Author: Vanna

Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture) seeks to add an outreach coordinator to its staff in its Pittsburgh office. The outreach coordinator will be responsible for recruiting new members; providing education about environmental issues with an emphasis on air-, water-, mining-, and energy-related policies to PennFuture members, the environmental advocacy community, and decision-makers; and assisting in issue campaign strategy and implementation throughout western Pennsylvania.

Qualifications – Applicants should have a bachelor’s degree and two years of outreach and/or issue campaign management experience.

To apply, please send a cover letter, resume, and two writing samples by email (preferred) or by mail to Heather Sage, Vice President, PennFuture, 425 6th Ave., Ste. 2770, Pittsburgh, PA 15219.

Salary – Upper 20s to mid 30s depending on experience. This will be a full-time position. PennFuture is a public interest organization and equal opportunity employer.

Pennsylvania has the best wind resources east of the Mississippi, together with New York and West Virginia. But most of the locations where large, utility-scale wind farms can capitalize on those wind resources are atop the Commonwealth’s many ridgetops. And a whole bevy of objections have arisen to wind ranging from the common-sense to the absurd.

The bottom line is this: global warming (for most of us) and rising, volatile fossil fuel prices (for others) are forcing our collective hand on getting serious about clean, alternative energy development in Pennsylvania and worldwide. It’s been a few decades since the U.S. pursued any sort of real advances in developing new energy… and I think we can all agree where that’s landed us.

(more…)

Well, ladies and germs, congrats. Progress? Indeed. Many ask what Progress Pittsburgh is all about– I think we are seeing the fruits of that labor, in all corners of the city. And I think all the P2 faithful are so exalted and exhausted today, we’ve neglected to blog and pat ourselves and our compadres on the back.

Nice work!

And now, I invite you all to join me in spending next Monday morning calling in to ask the Democratic Committee leadership team just what exactly it is they plan to do next? And whether they intend to pay more than lip service to the progressive organizations, voters, and elected officials in Pittsburgh?

Or better yet, let’s just prank call them. Over and over and over again…

Dianna Wentz, Allegheny County Dem Committee’s “spokesperson,” will be subbing for Lynn Cullen.

WPTT call in: 412.333.1360

For years now the ill-conceived Deer Creek Crossing retail project proposed for the Harmar area has threatened to be one of Allegheny County’s worse greenfield development projects. Late last week, it was announced that the project is no more. Three development companies later, all the potential anchor stores jumped ship (finally). Yet another reason for me to like Tar-jhay.

For those who may not recall, the project would have destroyed a trout stream (something we have precious few of these days in Allegheny County), but perhaps the more widely popular un-appeal was the handy little TIF deal the project got, despite the land being anything but a blighted, urban property in need of redevelopment. (State law that pertains to TIFs has loopholes in it so huge you could drive a locomotive through.) And despite the fact that County Exec Onorato implemented guidelines at the county level to prevent TIFs going for greenfield development and discouraging their use on retail projects, Deer Creek still wound up with its TIF. This is not the post where I’ll rant about the piss-poor greenfield development projects Allegheny County has blessed (though in fairness, those largely predated Dan Onorato).

Anyhoo, recently-defeated Eileen Watt (ran against Rep. Frank Dermody) was the Deer Creek project’s most vocal cheerleader. Once we get the P2 Knowledge Base back up and running, you can find a handy chronicle of Ms. Watt’s ethically questionable antics in support of the project when it came up for its final vote in County Council for the then new-and-improved TIF deal. Watt is a suburban-mom-turned-politico (not that there’s anything wrong with that, necessarily, though I am still steamed over Run Baby Run supporting Watt’s efforts, because the woman is bad, bad, bad– and tarnished their good name, in my opinion), who came up the ranks under the scaly wing of Melissa Hart. She’s a darling in the local and state Republican scene, though she got herself into a bit of a scuff (ethics are so pesky, aren’t they?) while workin’ for the RCAC.
Few in government have been willing to attempt to put the woefully-needed clamp down on TIF abuse. State legislative attempts have gone nowhere fast; the Rendell administration has refused to take up the issue, and ignores the requirement for reporting and assessment of TIF projects. One of the few vocal opponents of the Deer Creek project, and TIF abuse, was and is County Councilman Dave Fawcett.

Now it seems that Eileen is spending her time getting even with Fawcett, backing challenger Kevin Acklin in the race for the at-large County Council seat against him. For some vexing reason I can’t find this version of David Brown’s article from today online, but here’s the relevant passage:

Acklin has hired Erica Clayton Wright, previously a communications director for former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum. Becky Barret Toomey, chairwoman of the Bethel Park GOP committee, is Acklin’s campaign coordinator. Eileen Watt, a Cheswick Republican and former county councilwoman, also is backing Acklin.

“Kevin is definitely a serious challenger. He’s in it for all the right reasons, and I think it’s going to be a competitive race,” Watt said. “Kevin has a history of working within the party and supporting many different candidates.”

“I’ve not seen Dave take an active role in the party,” Watt said.

Fawcett said he’s “very disappointed” in Watt’s comment.

“I’ve worked as hard as anyone worked for Republican council candidates, including for Eileen Watt, when she started her political career,” he said.

Why am I so interested in this race? Well, while no die-hard progressive, Dave Fawcett is one of the few on County Council who seems willing to tackle some tough environmental issues head on, and certainly one of the only Republicans. He’s not particularly partisan, as he will admit. And he’s probably in some trouble if the Republican stars on Acklin’s side of this race are aligning against him. While I’ve questioned Fawcett’s integrity on some level for serving as Chuck Betters’ attorney in his attempts to get a thoroughbred race rack license and level Pittsburgh’s largest and best undeveloped greenspace (and for investing in the project), he’s been a solid guy on Council. And in my book, anyone Eileen Watt is vouching for can’t be good. She’s successfully amassed massive war chests for her races, and those she works on, and plays nasty.

Plus I’ve seen Fawcett hangin’ at the Brillobox. Can’t say that for too many County Councilfolk.

I’ve started a little collection of my favorite Councilman Jim Motznik gems. It includes the video of him running through downtown buildings as news cameras attempt to get him to face the music on his questionable travel expense reports/city vehicle usage. It includes his diplomatic quotes during the advertising-in-the-parks debacle he dreamed up (and lost). It also includes a pic of him mopping up the hall outside his office (I keep it taped next to my desk for those dull moments. Gives me a chuckle every time). Some of his crying after Shields got elected to Council President instead of him made for some entertaining listening and reading as well.

Now this. He’s blogging. Or at least has started with a post. Claiming he wants to set the record straight in the blogosphere on the whole John McIntire/Luke Ravenstahl drinkin’-handcuffin’-Dennis Regan owin’ rumors, he chimes in with his take on the whole thing. Good to see he has all the facts, somehow. As usual, Davyoe at 2 Political Junkies has a great review of how Mr. Motznik’s comments don’t hold much water.
As my pal noted, the post was made at 1:26 p.m. today. Hmm, that seems like the middle of the work day there, Councilman. Wonder if Mr. Motznik was hanging out at the library starting up his new blog, or hard at work on a taxpayer-funded computer? Just asking.

I must admit that from Day One I was presuming Luke Ravenstahl would have a difficult time holding the reigns of the ‘burgh, but not much has thus far occurred to rock the boat. It puzzles and interests me, though, how much time and effort has been going into keeping control of things. Note Chris Briem’s interesting post on Null Space about the Wikipedia warfare that’s been going on at the Luke Ravenstahl entry. (Reminds me of some similar efforts that were underway during the last mayoral race on the P2 Knowledge Base, which I’ve heard tell is going to be emerging from the depths any day now).

Now I learn the Young Democrats of Allegheny County (trailblazers that they are) are offering “a night with Mayor Luke Ravenstahl.” In the past, there’d been some throwdowns over whether or not it makes for good practice (in a broad, landscape-view sense) to simply give the good old thumbs-up for the established candidates/incumbents. Challenging questions have created some in-fighting among young Democrats and Young Democrats about the endorsement process in Allegheny County, whether the party members and the party faithful should be free to support candidates of their choosing, or should they simply kowtow to the establishment? Since LR has declared his intentions, I can only view the “evening with…” invitation as an indication that the Young Democrats have (as an entity) made it their intention to back Young Ravenstahl.

If not, then why not (at this stage in the race anyway) pursue an agenda that provides an open forum for potential or known candidates?

Shout out to Sue at Pittsburgh Lesbian Correspondents for her insightful commentary on City Council’s infantile responses to the Smoking Ban. Regardless of your personal opinion on the ban, you have to be less than proud of the quality of comments from our elected officials about it. Grow up, I say.

Something to ponder (over a smoke?):

Apparently, our elected officials are already breaking the rules on smoking INSIDE the building.  Wink, wink, nudge, nudge … all the kids are doing it giggles Student Body President Doug Shields.

“We’re not allowed to smoke in the building, though I’ve been known to — eh, heh heh — in a closed room,” said City Council President Doug Shields, an on-again, off-again smoker.

Is it just me or is Shields trying to sound …cool?  First, “eh, heh, heh” is just an incredibly creepy and disturbing quote for a grown man in an elected position of power and authority. Second, its nice that Shields has such respect for the health and welfare of all his employees, colleagues and the residents of Pittsburgh (and the county) that he would smoke in a closed room.  Because we all know how effective that closed door is at preventing cancer.  Finally, it sort of gives support to the claim that Shields is firmly wedged up the ass of the powers that be if he doesn’t have the gonads to set a good example on SMOKING.  What kind of leadership is that?  A “fuck you, I’m hanging with the cool guys like Luke” type.

You go, Sue.

Nods out to Philly’s John Laumer for this post in Treehugger, referencing a Chicago Tribune  article on Wisconsin’s “Big Bang” plan to keep young people in the state after they attend college there, at least for 10 years.

Students would get four years of reduced or free college tuition in exchange for staying in Wisconsin 10 years after they graduate…That’s the plan, known as the “Big Bang,” from a special state commission that looked at daunting economic projections and decided last week it was time for a “Hail Mary” approach to stave off an era of serious decline in the Dairy State”.

Apparently other states are considering the same.

But what I like about the post is that it goes beyond mentioning this, but cites a number of things (and asks for us to add to/subtract from the list) that make staying in a place worth it– things that make places sustainable.

I like the idea, and I like the list. What do you think?

Care about healthcare? Not sure which model makes the most sense? Me too, me neither. Maybe this will help:
The American Medical Student Association (AMSA) is pleased to invite you to a cutting edge debate on the future of US health care reform. While many Americans believe that all people should have access to quality, affordable health care, there is considerable variability in opinion on how to achieve this goal.

This difference in opinion is evident among national thought leaders active in the universal health care movement. Some support a broad-based overhaul of the current health care system in the form of a single-payer, national health program. Others believe that incremental reform that builds toward universal coverage by addressing existing gaps in care is the most pragmatic approach given the current political landscape.

With the recent shift in the makeup of Congress, AMSA and the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine AMSA Chapter are excited to explore this timely issue by hosting a debate between two leading national experts in health policy:

• John McDonough, Ph.D. is the Executive Director of Health Care for All in Boston. Dr. McDonough was a key player in the development, negotiation, and passage of the Massachusetts universal health care bill passed earlier this year. This bill employs a combination of expansion of public programs, employer mandate, and individual mandates.
• Walter Tsou, M.D., MPH is the Past President of the American Public Health Association. He also serves on the board of Physicians for a National Health Plan (PNHP). PNHP is a national organization with more than 14,000 members that advocates for single-payer national health insurance.

The debate will be held at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in downtown Pittsburgh, PA this coming Friday, December 1, 2006 from 4:45 PM – 6:30 PM in rooms 403-405. We welcome health care professionals, advocates, students, and community members to attend; admission is free.

We hope to see you there!

For more information, please contact:

Marc Larochelle
Health Policy Action Committee Co-Chair
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine AMSA Chapter
617-461-6585
larochelle.marc@medstudent.pitt.edu

I’ll be anxious to see how many young people came out and voted locally, and what impact it had. But in Senate races in PA and across the country, they appear to have played a role in swinging things– and turnout was up over 2002.

The following from Rock-the-Vote via Rolling Stone:

Among voters 18-29 years old, here’s how they cast their votes in the key Senate races. The first column is for Democratic candidates, the second for Republican.

Virginia 52% 48%
Rhode Island 65% 35%
Pennsylvania 68% 32%
Ohio 57% 43%
Missouri 49% 48%
Montana 56% 44%

I am especially interested in this since so much effort locally has been going and went into voter registration and GOTV in the 18-29 year old demographic, and also because there continues to be so much doubt about the importance of the group. I realize the above numbers tell us nothing about how many young voters actually came out, nor what percentage of total voters they comprised.

It’s not like we haven’t had plenty of warnings about the lack of security of electronic voting machines. Well, now this. It seems “Illinois Ballot Integrity Project — which bills itself as a not-for-profit civic organization dedicated to the correction of election system deficiencies” last week successfully hacked into the Chicago voter file database, with 1.35 million voters in it.

Here’s a little excerpt to put all of our minds at ease:

A nefarious hacker could have changed every voter’s status from active to inactive, which would have prevented them from voting, he said.

“Or we could’ve changed the information on what precinct you were in or what polling place you were supposed to go to,” he said. “So there were ways that we could potentially change the entire online data base and disenfranchise voters throughout the entire city of Chicago.”

“If we’d wanted to, we could’ve wiped the entire database out,” Wilson claimed.

 

While I don’t even recognize the woman who calls herself Roseanne Barr anymore, two thumbs up for this week-long series on what life is like for the many people trying to make ends meet on minimum wage. Sponsored by AFL-CIO and ACORN.

I recently had an extremely disturbing conversation with my extremely conservative mother (read: I don’t go home too often anymore) about how she firmly believes that in a family, the woman’s role is to be mother and homemaker. When I probed and attempted to play out various scenarios about how families can’t afford to not have two working parents, and that’s even when they are being paid something decent, let alone the minimum wage, she persisted. I won’t even go into all of the other disagreements we have. It wasn’t even worth my breath to get into the “woman’s role” part of the argument. Sympathatic comments welcome.

But the focus here should not be on me. The focus should be on the fact that Americans can’t afford all these fantastic “values” and “ideals” we hear so much about from the right wing.

I happened upon this interesting (disturbing) stat in TomPaine.com:  29% percent of people in the U.S. who identify themselves as liberal are not registered to vote, as compared to only 17% of people who consider themselves to be conservative.  The information comes from this report.

There are a lot of other revealing statistics in the report. I’ve been pondering what we do with this information. For some time now we’ve been lamenting that a lot of young people want to ID themselves in Pittsburgh not as Democrats, but as Independents. The study found that while about 30% of registered Independents frequently vote, about 26% of them don’t vote at all, and another 27% of people identify themselves as Independents, but aren’t registered to vote. The report also states that the top 3 reasons people don’t register to vote are haven’t had time or haven’t taken time, recently moved, and don’t care about politics.
With a mayoral race on next year, let’s hope we somehow figure out how to crack the nuts in Pittsburgh. And I find it particularly interesting that Mayor Ravenstahl is courting the unviersity crowd now with a closed-door Q&A session. More to come? Wonder what he’s saying in the meeting about how he (eventually) agreed to make the date of the Council District 3 special election accessible to university students. Hmm. That had nothing to do with us now did it?

Hats off to Jonathan Potts and his source, AND the journalistically revered, cough, cough, Herald-Standard, for this fine story on Rick Santorum’s take on why it’s a good thing that we invaded and are now occupying Iraq. Here’s a taste:

“As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else,” Santorum said, describing the tool the evil Lord Sauron used in search of the magical ring that would consolidate his power over Middle-earth.

“It’s being drawn to Iraq and it’s not being drawn to the U.S.,” he continued. “You know what? I want to keep it on Iraq. I don’t want the Eye to come back here to the United States.”