Virginia Heroes

The Washington Post has a good article about the Virginia Tech professor who documented both the lead content of Flint, Michigan's water and the complete failure of public officials at all levels who discounted and covered up the problem.    Turns out Flint is not his first run-in with lead pipes and devious public officials. 

Marc Edwards...more than a decade earlier proved, along with an investigation by The Washington Post, that corrosion in the nation’s capital’s pipes had caused lead to seep into the water supply and pass through kitchen faucets and shower heads. After helping to expose that water crisis in 2004, he spent six years challenging the Centers for Disease Control to admit they weren’t being honest about the extent of the damage the lead had on children.  He burned through thousands of dollars of his own money, as well as $500,000 from a MacArthur Foundation genius grant he won in 2008, to take on the federal government. He was harassed, lampooned, and threatened. He lost friends.  Then, in 2010, he was vindicated when it was proven that the CDC had lied to the public in a misleading report, which falsely claimed lead levels in the water had not posed a health risk to D.C. residents.

Unlike state, local and federal officials, Dr. Edwards has earned the trust of Flint's citizens by his dogged pursuit of the truth behind one of the most grievous governmental failures in US history.

This event, and the actions of a dedicated public official reminds me of another public official who went out of his way to identify a similar environmental crime.  In 1975 Virginia state epidemiologist Robert Jackson documented Kepone poisoning of  workers at Life Sciences Products Company in Hopewell, Virginia after being alerted by a local doctor who had treated worker and suspected chemical poisoning.  Upon seeing the plant, which was housed in an old gas station, Jackson arranged to meet with workers and take blood samples which returned results high enough to trigger an immediate state shut-down of the plant.

Further investigation found that, in addition to poisoning workers, the plant had also poisoned the lower James River, leading to a ban on commercial fishing on the river that lasted until 1988.  In the end Allied Chemical, which had contracted with two employees to create Life Sciences to produce Kepone, was found to have also discharged Kepone to the river and was fined $13.2 million for violating federal pollution laws .  Life Sciences was also fined $4 million but was already defunct and never paid.  The two owners were fined $25,000 each.

The difference between Flint and Hopewell was that in the latter event, government worked to identify  and take immediate action.  Not so in Flint.  What did work in both cases was that one individual acted on results to force action.  Hopewell was more fortunate than Flint in that action was immediate but if it weren't for the tireless efforts of Dr. Edwards, the official stone wall of evasion in Flint would not have been breached.

What did not work in Virginia was public oversight of hazardous materials and their routine discharge into the state's waters.  Virginia's State Water Control Board (SWCB) largely ignored Allied Chemical's discharges until the Dr. Jackson blew the whistle on the company after egregiously poor handling of a toxic substance by Allied's supposedly independent subcontractor.  The SWCB in that era was less likely to challenge one of the state's largest industries.  I worked on a 1976 program evaluation of water resource management in Virginia that found " widespread noncompliance among major municipal and industrial [discharge] permit holders in Virginia." 

America may have come a long way in dealing with environmental hazards since the 1970's.  Still the system requires dedicated public officials to speak out forcefully. 

Kudos to Doctors Edward and Jackson.  American could use many more of you.

We Never Do Learn

Today's BBC front page juxtaposes the commemoration of the American-British firebombing raid on Dresden in 1945 and news of continued fighting in Ukraine even after world leaders announced a truce.  A visitor to Dresden says it all:

"I can't believe that we learn nothing from all this. Ukraine, the Balkans. The world learns nothing."

Does Believing in Conservation Make Me a Conservative?

Third world garbage recyclers—the people who scavenge landfills for usable materials, testified against burning garbage to generate power at U.N. climate conference in Cancun. They rightly note that diverting the trash to incinerators will deprive them of their living and add tons of carbon into the atmosphere and argue for continuing this tradition and further supporting it as one solution to controlling greenhouse gasses. The waste-to-power scheme is the result of trading pollution credits under international law. Burning waste to generate power pollutes less than fossil fuel and earns credits that are used to offset emissions from coal plants that cannot meet standards. It’s a very orderly and rational market-based method for reducing overall emissions, don’t you see?

Unless, of course you rely on the garbage for your living or live downwind of either the waste incinerator or the coal plant. What has been created is a system that leaves populations still vulnerable to pollution, adds more carbon to the atmosphere, destroys a longstanding tradition of recycling and deprives some of the world’s poorest of their livelihoods. If this is the best solution to a critical environmental issue that we can come up with, we are doomed. Rightfully so, I will add.

We have a chance to forestall that doom—maybe—if we make wise choices now. One wise choice would be to designate the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge as a national monument, a decision that President Obama could make on his own authority. It would be an historic decision. An ANWR National Monument would protect a vast ecosystem, one of the last remaining on this continent, as part of America’s natural heritage. It would send a clear message that that the fossil fuel era is over, that our economy will look elsewhere for its energy. It would even give the Republicans some of the certainty they demand of public policy these days.

Not all Alaskans are enthused by the prospect.

That sounds nice, but it's a bad idea, said Wayne Stevens, president and CEO of the Alaska State Chamber of Commerce. He said there is a "huge disconnect" in this country between products people want and the resource development required to provide those products.

"We are shutting this country down," he said

[…]

Kara Moriarty, deputy director of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, which speaks for the industry, said it is appalling that there is a push to lock up an area so rich in oil when fossil fuels will be needed to meet the nation's energy needs for decades to come.

On top of that, Alaskans overwhelmingly want ANWR opened to drilling, she said.

"I think it is another stunt to stop development in an area that is not even in their own back yards," Moriarty said. "It is our back yard and I find it offensive as an Alaskan."

As an American I find it offensive that some Alaskans claim the sole right to direct policy over national lands and resources within their borders. It’s even more offensive when they are shills for vested interests. I remind these sovereign Alaskans that “their back yard”, like the rest of the state, was purchased by the United States Government. The subsequent development and political organization of that land notwithstanding, much of Alaska remains federal land and is the nation’s back yard, not just Alaska’s. ANWR belongs to us all.

Silly Seasons Greetings

Olympia is ground zero for the latest battle in the Holiday Wars. This year’s holiday display at the Washington State Capitol includes a decorated tree in the Rotunda Lobby and elsewhere a nativity scene and a sign noting the Winter Solstice and superstition of all religion and gods. The latter was placed at the request of the Freedom From Religion foundation. It’s come to be known as the Atheist sign. The sign’s mere presence so enraged Fox News mountebank Bill O’Rielly that spent ten minutes directing his offended followers to call the governor and protest this grievious insult to Christian America. Apparently, they did. I’m sure that talking with these Christ-loving, mostly non-Washingtonian callers was a pleasant diversion compared to figuring out how to balance a $5 billion budget deficit. (Other stories here and here.)

So much excitement in sleepy little Olympia. I stopped by on my bike ride today. The tree is very nice—tall, brightly lit and highly decorated. As tall as it is, it still seems small in that vast space. The Atheist sign is on the balcony above the main hall. It’s about ten meters from a spare three-figure nativity crèche with a small sign stating that Christians around the world celebrate Christmas as Christ’s birth date (although I’ve heard reports that the date was more springtime-ish). The Atheist sign, neatly printed and framed on a pedestal stand is surrounded by several thundering denunciations of this blasphemy. The display area is cordoned off to prevent another theft. When I was there the lobby was bustling with people and nobody seemed particularly distraught by the theological debate. Olympia’s infamy is not the first Holiday War skirmish in the Northwest. SeaTac airport had some foolishness about a Christmas tree and a Menorah maybe a couple of years ago and decided against all such displays, lest travelers be inconvenienced by thinking of too many holidays.

The Atheist sign at the capitol simply states the obvious facts about religion and superstition, all of which I believe. As a holiday feature it's not much. The statement notes the Winter Solstice but does little to celebrate it or explain its meaning. It’s just a sign. The nativity scene, isn't much, very spare, seemingly tucked in a corner. No shepherds, no angels or wise men. No star. Compared to church displays, this one doesn't project the grandeur and hope of Christian myth. It's just a small reminder, wedged in the corner of a public space. The tree in the lobby skunks them both.

Of course, as a pagan I’m partial to decorated trees and think it’s cool that they so appropriately fill public spaces like the Capitol rotunda. Few of those public display trees are Pagan in our culture but the link is still there. I’ve heard a couple versions of the origin of cutting and decorating trees at the dark of winter but the differences are minimal. I can appreciate the symbolism of a holiday tree. I grew up celebrating Christmas, a Christian holiday when I was a child and a secular one as an adult. I found the natural world as a source of my spirituality early in my adulthood and have celebrated the Solstice and the darkness of winter pretty much ever since.

I’m probably not that much of a pagan, either, since I don’t believe in gods, supernatural powers or divine intervention. I don’t know exactly what ancient pagans believed but I know theirs was an Earth-centered belief system that recognized, celebrated and found meaning in the change of seasons. In my own life I have developed a great reverence for Earth and Sky. That reverence encourages me to respect all creation, to harm nothing by my presence or actions in life. I don’t do it for any eternal reward or to escape damnation, I do it because I know that is how I would want others to act toward me. It’s that simple. (disclosure: Lest I sound too perfect, I will remind you that I’m not always equal to my beliefs.) When I sit on a mountain top or gaze into the night sky, I understand my connection to these many other human beings and the world in which we all live. I don't need a church to tell me what is sacred. I'm fully capable of understanding that on my own.

One account of the Christmas tree’s origins tells of a Christian missionary challenging pagan belief by cutting down a sacred tree. When no harm befell the Christian, the pagans saw the impotence of their beliefs and converted to Christianity. I don’t know if the story is true but I do know that Solstice was a pagan holiday long before Christians appropriated the date for Christ’s birth. All in all, I can celebrate Solstice while others celebrate the holiday of their choice. (I don't cut trees, though. Destroying a tree for a few week's decoration does not celebrate anything for me.) What’s more important than whose day gets recognized how in what public space is that many of our western cultural beliefs celebrate this time of year and by extension, much of the world. The Christian version of events has dominated for centuries and for America’s entire history. Christians have come to expect preferment. The fact that other beliefs challenge that preferment undoubtedly frightens them. They never have been comfortable with competing thoughts.

Apparently, neither are some Atheists. It would seem that unless you accept the rationality and science behind Atheist thought, you are hopelessly superstitious. I certainly don’t think that of Believers. They can believe what ever they want, especially if they find meaning or solace in their belief. Sometimes I wonder just how some Believers can so completely ignore modern thought but as long as they don’t try to force me to live by their unique interpretations of ethics and morality, I pay them little mind. When they try to force their beliefs on society at large I will challenge them and sometimes use ridicule in my opposition. Otherwise, I have no problem co-existing with any Believer.

As for Atheists, I accept their beliefs and thought. What I don’t accept is the certainty. Yeah, all logical thought denies the existence of gods but, hell, in the end none of us know for sure. I’ll stick with pagan. Combine pagan respect for the natural world and the Golden Rule and I have all the moral compass I need.

I Object!

In the past few weeks I learned that I am a Conscientious Objector to war and that I have been most of my life. Except for that one time when I was ordered to war and said “okay”. But even though I objected to war and THAT war in particular, I didn’t fit what the government’s criteria for conscientious objection and I didn’t push the point. As a veteran however, I know how truly wrong war is. I don’t consider myself a pacifist; if someone’s coming at me with lethal intent, I will respond in kind if that becomes the only option.

But my willingness to act forcefully in my own defense in an immediate circumstance does not translate into a requirement that I support or participate in wars at the order of my government. After a lifetime of watching successive American presidents lie, dissemble, misinform and mislead the public, simply hearing my government yell “Fire!” does not mean that I must pull the trigger.

As a citizen, I reserve the right to question my government’s use of war and military force. My government must tell me why. About the only answer that will make me re-think my objection to war is that someone is attacking the United States with lethal intent. A response, up to and including sustained counter attack, may well be warranted Absent that kind of threat, no war is justified. Special Operations at specific targets of known intent and capability are okay, especially when done with the cooperation of the “host” nation and without civilian casualties.

All that said, I still believe myself to be a conscientious objector. I object to war because I have thought deeply about what war requires of me as a human being and I cannot in good conscience carry out those actions. When I went to war, I ignored my conscience because I was afraid to challenge my government. My conscience didn’t quit, though, it kept reminding me. If ignoring my conscience years ago was surrender, then my lifetime support of peace and justice, longtime objection to war is resistance, a resistance all the stronger because I saw war up close and personal.

My thoughts on conscientious objection are hardly new and certainly not exclusive. Many others have articulated the same in far better prose. Hell, if I’d listened to them 40 years ago, maybe I would not have gone to war. What is new is that I recognize myself as a Conscientious Objector even now. I don’t need a sky god or organized church to support my conscience; I can come to these beliefs on my own. That is one of the most fundamental individual freedoms.

Thinking of myself as a life long conscientious objector is also a valuable reminder that the struggle against war, and toward social and economic justice for all is never-ending. My generation—and the rest of the country, too, I might add—thought that after Vietnam and Watergate we had seen the worst that history had to offer and went on with normal lives. But the Monster (*) was only wounded, not dead and the past decade has certainly demonstrated how truly alive the worst of humankind remains.

(*) Video here.

So That's the Deal...

American official, witness to the suicide bomb attack in the Green Zone:

"I hope this doesn't slow things down here," said the official, who did not want his name used because he is not authorized to speak to journalists. "These are the people we need to make this experiment work."

Corporations and science used to routinely experiment and test on animals. Some still do but the practice is considered inhumane to most people. I would think that experimenting on other people would be equally repugnant.