As a lesbian, I’m more exhilarated and infuriated by this year’s presidential campaign than I’ve ever been before. And at 55, I’ve seen more than a few presidential bouts.Read more.
By Diane SilverA hunt through women's medical records soon could begin at the Sedgwick County Courthouse -- one set in motion by a petition, paid for by tax dollars and sanctioned Wednesday by a judge. That should bother Kansans on both sides of the abortion issue....
(T)here's something chilling about the idea of 15 strangers on a grand jury poring over someone's patient records and discussing and second-guessing her medical and sexual history and mental health -- even if she is nameless.
Patients visit their doctors expecting privacy, something underscored by the protections of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. If they knew that their doctor visit could end up being fodder for a grand jury investigation -- or a Bill O'Reilly tirade on Fox News, as also has happened -- might they have gone to the doctor at all? Some surely would not.
IMAGE: The Wichita Eagle's Richard Crowson weighs in with his opinion on the issue. See the full cartoon.
Unfortunately, there are some very troubling components of this bill that put Kansans at risk, and would put our state at odds with the rest of the country in efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I cannot support these components.
...
Under the current bill, any coal plant, from anywhere in the country, applying for a permit and meeting the very minimum standards established by the EPA would have to be given a permit. It wouldn’t matter whether Kansas needed the energy or not. All the coal plants that have been denied permits or withdrawn applications in other states would be knocking at our door. Why wouldn’t they? Given the lack of zoning requirements in many of our counties, these plants could be sited anywhere. Kansas would be the coal capital of the country.
The so-called “carbon dioxide emission offset act” will actually promote greater carbon emissions. Around the country the proposals that are being developed for carbon offsets require scientifically-based, verifiable, additional, permanent, and enforceable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, or increases in biological sequestration.
There is simply no relation between the offsets allowed under the bill and actual offsets that occur. The bill provides credit for wind facilities built anywhere in the country since 2000. It allows triple credit for carbon dioxide offset through use of the algae process proposed in the Sunflower plant, and triple credit for converting cultivated land to pasture. The bill also allows credit for one ton of carbon dioxide for each dollar invested in experimental project, regardless of whether carbon dioxide emissions are ever reduced.
The proposed legislation sets such a low monetary penalty for failing to offset ($3 per ton), that there’s no incentive to invest in real offsets. This “penalty” is not in line with the $20-30 estimates made by utility companies or financial analysts, or contained in any of the proposed Congressional legislation. It will not result in a reduction of carbon dioxide emissions. If anything, it appears to be an attempt to mislead Kansans that significant action would be taken.
I do not support the section of the bill that prohibits the Secretary from taking action where the federal government has failed to act. Even though the United States Supreme Court told the EPA that it was obligated to regulate carbon dioxide, the EPA has refused to take action. Prohibiting our state agencies from filling voids resulting from federal inaction unnecessarily places our citizens at risk.
I do not support the sections of the bill that strip the Secretary of the Kansas Department of Environment of his critical authority to insist that coal plants meet more stringent standards than those established by the federal agencies to protect the health and environment of Kansans.
Finally, there are critical missing pieces that must be an element of any real and meaningful discussion regarding future Kansas energy policy.
The proposed energy package does nothing to encourage the further development of commercial wind power in our state or enhance transmission development. Nor does it further our voluntary renewable portfolio standard (RPS) that I announced last year. Both of these features are needed to support alternative energy expansion in Kansas and make use of our abundant natural resources.
As I suggested in my State of the State, we need to join the 36 states that have begun or completed development of a comprehensive climate change action plan. It is clear the people of Kansas welcome an informed discussion about our energy future, economic opportunities, and the protection of our environment.
A Blue Ribbon panel of Kansas experts composed of distinguished citizen leaders from business, environment, government and other key sectors of our state economy should be assembled to begin this process. I would welcome the opportunity to partner with the Legislature on moving this process forward as soon as possible. We can rise to the challenges we face only if we commit ourselves to moving forward.
We must look beyond gay issues to endorse a candidate. We’re not alone in doing this. A November survey of LGB Americans by Hunter College (funded by the Human Rights Campaign) found that only 21 percent of respondents placed LGB rights above issues such as the economy, health care and the war....
Looking at the wreckage left by our current Commander in Chief, we want an experienced leader who can get serious work done. That is why we endorse Sen. Hillary Clinton.
The Blade acknowledges some hesitance over endorsing Clinton, but then argues:
We question whether Obama can muster the aggression needed to force change. His talk of bringing people together reminds us of current Democratic Congressional leaders’ talk of bipartisanship. In an effort to avoid confrontations with Republicans, Dems have gotten us nowhere in 2007: no hate crimes, no ENDA, no impeachment...
This would not be the case if Hillary were running the show. It might be if Obama were President. In October, Obama learned that “ex-gay” minister Donnie McClurkin had been invited to speak at one of his fundraisers. Under the rhetoric of bringing opposing viewpoints together, Obama allowed McClurkin to speak. In doing so, he gave credence to the harmful “pray the gay away” propaganda.
He deserves kudos for his courage in standing up against the rush to war in Iraq at a time when conventional political wisdom counseled a would-be national figure to do otherwise. He will serve the nation well if he can articulate a comprehensive approach not only toward the mess in Iraq but also the broader and more explosive question of America's standing in the entire Islamic world.
....
In his recent comments about what Ronald Reagan offered to Americans hungry for optimism and new ideas, Obama ought to have made more clear his understanding that at critical moments the hope for unity cannot substitute for hard choices. This newspaper was probably tougher on Obama than anyone else was for his ill-considered decision to call on Donnie McClurkin - a so-called "ex-gay" gospel singer vitriolic in his attacks on the LGBT community - to reach out to churchgoing African-American communities in South Carolina. We are counting on him to make wiser choices in future efforts to "build bridges" - and on that score applaud the loving words about his "gay brothers and sisters" Obama enunciated from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Atlanta pulpit last week.
The McClurkin episode, unfortunate as it was, pales in comparison to the divisiveness that Senator Clinton has allowed her campaign to devolve into. Her comparison between the roles played by Dr. King and President Lyndon Johnson in advancing civil rights can be chalked up to inartfulness. The comments coming from her surrogates are far more disturbing, forming a pattern that sadly can no longer be ignored.
Meanwhile, a writer at the Gay Alliance in Rochester, N.Y. is not at all pleased with Obama, citing the McClurkin gaffe and Obama's recent endorsement by one of George W. Bush's spiritual advisors, the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, senior pastor of Windsor Village United Methodist Church. The church touts an ex-gay ministry.
The gay and lesbian community has the right to be disturbed about the Obama campaign when such individuals are standing up beside him in his quest for the highest-ranking office in the free world. These same people will be asking for more faith-based ministry money to cure homosexuals.
At the same time, the Obama camp extols him as a believer in everybody having access to all rights and privileges.
One thing is for sure, and that is, I am not sure what Obama truly believes. His flexible, unprincipled style should be raising more eyebrows than cash from our very own lgbt community.
Where do I stand? I'm caucusing in Kansas in five days, and to say that I'm undecided is an understatement.
First and foremost, it’s really hard to build new coal plants that will spew 11 million new tons of CO2 into the air, while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions. I think therapists refer to this phenomena as “magical thinking.”
The KC Star reports that Bruce Nilles, director of Sierra Club’s Midwest Clean Energy Campaign, says the legislation could make Kansas the “ashtray of the Midwest.
“Kansas is the first state that we know that is proposing to accelerate global warming,” Nilles said. “That is a real black eye for Kansas to be the one state right now proposing to accelerate global warming.”
Kansas' controversial Holcomb coal plants appear to be on the verge of resurrection with the help of two bills written in secret. The bills -- House Bill 2177 and Senate Bill 515 -- were introduced yesterday.
The Lawrence Journal-World reports that the plants’ developer, Sunflower Electric Power Corp. "had input into the legislation." The bills were crafted by the Republican chairs of the House and Senate committees that deal with energy legislation and the ranking Democratic members on the committees.
I've made a few calls and have learned that as of last week, even pro-coal lawmakers who normally participate in energy discussions were kept out of these talks.
The Journal-World reports:
Tom Thompson, a lobbyist with the Kansas chapter of the Sierra Club, which opposes the plants, said he didn’t think that was right.“Obviously, it was not an open process,” Thompson said.
By Diane SilverThese are interesting times for Kansas and the governor. In some circles, folks believe it is a forgone conclusion that Sebelius will move up in the political food chain. The only questions seem to be about exactly where and when that will happen. The answer to that depends, in part, on what happens tonight.
In a very real sense, Sebelius is auditioning in front of the entire nation.
Stay tuned.
