banner2e top

California Recycling Bill Highlights Rift Between Mainstream Environmentalism and Environmental Justice Movement By Khalil Abdullah

June 19, 2019

 

California Recycling Bill Highlights Rift Between Mainstream Environmentalism and Environmental Justice Movement

By Khalil Abdullah

 

dr.dorectae.taylor

Dr. Dorecta E. Taylor 

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - When a group of liberal lawmakers in the state capitol in Sacramento recently proposed legislation that would raise the amount of recycled plastic required in bottled beverages sold in California, many environmental activists lauded the move as a much-needed step in the fight to curb plastic waste.

 

But as debate over the legislation begins to take shape, critics say that it is becoming increasingly clear that the proposed recycling requirement would, if enacted, have an unintended consequence that hurts one group in particular: low-income Californians, particularly those in African-American communities around the state.

 

The bill, AB792, would mandate that plastic bottles be made with 25 percent recycled plastic by 2021 before it steadily increasing the recycling requirement to 75 percent by 2030. The bill faces a major test in early July when the Senate Environmental Quality Committee considers whether to send it to the full Senate for a vote.

 

To supporters, the bill would put in place necessary targets to accelerate a reduction in California’s overall plastic use. But a number of consumer advocates worry that the bill would create new production costs that average Californians would have to ultimately take on at the checkout counter.

 

A major concern is that the bill would unintentionally discourage bottled water consumption at a time when research shows that drinking sufficient amounts of water is key element for better nutrition and a successful diet.

 

The health implications are especially significant for African Americans, who have experienced higher rates of diabetes than white Americans partly because of poor diet. The proposed legislation also comes at a time when studies have consistently shown black and Hispanic Americans are more inclined to drink bottled water than other ethnic groups.

 

In addition, research suggests that minority families without access to clean drinking water are more likely to turn to less healthy sugar-sweetened beverages. With African Americans and Hispanics making up more than 60 percent of Californians suffering from obesity, some advocates say creating new barriers to healthy drinking options could put these individuals at an even greater risk of developing a more serious chronic condition like diabetes.

 

As a result, experts and advocates are asking state lawmakers to slow down the pace of negotiations over the bill so that they can identify any other unintended consequences of the recycling legislation, no matter how laudable its ultimate goals may be.

 

The recycling bill has also had unintended consequences politically. It has exposed a rift in the environmental movement between mainstream environmentalists and environmental justice advocates.

 

Specifically, some in the environmental justice movement complain that many mainstream environmental organizations have focused on high-profile issues like climate change and bottled-water recycling while largely neglecting the day-to-day environmental hazards that communities of color face in many American cities.

 

These environmental hazards largely stem from a number of factors, including rampant industrial development and unwise land-use policies in many cities. The toxic legacy that these communities confront include incinerators, landfills and contaminated water.

 

In fact, mainstream environmentalists have drawn heavy criticism for their relative silence during the water-contamination crisis in Flint, Michigan, a predominantly African-American city where there is now a pressing need for bottled water.

 

The differences between the mainstream environmental movement and the environmental justice movement appears to have deep roots: research that has shown people of color and low socioeconomic status have been historically excluded from preeminent environmental groups, many of which are largely white and enjoy the support of wealthy funders.

 

In 2014, researchers conducted one of the most comprehensive studies examining the intersection between race and environmentalism in environmental institutions. Their conclusion: An overwhelmingly white “green insiders’ club,” with racial minorities occupying less than 12 percent of the leadership positions in the environmental organizations studied.

 

Dr. Dorecta E. Taylor, the study’s primary author, is a graduate of the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies and is presently professor of environmental justice at the University of Michigan, where she also serves as the program director of the Multicultural Environmental Leadership Development Initiative. She is also the university’s director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

 

Taylor says White environmentalists are ignoring pressing environmental justice demands due to their failure to move outside of their own insular communities. “One of the things they should be doing is stop being so afraid of people of color, and meet them, interact with them, cultivate them, and start recruiting them,” she said.

 

This dynamic could slow AB792’s progress as it makes its way through the chambers in Sacramento. While supporters laud the bill for its impact on reducing plastic waste, community advocates say AB 792 could potentially limit much-needed access in minority communities where bottled water is a lifeline.

 

And those concerns come at a time when nearly a million Californians are forced to rely on water systems that the State Water Resources Control Board deems unsafe. Take the people of San Bernardino County, home to one of the largest populations of black residents in the state. It has had dozens of suppliers that failed to meet compliance standards for safe drinking water.

 

Khalil Abdullah, is a Washington, D.C.-area writer and editor. He staffed the Committee on Transportation and Environment for the National Black Caucus of State Legislators before and while serving as executive director. As a national editor for San Francisco-based New America Media, he edited and occasionally wrote on environmental issues.


Poor People’s Campaign Mobilized in DC This Week by Jesse Jackson

June 17, 2019

Poor People’s Campaign Mobilized in DC This Week 

By Jesse Jackson

NEWS ANALYSIS

poorpeoplescampaign-theoharis jackson barber
Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis, Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. and Rev. Dr. William Barber II

barbernaacp
Rev. Dr. William Barber II, Co-Chair, the Poor People's Campaign

dr. liz theoharis3
Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis, Co-Chair, the Poor People's Campaign

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - This week in Washington, the powers that be are hearing from a vital new democratic force in this country.

For three days, the Poor People’s Campaign will bring poor and low-wage Americans to the nation’s capital to call for a moral renewal in this nation. They will question many of those who are seeking the Democratic nomination for president. Congressional hearings will showcase their Poor People’s Moral Budget.

Their actions should be above the fold of every newspaper in America; they should lead the news shows and fill the talk shows. A movement for common sense and social justice is building, putting every politician on notice: lead or get out of the way, a new moral majority is building and demanding change.

As the co-chairs of the Poor People’s Campaign, the Rev. Dr. William Barber II and Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis, write in their forward, this movement is not partisan. It calls not for liberal or conservative reforms, but for a moral renewal. It is not a deep-pocket lobby. It is mobilizing the 144 million Americans who are poor or one crisis away from poverty into a “new and unsettling force” to “revive the heart of democracy in America.”

This movement launched on Mother’s Day in May 2018. In 40 days, it triggered 200 actions across many states with 5,000 nonviolent demonstrators committing civil disobedience, and millions following the protests online. Forty states now have coordinating committees build a coalition of poor people and people of faith and conscience across lines of race, religion, region and other lines of division.

They are morally outraged that the richest nation in the world would in a “willful act of policy violence” condemn 140 million — more than 40 percent of the population — to live in poverty or near poverty. This includes 39 million children, 60 percent — 26 million — of African Americans, 64 percent — 38 million — of Latinos, more than one-third — 66 million — of white Americans.

These realities — and the extreme inequality that scars this society — pre-date the Trump administration, but now Trump is fanning increasing policy violence against the poor. In response, the Poor People’s Campaign is doing deep organizing and power building among the poor, turning them from victims to subject actors in history.

This week, the campaign releases their Poor People’s Moral Budget. It details authoritatively that the cost of our current inequality, the cost of mass poverty is far greater than what it would cost to invest in people, put them to work at a living wage and guarantee basic economic and political rights. It costs society big time to not provide health care or quality education or clean water and air, to suppress voting rights and to keep wages low.

The moral budget is detailed and authoritatively sourced. The numbers are clear, as is the conclusion.

As the document concludes, “We have been investing in killing people; we most now invest in life. We have been investing in systemic racism and voter suppression; we must now invest in expanding democracy. We have been investing in punishing the poor; we must now invest in the welfare of all. We have been investing in the wealthy and corporations; we must now invest in the people who build this country.”

This is not a time for incremental change, but for fundamental transformation of our priorities and our direction. The budget details large reforms — from automatic voter registration, a living wage, health care for all, quality education from pre-k through college, investment in clean energy and modern infrastructure. It details how these and other reforms can be easily afforded by fair taxes on the wealthy and corporations and by ending our effort to police the world.

The Poor People’s Campaign picks up the unfinished work of Dr. Martin Luther King. It realizes that ending the policy of violence on the poor at home cannot be achieved without challenging the costly endless wars and constant arms buildup that only make us less secure. It understands that change will come not from the top down, not from our corrupted big money politics, but from the poor, the worker, people of conscience coming together to revive our democracy and to change our course.

In these troubled times, the promise of this new force is powerful. Across the country, working and poor people are beginning to move. If this movement can continue to grow, it will transform our politics. And it is the only force that can.

A Moral Agenda by Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.

June 17, 2019

A Moral Agenda
By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.

williams2

(TriceEdneyWire.com) — A few days ago, I had the opportunity to participate in the Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival. Along with Jerry Paris (GM of WPFW-FM 89.3) and Rev. Graylan Hagler, I was invited to co-anchor the program carried by WPFW-FM radio. The campaign is based on fundamental rights that all human beings should enjoy. Rev. Dr. William Barber is the leader with the moral authority to conduct this action. At the meeting and March to the White House, Rev. Barber spoke to a large, enthusiastic and diverse crowd at the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington, DC.

Prior the meeting in Washington, the campaign had reached out to more than 30 states, meeting with thousands of people, witnessing the strength of their moral courage. The group collected testimonies from hundreds of poor people and chronicled their demands for a better society. They’ve witnessed the struggles of the poor and dispossessed.

It has been documented how the group came to the current point. Documentation reveals the evils of systemic racism, poverty, ecological devastation, and the war economy and militarism that are persistent, pervasive and perpetuated by a distorted moral narrative that must be challenged. It indicates that those who refuse to see these injustices and acknowledge the human and economic costs of inequality must be challenged. The action in Washington was a great step toward challenging these conditions.

A moral agenda was issued and I will share just a sampling of the demands the group has adopted.

  1. Full restoration and expansion of the Voting Rights Act, an end to racist gerrymandering and redistricting, early registration at age 17, automatic voting registration at the age of 18, early voting in every state, same-day registration, enactment of Election Day as a holiday with a verifiable paper record, as well the right to vote for currently and formerly incarcerated.
  2. Statehood, voting rights and representation for the more than 690,000 people in Washington D.C.
  3. Implementation of federal and state living wage laws that are commensurate for the 21st century economy, guaranteed annual incomes, full employment, right for all workers to form and join unions, end to anti-union and anti-workers’ rights laws in states, equal pay wage and relief from wealth inequality.
  4. End inequalities for black, brown and poor white people within the criminal justice system.
  5. An immigration system that, instead of criminalizing people for trying to raise their families, prioritizes family reunification, keeps families together and allows us all to build thriving communities in the country we call home.
  1. Particular attention be paid to data concerning First Nations, Native Americans, Alaskan Natives, LGBTQIA and disabled people regarding poverty. 
  1. Change in the current poverty standards to get an accurate assessment of who is poor — based on access to decent and adequate housing, education, health care, water, sanitation and public utilities, childcare, as well as income, savings and debt, and social welfare — and that’s made widely available to all.

50 years after Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the 1968 Poor People’s Campaign declared “Silence is betrayal” the group’s message is “We are coming together to break the silence about the interlocking evils of systemic racism, poverty, ecological devastation, the war economy and our distorted moral narrative….if silence was betrayal in 1968, revival is necessary today. We’ve come to remind our nation what truths we hold to be self-evident and what values we hold dear. We draw on the histories of resistance… and the power of the blood that has been shed through generations of struggle. We loudly proclaim that we will move forward together, not one step back!” These declarations are something about which all of us should care about want to be involved. (See https://www.poorpeoplescampaign.org/demands for more information.)

(Dr. E. Faye Williams is President of the National Congress of Black Women.)

 

Donald Trump Confuses Bluster With Strength on Trade by Jesse Jackson

June 17, 2019

Donald Trump Confuses Bluster With Strength on Trade
By Jesse Jackson 

Jesse3

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - For Donald Trump, America First is increasingly translating into America alone. He apparently believes that the United States is so dominant that it needs no friends. Trump prefers to act alone, often on impulse, in conflicts across the globe. He views allies as a burden, international law as an affront. He claims that America is back, more respected than ever. In fact, it is becoming more isolated than ever.

The New York Times reports that Trump was ready to impose tariffs on Australia recently, to counter a surge of aluminum imports to the United States, to all of 6 percent of total U.S. imports. Fierce opposition from the military and State Department led the White House to reconsider. Trump has launched a long overdue challenge to our trading relationship with China.

Our trade deficits with China have been the largest between two countries in recorded history. The Chinese have been masterful mercantilists, manipulating their currency and conditions to capture jobs, expand exports and build their industries. The U.S. — with our trade policies defined by global corporations and banks — has been willing to allow U.S. companies to ship jobs abroad to take advantage of suppressed labor and lax environmental and consumer standards, and then ship goods back to the U.S. Profit margins and CEO pay soared; workers and communities in the U.S took it on the chin. The relationship had to change.

Yet instead of enlisting allies in challenging the Chinese practices, Trump slapped tariffs on Canada and Mexico, on Europe, Japan and South Korea. He’s on the verge of alienating Australia, which has been a staunch ally in relation to China. Instead of isolating China, he’s isolating the United States. Now the Europeans are ignoring U.S. warnings about the Chinese high-tech company Huawei’s 5G system. Trump trumpeted his NAFTA 2.0 agreement with Mexico and Canada as a great success.

Yet, he suddenly threatened to slap escalating tariffs on Mexican imports unless that country cracks down on the people traveling from Central America to seek asylum in the U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the chair of the Senate Finance Committee, warns this could torpedo any possibility of passing the treaty.

Trump isn’t just isolating the U.S., he’s isolating himself. Trump moved to take the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accord that includes virtually every country in the world. He’s repudiated the Iran Nuclear Deal, spurning the pleas of our allies to respect a treaty that ensures Iran cannot revive a nuclear weapons program. His bellicose bluster and military maneuvers against Iran have earned the rebuke of European allies warning against the threat of hostilities.

Instead of removing us from the endless “stupid wars” that he campaigned against, he’s gone all in with Saudi Arabia, sustaining troops in Afghanistan, Syria, escalating tensions with Iran, and vetoing the bipartisan congressional resolution seeking an end to our shameful complicity in the Saudi assault on Yemen. His solo act on North Korea blew up in his face in the failed summit leaving South Korea to pick up the pieces, if that’s possible.

He’s ratcheted up the economic sanctions against Venezuela, adding to the miseries of the people there, while the regime-change efforts orchestrated by his aides violate both decency and international law. The United States is a powerful nation. Our economy represents about onefourth of the global GDP. Our military is the strongest in the world. Our network of alliances is unrivaled.

Our culture - movies, language, currency - spread across the world. But we are not an indispensable nation or all powerful. Acting sensibly with allies, we can have immense influence. Acting erratically alone, we make ourselves weaker, not stronger. Bluster is not strength. Isolation is not freedom. Lawless impulse is not strategy. Trump’s posturing is making us weaker, not stronger.

Why is the Insurance Industry Pushing Repeal of Discrimination Protection? Marc H. Morial

To Be Equal 

Why is the Insurance Industry Pushing Repeal of Discrimination Protection?
Marc H. Morial

marcmorial

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - “As long as the color of a man's skin determines his choice of housing, no investment in the physical rebuilding of our cities will free the men and women living there. … A nation that aspires to greatness cannot be a divided nation--with whites and Negroes entrenched behind barriers of mutual suspicion and fear.” – President Lyndon B. Johnson, letter to Congress, April 1966

Racial discrimination in housing harms not only families who struggle to find homes, but communities still plagued by segregation. Housing segregation reinforces racism and diminishes us as a nation.

So why is the insurance industry fighting to tear down one of the most important tools we have for preventing discrimination?

Under pressure from the insurance industry, the Department of Housing and Urban Development is considering revising its regulation on “disparate impact” claims in the Fair Housing Act, the landmark legislation that bans housing discrimination on the basis of race and other factors. Other federal agencies are considering similar action.

Under the concept of disparate impact, actions can amount to discrimination if they have an uneven effect even if that was not the intent.

The Supreme Court affirmed the principle of disparate impact in its 2015 decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said “recognition of disparate-impact liability under the FHA also plays a role in uncovering discriminatory intent: It permits plaintiffs to counteract unconscious prejudices and disguised animus that escape easy classification as disparate treatment."

That case revolved around the tax credits the federal government provides for developers who build low-income housing. The Inclusive Communities Project sued the Texas agency responsible for administering these tax credits for allocating too many tax credits "in predominantly Black inner-city areas and too few in predominantly white suburban neighborhoods." The policy effectively kept Black families out of predominantly white neighborhoods.

But even though the disparate impact principle is settled law, the insurance industry continues to push the Trump Administration to challenge it.

Economic justice is dependent upon fair housing. Moving from a high-poverty neighborhood to a low-poverty neighborhood raised incomes, improved college attendance, and reduced teen-age pregnancy, a Harvard study found. Zip code is a better indicator of life expectancy than genetic code.

To stand in the way of fair housing is to oppose racial equality itself.

As a civil rights organization devoted to fair housing for more than 100 years, the National Urban League will not tolerate the erosion of the provisions of the Fair Housing Act, or the failure of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to fulfill its duty.

X