The Senate Commerce Committee voted Do Pass last Wednesday on the PACE bill. So this win/win proposal is on its way in the upper chamber. But it’s having a tough go in the House because we live in a state where representatives propose such dim bulb ideas as a bill that would allow for light bulbs manufactured in Missouri to be stamped “made in Missouri”. Seriously. In contrast, PACE is a bill for grownups. It would allow homeowners to get long term loans for energy upgrades by applying to municipalities that have opted in. The bill would enable homeowners to see cash savings from the very first month they upgraded, it would create green jobs, and it would cost the state … nothing. What’s not to like? Twenty-eight other states have already instituted similar programs.

Our job is to make the House leadership notice good fortune when, wearing sequins and a sash that says “GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY”, it jumps up and down waving its arms in front of them. Let me inspire you to take the initiative by reprinting these grafs from a posting two years ago about Jim Trout’s run for the Senate seat in Kirkwood/Webster:

[Trout] told me that in the latter half of the nineties, Representative Sue Shear (D-HD 83) worked for several years to get health care coverage for poor disabled children. At the time, only parents at the poverty level could get coverage for such children. Insurance companies turned a cold shoulder to disabled children whose parents earned more than poverty level, even if the family could scrape together the money for premiums. Shear was proposing MC Plus, a program that enabled parents earning $39,000 or less to insure a disabled child; it guaranteed coverage and gave them some help from the state on a sliding scale.

One spring, Trout called Shear and asked where the bill stood in the legislature. It’s dead, she told him. The chair won’t let it out of committee. Trout asked her who the committee chair was, but he didn’t call the man. Instead, he called fifty of his friends and asked them to call the man–and to keep him on the phone with their complaints. Apparently, a lot of those fifty people did as they were asked. The bill made it out of committee in a jiffy and passed.

I’m writing in lieu of calling fifty people individually. And I can’t ask you to bend the ear of some committee chair, since no committee’s got the bill. You’ll need to call Speaker Ron Richard’s office (573-751-2173–ask for Kristen) and Majority Leader Steve Tilley’s office (573-751-1488). The PACE bill is HB2178.

Tell them that Missouri could save up to 30 percent of its energy costs just by creating more efficient buildings. But don’t come across as some Greenpeace-crazed, granola-munching hippie: they don’t want to hear about slowing climate change. Focus instead on eliminating the need to build another power plant. They still remember what a touchy subject that is. And even those who think climate change is some librul hoax know it’s a good idea to use less foreign oil.

Stress that the beauty of this legislation is that it is not an example of government poking its nose into people’s business. Instead, it’s a bill that simply allows citizens to do good for their state and their country even as they solve their own problems. PACE would let people do for themselves, at no cost to the state in these recessionary times. Think of it as deregulating consumers.

Right now, the leadership is overlooking a chance to gain bragging rights for years to come as the party that created thousands of jobs without spending a cent, merely by offering citizens a chance to do the right thing.

We’re not alone in pushing this project. Members of MAAEP (MO Assn. of Accredited Energy Professionals) have spent several days in the Jeff lobbying legislators. And last week MAAEP members Byron DeLear and Tom Appelbaum went to K.C. to quietly promote it to bankers and other business stakeholders. Here’s hoping DeLear and Appelbaum convinced some of those people to call legislators.

It’s worth the trouble to contact Richard and Tilley. Remember Jim Trout’s success story. But even if we don’t get it passed this spring, we’ll lay the groundwork to get off to a roaring start next January. So make those calls. I’ll be phoning Richard’s office and Tilley’s office later in the week, and I better not hear that I’m the only one. Don’t make me call y’all individually. … Okay, okay, that’s an empty threat. I don’t have phone numbers. But you get the idea.

Previously: Rep. Mark Parkinson (r): great moments in projection

Ah, some members of the Missouri House of Representatives seem to want to go out of their way to try and prove that we never get out of junior high school. A case in point – Representative Mark Parkinson (r), via Twitter:

@MBersin (d-noun, cellist/tracker-verbs) it just occurred to me why you have an infatuation with trackers, as you are one.     26 minutes ago  via Tweetie  from Spencer Creek, MO  

Did he just say, “I know you are, but what am I?”

The meta, for those who aren’t clueless:

….At Show Me Progress we cover campaign, public, and government events. We sometimes cover fundraisers when we get an invitation to do so. We either wear ID in the form of a photo credential or we present a business card with our contact information, clearly identifying our affiliation with this blog. Our identification informs those at the events that we cover that what they say to us is on the record. We utilize the public record, the Missouri Sunshine Law, as well as other public resources to access public information. Further, there’s nothing keeping Representative Hoskins from signing up on this blog and participating consistent with our user guidelines.  

A tracker, on the other hand, is a paid political operative who may or may not identify his or her associations/affiliations.

Show Me Progress: How are you doing?

Tracker: Hello. How are you?

SMP: Good, good. So, are you a tracker or something?

Tracker: Uh, you could say that I guess.

SMP: Yeah. I’m with Show Me Progress. [I handed him my business card. He took it.]

Tracker: Oh!

SMP: Yeah. So, so, where are you from?

Tracker: Uh, I’d rather not say.

SMP: Oh, okay, that’s cool. [sound of camera shutter]

Tracker: You like the license plate? [In response to me photographing the back of the car.]

SMP: Actually? Interesting.

Tracker: Um, hm.

SMP: Yeah, so, uh, so have you been doing this for long or working in, in politics and stuff like that? [crosstalk]

Tracker: Uh, yeah, I’ve been working in politics for a while. [crosstalk]

SMP: Yeah. Good, good. Uh, where are you from, just in, are you from Missouri or just?

Tracker: I’d rather not say.

SMP: Okay, that’s cool. Well, listen, have a good evening, all right?

Clear enough for you now? Or is that irony definition thing still a little fuzzy for you?….

More junior high school, from the current session:

…the new Mark Parkinson idea is far weirder and angrier than the antique slot machines idea which was narrowly defeated in 2009. His new idea: deducting from Jay Nixon’s salary to buy Powerball tickets. An idea so absurd, asinine, and petty that it’s one of the better Republican revenue ideas ever (by default)…

I rest my case.

Senator David Pearce (r) (left) and Representative Denny Hoskins (r) (right) speaking at a forum on the campus of the University of Central Missouri sponsored by the Faculty Senate.

On Friday afternoon Senator David Pearce (r) and Representative Denny Hoskins (r) spoke on the budget at a forum sponsored by the University of Central Missouri Faculty Senate. The legislators (their districts include the university) spoke in turn for approximately twenty minutes and then took questions for the remainder of the hour. There were about thirty-five to forty individuals in attendance.  

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): ….I mean for goodness sake we even cut the personal chef of the Governor and that was a, only a, I think a forty thousand dollar cut and, uh, I, I still don’t believe that, uh, the Governor’s wife will be behind the, in kitchen, behind the grill and cooking meals for some of the different constituents they have there. But I think it, at least it would serve as a discussion point in order to see if, if maybe it would be more cost effective have meals catered or something like that….

….I think right now, with our budget crises and budget crunch, crunch I don’t think that there’s anything off the table. I think everything at least deserved to be discussed and vetted…

…trying to think outside the box, how can we raise revenue? One of the, one of the things that’s been discussed in the Senate and over in the House is, uh, Internet, sales tax on Internet purchases. Um, right now we’re supposed to pay, uh, any time you shop at the Gap or Bass Pro or anywhere else you’re supposed to pay sales tax on that. Uh, as the, the system in Missouri. But, right now, I, we took a show of hands I bet a lot of us are not paying sales tax on that or use tax on that. And so, what this bill would do is basically just enforce the current law that we already have in order, um, because, it, it’s, what, what it’s doing is killing our retail, our brick and mortar shops around Warrensburg and, and the other cities because they don’t, you have to pay sales tax when you go in there and so I think it’s only appropriate that we would enforce the current laws that we have in order to pay sales tax on Internet purchases as well….

….Question: We’re starting to see in some other state legislatures along with the process of cutting the budget, uh, a slow acknowledgment that revenues need to be increased. And there are some states that are starting to look towards tax increases. Any suggestion of that here in the state? Or, how bad would things have to get before you would see your colleagues thinking about raising revenue?…

…Senator David Pearce (r): Um, right now the Governor and the legislature said we’re not gonna raise taxes. Uh, and, and, uh, we’re from the show me state and I think that, uh, people actually have to see what cuts are actually gonna look like and have to feel them before the state will rally, uh, and ask for a tax increase. Uh, I do have some colleagues who signed a no new taxes pledge., there’s some organization out there, no new tax pledge. I did not sign that. Uh, because I think as [applause], uh, [laughter] I think, I think as a leader that you have to, to be able to, uh, have those things at your disposal. And so, um,  at this point there, there haven’t been, uh, there hasn’t been a big thing like that, but, [inaudible].

Representative Hoskins (r): Uh, um, I did not sign on to the no tax increase pledge [applause] either. Um, I, you know, I don’t want to tie my hands and take anything off the table, but, right now I’m not in favor of any, uh, tax increase. I think it’s, I know there’s been some stories out there that fifty percent or forty-seven percent of the population do not pay any income tax  and, uh, some other studies that showed the top ten percent of, of earners pay about seventy-three percent, I believe it was, of all the income tax. So right now there, um, the Governor as well as the legislature said, no, uh, no to new any more tax [inaudible].

Question: Can, can I [inaudible] how much you just said Representative Hoskins?

Representative Hoskins: Yes.

Question: Because we had an e-mail exchange about a month ago. You did vote for what’s called TABOR, the tax payer bill of rights, which was in Colorado.

Representative Hoskins: It’s not called TABOR. [crosstalk]

Question: Well, it was in Colorado, though. And it, and it tie, it essentially will be a constitutional amendment, I think, that you voted for that will be voted on in November that will tie any tax, any revenue increases to the population growth and inflation. You just said you didn’t want to tie your hands. Doesn’t that legislation tie your hands?

Representative Hoskins: I don’t believe that legislation, uh, ties your hands. [inaudible] And I would say, you know, do you, do you like havin’ a, uh, decrease in funding for higher education?

Question: But, that, yeah, which raises an interesting question, though. When revenue ever comes back, if you limit revenues, how do we ever get a, uh, cost of living increase?

Representative Hoskins: Well, and what I would say is that, um, this plan was in, in effect back when we had the boom years we would have been able to set some of that, those funds asides for these, uh, down years. So, and I, I’ve always find it interesting when people, you know, I, I say well, do you, do you like taking the cut? And they say, well, no. And I say, well, you know, under this plan, you know, we would have been able to save some of that money back from the boom years and would have helped fund during the short years.

Question: I, is this plan rolling back the Hancock restrictions on state revenue?

Representative Hoskins: No, in, in the Hancock amendment, when, when it came, that’s, when we talk about tax credits, that’s when, uh, back in the boom years, that’s one of the reasons we had to come up with a lot of these tax credits is because the legislature back, the way I understand it, the legislature back in the nineties, uh, when revenue did come back, come in [inaudible] more than expected the Hancock amendment kicked in and so therefore, instead of giving, uh, I don’t, I don’t know if, if the legislature could not, uh, give refunds back to the people, because they had too much money, or if they chose not to. But, a lot of these tax credit programs came up then that we’re really concerned about now because the way these tax credits, like the example I, I used, it’s that, uh, you know, I’m a developer I go out and build on a project, I, because the State of Missouri can’t write a check to R and D Developers or, or whoever developers, but they can offer tax credits. And so a way to draw down some of that extra excess that they had, what they would do, is they would give that developer a, a tax credit in order to build one of these projects or, or developments. And so then with a, uh, so let’s say that developer was issued a million dollar tax credit. Well they came in with a hundred thousand dollars in Missouri income tax that they were supposed to pay and the check had, the State of Missouri wrote a check for nine, the difference, nine hundred thousand back to that developer.

Question: Just, just one more question. I apparently have mischaracterized the legislation you support. Would you please tell us exactly what this bill will do to revenue increases that the state has? It does put a cap, my understanding, on the revenue coming in to the state based upon population growth and inflation.  Now, and as a consequence, if we go over that cap, what happens to the money? You voted for this, so please tell us.

Representative Hoskins: Let, uh, I’d be glad to talk with you afterwards. I know there’s a lot of details of that bill and we discussed this last year as well. I know [crosstalk]…

Question: At, at approximately the same level of generality. I’d like you to be more specific.

Representative Hoskins: Okay. I’d be glad to visit with you and go in detail on that bill afterwards [inaudible]….

Afterwards? Because no one else in the room was interested in those details?

Article X, sections 16 through 24, of the Missouri Constitution (republicans call it the “Hancock amendment”), is it good or bad? You can’t tell from Denny Hoskins’ answer.

REVIEW OF ARTICLE X

SECTIONS 16 THROUGH 24

CONSTITUTION OF MISSOURI

TWO YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999

…On November 4, 1980, the voters of Missouri passed Constitutional Amendment No. 5, which added Article X, Sections 16 through 24 to the Constitution of Missouri. The amendment, commonly referred to as the Hancock Amendment, requires that no greater portion of Missourians’ personal income be used in any future year to fund state government than was the case in fiscal year 1981, except as authorized by a vote of the people…

[pdf]

The limits as set in the Missouri Constitution:

Missouri Constitution

Article X

TAXATION

Section 18

August 28, 2009

Limitation on taxes which may be imposed by general assembly –exclusions–refund of excess revenue–adjustments authorized.

Section 18. (a) There is hereby established a limit on the total amount of taxes which may be imposed by the general assembly in any fiscal year on the taxpayers of this state. Effective with fiscal year 1981-1982, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the general assembly shall not impose taxes of any kind which, together with all other revenues of the state, federal funds excluded, exceed the revenue limit established in this section. The revenue limit shall be calculated for each fiscal year and shall be equal to the product of the ratio of total state revenues in fiscal year 1980-1981 divided by the personal income of Missouri in calendar year 1979 multiplied by the personal income of Missouri in either the calendar year prior to the calendar year in which appropriations for the fiscal year for which the calculation is being made, or the average of personal income of Missouri in the previous three calendar years, whichever is greater.

(b) For any fiscal year in the event that total state revenues exceed the revenue limit established in this section by one percent or more, the excess revenues shall be refunded pro rata based on the liability reported on the Missouri state income tax (or its successor tax or taxes) annual returns filed following the close of such fiscal year. If the excess is less than one percent, this excess shall be transferred to the general revenue fund.

(c) The revenue limitation established in this section shall not apply to taxes imposed for the payment of principal and interest on bonds, approved by the voters and authorized under the provisions of this constitution.

(d) If responsibility for funding a program or programs is transferred from one level of government to another, as a consequence of constitutional amendment, the state revenue and spending limits may be adjusted to accommodate such change, provided that the total revenue authorized for collection by both state and local governments does not exceed that amount which would have been authorized without such change.

   (Adopted November 4, 1980)…

[emphasis added]

So, is the representative advocating repeal?

Representative Mike Talboy (D) speaking to students at the University of Central Missouri.

On Friday morning Representative Mike Talboy (D-37) addressed students at the University of Central Missouri as part of the program for Politics & Social Justice Week:

Representative Mike Talboy (D-37): ….I’ve been in the legislature for four years now. I, uh, I’m heading up the campaign committee for the House Democrats and I also have been selected by my caucus as the Democratic Leader-elect….

….If you’ve watched what’s going on in Jefferson City the last few years, aside from the news about the FBI investigations or anything like that, you know that we have no money. And I wish I could tell you that it was gonna get better. But the bad news is that we are going to have even less money next year. Uh, we’re looking at about a billion to a billion two shortfall and the reason that things aren’t that bad right now is because we have a little left over stimulus money that, that came in and gave us a cushion at the state level.  The problem is,  is that that money’s all going to be dried up and we may have just a tad bit that will come in because of the jobs bill, maybe three hundred million, and that’ll keep us from going completely into the one and a half to one point six billion dollar shortfall possible.

Uh, the, the environment down there is about like what you’d expect it to be. It looks a lot like the, for anybody that watched the health care debate, it looks a lot like that on a, on a daily basis. Oh, and they actually, probably are a little more civil day to day. Uh, it’s always funny because you hear about the, the party in power will always say that the party in the, in, in the minority is always doing obstructionist work and, and they’re, they’re not really coming to the table. Or they’re, the minority will always say they’re not being included. And so it’s always very interesting to watch the dance that happens in, in Jeff City.  ‘Cause we’re in, we’re in minority. We’re eight seats down. But we actually had the guy who, if the, the Republicans stay in power, is talking to us about his bill about opting out of the health care bill and trying to put the constitutional fight that all these states want to get in to, actually on the ballot inside of our Constitution in the State of Missouri. Well, the, the interesting part about the whole thing is they shut off debate during that bill. On us. While they were complaining about the majority party at the federal level not allowing the minority party at the federal level to have a voice in the process. So, it’s, it’s one of those things that regardless of, of what the environment or who’s in power or anything like that, the House of Representatives is not the deliberative body that the Senate is. It is very much a tyranny of the majority. It is very much a whoever’s in power, as long as you have votes to do something you’re gonna get it passed.

And so it, it’s been interesting ’cause we’ve had a lot more people take interest now that the, the health care debate was on TV at such a wide, uh, audience that I can’t remember any other kind of, of, uh, C-SPAN audience actually have that many viewers at any one time. Uh, matter of fact, I think the only time I’ve ever, I’ve seen that much interest in anything that was going on inside Congress, the day to day, was Anita Hill and, and Clarence Thomas.  And you are all probably way too young to remember any of that….

….But the interesting part is that we have become very divided along all sorts of different lines. It’s happened at the national level, it’s happened at the state level, and it’s, it’s probably going to get a little bit worse before it gets better. The good news is that usually throughout history these types of things do end up getting better. But, it takes a while for it to cycle back.

Uh, we have some things that are, that are moving forward in the legislature. But again, when you don’t have any money and you’re actually taking money out of programs it’s very hard to try to actually advance anything because it, passing legislation usually has some sort of fiscal impact on the state to it. And right now the, the big thing is this new DWI bill that, that the Governor had put forward and, and we debated on the floor. It’s probably not going to end up passing unless there are some significant changes to it because of this simple fact. And it’s amazing, the warrantless blood search is probably, you know, the fact that a guy fresh out of the police academy can come in and take your blood without a warrant, uh, plays no factor in that. It’s simply a monetary problem. It’s [inaudible] we can’t fund it. If we actually put it in we would completely tax the law enforcement divisions of municipalities and counties.

And so, a, a lot of bills are going to simply live or die based upon whether or not there’s any fiscal  impact to the state….

Representative Talboy took questions from students for the remainder of the hour.

From time to time someone will reply to a post via Twitter and I don’t catch that reply right away. Sure enough, this evening I was checking for replies and, lo and behold, look what I found, from Representative Mark Parkinson (r):

@MBersin do you honestly think Rep. Hoskins has it in his budget to hire a tracker? If so, you are an idiot.     8:36 PM Mar 31st  via Tweetie  from Jefferson, MO   in reply to MBersin

“…If so, you are an idiot…” Heh. That wasn’t very nice. But, that’s okay, it’s still really nice to know that Representative Parkinson (r) reads Show Me Progress.

Well, there was a tracker. That’s indisputable. But Representative Parkinson (r) may have a point about that budget stuff since Representative Hoskins (r – noun, verb, CPA) couldn’t even pay his taxes on time.

Unless he thinks someone else hired the tracker:

…A common, but perhaps unfortunate fact in politics today is that political parties use videographers, or “trackers,” to record the political activities of candidates for offices…

Well, okay, but if trackers are “icky” and republican don’t use them, the question remains:

…With this tracker stuff out in front of the public does that mean we won’t be seeing any darkly lit shaky videos or grainy photographs along with shock headlines and disturbing music in cable television commercials in the 121st District before the November election? Just asking.

Update: Heh. Representative Parkinson (r) posted via Twitter:

@MBersin (d-noun, cellist-verb) smp is read to track the negative mentions of R’s. The R with the most wins (it means we are effective).     about 6 hours ago  via web  in reply to MBersin

Ah, I get it. There’s a tie for first place in the mention department and someone will take the lead if they post more on Twitter.

As for being effective? That claim is debatable.

Previously:

Campaign Tracker: the worst job in politics and you still have to wear a suit (March 17, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): tracker, what tracker? (March 22, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): a clueless pilgrim in the land of republican false equivalence (March 27, 2010)

Representative Denny Hoskins (r): appropriate legal remedy? (March 31, 2010)

Courtney Cole (D) in the 121st Legislative District – letter to the editor (April 6, 2010)

What do human “bees” do to save the rest of us from self-immolation?  They “cross-pollinate the grassroots.”

Two members of the Beehive Collective of Machias, Maine, explained their mission to an audience of their peers at Wash U while a few of us old folks watched in amazement.

The topic for the day was “The True Cost of Coal,” but Tyler Bee and Erin Bee explained the history of the collective and why they don’t use their real last names. Read more about their restoration of a 100-yr old Grange Hall and how their hard work earned them a new home.

These young, talented activists collaboratively decide which topics to research and then spend literally years visiting the sites, interviewing the people directly impacted, designing artistic representations of what they learn and producing curriculum materials for use by schools, environmental and social justice groups, or anyone who wants their copyright-free designs.

Their current work-in-progress is a mural depicting the history, destruction and current conditions in the coal mining region of Appalachia

The reason they use animals to depict human characters is to allow a universal appreciation of the message.  The artists painstakingly depict the actual living creatures and plants of each region studied right down to the 60+ varieties of ants found in one of their previous projects.  Frogs are main characters in the coal mining mural because frogs are an “indicator species.”  

Erin and Tyler explained the hostile environment that economic justice and nature lovers confront in coal country.  Despite a long history of union activism and solidarity with the miners, the local people are deathly afraid to be seen talking to “activists.”  Many of the local people have been propagandized to believe that environmentalists are inherently evil.  Despite being physically assaulted and terrorized, members of Mountain Justice continue to work toward saving what is left of the land these people love.

With mechanization of underground mining in the 1950’s, fewer miners were needed.  Now with mountain removal methods, one-tenth as many miners are needed as in the old days.  Consequently, over three million West Virginians have left the state looking for work.  When asked what their dream would be for the future of their state, the residents who remain said they want their families back together and to be able to raise their children in a healthy environment.

The recent disaster in Raleigh County had to be mentioned. Members of the Wash U audience were keenly aware of Massey’s record of safety violations and the comments made by the company president, Don Blankenship.  I looked up the median household income in Raleigh County.  The most recent date from 2007 showed that families are surviving (barely) on $25,000 a year.  Compare that to Blankenship’s salary of tens of millions.  It makes me sick to think we ever allowed our country to get this out of balance. President Obama has appointed a new head of the Mine Safety Board, so maybe we’ll see positive changes.  The good people of Appalachian coal country have been put in the cruel position of having to support themselves by destroying the land they love.

I, personally, am extremely thankful that there are young people like the Bees and the students at Wash U who will demand a rebalancing of the scales of economic justice in our country.  They are in it for the long haul.  As Erin Bee said, their group can educate and connect people to make significant changes here and now.  But they can also “Yell NO! at big scary things that won’t change in our lifetime.”  I hope their youthful idealism and hard work pay off for all of us.  

Remember Climategate – the manufactured controversy over some emails stolen from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Great Britain? If so, you remember lots of right-wing noise, and little or no substance, right? But lots and lots of noise.

Do you also remember the Missouri congressman who grabbed onto the so-called controversy and used it like a big, ugly club to batter cap-and-trade legislation? If you guessed that it was Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R. 9th) you would be right.

Remember Luetkemeyer’s strident demands for a  congressional investigation into Climategate? Why? Because, as he put it:

… the “Climategate” emails seem to indicate that the same scientists who were sending data to the UN climate panel were suppressing scientific evidence and manipulating data that was used in part as justification for liberals to pass cap-and-trade legislation.

Recently, though, the first of the actual British investigations (as opposed to bloviating press releases and general bullyboy behavior on the part of climate-change deniers in the U.S. Congress) presented its findings which have “largely vindicated the scientists involved”:

The House of Commons’ Science and Technology Committee said Wednesday that they’d seen no evidence to support charges that the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit or its director, Phil Jones, had tampered with data or perverted the peer review process to exaggerate the threat of global warming – two of the most serious criticisms levied against the climatologist and his colleagues.

In their report, the committee said that, as far as it was able to ascertain, “the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact,” adding that nothing in the more than 1,000 stolen e-mails, or the controversy kicked up by their publication, challenged scientific consensus that “global warming is happening and that it is induced by human activity.

None of which is at all surprising to those who were actually paying close attention to the claims and counter-claims when the so-called scandal broke. At that time the incendiary emails didn’t seem to amount to much more than some trash talk among scientific colleagues directed, understandably enough, towards climate change skeptics, some ambiguous phrases pertaining to data display mechanisms, etc.  

Nor, however, will this finding probably quiet critics such as Rep. Luetkemeyer. The fact that the report did chide the scientists at the CRU for refusing to share their raw data and for their reluctance to respond to freedom of information requests has already provided the usual suspects with a pretext to claim that their lurid fantasies about the content of the emails have not yet been disproved.

It will be interesting to see how Luetkemeyer responds to this report – if he ever does. The controversy, after all, was never really about what the emails really said or did not say, but what they could be made to seem to say – and Blaine Luetkemeyer did yeoman’s duty trying to present them as the requisite smoking gun that could prove climate science fraud. He will, doubtless, be as loth to let facts stand in the way of his anti-science bluster now as he was earlier.  

……..wide-ranging public initiatives to prevent disease and encourage healthy behavior-

……chain restaurants with 20 or more locations will have to provide a calorie count for each standard menu item.

Employers must provide “reasonable break time” for nursing mothers…requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide time for new mothers to express, or pump, breast milk.

Medicaid will cover drugs and counseling to help pregnant women stop smoking………

Health insurance companies will soon have to cover all recommended screenings, preventive care and vaccines, without charging co-payments or deductibles

……each Medicare beneficiary will be entitled to an “annual wellness visit,” in which a doctor can assess the patient’s condition, check for signs of Alzheimer’s disease and draw up a “personalized prevention plan” with a screening schedule for the next five or 10 years.

The new law also allows employers to give stronger incentives to employees who participate in programs to lose weight, stop smoking or improve their health in other ways

Employers can offer rewards equal to 30 percent of the cost of coverage – up from 20 percent under prior law – to employees who participate in such programs.

…..a new federal trust fund will pay for more bicycle paths, playgrounds, sidewalks and hiking trails.