Sunlight Seeker
Look up national or state donors or check where your Congresspeople are getting their money.
Media Campaign Tools
The Democratic Agenda
*Tips & Talking Points for Letters to Editors
Email The Media
*Email Iowa and national media, five at a time
Framing The Message
*UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language to dominate politics
Simple Framing
*A step-by-step guide on how to frame progressive issues, by George Lakoff
DemSpeak
*Values Inventory, Message Identification and Development, Engagement & Rapport Strategies, Framing and Reframing Language, Strategic Development and Deployment of Frames, Mediaspace Injection Choreography, and Framing/Media Crossfire training of Capitol Hill Legislators, new TV spokespersons for progressives, Talk Radio callers, and Progressive Leaders
| January 2005 |
| 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
|
no4gman - Tue 15 Jul 2008 10:46 PM CDT
evaroberts - Tue 15 Jul 2008 01:20 AM CDT
Sam Garchik - Mon 02 Jun 2008 10:10 AM CDT
atomburke - Fri 23 May 2008 03:49 PM CDT
salman - Fri 23 May 2008 06:28 AM CDT
|
Sunday, January 30
LOOPHOLES IN IOWA POLLUTION LAWS by Molly Regan
by
Linda Thieman
on Sun 30 Jan 2005 12:24 PM CST
 LOOPHOLES IN IOWA POLLUTION LAWS
by Molly Regan
Loopholes…Loopholes…Loopholes. Bad little areas of the law that just happen to allow all kinds of things to slip through. ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT
released a report saying: “At least 29 states have loopholes in
their laws that allow “accidental” pollution emissions to exceed
federal CLEAN AIR ACT limits, while many other states simply choose not
to take enforcement against industrial facilities for such emissions”
that include BENZENE, BUTADIENE and other CANCER-CAUSING CHEMICALS.
IOWA is one of those 29 states.
OIL
REFINERIES are some of the culprits. Is there a refinery near
you? Do you drive by one on the way to work? One woman who
lives in Ohio close to one stated for the ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY
PROJECT: “I used to work across the street from a Sunoco
refinery. I now have HEART ARRHYTHMIA and CHEMICAL
SENSITIVITY. We found nine people in a two-block area around the
refinery with MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS. Something is obviously
wrong. We know emissions from the refinery are affecting our
health, but we can’t even get basic information from the state about
what is being emitted. We’re at least entitled to know what we’re
breathing”.
The
great work that the ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT has taken on
was started in 2002 by Eric Schaeffer. He had previously been
with the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY as part of their OFFICE OF
REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT. “He resigned after publicly expressing his
frustration with efforts of the Bush administration to weaken
enforcement of the CLEAR AIR ACT and other laws”….KUDOS TO YOU, ERIC
SCHAEFFER!
This
non-partisan, non-profit organization’s August 2004 report goes on to
indicate that according to a woman in Texas who lives near an
industrial area: "HEART DEFECTS IN BABIES in our area occur at TWO TO
SIX TIMES THE STATE REGISTRY RATE”. Her grandbaby was born with a
heart defect, and when she sees the pollution she asks, “ How is this
affecting my family’s health? How is this affecting my
community? How sick must we be before someone pays attention?”
Another
woman in California admits: “You can sometimes smell a terrible odor
and feel a nasty taste in your mouth, but I’m just as concerned at all
the things I can’t see that I know are occurring on a daily basis!”
For further information on this report and to view their RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION, go to:
environmentalintegrity.org/pub238.cfm to see the press release from AUGUST 18, 2004.
So,
“What now?” you may ask. To be sure, the first thing that would
really show you are serious about making an impact, is to make a change
in your behavior. For example, sit down and make a list of ways
to CUT DOWN ON PETROLEUM PRODUCT USE. This may be a very long
list, because you may be unaware of the extensive use that these
products play in our lives.
That
case holding your computer innards in one place is probably plastic
(Petroleum Based), the oil keeping your vehicle lubed is Petroleum
Based, your glasses sitting on your nose may be, that new lawn set
you’ll look at in a catalogue soon, and even the little ball bearings
making your child’s newest toy so much fun may all be Petroleum Based.
So where does a person go to find products that are less dangerous to create? One place to start is www.patagonia.com to find much information about becoming a more BENEVOLENT, LESS POLLUTION-CONTRIBUTING CONSUMER.
Another
suggestion to help clean up the air, is to report any sightings of an
industry spewing colorful, toxic smelling agents into our air. We
all should seriously change how we get from place to place, too, as
well as share that new-found information with others. It could
not only save you some money and possibly make you new friends, but may
also save lungs and hearts and lives.
Let us not forget to CPR…CONSERVE/PARTICIPATE/RECYCLE
Tuesday, January 25
John Drury: Iowa Pharmacy Board Gets Tough with Canadian Outlet
by
John Drury
on Tue 25 Jan 2005 06:40 PM CST
 Iowa Pharmacy Board Gets Tough with Canadian Outlet
by John Drury
As
I write this column, a very interesting case is being heard in a Cerro
Gordo County court room. Perhaps you’ve read about it already, if not,
here’s the deal.
Back in
June of 2004, Scot and Cheryl Huff of Mason City opened the doors on a
business called Canadian Drug Outlet. Here’s how it works: customers
receive their prescriptions from their doctors, then bring them to the
Canadian Drug Outlet where the drugs are then ordered from Canadian
pharmacies over the Internet. The pharmacies then ship the drug
directly to the customers’ homes. The pharmacies pay the Huffs a
commission on orders received. It seems perfect for those senior
citizens, and anyone else that may not be all that comfortable using
the Internet, to be able to get their prescriptions filled without
taking out a second mortgage on their homes just to pay the exorbitant
costs in the United States.
A couple
of months after opening the store, the Huffs were informed by the state
that they could not legally use the word drug in the name of their
store. They were also informed that the Iowa Board of Pharmacy feels
that they are violating state law by dispensing prescription drugs
without a license. They were also directed to close the business,
stating that there have been two other attempts to do this in the state
and they have both closed their doors after receiving a warning from
the state. The Huffs did remove the word drug from the name of their
business but are still in operation. They have attracted about 500
customers since opening the doors back in June and they plan on
expanding depending on the outcome of the court case.
The
Huffs argue that they aren’t actually dispensing prescription drugs,
only helping people gain access to affordable medicine. They don’t
claim to be pharmacists. The drugs are shipped directly to the
customers’ homes from the pharmacy offering a savings of anywhere from
25 to 85 percent on the same drug sold in the United States.
The
state disagrees. The state code defines a pharmacy as “ a location
where prescription drugs are compounded, dispensed, or sold by a
pharmacist and where prescription drug orders are received or processed
in accordance with the pharmacy laws.” The state argues that this
business does enough of those things to make it a pharmacy.
This
court case is so much bigger than whether or not the Huffs get to keep
the doors open on their business. It’s obviously part of a larger
national debate that is taking place in our country. Federal law
prevents individuals from ordering drugs from Canada but they don’t
prosecute individual citizens from buying their own medicines.
In this
case, we don’t see our government concerned with the fact that people
are breaking laws and ordering their medicines from Canada from the
privacy of their own homes, instead we see them concerned that perhaps
the practice is becoming all too common and convenient for people.
Obviously,
the administrators of the state pharmacy board jump on the fear
bandwagon and tell you that they are only concerned with the safety of
the drugs being shipped to the customer.
I would
say that the Canadian Outlet offers a very important service. They
offer safe, affordable prescription drugs conveniently shipped to your
home at a savings of up to 85 percent. The Huffs have made it easier for citizens to obtain affordable drugs that are prescribed to them.
Perhaps our government is just suffering from professional jealousy.
I’ll keep you posted on the outcome of the case.
Sunday, January 23
IOWA COUNTIES & THE DNR MASTER MATRIX by Molly Regan
by
Linda Thieman
on Sun 23 Jan 2005 02:39 PM CST
 IOWA COUNTIES & THE DNR MASTER MATRIX
by Molly Regan
Good news for those of us in the IOWA counties that choose to retain
the Department Of Natural Resources’ (DNR) MASTER MATRIX system.
This Master Matrix is “a scoring system that can be used to evaluate
the siting of permitted confinement feeding operations” according to
information at www.iowadnr.com. This questionnaire is for animal
confinement owners as well as smaller farmers who raise a certain
number of cattle, hogs, or chickens. They need to indicate how
creating or expanding their business will impact the surrounding
COMMUNITY, THE WATER, AND THE AIR.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS in each IOWA county has until January 31st,
2005, to choose whether or not to continue (or in some cases take up)
the requirement that the Master Matrix be used for building
permits. For example, if a company wants to build a 30,000
chicken production facility in Scott County (whose Board Of Supervisors
APPROVED for the THIRD YEAR in a row the Master Matrix), it would need
to fill it out in that county.
One of the questions on the Master Matrix is as follows: “ Groundwater
monitoring wells installed near manure storage structure, and applicant
agrees to provide data to the department.” If these monitoring
wells will indeed be in place, then a score of 15 can be divided under
the Air, the Water, and/or the Community sections. 44 questions
with a total of 880 possible points are on the questionnaire. At
least one half of the total must be reached for approval.
Use of this system is of the utmost importance if counties want to have
any say as to whether or not confined animal feeding operations
(CAFO’s) operate or upgrade within their boundaries. The DNR
still has the final say, but at least with this Master Matrix, each
county can still have input on new or expanding operations.
For the smaller farmer, some may have to fill out the paperwork if
their expansion goes beyond a certain number of animal units.
Of utmost concern is AIR POLLUTION caused by these facilities.
Even a 500-head hog operation can create much HYDROGEN SULFIDE and
AMONIA. Both of these, if too concentrated, can cause damage to
humans. According to DR. KAY KIMBALL in his (yes, it is a man)
book ‘CHEMICAL BRAIN INJURY,’ too much exposure to these toxins can
cause memory loss, imbalance, reproductive problems, unconsciousness,
and even death. Dr. Kimball has researched this area for over 20
years, and his book explains in depth the consequences of living near
or working in an environment which produces harmful bi-products.
Check with your local Board of Supervisors to see if your county is
part of the process. Encourage them to do so. We all need to be
involved with this, even if you live in an urban area. Three
years ago, I spoke in front of the Clinton & Scott Counties Boards,
and I believe it helped encourage them to each go with the Matrix.
For more information go to: www.iowadnr.com or contact your local Board
of Supervisors…..And don’t forget: CPR/Conserve, Participate, Recycle
Saturday, January 22
No Part of Mad Cow is Safe to Eat
by
Linda Thieman
on Sat 22 Jan 2005 05:00 PM CST
 No Part of Mad Cow is Safe to Eat
Dr. Thomas Blythe, Earthtimes.org
Mad Cow Disease Triggered by Inflammation
Mad Cow
disease, which was thought to spread in humans only if they consume
infected brain or intestinal tissues of infected cows, may have other
routes of entry. If the study done on mice by a group of researchers
led by Adriano Aguzzi at the University Hospital of Zurich, Switzerland
holds true then BSE/CJD testing programmers will have to change their
ways and practices in what could turn into another major problem for
the beef industry.
Since
earlier screening showed Prions, that cause BSE, are present only in
specific organs like brain and intestines, "the assumption has been
that other parts are safe to eat," says Aguzzi.
"People
in countries with BSE still eat steak because the authorities say if
you stay away from the brain and lymphoid tissue, you should be safe.
However, most Prion testing has been done in healthy animals. If you
have a sick cow, these rules may no longer apply."
Aguzzi’s
study showed inflammation can let the disease causing protein Prion to
be replicated (produced) in other parts of the animal body which were
earlier thought to be safe for consumption. The mice used in the study
were having inflammation due to several reasons including kidney and
liver diseases. It was seen in all the cases that chronic inflammation
leads to a build up of prion proteins in organs that are usually Prion
free.
"The organ transforms itself into a bioreactor for Prions," says Aguzzi.
The mice
having inflammation due to diabetes had its pancreas full of the Prions
while the organ in healthy mice was left unaffected.
Researchers
have not yet worked out how exactly inflammation leads to Prion
production and the spread of deadly protein in other parts of the body.
However, they feel that it has got something to do with the cells
playing a role in the immune system. These cells produce a substance
called lymphotoxin to fight invading pathogens. Aguzzi feels that the
lymphotoxin starts a reaction that turns a normal cell into a prion
producing bioreactor. They have observed that mice lacking the
lymphotoxin receptors lack prion disease in inflamed organs.
(Source)
Friday, January 21
EPA Sweetheart Deal with Factory Farms Exempts Polluters from Clean Air Act
by
Linda Thieman
on Fri 21 Jan 2005 04:05 PM CST
EPA Sweetheart Deal with Factory Farms Exempts Polluters from Clean Air Act
Hastings Group
WASHINGTON, D.C.
(January 21, 2005) In the wake of the EPA release of its CAFO Air
Quality Compliance Agreement today, Michele M. Merkel, senior counsel
of the Environmental Integrity Project issued the following statement
today:
"These
EPA rules amount to a wholesale relaxation of the Clean Air Act as it
relates to factory farms, which are a major source of pollution in
rural America.
All
along, EPA has had the authority under the Clean Air Act to gather the
kind of data it needs to determine emission levels at these industrial
farming operations - it does not need the industry's permission.
The
EPA-proposed amnesty on imposing the Clean Air act protections for the
public can last until 2011. Given that EPA already has had a
moratorium on enforcement for the past four years, that means the
current Administration will stall permits and air pollution controls at
some facilities for more than a decade.
Why is
the EPA doing this? The industry's lobbyists who are operating
hand in glove with the Agency understand they can't defeat emission
controls outright, especially where the public's health is at stake,
but they understand that regulations deferred are money earned, so
their strategy is to postpone the day of reckoning.
This is
another example of what should be a scientific process conducted in the
public's best interest being hijacked by industry. Industry gets
to select the "independent monitoring contractor" who will select the
farms for testing and related steps. The scientific soundness of
the monitoring program can only be ensured if the monitoring protocol
is reviewed by qualified independent experts who do not have ties to
the livestock industry. Furthermore, we are also concerned that the
small number of farms EPA anticipates including in the data collection
process (28) will not provide a significant enough sample to be
representative.
What EPA
is proposing is a sell-out of the public in order to profit the
industry. In practice, this agreement will end up being even
worse than it looks now. Industry will use this agreement to try
and block citizen suits. The idea of preventing citizens from
exercising their rights to hold polluters accountable under federal law
for the next six years (or more) is troubling. Additionally, the
agreement allows companies that have been sued by citizens to sign up
for the amnesty."
For more information, contact Michele M. Merkel at (202) 263-4452 or mmerkel@environmentalintegrity.org.
Keeping Livestock Records Secret?
by
Chad Thompson
on Fri 21 Jan 2005 12:36 PM CST
 Keeping Livestock Records Secret?
This item appeared in the Des Moines Register this morning:
State
agriculture officials want to be allowed to keep secret certain records
dealing with the control of livestock diseases such as mad cow disease.
Key lawmakers are unsure whether they want to take that step, which the Iowa Department of Agriculture has requested.
Senate
Study Bill 1023 would carve out an exception to Iowa's open records law
for any records related to livestock tracking programs that aid in
pinpointing and stopping animal disease outbreaks.
"The
information may relate to an investigation, a person associated with
the animal, or an animal carcass. However, nothing in this subsection
restricts the department from releasing a record to any person," the
proposed law says.
Can anyone think of a situation where it would be a good idea to keep secret any records dealing with livestock disease?
After all, it's only the food supply we're talking about...
Teflon: Is Your Cookware Hurting You?
by
Linda Thieman
on Fri 21 Jan 2005 04:00 AM CST
 Teflon: Is Your Cookware Hurting You?
by John Heilprin, Associated Press
The
Environmental Protection Agency warns that people nationwide could face
"a potential risk of developmental and other adverse effects" from
exposure to low levels of a chemical used in making the nonstick
substance Teflon.
EPA
issued a draft assessment of the potential risks of perfluorooctanoic
acid and its salts, known as PFOA, or C-8. The report, based on animal
studies, says some evidence exists that PFOA is carcinogenic in rats,
but the cancer hazard for people is less certain.
It
suggests the chemical targets the liver and is present in the breast
milk of rats. It also says the chemical could raise cholesterol and
triglyceride levels in people - a finding that chemical maker DuPont
Co. publicly released last week. DuPont said its study found no overall
health problems.
While
PFOA is used to make Teflon, it is not present in Teflon itself, which
is applied to cookware, clothing, car parts and flooring. PFOA also is
used to produce materials used in firefighting foam, phone cables and
computer chips.
EPA
officials emphasized that its assessment was preliminary, saying that
while the agency "has concerns with respect to the potential nationwide
presence of PFOA in blood and with the potential for developmental and
other effects suggested by animal studies, there are significant
uncertainties in the agency's quantitative assessment of the risks of
PFOA."
The
Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that brought
DuPont's record on PFOA to EPA's attention, said that based on other
studies of PFOA, it believes the potential cancer and heart disease
risks from the chemical are being played down too much.
"There is a more serious risk, we believe, than what EPA is discussing," the group's spokeswoman, Lauren Sucher, said.
(Click here to read the rest of the article.)
For further related information, click here.
|
DFIA Events Calendar
Add Your Event Here
|
