news media have remained roughly stable, but avoidance has decreased slightly in the UK, USA, and Pakistan, as well as trust in the UK and Germany.
- Scientists remain the most trusted sources of news and information about climate change, trusted by 73% on average, and respondents more often see them used as sources in the news media than any other source of information.
- Over three quarters (80%) of survey respondents say they are concerned about climate change misinformation, consistent with data from 2022.
- Once again, respondents think television and online (including social media and messaging apps) are where they see most climate-related misinformation. Politicians, political parties, and governments are frequently mentioned as sources of false and misleading information.
- Nearly two thirds of respondents believe that news media play a significant role in influencing climate change decisions, actions by large businesses, government policies, and public attitudes, with particularly strong beliefs in Brazil, India, and Pakistan.
- There is large variation in how soon respondents think people in their country will face the serious effects of climate change, with significant proportions in every country thinking the consequences are decades away at least. However, people who use climate change news on a weekly basis are considerably more likely to think that people are being affected by climate change now.
- Significant disparities exist in perceptions of the impact of climate change on public health specifically, with those in Global South countries (Brazil, India, Pakistan) generally perceiving larger effects (50% or more) than those in the Global North (UK, USA, France, Germany, Japan).
- Just over half of respondents think that climate change has a larger effect on poorer people (53%) and poorer countries (52%), but there is a considerable partisan disagreement on this in France, the UK, and the USA, with those leaning politically right less likely to agree.
- People are more likely to think that richer countries and more polluting countries should take greater responsibility for reducing climate change, and weekly climate change news users are more likely to hold this view.
- In the UK, USA, Germany and France opinion is roughly evenly split on whether direct action climate protests (e.g. blocking roads, disrupting sporting events) are covered fairly by the news media. But in Germany, the UK, and the USA opinion varies depending on whether people support or oppose the protests.
- People in our survey expressed a high level of interest in various types of climate coverage, including news that discusses latest developments, positive news, and coverage presenting solutions. People did not express a clear preference for the type of solutions journalism they are most interested in.
What do these findings mean? Assessing news in media has become a critical skill in 2024. It is important to align our lives with accurate information about the climate crisis. Rich McKibben is a good source of information. So are Katharine Hayhoe and Al Gore. Knowing the truth about the climate crisis will make us better advocates. It will set us free to create a better world for our progeny.
On Earth Day 2024, we are a distance from achieving our goals. Things are not going as well as we need and it is complicated by reliance on media fraught with misinformation. We can do better.
~ The author helped organize the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970 in his home town. He served as chair of the county board of health, and has been advocating and writing on environmental issues all along his journey. He joined Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project in 2013.
Prairie Dog
From the Spring 2024 edition of The Prairie Progressive, Iowa’s oldest progressive newsletter. The PP is funded entirely by reader subscription, available in hard copy for $15/yr. Send check to PP, Box 1945, Iowa City 52244. Click here for archived issues
We’ve all heard of “Iowa nice.” Agree with it or not, it describes a state where folks are— well, folks. Amiable, helpful, willing to visit and ready to lend a hand as need arises. People have long been proud of this little phrase, but the state may soon have to retire it. Iowa nice has morphed into Iowa nutty. And Iowa’s elected version of nutty exhibits both a lack of reason and a very mean edge.
Between the GOP-controlled legislature and our increasingly fervid, pen-wielding governor, the state is considering, passing, and even signing into law bills that serve to increase our children’s chances of getting killed, decrease their odds of eating three squares a day, and potentially insure they grow up without both parents. And that’s only the bills pertaining to arming teachers, the governor’s rejection of $29 million in federal food funding for kids and replacing it with around $900,000 in state funds with strings attached, and the attacks on abortion that seem to wait around the corner in red states.
The bill to arm teachers and other school staff, HF2586, would give those who shoot and kill someone more than the guns to do it: they would also enjoy qualified immunity. To be armed, they’d have to pass a one-time training on the legal issues surrounding qualified immunity plus emergency medical treatment; then quarterly firearms training; and an annual ‘live scenario’ drill. Well, that should make us all feel better about Mr. Fury, the recently divorced shop teacher having weapons at work. The bill passed the House and passed the Senate but was amended there, so is back in the House. The Governor will sign it in a heartbeat. Perhaps a child’s last heartbeat.
Aside from the above, the Area Education Agencies bill and the so-called “illegal re-entry” bill are now laws. The first decimates—or, to use the trendy word for interfering right-wing havoc, “disrupts”—a perfectly solid statewide system providing educational assistance to children with special needs. AEAs are respected and relied upon by everyone from farmers to remote tech workers, parents, and children in all 99 counties.
The bill faced massive opposition from voters. They filled committee meetings and flooded legislators with emails and letters stating their outrage, anxiety, and dread over what the bill might do to children’s well-being and educational opportunities. The majority party was not having any of it. They voted for the bill and the Governor signed it. The bill takes a system working well and alters its funding model. It gives percentages of various funding streams to school districts, and the rest to the AEAs— who may or may not be chosen by the school districts to provide the services in a specific funding area. It creates uncertainty. It rolls the dice in an area where the students have great vulnerability and an even greater
need for stability and predictability. It meets Gov. Reynolds’ model for reaching into a bureaucracy and rearranging it for no good reason, with potential for great harm, simply to say she “fixed” something. Does this remind you of another (former) chief executive?
The illegal re-entry bill, SF2340, is a complete farce, a tour de force of right-wing showmanship signifying nothing. It applies to a tiny group of people. The Des Moines Register described this well in its April 10 outline of the newly signed bill: “The law creates a new crime of illegal reentry into the state, which applies to anyone who has previously been deported, removed, or denied admission to the United States.”
Iowa is not a border state. We are assuredly not a revolving door state. The most likely harborers of anyone meeting the law’s description are mega-farms that desperately need migrant work to continue raking in profits. Ironically, most of these are owned by GOP cheerleaders who write checks to support this nonsense with one hand, knowing they will be left alone by law enforcement in their counties to sign the paychecks for “illegal” immigrants with the other. It’s ironic. It’s galling. It’s performative yet dehumanizing. It’s Iowa!
Our state is in terrible straits. It appears most Iowans approve of at least some of what our governor is doing (for example, the bill to arm teachers polled at a 60% approval rating, also cited in the Register). But lowest common- denominator fears and knee-jerk solutions erode a state’s livability factor over time. And it doesn’t take long. Time’s a wasting for us to maintain our “Iowa nice” vibe. Meanwhile, our governor seems almost dreamily enamored of the Field of Dreams storyline. If you build it, they will come. She (and all those elected under the banner of her party) need to start asking, If you tear it all down, what will you have left?
—Kim Painter is the Johnson County Recorder.
She who can’t be bothered to answer questions from reporters.
Happy Thursday loyal readers!
Monday April 22 is Earth Day 2024. Paul Deaton will have a post here Saturday about how we’re doing meeting our goals to save the planet. Paul has excellent credentials as a climate activist. I hope you check out his article.
If you are looking for Earth Day events around Iowa, click the link for what looks like a pretty complete list.
Will the current nightmarish Republican controlled legislative session ever end?
Here’s what R’s are up to now:
From the Iowa Capital Dispatch
“The Iowa House voted Tuesday to diminish the role and authority of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission and combine individual commissions on the status of underrepresented populations into a single board.”
“The bill would also do away with panels such as the commissions on Latino affairs, Native American Affairs, the commissions on the status of women, African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islanders, persons with disabilities and women. One person representing each group would be appointed to a consolidated Human Rights Board.” [bolding added by BFIA]
No Democrat voted for the bill so in my view it is misleading for a newspaper or other media outlet to say only “The Iowa house voted to diminish the role and authority of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission.” All but eight Republicans supported the bill and no Democrats. The above statement adds to the oft-repeated myth that “all politicians are alike.” When newspaper and media outlets do not put this information at the top of every story about legislation passed, it is a disservice to Iowans. The Des Moines Register did include receipts.
“Eight Republicans joined every Democrat in opposition, while all other Republicans were in favor.” – The Des Moines Register
Another session where we can only hope it gets over before Republicans have time to do even more damage to our once fair state.
On a happier note, there’s this.
The conversation on Thom Hartmann’s program yesterday also pertains to Iowa which is saturated in right wing radio including WHO radio, a 50,000 watt station that reaches every corner of our state and beyond plus multiple hours of daily right wing talk on local commercial radio stations all around the state. Click on the link for a list of stations in Iowa and the number of hours of daily right wing programming. https://blogforiowa.com/2017/02/10/right-wing-media-and-the-power-of-fear/
“..by stoking rural Whites’ anger rather than addressing the hard problems they face, conservative politicians and talking heads create a feedback loop of resentments that are undermining American democracy.”
“What isn’t said enough is that rural whites are being told to blame all the wrong people. When Republican politicians and conservative media tell rural whites to aim their anger at these targets, it’s so they won’t ask why the people they keep electing haven’t done anything to improve life in their communities.”
Ari Berman is a native Iowan and author of Herding Donkeys: The Fight to Rebuild the Democratic Party and Reshape American Politics (2010); Give Us The Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America (2015); and Minority Rule. The Right-Wing Attack on the Will of the People—and the Fight to Resist It (2024) coming out April 23rd.
Follow Simon Rosenberg for reality based election information and more. Hopium Chronicles link below. Also follow him on Twitter.
Commenters said:
“A sane voice in an era of madness in American politics.”
“Essential listening for Democracy”
“Thank you so much for reminding us of the truth of what the Democrats have done and how we continue to fight for our freedoms every day.”
“With Democrats Things Get Better s is a 30 minute deep dive on US politics since the Berlin Wall fell and a new era of global and domestic politics began. It tells a simple story – when Democrats are in power in America, things get better. When are Republicans are, they don’t. Hope you will check it out, share with others and let me know what you think – Simon For more commentary and analysis like this come join me at Hopium Chronicles” – https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/
From our friends at Physicians for Social Responsibility:
Members of Congress are attempting to roll back one of the most crucial standards of Clean Air Act protections. We must stop them!
The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are now under attack, under the guise of the “Air Quality Standards Implementation Act of 2024” – although we refer to HR 7650 with a more apt name, the “Smoggy Skies Act.”
This is an outrageous attack, given the incredible work the NAAQS have accomplished at cleaning up pollution and saving lives since 1971.
The Smoggy Skies Act de-prioritizes health in several ways:
The NAAQS, our basic pollutant standards, are currently reviewed and revised every five years. This would be extended to every ten years, despite any technological or health breakthroughs that could take place during this time. Rather than basing new standards on health outcomes, the Smoggy Skies Act would give precedence to implementation costs and technological feasibility, even though these things are already taken into account under current NAAQS procedure.
We rely on the Clean Air Act and NAAQS to put health first and protect our most vulnerable, like front line communities, children, and the elderly. The passage of the Smoggy Skies Act puts all of us at risk by rolling back the decades of progress we have made in decreasing air pollution nationwide. In honor of Earth Month, let’s raise our voices on behalf of our planet. Please take action today to preserve the progress we have made in decreasing air pollution.
This bill could be voted on at any time, so don’t delay! Contact your Members of Congress today and tell them to vote NO on HR 7650, the Air Quality Standards Implementation Act of 2024.
Click here to take action or write your member of Congress directly to vote NO on HR 7650.
Thank you,
Miah Hornyak
Policy Coordinator, Environment & Health
Barbara Gottlieb
Director, Environment & Health
