Column on Slots

House Always Wins

So I have a column on the slots referendum in Maryland out today. It had to be edited pretty short, so the longer version can be found below. The online version can be found here

——————————————————————————–

Did you know that the poorer you are, the more likely you are to gamble? This is why the slots referendum we’ll be voting on in November will place 15,000 slots in three rural areas, and two low income minority areas. The poor also gamble differently than the rest of us, at proportionately higher stakes as an ill advised investment rather than entertainment. The reality is that slots are a regressive tax on the poor that bring negative social consequences. They are highly correlated with gambling addiction, crime, domestic violence, and child neglect.

It’s alarming to see such a lack of morality and vision that lawmakers seek to take advantage of low income people and minorities to reap profits for our state. They disregard the baggage that slots bring with them as tomorrow’s problems. It’s a failure to recognize that with poor planning and a lack of vision, tomorrow’s problems can quickly become today’s. That’s, after all, how we got into a budget deficit in the first place.

A little over a year ago there was a noose left hanging outside the Nyumburu Cultural Center. Everyone from University officials, to student leaders, to the Diamondback held discussions and rallies about race relations and racism. It couldn’t be more clear to me right now that everyone missed the mark. The noose represented far more than racism, it represented social oppression of people. Slots are a form of oppression targeted at low income minorities. How can anyone protest a noose hung by one bigot, yet stay silent or support slots being voted on by millions of Marylanders? We’re so quick to condemn blatant racism, but slower than a snail with arthritis to spot its more subtle signs.

Where is the leadership on campus with this issue? What happened to President Mote? Where are the College Democrats and College Republicans? How does the SGA not take a position? What about the cultural groups on campus? Are there suddenly no activist groups on this campus that stand for social justice and equality? If you’re going to talk, walk. Are we all paralyzed simply because the promise of funding for higher education is tied to a measure that challenges our principles?

There’s a fascinating similarity between the slots referendum supporters, and the people that slots will be taking money from. Our University, our Board of Regents, and many of our elected officials are desperate. They need money very badly. They’re willing to try and acquire it by any means necessary, even if in better circumstances they would prefer to do it differently. Compare that to the people who play slots. Just as desperate. Most of them have very little money. They’re just hoping to catch a break against a system that seems more stacked against them every hour of every day. So they play our game.

In this game, the odds are impossible to overcome. They can’t win, but they need to hit the big one to find a way out. Our revenue depends on them losing. Maryland is the wealthiest state in the nation because we invest in our residents. But, this time we’re working harder on creating slot machines than good paying jobs to rejuvenate the economy and balance the budget.

So the single mother pops in quarter after quarter, and keeps pulling the lever. The man fighting alcoholism becomes a gambling addict and digs deeper into his meager savings. Children never make it to college to see the higher education benefits their parents paid for. These people may never crawl out of their budget shortfall. It’s okay though, we win. Right?

Obama and McCain Debate

So I along with many others watched the debate between Obama and McCain and Friday, and I must say that I liked that Isaw. There are just a few observations I would like to make. The first is that in the part of the debate that focused on the economy, Obama fared very well because he mentioned numerous times tax cuts for the middle class, making sure that the average American was getting a fair shot, and quit frankly taxing the rich just sounds better to a lot of Americans right now because people are upset about the “fatcats on wallstreet” that we are bailing out. McCain bogged Obama down a little when it came to earmark spending, that was his one strongsuit, but Obama was able to work his way around that attack numerous times. McCain never mentioned the middle class or made reference to ordinary working Americans. He talked about the capital gains tax, but once again he didn’t specify anything about small businesses, he just called it “the business tax”. Right now people are not in the mood for providing tax breaks to “businesses” which really means corporations. At the end of the day, when it comes to economic policy and economic philosophy, McCain does in fact identify with the very strategy that Bush has applied during his tenure. Try telling people that all we need to do to fix our economic problems is “more of that”.

Then we move onto foreign policy. I felt that Obama held his own here, and this was exactly what he needed to do. McCain constantly tried to belittle Obama, make him seem naive and inexperienced, and unable to protect the country. In my opinion, what has made the polls so close hasn’t been Obama’s ideas or his philosophy, people are drawn to that. However, since he has limited experience on the national stage, voters are wary of his knowledge on foreign policy. By simply demonstrating that he was very coherent and confident when it came to international issues, this shored up a lot of doubt in the undecideds. That alone is what Obama has needed to do, and what he did. Believe me, Obama isn’t losing because people are more drawn to the Republican ticket, right now they want a change to more progressive policies. People are simply afraid of Obama. If he can alleviate that fear, he’ll pull away, and he did a good deal of it with the foreign policy debate.

Over the next few days we’ll see the lasting effect if any from the debate. Today however, it appears things are moving in Obama’s favor. Check out these statistics, where not only is Obama widening his margin in the national polls, but he has a larger percentage of people who think he won the debate.

Now I think that Obama is extraordinarily intelligent, has great judgement, is a good person, and has the right ideas to be President. However, in this election, he only needs to be an average Democrat. He just needs people to trust him more, and he’ll win.

Seven Years to Climate Midnight

This is a very good op-ed from a few weeks ago by the very centrist Brookins Institute. They make a very strong case for why solving Climate Change should be a priority for both of our presidential candidates. I highly encourage you to read it. I’ll be following up this post with my analysis of why Barack Obama is the best candidate for solving the climate crisis.

Carpooling

So heres a link to my most recent column in the Diamondback

http://media.www.diamondbackonline.com/media/storage/paper873/news/2008/09/23/Opinion/Carpooling.Just.Connect.The.Dots-3445270.shtml

Enjoy

Drilled

Short post here. At some point I’ll make a longer and in depth post about my opinions on the offshore drilling debate in Washington and in America (namely why it’s a joke and a farce), and also explain my rationale of how environmental groups and Democrats in Congress should go about the politics of it (which is at odds with environmentalists).

However, I found this clip too funny to not share. I was watching a very interesting Senate hearing on energy last weekend. A bipartisan group of Senators brought five of the nations energy experts to a panel to ask questions on how to best move forward with America’s energy policy. Of these experts, one was a member of Shell, three were either professors or heads of institutes, and one was from Google. Of the five, only the guy from google could be considered an environmentalist. He was balanced out by the man from Shell, and the other 3 were pretty much neutral. Now during this hearing, many of the Senator’s questions(particularly the Republicans) were directed at trying to pin the panel into #1. Expressing that offshore drilling should be part of our energy policy, #2. That it should be a priority. Four out of the five were willing to bite on the bait of saying offshore drilling should be part of the energy policy. However, as I know, offshore drilling is so inadequate with meeting our oil consumption and also takes 5-10 years to get oil out of the ground. So it was great when one of the Senators cut through the bullshit and asked a pointed question of his own. Owned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnJAIeEgjSM

Kratovil and Harris in Dead Heat

So I worked through the Sierra Club on the most heated Congressional Race in Maryland which is taking place in District 1. If you want a throrough explanation of the contest and who I am supporting, check out my past blog post. The momentum for Frank Kratovil appears to be headed in the right direction.

A new poll shows that the race is a dead heat, with both Andy Harris and Frank Kratovil being at 36%, and 25% of voters undecided. Now this poll is a very good sign, previous polls from a couple monthes ago showed Harris with a double digit lead. However, I’m not going to read TOO much into this poll, except that Kratovil now has a shot. My reasons for skepticism are as follows

1. The poll has a 4.9% margin of error and a sample size of 400. It was also a poll held by the Democrats. While a valid poll, the margin of error and sample size means that this thing could be 5% more in favor of either candidate. A sizable swing.

2. 25% undecideds is from my perspective a dangerous number. The reason is that i think undecideds are predominately people who haven’t been paying much attention to the race. In a conservative-leaning district, I can see alot of these voters going to the polls with little knowledge of either of the candidates except that Kratovil is registered Democrat and Harris registered Republican. I think with only that to go on, more of these voters will vote Republican.

So I think the Kratovil campaign needs to bring down the number of undecideds, whether that be advertising, targeted canvassing, and mailings. The debates should help. The more people learn about Andy Harris’s extreme views, the more of those undecideds that are moderates will swing to Kratovil. Talking about how Andy Harris has a lifetime score of 7% on environmental bills during his tenure as a State Senator is proving to be a very effective line. I think this is what puts the district in play for Kratovil. The health of the environment, the Chesapeake Bay, and the preservation of farmland and open spaces is very important to people in the 1st district. Ultimately, Andy Harris’s record on those issues leaves no indication that he will fight for any of those things. In fact, the record shows Harris will work to fight them.

The University of Maryland Gets It Done

So the first activist campaign that I was ever a part of was in the spring of 2007 when I joined the student group on campus “UMD for Clean Energy”. What we were demanding was that our university pay for 100% renewable energy by 2010. Note the distinguishment here is that paying for clean energy is different than supplying your energy from 100% clean energy sources. Buying renewable energy credits isn’t perfect, but it’s not shallow like some detractors like to argue. Buying renewable energy credits provides a market for a wind turbine in the Midwest or a solar baseload plant in Arizona or Florida. Our University’s contribution to these projects which supplant what would be a dirty energy source effectively is a carbon offset because carbon would be burned without purchase of the credits.

We gathered thousands of petition signatures from students who said they were willing to see a small increase of a few bucks in their tuition in order for the University of buy 100% clean energy. We said we wanted this implemented by 2010. Some people laughed. Then the student body voted for a SGA resolution during the elections asking them if they’d support paying a few extra bucks a year for 100% clean energy. 91% of the student body voted in favor. It was a great message, but only that because the student body and the SGA can’t force the University’s hand. Now, a year and half later, the University has made good on the students’ demand for 100% clean energy. You can read in this article here. The slight fee increase may or may not pay for 100% clean energy, but it’s definitely fantastic to see the University taking these steps. As the first thing I ever got involved in, it shows me that activism does work. This is not the last step to sustainability for UMD. It wasn’t the first thing we achieved. But it’s the culmination of a campaign the group I was part of ran 18 months ago. It does feel pretty sweet.

Another Sign for Maryland to Act

The University of Maryland’s Center for Integrative Environmental Research came out with a report about how Climate Change would cost the Maryland economy billions of dollars. It can be found here.

This is but another sign, and a strong follow-up to the report by the Maryland Climate Change Commission, which I provided analysis on in this post.

All I can do here is double down on everything I said in that post. The time to act is yesterday.

Be Gone Gas Guzzlers

Heres my weekly column that’s out today about fuel economy standards, who’s setting them, and how they’re planning on doing it.

Article

Obama vs McCain on Energy and Environment

I wrote this comparing Barack Obama and John McCain when it comes to energy and the environment. Here is a very good Op-Ed highlighting why if you care about these issues, Obama is the man, not McCain.

There is a misconception put forth by the McCain campaign and propagated through the media to misguide voters. It’s a lie that Obama and McCain are identical when it comes to global warming, renewable energy, and the environment. The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama’s energy plan is easily the best that has ever been put forth from either party. It has so much depth and detail to it that I can only scratch the surface here, I will follow up with more on it in future posts. First and foremost, Barack Obama’s climate change policy actually meets what the science demands. It will be nice to have an administration that believes in science. The plan calls for the implementation of an economy-wide cap and trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050, and to 1990 levels by 2020. He also wants to invest $150 billion over the next decade to develop climate friendly energy sources and create millions of green jobs. There is a goal of a 10% renewable electricity standard by 2012 and a 25% standard by 2025, and extending the production tax credits for renewable sources for 5 years.

Energy efficiency is a vital aspect of any energy plan, and Obama doesn’t dissapoint. He will implement aggressive energy efficiency program which will reduce consumer energy usage 15% below the Dept. of Energy’s projected levels by 2020, at the same time saving consumers $130 billion. He wants to overhaul Federal efficiency standards , invest in improving our electricity grid, and will set a goal to make all new buildings carbon neutral by 2030. He’s also going to flip utility incentives so that they are rewarded for reducing energy consumption, rather than for increasing it.

We’d all like to drive cars that burn cleaner fuel and go further on a gallon of gas. Obama has a goal of increasing CAFE standards by 4% each year while putting 1 million plug-in hybrid vehicles on the road that get 150 mpg by 2015. He will mandate that all new vehicles be flex fuel, and institute a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard which requires fuel suppliers to reduce the amount of carbon in their fuels 5% within 5 years starting in 2010, and 10% after 10 years. Last but not least there will be a $7,000 tax credit for people who buy or convert advanced technology vehicles.

One look at Obama’s past record on these issues tells us that he will keep his promises. One year in the Illinois State Senate Obama received a 100% environmental score, and his lifetime score in the US senate is 86%. John McCain’s lifetime score is a robust 27%.

In the winter of 2007, a crucial vote came on a bill before the US Senate. The renewable energy production tax credits for wind and solar are set to expire at the end of 2008. Not extending these credits could devastate the momentum that renewable sources of energy have, and continue our dependence on dirty nonrenewable fossil fuels. The bill that would have lengthened the credits was turned down in a Senate vote of 59-40, where 60 were needed for it to advance. One of the Senators couldn’t be bothered to turn up to cast the deciding vote. It was John McCain.

This is but one example in a disturbing trend since 2005, where John McCain seems to disappear off the face of the Earth every time there is a vote on renewable energy. Remember the economic stimulus package the government gave out? There was an amendment to include clean energy incentives in the bill. John McCain once again was missing from action. With wind turbines, solar panels, and talk of renewable energy in his campaign commercials, John McCain talks a big game on energy. But the straight talk express doesn’t seem to walk a straight line.

It’s unfortunate, this could have been an election with two green presidents. In 2000 it may have been, but John McCain is no longer the Maverick he once was. Now, John McCain is a sidekick. Along with George Bush, John McCain supports offshore drilling in environmentally sensitive areas even though Bush’s down Dept. of Energy says it wouldn’t lower the price of gas. Along with Bush, McCain supports the billions of dollars in tax breaks that are being given to the oil companies. Bush promised before his election that he would cap greenhouse gas emissions. Will McCain stand by his predecessor here as well?

McCain is so obsessed with the idea of nuclear power, it’s a testament to his campaign staff that he isn’t glowing a bright green. He doesn’t seem to understand that building nuclear power plants are unreasonably expensive and very time consuming. There’s a reason that there has been billions of dollars of investment into wind and solar, but zilch in to nuclear. The free market rejects it.

Now it’s time for the free will of the American people to reject John McCain, and elect Barack Obama. A secure energy future without catastrophic climate change is at stake.

Like I said, I’ll be having many more posts on this issue, but the point of it all is to make sure you know that I am DEAD CERTAIN that if you elect Obama, we can solve our energy crisis and combat climate change. If you elect McCain, you reap what you sow.