The Daily Signal

Lame Ducks, Lame Deal: The Boehner-Obama Budget Plan This is an insult to the American families whose tax dollars pay their salaries, writes Heritage Foundation President Jim DeMint.

This Is the Worst Budget Deal for GOP Since Bush Violated 'No New Taxes' Pledge Economist Stephen Moore says GOP congressional leaders have declared an unconditional fiscal surrender to President Barack Obama and the left, negotiating a dangerous budget deal that eliminates all of the checks on Washington's spend-and-borrow binge by breaking the budget caps, ending the sequester, and raising the debt ceiling by over $1 trillion.

Boehner-Obama Budget Deal Uses Same Accounting Gimmick as Obamacare Two conservatives are accusing Republican leaders of using an accounting gimmick in their budget deal—a "trick" that mimics a tactic Democrats employed to pass Obamacare.

 

Find Out How Your Congressman Voted on the Boehner-Obama Budget Deal "Just in time for Halloween, this legislation is more trick than treat, with phantom savings and a truly terrifying $85 billion in new spending in the first three years," Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., said.

Is Planned Parenthood Targeting Schoolchildren?  That is what parents and voters are asking themselves in Jefferson County, Colo., this week after Planned Parenthood waded into a local recall election aimed at ousting three Republican school board officials in the middle of their terms. 

Double-dose of EPA regulations will make your bank account scream

By Marjorie Haun  @ Watchdog.org / October 28, 2015 / 2 Comments

As if turning Colorado’s Animas River jack o’ lantern orange wasn’t frightening enough, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s new “climate initiative” policies, if implemented, have some real scares in store for energy consumers.

The agency’s Clean Power Plan (CPP), officially published in the federal register Friday, is the first federal measure to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, ozone, and other minor emissions from existing power plants.

By forcing energy producers to comply with the CPP mandate of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 32 percent by 2030, these shock-worthy standards will also force states to increase the percentages of costly, subsidized wind and solar-based electricity since coal-burning power plants that cannot afford the reduction will ultimately shut down.

The Independence Institute, a free-market think tank headquartered in Denver, compiled a white paper in April titled “Colorado and the Clean Power Plan: Expensive, Ineffective, Illegal and impossible.” According to their research, if EPA’s CPP is implemented, beginning in the year 2020:

• American consumers, businesses and industries will pay $284 billion more each year in power and gas costs
• The total annual cost of power and gas will total more than $750 billion
• The average annual U.S. household’s combined electricity and gas bills will increase by $680.00

The EPA also announced earlier this month a stricter standard for ozone, tightened from 75 parts per billion to 70 ppb. This new standard was published in the Federal Register Monday.

Many states see standard this as nightmare to attain, even in some of the nation’s national parks. While emissions that form ozone have been reduced by 50 percent since the 1980s, according to the Institute for 21^st Century Energy, many states have not yet been able to attain the 75 ppb standard. If implemented, the Institute, which labels this regulation the most expensive in American history, warns “non-attainment,” or the inability of local governments to comply, will result in:

• An annual loss of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) loss of $140 billion
• Decreased electrical reliability
• Increased forced outages
• Potential delays in highway funding
• Shuttered coal-fired power plants
• The closure of manufacturing and industrial facilities
• Skyrocketing food costs as agricultural producers are negatively effected
• Costly restrictions on small businesses that will harm consumers
• Expensive regulations on vehicles and fuels
• Lower local and state tax revenue due regulatory strains at all levels

These two regulatory products of President Obama’s climate change agenda are touted as necessary to protect the environment and spare the planet from the consequences of man-made global warming.

However, the CPP, for example, will have almost no effect on global temperatures, as acknowledged by its own architects. A July 15 post in Climate Depot recounts testimonies from both former and current EPA chiefs admitting the CPP would result in less than a one-degree global temperature change. Lauded as “enormously beneficial” by current EPA administrator Gina McCarthy, she revealed in congressional hearings that the agency projects a drop in global temperature of one one-hundredth of a degree Celsius will result from full implementation of the CPP.

In response, states and businesses aren’t hiding under the covers. Legal challenges to the CPP have been filed by attorneys general from 26 states and multiple industry groups, alleging the rule violates the Clean Air Act. As for the new ozone standard, a lawsuit released Tuesday against the EPA by five states is challenging whether the agency “conducted an appropriate scientific review before issuing its new standard,” according to The Hill.

The new ozone standards will become effective in 60 days, while 90-day public comment period begins for the CPP.

This article was written by a contributor of Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists.

Click here to LEARN HOW TO STEAL OUR STUFF!

Marjorie Haun

Marjorie Haun is a freelance journalist and author. Her works include: "The Heroes of the Vietnam War: Books for Children,” numerous articles, editorials, book reviews, and humor pieces for The Daily Signal, American Thinker, the Post Independent, Watchdog Arena, and others. She makes her home in beautiful and rugged Western Colorado. Follow her on Twitter: @Reagan_Girl

marjoriehaun@yahoo.com

How one congressional investigation into a climate scientist is different from another

By Rob Nikolewski @ Watchdog.org / October 27, 2015 / 7 Comments

COMMITTEE QUESTIONS: George Mason University climate scientist Jagadish Shukla is the focus of questions from the House Science Committee regarding finances.

Earlier this year, House of Representatives liberal Raúl Grijalva of Arizona sent a letter to seven universities asking for detailed financial records from sources such as fossil fuel companies that gave money to scientists who’ve questioned how much humans cause climate change.

Now, House of Representatives conservative Lamar Smith of Texas — also chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology — has launched an investigation into the financial dealings of a climate scientist who signed a letter “strongly” supporting using federal racketeering laws to investigate those who “undermine climate science.”

The two congressional probes into the increasingly polarized global warming debate have gone in different directions.

Grijalva backed down amid charges of McCarthyism, but Smith’s investigation into George Mason University climate dynamics professor Jagadish Shukla is proceeding apace.

What’s the difference?

Smith’s critics say there essentially is none, but his supporters say there’s a big difference — namely, the questions do not focus on one’s opinion about climate change but government tax dollars.

One noted scientist who has been in the center of many a climate crossfire told Watchdog.org it appears the Smith investigation is worth pursuing.

“It should be investigated,” said Georgia Tech climate scientist Judith Curry. “It’s a topic of discussion among my colleagues and no matter what side of the climate change debate they’re on, they agree something looks suspicious here.”

Curry was one of the scientists targeted in February by Grijalva, the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Natural Resources, who cited “documents I have received that highlight potential conflicts of interest and failure to disclose corporate funding sources in academic climate research.”

Curry objected, saying at the time, “Absolutely, this letter is intimidation.”

Hit by criticism, Grijalva withdrew the letter — the link to the letter from Grijalva’s office at the Natural Resources Committee can no longer be found — and conceded it was “overreach.”

The Shukla backstory

Shukla is now the latest scientist drawing attention from Capitol Hill, but the attention he’s getting is the result of a political boomerang.

Shukla was the lead signatory of a September letter from 20 climate scientists calling on President Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the head of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act to file civil lawsuits against “corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters” who have “knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”

The RICO law is commonly used to go after Mafia figures, but Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, has advocated using it against “fossil fuel companies and their allies” as it was used against tobacco companies.

The letter sparked backlash from critics — including Curry — who said invoking RICO would silence scientific discourse and act as a blunt instrument to intimidate policy discussion.

Signers of the letter said it was not aimed at fellow scientists.

But in the letter’s fallout, questions arose regarding Shukla and his finances. The decorated scientist heads the Institute of Global Environment and Society, as well as the Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies at George Mason.

A financial examination first initiated by University of Colorado environmental studies professor Roger Pielke Jr. and subsequent followups from journalists and bloggers raised allegations Shukla may be double-dipping to the tune of millions of dollars.

Shukla earned $314,000 last year from George Mason, a public university based in Fairfax, Virginia. IRS documents show Shukla also received $333,048 in compensation from IGES in 2014 for working an average of 28 hours a week.

His wife, Anne, received $166,097 in compensation as the IGES business manager. National Review reported that Shukla’s daughter is also on the payroll, but her earnings have gone unreported.

There is some question about whether Shukla’s salary at IGES comports with state and federal laws. In addition, IGES has reportedly received $63 million in taxpayer-funded grants since 2001.

That prompted Smith’s investigation. A letter sent to Shukla’s lawyer last week said the reports raise “serious allegations about Dr. Shukla’s use of grant money.”

Two different committee actions

How is the Smith investigation different from the aborted Grijalva inquiry?

In an email to Watchdog.org, Smith said, “IGES appears to be almost fully funded by taxpayer money while simultaneously participating in partisan political activity by requesting a RICO investigation of companies and organizations that disagree with the Obama administration on climate change.”

Smith’s office said the committee is not focused on the opinions of scientists, but on the potential misuses of federal funds by Shukla and IGES. None of the other 20 signatories of the letter to Obama have received a similar letter from the committee, Smith’s office said.

“Regarding Shukla, that remains to be uncovered, but it appears there is some sort of irregularity,” Curry told Watchdog.org in a telephone interview.

It seems the partisan lines have been drawn.

After the letter from the scientists — called the #RICO20 on Twitter — got lambasted by critics, Whitehouse took to the Huffington Post to call detractors part of “the right-wing attack machine” who “are having fun twisting” the application of RICO “around in service to their fossil-fuel friends.”

“The bottom line is this,” Whitehouse wrote. “A private company and/or its industry allies should not knowingly lie to the American people about the harms that are caused by its product.”

Whitehouse also called Curry “a prominent climate denier” and Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics “a small cog in a massive climate-denial machine.”

“For anyone who tries to say that this RICO thing is only about the oil companies, Sen. Whitehouse’s continued writings imply otherwise,” Curry said Sunday.

Whitehouse “didn’t mention any specific oil companies,” in the Huffington Post article, Curry said, “but he mentioned two climate scientists by name, including myself. So when the ‘RICO 20’ say, oh this isn’t about the scientists, well, it clearly is.”

RELATED: Congress investigating scientist who advocated RICO use for climate change skeptics

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, the ranking member of the House Science Committee, has not responded to emails from Watchdog.org about the Shukla investigation, but there appears to be tension between her and Smith.

Johnson sent a letter to Smith Friday, according to the Washington Post, complaining about recent subpoenas from Smith to NOAA, demanding information from the agency about a recent study that contradicted claims that there has been a “pause” in global warming.

Accusing Smith of “furthering a fishing expedition,” Johnson wrote the subpoenas represent “a serious misuse of Congressional oversight powers.”

Smith wrote Johnson back, saying his actions are an “appropriate constitutional oversight” and do not constitute harassment.

Click here to LEARN HOW TO STEAL OUR STUFF!

Rob Nikolewski - rnikolewski@watchdog.org

Rob is the National Energy Correspondent for Watchdog.org. Rob is an Emmy-winning news anchor who has held many prominent positions in the journalism field for over 10 years working for MSNBC, Fox Sports Net Pittsburgh and several local television stations. He served as the bureau chief for New Mexico Watchdog and Capitol Report New Mexico for four years. Rob can be reached on Twitter at @NMWatchdog or by email at rnikolewski@watchdog.org

Ohio Obamacare expansion keeps getting bigger

By Jason Hart @ Ohio Watchdog / October 26, 2015 / 13 Comments

Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s Obamacare expansion shattered enrollment projections in its first year, and reliance on the welfare program keeps growing.

There were 634,526 Ohioans enrolled in the Obamacare expansion in September — an increase of more than 140,000 since January — according to the Ohio Department of Medicaid.

For the 21 months Kasich’s Obamacare expansion has been in effect, the program has grown much faster than Ohio’s economy.

 

 

Most of the Ohioans on Medicaid under the expansion are working-age adults without children or disabilities. Before Obamacare, Medicaid was restricted to children, the elderly, the disabled, pregnant women and impoverished families.

Pitching Obamacare expansion to the Ohio General Assembly in 2013, the Kasich administration estimated 447,000 would enroll by fiscal year 2020. Actual enrollment exceeded 620,000 by the time fiscal year 2015 ended in June.

Kasich implemented Obamacare expansion after vetoing a legislative ban on the policy, despite publication of a National Bureau of Economic Research study finding Tennessee’s employment increased when the state removed working-age adults from Medicaid.
The Foundation for Government Accountability and other free-market groups warned against extending Medicaid benefits — which come with no work requirements — to every Ohioan whose income is at or below 138 percent of the poverty line.

FGA expects budget-busting enrollment in Ohio and elsewhere will deter more states from chasing Obamacare expansion funding.

“More able-bodied adults have signed up for Gov. Kasich’s unilateral ObamaCare expansion than the administration thought would ever sign up,” FGA research director Jonathan Ingram said in an email to Ohio Watchdog.

“That is costing taxpayers billions more than expected, but the problem goes beyond that,” Ingram said. “Kasich’s expansion will also have a lasting, negative impact on the state’s economy.”

RELATED: Ohio’s Obamacare expansion has cost taxpayers $5 billion

Ohio’s employment and labor force, Ingram added, “may worsen over the coming years, as Medicaid discourages work and, ultimately, shrinks the economy. Research suggests that in Ohio, as many as 93,000 able-bodied adults could drop out of the labor force as a result of Kasich’s expansion.”

In May testimony before the Ohio Senate, the Kasich administration reported only 43 percent of Ohio’s Obamacare expansion enrollees have jobs. The governor’s office did not respond to Ohio Watchdog questions about enrollment.

Kasich staffers weren’t the only Obamacare advocates to undershoot the target with their projections for Medicaid expansion enrollment.

Ohio’s pro-Obamacare newspapers widely disseminated a 2013 Health Policy Institute of Ohio study including enrollment estimates from Ohio State University researchers and the left-leaning Urban Institute.

UI projected 380,313 Ohioans would enroll in Obamacare expansion by fiscal year 2015. OSU researchers’ fiscal year 2015 estimate of 550,050 was low compared to actual June enrollment, but high relative to the monthly average for the full year.

OSU’s initial estimate of 609,264 enrollees in fiscal year 2016 is already falling short — but not as short as UI’s 2016 estimate of 497,799.

HPIO published revised enrollment projections last year, and communications manager Nick Wiselogel told Ohio Watchdog the organization will likely review enrollment trends over the coming months.

Because of backdated eligibility for Ohioans whose health care Medicaid will cover even though they haven’t enrolled in the program yet, September’s enrollment is likely to climb in future Ohio Department of Medicaid caseload reports.

In May, ODM reported there were 509,771 Obamacare expansion enrollees the preceding month. By the time the September caseload report was released, backdated eligibility had increased April enrollment to 606,524.

Comparing the numbers initially reported for each month, Obamacare expansion enrollment has grown by at least 10,000 per month since April — when the state was in the process of settling a lawsuit over ODM’s old method for dropping ineligible enrollees.
As a result of the lawsuit, ODM now uses a “passive redetermination” process, checking tax records and other government databases once a year to confirm Medicaid enrollees still qualify for benefits.

Most of the Ohioans on Medicaid under the expansion are working-age adults without children or disabilities. Before Obamacare, Medicaid was restricted to children, the elderly, the disabled, pregnant women and impoverished families.

Pitching Obamacare expansion to the Ohio General Assembly in 2013, the Kasich administration estimated 447,000 would enroll by fiscal year 2020. Actual enrollment exceeded 620,000 by the time fiscal year 2015 ended in June.

Kasich implemented Obamacare expansion after vetoing a legislative ban on the policy, despite publication of a National Bureau of Economic Research study finding Tennessee’s employment increased when the state removed working-age adults from Medicaid.

The Foundation for Government Accountability and other free-market groups warned against extending Medicaid benefits — which come with no work requirements — to every Ohioan whose income is at or below 138 percent of the poverty line.

FGA expects budget-busting enrollment in Ohio and elsewhere will deter more states from chasing Obamacare expansion funding.

“More able-bodied adults have signed up for Gov. Kasich’s unilateral ObamaCare expansion than the administration thought would ever sign up,” FGA research director Jonathan Ingram said in an email to Ohio Watchdog.

“That is costing taxpayers billions more than expected, but the problem goes beyond that,” Ingram said. “Kasich’s expansion will also have a lasting, negative impact on the state’s economy.”

RELATED: Ohio’s Obamacare expansion has cost taxpayers $5 billion

Ohio’s employment and labor force, Ingram added, “may worsen over the coming years, as Medicaid discourages work and, ultimately, shrinks the economy. Research suggests that in Ohio, as many as 93,000 able-bodied adults could drop out of the labor force as a result of Kasich’s expansion.”

In May testimony before the Ohio Senate, the Kasich administration reported only 43 percent of Ohio’s Obamacare expansion enrollees have jobs. The governor’s office did not respond to Ohio Watchdog questions about enrollment.

Kasich staffers weren’t the only Obamacare advocates to undershoot the target with their projections for Medicaid expansion enrollment.

Ohio’s pro-Obamacare newspapers widely disseminated a 2013 Health Policy Institute of Ohio study including enrollment estimates from Ohio State University researchers and the left-leaning Urban Institute.

UI projected 380,313 Ohioans would enroll in Obamacare expansion by fiscal year 2015. OSU researchers’ fiscal year 2015 estimate of 550,050 was low compared to actual June enrollment, but high relative to the monthly average for the full year.
OSU’s initial estimate of 609,264 enrollees in fiscal year 2016 is already falling short — but not as short as UI’s 2016 estimate of 497,799.

HPIO published revised enrollment projections last year, and communications manager Nick Wiselogel told Ohio Watchdog the organization will likely review enrollment trends over the coming months.

Because of backdated eligibility for Ohioans whose health care Medicaid will cover even though they haven’t enrolled in the program yet, September’s enrollment is likely to climb in future Ohio Department of Medicaid caseload reports.

In May, ODM reported there were 509,771 Obamacare expansion enrollees the preceding month. By the time the September caseload report was released, backdated eligibility had increased April enrollment to 606,524.

Comparing the numbers initially reported for each month, Obamacare expansion enrollment has grown by at least 10,000 per month since April — when the state was in the process of settling a lawsuit over ODM’s old method for dropping ineligible enrollees.
As a result of the lawsuit, ODM now uses a “passive redetermination” process, checking tax records and other government databases once a year to confirm Medicaid enrollees still qualify for benefits.

Click here to LEARN HOW TO STEAL OUR STUFF!

 

Jason Hart is Watchdog.org's Ohio-based National Labor Reporter. Contact him at jhart@watchdog.org and follow him on Twitter @jasonahart.  hart@watchdog.org

 

Press Release: 1851 Center For Constitutional Law

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 28, 2015

MEDIA CONTACT

Timothy Boggs

(614) 340-9817

TBoggs@OhioConstitution.org

Ohioans Beware: State Issue 2

Proposed Constitutional Amendment would prohibit tax reform without stopping monopolies or marijuana legalization as promised

Columbus, OH - The 1851 Center for Constitutional Law today took action to clarify for Ohioans State Issue 2, which will appear on the November 3, 2015 ballot.

State Issue 2, introduced as an attack on the marijuana legalization effort of State Issue 3, proposes to amend Section 1e of Article II of the Ohio Constitution to specify numerous purposes for which "the power of the initiative shall not be used." (The "initiative" refers to the people, through submission of petitions, to place issues on the ballot). Those include granting or creating a monopoly, oligopoly, or cartel; but also include specifying or determining a tax rate.

Issues that are deemed to violate the new limits, in the opinion of the Ohio Ballot Board, will be required to win an extra election before they can be added to the Ohio Constitution.

There has been very little public debate on the issue leading up to the election, and many citizens are largely unaware of the details of proposed amendment. Accordingly, in its Policy Briefing on State Issue 2, released today, the 1851 Center explained the following:

• State Issue 2 is not an "anti-monopoly amendment." The Ohio General Assembly will be left entirely free to create monopoles and rejected language that would have tied its own hands.

• State Issue 2 precludes tax reform instead of monopolies. While Issue 2 would not stop government from creating monopolies, it would stop citizens from initiating tax reform. Ohioans would be prohibited from using the initiative to eliminate or reduce any state or local income tax, severance tax, sales tax, property tax, or other tax.

• State Issue 2 would not preclude marijuana legalization. This issue will only override Issue 3 if it gets more votes than Issue 3, and even then, litigation is likely to preclude that effect.

• Issue 2 is the result of a questionable political process. Only after those supporting the marijuana amendment submitted their signatures did the Ohio General Assembly spring into action, and change rules in midstream. If legislators are successful on this occasion, there is nothing stopping them from again laying in the weeds and changing the rules of the game once any citizen initiative is completed
 
• Issue 2 would allow the Ballot Board to stifle any Initiative. "The opinion of the Ohio ballot board," without judicial review, determines whether the Ballot Board can impose additional hurdles on citizen initiatives. No standards or criteria are specified other than the Ballot Board's "opinion."

"The messaging behind State Issue 2 appears to be built upon the mistruths that it prevents monopolies and would stop the proposed marijuana monopoly if enacted - - neither is accurate: this issue is simply an attack on Ohioans' initiative rights," said Maurice Thompson, Executive Director of the 1851 Center. "Issue 2 simply proposes that legislators should have a monopoly on the power to create monopolies. This change would simply force special interests to fund politicians' campaigns, rather than directly promoting their issues to the public."

Ohioans appear particularly unaware that the proposed amendment would eliminate their ability to use the initiative to advance any number of issues having nothing to do with monopolies, including any effort at tax reform, since the proposal would stifle an amendment that would "specify or determine a tax rate."

"Nationwide, it has been proven that the citizen initiative is the most effective method of reforming excessive state and local taxes, which Ohio certainly maintains. Because current political leadership has proved unwilling to tackle these problems, Ohioans will need the initiative in the future," added Thompson

Read The 1851 Center's Short Policy Brief on State Issue 2 HERE

 

Our clients receive free legal representation thanks to the generosity of our donors. If you support our efforts to advance liberty and limit government, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law.

 

Be a P&D Twitter Follower!

Dear Readers,

I've started creating a new website with a Wordpress platform and the help of my friend Ken Zak, who specializes in all this web site stuff. Stuff I'm finding more and more complicated each day and well beyond my abilities. On January 1st I will be launching “The New and Improved Paradigms and Demographics”.

Please consider becoming a Twitter follower. Follow @ElkozRich

Best wishes, Rich K

Obama Administration Condemns Own Common Core Tests

The President asks Congress to overturn policy that he imposed by stealth, bribery, and arm-twisting.

Posted by Mary Grabar @ Frontpage.com

On October 24, 2015, the Obama administration condemned “over-testing” in schools. It called for a cap on testing, limiting it to two percent of a child’s class time. It called on Congress to enact this cap and on teachers to “step back and make tests less onerous and more purposeful.” This accompanied the release of a study by the Council of the Great City Schools.

In a smooth move, the Obama administration called on Congress to fix a problem that had been foisted on the people without the consent of Congress—namely the national Common Core standards, even as the widely hated name was scrupulously avoided. The Obama administration also told teachers to fix tests that they had not devised and were forced to administer.

In an even smoother move, the New York Times summed up the blame this way:

The administration’s move seemed a reckoning on a two-decade push that began during the Bush administration and intensified under President Obama. Programs with aspirational names — No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top — were responding to swelling agreement among Democrats and Republicans that higher expectations and accountability could lift the performance of American students. . . . .”

Alas, the push began “during the Bush administration.”

It is true. NCLB was a misapplication of “compassionate conservatism” through the federal government in hopes of ensuring that children (mostly in urban schools) would not be denied a basic education. You see, while “urban schools” teachers were assigning group projects in “social justice” per the philosophy of Bill Ayers, students were left virtually illiterate and unable to do basic math.

Cecilia Munoz, Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council (but prior to that “Senior Vice President for the Office of Research, Advocacy, and Legislation at the National Council of La Raza”), said that all the testing “can sap the joy and fun out of the classroom for students and for teachers” (unlike Raza Studies, perhaps).

The lead designer of one of the two national Common Core tests was head of the Obama education transition team, Linda Darling-Hammond. She was also Bill Ayers’s pick for Secretary of Education and a close colleague of his. She had promised that these tests would be so much better; they wouldn’t even be like tests at all. In the August 2009 Harvard Educational Review, she claimed the tests would go beyond “the narrow views of the last eight years” of measuring knowledge objectively. She would make tests that measure “deep understanding.” They would support “developing creativity, critical thinking skills, and the capacity to innovate.” In November 2009, in her speech to the Grow Your Own organization in Chicago (later published as part of a collection titled Grow Your Own Teachers, under the Columbia Teachers College “Teaching for Social Justice” series edited by Bill Ayers), she rejected “the imaginary model classroom where every student is learning in the same way at the same pace at the same time.” She envisioned a classroom culture of “revision and redemption.” On April 28, 2010, in an Education Week article titled “Developing an Internationally Comparable Balanced Assessment System,” she claimed that the new assessment system is “designed to go beyond recall of facts and show students’ abilities to evaluate evidence, problem solve and understand context.”

Obama, in his Facebook video released on the day of the “over-testing” announcement, repeated Darling-Hammond’s promises from several years back, and said, “Learning is about so much more than just filling in the right bubble.’’ In a newfound spirit of cooperation, he pledged, ‘‘we’re going to work with states, school districts, teachers and parents to make sure that we’re not obsessing about testing.’’

Candidate Obama in 2007, in his best black dialect, before the National Education Association, railed against No Child Left Behind, standardized tests, and inequitable resources among schools.

At a town hall in Washington in 2011 President Obama, said, “’Too often what we have been doing is using [standardized] tests to punish students or to, in some cases, punish schools.’”

In 2013, at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) meeting, as educators held protest signs against the new Common Core assessments, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan praised Darling-Hammond. Duncan promised a “sea-change in assessments,” with new tests measuring “growth” and “non-cognitive” abilities. Most likely Ayers and Darling-Hammond applauded him, for they participated in several panels at the conference.

Funny, though, in spite of the best-laid plans, teachers didn’t like it. Students were failing and teachers’ evaluations tied to the test scores were suffering. Under Common Core, first-graders have to write op-eds. Older students have to draw pictures for crazy math problems. English Language Arts is dull and dreary. Common Core tests punish bright students—those who can think abstractly, do equations, and read at a level that goes beyond retrieving bits of information.

The Common Core tests, of course, had to test for a minimal level of knowledge. The sales pitch was that it prepared “workers in a global twenty-first century economy.”

Teachers, after having invested so much in Democrats, were miffed at not being invited to the Common Core standards writing party. In 2011, I heard them grousing at one of the panels at the Conference on College Composition and Communication meeting for college and high school writing teachers. They were upset because the “social, civil, and aesthetic,” purposes like the Native American greetings, analysis of protest signs at rallies for illegal aliens, and descriptions of ladies undergarments that were discussed at the conference were not factored in.

So now Obama is asking Congress to overturn policy that he imposed by stealth, bribery, and arm-twisting—much like the health care legislation.

Funny, isn’t it, how the Obama administration has reversed course, now that an election is coming up and the teachers are unhappy about Common Core.

No longer are opponents of Common Core a “conspiracy in search of a conspiracy” or “white suburban moms” frustrated that their “brilliant” kids weren’t doing well, as Arne Duncan had jibed.

Democratic contender Hillary Rodham Clinton (who sits on the board of a Council of the Great City Schools “partner” that teaches kids about elections) “embraced the principles laid out by Obama,” and said in a statement, ‘We should be ruthless in looking at tests and eliminating them if they do not actually help us move our kids forward.’”

Maybe she too can blame Bush.

 

Gamifying the Classroom, a Talk, Nov. 17

How the U.S. Department of Education Is Using Video Games and Common Core to Transform K-16 Education. (Photo from an educational game used to teach One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.) Learn how "educational games" are replacing books.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015, 7:00 – 9:00 p.m. Talk begins at 7:30 p.m.
Refreshments will be served.
The Solarium, 321 W. Hill Street, Decatur, GA 30030 (Oakhurst Neighborhood)

The U.S. Department of Education is pushing the takeover of education to the next level by imposing Common Core on college and promoting video games in the classroom, K-16. (Yes, the senior year of college is considered grade 16 now.) Video game designers, who work at their own companies as well as in academic departments (and often at both) and receive grants from the federal government and technology-aligned non-profits like the Gates Foundation, argue that games motivate students and “cultivate dispositions.”

Textbooks and classroom lectures are being replaced by video games that teach subjects like science and literature, but even more so impart lessons in “social and emotional intelligence” and “social justice.” While technology companies and professors of “gaming” benefit from this gravy train, students will lose in the ability to focus, to read, and to think for themselves.

The lecture is free and open to the public. Drinks and refreshments will be served. Free parking is available in the parking lot and on the street. Handicapped accessible.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: Ann Hartle (ahartle@emory.edu)

This lecture is made possible through the generosity of the The Devereaux F. and Dorothy M. McClatchey Foundation, and is sponsored by the Georgia Chapter, The National Association of Scholars.

American Council on Science and Health

MSG (Column A) is No Health Threat (Column B)
Who hasn't heard of the so-called "Chinese Restaurant Syndrome" featuring symptoms such as headaches, flushing, sweating and heart palpitations tied to MSG consumption? Yet despite the supposed connection studies of MSG have not been able to establish a causal connection. Read more.

Organ Selling From Homicides In PR: Smart Or Macabre?

Puerto Rico has a proposal on the table to, in effect, use the fallout from violent crime to boost its country's standard of living, and to, in turn, reduce crime. Lemons, meet lemonade. But is this smart or simply macabre? Read more.

CRISPR May Redefine What it Means To Be GMO

The genome editing technique known as CRISPR-Cas9 is changing many fields in biology with its precision and simplicity. Bioagriculture is no different, but many have feared the GMO label would slow its incorporation to this field. However, researchers are finding ways around it, but that might not be a good thing. Read more.

Fracking Passes Another Safety Exam, Large Study Says

Yale researchers analyzed groundwater from wells in several fracking-dense PA counties where Marcellus shale drilling is taking place. In the largest study of its kind they found no association between fracking and well water contamination. Read more.

Is Beef Fortified With Omega-3s Worth The Higher Cost?

For many years, nutritionists and many doctors have stressed the importance of Omega-3 fatty acids as being a vital part of a healthy lifestyle, should you be overpaying for it? Read more.

Errors in Half of its Surgeries, Mass General Self Reports

An internal study of operating room procedures at Massachusetts General Hospital, one of the nation's most preeminent healthcare institutions, determined that some mistake or adverse event occurred in nearly half of all surgeries performed during an eight-month period. Read more.

Oregon Sues GNC Over Illegal Supplement Sales

We've written repeatedly about dietary supplements — which contain ingredients that range from ineffective to dangerous. But now Oregon has noticed, and the state is suing General Nutrition Centers for selling supplements containing ingredients that haven't been approved for sale in the U.S. Read more.

Blood Test May Soon End Heart Attack Uncertainty

Chest pain is one of the most common complaints involving those who visit the ER. Meanwhile, healthcare costs associated with ruling out a heart attack are exorbitant. But a new blood test could provide a more accurate diagnosis in less time, while potentially saving billions of dollars. Read more.

Malaria Prevention Vaccine Edges Closer to Reality

A new vaccine against malaria, a scourge especially in sub-Saharan Africa, shows that a series of three shots offers about 50 percent protection. It's one small-to-medium sized step toward a truly protective malaria vaccine, which would amount to saving many thousands of lives in the near term. Read more.

Europe to Approve Herpes Virus for Cancer Treatment

The European Medicines Agency has recommended a novel drug therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma. What's interesting is that this drug has been derived from the herpes simplex virus. The FDA is scheduled to give its evaluation of the drug this week.
Read more.

Study Impugning Pesticides Besieged With Bugs

A new study purports to link some pesticides with obesity. Really? This sloppy study, based on both dietary and pesticide exposure while utilizing statistical manipulations and ad-hoc, exposure-intensity criteria, should be relegated to the junkpile of anti-pesticide zealotry. Read more.

Flu Flunkers: Docs, Patients Ignore Antibiotic Rules

A CDC report card shows that doctors are prescribing antibiotics for flu patients at an alarmingly high rate, a trend that contributes to the spread of antibiotic resistance. However, physicians shouldn't shoulder all the blame, as pushy patients need to be held accountable, too. Read more.

Botox Gets Shot At Calming A Troubled Heart

Atrial Fibrillation, or A-Fib, is a heart disease affecting millions of Americans. But researchers are looking to treat this condition with botox, one of the world's most potent and lethal toxins. A recent study examines whether the facial-treatment drug can also suppress heart arrhythmia. Read more.

Outlawing K2 Drug is Right, But Ultimately Ineffective

New York City has criminalized K2, or "synthetic marijuana." While this is the right thing to do, the effect will be short-lived since five psychoactive chemicals that give the dangerous street drug its properties can, and eventually will, be easily tweaked to skirt the law. Read more.

Don't Lose Sleep Over Technology, 'Cause Actually We're Not
Ubiquitous technology has frequently been blamed for preventing Americans from getting a good night’s sleep. However, researchers studying isolated tribes in far-flung parts of the world found they, like those of us in the modern world, sleep roughly the same amount of time. Read more.

Poland May Save The West Again!

New Polish Government Opposes EU Climate Deal

Poland's New Government & The Paris Climate Conference

New Polish Government May Opt Out Of EU Climate Deal

US Congress To Investigate NOAA’s Temperature Adjustments

Climate Scares Discredited

Winemakers Will Adapt To Climate Change, International Body Says

Editor's Note: Due to Poland's geographic position Poles have been at the center of defending Europe from the Golden Horde, Muslim invasions, Nazi Germany, Communism and now Eco-Fanaticism. It's a shame they get so little credit! One more thing. Here is a complete list of all the things Global Warming - or Climate Change - is supposed to be causing.

Poland’s opposition Law and Justice party is on course for an election victory unprecedented in the country’s modern history after pledging a tougher stance on refugees and more state control over the economy. Tapping concerns among some of its conservative Catholic base that too many Muslims are being allowed into Europe, Law & Justice opposes German-led efforts forcing EU member states to take in more migrants. It’s against plans to curb CO2 emissions, which would hit the country’s unprofitable coal mining industry. It also seeks western support for a greater NATO presence on Polish soil. --Bloomberg, 26 October 2015

The likely winner of Poland's Oct. 25 parliamentary election called on Tuesday for a renegotiation of a climate deal agreed last year by the European Union, saying the country needed more coal-based power stations. The European Union agreed last year, after marathon negotiations, to cut greenhouse gases by 40 percent by 2030, pitting heavy industry against green business. The emissions goal is also the basis of the EU position for the Paris climate change talks that start on Nov. 30. "We have to fight for this in the European Union. As to the climate package renegotiation is needed. We should not have agreed to that, it could have been vetoed," PiS leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski said. --Reuters, 13 October 2015

One potential sticking point between an eventual PiS government and Berlin is climate policy. Germany has been at the forefront of tougher EU climate policies, but Lipiński said Poland under PiS would “do everything it can to reverse the current policy because they believe coal remains Poland’s energy future.” Poland has huge coal reserves and depends on it for roughly 90 percent of its electricity needs. Waszczykowski said the current government made a “big mistake” last year by accepting an EU-wide target calling for a 40 percent emissions cut by 2030 because Poland needs “more time” to reach this target. PiS suggests it would want to negotiate opt-outs from EU rules on carbon emission reductions, and says the crucial role of coal for Poland’s economy deserves “special treatment.” Such a move would likely prove contentious with Berlin. --Politico, 23 October 2015

Poland’s leading opposition party is seeking to negotiate exemptions from the European Union’s rules on reducing carbon emissions because the nation’s energy security and economic development depends on coal. Law & Justice, which opinion polls show winning October’s general election, has vowed to toughen Poland’s stance on climate issues to protect the $526 billion economy, which relies on coal for about 90 percent of its electricity. While the government has been critical of EU emissions goals, it didn’t veto last year’s move toward stricter curbs on discharging heat-trapping carbon dioxide. “The strategy that we’re planning for the economy rejects the dogma of de-carbonization,” Piotr Naimski, in charge of preparing energy policy at Law & Justice, said in an interview last week. “The role of coal in Poland’s economy fully deserves to receive special treatment.” --Maciej Martewicz, Bloomberg, 22 June 2015

Whether Poland will continue to support the EU’s 2030 package or whether it will change in light of an inadequate Paris agreement will very much depend on the parliamentary elections this October. Poland’s main opposition party, the Law and Justice Party, opposes the EU’s 2030 climate package and has called it a serious blow for Poland’s economy. A victory for the opposition could spell the end of the decarbonisation consensus in Poland and the EU. Three years ago, the Law and Justice Party proposed a referendum on the EU’s 2020 climate package which the party opposed just as much. Although it was voted down by MPs in 2012, there is clearly a case for reviving the referendum proposal if the Paris climate accord fails to become legally binding. A referendum would bring a renewed focus on just how much current climate policies are costing people both in the developed and developing worlds and just how little those policies are giving in return. --Benny Peiser, Keynote address to the Solidarność Trade Union Climate Conference, Katowice, Poland 29 May 2015
 

Questions lingered about key aspects of a draft agreement on the world’s climate, as the final scheduled round of negotiations ended Friday before a the crucial summit, which opens next month in Paris. Developed countries have said that they would commit 100 billion dollars per year to a global climate fund by 2020, but did not come to a concrete proposal for funding after 2020. A bloc of developing countries, the Group of 77, which comprises 134 countries, said the financing commitments did not go far enough. Environmentalists said there had been too little progress on moving the draft forward. --Deutsche Presse Agentur, 26 October 2015

Speculation about machinery of government changes is set to reach a fever pitch this week as MPs debate a private member’s bill on the abolition of the Department of Energy and Climate Change. The bill, introduced by the maverick Tory MP Peter Bone, is unlikely to pass — in its current form at least. Nevertheless, for the hundreds of civil servants at DECC, the debate will not be much fun because its dissolution remains a distinct possibility. If Mr Osborne does choose to wind up DECC, he might wait until the new year to do so— but I certainly wouldn’t rule out his doing so before then. --Robin Pagnamenta, The Times, 26 October 2015

The abolition of DECC would not be difficult to achieve. Energy policy could be transferred to the Department for Business and climate policy moved to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Many unnecessary green expenditure items could be phased out altogether. Moreover, the current political climate is favourable for such action. With green opposition deeply divided and ineffective, it is an ideal opportunity for the government to abolish this unnecessary arm of the state without much fuss (although, in practice, it is likely to happen after the Paris conference). Such a move would be good for cost-effective energy policy, good for consumers and good for the Exchequer. --Benny Peiser & Daniel Mahoney, City A.M. 27 August 2015

Domestic electricity prices are now the highest in the Europe and 52pc more than median prices in the Continent, surpassing both Ireland and Spain for the first time, according to official figures. Expensive policies designed to slash our reliance on fossil fuels are disproportionately driving up bills compared to other countries, experts say. --Kate Palmer, The Daily Telegraph, 24 October 2015

 

As Poland’s new government promises to be more assertive over everything from refugees to how to handle Russia, the first battle with Brussels is already looming and may prove to be just as divisive. The Law & Justice party, which is on course for an unprecedented parliamentary majority, will fight for special treatment under the European Union climate pact, according to Konrad Szymanski, the likely next minister responsible for EU affairs. As the continent’s largest producer of coal, Poland wants concessions going beyond what European leaders decided last year or it will seek an opt-out from the pact. --Ewa Krukowska, Bloomberg, 27 October 2015

The head of a congressional committee on science has issued subpoenas to the Obama administration over a recent scientific study refuting claims that global warming had “paused” or slowed over the last decade. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology and a prominent congressional skeptic on climate change, issued the subpoenas two weeks ago demanding e-mails and records from U.S. scientists who participated in the study, which undercut a popular argument used by critics who reject the scientific consensus that man-made pollution is behind the planet’s recent warming. --Joby Warrick, The Washington Post, 24 October 2015

One group wants wealthy countries to be beholden to an International Tribunal of Climate Justice. Another wants the final Paris agreement to reflect the rights of Mother Earth. Some countries want “free of cost” access to clean technology. Others have a counteroffer: “no text.” One thing everyone seems to agree on is that the past week of negotiations in Bonn, Germany, did little to make the decisions for a new global climate agreement any easier. While countries did make the thousands of options before them somewhat clearer, no one actually compromised. Come December, all the hard decisions will still be on the table. Finance remains the most contentious issue of the deal. Many developing nations feel that wealthy countries are trying to back out of a 2009 promise to deliver $100 billion annually by 2020, and some say the 1992 architecture of the entire climate change regime demands that industrialized nations deliver assistance in perpetuity for poorer countries. --Lisa Friedman, E and E News, 26 October 2015

A closely linked and equally contentious issue known in the talks as “loss and damage” is also shaping up to be one of the most contentious endgame decisions. Island nations and other countries deeply vulnerable to climate change are currently experiencing the impacts of extreme weather events that scientists say are worsened by the greenhouse gas emissions currently in the atmosphere. They want a provision in the main agreement out of Paris that will ultimately allow them to seek compensation. The United States and other rich countries are indeed rejecting any text that even implies their countries are liable for the impact of climate pollution. Their counteroffer to a lengthy G-77 proposal for tackling the issue is to delete the section altogether. Activists say they don’t believe that tactic will succeed. --Lisa Friedman, E&E News, 26 October 2015

India on Monday said that developed nations should come out with more ambitious climate action plans and hoped the coming climate change summit in Paris does not end up in “failure.” “We want equitable and just climate agreement in Paris. We do not want Paris to fail. We will try hard till the end that collective wisdom prevails. India is walking a sustainable path but we are on a growth trajectory. So we want more carbon space and that must be provided by those who have occupied that space for the last 150 years,” Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar said. He said that the five-day session in Bonn recently was a “classic” example where the G-77 plus China and African grouping countries dominated and “marshalled” out “old, inequitable and very lopsided”draft agreement. --Press Trust of India, 27 October 2015

Participants in the Paris conference are expected to set up a Green Climate Fund to pay for renewable energy projects. Most of the money, $100 billion a year starting in 2020, will be provided by prosperous developed countries. President Obama intends to bypass Congress. The Obama era is winding down, however, and key Republicans are warning that Mr. Obama’s climate change agreement might not survive his departure in 2017. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell sent word to foreign embassies across Washington that any deal the president makes with United Nations members may not be legally binding without Senate approval. --Editorial, The Washington Times, 26 October 2015

 

Good news for wine drinkers – a leading international body says grape vines are a hardy little number and can survive climate change, at least over the medium term. Earlier harvesting, changes in grape varieties and new wine-making processes have already helped counter the impact of the harsher weather hitting vineyards across the globe, the head of the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) says. “You can adapt to climate change or you can react to it,”Treasury Wine Chief Supply Officer Stuart McNab said at a Reuters Global Climate Change Summit earlier this month. --Reuters, 28 October 2015

Scientists say that there is significant disagreement about how climate change will affect the Gulf region, after one published study raised fears about high temperatures and humidity at the end of the century. The new research, by two scientists based in the United States, said that... unless greenhouse-gas emissions are cut, in the UAE’s major cities the wet-bulb temperature would, several times between 2071 and 2100, exceed the level at which humans could survive. The Global Warming Policy Foundation dismissed the latest study. The group’s director, the social anthropologist Benny Peiser, said: “These kind of scare stories crop up” whenever a UN climate-change conference is looming, a reference to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris that begins at the end of next month. “The fact of the matter is that warming over the last 50 years is much slower than most computer models predict. The models are wrong and the observations are more reliable than the models.” --Daniel Bardsley, The National, 27 October 2015

All public policies, in France, Europe and throughout the world, find their origin and inspiration in the battle against global warming. The impact on the entire field of scientific research is particularly clear and especially pernicious. There is not a single fact, figure or observation that leads us to conclude that the world‘s climate is in any way disturbed. Conclusions based on any kind of model should be disregarded. As the SCM specializes in building mathematical models, we should also be recognized as competent to criticize them. Models are useful when attempting to review our knowledge, but they should not be used as an aid to decision-making until they have been validated. --Calculation Mathematical Society, September 2015

Has anyone been wondering why we’ve been hearing so little about the Arctic lately? It turns out that the Arctic is far less ice free than many thought or expected just some years ago. So wrong can the models be. More Arctic ice and up to 1.5°C colder! The new study finds that in 2014 “more ice survived the summer as MYI than in the nine most recent years” and it was only “slightly less than during 1968–2015 on average” Also “between November 2014 and April 2015, winter air temperatures were between −0.5°C and −1.5°C colder than during 1980–2010.” --Pierre Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, 27 October 2015

For reading matter on my half-term trip away, I took Matt Ridley's latest book The Evolution of Everything. At nearly 400 pages long it's not a short book, but it turned out to be not nearly long enough to keep me occupied and by the middle of the week I had finished it. There's only one word to describe it: subversive. It's subversive of pretty much everything - religion, politics, technology, statism, central banking, education, culture. You name it and it's subverted by the book's central hypothesis. This is the idea that while we seek proximal, top-down explanations for change, in truth bottom-up forces are more powerful, more sustained, and more often than not are the true causes. So with this book, Ridley sets the philosophical cat well and truly among the pigeons, and those who make their living in the world of top-down plans are up in arms. --Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, 26 October 2015

Brought to you by Benny Peiser’s Global Warming Policy Foundation