Sunlight Seeker
Look up national or state donors or check where your Congresspeople are getting their money.
| December 2004 |
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
Liz Eisen - Thu 09 Oct 2008 02:12 PM CDT
Tojo8817 - Fri 03 Oct 2008 08:35 PM CDT
Marilyn Walker - Fri 03 Oct 2008 12:51 PM CDT
Brent - Mon 29 Sep 2008 02:55 PM CDT
audiored - Sat 27 Sep 2008 10:34 PM CDT
|
Sunday, December 26
Future IOWA Weather
by
Molly Regan
on Sun 26 Dec 2004 02:11 PM CST
 Future IOWA Weather
So, now that we IOWANS have endured our first wave of 4-degree F
temperatures and less this winter, what is all the hubbub about global
temperature change?
Let us put it in terms we can understand. Humans put thousands of
pounds per day of carbon dioxide and other nasty items into our air
from our activities. More and more of us have become aware that
these behaviors are not good for our health or for the status of our
weather. According to the Sierra Club, the last four years have
been the warmest since 1861 records were kept. If you happen to
look at the forecast for the end of this week, at least here in eastern
IOWA, we will be close to 60 degrees F by Thursday or Friday.
This is not necessarily a good thing. Let's look at what the
Sierra Club says about this because the consequences of global climate
change will be felt locally by IOWANS and our economy.
The world's leading scientists project that during our children's
lifetimes, global warming will raise the average temperature of the
planet by 2.7 to 11 degrees Fahrenheit.
The Earth is only 5 to 9 degrees warmer today than it was 10,000 years
ago during the last ice age. Throughout history, major shifts in
temperature occurred at a rate of a few degrees over thousands of
years. They were accompanied by radical ecological changes, including
the extinction of many species. Manmade global warming is occurring
much faster - faster, in fact, than at any time in the past 10,000
years. Unless we slow and ultimately reverse the buildup of greenhouse
gases, we will have decades, not millennia, to try to adapt to radical
changes in weather patterns, sea levels and serious threats to human
health. Increased flooding, storms and agricultural losses could
devastate our economy. Plants and animals that cannot adapt to new
conditions will become extinct.
But How Much of a Difference Can a Few Degrees Make?
Plenty.
The human race is engaged in the largest and most dangerous experiment
in history - an experiment to see what will happen to our health and
the health of our planet when we change our atmosphere and our climate.
This is not some deliberate scientific inquiry. It is an uncontrolled
experiment on the environment of the Earth, and we're gambling our
children's future on its outcome. The results of this pollution are
already significant. We have increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2),
the primary global warming gas, in our atmosphere by 30 percent in the
past 100 years. Some regions of the world have already warmed by as
much as 5 degrees Fahrenheit. Physicians at Harvard University and
Johns Hopkins medical schools and other medical institutions have
issued grim assessments that global warming may already be causing the
spread of infectious diseases and increasing heat-wave deaths. Extreme
weather events have become more common. Plants and animals around the
world are shifting their ranges in an effort to escape a changing
climate.
The rapid buildup of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere is the source
of the problem. By burning ever-increasing quantities of coal, oil and
gas, we are choking our planet in a cloud of this pollution. If we
don't begin to act now to curb global warming, our children will live
in a world where the climate will be far less hospitable than it is
today.
The current Washington, D.C. administration has a Clogged Skies Policy
that does nothing more than give a pass to energy industries and other
corporations that spew killing toxins into our atmosphere. Current
administrators have given their plan a different name, but I choose to
call it EXACTLY what it is: THE CLOGGED SKIES POLICY. For you
see, this current administration is WEAK when it comes to keeping
cancer-causing, asthma-inducing products out of our lives. The
businesses that choose to slide under the radar and not be progressive
and benevolent enough to do the right thing, are going to continue to
contribute to the ill health of us all.
So, are you asking yourself what you can do? Look around your
town, your county, your state, and nearby states to see where the
pollution in your area is coming from. Then take action. It
is as close as looking in your own backyard.
For more information and to see what you can do to alleviate this problem, go to: www.sierraclub.org/globalwarming/overview/
See also the September 2004 issue of National Geographic or go to their site: www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine
Naughty and Nice 2004
by
Linda Thieman
on Sun 26 Dec 2004 04:44 AM CST
 Naughty and Nice 2004
American Progress
The Progress Report
makes this year's holiday list and checks it twice
Naughty: Merck, for
spending millions to market the pain-reliever Vioxx to consumers long after
the company knew it was unsafe.
Nice: Dr. David Graham, of the
FDA's Office of Drug Safety, for fighting to keep
dangerous drugs off the market.
Naughty: Bernard
Kerik, for turning an apartment donated for weary Ground Zero police and rescue
workers into a
love nest for his adulterous affairs.
Nice: Miramax Films, for putting the kibosh on Kerik's
summer blockbuster biopic.
Naughty: Congress,
for underfunding the Low-Income
Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). allocating "$164 million less than
needed to cover the expected 24 percent increase in home heating costs" this
winter.
Nice: Richard
Hamann and his wife, Donna, for paying the electricity bills for the entire
town of Anthon, Iowa, because they wanted to give something back to their
community.
Naughty: NRA
Radio, for broadcasting anti-gun-control propaganda and calling it
legitimate news.
Nice: Ed
Schultz, Arnie Arnesen, Tony Trupiano, Thom Hartmann, Wendy Wilde, Al Franken,
Katherine Lanpher and the rest of the Air America crew, for showing
progressive radio can be thought-provoking, hard-hitting and fun.
Naughty: Department
of Homeland Security, for omitting
"major sites" like chemical plants and dams from its unfinished national
database of potential terrorist targets.
Nice: Department of Homeland
Security, for including
"water parks and miniature golf courses" in the national database. At your
local putt putt, the terrorists never win.
Naughty: The
Environmental Protection Agency, for using
camcorders to bribe parents into offering up their toddlers as guinea pigs
for a study about the dangers of pesticides on children…sponsored
by the chemical industry.
Nice: The Natural Resources Defense
Council, for fighting to protect kids from the harmful effects of pesticides
and chemicals.
Naughty: Right-wing
conservatives in the House of Representatives, for changing
ethics rules so Tom DeLay (R-TX) could one day be their indicted
leader.
Nice: Whistleblowers like Bunnatine
Greenhouse, Richard
Foster and Paul
O'Neill, for holding our government to a higher ethical standard.
Naughty: Medicare
head Tom
Scully, Rep. Billy
Tauzin, Rep. James
Greenwood and trade representatives Ralph Ives and
Claude Burcky, for using public service for personal benefit, taking
lucrative, top-dollar jobs with the pharmaceutical industry they had formerly
regulated.
Nice: Rep. Henry Waxman, for using public service for
public benefit, compiling reports on everything from the Halliburton to undue
secrecy in the White House.
Naughty: EPA
administrator Mike Leavitt, for blaming pollution on
poverty.
Nice: The Union of
Concerned Scientists, for giving us the facts about global
warming, pollution, clean
energy and the Bush administration's ideological
approach to science.
Naughty: Sinclair
Media, for planning to run an
hour long anti-Kerry screed as "news" just before the U.S. presidential
election.
Nice: Media Matters and the
blogosphere [and Rapid Response!], for forcing Sinclair to change its plans. (And continuing to
demand that Sinclair stop broadcasting one-sided political spin.)
Friday, December 24
Happy Holidays, and Have a Green Christmas!
by
Linda Thieman
on Fri 24 Dec 2004 11:10 AM CST
 Happy Holidays, and Have a Green Christmas!
The Associated Press
So,
the AP actually DOES have more on its mind than stumping for the
wasteful, sinful, slothful GOP agenda. Happy Holidays!
Careful
planning during the holidays can reduce the amount of waste that ends
up in landfills. The following are a few environmentally friendly
suggestions:
• Buy
toys that don't use batteries or buy rechargeable batteries to go with
new electronic toys. Information on disposing of batteries is available
on www.rbrc.org.
• Buy living gifts, like houseplants, garden seeds or potted trees that can be transplanted in the spring.
• Reuse
holiday wrapping, or use old maps or comic pages from the Sunday paper
for wrapping gifts. Put gifts in decorative tins or boxes instead of
throwaway wrapping materials. Use and reuse decorative gift bags.
• Use
your imagination in trimming the tree or yard for the holidays. Take
time to recondition strings of lights that may only need a few bulbs.
Create ornaments out of items that can be painted or decorated for a
new look.
• To
compensate for the harvest of your Christmas tree, arrange to plant a
new tree next spring. Or, consider using a durable artificial tree. Try
reusing old artificial trees in outdoor holiday displays.
•
Recycle cardboard boxes or better yet, save boxes and bows for reuse
next year. It can be a surprise to find that the gift inside is not
what is pictured on the box.
And DFIA Environmentalist Molly Regan
reminds us that gift-wrap, holiday cards, envelopes with foil linings,
and gift bows are not recyclable. Some of these items contain metallic
inks and excessive tape, which prevent them from being recycled.
Rather than throwing these items in the trash, why not avoid using them
altogether? It's never to late to change old habits!
Happy Holidays!
Thursday, December 23
Socially Responsible Investing
by
Linda Thieman
on Thu 23 Dec 2004 12:32 PM CST
 Socially Responsible Investing
Union of Concerned Scientists
Many
people do their part for the environment by driving a fuel-efficient
car, buying organic foods, or using energy-efficient appliances. You
can also promote environmental values through socially responsible
investing (SRI), also known as “green” investing. SRI gives
corporations an incentive to improve their environmental stewardship
and can also provide investors with a more secure financial future — a
“double bottom line.”
Though
socially responsible stocks have a reputation for poor performance,
recent data from Lipper, a fund tracking and research firm, show that
returns from SRI funds are now competitive with — and, in some cases,
have even outperformed — the overall stock market.
Here are a few things to keep in mind when you’re preparing to become a socially responsible investor:
Mutual Funds
Mutual
funds pool the money of multiple shareholders and invest it in the
stocks of corporations that meet certain criteria; investors then share
the fund’s gains and losses. In the case of green investing, the
companies chosen to make up the fund have been screened according to
environmental, social, and/or political criteria.
The
success of mutual funds is measured against an index — a collection of
stocks meant to represent the overall stock market or a specific
segment of the market (SRI in this case). Mutual funds known as index
funds simply attempt to duplicate the performance of a particular
index; the Calvert Social Index, for example, is a socially responsible
index fund.
Screening Criteria
When
selecting a socially responsible mutual fund, it is important to know
the business sectors in which the fund invests and the method it uses
to screen corporations. Negative screens, for example, exclude
companies that behave in an unacceptable manner or develop products
that investors do not wish to support, such as tobacco, casinos,
alcohol, weapons, or nuclear energy. Positive screens give recognition
to companies that engage in issues such as conservation, civil rights,
labor relations, or animal rights.
One fund
might choose to invest in renewable energy corporations exclusively,
while another might invest in any company except those that produce
weapons. The Pax World Balanced Fund uses both positive and negative
screens to invest in businesses that provide life-supporting goods and
services such as health care, pollution control, and education.
Comparing Funds
Several
websites can help you compare mutual funds and choose which ones are
right for you. Calvert’s “Know What You Own” service lets you run the
holdings of various funds through the screens used by its Calvert
Social Index. The nonprofit Social Investment Forum lets you compare
the screens used by different funds and presents the distinctions in an
easy-to-follow chart.
Please note: The
fund names and services mentioned in this article are used for
identification purposes only and do not imply endorsement. UCS is not
responsible for any investments made as a result of the information
provided in this article.
(For further information on socially-responsible investing, click here.)
Sunday, December 19
Recycle 'Til You Drop!
by
Molly Regan
on Sun 19 Dec 2004 02:08 PM CST
 Recycle 'Til You Drop!
Waste Commissions In Your Area
There
once was a girl name' of
ANN
Who'd recycle every jar, every
can
'cycling cartons and
boxes
And papers and
watches
Such a good little example this girl name' of Ann
Did you know the recycled cardboard that your cereal comes in used only
1/4 the energy to make and also only created 1/2 the pollution as a
newly made box?
Besides decreased
energy use and pollution reduction, another advantage is the resultant
pride knowing you are contributing to the welfare of your community and
state. It can also be a chance to create a family project at home or
with your friends. See who can recycle the most as well as
purchase recycled items. List items that you find are made by recycling
means. This can be something we ALL can work on every day of our
lives.
From a recycled garden in Davenport on North
Carey Avenue above 53rd Street, to a Davenport resident winning a car
for her years of recycling, IOWANS are doing their part to make our
state a cleaner state.
So what can recycling do for you and what can you do for
recycling? Park benches, rugs, goggles and fiber for filling ski
jackets are just a few items that can be made from recycled
plastics. Used aluminum and steel have each found a second life
as bikes, cookware, and cars.
Every county in IOWA should have a WASTE COMMISSION. Check out your
government listings. Here in SCOTT COUNTY you can go to
www.wastecom.com to find more
information. Or you can contact them at
WASTE COMMISSION OF SCOTT COUNTY/PO BOX 563 BUFFALO, IOWA 52728/(563)
381-1300/ or FAX 381-1301...Love, Peace, Happy Holidays.... Please,
remember to CPR: CONSERVE, PARTICIPATE, &
RECYCLE.
Thursday, December 16
Food Supply Vulnerable to Contamination by Drugs and Plastics from Gene-Altered Crops
by
Linda Thieman
on Thu 16 Dec 2004 03:37 PM CST
 Food Supply Vulnerable to Contamination by Drugs and Plastics from Gene-Altered Crops
Union of Concerned Scientists
WASHINGTON
-- For more than a decade, corn, soybeans, and other food crops
genetically engineered to produce drugs, vaccines, and industrial
chemicals have been grown on American farms. But a new report by six
agricultural experts now warns that the food supply is vulnerable to
contamination by these "pharmaceutical crops" unless substantial
changes are made in the ways and places such crops are grown and
managed.
Based on
the experts' findings, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) [this
week] called on the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to immediately
ban the field production of corn, soybeans, and other food crops
engineered to produce pharmaceutical and industrial chemicals. UCS
recommends that the USDA spearhead a major campaign to encourage and
fund safer alternatives like non- food crops or growing pharmaceutical
food crops indoors....
UCS
convened the panel of experts to determine whether it is possible to
produce pharmaceuticals in familiar food crops like corn or soybean
(the two plants most often used for pharmaceutical production) without
contaminating human food or animal feed. The panel -- acting
independently of UCS -- analyzed the current system for growing food-
and feed-grade corn and soybeans and identified many points where drugs
and plastics could pass to the food supply if pharmaceutical crops were
grown under the same system. After evaluating various approaches to
blocking contamination at those points, the panel concluded that the
current corn and soybean production system cannot be used for
pharmaceutical corn and soybean in the United States while ensuring
virtually no contamination of the food and feed system.
"It is
sobering that drugs and industrial chemicals could have so many routes
to the food supply," said Dr. David Andow, editor of the technical
report and a professor in the Department of Entomology at the
University of Minnesota. "Pollen can be carried to fields with food
crops by the wind or insects, seeds lodged in the crevices of
harvesting equipment could come loose while harvesting food, and plants
can come up as volunteers in the middle of a food crop. To protect the
food supply, each potential route has to be blocked."
(Click here to read the complete article.)
Sunday, December 12
Asthma Danger To Rural Children
by
Molly Regan
on Sun 12 Dec 2004 03:17 PM CST
 Asthma Danger To Rural Children
IOWA Public Radio
December 12, 2004
Children living close to large factory hog farms have a higher than
normal incidence of ASTHMA than children who do not live in such
areas. Those children living close to factory farms that use
antibiotics on the swine incur the highest rate of ASTHMA.
This information was reported on IOWA Public Radio Friday, December
10th and is from a study in part by Dr. James A. Merchant. Dr.
Merchant is Dean of the University of IOWA College of Public Health in
IOWA City. The College of Public Health at the U of I teaches and
publishes research on causes of rural illness and prevention as well as
environmental health policy. They also have published information
on "Cancer In IOWA", the "IOWA Birth Defects Registry Annual Report"
and "Environmental Health Science Research".
Connections between use of pesticides and prostate cancer are
laid out in their 2004 College of Public Health Research
Publication. On page 16 entitled "All in a Day's Work" it
states: "In IOWA individual farm holders have 27% increased
risk of prostate cancer, while commercial pesticide applicators have a
41% increased risk."
(See: www.public-health.uiowa.edu/news/pubs)
(Also see: www.ehsrc.org and www.aghealth.org)
Sunday, December 5
Iowans Toss Toxic TVs in Trash
by
Molly Regan
on Sun 05 Dec 2004 12:47 PM CST
 Iowans Toss Toxic TVs in Trash
Des Moines Register
To protect human health, IOWA must require proper disposal.
Television is toxic, and we're not referring to prime-time reality
shows. Most color televisions contain 4 to 8 pounds of lead, as well as
cadmium and mercury. This isn't a big deal when the television is
sitting in your living room. But if it makes its way to a landfill, the
toxins can eventually leak and seep into the soil. An old television
becomes hazardous waste.
It's a growing problem because millions of flat-panel televisions are
replacing the older units. It's estimated that more than 163,000
televisions and computers will become obsolete every day by 2006. Iowa
must adopt laws to ensure they're properly discarded.
Currently, federal law prohibits businesses in Iowa and elsewhere from
putting televisions in landfills. Ditto for computer monitors, which
also pose a hazard….But Iowa households can still throw their toxic
televisions in the trash. Federal laws don't apply to households.
That makes absolutely no sense. Hazardous waste is hazardous waste,
whether it comes from a store at the mall or the house down the street.
Lead can cause damage to the human nervous system. Children are
especially susceptible. Cadmium can damage the kidneys. Mercury
accumulates in living organisms and can disrupt brain functioning….
Lawmakers need to require households to properly dispose of televisions and computer monitors as well.
(Click here to read complete article.)
|
|
