Globalization of California

Freedom Advocates are putting on a conference on May 3rd at Treasure Island in San Francisco. It's a one day even showcasing the risks and challenges of, and alternatives to "Plan Bay Area" a central planning fiasco that has been foisted upon the citizens of the Bay Area in the name of participatory democracy.

For more details on the event click on our event page, and register at:

globalizationofcalifornia.com

The EPA is at it Again.

PJ Media - WASHINGTON — While the country is immersed in Obamacare headlines and a congressional tussle over delays and mandates, the Obama administration is stealthily moving toward unprecedented control over private property under a massive expansion of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Water Act authority.

walter-peck

The proposed rule, obtained by the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee in advance of EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy’s testimony at a Thursday oversight hearing, widely broadens the definition of waterways over which the federal government has jurisdiction to as little as a water ditch in a backyard.

The Clean Water Act redefinition of “waters of the United States” would include all ponds, lakes, wetlands and natural or manmade streams that have any effect on downstream navigable waters — whether on public lands or private property.

And, committee Republicans note, the administration is trying to move forward with the rule at a breakneck pace, relying on the findings of a scientific report that hadn’t undergone peer review at the time the rule was submitted to the White House for approval.

“The EPA’s draft water rule is a massive power grab of private property across the U.S. This could be the largest expansion of EPA regulatory authority ever,” Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said after seeing the proposal. “If the draft rule is approved, it would allow the EPA to regulate virtually every body of water in the United States, including private and public lakes, ponds and streams.”

“The Obama administration’s latest power play to regulate America’s waterways is an unprecedented effort to control the use of private property,” Smith added, promising to question McCarthy this week about her agency’s “ever-expanding regulatory agenda.”

The EPA has made no secret of wanting to balloon its jurisdiction over all waters, even testing the limits by going after businesses that could potentially taint any type of water on its way to a body of water...

Full article at PJMedia...

Are “Green” Progressive Policies Really Good for the Poor?

It is typically understood that "Green" policies are tailor made to support and improve the lives of the working poor. Joel Kotkin does a great job of debunking that myth on NewGeography.com.

The ACP

FIXING CALIFORNIA: THE GREEN GENTRY’S CLASS WARFARE

by Joel Kotkin 10/28/2013

Historically, progressives were seen as partisans for the people, eager to help the working and middle classes achieve upward mobility even at expense of the ultrarich. But in California, and much of the country, progressivism has morphed into a political movement that, more often than not, effectively squelches the aspirations of the majority, in large part to serve the interests of the wealthiest.

Primarily, this modern-day program of class warfare is carried out under the banner of green politics. The environmental movement has always been primarily dominated by the wealthy, and overwhelmingly white, donors and activists. But in the past, early progressives focused on such useful things as public parks and open space that enhance the lives of the middle and working classes. Today, green politics seem to be focused primarily on making life worse for these same people.

In this sense, today’s green progressives, notes historian Fred Siegel, are most akin to late 19th century Tory radicals such as William Wordsworth, William Morris and John Ruskin, who objected to the ecological devastation of modern capitalism, and sought to preserve the glories of the British countryside. In the process, they also opposed the “leveling” effects of a market economy that sometimes allowed the less-educated, less well-bred to supplant the old aristocracies with their supposedly more enlightened tastes...

Read More

The Alternative to the IPCC

There has been recently, a lot of "to do" about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's new Assessment Report 5 (AR5), with its political makeup, its closed-door meetings, and scrambling to "explain away" the lack of any real global warming over the last 15 years.

But there is another group of international scientists which...

...released a comprehensive new report on the science of climate change that concluded that evidence now leans against global warming resulting from human-related greenhouse gas emissions.

The report, which cites thousands of peer-reviewed articles the United Nations-sponsored panel on climate change ignored, also found that "no empirical evidence exists to substantiate the claim that 2°C of warming presents a threat to planetary ecologies or environments" and no convincing case can be made that "a warming will be more economically costly than an equivalent cooling." The U.N.'s panel is scheduled to release its next report next month.

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, or NIPCC, which produced the report, is described as "an international panel of scientists and scholars who came together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change." Unlike the "United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is government-sponsored, politically motivated, and predisposed to believing that climate change is a problem in need of a U.N. solution," NIPCC "has no formal attachment to or sponsorship from any government or governmental agency" and is "wholly independent of political pressures and influences and therefore is not predisposed to produce politically motivated conclusions or policy recommendations."

read more at Breitbart.com

We'll see how much media coverage the NIPCC gets in the coming weeks and months.