Moral Center? What's That?

.

 

 

There’s an article in the New York Times today bearing the title, "Death of Nelson Mandela Leaves South Africa Without a Moral Center."  Very well.  But speaking of moral centers, where, may I ask, is ours? 

Seriously.

She's Both Left and Right

      Gayle McLaughlin is serving her second term as mayor of Richmond, California, the first member of the Green Party to represent a city of more than 100,000.  In a recent interview, she was asked whether the fact that she is Green gives her an advantage politically.  Ms. McLaughlin replied: "It’s the independent thinking that makes the difference.  One party is moving us into a brick wall at 100 mph. The other is moving us there at 50 mph.  We’re still going in the wrong direction, in my view.

     She’s right.

Fracking in North Dakota: An Update

      There were three news reports during the week of October 14 emanating from the Bakken Oil fields of North Dakota.

 

     1. It was reported that the Environmental Health Section of the State Department of Health was investigating the leak of crude oil in a wheatfield in the northwestern part of the state. The pipeline company, Tesoro Corporation, first estimated the spill at 750 barrels, then increased it to 20,6000 barrels, making it one of the largest spills in North Dakota history. Tesoro, which did not share its test results with the state, said in a statement that it had inspected the pipeline two weeks before the spill and was awaiting results when the leak was reported.

     2. Landowners in North Dakota recently filed 10 class action lawsuits seeking millions of dollars in lost royalties from some of the nations’ largest oil companies. The oil companies that once rushed into the state to drill for oil do not yet have a viable method of transporting it out of the state and therefore there is no profit incentive to move the product. As a result, roughly 1,500 flare fires burn constantly above western North Dakota in which nearly 30 percent of the state’s output valued at $100 million a month is burned at the well site, producing emissions equivalent to more than two medium-size coal-fired power plants. The land owners are suing for the loss of royalties promised them by the oil companies.

     3. It was reported that North Dakota landowners had become increasingly concerned that waste from oil drilling operations was placing their croplands at risk. Oil companies in the state disposed of more than a million tons of drilling waste last year, 15 times the amount in 2006. Seven drilling landfills operate in North Dakota at this time, with 16 more under construction or seeking state approval. Most drilling waste, usually chunks of earth slathered in chemicals and petroleum, is disposed of at the drilling site. However, about a year and a half ago, the state passed a regulation requiring drillers to dry the waste before buying it on-site to address landowners’ concerns about runoff and leakage. But the companies don’t want to do that, so they have turned to landfills to dispose of the waste.

     It is well known that much of the oil in the Bakken field in North Dakota is produced by the process of horizontal hydraulic drilling, known as "fracking." Those groups that oppose fracking, such as "Ban Michigan Fracking" (of which I am a member), do not usually delight in saying "We told you so."

     These reports, however, justify an exception.

A New Constitutional Amendment

     There have been a multitude of interesting and provocative proposals to amend the United States Constitution over the past several years.  Here's another --

 

 

Amendment XXVII

1.     It shall be unlawful for any member of Congress, on a roll-call vote in either house of Congress, to cast a vote to prevent or obstruct the United States from completing the basic, non-optional requirements of funding the federal government or authorizing the borrowing required to finance the deficits created by Congress.

2.     Any member of Congress who violates Section 1 shall be deemed to have forfeited the right to serve as a member of Congress and shall be immediately terminated as a member thereof. Such terminations shall not be considered an impeachment and shall be effected solely by operation of this Amendment and shall not require any special or independent act of Congress or the President. There shall be no appeal from operation of this Amendment.

3.     Vacancies thus created in the House of Representatives and the Senate shall be filled pursuant to applicable provisions of the Constitution.* Members of Congress terminated under this Amendment shall not be eligible to run for Congress or to be appointed to any federal office for a period of six years from the date of termination.

4.     The vote of any member of Congress in violation of Section 1 shall be null and void ab initio.

 

------------------------------

 

* By Article I, Section 2, for vacancies in the House of Representatives: "When vacancies happen in the Representation form any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies."

By Amendment XXVII for vacancies in the Senate: "When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct."

　

　

　

　

　

　

　

　 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Military Sex: The Few, The Proud, The Deplorable

Our local paper recently carried a syndicated preview of "Lauren," a three-part dramatic series forthcoming on YouTube which focuses on sexual assaults of women in the military. The article contained a couple of alarming statistics: it appears that the Defense Department has estimated that nearly 3,200 sexual assaults were reported in the military last year and, what’s more, 86 percent of sexual assaults of women each year go unreported.

What are the implications of these statistics?

Well, for starters, we can conclude that the 3,200 assaults actually reported in 2011 were just 14 percent of the total — which means that there were a total of 22,850 sexual assaults of women in the military that year. This, in turn, translates to about 1,900 a month, or 63 a day.

There were a reported total 214,100 women in the U.S. armed services last year. Assuming that none of them was assaulted more than once, it means that 10.7 percent of all military women were assaulted that year. If 2011 is a representative year, in other words, more than one in 10 military women are sexually assaulted each year.

In 2010, the year of the last census, there were a total of 143,300,000 women over the age of 12 living in the United States. That year there were an estimated 207,750 sexual assaults, reported and unreported, committed against that population (one every 2.5 minutes); again assuming that none was attacked more than once, about .15 percent of all women were victims of sexual assault. These figures, monstrously high as they are, pale into comparison with military figures for, statistically, military women are over 70 times more likely to be sexually assaulted than civilian women.

As I see it, these numbers give rise to two glaring implications. First, the U.S. military is a terribly violent and dysfunctional organization when it comes to the treatment of women and to sexual behavior within its own ranks. It’s not surprising that sexual offenses against women soldiers are notoriously inadequately investigated and prosecuted for, if they were, we’d probably have to pull out of Afghanistan just to raise the manpower.

And second, why would any woman even remotely consider joining the military? Why?