The Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) met yesterday and voted 2-1 to allow pipeline construction to start in areas where they have voluntary easements.
Iowans have stood strong working to prevent the pipeline for months on end and we’re not going anywhere.
This pipeline fight is still far from over. Dakota Access can start construction of segments, but oil will never flow through this pipeline:
Dakota Access doesn’t have their Army Corps of Engineers’ authorizations yet for 64 water crossings.
Dakota Access had their Department of Natural Resources (DNR) sovereign lands permit revoked after Native Burial grounds were found in the pipeline’ s path.
Over a hundred of you gathered for the Broken Heartland rally right after the decision to demonstrate exactly the type of energy we need. Thank you!
Here is what we’re doing next, and we need you with us:
Landowners and activists who are willing to consider non-violent civil disobedience are being asked to step forward. Let us know you’re interested by replying to this email.
Keep the summer of resistance going by joining the Bakken Pipeline Resistance Coalition’s flotilla on the Des Moines River on Saturday, June 25! Click here for more information.
Stay tuned for more details on our next steps!
For a better Iowa,
Adam
State Policy Director
P.S. Check out all the news coverage of yesterday here!
Des Moines, IA – With the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) meeting on Monday, June 6 to possibly decide to allow construction of the Bakken Pipeline in Iowa, Bold Iowa, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, and the Bakken Pipeline Resistance Coalition are set to rally on Monday, June 6 from 1:30-2:30 p.m. at the far west side of the west Capitol Terrace, on the large granite county map of Iowa, at E Locust and E 7th streets.
The groups will ask the IUB not to reverse its March 10 order requiring Dakota Access to secure all necessary permits and authorizations for the proposed Bakken Oil Pipeline, set to cross 18 Iowa counties and all of Iowa’s major waterways. Participants will present a creative, visual representation of the potential impact of the pipeline on Iowa’s watersheds, with statements being shared by landowners in each of those watershed areas.
Since the March 10 ruling, Dakota Access has still not received the needed Army Corps of Engineers’ authorizations. On May 25, the US Fish & Wildlife Service revoked an Iowa DNR-issued Sovereign Lands permit after discovering a historic and culturally significant Native America site in the pipeline’s path in Lyon County.
Iowans remain concerned about the project’s impact on soil, water, property rights and economic interests.
Bold Iowa, Iowa CCI and the Bakken Pipeline Resistance Coalition will continue building their “Summer of Resistance” against the Bakken Pipeline. At the granite county map of Iowa on the State Capitol grounds, seven Iowans will speak out about their ecosystems and communities that the pipeline imperils, against the backdrop of a huge patchwork heart in this “Broken Heartland” action.
Who: Bold Iowa, Iowa CCI and Bakken Pipeline Resistance Coalition What: Rally and creative political theater against the pipeline Where: Map on the West Capitol Terrace, E Locust & E 7th, Des Moines When: Monday June 6, 1:30-2:30 p.m.
Bold Iowa and Iowa CCI are part of a growing number of organizations, landowners and everyday Iowans across the state committed to stopping the proposed Bakken Pipeline. Both groups work closely with and are members of the 30-member Bakken Pipeline Resistance Coalition. Visit www.nobakken.com.
Bold Iowa is part of the national Bold Alliance, now in five states and building unlikely alliances to fight fossil-fuel infrastructure expansion projects and promote renewable energy. Visit www.boldnebraska.org/tag/bold-alliance.
Iowa CCI is a statewide, grassroots people’s-action group that uses community organizing to win public policy that puts communities before corporations and people before profits, politics and polluters. CCI has fought to put people first for 40 years. Visit www.iowacci.org.
Contact: Ed Fallon, Bold Iowa ed@boldiowa.org, (515) 238-6404
Adam Mason, Iowa CCI adam@iowacci.org, (515) 282-0484
Donald Trump and Chuck Grassley have at least one thing in common – they hate judges. Grassley hates judges that are nominated to fill vacancies by persons who are not Republican.
Trump hates judges for many reasons, many not good reasons. Trump’s tirade the other day claiming a judge hated him because of what he (Trump) has said during the campaign. Based on that criteria there is a very narrow set of people who could be nominated by Trump. Take away women, hispanics, people of color, liberals, college graduates and the poor.
Chuck Grassley for his part says Obama just doesn’t nominate the right kind of people. Grassley is not just blocking Merrick Garland’s appointment to the Supreme Court, but pretty much every nominee Obama has put forth since Republicans took over the senate in 2015.
Both men have considerable experience in judging judges. Grassley once upon a time (this is not a fairy tale folks) would vote IN FAVOR of judicial nominees. So there is something he does like in justices sometimes.
Trump for his part has been involved 3500 lawsuits or about as many as Iowa has in a decade. A person sees a lot of judging with action like that. One can form opinions on what makes the best judges when your suing at the rate of a hundred or so a year. So we must think Trump’s remarks are based on a life of study of the judiciary as a client not the intemperate rant of someone caught in an uncomfortable situation where his attempt to sell a bad product is revealed.
Maybe they should get together for a “Don and Chuck: Courts ‘r’ Us Campaign.” Truth be told, Grassley and Trump probably have much they agree on. But if they don’t we may only have this last dance to remember them by:
Doing the screw the people polka
If both lose this fall, maybe Chuck can pick up a “Trump Steaks” franchise and maybe Don the Con can learn some grass cutting tips from Grassley and start a lawn care business.
Congratulations to all here who have conquered one of man’s most dreaded diseases.
Major thanks to all who have worked tirelessly over the decades to eat away at the power of cancer – researchers, doctors, staff and some credit to you the taxpayer who has helped fund the research.
Were you paying attention?
1) The incredible string of months with job increases didn’t end, but the pace slowed. How many jobs did the economy add in May?
2) Libertarians put forth a presidential ticket featuring what two former governors last weekend?
3) Meanwhile Sunday what former governor ruled out any kind of a run for the presidency this year?
4) Also on the candidate front, dissident Republicans put forth who as an alternative to Donald Trump this week?
5) In Japan, a 7 year old boy was found alive six days after what happened to him?
6) No climate change, but record flooding inundated what southwestern state?
7) More no climate change. Art was moved from what famous museum as France continues to get nailed by flooding?
8) A Trump news conference turned into a media chastisement this week. What was the purpose of the news conference?
9) Iowa’s primary for state and federal races will be held when?
10) A sad anniversary today. June 5th, 1968 what presidential candidate was assassinated following the California primary?
11) A major case in sexual freedom was decided June 5, 1965. What was the issue in Griswold v. Connecticut?
12) SiriusXM suspended what well-known right wing talker after a guest made a veiled threat on Donald Trump’s life?
13) In San Diego, federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel unsealed documents in a lawsuit against what business?
14) Hillary Clinton got a major endorsement from what former foe of her husband’s?
15) The OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) said what must be done to avoid “low growth traps”?
16) In a well reported story out of Cincinnati, a silver back gorilla was killed after what happened?
17) Kenneth Starr was in the news as he announced he would leave his remaining job at what university?
18) What normally anti-Obama governor was begging the administration for help concerning what crisis?
19) The CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) proposed new rules that will directly affect what so-called industry?
20) From the foreign bureau – What international leader endorse Donald Trump saying Trump was a “wise politician”?
As basketball end, football starts.
Answers:
1) 38,000
2) Gary Johnson (New Mexico) and William Weld (Mass.) – both were once republicans
3) Jesse Ventura
4) David French – don’t know and don’t care
5) his parents abandoned him in a forest as punishment
6) Texas
7) the Louvre
8) To reveal who received money from Trump’s fund raiser for vets
9) June 7th (Tuesday)
10) Robert Kennedy
11) privacy in matters of birth control
12) Glenn Beck
13) Trump University
14) Gov. Jerry Brown of California
15) governments must boost spending
16) a 3 year old boy got into the gorilla’s cage
17) Baylor
18) Rick Scott of Florida. But Obama has no power here. Republicans left town without funding zika programs
Wednesday I was listening to my walking radio as I did some work in my yard. A story came on concerning President Obama’s trip to Elkhart, Indiana. Obama’s trip was a followup to a trip he had taken there at the height of the Great Republican Recession of 2008 – 2009. Elkhart was one of the worst hit cities at that time.
Part of the story is an interview with a local resident. The NPR interviewer says in his intro:
SHAPIRO: “As Obama became a much more polarizing president, Ed Neufeldt got a little shy talking about that introduction. Here’s what he told NPR last year.”
“Obama became a much more polarizing president.” What the hell? That statement, which had nothing to do with the story, by an NPR host creates a lot of images. It seems to validate the distorted view that the right wing media has been selling to America from the time Obama announced he would be running for president. There was no explanation for this phrasing. Shapiro just put it out there with all the imagery that went with it. His opinion mixed stealthily into a news story that many listeners will thus take as a fact.
As I do daily now, I disgustedly turned off my radio. NPR was the only over-the-air radio worth listening to for those of us who like to listen to news and views that deal with reality. It seems like over this past winter NPR has taken yet another hard turn to the right.
We used to enjoy listening to NPR at breakfast in the morning. Now Morning Edition seems to be a place where right wing commentators can go to have their views “green washed” so to speak. That is, their views are given an airing on a program that is supposed to be fairly neutral and touted for its reliability. Thus far right wing commentators such as Jonah Goldberg, Tucker Carlson, Erik Erikson and Kathleen Parker to name just a few have been graced with the NPR mantle of respectability. Mixing their opinion pieces in the news segments and thus giving them a veneer of responsibly researched journalism is irresponsible
Having been an NPR listener for decades, this hurts. No, the answer is not too have left wing commentators do the same thing to counter balance this situation. The answer is to put commentary into commentary shows.
For those in the Iowa City area there may be hope on the horizon. A group of citizens have been working on whelping a community based radio station. Hopefully they will be on the air soon. Here is their Facebook page. This couldn’t come at a better time for us. Folks over in Ames already have community radio on KHOI 89.1 on your FM dial or online at www.khoi.com.
So now it looks like we will be doing something we have been avoiding for a while. That is to purchase an internet radio so we can pull in the signals that are too far away to hear over the air such as the two stations mentioned above.
NPR is hardly the only one that seems to be turning. Remember our old friend in MSNBC? Video @ 12 minutes
One of the bad things about email is that it has become a huge money solicitation vehicle. However, every now and then in those solicitations are little nuggets of information that can pique an interest that can lead a person to explore an issue that was perhaps the furthest thing from your mind a few seconds before.
In this instance it was a solicitation from NARAL. If you are unfamiliar with NARAL (National Association for Repeal of Abortion Laws) they are one of the oldest pro-choice groups in the country. The email was to point out Chuck Grassley shifting his excuses for refusing a hearing for Merrick Garland from their previous “we don’t have to so we won’t” to a new excuse of “he could be a liberal and might not overturn Roe v. Wade so we won’t even give him a hearing.”
Pique of interest – Grassley dragging out abortion to cover his ass on the SCOTUS refusal. Apparently holding his breath and throwing a tantrum like a 2 year old ain’t selling anymore. But anti-abortion is always a bogeyman that sells for Republicans. So it looks like Chuck has reached into the old Republican bag-o-fear and pulled out the abortion fear to shake around.
“I believe it is vitally important that we don’t have another liberal Supreme Court Justice whose world view is that the Constitution is a living, breathing document,” Grassley said. “I can’t overstate what is at stake here. We know if another liberal is nominated to the Court that even the reasonable restrictions on abortion, that have been enacted into law through the Democratic process … these would be swept away. You heard that in the quotation from candidate [Hillary] Clinton. You all remember that a few years ago, the Court upheld the ban on partial-birth abortion by a 5 to 4 vote. Amazingly, four justices would’ve made partial birth abortion a constitutional right. So, you can multiply or add or subtract, we’re just one justice away from that being the case.”
“Partial birth abortion” even. One of the big hitters in the fear bag. Grassley must be in real trouble.
Oddly that very night, we watched our recording of “Full Frontal With Samantha Bee.” Sam was doing a story on how abortion became the rights issue of perpetual importance. Something that has always eluded me. My recollection is that when Roe v. Wade was announced it was not a huge issue. Wasn’t a huge issue for quite a while except among Catholics. Catholics had always been anti-abortion and anti-birth control as well. But it seems that abortion as an issue for other religions and for the political right came quite a bit later.
And Sam Bee answered my curiosity with this little piece. Karmic, I would say. (about 7 minutes)
A politico.com article by Randall Palmer two years ago traces the beginnings of abortion as a major issue for the right. Not too surprising to find that abortion as an issue is an offshoot of racial issues in this country. In particular, IRS action against private segregated schools.
This is a fascinating read of how the masses can be manipulated. One of the most damaging but least known of right wing operatives, Paul Weyrich, is at the core of this one. Weyrich is also known for his push to suppress voters:
“Weyrich saw that he had the beginnings of a conservative political movement, which is why, several years into President Jimmy Carter’s term, he and other leaders of the nascent religious right blamed the Democratic president for the IRS actions against segregated schools—even though the policy was mandated by Nixon, and Bob Jones University had lost its tax exemption a year and a day before Carter was inaugurated as president. Falwell, Weyrich and others were undeterred by the niceties of facts. In their determination to elect a conservative, they would do anything to deny a Democrat, even a fellow evangelical like Carter, another term in the White House.
But Falwell and Weyrich, having tapped into the ire of evangelical leaders, were also savvy enough to recognize that organizing grassroots evangelicals to defend racial discrimination would be a challenge. It had worked to rally the leaders, but they needed a different issue if they wanted to mobilize evangelical voters on a large scale.
By the late 1970s, many Americans—not just Roman Catholics—were beginning to feel uneasy about the spike in legal abortions following the 1973 Roe decision. The 1978 Senate races demonstrated to Weyrich and others that abortion might motivate conservatives where it hadn’t in the past. That year in Minnesota, pro-life Republicans captured both Senate seats (one for the unexpired term of Hubert Humphrey) as well as the governor’s mansion. In Iowa, Sen. Dick Clark, the Democratic incumbent, was thought to be a shoo-in: Every poll heading into the election showed him ahead by at least 10 percentage points. On the final weekend of the campaign, however, pro-life activists, primarily Roman Catholics, leafleted church parking lots (as they did in Minnesota), and on Election Day Clark lost to his Republican pro-life challenger.”
Weyrich hooked up with young film maker Frank Shaeffer to produce the film featured in the video above. Slowly the movement took off. By 1980 it had big effects:
“By 1980, even though Carter had sought, both as governor of Georgia and as president, to reduce the incidence of abortion, his refusal to seek a constitutional amendment outlawing it was viewed by politically conservative evangelicals as an unpardonable sin. Never mind the fact that his Republican opponent that year, Ronald Reagan, had signed into law, as governor of California in 1967, the most liberal abortion bill in the country. When Reagan addressed a rally of 10,000 evangelicals at Reunion Arena in Dallas in August 1980, he excoriated the “unconstitutional regulatory agenda” directed by the IRS “against independent schools,” but he made no mention of abortion. Nevertheless, leaders of the religious right hammered away at the issue, persuading many evangelicals to make support for a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion a litmus test for their votes.”
Now, in 2016 it looks like Chuck Grassley and his obstruction is sinking his reelection chances. To save his butt he is turning to the Republican life preserver known as anti-abortion and hooking it to his niche of refusing to do his job on the judiciary. Very interesting to know that that life-preserver was created in the service of keeping segregation.
Well, while we are on the subject, may as well arm yourselves with some facts on abortion and be prepared to debunk the myths that the right wing has created. Here is an excellent article that lays out the myth and the truth in a very straight forward way.
This article on BillMoyers.com explains why things feel so crazy right now. Everything on the TV and in the media about DT has nothing to do with anything real.
Media reform needs to be a national priority. Read the entire article here.
by Neal Gabler
The media had a lot to do with enabling the rise of Donald Trump. Just not how most people think.
To enable Trump, what the media did is fulfill what almost seemed to be a longtime mission: to create the first “pseudo-campaign” with the first “pseudo-candidate.” And now they are having buyer’s remorse.
CBS head Les Moonves gave away the game earlier this week when he admitted,
“It may not be good for America,” meaning the Trump-dominated campaign, “but it is damn good for CBS,” meaning the ratings. And then he kept doubling down: “The money’s rolling in and this is fun.” “I’ve never seen anything like this, and this is going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going.”
“Donald’s place in this election is a good thing” – presumably for CBS stockholders. To which I can only say that the networks were granted licenses to the public airwaves, our airwaves, by promising to provide a public service. Moonves just blew that pretense all to hell.
The far more grievous crime is what the media have been doing to our politics for decades now – something for which Trump just happens to be the chief beneficiary. Nearly 60 years ago, the historian Daniel Boorstin in his seminal book The Image described a society in which things were increasingly staged expressly for the media without any intrinsic merit of their own – things like photo ops, press conferences, award ceremonies. He labeled these “pseudo-events” because they only looked like real events, while being hollow inside. And Boorstin defined pseudo-people too – people whose activities, as he put it, had no intrinsic value either. He called them “celebrities,” and he defined them as people who were known for being well-known.
Another way to think about it is that a pseudo-campaign is all about itself and not about the presidency. Just look at the horse race aspect, which has long consumed 95 percent of our election coverage. Trump is the horse-race candidate, expatiating on little else besides his lead in the race. But let’s be clear: Donald Trump did not create this situation. He is its heir..
And let’s be clear about something else: we only tolerate this state of affairs because the media have changed our expectations of a campaign. Having given us nothing in election after election but a show, we expect nothing but a show.
While celebrity may not be much of a recommendation for the presidency, it is a hell of a recommendation for a presidential aspirant performing before a media that is far more interested in creating a reality show than presenting a process for selecting a leader.
One more reminder that the Iowa primary is next Tuesday, June 7th from 7AM to 9PM.
The big draw for democratic primary voters across the state this year is the opportunity to choose an opponent for Chuck Grassley for this falls election.
Even before Grassley’s strange behavior concerning filling the SCOTUS vacancy left by the death of Antonin Scalia four or five months ago, Grassley’s behavior during this term has been that of the ultimate party insider whose first concern is how any move will affect the party. With the death of Scalia Grassley who has been obstructor-in-chief behind the scenes for senate Republicans has deservedly become the national face of Republican obstruction and the face of a do nothing Congress.
As I write this the Republicans are once again on recess while a critical health situation with the zika virus looms. Returning Republicans to power in the senate and Grassley to his role as obstructor-in-chief would seem to be the height of irresponsibility.
But who will Iowans choose to take Grassley’s place? The race seems to be between current state senator from Cedar Rapids, Rob Hogg and former state senator, agricultural secretary and Lieutenant Governor Patty Judge. Judge stirred up some excitement when she entered the race in February as Grassley stumbled and bumbled in his attempts to make his obstruction look acceptable. Grassley’s obstruction is still not acceptable.
Hogg has been in the race for the long haul having entered last fall. While Judge’s entry has stirred much press around the country and some contributions from everywhere, buzz on the ground feels light. I have seen no polls for Tuesday’s vote but my guess is that it will be close. If you want to see Grassley back on the farm as much as most of us do, be sure to vote. Former state senators and good solid democrats Bob Krause and Tom Fiegen are also vying for the nomination.
Besides the senate primary across the state, 3 of our 4 congressional districts will see primaries to choose opponents to face Iowa’s three really bad Republican congress persons.
In the 4th district the Democrats candidate Kim Weaver doesn’t have a challenger. Republican Steve King does, however. In a intra-party fight at the upper levels that seems to have spilled down to this level state senator Rick Bertrand is running against the long time incumbent King. Whatever the results of that race, look for Kim Weaver to give her opponent a tough race. This year I wouldn’t count any district as a “safe Republican” even Iowa’s 4th. King is a known whacko in a party that will be lead by a reality TV personality this year. Maybe his luck has run out.
In the southwest corner of Iowa, three democrats are looking to take on one term incumbent David Young. Young is very vulnerable, especially after his embarrassingly being forced to change his vote to oppose an LGBT amendment last week. Vying to oppose Young are:
In Iowa’s northeast corner incumbent Rod Blum seems very, very vulnerable. Blum is a tea partier and doesn’t seem to quite fit in this more progressive district. The Democrats have a couple of good candidates, either of which should give Mr. Blum a good tussle. The Democrats:
– Monica Vernon who ran for Lieutenant Governor with Jack Hatch in 2014
– Former Iowa House Speaker Pat Murphy
Finally those who live in Iowa southeast corner have the pleasure of putting forth Congressmember Dave Loebsack for another couple of years. But just because Loebsack is an incumbent by no means means that this election is to be taken lightly. We need to keep Loebsack’s vote in Washington. This has been a really crazy year, so those in the southeast need to nominate Loebsack for another term and then work like hell to make sure he is re-elected.
We shouldn’t need to remind you that races at the state and county levels will probably have more effect on your day to day life than votes for national representatives, so pay attention and be sure to choose good candidates for state House, state senate and of course for county officials such as auditors, sheriffs and supervisors.
This primary is very important. democrats need to put their best candidates forward. Be sure to set your smart phones to remind you to vote Tuesday.
Governor Kim Keynolds: (515) 281-5211 U.S. Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121 Iowa Members of Congress - Rep. Randy Feenstra (R) - Rep. Ashley Hinson (R) - Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R) - Rep. Zach Nunn (R) Iowa US Senators - Senator Joni Ernst (R) - Senator Charles Grassley (R)
iowacci.org
