Preventing 4,700 heart attacks, 130,000 asthma attacks, 11,000 premature deaths too costly to justify, says Trump!

Let's get 3 things straight: 

1. There is no "balance" between business and the environment...

2. ...because it's still pollution, no balance, and... 

3. ...Republicans/conservative voters are willing to let people die for money and business. It's that simple.

Hyperbolic? No, because there's no wiggle room here, Republicans will let people die. It's the price of capitalism, no balance:

The Trump administration proposed major changes to the way the federal government calculates the benefits, in human health and safety, of restricting mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants ... declaring rules imposed on mercury ... are too costly to justify ... ignoring or playing down other health benefits. The administrator “has concluded that the identification of these benefits is not sufficient, in light of the gross imbalance of monetized costs.”

In other words, by narrowly focusing in on mercury, which is no small matter either...

...the costs to industry in installing pollution controls ranged from $7.4 billion to $9.6 billion annually, while the health benefits of cutting mercury ranged from $4 million to $6 million annually. In other words, it said that the costs of the rule outweigh the benefits.

Weakening mercury regulations effects all other pollutants: Not too difficult to understand. Besides mercury, it allows all other particulates in the air that will hurt and kill thousands of Americans prematurely a year:

The Obama administration cited an additional $80 billion in health benefits a year ... the rules would prevent 11,000 premature deaths not from curbing mercury itself, but from what is known as a co-benefit, the reduction in particulate matter linked to heart and lung disease that also occur when a plant reduces its mercury emissions. 

Trump’s revised procedures would essentially ignore co-benefits and count only the direct potential benefits of cutting mercury ... the current limits can no longer be justified as “appropriate and necessary” under the law.

The Energy Industry Opposes Trump's Coal Industry Special Interest Rollback: Another longtime Republican Party platform decision opposed by the energy industry moving quickly into alternative clean energy sources:

The vast majority of utility companies have said the proposed changes are now of little benefit to them, because they have already spent the billions of dollars needed to come into compliance, and have urged the Trump administration to leave the mercury measure in place.

Let's be very Clear about Trump's EPA Coal Industry backed death sentence for thousands of Americans: Note-just damaging the brain and nervous system of children is reason enough, right?

1. Mercury is a neurotoxin that can damage the brain and nervous system in young children, leading to lower I.Q. and impaired motor skills. 

2. The Obama administration estimated that the measure would prevent 4,700 heart attacks and 130,000 asthma attacks as well as 11,000 premature deaths by also eliminating fine particulate matter linked to those ailments.

3. Business groups like the Chamber of Commerce and others argue the earlier numbers inflated the benefits of the rule, underestimated costs and improperly justified cutting mercury by relying largely on the benefits of reduced particulate matter. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote: “It is not rational, never mind ‘appropriate,’ to impose billions of dollars in economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits.

A few dollars in health benefits? Ah, the mind of a great justice. 

Reversing Clean Power Plan like Reversing Time, not happening...

When Scott Walker brags about keeping energy costs low in Wisconsin by doggedly standing by the coal industry, keep this amazing fact in mind:

"Electricity rates paid by businesses and residents of Wisconsin now rank highest among eight Midwest states."

and...

Industry analysts are warning that Trump administration efforts to support coal and nuclear energy by repealing the Clean Power Plan could upend wholesale markets and drive up electricity rates for Wisconsin consumers.

Wisconsin Slammed the Door on dangerous Wind Energy 5 years ago: Wisconsin Republicans turned away an entire industry and the massive jobs it is now creating elsewhere, long before Trump stepped in to save the dying coal mines. The rhetoric below seems idiotic, and almost funny now: 

Sheboygan Press Sept. 2012: State Sen. Glenn Grothman plans to introduce a bill that would freeze renewable energy requirements for Wisconsin utilities at 2012 levels in an effort to stop wind farm development throughout the state. The announcement comes as a developer is looking to build a wind farm in the West Bend Republican’s senate district in southwestern Sheboygan County. Officials with RENEW Wisconsin said Grothman’s proposal would be “profoundly detrimental” … “It would send a big message to the wind industry that Wisconsin is not open for renewable energy business,” said Michael Vickerman, program and policy director with RENEW Wisconsin.

WPR April 2013: People who claim that wind turbines make them sick would be able to sue wind developers under a proposal introduced by Republican state Senator Frank Lasee's (la'-say) ... bill would allow families that claim to be physically or economically affected by wind turbines to sue the companies that own them and property owners hosting them. Chris Kunkle represents the American Wind Energy Association in Wisconsin says Lasee's bill is par for the course: "This is just another attempt from Senator Lasee to install a level of uncertainty across the industry. It's another piece of his ongoing hostility towards an industry that creates manufacturing, construction, operation and maintenance jobs all around the state."

Message sent:

Sen. Lasee's concerns about nearby wind developers harming local citizens does not transfer over to those who will be near mines, where Republicans are pushing a bill that would harm local towns and villages. their roads, water and air, by eliminating local control:

The repeal of Wisconsin's so-called mining moratorium would limit public opportunities to contest DNR decisions ... Repeal a law requiring the DNR to deny a mine's request for a high-capacity well that would unreasonably harm the ability of others to have drinking water or enjoy lakes and streams.

And while we spend billions of taxpayer dollars for up to 13,000 possible jobs relating to Foxconn, look at what Iowa did by simply supporting wind energy:

Iowa had about 30,400 clean energy jobs last year, nearly 7 percent more than in 2015, an industry group estimates.
Iowa is already a renewable energy leader. It gets 36.6 percent of its energy from wind, leading the nation in the percentage last year. It ranks second nationally in the amount of wind energy generated, according to the U.S. Energy Information Agency. Wind is second only to coal as a source of energy.

Brenna Smith, a spokeswoman for Gov. Kim Reynolds, said Iowa's large renewable energy portfolio has been a leading factor in landing economic development projects such as Apple and Facebook data centers. But without the Clean Power Plan, environmental leaders say Iowa's wind-energy manufacturing industry — building wind blades, nacelles and towers — will lose out on business and jobs if other states are no longer required to adopt wind, solar and other clean energy technologies.

"Iowa sees significant economic benefits from wind and solar development that would have only increased with implementation of the Clean Power Plan," said Nathaniel Baer, the Iowa Environmental Council's energy program director. "Manufacturing jobs would have likely increased ... as Iowa and other states in the region shifted to renewable energy," Baer said.

Costs are declining for both wind and solar energy, Baer said, adding that wind is the cheapest form of new energy capacity installed today — even without federal production tax credits (that end in 2020).

Trump and Pruitt's Clean Power repeal is time wasting Republican wheel spinning, since even big energy has moved on from coal, considering Trump's move just a blip in time:

MidAmerican says its construction of 2,020 turbines across 23 counties has created about 3,800 jobs with $230 million in payroll. The wind farms support 320 permanent workers earning an average of nearly $69,000 annually, a total of $22 million a year. The investment and jobs help keep hospitals and schools open and pay for county roads and bridges, said Michael Fehr, who leads MidAmerican's wind development. Wind revenue helps counties "maintain their rural way of life."

...or this "free market" renewable movement ignored by Republicans:

St. Louis Post-Dispatch: EPA proposes killing Clean Power Plan, but market already cutting carbon. Market forces continue to push down the cost of renewable energy and keep natural gas competitive with coal, the most carbon-intensive fuel used by power plants. And there’s still almost no interest among utilities to invest in new plants as old ones retire. And after President Donald Trump was elected and signaled he would repeal the carbon regulations, Ameren opted to make the biggest renewable energy announcement in its history. Just two weeks ago, the utility said it planned to spend $1 billion on some 700 megawatts of new wind power by 2020. That’s about three-quarters of the capacity at its Sioux coal plant in St. Charles County. “For Ameren, the markets were penalizing them for being not diverse.”

By next June, Dayton Power and Light (DP&L) will close two coal-fired plants in Adams County, Ohio What’s happening in the two Ohio River counties, little more than an hour’s drive from booming Cincinnati, illustrates how powerful trends in technology and finance are quickly reshaping American electricity markets, Kabel of DP&L said that the proposal did not sway the utility. “The company has not made any changes to its previously announced plans,” she said.

Pfeffer, of Mason County, said he is not surprised. “What I’m seeing from generators, they see whatever measures that happen in this administration as a blip. They don’t see it as something that is long-term.”

Here's a timeline projection of what we can expect from renewable energy:

Pruitt's EPA picks Winners (Coal), and Losers (Clean Air/Water)

Come on folks, this is an easy one, and we've been letting Republicans get away with it for years...think about it: The absurdity of striking a "balance" between clean water and air for a few extra jobs and cuts to regulation. Let's see..."a little" dirtier water and air in exchange deregulation and possible jobs?

"Balance?" Nope. And yet we tolerate dumb ass statements by Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, heck every right winger, everyday:

“As EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt is working to strike an appropriate balance between protecting water and air, and preventing the kind of job-killing overregulation,” McConnell said, according to CBS News, adding that Pruitt has been working to “stop the war on coal in its tracks.”

And yet, a new UCS analysis found that humans can effect climate:

Between 2008 and 2016, 17 percent of US coal capacity retired. Another 4 percent converted to other fuels, mostly natural gas. These closures led to:

-80 percent less sulfur dioxide, a source of acid rain,

-64 percent less nitrogen oxide, a key component in smog,

-34 percent less carbon dioxide, a heat-trapping gas.

Clean Coal Lie Exposed by Coal Baron: Trump shot off his mouth again, without thinking, stirring up his mindless base:

Trump boasted, “We’ve ended the war on beautiful, clean coal, and it’s just been announced that a second, brand-new coal mine, where they’re going to take out clean coal — meaning, they’re taking out coal, they’re going to clean it — is opening in the state of Pennsylvania.” 

Another Trump Lie: Take it away Murray Energy's CEO, and "member of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity — which has spent tens of millions of dollars trying to persuade the public that clean coal is the solution to global warming:"

Coal baron says carbon capture and storage ‘does not work’ and ‘is just cover for the politicians.’ While President Donald Trump continues to tout “clean” coal, coal baron Robert Murray, the CEO of Murray Energy, the country’s largest privately held coal-mining company, says it’s just a fantasy.

“Carbon capture and sequestration does not work. It’s a pseudonym for ‘no coal. It is neither practical nor economic, carbon capture and sequestration. It is just cover for the politicians, both Republicans and Democrats that say, ‘Look what I did for coal,’ knowing all the time that it doesn’t help coal at all.”

Oh, don’t forget how well the move to “clean coal” is going:

Mississippi pulled the plug on one of the country’s biggest CCS efforts last month after the company spent billions on trying, and failing, to make it work. Mississippi utility regulators finally figured out the best way to make the state’s wildly expensive “clean coal” plant much cleaner and more affordable: Skip the coal part entirely.

Free Market Winners and Losers? Nope: Former Republican, turned Democrat, and then Republican again Gov. Jim Justice posed this not so free market idea based on the fear the eastern energy grid might not be secure:

Energy Department Secretary Rick Perry Tried, but failed, to backup Trump's EPA:

Energy Secretary Rick Perry ordered up a study of the reliability of the nation’s electrical power grid. The coal and nuclear power industries had been arguing that the system faced challenges that required special breaks for their energy sectors.

The study was released, and it found the energy grid is in pretty good shape. Wind and solar power are playing an important role on the grid. Cheap natural gas, not government regulation, is primarily responsible for the closing of coal-fired plants … alternative sources like wind and solar are cheap, clean and growing, and appliances are more energy-efficient, meaning energy use is down.

And again, for all those “free market” right wing purists…let's spend taxpayer money on dying industries:

The coal and nuclear industries have been arguing that they need better compensation for the reliability of their energy contribution … the nuclear power industry, which accounts for 20 percent of the U.S. electrical supply, are extraordinarily expensive, and older plants are closing. Illinois is among the states subsidizing aging nuclear plants just to preserve jobs. market forces make such investments dicey.

Cheap Natural Gas & Wind Energy killing Walker's little friend "Coal."

If you’re Scott Walker or a conservative voter who believes with all their heart and soul that coal is the only cheap fuel holding down our utility bills, you’re not going to like this story.

While Walker and AG Brad Schimel spend taxpayer dollars suing the EPA for supposedly killing coal and supposedly raising the price of energy in Wisconsin, reality and the price of natural gas, just proved them wrong on every count. JS:

The plummeting price of natural gas and future environmental regulations are making utilities do things that were practically unheard of years ago, from shutting down nuclear plants to turning to natural gas for a variety of fuels in power plants. 

The moves are being driven by prices in the wholesale power market, including both the low cost of natural gas and the growing number of wind farms. Low-cost wind provides one-third of the electricity consumed in Iowa.

What's that..."Low-cost wind?" Well what-a-know Walker dupes. The slow steady pace of progress and innovation are suddenly allowing big energy providers to be in compliance with Obama's Clean Power Plan:

We Energies and its sister utility, Wisconsin Public Service, plan to test the burning of natural gas inside coal boilers from Kenosha and Oak Creek to Green Bay and Wausau. The tests are designed to see if burning less coal in the plants will help the utility comply with the federal Clean Power Plan and other air pollution regulations. Burning natural gas inside coal boilers is one of the potential compliance strategies that the Environmental Protection Agency identified for utilities...

Despite Walker's and Sen. Frank Lasee's efforts to kill wind energy in the state, the rest of the nation isn't just building wind farms, they're manufacturing the turbines and equipment for them. Can't say the same for coal in Wisconsin:

Aided by Congress' move to extend production tax credits for renewable energy, the price of wind power has fallen so much that utilities are turning to expansion of their wind power resources.

 Let's ask Scott Walker and Brad Schimel again why they're suing the EPA, I would love to hear their tortured logic on this one.

Under Walker, fixed rate energy increases skyrocket burning cheap coal. So why is he suing the EPA?

Electric rates are going up again, even as the state continues to use "cheap" fossil fuels like coal. You won't hear Scott Walker complain about the price hike or the strain that this will have on fixed income seniors or customers thinking about installing solar panels. 

Your best friend Coal.

All of this flies in the face of the Republican governors lawsuit against the EPA; the governors claim electric bills will actually be going up if we move away from cheap coal. Really?

Then why did this just happen:

Major Rate Increase For Xcel Energy Customers Gets State Approval: Fixed Rates Will Go Up 75 Percent On Electric Bills In Western Wisconsin ... the utility's customers in western Wisconsin will begin paying $14 per month in fixed charges, instead of the $8 per month ...  

But this is a good rate increase because we're burning coal yet. 

And get ready to hear this ridiculous reason for the rate increases using cheap coal, over and over. Just wondering, why hasn’t this been an issue before? Just saying...

Don Reck, regional vice president of rates and regulatory affairs for Xcel, said the increased fixed charge will better reflect the actual costs to provide energy, such as materials and maintenance. "The cost of poles and wires and meters to provide electric service don't vary based on the amount of usage that a customer has," Reck said.

How much more would Obama's new EPA standards raise rates: I recently wrote this: "In fact, Walker whined that electric bills could jump as much as 29% if the EPA rules go into affect. Yet the PSC raised the fixed rate charge for electricity by more the 80% using good old dirty coal.

What just happened in Western Wisconsin is on top of this rate increase a few weeks ago:

UPDATE- Saturday: The rate increase was reduced, and that's a good thing.

Rates for customers of a Green Bay electric utility are on track to drop in 2016, but the customer fixed charge will rise by $2 a month ... Customers of Wisconsin Public Service Corp. will pay a fixed charge of $21 a month next year, after the state Public Service Commission trimmed the utility's request to raise the fixed charge to $25. The utility had raised the fixed charge by more than 80% in January, to $19 a month from $10.40 a month.

Walker's corporate foot soldier AG Schimel abandons law for Capitalism

In one of the most partisan and embarrassing opinion pieces, Attorney General Brad Schimel admits in a Journal Sentinel editorial “Why Wisconsin is suing the EPA,” that he’s there to protect business special interests. And he's got a long list of non-legal reasons why he's supporting Scott Walker's lawsuit.

The following list of purely political justification by Schimel to waste taxpayer money on a lawsuit against the EPA is really jaw dropping. Let's start with his killer opening paragraph:

A lump of Coal this Christmas?

JS: As a strong supporter of capitalism and the free market, certainly I don't begrudge former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg his billions of dollars. I do find it ironic, though, that a man who fuels a private jet and heats his penthouse advocates for federal regulation that will significantly raise electricity rates and kill jobs in Wisconsin.

What in gods name does Bloomberg's private jets have to do with coal pollution? Also keep in mind, the PSC has now dramatically raised rates twice, in the last two years, with no Walker administration objections. In fact, Walker whined that electric bills could jump as much as 29% if the EPA rules go into affect. Yet the PSC raised the fixed rate charge for electricity by more the 80% using good old dirty coal.

Schimel's got every GOP talking point down to the letter. Perhaps he thinks if he says it, that must make it legal:

As one of the top manufacturing states in the country, Wisconsin has much to lose if the Obama administration succeeds in its plan to destroy the viability of clean-coal electric generation.

We in Wisconsin have been and continue to be responsible environmental stewards while also protecting jobs. 

Not only will the EPA rule cause the U.S. to lose jobs to countries such as China and India, but the repercussions of the EPA rule actually may result in increased global carbon dioxide emissions. If American manufacturing jobs move to China and India, both of which rely heavily on uncontrolled coal-fired plants, there is a real potential that carbon dioxide emissions, along with emissions that actually do qualify as "pollution" under the Clean Air Act, will increase globally.

One more thing, Democratic AG's suing are doing so by order of their Republican governors, so it isn't really "bipartisan:"

 ...if the coalition of Republican and Democrat state attorneys general do not succeed in their challenge to the EPA's edict. 

Walker's PSC hiking Energy Bills again, while he sues EPA for possible hikes in energy bills?

UPDATE- Saturday: The rate increase was reduced, and that's a good thing. 

Rates for customers of a Green Bay electric utility are on track to drop in 2016, but the customer fixed charge will rise by $2 a month ... Customers of Wisconsin Public Service Corp. will pay a fixed charge of $21 a month next year, after the state Public Service Commission trimmed the utility's request to raise the fixed charge to $25. The utility had raised the fixed charge by more than 80% in January, to $19 a month from $10.40 a month.

That's still an increase. But something else was encouraging, probably due to the fact Wisconsin is getting national attention as an outlier in discouraging green energy:

While approving the smaller increase, commissioners also authorized a study looking at the impact of fixed charge increases on customers. On the fixed charge issue, commissioners Phil Montgomery and Michael Huebsch initially sought to keep it unchanged, with commission Chair Ellen Nowak advocating a $21 charge. Montgomery said it was time for the PSC to review the impact of the fixed charges. He and Huebsch agreed to the increase in the charge to $21 as long as the commission agreed to a review.

But rates were lowered because the utility, unfortunately, saved money cutting 182 jobs in the Green Bay area:

Savings were found primarily thanks to the low price of natural gas burned in utility power plants, The commission trimmed $11.3 million in expenses in light of recent job cuts in Green Bay announced by the utility's parent company. WEC Energy said this month that it eliminated 2% of its workforce, with cuts taking place at its operating headquarters in Green Bay, Milwaukee and Chicago. 

Below is the original story: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The scary thing about conservative voters is that they never seem to get confused over confusing GOP policies. Maybe that's the disconnect between our two ideologies. Yet some of this stuff is ridiculously obvious.

An Energy Rate Hike vs An Energy Rate Hike...huh? Scott Walker and his AG lapdog Brad Schimel (oh boy did we see that coming), said they're suing the Obama administration over the new carbon emission rules because consumers would be hit hard by rate increases. jsonline:

The states say the rules will heap higher costs on consumers and business … require new plants to use expensive and unproven technology, said Schimel, a Republican.

Walker: "The Obama administration ignored the concerns submitted by Wisconsin ... instead pursuing a political agenda that will increase costs and prevent the construction of future power plants producing reliable, affordable electricity for our state."

No Really, Walker doesn't care about Increased Energy Costs: It's hard to watch Walker's manic support for one dying industry (coal), and support for reviving a depleted, stagnant automated industry (manufacturing). But wasting taxpayer money suing the government in the name of keeping consumer energy price down isn't just foolish, it's also a Walker lie.

Walker, not Obama, is about to increase energy costs again on Wisconsinites when his own GOP dominated PSC, approves a rate hike just last year. What, no complaining or lawsuits?

A year after receiving an 83% increase in the fixed customer charge on monthly electric bills, Wisconsin Public Service Corp. is seeking another increase in that fee — this time by an additional 32%. 

Wisconsin has become an outlier on fixed charges based on what utility regulators have approved around the country. A review of decisions in other states by Renew Wisconsin found that 35 utilities proposed to increase their fixed charges ... Of those, 14 utilities were required to keep the charges unchanged, while 18 were allowed increases between 1 cent and $4.30 a month. The biggest increases were the three in Wisconsin, ranging from $6.83 to $8.71. "Only in Wisconsin have large increases been granted," said Tyler Huebner, executive director of Renew Wisconsin, a renewable energy advocacy group.

So cry me a river Scott Walker and Brad Schimel, about rate hikes under the new EPA standards.  

Walker stacked the Public Service Commission deck so they could stuff the fossil fuel energy industry pockets with money:

The current chair is Ellen Nowak ... was the chief of staff to Waukesha County Executive … the legal counsel to the Speaker of the Wisconsin Assembly … deputy director of School Choice Wisconsin … practiced business litigation at Mallery & Zimmerman, SC in Milwaukee.

Nowak serves alongside Michael Huebsch (R)(16 years in the state legislature, four years as Wisconsin Department of Administration Secretary) and Phil Montgomery  (previously served six terms as a Republican member of the Wisconsin State Assembly). 

Keeping Seniors in their Homes? More BS: Walker's plundering Republican pirates say they're helping seniors stay in their homes by saving them a laughable $1 on their property taxes. But those same Republicans are forcing seniors to spend that dollar and $7 more on their energy bills. Oh wait, even that wasn't enough?

If approved, the fixed charge paid by WPS customers will have more than doubled since last year, from $10.40 to $25 a month, Patricia Finder-Stone of AARP said during a public hearing on the Green Bay utility's proposal.

"It makes consumers pay more before they even turn on their lights," she said. "This increase has a disproportionate effect on seniors and others that are living on limited or fixed incomes."

Thanks to Obama-derangement syndrome: "Stand with Walker" voters can not only delight in getting bigger energy bills now, but they can also sleep comfortably knowing their sue happy state government will be locked in the coal fired past for some time. I also found the graph below that I just had to post here. The wonders of coal:

Fiorina says U.S. can't change climate, so why try? Wants to make coal "less bad."

Carly Fiorina is not a smart person, and I’m not afraid to saying it. Let’s face it, you can’t be a Republican presidential candidate without being completely out to lunch, appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Like most Republicans, Carly admits defeat right away, essentially saying there’s no such thing as American exceptionalism. She's saying climate change can’t be done by just the U.S. alone, so, that’s it, can’t be done. That’s the American spirit.

JOHN HARWOOD: Do you believe that humans contribute to climate change and that government ought to do something about it?

Defeatist Republican Attitude- FIORINA: I believe if you're going to go to science, you need to read the fine print. And here's what the scientists say: A single nation acting alone can make no difference at all. The only answer to this problem, according to the scientists, is a three-decade global effort, coordinated and costing trillions of dollars. Are you kidding? It'll never happen.

But even more bizarre is the solution; “innovation.” Huh? Yes, magical innovation will turn even coal into something “less bad.” Oh, and did you know big energy isn't "powerful enough" yet to innovate. They need more power and money, because tens of billions in profit isn't enough. Would I kid you:

Innovation Magid- FIORINA: The answer is innovation. And the only way to innovate is for this nation to have industries strong enough that they can innovate. So we're going to become the global energy powerhouse of the 21st century. To create jobs, to make the bad guys less bad, and so that we have industries including the coal industry that's powerful enough to be able to innovate. That's how you're going to solve an intractable problem. It's always the way you solve an intractable problem. Not with regulation—with innovation.

Republicans like big talking millionaires, no matter how bad they've failed in the past. Here's a quick reminder:

In an article about worst CEOs in USA Today in 2005, Yale business Professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld said that Fiorina was "the worst because of her ruthless attack on the essence of this great company. ... She destroyed half the wealth of her investors and yet still earned almost $100 million in total payments for this destructive reign of terror."

Oh yes, there's more, when asked today if he could add to his 2005 opinion:

"...while Fiorina was at HP, "virtually everything she bought ... has been shuttered or divested." He pointed out — emphasis his — that "She has NEVER been offered another CEO position in the decade since."

Failure is a prerequisite in the Republican Party, because apparently, even the following hasn't swayed Fiorina backers:

My brother, smiling, scaring me...

Yahoo: In an article about worst CEOs in USA Today in 2005, Yale business Professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld said that Fiorina was "the worst because of her ruthless attack on the essence of this great company ... She destroyed half the wealth of her investors and yet still earned almost $100 million in total payments for this destructive reign of terror." While Fiorina was at HP, "virtually everything she bought ... has been shuttered or divested." He pointed out — emphasis his — that "She has NEVER been offered another CEO position in the decade since." 

She's famous for buying Compaq over the strong objections of some board members. Fiorina angered many employees with a massive layoff right after the acquisition, cutting a reported 30,000 HP jobs. Fiorina was accused of off-shoring thousands of HP jobs and making the workers who lost their jobs train their overseas replacements. 

Justice Scalia sides with saving Big Energy Money, rules against bigger Savings protecting American Lives.

The Supreme Court ruling, by the conservative activist justices, struck down Obama’s new EPA clean air standards.

Let's start with the first problem: Republicans always weasel out of answering questions by refusing to address “hypothetical's.” In this case though, Justice Scalia turned the tables.

In another Salvador Dali moment of logic, Justice Scalia came up with a hypothetical that’ll blow your mind: What if wind and solar did more harm than burning coal? He really said that.

Scalia: "The government concedes that if the agency were to find that emissions from power plants do damage to human health, but that the technologies needed to eliminate these emissions do even more damage to human health, it would still deem regulation appropriate. No regulation is 'appropriate' if it does significantly more harm than good."

But it doesn’t? It was a wretched twist of reality.

It’s an argument that defies logic, and is never addressed by the press either. Republicans have always said environmental standards must balance the cost to business with the cost to human health and lives.

Not even close, right, who would not try to save lives by cleaning up energy production? The fact that most utility companies are already moving in the clean energy direction anyway makes this whole question a moot point.  But not to our clueless conservative jurists stuck in the 20^th century.

The cost to energy company’s vs peoples worthless lives? That’s easy for Scalia. Saving lives…is unreasonable:

Just in case you didn't see this...

"We hold that EPA interpreted unreasonably when it deemed cost irrelevant to the decision to regulate power plants," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the court's majority opinion … The Obama administration argued that the costs were only a fraction of the industry's profits. The EPA eventually did (look at the costs) and determined that the benefits far outweighed the costs.

The new regulation could add almost $10 billion in annual costs. But the EPA countered that the economic benefits could reach as much as $90 billion per year, based on health benefits and saved lives. The plaintiffs countered that the maximum benefit could reach no higher than about $6 billion.

There was no mention of saving lives. And you wonder why the national debt keeps going up; Republicans won’t let it come down unless it has a tax cut tied to it.

In a fiery dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said the EPA acted "well within its authority" in imposing regulations that could save "many, many lives."

Saving many, many lives is such a "liberal" thing. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell flipped reality inside out about the actual cost of doing nothing:

"Middle-class families in Kentucky and across our country … are often the first to suffer." 

From Republican policy, yea. 

MacIver Institute makes Dire 15 year energy prediction if we're crazy enough to go with Solar and Wind Power.

The fellows at the rightwing tabloid and think tank, MacIver Institute, have another phony drummed up "report."

The Nostradamus wing of the institute wants us to think they can look 15 years into the future and predict job losses totaling nearly 21,000, with electricity prices rising 19%. Of course that assumes solar and wind energy prices never come down, the cost of equipment never gets lower, or that new manufacturing plants filled with workers are never built to create the turbines and fuel cells. So...:

This isn't the first time MacIver Institute stuck their neck out with wild predictions. Who can forget their headline from the turn of the 20th century:

Wind and Solar averse Walker blames Obama for Wisconsin's soon to be costly reliance on Coal.

Scott Walker loves coal. It's an old reliable fuel, cheap, pollutes like nobodies business, and prematurely kills thousands of people a year. Walker's reliance on coal and other fossil fuels has left the state in a costly pickle. While other states are moving forward with wind and solar, seeing smog, lead and arsenic contamination as undesirable, Walker is sticking with costly coal.

And now Walker is blaming Obama and the EPA for sticking rate payers with higher energy costs. Yes, Walker's bad decision is Obama's fault.

In his state-of-the-state address, Walker breathed new life into old cliches that blamed "top down mandates," unlike his own top down voucher mandates, mining mandates, cell tower mandates, billboard siting mandates, sick leave mandates, tort mandates, women's health mandates, voter ID and hours mandates etc.

Walker: "Top down regulations and mandates from the federal government can get in the way of innovation and growth in Wisconsin, and states like ours." 

So wind and solar aren't considered "innovative" enough, but coal is? Anyone see growth, or even a future in the coal industry? The now lawsuit happy Republicans are more than okay with legislating through the courts:

Walker: "Therefore I'm working with our new attorney general to prepare a lawsuit challenging the newly proposed federal energy regulations." 

Walker's backward and costly policy of staying with coal, and the prediction of lost manufacturing jobs, is now all Obama's fault:

Walker: "These proposals could have a devastating impact on Wisconsin, because we're so heavily dependent on manufacturing. According to recent reports, we could lose tens of thousands of jobs in our region, and the rate payers could see an increase of up to 29%. We will fight to protect Wisconsin's hard working families..."

...from Walker's own energy policy disaster, the one he created by himself when he opposed wind and solar expansion. Standing ovation please! And then the misdirection plea; asking the fed to work with the states for "reasonable" alternatives...like coal? Very BOLD:

Walker: "Instead of fighting with states like Wisconsin, the federal government should work with us to find reasonable alternatives. We can be both environmentally and economically sustainable."

Our poor irresponsible incidental Governor Walker will cost the state jobs and rate payers money on energy and the AG's legal bills. Now that's fiscal conservatism.

Walker's opposition to new EPA smog standards will lead to more children with Autism.

Not only do Republicans want to roll back the new EPA standards that would reduce the particulate pollution contained in localized smog, but they want to get rid of the agency altogether. Yet they might want to rethink that position, since this same pollution is now tied to autism. Yea, right.

Until then, they intend to slow walk changes until they take control, when all of this will just magically goes away. Even if it means peoples lives will be at risk, including developing 3rd trimester fetuses.

Here's what we know about Wisconsin foot dragging:

Nearly five years after the federal government set new standards designed to protect public health from short, sharp spikes in air pollution levels, Wisconsin hasn't made the rules mandatory for all polluters. “The Department (DNR) has not met its statutory obligation to promulgate standards ... consistent with the federal standard,” the Midwest Environmental Defense Center and Clean Wisconsin said in their suit.

The lawsuit comes on the heels of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency “finding of failure” issued to the DNR in August for missing a 2012 deadline for new state rules on “incremental” increases in particles from smokestacks. Rewriting state rules ... should not have been complicated because it would require inserting new numbers into existing rules.

Now, new research has more than substantiated what was already assumed about particulate pollution and autism:

Pregnant women may nearly double their risk of giving birth to a child with autism by inhaling smog spewed by vehicles or smoke stacks, according to a new Harvard study that could help unlock the deepest autism mysteries … fortifies previous scientific findings that linked air pollution to autism. And it offers fresh insights by showing women in their third trimesters seem most vulnerable if they breathe in elevated levels of tiny airborne particles emitted by power plants, fires and automobiles said Marc Weisskopf, the report's senior author and associate professor of environmental and occupational epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. The higher the exposure rate, the greater the risk, he found.

Scott Walker keeps Wisconsin on Coal Power, complains Gas and Renewable Energy would cost too much.

There are consequences for not helping Wisconsin embrace a strong clean energy plan.

Instead of making our own energy, as opposed to importing it from out-of-state suppliers, Scott Walker has sent a clear message to wind and solar manufactures and installers that alternative energy is not welcome here. His crony filled PSC just raised rates on customers in a way that discourages the spread of solar and energy savings.

So now Walker is whining about the cost of sticking coal. Go figure. He’s not a smart man:

The Republican governor said the proposed rule would have a detrimental effect on Wisconsin’s manufacturing-based economy, as well as household ratepayers. Those ratepayers, however, already are seeing rate increases from the utilities under Walker's watch.  Walker said the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin said the proposed rule would cost the state … which recently approved a rate hike for Milwaukee area electricity customers.

He added Wisconsin obtains more than half its electricity from coal and shifting to natural gas will jeopardize reliability. An EPA spokeswoman issued a statement saying any small price increases would be dwarfed by huge benefits and it’s too early to make reliability claims since states haven’t developed implementation plans.

Too early is an understatement. By 2030 we’ll probably be phasing out solar and wind for the energy rich dilithium crystal.

Walker found himself lying again, claiming an increase in energy efficiency – that program went away – and increase renewable energy usage – he’s doing everything he can to kill that.   

Walker, in his statement, said, “Wisconsin has invested approximately $10.5 billion over the past 15 years to help reduce CO2 emissions, increase renewable energy usage and energy efficiency, and install air pollution control equipment."

Oh sure, Walker wants you to forget this:

Focus had suspended renewables incentives in 2011, for one year, after the PSC concluded it had been spending too much on renewables, which don't provide as strong a payback that energy-saving efficiency projects do. We Energies and Renew Wisconsin have been at odds since We Energies terminated a renewable energy development program that provided incentives for churches and nonprofit groups to add solar. Utilities are also opposing moves to allow companies to build and own the solar panels that are on customers' rooftops.

Coal Ash poisoning our water? Prove it says DNR.

Isn't it time to put the kibosh on that meddling EPA? Getting rid of it is the GOP’s ultimate goal, a bizarre and blatantly irresponsible goal that seems to make sense to their unquestioning voter base. It starts with getting government out of the way, and ends at hurting the “job creators.” It’s simple to understand wordsmithing that works like the saying abracadabra.

Without serious environmental “job killing” regulations, the following major threaten to our water supply would be the norm. Still, conservative voters don’t seem one bit concerned.

The question has always been; similar to climate change, why don’t we just play it safe, just in case? Throwing caution to the wind...

We Energies said the Oak Creek Power Plant ash could not be definitively tied to higher levels of chemicals like boron and molybdenum in local groundwater.

The least costly solution is to transition away from coal completely, which according to the Walker administration is an attack on that lovable black stocking stuffer, and probably a part of some liberal plot to kill jobs and businesses. We've all seen how bad things are in liberal Madison, one of the best cities in the country in almost every category?:

A new study from a Wisconsin environmental group has found that when the ash from coal-burning power plants is used in places like construction projects, some harmful chemicals can wind up in drinking water. Recently, however, the environmental group Clean Wisconsin issued a report that contends that more than 1 in 5 wells across Racine, Kenosha, Waukesha and Milwaukee counties are contaminated with molybdenum at amounts above the state health advisory level. Clean Wisconsin's Tyson Cook said the problem is that construction firms have used the ash as fill material under roads, schools and other buildings.

We're using coal ash as fill material...oh, why not. Of course, we could move to a strictly private system using bottled water? That might be more expensive than that quarterly bill you get from your municipality, but it does get government off your back and downsizes your late mail delivery.   

Ann Michna’s family, which includes her husband Frank Michna, their children, and pets, all drink bottled water. Frank, who's part of a family that has lived in Caledonia for 160 years, said he blames We Energies coal ash for spoiling his tap water and causing health problems. He said the company should be held accountable. “They tried to cover it up and say, ‘Well we’re doing the right thing now.’ But you didn’t in the past, and you need to pay for that,” he said.

Based on the DNR’s ideologically driven opinion, nothing needs to be done, because so far no one can prove beyond a reasonable doubt we’re poisoning our water. And besides, many metallic poisons occur naturally:

The DNR's Ann Coakley said that more study is possible, but said that she finds fault with Clean Wisconsin's report. “At this time we really do not concur that there is a clear correlation between the elevated molybdenum in groundwater and the beneficial use of bottom ash from coal-fired power plants,” said Coakley. “We also know that there’s evidence that molybdenum is a naturally occurring metal in Wisconsin soil and rock formation. 

Republicans predict U.S. Business collapse after cleaning up or ending our dependence on deadly Coal.

Scott Walker's policies are already affecting Wisconsin's economy in a negative way. He and his Republican majority have done all they can to discourage alternate energy expansion like wind and solar. Forget about job creation and weening ourselves off outside energy dependence, we're now going to spend more money cleaning up our old supposed "cheap" energy. Doh! 

Wisconsin's power plants are already near the halfway point in reaching a national goal outlined Monday to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2030, but the state's reliance on coal could still pose challenges to hit the target.

See what happens when some are lulled into complacency with pitiful tax cuts? 

jsonline: The Obama administration's biggest policy announcement to restrict carbon dioxide emissions since reaching an accord with car makers several years ago.

It's a bad thing for the economy that would kill 31,000 jobs? WKOW's Greg Neumann asked WMC's panicky guy, Scott Manley. Be afraid, be very afraid:

To get a feel for just how disingenuous the Republican argument is, with their doom and gloom predictions, check out the following edited segment from Rachel Maddow on all the previous false warnings predicting "the end" of American businesses. Great stuff:



Fact: About 1,000 coal miners die each year from black lung disease; 670,000 cases of coal related lung disease is diagnosed every year; Americans support regulating carbon/willing to pay a little more; the coal industry downsized jobs by half before regulations, to increase profits; and didn't they see this coming?

Here's Chris Hayes with a few more facts, along with the perspective of a coal miners son:

Clinging to the past, WMC loyalty to Coal Industry may cost the state money, jobs.

You've got to be kidding. We're now expected to treat as serious research, a right wing think tanks study predicting big job losses due to coal regulation? The Heritage Foundation is the same group that created the basic structure of the Affordable Care Act, mandate and all, and later denounced it as unconstitutional. Yea, whatever's convenient guys.

The low life lobbyists at Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, who are dead set on clinging to the 20th century fossil fuel model of coal in our state, are now whining about the cost of keeping coal as an energy source. What the...?

Never mind the millions of premature deaths caused by coal pollution.

Kurt Bauer, President/CEO of Wisconsin’s Chamber of Commerce – WMC – issued the following statement regarding the study’s findings:

“The war on coal will hit Wisconsin’s employers and families harder than those in any other state. These EPA policies, which will have little to no impact on global climate, are sapping the lifeblood of our manufacturing economy. In light of these newly found results, WMC once again calls on the EPA to consider the impact its regulations will have on thousands of working Wisconsin families and job creators.”

After reading stories like this, I often try to imagine what our countryside and air would look like if these guys were in charge. China may be the closest example of their environmental position, from Market to Market:



This is the price of doing nothing: