ICG didn’t just trespass on McKinley Sumner's land

Photo from KFTC, via ilovemountains.org. I've checked with Jamie Goodman to try to get more info on the photographer.

Montgomery Creek Kentucky is one of those mountains that isn't any more. Today I was corresponding with fellow journalist Anne Butterfield who writes about coal issues from Colorado and she was surprised to learn that mountain removal operations in Appalachia often don't own the land they destroy. They lease it. And sometimes they don't even do that--they steal it.

Consider the case of McKinley Sumner, a member of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth (KFTC) who testified in 2007. ICG is International Coal Group, which I have written about before in connection with its deep mine disaster at Sago. Evidently the corporation, having bought out companies in bankruptcy, is also blowing up mountains--without the permission of its owner. How the corporation would defend this, I don't know. Gene Kitts of ICG defends mtr in principle at Ken Ward's blog here. (pdf at the company's site, here.)

ICG had approached my siblings and I about selling or leasing them our land that is about 63 acres. I told them a number of times that we did not want to sell to them because I wanted to live out my days here on the land I grew up on. This company did me dirty on George’s Branch, and I didn’t trust them so every so often I would go up the ridge to make sure they weren’t getting on my property. Back in August, I was out in the yard one day and I heard this awful commotion. It didn’t sound right to me, so I decided to go to the top of the mountain. I put on my boots to keep the copperheads and rattlesnakes away and headed up. When I got back there, I saw this monster bulldozer. At about the time I got to the top, a truck pulled up. I went up to the person in the truck who was apparently the foreman, and asked him if he realized they were on private property. He said, “No, I don’t think so.’ I responded by saying, "Yes, I do think so!" I talked to him for a minute and then I started on down the ridge to see what all they had done. I started down the ridge, and he said, "You can’t go down the ridge."

I said, "I can go anywhere I want to on our own property, so you don’t tell me where I can go and where I can’t go. Furthermore, when I go down the ridge and see what all you’ve done, you don’t be here when I get back." A few evenings after this happened a representative from ICG coal company called me. They said it was a mistake, and that they would make it good. I don’t think it was a mistake. I think the company wanted to see how far they could push me. They couldn’t say that it was a mistake because my property lines were well marked, and there was a big white oak tree that was well-marked by the surveyor where the property lines were. I had talked with them a number of times before and told them that they weren’t to get on my property. After the company realized that I had contacted a lawyer, they took it upon themselves to contact the state. When I talked to Susan Bush [Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources], she knew about the problem, and ICG said they had gotten off permit by mistake. The state gave them a citation back in August, but they still have not issued ICG a fine. It makes me think that the state does more for the companies then they do for the property owners of Kentucky. This whole situation has caused me a lot of aggravation and stress. I have had to put out a lot of money, about $7,000 in total, from my own pocket to make sure I knew where the property lines were and that the lines were well marked. The pegs and flags were removed on other part of the ridge, which cost money to have the property line remarked. I don’t know who else would do that but the coal company. I am 74-years-old, and I hike up to the ridgeline three times a week to make sure the company is not trying to come on my property again. I just want them to know that I’m still here and I’m watching. I just don’t think that this should be happening in the United States.

KFTC adds that Leslie Resources Coal Company started strip mining coal on the ridge tops above Montgomery Creek in 1999, affecting the hundred or more families that live in the Montgomery Creek hollow. Leslie Resources Coal Company eventually sold to the Addington Brothers who then went bankrupt.

This led to the purchase by so-called bottom-feeder Wilbur Ross Jr. and ICG. Ross went on to sell ICG, as in the case of his other acquisitions. As KFTC writes,

In order to make sure ICG stay off of his property, Mckinley Sumner, had is property surveyed with bright orange markers. When ICG decided they wanted to mine some of Mckinley’s property they not only removed the markers, but they also removed the line tree used to indicate the property line. One lawyer said it’s hard to get them (ICG) for trespassing on his property, because there is no property their any more. It’s just a straight drop-off now. They didn’t just trespass on his property they stole it.

Another KFTC member Carolyn Brown was quoted by Kentucky writer Mary Popham, in and July 9, 2007 op-ed in the (Lexington, KY) Herald-Leader about coal-to-liquid technology and its acceleration of mtr.

The wildlife is being destroyed. All the trees, the plants, yellowroot, wildflowers. Our streams are black, ruined. You drive through the areas, you see nothing, all the trees are gone. You see dirt, nothing won't grow on it. Where they plant grass, it won't grow. Some people still like to enjoy the natural look of the mountains. Our children will not get to see them. Because coal companies come in and make some people a few bucks. The land will be gone. It breaks my heart. It insults me. I really don't know how, but we have to save the mountains we have left.

Judy Bonds: "Fight harder and finish them off."

Portrait of Judy Bonds by Robert Shetterly for his project, Americans Who Tell the Truth, used by permission of the artist. (UPDATE 7/29: Ordering info--more details see the bottom of this entry.)

Vernon Haltom, Judy Bond's co-director of Coal River Mountain Watch, just sent me the bad news that Judy has found out that she is battling stage three cancer. Vernon writes that "She said that some people have asked her before, "What do you want us to do if anything ever happens to you?" Her answer is "Fight harder." She repeated that today, to fight harder. " Her words:

We've got them on the ropes and smell blood. Don't let up, fight harder and finish them off.

I'm sharing this by permission. When I asked to what extent I should share the news, Vernon answer, "I asked how much of that she wanted me to let folks know, and she said there's no point in keeping it from people."

Treatment will take at least 3 months, and she doesn't expect to be back at work for several months. Judy had been sick for several weeks when her doctor sent her to the hospital in Charleston, after antibiotics didn't work on what had been diagnosed as pneumonia. Vernon wrote,

Judy has always been a fighter, never giving up. This is her big fight now; the only one she's able to do right now. ...Please, keep her in your prayers.

Judy won the prestigious Goldman Prize in 2003, for her work in fighting mountaintop removal. I also love the quotation on the page I've linked to.

The right to mine coal here ends where it endangers our health and safety. You may have your job tomorrow, but what do you tell your kids? That you wasted the future of these mountains?

*


Did you know you can support this post?

I'm putting this on a separate page, so as not to mix my discussion of how to crowd-source my journalism with news of Judy. But if you're interested, see my July 29 update: "Why I decided to try and fund this blog." (And, I might mention, if the experiment goes well, to also provide a way for me to fund support for activism in the coal fields and others' media coverage thereof. Too bad I didn't have the idea before I launched this page--for a while it was getting over 300 out of the last 500 hits, according to statcounter. If this works, I might also pitch in for something other than a free account and have better data.

PBS: Can you say "unlevel playing field?"

Photo of a mountaintop removal site by Daniel Shea of Chicago, who is now working on a series of photographs of coal plants, entitled Plume. (I'll be writing about his print sale to fund that project in my next post.)


*
In reading Alessandra Stanley's July 12 column, "Mr. Secretary, This Is Your Life (in Plenty of Detail) I thought of the PBS handling of the film Coal Country v.s. that of the tribute to George Schultz. At the time that PBS pulled the plug on airing Coal Country, citing its Sierra Club funding, I wondered whether Board member Sharon Rockefeller (wife of the big coal lovin' WV Senator) had played any role.

I had seen the film at its West Virginia premiere and found it to be pretty even-handed, using a much more sympathetic representative of the coal industry than, say, Black Diamonds. This is not to criticize Catherine Pancake or her film. I am just saying that Coal Country, by Mari-Lynn Evans and Phylis Geller, looked to me to be ready for prime-time PBS, more akin to Ken Burns, than say its more controversial programming, such as POV.

Funding for the George Shultz tribute

Now, according to Stanley, PBS is airing a three-hour George Shultz tribute, whose sponsors include

Mr. Shultz’s Nixon-era colleague, Peter G. Peterson, who is married to Joan Ganz Cooney, the founder of Children’s Television Workshop. The Stephen Bechtel Fund gave money, so did Charles Schwab, founder of the Charles Schwab Corporation, where Mr. Shultz also served as a board member. So did many prominent foundations and individuals, including Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California.

But John Wilson, the chief programming executive told Stanley that money had nothing to do with airing the program.

We evaluate programs on their merits ...PBS has a vivid track record of covering this administration’s key players. It goes without saying this is not our first look at the Reagan White House and not the last.

I guess just not so vivid a track record of covering mountaintop removal.

The directors of Coal Country react

The filmmakers of Coal Country have said,

It is important for us to state that THE APPALACHIANS airing on PBS (and one of their largest pledge films) was also funded in part by the Sierra Club. Now we learn that PBS has accepted a 3 hour film on George Shultz, funded in its entirety by his supporters.

PBS's decision regarding these two films surely appears to be a conflict of interest In looking at the site for Free to Choose Media, founded by Bob Chitester and producer of the Schultz film, it hardly seems to be involved in non-partisan projects.

Free to Choose Media: can anyone say "climate change denial?

Take a look, for instance, at what's next up for the company, What a Wonderful World. The site says it features

Johan Norberg, a noted Swedish Author and Scholar, will attack the pervasive and negative myths about Capitalism, Free Trade and Globalization with an insightful, engaging and often times humorous look at the world around us as it really is.

Then there's a finished project, Unstoppable Solar Cycles: The Real Story of Greenland, which

sets aside doomsday alarmism and political axe-grinding to look at the science behind the history of climate change on earth.

Supposedly, this is authoritative since

Dr. Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and Dr. David Legates of the University of Delaware provide an easy-to-follow review of current climate science, which suggests that the sun's irregular patterns and other natural forces are the major sources of climate change.

Of course, climate skeptic Soon was Scientific Advisor to Greening Earth Society between Dec 1998 and September 2001 and had ties to the American Petroleum Institute, according to Sourcewatch. Legates, according to the same source is a frequent

contributor to publications released by the National Center for Policy Analysis, a conservative think-tank that strongly opposes climate change regulation.

PBS may have used Chitester before for a skewed series on economics

In 1980, at least according to his website, Chitester produced a series with Milton Friedman. (I can't find it on the PBS site, nor does IMDB list who aired it.)

Take a look at the PBS standards

Here are the network's standards on editorial integrity

PBS's reputation for quality reflects the public's trust in the editorial integrity of PBS content and the process by which it is produced and distributed. To maintain that trust, PBS and its member stations are responsible for shielding the creative and editorial processes from political pressure or improper influence from funders or other sources. PBS also must make every effort to ensure that the content it distributes satisfies those editorial standards designed to assure integrity.

Other journalists are weighing in--will PBS answer?

Greg Mitchell (email), formerly of Editor and Publisher, wrote this for his blog The Nation. But despite an action alert by Peter Hart at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler (email, phone: 703- 739-5290) has yet to respond on his blog--the last entry was July 9. I hope that he'll write about PBS's decision-making regarding these two films, given his role in upholding the station's integrity.

*

UPDATE (not part of my drafted op-ed):

In getting ready to write PBS, I also located some articles for further reading:

• Joe Strupp (email) weighs in at Media Matters

On July 14, I emailed Getler, copying the No New Coal Plants, Friends of Mountains, Appalachian Studies, Concerned Citizens of Giles County, Surry Justice and Mountain Justice Organizers lists, as well as the three writers above and Mari-lynn Evans:

Jul 14, 2010, 1:13 PM

Mr. Getler,

Consider the case of Coal Country v.s. the recent George Shultz tribute.

http://bethwellington.blogspot.com/2010/07/pbs-can-you-say-unequal-playing-field.html

I hope your station will revisit the original decision to not show Coal Country. By copy of this, I'm letting friends on several email lists know about this, thinking that they may find the topic of interest and want to contact you.

BTW, as you might know, Greg Mitchell also has a post w. more info on this:

http://www.thenation.com/blog/37323/pbs-offering-three-hour-valentine-george-shultz-rightwing-backing

As does Joe Strupp at Media Matters:

http://mediamatters.org/strupp/201007120040

And Peter Hart at FAIR

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4114

On July 16, I copied just the three writers and Mari-Lyn, plus I wrote the NYT's author at the contact form at the paper.

Jul 16, 2010, 10:29 AM

BTW, I notice that you have a blog and the last entry was July 9. I hope that you'll write about your decision-making regarding these two films, given your role in upholding the station's integrity, especially in light of the standards on editorial integrity:

PBS's reputation for quality reflects the public's trust in the editorial integrity of PBS content and the process by which it is produced and distributed. To maintain that trust, PBS and its member stations are responsible for shielding the creative and editorial processes from political pressure or improper influence from funders or other sources. PBS also must make every effort to ensure that the content it distributes satisfies those editorial standards designed to assure integrity.

These standards are especially interesting, given that you gave the filmmaker an extra hour, according to the New York Times.

Also, you might be interested to know that this is a quite a topic of interest. My blog post has had more hits than anything in a long while.

Morgan Cain Grim of Floyd County, Virginia on MTR

Illustration compiled from Daniel Shea's "Mountaintop Removal Site" and "West Virginia" in his 2007 series Removing Mountains. While Shea had a grant for that series, he is holding a print sale to fund Plume, his current photographs of Southeast Ohio and "its unusually dense concentration of coal-fired power plants."

*

I wrote on July 10 about the 5' by 3' poster at a Prestonburg, Kentucky golf course, featuring a semi-nude photograph of Ashley Judd. Accompanying the photograph was the slogan,

Ashley makes a living removing her top. Why can't coal miners?

By permission, I'm publishing here the poem "Topless," in which Morgan Cain Grim of Floyd, VA. Morgan examined the comparison of topless women to topless mountains back in 2009. For more information on Grim, see the bottom of this post.

*

TOPLESS (Listen along as Grim reads her poem here)

I read quickly as his car sped by…
curious what token he offered the world,
what statement defined him enough to brand his vehicle.
Squinting, I made out the small words on his bumper sticker:
I LIKE MY MOUNTAINS LIKE
I LIKE MY WOMEN: TOPLESS

The car sped off into the distance, but the slogan did not.
It stayed with me. Lingering. Repeating. Stuck.
Taking me back to a sad day.
A field trip unlike childhood years
with packed lunch and souvenir money.
The day I saw a mountain decapitated.
Invaded. Stripped. Topless.

With a stab to my chest, I dissected the words:
Topless mountain. Topless woman.
But no sensual silhouette would come to mind.
No ripened breasts, exposed, and proud.
Instead, a woman, in mourning like the mountain.
With shameful scars in place of breasts.
Wounds: Exposed. Abashed.
Where cancer had spared her life, but stolen her bosom.
Invaded. Stripped. Topless.

Is this what the driver meant?

The words were branded on my skin like his bumper.
Even though his car was infinitely distant from me…
As distant as roots feel, ripped from their earth.
As distant as babes feel, weaned from the nipple.
As distant as the woman and the mountain
from nature’s intentions.

All I thought of was the woman, the mountain.
All I felt was their shame. A victim’s shame.
Unjustly felt. Unjustly suffered.
I stared into her, I stared unto the mountain.
My eyes trying to apologize.

Her eyes stared back…
telling me how it once was.
How the bare chest she clutched once nursed babes.
How her breasts gave strength to precious little lives.
How she once knew herself through them,
part of her distinct shape, femininity, identity.
How she never knew she loved them…
never knew she would be without them.

The mountain, too, stared back at me…
speaking the wisdom of a timeless elder.
Tales of changes and seasons. Life and death.
Animal, tree, rock, fern.
The springs of life that once flowed abundantly.
The billions of years spent climbing, moving.
So slowly that man could not notice.
The infinite, patient journey since creation.

They stared back at me.
Telling me how it would never again be.
Of what was forever severed.
Irreversible. Irreplaceable. Gone.
Invaded. Stripped. Topless.

I stared. I listened. I cried.
Heavy tears turned to cleansing flood,
baptizing my stained conscience.
And then…I knew.
I LOVE MY MOUNTAINS LIKE
I LOVE MY WOMEN: SHAMELESS
Healthy. Vivacious. Proud.
A new slogan branded to my soul!
A new song for you, woman,
a new ballad for you, mountain:

Woman, you survived.
Live shameless. Live assured
of tomorrow’s cure.
Mountain, live to see
God’s glory restore man’s rape.
For long before draglines,
there lived prophets, proclaiming:
“The Lord’s house shall be established
on the top of the mountains!”

You survived. You breathe.
And with all the life left in you,
You strive. You fight.
You live.
To see a future
with no more
Invaded. Stripped. Topless.

*

About the poet

Grim was a senior majoring in interdisciplinary studies at Virginia Tech when "Topless" won first prize in the Steger Award for undergraduate poetry on April 24, 2009. Here's a picture of her accepting the award, standing along side poet Nikki Giovanni, who administered the award and University President Charles Steger, who funded it.

A honors graduate, Grim, while at Tech, also introduced Appalachian culture to Spain, and eventually brought Spanish gospel back to its African-American roots. While at Tech she also interviewed members of Wakefield, an African-American community in preparation for publishing her 350-page honors thesis: "“Wake Forest: Voices That Tell of a Faith Community.”

Endnote: the poster and permission

So, what about the unnamed person who funded the poster of Judd? Did s/he appropriate a work of art without permission or credit? I've written Caroline Noseworthy, a representative for the photographer, Ruven Afanador, to try and find out. If I hear back, I'll update this post.

Jul 17, 2010, 3:19 PM

Folks are speculating that the semi-nude photograph of Ashley Judd used in the 5' by 3' poster on a golf course in Kentucky is the one taken by Ruven Afanador for the 2006 Marie Claire story by Lucy Kaylin, "Ashley Judd: The Good Fight: As the global ambassador of Youth AIDS, actress Ashley Judd has stepped into the role of a lifetime: a knowledgeable, caring, committed crusader hell-bent on making a
difference."

According to a contemporaneous story, the cover is this one which appears to be similar to this one which accompanied the web version of the article.

I'm wondering if you can tell me if Mr. Afanador still holds rights to the picture, and if not, who does. If he does retain rights, did the anonymous funder of the poster obtained permision from Mr. Afanador to use the image?

An a hat tip for the recording

Thanks go to Mimi Pickering (email) of Appalshop who sent a link to a recording of the poem after WMMT posted an audio file posted July 8, 2010, while we were discussing the brouhaha on the Appalnet email list.

Open Letter to Dylan Lovan about Ashley Judd

Dylan Lovan is an AP journalist who uses the above stock illustration from jupiter images on twitter. He recently got lots of coverage for reporting on the strip miner's revenge on Ashley Judd for speaking out about mountaintop removal, reporting which has, in turn, been getting criticism on various list serves (and I'm sure support on others.)

Dear Mr. Lovan,

I'm glad that the later version of your story included quotes from Ms. Judd.

What disappoints me is that you went to press before getting her side of this--could you not wait for her reply? And if not, could you have at least interviewed others who oppose mountaintop removal and written a better lede?

The original story read,

Appalachian anger at Ashley Judd's outspoken criticism of mountaintop removal coal mining has led to a backlash using a topless photo of the actress.

This was not "Appalachian anger," although the story circulated by the likes of HollywoodNews.com, repeated a narrative of the do-gooder-outsider Judd versus "the locals."

Many whose roots in our region go back generations adamantly oppose mountaintop removal. And Judd was more than just KY-raised "outsider:" I've read that her mom was a KY native who returned home after a divorce from Ashley's dad. If the adage about outsiders, "if a cat had kittens in the woodbox, it wouldn't make them logs" is true, how about the converse?

Nor was Judd's appearance at the National Press Club the first time she's spoken out about mtr. Besides, as others have pointed out, the sexist sign is a sensational non-sequitur. Judd's top is hers to remove and she can put it back on. The mountains (and those who love them in their pre-mtr shape) don't have that option: those who engage in mountaintop removal are poisoning water and laying waste to our landscape and our communities.

I'd urge you to use your journalistic skills to research who funded the sign, so that s/he can not gloat anonymously.

*

BTW, Lovan has been with the wire service since 2000 and his bio says that he's

[r]esponsible for day and evening supervisory shifts, broadcast desk and general assignments

The Kentucky AP publishes Mr. Lovan's email address and I tried to write him via twitter, facebook and email before posting my take on his coverage, so as to get his response. Unfortunately, the server returned an error message:

550 550 #5.1.0 Address rejected dlovan@ap.org

I wrote an AP colleague of his to found out about the bounce, who can't explain it.

Since I haven't heard back and the library is closing and tomorrow I'll be in Beckley, I'm posting this without his response. Which is ironic, given the content, but I don't have anywhere near the AP's circulation, so if I do hear back, the correction will be included before many read this.

Financial Services for the Greater Good?

My friend Betsy in Lexington, KY, gave me a heads up that Jewish Voice for Peace is urging the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association and the College Retirement Equities Fund (TIA-CREF) to stop investing in companies that profit from the Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank including Caterpillar and Motorola. The organization hopes to deliver 1,000 postcards at the CREF annual meeting July 20 and has a petition to sign online.

The fact that TIA-CREF bills itself as " Financial Services for the Greater Good" should have made it somewhat susceptible to moral suasion. To date, though, the reaction from the fund is:

While TIAA-CREF acknowledges participants’ varying views on Israeli and Palestinian policies and the Gaza Strip and West Bank, we are unable to alter our investment policy in accordance with those views. Our responsibility to earn a competitive financial return on the retirement savings entrusted to us by 3.7
million participants obliges us to invest in a diverse line-up of companies
across all sectors of the global economy.

One wonders just how far "earning a competitive financial return" can be taken. As an American Jew, I flinch when I see a parallel between Israel and one of the reasons for its formation (Nazi Germany and anti-semitism), but the fact remains, that just such an argument about financial returns was used to excuse investments in Germany during the Third Reich. That the Israeli government makes itself susceptible to such comparisons is a source of continuing sadness for me.

Israel, of course, says it's not occupying Gaza. Well, tell that to the families of the eight Turks and the American of Turkish slain by the Israeli Defense Force May 31 in international waters. They were in the lead boat of the Freedom Flotilla. According to the AP, many aboard the flotilla refute Israel's statements that they were armed and dangerous. (The Guardian has a rundown of some the 600 people who took part in the attempt to breach Israel's Gaza blockade and deliver humanitarian aid.)

Obama has warned the Turkish Prime Minister, at least according to London's Al Hayat, newspaper of record for the Arab diaspora (as reported in the Israeli media including YNET and Ha'aretz) that

such an inquiry commission may lead to accusations against several passengers on the Marmara ship, or members of the IHH organization and Turkey must know that its request could turn into a double-edged sword.

To which I wish Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdogan that had replied,

Mr. President, if we're willing to be subject to such a sword, that should tell you something...

Interestingly, not all the hawks in Israel approve what happened. Ami Ayalon, former Chief of Shin Bet, Israel's secret service, and commander-in-chief of the Navy Ami Ayalon supports a two-state solution (without the right of return) but has criticized the Israeli peace movement. He told Rebecca Anna Stoil for a 07/02/2010 Jerusalem Post story that

Two days before the navy confronted the flotilla... an interviewer found him
participating in a conference at Tel Aviv University, and asked him what he
thought should be done to stop the flotilla. “I asked the interviewer why we
needed to stop it, and he was horrified...We must differentiate between the need
to stop entry of heavy weaponry into Gaza, which is a clear interest that nobody
questions, and between a situation in which we stand looking at six boats about
to come, on board which intelligence knows there is no heavy weaponry – I’m not
talking about a few handguns. Instead, this is a struggle for public relations,
and so I think from the beginning that the system should work completely
differently, involving the international community and only blocking weapons. So
I say to him, ‘Why do you think that the only option is to stop it? Let’s
imagine a situation in which we take a few civilian boats, go out, meet them at
sea, during daylight and with huge pictures of Gilad Schalit on our ships and we
sail together to Gaza. They bring humanitarian supplies and we demand that
Ismail Haniyeh allows us to see Gilad Schalit.’”

According to Stoil, Ayalon would like to see the international community – and particularly “pragmatic” states in the Arab world– take part in inspecting goods going into Gaza.

It is not that I believe that they have become Zionists, but rather that they too do not have an interest in seeing the increase in power of Hamas. Not [Mahmoud] Abbas, not the Egyptian president, not the king of Jordan. It is a confluence of pragmatic interests. And then, with international bodies in charge
of checking ships and goods, even if we get to violent events – say a boat that
wishes to break the blockade – it is them and not us. Thus, I argue that we must
to do as much as possible to integrate the international community.

For such a process to work, you need a lot of time. You need to stop all violent terror activities, and second, you need to stop all settlement activities, because in Palestinian eyes, settlement activity is almost terror. No Israeli government can completely stop the settlements and no Palestinian actors can completely stop terror. And thus the daily friction between Palestinians and settlers does not stop, but leads to events that in the end are what directs the process.

Because of this, he says, peace will require a mediator, someone who will say, according to him.

Gentlemen, you don’t see it – the Israelis say that they agree but the Palestinians don’t want it, and the Palestinians say that they agree but the Israelis don’t want it – but in fact, I am looking from another planet and I know that you both want it.

Jack Ferguson's Swiss Chard--yum

I went to the Roanoke City Farmer's Market a few weeks back and my favorite farmer, Jack Ferguson (space 46), who recently celebrated his 89th birthday, had great looking chard in three varieties--red, white, and rainbow (which includes yellow and pink, as pictured above from Brit site JungleSeeds.com).

I steamed it up the red plain for book group, but I wish I had taken the time to find and adapt this recipe from Epicurious.com for chard drizzled with balsamic syrup.  The original recipe included lamb chops, but I'd like it w. garbonzos, as below. Hopefully, there will be another opportunity to get Jack's kale.

For balsamic syrup
3/4 cup balsamic vinegar
1/4 teaspoon minced fresh rosemary
1/8 teaspoon black peppercorns

For chard
1 pound Swiss chard
1/4 cup chopped red onion
1 teaspoon finely chopped garlic
1 tablespoon olive oil
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon black pepper
1 tablespoon water

Make syrup:
Simmer syrup ingredients in a 1- to 1 1/2-quart stainless steel pan over moderate heat until just syrupy and reduced to about 1/4 cup, about 8 minutes. Pour through a sieve into a small bowl, discarding rosemary and peppercorns.

Sauté chard:
Cut stems and center ribs from chard, discarding any tough portions, then cut stems and ribs crosswise into 1/4-inch-thick slices. Stack chard leaves and roll into cylinders. Cut cylinders crosswise to make 1-inch-wide strips.

Cook onion and garlic in oil in a cast iron skillet over moderate heat, stirring occasionally, until onion begins to soften, about 4 minutes. Add chard stems and ribs, salt, and pepper and cook, stirring occasionally, until stems are just tender, about 6 minutes. Add 2 cups of already cooked garzbanzo beans.

Meanwhile steam leaves until tender, about 5 minutes and then add to skillet and toss. Remove to platter and serve mixture drizzled with balsamic syrup.

Senator Byrd did not give coal a free ride at the end of his life

May 13, 2010 photo by WaPo photographer Linda Davidson


*

While the Associated Press obituary for the late Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) gives him credit for shedding his alliance with the KKK, it goes on to say,

His views gradually moderated, particularly on economic issues, but he always sided with his state's coal interests in confrontations with
environmentalists.

Not quite. At the end of his life, Senator Byrd was still very much pro-coal, but he had also decried the greed of some in the coal mining industry--specifically Massey. For instance, in October 2009, he had this to say about Massey for refusing to fund a new school for Marsh Fork Elementary, which sat across the road from an impoundment. And this was months before Massey's Montcoal, WV explosion at Upper Big Branch Mine.

Such arrogance suggests a blatant disregard for the impact of their mining practices on our communities, residents and particularly our children. These are children’s lives we are talking about....This is about companies that blatantly disregard human life and safety because of greed. That is never acceptable. At a time when coal is under such close scrutiny, coal companies operating in West Virginia should be working together to put their best foot forward. For the sake of the entire coal industry, Massey Energy should strive to be a better and more responsible corporate citizen. And for the sake of the kids, they should address these serious environmental concerns at Marsh Fork Elementary immediately.
[See Ken Ward Jr. ,"Byrd blasts Massey ‘arrogance’ at Marsh Fork," October 7, 2009.]

With regard to the Upper Big Branch explosion, Senator Byrd said,

The old chestnut that “coal is West Virginia’s greatest natural resource” deserves revision. I believe that our people are West Virginia’s most valuable resource. We must demand to be treated as such. [See Ken Ward Jr, "New commentary from Sen. Robert C. Byrd: Coal industry must respect miners, the land and the people who live in the West Virginia coalfields," May 5, 2010 ]

Also from that commentary, as noted by JW Randolph, at Appalachian Voices.

The industry of coal must also respect the land that yields the coal, as well as the people who live on the land. If the process of mining destroys nearby wells and foundations, if blasting and digging and relocating streams unearths harmful elements and releases them into the environment causing illness and death, that process should be halted and the resulting hazards to the community abated.

JW also reminds us of two other pieces from Ken about Byrd and MTR:

"Sen. Robert C. Byrd: Majestic mountains are ‘God’s gift to West Virginia,’" March 5, 2010.

"Sen. Byrd: “Coal Must Embrace the Future” December 3, 2009.

In the latter, Senator Byrd said,

In recent years, West Virginia has seen record high coal production and record low coal employment ... The increased use of mountaintop removal mining means that fewer miners are needed to meet company production goals.

It is also a reality that the practice of mountaintop removal mining has a diminishing constituency in Washington. It is not a widespread method of mining, with its use confined to only three states. Most members of Congress,like most Americans, oppose the practice, and we may not yet fully understand the effects of mountaintop removal mining on the health of our citizens. West Virginians may demonstrate anger toward the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over mountaintop removal mining, but we risk the very probable consequence of shouting ourselves out of any productive dialogue with EPA and our adversaries in the Congress.

"Some have even suggested that coal state representatives in Washington should block any advancement of national health care reform legislation until the coal industry’s demands are met by the EPA. I believe that the notion of holding the health care of over 300 million Americans hostage in exchange for a handful of coal permits is beyond foolish; it is morally indefensible. It is a non-starter, and puts the entire state of West Virginia and the coal industry in a terrible light.

To be part of any solution, one must first acknowledge a problem. To deny the mounting science of climate change is to stick our heads in the sand and say "deal me out." West Virginia would be much smarter to stay at the table."

National Group Calls on Boucher to Act on Giles Fly Ash Dump

2007 photograph at Hillbilly Savants October 17 blog post, "Fly Ash in Giles County, Virginia"

*

Because of Virginia's beneficial use clause for coal combustion waste, we've got a toxic coal ash dump in the flood plain of the New River without so much as a public hearing. Lead, arsenic, mercury and other metals which threaten human health can leach from coal ash when it is exposed to moisture.

The National Committee for the New River (NCNR) in West Jefferson, NC is working with Giles Countians to against the dump. NCNR started out in 1974 to organize against construction of APCO pumped storage dams on the New River and stopped them through a sucessful national campaign to get a portion of the New River designated as a National Wild and Scenic River in 1976. The group has worked since then to protect the New.

George Santucci, NCNR Executive Director calls for action on June 21

George writes,

Many of you have been following the fly ash travesty in Giles County, Virginia. With this Action Alert, we are asking you today to take action on behalf of the New River!

For 2.5 years NCNR has been working with the Concerned Citizens of Giles County (CCGC) who have been working tirelessly trying to figure out how a 7.5 acre 250,000 cubic yard Coal Combustion Waste dumpsite could be placed in the flood plain of the New River.

Through dogged research, and numerous FOIAs (Freedom of Information Act), much of the “process” has now been uncovered. On April 3rd 2006, before any information about the project was public knowledge, an AEP representative requested assurances from Giles County, via an email, that their project (to dump fly ash in an unlined pit on the banks of the New River) would be allowed to move forward if the property was acquired.

We can only assume that the assurances were given -- because the land was acquired and the project began! At the time the land was acquired, no permits were applied for or granted -- the project had not been reviewed by state or federal agencies.

Additionally, we suspect that different information was subsequently provided on the state and federal permit applications -- these agencies did not have the complete picture when approving permits.

The lack of information effectively eliminated public participation in the approval process. Citizens should have the right to comment when a dumpsite containing toxic heavy metals is placed in their community!

How can you help? We're asking you to request Congressman Rick Boucher (the dump is in his Congressional District) to continue to seek the answers to these questions. He sought a congressional FOIA in the fall of 2009, but we still have not received answers to our questions. We're appealing to VA DCR, FEMA, and EPA regarding these issues but without these answers our case is incomplete.

George has been up to visit Giles

Santucci has met with the Concerned Citizens and even offered to buy the land on the New River for $100,000 to prevent leasing to AEP fly for a flyash dump by Howard Spencer and his so-called Partnership for Excellence. The partnership describes its project like this:

The Giles Cumberland Park Project is a land improvement project which will create a 7-acre commercial building site along Rt. 460 in Narrows, Va. The development site will be created above the flood plain, using a combination of compacted recycled coal ash and soil.

The property was purchased by the Giles Partnership for Excellence, a non-profit economic development organization, for $100,000 in 2006. The land value when developed and brought to grade with Rt. 460 is expected to appreciate substantially. When sold, net proceeds from the land development will be rolled back into the community, through the schools, and/or other applications to help create much needed jobs.

George tells me Howard Spencer, who also sits on the Giles County Board of Supervisors, turned down the offer, saying too much had been invested. As George says,

The New River needs answers.

George asks that we contact Boucher

At the end of this entry you'll find a sample letter to Boucher George prepared. You can send yours by email via Boucher's website if you live in the 9th district. Or sent to or by regular mail, if not. Or you can call one of the offices. Be sure to you’re your name and supply contact information for a response when you take call or send a letter.

Boucher's Offices

Abingdon Office | 188 East Main Street | Abingdon, Virginia 24210 | 276-628-1145

Pulaski Office | 106 North Washington | Pulaski, Virginia 24301 | 540-980-4310

Big Stone Gap Office | 1 Cloverleaf Square | Suite C-1 | Big Stone Gap, Virginia 24219 | 276-523-5450

Washington D.C. Office | 2187 Rayburn House Office Building | Washington, D.C. 20515 | 202-225-3861 | 202-225-0442(fax)

Sample letter

The Honorable Richard Boucher
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representative Boucher:

It is critical for the people of Giles County, and everyone who values the New River, to receive answers to our questions regarding the fly ash dump on the river in Giles County. We know that you are aware of the project and have sought answers via a congressional FOIA, but to date we have no answers to our concerns about the public comment and permitting processes of this project. As a (tax payer/Giles or VA Citizen/lover of the New River), I request that you find out this information. Please let me know when we can expect a response.

Paul Harding: Tinkers

Photo of Paul Harding by Anthony Pidgeon from the Boston Globe article "Yoknapatawpha, Mass. " by Jan Gardner.


Tomorrow night our book group will be discussing this year's Pulitizer Prize winner in fiction, Tinkers, by Paul Harding. I highly recommend it. BTW, here's some interesting trivia on the book.

*It's the first novel from a small press to win the Pulitzer since A Confederacy of Dunces did from Louisiana State University Press in 1981. (and LSU Press had been around for a lot longer Bellevue Literary Press--a five-year old publisher affiliated to New York University's school of medicine. LSU had published O'Toole's book 11 years after his suicide at the behest of Walker Percy.)

* When Harding won, no one called to tell him. He found out by logging onto the Pulitzer site to see who had won according to Geoff Edgers (email) of the Boston Globe.

*the NYT failed to review it, unlike The Los Angeles Times, The New Yorker and The Boston Globe. The book had sold 7,000 copies before the Pulitzer announcement.

*According to The Pulitizer Prize First Edition Guide website, reports are that the publisher originally intended to publisher the book only in softcover, but then decided to publish both the softcover and hardcover simultaneously.

*Michele Filgate (email), the events manager at RiverRun Bookstore in Portsmouth, N.H first told Rebecca Pepper Sinkler, chairwoman of this year’s Pulitzer fiction jury about Tinkers at book-reviewing workshop Ms. Sinkler led in Manchester, N.H. in April 2009 at Writers' Day run by NH Writers' Project. Sinkler retired editor of the NYT Book Review in 1994.

*Filgate has a great interview with Harding at BookSlut and a review at Quarterly conversation.

* Random House signed Harding to a two-book deal in 2009 (before he won the Pulitzer)

* A few days after Harding received the prize, the Guggenheim Foundation announced he had received one of its prestigious fellowships.

*Harding took six years to earn his undergraduate English degree from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

*After college he was a drummer for a rock band Cold Water Flat which got its start at Amherst. The members recorded two albums and toured Europe and then broke up due to "creative differences."

*Upon the band's break-up, Harding studied with Marilynne Robinson (Gilead) in a summer writing course at Skidmore College. He used an earlier version of Tinkers in his successful application to attend the University of Iowa MFA program in creative writing program.

*The story’s genesis came from Harding’s maternal grandfather's whose epileptic father abandoned the family when the grandfather was twelve after he learned that his wife planned to send him to an asylum. Harding apprenticed with his grandfather in clock repair. Harding told Filgate,

The novel sort of rose out the half-dozen, handful linchpin premises that are based in fact. And they're basically family stories. But my grandparents, I could never get them to talk about them. They were both form northern Maine. Very, very impoverished. A traumatic, difficult life there. His experience was "I made it out of the woods and what happened in the woods, stayed in the woods."

So I just took those one or two sentence premises and tried to imagine the sentence before and the sentence after until the fictional material hit its own critical mass, its own momentum, and took over. I imagined it all and just kept writing until they started to overlap together.

*Harding taught expository writing to undergraduates at Harvard (but the university cut back on his classes and he went on unemployment.) He had also taught creative writing to students at night school.

* Although Harding wrote the novel on a laptop, when it came time for the final editing, he printed it up and laid it out on the living-room floor and then cut, stapled and taped the document into its final form, according to Motoko Rich of the NYT.

Industry Pressures EPA on Benefits of Coal Ash Regs?

This photograph by J. Miles Carey of the Knoxville News Sentinel accompanied a NYT story by Shaila Dewan, "Coal Ash Spill Revives Issue of Its Hazards." In the wake of the spill, which I wrote about December 25, 2008, the EPA promised to look at regulating coal ash as a hazadous waste.

Now we get news of that EPA will labor under skewed cost benefit calcs imposed by the Office of Management and Budget. The question remains whether public opinion can force the OMB to back off or whether industy pressure will prevail.

Here's what Dawn Reeves says in "EPA Cuts Coal Ash Rule's Benefits To Measure Industry 'Liability Fears'"in the the June 4 edition of Inside EPA (hat tip to Lisa Evans at Earthjustice for the heads up--a sub goes for $320 a year.)

At the insistence of the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB),
EPA was forced to slash by more than $300 billion its lower-end estimates of
the regulatory benefits from its recent proposal to regulate coal ash as a
hazardous waste due to industry's "fear of liability," the first time the
agency has quantified such fears in a cost-benefit assessment, sources say.

The diminished benefits estimate may make it more difficult for EPA to
justify strict regulation of coal combustion residues (CCRs) as agency
regulations are generally required to demonstrate greater benefits than
costs, unless barred from doing so by Congress.

A May 7 article in the same publication had reported the regulatory benefits of a rule
to regulate coal combustion waste as hazardous would amount to a savings of $87 billion to $102 billion over 50 years The industry is arguing that "beneficial reuse" will falter if coal ash is classified as hazardous

due to fear of liability and stigma, resulting in more waste being shipped to a hazardous landfill -- ...[and thus change] the low-end range from a positive $87 billion to a negative $230 billion.

As a result the EPA "fixed" a table in the May 4 draft rule's preamble., but also noted that that the "correct" range was

identified elsewhere in the original proposal's release and states that its inclusion was "at the urging of OMB as a condition to conclude review" -- an explicit reference that EPA was forced to change its initial calculations that the rule would have no negative impact on beneficial reuse after OMB held up the normal 90-day pre-publication review for six months.

OMB had criticized EPA in a comment on the proposed rule for for providing

no evidence for assertions that rulemaking under subtitle C will not have an impact on beneficial reuse

Reeves interviewed a former senior OMB official, who said it

"seems like a typical EPA and OMB dispute-resolution mechanism" with the only "unusual feature" the "transparency about the OMB condition." The source adds that normally EPA will adopt OMB's position "because the executive branch, representing the president, can have only one official position for purposes of judicial and congressional review." However, there is a process for agencies to seek to overturn OMB's position, known as a "presidential reversal," but EPA did not appear to seek such an option in this case.

"By the time this final rule is issued, my prediction is that OMB and EPA will have resolved their differences and there will be only one official view reported for purposes of judicial review. This is required by the unitary concept of the executive branch. The president's view prevails," the source says. And because Obama is unlikely to become personally involved in the issue, the source predicts "a persistent OMB is likely to prevail, though the public comment process could persuade EPA and/or OMB to modify their positions."

According to Reeves,

The change could mark the first time EPA or other agencies have been required to quantify the "fear of liability," sources following the issue say.

She writes that one of sources, an environmentalist, warns that

"It makes the ranges look so crazy, no one would want to take a chance," and that could result in forcing EPA to "go with the more rational proposal."

The same source calls the new range

"about as reliable as melted Jello" because the low end assumes that most coal-fired power plant managers would pay high disposal costs to send the waste to a subtitle C landfill, rather than sell it to be mixed with cement, because the operators will be "so terrified of liability down the line."

The source argues that fear of liability should not be included because, as the EPA notes through out its proposal, tightening of waste rules has always increased recyling.

Another environmentalist told Reeves that that EPA's regulatory text shows

"that the stigma fear has never panned out in the past" and that EPA should require industry opponents to prove their point rather than be forced to quantify it. "The idea that no one is ever going to recycle coal ash for the next 50 years is so beyond the realm of possibility it's laughable," the source says.

Meanwhile her industry source counters that EPA's initial estimates of zero impact on beneficial reuse were

"not realistic," and notes the agency "was forced to go back and recalculate the real impact on the reuse industry." The source adds it is unclear whether the costs could be as high as negative $230 billion but notes that some impacts are "real."

Mountain Justice, Rising Tide, UMWA Converge on Massey

Photo by ALEXA WELCH EDLUND, Richmond Times Dispatch.

EmmaKate Martin and Benjamin Bryant, two Climate Ground Zero activists languish in the Boone County jail on $100,000 bail each for a protest blocking the driveway yesterday at Massey's regional headquarters, union members. CGZ is asking that folks call Magistrate Snodgrass in Boone County at 304-369-7360 to demand that the bails be reduced to a reasonable amounts on the grounds that the 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Meanwhile activists converged on the Jefferson Hotel in Richmond, Virginia this morning, site of Massey Energy's annual meeting, after a candlelight vigil in front of Massey Energy headquarters, also in Richmond, for the 52 coal miners killed in Massey Energy accidents in the last 10 years--29 in the Montcoal, WV explosion April 5, 2010.

The demand: safe and humane working conditions for miners and criminal accountability for CEO Don Blankenship. While the stockholders didn't exact punishment on Blankenship and the Board, Kris Maher and Joann S. Lublin in "Three Massey Directors Eke Out Reelection" in the 5/18/10 WSJ reported,

Three Massey Energy Co. directors won reelection at the company's annual shareholder meeting, after they had been under fire from public pension funds and other investors who alleged that Massey's safety performance contributed to the April explosion at the company's W.Va. mine where 29 workers were killed. But union group CtW Investment Group said that the three directors won reelection by narrow margins, casting "a cloud" over the board going forward. CtW is an arm of labor federation Change to Win. The federation represents unions with six million members whose pension funds own less than 1% of Massey shares. Michael Garland, a representative of CtW, cited preliminary results from a proxy voting agent and said Massey President Baxter Philips won reelection with 49.6% of votes withheld by shareholders, while outside directors Dan Moore and Richard Gabrys won reelection with 49.8% and 48.5% of votes withheld, respectively.

Mountain Justice with support from coalfield community organizations Coal River Mountain Watch and the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, featured three protesters wearing orange prison jumpsuits with Blankenship's name emblazoned on the back. Others held signs that read "Safe Jobs, Safe Air, Safe Water" and "People and Communities before Profit." Laura von Dohlen of Richmond said in a MJ statement,

Massey is polluting the land and water with toxins in addition to stripping the land with its much-contested practice of mountaintop removal coal mining. Massey, in all areas of its 'business,' has no concern for the people and land of Appalachia ....Blankenship's hazardous views and actions surrounding safety in his mines have contributed to the death of the miners in the Upper Big Branch Disaster, as well as past mining disasters. Blankenship is running a criminal enterprise and must be held accountable for negligence.

The United Mineworkers of America members and family held signs such as, "Don Belongs in Jail" and cheered every time a passing vehicle honked its horn in support or the union SUV towing a trailer with the sign, "Massey Corporate Responsibility: 52 Dead in 10 Years" circled around the block.

Inside the hotel, Rising Tide had unfurled a 10 x 10 banner from the mezzanine above the ballroom where the stockholders were converging for their annual meeting: “Massey – Stop Putting Profits Over People!” They read on open letter, similar to the one tendered at Massey's regional headquarters in Boone County, WV. Kate Finnegan of New York and Oscar Ramiriz were arrested as a result. By contrast with the treatment of protesters in WV, the two were able to call from jail to say that they expected to be released later this afternoon on their own reconnaissance and charged with a misdemeanor trespass charge.

The FCC and Internet Broadband

Verizon and other broadband providers have bankrolled astroturf campaigns in which pr firms and think tanks organize fake grass roots support for the corporate agenda against regulation, reminding me of this illustration from Zaius Nation, which actually refers to Fox News coverage of lobbyist-run think tanks funding the Tea Party Movement.


*
Do we really want broadband providers to slow down, block or censor our email, news and financial transactions at will? In an April 6 ruling, 1994 Clinton appointee David S. Tatel changed the landscape for net neutrality, the idea that service providers shouldn't play favorites with regard to what content gets to whom when.

Historically, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had treated internet service providers as content managers, rather than communications carriers. As such, the FCC had only "ancillary" powers, more limited its regulation of telephone companies and radio and television broadcasters.

Comcast's peer-to-peer traffic management practices optimized profits, but degraded service (explained here). When the FCC stepped in to enforce the public interest, the company sued. Tatel decided in in Comcast v. FCC that the FCC had failed to tie its claimed authority to any statutory delegation by Congress.

The FCC announces it plans to address Tatel's ruling

Yesterday, the FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski outlined his plan to regain authority by partially reclassifying internet service providers as carriers, contrary to speculation that the FCC would let broadband go unregulated. The WaPo's Cecilia Kang reported on the plan, as did NYT's Edward Wyatt, WSJ's Amy Schatz, Gigaom's Stacey Higgenbotham and Endagadget's Nilay Patel.

Kang writes that sources requesting anonymity advised her that Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) had provided

political support for the agency to shift Internet lines to a more regulatory framework.

Although she doesn't mention it, the letter is public, indicating the both chairmen of committees overseeing the FCC that they could support defining broadband as a telecommunications

provided that doing so entails a light regulatory touch, with appropriate use of forbearance authority [the technical term for the FCC accepting companies' petitions to avoid some forms of regulation if its judges there is sufficient competition.]

In another piece, Kang informs us of the effects of MoveOn and Free Press to get Genachowski to take action.

A source at the FCC said the agency has been bombarded with calls. Free Press, a media reform public interest group, called for its 500,000 members to call and e-mail Genachowski to tell him to “protect the Internet” by reclassifying broadband. Some 200,000 of its supporters signed an online petition on the topic. Twitter was flooded with tweets to @fcc and @whitehouse calling for reclassification.

Interestingly, she adds,

The grass-roots efforts come amid a stark quiet from companies that have been supportive of net neutrality rules. Companies on both sides of the debate have told me they are waiting for a final decision by the agency before commenting publicly.

What the FCC says about the ruling

In his statement, Genachowski seems to me either to be putting on a brave face or or spinning, claiming Tatel's decision doesn't

challenge the longstanding consensus about the FCC’s important...role in protecting consumers, promoting competition, and ensuring that all Americans can benefit from broadband communications. Nor does it challenge the commonsense policies we have been pursuing.

The chairman argues that the opinion merely casts doubt

on the particular legal theory the Commission used for the past few years to justify its backstop role with respect to broadband Internet communications

That may be optimistic, as indicated by the protests from broadband providers compiled and rebutted by public interest group Free Press and by the prediction of more law suits to come by CNET's Maguerite Reardon.

What the FCC proposes

Genachowski says he will neither use “ancillary” authority to

anchor actions like reforming universal service and preserving an open Internet

nor treat broadband entirely

as a “telecommunications service,” restoring the FCC’s direct authority over broadband communications networks but also imposing on providers of broadband access services dozens of new regulatory requirements.

Instead he calls for the Commission to follow the approach outlined by FCC Counsel Austin Schlick to

• Recognize the transmission component of broadband access service—and only this component—as a telecommunications service;
• Apply only a handful of provisions...[which] were widely believed to be within the Commission’s purview for broadband [prior to the Comcast decision]; and
  
• Put in place up-front...boundaries to guard against regulatory overreach.

Is this enough to protect net neutrality?

While NOI fellow Jason Rosenbaum applauds the plan as the "only logical way forward to protect internet neutrality, " Rob Frieden (webpage, email), Chair and Professor of Telecommunications and Law at Penn State calls on the FCC to go further:

The FCC has to confront the messy reality that when ventures offer...services that combine conduit and content and when these ventures vertically and horizontally integrate throughout many market segments, the Commission cannot rely on absolute either/or service dichotomies...

It’s time to recognize that layered and convergent services defy compartmentalization into convenient, single regulatory classifications and regimes.

I'm with Professor Friendan on this. What I'm not sure of is whether a more complex classification requires Congressional action, something which may prove difficult, as we've seen in the case of the deracinated health insurance "reform."

Expect a broadband astroturf campaign

Here's a prediction: watch for "citizen" astroturf to oppose the Federal Communications Commission to regulate broadband, telling us that the Commission will infringe on the public opportunities to use the internet. As Phillip Dampier, of Stop the Cap, pointed out April 8,

Verizon has a track record of signing up non-profit groups to support its telecommunications causes. In addition to providing corporate executives for board positions of various community service groups, Verizon financially supports a wide range of not for profit groups, many of which later turn up writing letters of support in favor of Verizon’s policy positions.

Reporting on previous telecom astroturf campaigns

Dampier's contention is supported by Chang's recent reporting on ATT and Verizon funding of think tanks such as the Technology Policy Institute.

This is nothing new. For instance, Sourcewatch indicates that telecoms have long employed Issue Dynamics, Inc. (IDI),

a Washington-based consulting firm that organizes PR campaigns... [utilizing ] NGOs ...[such as] the Gray Panthers and the New York Public Interest Research Group....[S]ome consumer activists...say IDI often does not disclose whom it is working for and argue that IDI's work amounts to astroturf PR.

Fred Goldstein (email), who consults with telecommunication start-ups, wrote in 2004 of how many a charity is

willing to sell its name...especially if it's in a subject area that's outside of its area of interest. So IDI can leaven its home-grown astroturf like TRAC with the signatures of some third parties....

The press, of course, rarely gets it. They love to hear from charities. They eat this up, frequently quoting TRAC and other astroturf as if they were real consumer organizations. Competitors should ...point out who is behind these supposedly pro-consumer, but really pro-monopoly, positions.

And back in 2005, Dan Gilmor alerted us to Issue Dynamics "blogger relations" (via archive.org--the page is not available after 2008) as well as a campaign at the end of an in eWEEK article on Philly's municipal broadband by Wayne Rash(email), who had learned learned in the course of researching the story that

NMRC [New Millennium Research Council] is actually owned and sponsored by Washington lobbying firm Issue Dynamics Inc., whose clients include most of the major telecommunications companies in the United States. Those companies have been active in opposing municipal wireless and broadband efforts. The company claimed that its reports were nevertheless completely independent.

The response from supposedly independent entities has already begun

For instance Kang reports that Bruce Mehlman, co-chairman of the Internet Innovation Alliance weighed in, saying according to Chang:

If the goal is maximizing broadband deployment and adoption . . . new regulations such as these will not help...This sounds more like a political solution likely to imperil investment than a policy initiative that tackles actual challenges in the marketplace.

The high-minded sounding name and mission mask its purpose to mold public opinion in the direction of its corporate sponsors. While the alliance claims to be

a broad-based coalition of business and non-profit organizations that aim to ensure every American, regardless of race, income or geography, has access to the critical tool that is broadband Internet

a look at the non-profit members yields the usual C-PAC suspects such as Americans for Tax Reform. The only surprise is the National Education Association, which has received money from the BellSouth Foundation. Kind of reminds you of the Gray Panthers. I'm skeptical about the Alliance's promotion of

public policies that support equal opportunity for universal broadband availability and adoption so that everyone, everywhere can seize the benefits of the Internet - from education to health care, employment to community building, civic engagement and beyond.

It's time for the rest of us to weigh in

While the FCC hasn't announced its public comment process yet, you will be able to find it here and and press secretary Jen Howard (email) has promised me she'll keep me informed of the timetable.

It's hard to make time to weigh in, but it's necessary. We can't just leave this to the broadband operators, such as AT&T, Comcast and Verizon. They hardly qualify as disinterested purveyors of the public good: their internet access business represent a major source of revenue which they want to optimize. As such, I expect they will continue to lobby, as documented by Public Eye at the links I've provided in this paragraph and to fund pr firms and think tanks in their efforts to influence policy.

As New Yorker journalist A. J. Leibling (1904-1963) observed

Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.

The internet provides us all with the potential to own a press, but the broadbands, if unregulated, have the capacity, in chasing their profits, to shut down not only their competitors but any of us little guys who might question unbridled corporate power.