therealnews--2020-07-24--Leaked FBI Documents Reveal Secret Program To Criminalize Social Media

This is a rush transcript and may contain errors .
It will be updated .
Taya Graham : Hello .
My name is Taya Graham and welcome to The Police Accountability Report .
As I never get tired of saying , this show has a single purpose : holding the politically powerful institution of policing accountable .
But we don ’ t just focus on the misbehavior of individual cops .
Instead , we go behind the headlines and explore how the system itself bolsters bad behavior .
And today , we ’ re going to look at how that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by taking a look at this internal FBI memo about how federal agents spy on people ’ s Facebook posts .
And then second , by talking to people in Portland who have seen firsthand how secret federal agents are acting on that information to make questionable arrests .
But before we get started , I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct , please email it to us privately at [ email protected ] and we might be able to investigate .
And please like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You know I read your comments and appreciate them .
And of course , you can message me directly @ tayasbaltimore on Facebook or Twitter .
Okay , we ’ ve got that out of the way .
Now , I ’ m sure by now , most of us have seen this .
Secret federal police detaining federal protesters in Portland .
As this video posted by Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley on his Twitter account reveals , the agents have no external markings , no badge numbers , and according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no legal basis for detaining US citizens .
Let ’ s remember that most policing is a function of local government .
Federal cops have little jurisdiction over local laws .
Instead , they are empowered to protect federal property , the border or enforce federal statutes .
But these limits have not stopped the federal government from threatening to expand their presence to other cities nor has the federal government produced any information on exactly which agency in Homeland Security the anonymous operatives work for besides reports those seen were from Customs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unit that investigates human and drug trafficking .
Instead , what we ’ ve witnessed is the threat of a proliferation of an unnamed armed force in our cities that is nearly impossible to hold accountable .
The nightmare that many of the cop-watchers and activists had said was possible has now become a reality .
But unfortunately , the news gets worse .
That ’ s because in the past week , we have obtained this elite document that offers a glimpse inside the process of how secret police work in tandem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in our lives .
It is a confidential report filed by an FBI agent who was using Facebook to monitor protesters in Delaware .
As you can see , the report shows how the agent used the Facebook activity of protestors to gather information about the individual and the process of obstensively investigating a crime , but the information was vague and seemed to imply that the mere presence of a protestor at a gathering where property was destroyed was incriminating .
Now , we have been in touch with the FBI about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ m joined by my cohost , Stephen Janis .
Steven , what have you learned and what information is contained in this document ?
Stephen Janis : Well , it seems to be a report from an FBI agent who is monitoring Facebook and using Facebook to monitor protests in Dover , Delaware .
The information on it says that the agent monitored someone ’ s Facebook watch party and then reported that close to where the watch party was filming , or the person who was filming on Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And one thing was interesting is that the FBI agent said on the post , “ I will continue to monitor this anonymously.
” Taya Graham : Now , you asked the FBI specifically if this information was tied to an arrest .
What did they say ?
Stephen Janis : I contacted the FBI .
They call me back .
They didn ’ t give me any information about this particular document .
In fact , they would not confirm whether or not it was authentic .
The only thing they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was where I got it , which I refused to disclose .
But as far as what this is and if this is even confirmed , we don ’ t know yet , although I think it looks authentic .
Taya Graham : Steven , finally , how widespread is this program ?
Have we learned anything else about how much this methodology is being used by the FBI ?
Stephen Janis : Well , at this point we know they ’ re using Facebook to arrest people .
We know because we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was arrested in St. Louis for his Facebook post , and an activist in Georgia who was arrested for his Facebook post .
So we know that they ’ re using it .
We have filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the FBI and the Justice Department for all arrests in any sort of investigations tied to Facebook and are awaiting the results .
But right now , we don ’ t know the scope of this .
Taya Graham : Now , if you think the link between secret @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , let ’ s remember the arrest of Michael Avery .
As we reported in a previous show , Avery was arrested by at least 50 agents in , again , unmarked uniforms for a series of Facebook posts .
The arresting documents obtained by PAR revealed that Avery ’ s charges were directly based on information he had posted on social media .
In fact , the FBI accused him of fomenting violence by using terminology Avery told us in a phone interview was misinterpreted , including the FBI ’ s assessment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meant gunman , while Avery meant photographers .
And the misapprehension of “ red level , ” an event as a call to violence , not a characterization of the expected police response .
The charges against Avery were ultimately dropped , but not after he had spent time in jail , and authorities say the investigation is still ongoing .
But clearly , the presence of federal police in cities like Portland and the arrest of activists like Avery in St. Louis raise serious questions about the continued encroachment of law enforcement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what has happened in Portland , the government ’ s threat to peaceful and constitutionally-protected protest , what might come next ?
I ’ m joined by an activist who has been in the thick of what ’ s going on here for years .
His name is Eli Richey , and he has been watching cops and reporting on it for almost a decade .
He ’ s also in the process of producing a documentary on the subject , which he hopes will premiere soon .
Thank you for joining us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eli , looking back , what do you think has led up to Portland ’ s bursts of protest ?
I know it seemed to start after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis , but there has been activism against police misconduct in Portland before this , right ?
Eli Richey : Police misconduct is really government misconduct .
And if we look at Oregon historically , Oregon has always been , in terms of race politics , corrupt .
In Oregon ’ s constitution , there was a provision put in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to own land .
So from its very origins , there has been corruption in terms of equality .
Taya Graham : How have Portland residents responded to federal law enforcement coming in ?
Eli Richey : As a resident , my opinion on it is that unfortunately , we ’ re not going to see local political reform with the federal government here .
I ’ m very much under the impression that you got to think globally but act locally .
And so the federal officers here are kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that have led to these problems here today .
When it comes to the riots , like Martin Luther King , I tend to agree that the destruction of property is a language in which these people speak .
They used to own people .
So property is much more important to them than our plight as people .
So I ’ m glad to see the attention now being focused on reform .
However , at the same time it scares a lot of people .
Taya Graham : Now , public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seem to be intentionally trying to incite violence .
Have you seen any evidence of this ?
Eli Richey : I don ’ t know what else to say except that first , they came for the cop watchers .
And because people weren ’ t cop watchers , they didn ’ t do anything .
And now that they ’ re coming for the real quote-unquote journalists , I ’ m sorry , I don ’ t know what to say .
I mean , I ’ ve exposed criminal informants working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allowed a Nazi cop to retire .
One that was in charge of the not only Criminal Intelligence Division , but Drug and Vice at one point .
Who was responsible for approving the criminal informants who turned out to be a bunch of white supremacists .
Some could say I ’ m responsible for the reason why the Chief of Police left the city of Portland .
We ’ re just now having this conversation .
And it took another man , another black man , to die in the most toxic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disgusting .
Taya Graham : How has the Portland Police Department responded to your activism or your community outreach ?
Have you experienced any retaliation or had any charges pressed against you ?
Eli Richey : Arrested 20 times in two years .
Beat them all except for two .
The chief of police , Danielle Outlaw , was successful at gaining a restraining order against me .
It took two-and-a-half years for me to finally be able to have that seen in the appeals court and to have it reversed .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was just used about a month ago to protect an activist in Little Rock , Arkansas .
But unfortunately , the constant fear of having the police raid my home caused me to take certain measures that split my family , unfortunately .
So for safety reasons , it ’ s damaged .
I had to make certain steps to protect myself , which shifts damage from my family .
It ’ s taken an extreme , personal toll on my life .
However , it was for the right thing .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virtue that we all don ’ t have .
And thankfully , it ’ s one that I ’ ve been really practicing , and to see things come around to where we ’ re at today is really exciting .
Taya Graham : So how important is the movement to film police ?
Eli Richey : Simply going out there and holding a camera created such a controversy that I knew I was onto something .
And I believe that it is one of the most American things that we could possibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitution and see the way that it was written , it is to protect us from government .
And the way I ’ ve approached it is sticks and stones will break your bones , but words will never hurt you , especially if you ’ re a professional .
With officers today having qualified immunity , the benefit of the doubt in an argument , what we see today worldwide is a demand for respect .
Now , there ’ s a lot of people saying that police just demand respect .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a volunteer position ?
They took this position ?
I don ’ t .
I don ’ t believe so .
I believe the reason why they demand respect is because they have a gun , at the end of the day .
And in order to find some balance there , we need to put officers on an even level .
The way that we do that is through today ’ s technology .
Film an audio , film a recording .
Put it out there so everyone can see .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violating policy , reform shouldn ’ t be a problem .
We have to look at the reason why we have a police force .
From what I understand , they were put into existence to help break up unions , they would bust up unions , hunt down runaway slaves and Native Americans .
Taya Graham : Now , sometimes I like to make a literary reference to provide some context for the topic at hand .
It ’ s a tradition on the show that I think sheds light on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not unique , and a way to use a different perspective to show where we might be heading .
Today , I ’ m going to refer to a book by noted Russian author , Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn , The Gulag Archipelago .
It ’ s an expansive work of fiction that explores a variety of facets of how a functioning dictatorship evolves .
And it ’ s notable that the first chapter focuses on what appears to be the primary tool of enforcing authoritarian law : the arrest .
Solzhenitsyn recounts how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tool of terror and social control , how the unfettered ability to detain without accountability turns state power into a pathology that spreads throughout the community like a disease .
In fact , the argument seems to be that nothing is more essential to an authoritarian regime than the unimpeded control over our bodies .
So as we watch the federal response to protests unfold , perhaps we need to consider an aspect of this development that is often ignored but worth another look .
In a sense , the federal push to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that far removed from the continued arrest of activists by local police .
And that connection is predicated upon the fact that we are ready predisposed to being arrested .
What do I mean ?
Well , let ’ s remember there is no specific power to arrest outlined in the constitution , only protections against unlawful detainment .
And let ’ s also remember that the institution of policing itself didn ’ t emerge until the mid-19th century .
The point is that the whole so-called arrest infrastructure has evolved as our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and scope .
And along with that growth and power , the number of arrests in general have continued to rise in tandem .
In fact , according to data compiled by the Vera Institute in 2019 , American police made 10.5 million arrests .
That is one every three seconds .
And as the data points out , these are not detentions of murderers and child molesters .
The majority are for insignificant crimes like drug possession according to that same dataset .
The point is we are conditioned to the arrest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accept this ubiquity as necessary and a familiar part of the American landscape .
And along with the endless assortment of cop shows , or copaganda , we have been led to believe that millions of arrests and incarceration is somehow productive and beneficial to society , which can ’ t provide healthcare , solve poverty , or even supply affordable housing .
But as the arrest you are watching now reveals , the entire aforementioned narrative is subject to question .
The video was given to us by a viewer , Tina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occurred last week as she was commuting to work over the Brooklyn Bridge .
As you can see by the video , police began corralling protesters and bystanders alike , forming a veritable dragnet that scooped up citizens like fish in a trawler .
As Tina told us in an interview , throughout her ordeal , she continued to ask a fundamental question that police could not answer .
Why was she being arrested ?
We will speak with Tina next week about what happened and her treatment behind bars .
The point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police is an extension of the psychology of controlling space that already existed in the plethora of arrests made by our expansive law enforcement industrial complex .
What we ’ re seeing in Portland is a reality that has been part of the psyche of this nation as we ’ ve continued to prosecute the war on drugs and fill prisons with low-level offenders and acceptance that policing space is a necessary component of a community .
That the only way to maintain peace is to imbue a class of arresters with almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ otherwise corral us into a system that seems to manufacture disfunction and disempowerment .
As we noted earlier in the show , it ’ s a method of conditioning consent that is predicated by violence and its continued patrolling of our psyches that ’ s predicated upon the idea we accept the unjust conditions of income inequality and racial divisions as reality solely constructed by us , not the institutions , which benefit from it .
The question is , how far will we the people allow this to go ?
How much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coercion ?
How long can the massive deployment of power to detain that we are witnessing across the country continue ?
That ’ s the question at the heart of this issue .
The query that defines all the conflict and concern .
Who are we really and what kind of country do we really want to be ?
I would like to thank my guest cop watcher , Eli Richey , for his time and for his work in the community .
Thank you , Eli .
Eli Richey : You ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And at the end of the day , I just want to see the city of Portland be a better place .
And to you guys out in Baltimore , I wish you guys luck .
Act local and continue to think global with the social media platform that you have .
Taya Graham : I would also like to thank Intrepid reporter , Stephen Janis , for his investigative work , writing and editing on this piece .
Thank you , Stephen .
Stephen Janis : Taya , thanks for having me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : And of course , I would be remiss if I did not thank friend of the show , Noli Dee .
Thanks , Noli Dee .
And I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct or brutality , please share it with us and we might be able to investigate .
Please reach out to us .
You can email us tips privately at [ email protected ] and share your evidence of police misconduct .
You can also message us @ policeaccountabilityreport on Facebook or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And of course , you can message me directly @ tayasbaltimore on Twitter or Facebook .
And please like and comment .
I do read your comments and appreciate them , and I try to answer questions whenever I can .
My name is Taya Graham , and I ’ m your host of The Police Accountability Report .
Please be safe out there .

Simply posting about your presence at a police brutality protest can be used to incriminate you and lead to your arrest. We speak to Portland residents on the ground about the influx of unmarked federal agents.
Story Transcript
This is a rush transcript and may contain errors. It will be updated.
Taya Graham: Hello. My name is Taya Graham and welcome to The Police Accountability Report. As I never get tired of saying, this show has a single purpose: holding the politically powerful institution of policing accountable. But we don’t just focus on the misbehavior of individual cops. Instead, we go behind the headlines and explore how the system itself bolsters bad behavior.
And today, we’re going to look at how that system works from the inside. First, by taking a look at this internal FBI memo about how federal agents spy on people’s Facebook posts. And then second, by talking to people in Portland who have seen firsthand how secret federal agents are acting on that information to make questionable arrests.
But before we get started, I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct, please email it to us privately at par@therealnews.com and we might be able to investigate.
And please like, share and comment on our videos. You know I read your comments and appreciate them. And of course, you can message me directly @tayasbaltimore on Facebook or Twitter.
Okay, we’ve got that out of the way. Now, I’m sure by now, most of us have seen this. Secret federal police detaining federal protesters in Portland. As this video posted by Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley on his Twitter account reveals, the agents have no external markings, no badge numbers, and according to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU, no legal basis for detaining US citizens. Let’s remember that most policing is a function of local government. Federal cops have little jurisdiction over local laws. Instead, they are empowered to protect federal property, the border or enforce federal statutes.
But these limits have not stopped the federal government from threatening to expand their presence to other cities nor has the federal government produced any information on exactly which agency in Homeland Security the anonymous operatives work for besides reports those seen were from Customs and Border Patrol and an ICE tactical unit that investigates human and drug trafficking. Instead, what we’ve witnessed is the threat of a proliferation of an unnamed armed force in our cities that is nearly impossible to hold accountable. The nightmare that many of the cop-watchers and activists had said was possible has now become a reality.
But unfortunately, the news gets worse. That’s because in the past week, we have obtained this elite document that offers a glimpse inside the process of how secret police work in tandem with technology to forge an invisible presence in our lives. It is a confidential report filed by an FBI agent who was using Facebook to monitor protesters in Delaware.
As you can see, the report shows how the agent used the Facebook activity of protestors to gather information about the individual and the process of obstensively investigating a crime, but the information was vague and seemed to imply that the mere presence of a protestor at a gathering where property was destroyed was incriminating.
Now, we have been in touch with the FBI about this document and to talk about it, I’m joined by my cohost, Stephen Janis. Steven, what have you learned and what information is contained in this document?
Stephen Janis: Well, it seems to be a report from an FBI agent who is monitoring Facebook and using Facebook to monitor protests in Dover, Delaware. The information on it says that the agent monitored someone’s Facebook watch party and then reported that close to where the watch party was filming, or the person who was filming on Facebook, some destruction of property happened. And one thing was interesting is that the FBI agent said on the post, “I will continue to monitor this anonymously.”
Taya Graham: Now, you asked the FBI specifically if this information was tied to an arrest. What did they say?
Stephen Janis: I contacted the FBI. They call me back. They didn’t give me any information about this particular document. In fact, they would not confirm whether or not it was authentic. The only thing they would ask or tell me or ask me was where I got it, which I refused to disclose. But as far as what this is and if this is even confirmed, we don’t know yet, although I think it looks authentic.
Taya Graham: Steven, finally, how widespread is this program? Have we learned anything else about how much this methodology is being used by the FBI?
Stephen Janis: Well, at this point we know they’re using Facebook to arrest people. We know because we covered the case of Michael Avery, who was arrested in St. Louis for his Facebook post, and an activist in Georgia who was arrested for his Facebook post. So we know that they’re using it.
We have filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the FBI and the Justice Department for all arrests in any sort of investigations tied to Facebook and are awaiting the results. But right now, we don’t know the scope of this.
Taya Graham: Now, if you think the link between secret police and anonymous Facebook monitoring is farfetched, let’s remember the arrest of Michael Avery. As we reported in a previous show, Avery was arrested by at least 50 agents in, again, unmarked uniforms for a series of Facebook posts. The arresting documents obtained by PAR revealed that Avery’s charges were directly based on information he had posted on social media.
In fact, the FBI accused him of fomenting violence by using terminology Avery told us in a phone interview was misinterpreted, including the FBI’s assessment that the word “shooters” actually meant gunman, while Avery meant photographers. And the misapprehension of “red level,” an event as a call to violence, not a characterization of the expected police response.
The charges against Avery were ultimately dropped, but not after he had spent time in jail, and authorities say the investigation is still ongoing. But clearly, the presence of federal police in cities like Portland and the arrest of activists like Avery in St. Louis raise serious questions about the continued encroachment of law enforcement into our lives.
And to discuss what has happened in Portland, the government’s threat to peaceful and constitutionally-protected protest, what might come next? I’m joined by an activist who has been in the thick of what’s going on here for years. His name is Eli Richey, and he has been watching cops and reporting on it for almost a decade. He’s also in the process of producing a documentary on the subject, which he hopes will premiere soon.
Thank you for joining us, Eli.
Eli Richey: No problem.
Taya Graham: So Eli, looking back, what do you think has led up to Portland’s bursts of protest? I know it seemed to start after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, but there has been activism against police misconduct in Portland before this, right?
Eli Richey: Police misconduct is really government misconduct. And if we look at Oregon historically, Oregon has always been, in terms of race politics, corrupt. In Oregon’s constitution, there was a provision put in place that would prevent African-Americans from being able to own land. So from its very origins, there has been corruption in terms of equality.
Taya Graham: How have Portland residents responded to federal law enforcement coming in?
Eli Richey: As a resident, my opinion on it is that unfortunately, we’re not going to see local political reform with the federal government here. I’m very much under the impression that you got to think globally but act locally. And so the federal officers here are kind of creating a diversion from the actual politics that have led to these problems here today.
When it comes to the riots, like Martin Luther King, I tend to agree that the destruction of property is a language in which these people speak. They used to own people. So property is much more important to them than our plight as people. So I’m glad to see the attention now being focused on reform. However, at the same time it scares a lot of people.
Taya Graham: Now, public officials have said that these federal agents seem to be intentionally trying to incite violence. Have you seen any evidence of this?
Eli Richey: I don’t know what else to say except that first, they came for the cop watchers. And because people weren’t cop watchers, they didn’t do anything. And now that they’re coming for the real quote-unquote journalists, I’m sorry, I don’t know what to say.
I mean, I’ve exposed criminal informants working for ranking officials and PBB. Portland allowed a Nazi cop to retire. One that was in charge of the not only Criminal Intelligence Division, but Drug and Vice at one point. Who was responsible for approving the criminal informants who turned out to be a bunch of white supremacists.
Some could say I’m responsible for the reason why the Chief of Police left the city of Portland. We’re just now having this conversation. And it took another man, another black man, to die in the most toxic fashion. And it’s just disgusting.
Taya Graham: How has the Portland Police Department responded to your activism or your community outreach? Have you experienced any retaliation or had any charges pressed against you?
Eli Richey: Arrested 20 times in two years. Beat them all except for two. The chief of police, Danielle Outlaw, was successful at gaining a restraining order against me. It took two-and-a-half years for me to finally be able to have that seen in the appeals court and to have it reversed. A 27-page opinion was written and in fact was just used about a month ago to protect an activist in Little Rock, Arkansas.
But unfortunately, the constant fear of having the police raid my home caused me to take certain measures that split my family, unfortunately. So for safety reasons, it’s damaged. I had to make certain steps to protect myself, which shifts damage from my family.
It’s taken an extreme, personal toll on my life. However, it was for the right thing. And in some ways, patience is a virtue that we all don’t have. And thankfully, it’s one that I’ve been really practicing, and to see things come around to where we’re at today is really exciting.
Taya Graham: So how important is the movement to film police?
Eli Richey: Simply going out there and holding a camera created such a controversy that I knew I was onto something. And I believe that it is one of the most American things that we could possibly do. If you look at our constitution and see the way that it was written, it is to protect us from government. And the way I’ve approached it is sticks and stones will break your bones, but words will never hurt you, especially if you’re a professional.
With officers today having qualified immunity, the benefit of the doubt in an argument, what we see today worldwide is a demand for respect. Now, there’s a lot of people saying that police just demand respect. Well, why?
Because they took a volunteer position? They took this position? I don’t. I don’t believe so. I believe the reason why they demand respect is because they have a gun, at the end of the day. And in order to find some balance there, we need to put officers on an even level. The way that we do that is through today’s technology. Film an audio, film a recording. Put it out there so everyone can see.
There’s so many videos of officers violating policy, reform shouldn’t be a problem. We have to look at the reason why we have a police force. From what I understand, they were put into existence to help break up unions, they would bust up unions, hunt down runaway slaves and Native Americans.
Taya Graham: Now, sometimes I like to make a literary reference to provide some context for the topic at hand. It’s a tradition on the show that I think sheds light on the fact that the challenges we face now are not unique, and a way to use a different perspective to show where we might be heading.
Today, I’m going to refer to a book by noted Russian author, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago. It’s an expansive work of fiction that explores a variety of facets of how a functioning dictatorship evolves. And it’s notable that the first chapter focuses on what appears to be the primary tool of enforcing authoritarian law: the arrest.
Solzhenitsyn recounts how the random secret arrest turns into a tool of terror and social control, how the unfettered ability to detain without accountability turns state power into a pathology that spreads throughout the community like a disease.
In fact, the argument seems to be that nothing is more essential to an authoritarian regime than the unimpeded control over our bodies. So as we watch the federal response to protests unfold, perhaps we need to consider an aspect of this development that is often ignored but worth another look.
In a sense, the federal push to arrest protestors in unmarked vans is not that far removed from the continued arrest of activists by local police. And that connection is predicated upon the fact that we are ready predisposed to being arrested.
What do I mean? Well, let’s remember there is no specific power to arrest outlined in the constitution, only protections against unlawful detainment. And let’s also remember that the institution of policing itself didn’t emerge until the mid-19th century. The point is that the whole so-called arrest infrastructure has evolved as our neoliberal capitalist institutions have grown in influence and scope.
And along with that growth and power, the number of arrests in general have continued to rise in tandem. In fact, according to data compiled by the Vera Institute in 2019, American police made 10.5 million arrests. That is one every three seconds. And as the data points out, these are not detentions of murderers and child molesters. The majority are for insignificant crimes like drug possession according to that same dataset.
The point is we are conditioned to the arrest. We’ve been taught to accept this ubiquity as necessary and a familiar part of the American landscape. And along with the endless assortment of cop shows, or copaganda, we have been led to believe that millions of arrests and incarceration is somehow productive and beneficial to society, which can’t provide healthcare, solve poverty, or even supply affordable housing.
But as the arrest you are watching now reveals, the entire aforementioned narrative is subject to question. The video was given to us by a viewer, Tina [Spizike 00:16:00]. Her arrest occurred last week as she was commuting to work over the Brooklyn Bridge. As you can see by the video, police began corralling protesters and bystanders alike, forming a veritable dragnet that scooped up citizens like fish in a trawler.
As Tina told us in an interview, throughout her ordeal, she continued to ask a fundamental question that police could not answer. Why was she being arrested? We will speak with Tina next week about what happened and her treatment behind bars.
The point is the intervention by relatively anonymous federal police is an extension of the psychology of controlling space that already existed in the plethora of arrests made by our expansive law enforcement industrial complex. What we’re seeing in Portland is a reality that has been part of the psyche of this nation as we’ve continued to prosecute the war on drugs and fill prisons with low-level offenders and acceptance that policing space is a necessary component of a community. That the only way to maintain peace is to imbue a class of arresters with almost unfettered powers to detain, incarcerate and otherwise corral us into a system that seems to manufacture disfunction and disempowerment.
As we noted earlier in the show, it’s a method of conditioning consent that is predicated by violence and its continued patrolling of our psyches that’s predicated upon the idea we accept the unjust conditions of income inequality and racial divisions as reality solely constructed by us, not the institutions, which benefit from it. The question is, how far will we the people allow this to go? How much longer will we tolerate this system of coercion? How long can the massive deployment of power to detain that we are witnessing across the country continue?
That’s the question at the heart of this issue. The query that defines all the conflict and concern. Who are we really and what kind of country do we really want to be?
I would like to thank my guest cop watcher, Eli Richey, for his time and for his work in the community. Thank you, Eli.
Eli Richey: You’re very welcome, any time. And at the end of the day, I just want to see the city of Portland be a better place. And to you guys out in Baltimore, I wish you guys luck. Act local and continue to think global with the social media platform that you have.
Taya Graham: I would also like to thank Intrepid reporter, Stephen Janis, for his investigative work, writing and editing on this piece. Thank you, Stephen.
Stephen Janis: Taya, thanks for having me. I appreciate it.
Taya Graham: And of course, I would be remiss if I did not thank friend of the show, Noli Dee. Thanks, Noli Dee.
And I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct or brutality, please share it with us and we might be able to investigate. Please reach out to us. You can email us tips privately at par@therealnews.com and share your evidence of police misconduct. You can also message us @policeaccountabilityreport on Facebook or Instagram or @eyesonpolice on Twitter. And of course, you can message me directly @tayasbaltimore on Twitter or Facebook. And please like and comment. I do read your comments and appreciate them, and I try to answer questions whenever I can. My name is Taya Graham, and I’m your host of The Police Accountability Report. Please be safe out there.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-07-27--New DNC Platform Could Make The Bleak Climate Forecast Even Worse

In recent weeks , this column has focused heavily on the intersection between COVID-19 and the climate crisis , and that will continue as the pandemic sweeps the world .
But the presidential election is just over three months away , and that means Democrats will soon vote on their party platform .
Congress is still at work , and just tucked legislation the oil and gas industry lobbied for into the defense budget .
If you have a story you think deserves a spot in the roundup or story pitches in general , get in touch with me at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at @ SteveAHorn .
You can read the previous edition here .
The Democratic National Committee ’ s Platform Committee has released its proposed policy platform , which will guide party members for the next four years , and climate got 5 pages out of 79 .
Given the lack of ambition in the three other plans released in recent weeks by the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis , the Biden-Sanders Unity Committee , and the Biden campaign , holding out high expectations would ’ ve been foolhardy .
And yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the plan was unambitious even by DNC standards .
The plan doesn ’ t call for any type of oil fossil fuel industry phaseout .
The words “ fracking ” and “ natural gas ” are missing from the text altogether .
The terms “ coal ” and “ fossil fuel ” only show up once , and not in the context of an industry phaseout : The 2016 platform had much more grassroots pressure behind it , and didn ’ t need to navigate the pressure of an ongoing pandemic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fuel extraction on public lands backed by the “ Keep It in the Ground ” movement , an end to industry exemptions like the Halliburton Loophole ( Biden voted against the 2005 energy bill containing this provision ) .
It said that fracking “ should not take place where states and local communities oppose it.
” It called for phasing out coal production and ensuring a just transition for industry workers , winding down fossil fuel subsidies and tax breaks , and legal accountability for the fossil fuel industry for misleading the public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by funding denial campaigns .
None of that stuff made it into the 2020 draft platform .
Instead , the 2020 version continues Biden ’ s call for a “ double down ” on the expansion of carbon capture utilization and storage ( CCUS ) technology , and for “ breakthrough opportunities ” for “ direct air capture and net-negative emissions technologies.
” As explained in last week ’ s edition , CCUS means capturing carbon at the point of emissions at the industrial smokestack , storing it in underground pipelines and then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like cement and plastics production ( which are climate change-causing petrochemicals ) .
In the U.S. , most of the time the stored carbon is used to extract more oil in a process called enhanced oil recovery .
In reality , this all will mean more fracking for oil and gas and more growth of the sector overall .
Some of the people running climate policy for the Biden campaign may explain why this policy platform has arisen .
Campaign advisor Heather Zichal , formerly a top climate aide for President Barack Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of directors of gas exporting company Cheniere .
Zichal ’ s fellow campaign advisor , Ernest Moniz , is partial owner of a proposed liquified natural gas ( LNG ) terminal called G2 Net Zero LNG .
He is also currently on the board of directors of the predominantly gas-powered electricity sector giant Southern Company , a major proponent of CCUS and direct air capture .
Both direct air capture and CCUS are technologies heavily advocated for by Moniz via his think tank Energy Futures Initiative and through the Labor Energy Partnership .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ formed between his think tank and several labor unions which launched on the 50th anniversary of Earth Day in April .
As previously covered by The Real News , direct air capture is a form of geoengineering—a techno-fix aimed at reversing climate change—aiming to vacuum in greenhouse gas emissions from ambient air .
“ The various forms of carbon capture are still an unproven , hypothetical techno-solution , ” Dru Jay , a communications officer for ETC Group , an NGO which opposes geoengineering , told The Real News .
“ What we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ negative : at scale they will pollute , suck up precious renewable energy , create a giant infrastructure , feed the political and financial power of the fossil fuel industry , lead to more ecologically devastating extraction , and delay the global transition away from fossil fuels.
” The platform also boosts nuclear energy , CCUS and all broadly defined “ clean energy ” by calling for “ technology-neutral standards ” to achieve “ net-zero ” by 2035 in the electricity sector .
As recently reported by me and my colleague Aman Azhar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ clean energy ” framework is in the works in Congress and would boost the fortunes of the biomass industry .
Climate scientists have pointed to wood-based biomass—its predominant commercial form—as dirtier than coal when examined on a lifecycle basis .
The 2016 platform also called for the United States to stay in line with the 1.5 degree global temperature rise described in the 2015 Paris global climate agreement .
The 2020 draft platform simply cites a need for the U.S. to enter back into the Paris Agreement—given President Donald Trump has withdrawn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a temperature goal .
Yet that temperature goal , climate scientists concluded in a study published on July 22 , is very likely already out of reach due to already-existing emissions and weather patterns which will lock in atmospheric feedback loops .
Instead , the study—considered one of the most comprehensive ever done in terms of the amount of data analyzed and factors weighed—projects planetary warming of 2.6-3.9 degrees .
“ This is bad news for humanity .
It means the world has less time to act on climate , ” wrote Earther @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we fail , and carbon dioxide doubles , the planet that ’ s allowed humanity to flourish would essentially be gone , replaced by a hellscape of dead coral reefs , relentless heat waves , drowned coastlines , and rising unrest and poverty.
” Kate Marvel , a climate scientist at NASA and contributor to the study , told Bloomberg that kicking the can down the road on broad-sweeping and global climate action will only make a very bad situation far worse .
“ We can ’ t rule out really , really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outcomes , ” she said .
“ There ’ s a tendency to try to put the perfect numbers on things , to say we have 12 years to save the planet .
Honestly , we have , like , negative 30 years to save the planet.
” Climate activists , with that background in mind , have said the DNC draft plan fails to meet the moment .
Some , led by the group Climate Hawks Vote , have launched a petition calling for the party to insert the 1.5 degree goal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in some policy areas .
“ This proposal fails to dismantle the political and economic powers in place that allow the current extractive system to perpetuate , meaning it will not go nearly far enough to secure a just and equitable transition , ” Johanna Bozuwa , a past guest on The Real News and co-manager of the climate and energy program at the Democracy Collaborative , told TRNN climate correspondent alum Dharna Noor in a piece published in Earther .
CCUS , enhanced oil recovery , and direct air capture are also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Appropriations Act ( NDAA ) in a provision called the USE IT Act , S. 383 .
The NDAA recently passed through the Senate in a 86-14 vote .
The USE IT acronym stands for Utilizing Significant Emissions with Innovative Technologies Act , and the NDAA now awaits a House vote and President Donald Trump ’ s signature .
The USE IT Act calls for more research and development of direct air capture and CCUS , as well as expedited permitting of CO2 pipelines to ship the commodity to enhanced oil recovery projects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oil companies such as ExxonMobil , BP , Marathon Petroleum , Chevron , and Occidental Petroleum ; coal mining giants Peabody Energy , Arch Coal and Cloud Peak Energy ; fossil industry trade associations like the National Mining Association , American Petroleum Institute , Independent Petroleum Association of America ; business lobbying groups like Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber of Commerce ; and establishment environmental groups like Nature Conservancy and Natural Resources Defense Council .
Industry group lobbying on these issues has proven robust , OpenSecrets.org reported back in February 2019 , extending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The bill ’ s co-sponsors appear to be an odd alliance , including a man who many consider a champion on climate change—Sen .
Sheldon Whitehouse ( D-RI ) —and renowned climate change denier Sen. James Inhofe ( R-OK ) .
Sheldon Whitehouse is best known for his regular “ Time to Wake Up ” speeches on the Senate floor about the climate crisis .
Inhofe , on the other hand , is notorious for his Senate floor speech in which he brought in a snowball during the winter to prove that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he has called “ the greatest hoax ” in a book .
“ I will continue to find common ground with my Republican colleagues to advance bipartisan climate policies like the USE IT Act .
With the scale of the climate issue we ’ re facing , we can ’ t afford to take any solutions off the table , ” Whitehouse stated in support of the bill .
Sen. Tammy Duckworth ( D-IL ) , considered one of Biden ’ s likely choices for vice presidential nominee , was also a USE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provision for CCUS , direct air capture , and CO2 pipeline projects comes from the FAST Act , legislation passed in 2015 .
That law hastens the federal permitting process for infrastructure projects and created the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council , an office run by the White House Council on Environmental Quality , and received lobbying support from many of the same companies and trade associations backing the USE IT Act .
Alexander Herrgott , the director of FPISC , formerly worked as a lobbyist for the US Chamber of Commerce and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Herrgott led negotiations on the FAST ACT while working for Inhofe .
In a June 1 letter provided to The Real News , the group Food & Water Action wrote to senators advocating for the USE IT Act not to be included in the NDAA .
“ The USE IT Act seeks to streamline investment in carbon capture sequestration and utilization ( CCSU ) , under the guise of a climate solution .
This expensive technology will increase costs for ratepayers , while providing a steady stream of CO2 that oil drillers use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ known as enhanced oil recovery , ” wrote the group ’ s policy director , Mitch Jones .
“ Carbon capture technology also increases energy usage by 10 % to 15 % , which can also mean more pollution in areas near power plants when that energy comes from fossil fuels.
” The letter also expressed concerns about the potential for carbon dioxide leakage either from the underground injection storage wells or from the CO2 pipeline network , pointing to the 2015 mass leakage from the underground storage cavern owned by SoCalGas—a Sempra @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal by University of Michigan researchers , the first comprehensive data mapping project of its sort , has concluded that how American housing gets built and where it gets built is a fundamental aspect of tackling the climate crisis .
The study , titled “ The carbon footprint of household energy use in the United States , ” scoured data from 93 million homes ( 78 % of the national total ) from 8,858 zip codes nationwide and concluded what sustainable urbanism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ housing and single-family home units are likely not fit for the climate crisis era .
And that ’ s the case even if these homes are fueled by non-fossil fuel energy .
Put more bluntly , those with affluence and the ability to purchase such homes are far bigger contributors to climate change than those who can not .
Think of the homes as akin to a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV , or something urban and suburban theorists call “ McMansions.
” “ Wealthier Americans have per capita footprints ∼25 % higher than those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ larger homes .
In especially affluent suburbs , these emissions can be 15 times higher than nearby neighborhoods , ” the study concludes .
It adds that “ grid decarbonization will be insufficient to meet the [ global housing sector ] 80 % emissions reduction target for 2050 due to a growing housing stock and continued use of fossil fuels ( natural gas , propane , and fuel oil ) in homes.
” If housing in the United States were a country , it would be the sixth largest global emitter of greenhouse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Germany—at 20 % of United States ’ emissions , the study quantifies .
It also points to the sprawl pattern of housing created in the post-World War II era as the mechanism and socio-historical structure which built such a globally distinct housing pattern .
As a correction to the current housing pattern , the study calls for retrofitting of homes , outfitting those homes with non-fossil fuel energy .
It adds that urban and suburban areas should transition to “ reducing per capita floor space and zoning denser settlement patterns.
” The study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this housing pattern ’ s impact in spewing additional greenhouse gases into the atmosphere .
In California , one of the sprawl epicenters of the United States , 41 % of all emissions are generated through vehicle miles traveled .
Nationally that number is about 30 % .
So , even though California ranks as the greenest for housing stock emissions , that does not take into account any of its vehicular greenhouse gas emissions .
Even with that data in mind , another recent article points out work from home setups—a hallmark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a greater ability to work from home than service-sector and blue-collar workers—offer far less of a benefit than it would seem at face value , even though these people are driving less .
Data suggests , in fact , that it may even cancel out the greenhouse gas benefit of driving less .
Biden ’ s campaign links these issues together .
His campaign pledged to pump “ additional capital into low-income communities to spur the development of affordable housing and small business creation ” and to create affordable homes with modern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he ’ ll incentivize smart regional planning that connects housing , transit , and jobs , improving quality of life by cutting commute times , ” the campaign further details in its energy and climate plan .
Similarly , the Select Committee calls for passage of the Build More Housing Near Transit Act , stating “ Housing policy becomes climate policy when it limits households to one choice—cars—to commute and access services.
” “ Congress should provide grants , technical assistance , and other incentives to encourage the development of affordable housing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Select Committee continued .
That ’ s all a long way of saying that this study has huge implications for policymaking in the years ahead .
David Victor , a professor at University of California-San Diego , told the Associated Press that “ it raises fundamental justice questions in a society that has huge income inequality.
” Benjamin Goldstein , a co-author of the study , used a literary metaphor for the current situation .
“ This is like a tale of two cities in carbon form , ” he told CNN .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
”

Welcome back to TRNN’s Climate Crisis News Roundup.
In recent weeks, this column has focused heavily on the intersection between COVID-19 and the climate crisis, and that will continue as the pandemic sweeps the world.
But the presidential election is just over three months away, and that means Democrats will soon vote on their party platform. Congress is still at work, and just tucked legislation the oil and gas industry lobbied for into the defense budget.
If you have a story you think deserves a spot in the roundup or story pitches in general, get in touch with me at steve@therealnews.com or on Twitter at @SteveAHorn. You can read the previous edition here.
DNC Climate Plan
The Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee has released its proposed policy platform, which will guide party members for the next four years, and climate got 5 pages out of 79.
Given the lack of ambition in the three other plans released in recent weeks by the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, the Biden-Sanders Unity Committee, and the Biden campaign, holding out high expectations would’ve been foolhardy. And yet, particularly on oil and gas issues, the plan was unambitious even by DNC standards.
The plan doesn’t call for any type of oil fossil fuel industry phaseout. The words “fracking” and “natural gas” are missing from the text altogether. The terms “coal” and “fossil fuel” only show up once, and not in the context of an industry phaseout:
“We will hold fossil fuel companies accountable for cleaning up abandoned mine lands, oil and gas wells, and industrial sites, so these facilities no longer pollute local environments and can be safely repurposed to support new economic activity, including in the heart of coal country.”
The 2016 platform had much more grassroots pressure behind it, and didn’t need to navigate the pressure of an ongoing pandemic. It called for a phaseout of fossil fuel extraction on public lands backed by the “Keep It in the Ground” movement, an end to industry exemptions like the Halliburton Loophole (Biden voted against the 2005 energy bill containing this provision). It said that fracking “should not take place where states and local communities oppose it.” It called for phasing out coal production and ensuring a just transition for industry workers, winding down fossil fuel subsidies and tax breaks, and legal accountability for the fossil fuel industry for misleading the public about the impact of the climate crisis by funding denial campaigns.
None of that stuff made it into the 2020 draft platform.
Instead, the 2020 version continues Biden’s call for a “double down” on the expansion of carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) technology, and for “breakthrough opportunities” for “direct air capture and net-negative emissions technologies.” As explained in last week’s edition, CCUS means capturing carbon at the point of emissions at the industrial smokestack, storing it in underground pipelines and then utilizing the CO2 for future industrial process like cement and plastics production (which are climate change-causing petrochemicals). In the U.S., most of the time the stored carbon is used to extract more oil in a process called enhanced oil recovery.
In reality, this all will mean more fracking for oil and gas and more growth of the sector overall.
Some of the people running climate policy for the Biden campaign may explain why this policy platform has arisen. Campaign advisor Heather Zichal, formerly a top climate aide for President Barack Obama, was until recently on the board of directors of gas exporting company Cheniere. Zichal’s fellow campaign advisor, Ernest Moniz, is partial owner of a proposed liquified natural gas (LNG) terminal called G2 Net Zero LNG. He is also currently on the board of directors of the predominantly gas-powered electricity sector giant Southern Company, a major proponent of CCUS and direct air capture. Both direct air capture and CCUS are technologies heavily advocated for by Moniz via his think tank Energy Futures Initiative and through the Labor Energy Partnership. The latter is a partnership that was formed between his think tank and several labor unions which launched on the 50th anniversary of Earth Day in April.
As previously covered by The Real News, direct air capture is a form of geoengineering—a techno-fix aimed at reversing climate change—aiming to vacuum in greenhouse gas emissions from ambient air.
“The various forms of carbon capture are still an unproven, hypothetical techno-solution,” Dru Jay, a communications officer for ETC Group, an NGO which opposes geoengineering, told The Real News. “What we know about them for certain is mostly negative: at scale they will pollute, suck up precious renewable energy, create a giant infrastructure, feed the political and financial power of the fossil fuel industry, lead to more ecologically devastating extraction, and delay the global transition away from fossil fuels.”
The platform also boosts nuclear energy, CCUS and all broadly defined “clean energy” by calling for “technology-neutral standards” to achieve “net-zero” by 2035 in the electricity sector. As recently reported by me and my colleague Aman Azhar, a legislative proposal maintaining a similar “clean energy” framework is in the works in Congress and would boost the fortunes of the biomass industry. Climate scientists have pointed to wood-based biomass—its predominant commercial form—as dirtier than coal when examined on a lifecycle basis.
The 2016 platform also called for the United States to stay in line with the 1.5 degree global temperature rise described in the 2015 Paris global climate agreement. The 2020 draft platform simply cites a need for the U.S. to enter back into the Paris Agreement—given President Donald Trump has withdrawn the country from it—but does not list a temperature goal. Yet that temperature goal, climate scientists concluded in a study published on July 22, is very likely already out of reach due to already-existing emissions and weather patterns which will lock in atmospheric feedback loops. Instead, the study—considered one of the most comprehensive ever done in terms of the amount of data analyzed and factors weighed—projects planetary warming of 2.6-3.9 degrees.
“This is bad news for humanity. It means the world has less time to act on climate,” wrote Earther Managing Editor Brian Kahn. “If we fail, and carbon dioxide doubles, the planet that’s allowed humanity to flourish would essentially be gone, replaced by a hellscape of dead coral reefs, relentless heat waves, drowned coastlines, and rising unrest and poverty.”
Kate Marvel, a climate scientist at NASA and contributor to the study, told Bloomberg that kicking the can down the road on broad-sweeping and global climate action will only make a very bad situation far worse.
“We can’t rule out really, really, really wildcard catastrophic, very dangerous outcomes,” she said. “There’s a tendency to try to put the perfect numbers on things, to say we have 12 years to save the planet. Honestly, we have, like, negative 30 years to save the planet.”
Climate activists, with that background in mind, have said the DNC draft plan fails to meet the moment. Some, led by the group Climate Hawks Vote, have launched a petition calling for the party to insert the 1.5 degree goal back into the platform and stronger ambitions in some policy areas.
“This proposal fails to dismantle the political and economic powers in place that allow the current extractive system to perpetuate, meaning it will not go nearly far enough to secure a just and equitable transition,” Johanna Bozuwa, a past guest on The Real News and co-manager of the climate and energy program at the Democracy Collaborative, told TRNN climate correspondent alum Dharna Noor in a piece published in Earther.
Defending Enhanced Oil Recovery
CCUS, enhanced oil recovery, and direct air capture are also part of the proposed 1,160-page National Defense Appropriations Act (NDAA) in a provision called the USE IT Act, S. 383. The NDAA recently passed through the Senate in a 86-14 vote. The USE IT acronym stands for Utilizing Significant Emissions with Innovative Technologies Act, and the NDAA now awaits a House vote and President Donald Trump’s signature.
The USE IT Act calls for more research and development of direct air capture and CCUS, as well as expedited permitting of CO2 pipelines to ship the commodity to enhanced oil recovery projects. It has received lobbying support from oil companies such as ExxonMobil, BP, Marathon Petroleum, Chevron, and Occidental Petroleum; coal mining giants Peabody Energy, Arch Coal and Cloud Peak Energy; fossil industry trade associations like the National Mining Association, American Petroleum Institute, Independent Petroleum Association of America; business lobbying groups like Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber of Commerce; and establishment environmental groups like Nature Conservancy and Natural Resources Defense Council. Industry group lobbying on these issues has proven robust, OpenSecrets.org reported back in February 2019, extending well past the USE IT Act legislation.
The bill’s co-sponsors appear to be an odd alliance, including a man who many consider a champion on climate change—Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)—and renowned climate change denier Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK). Sheldon Whitehouse is best known for his regular “Time to Wake Up” speeches on the Senate floor about the climate crisis. Inhofe, on the other hand, is notorious for his Senate floor speech in which he brought in a snowball during the winter to prove that global warming is not real, something he has called “the greatest hoax” in a book.
“I will continue to find common ground with my Republican colleagues to advance bipartisan climate policies like the USE IT Act. With the scale of the climate issue we’re facing, we can’t afford to take any solutions off the table,” Whitehouse stated in support of the bill.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), considered one of Biden’s likely choices for vice presidential nominee, was also a USE IT Act co-sponsor.
The expedited permitting provision for CCUS, direct air capture, and CO2 pipeline projects comes from the FAST Act, legislation passed in 2015. That law hastens the federal permitting process for infrastructure projects and created the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, an office run by the White House Council on Environmental Quality, and received lobbying support from many of the same companies and trade associations backing the USE IT Act. Alexander Herrgott, the director of FPISC, formerly worked as a lobbyist for the US Chamber of Commerce and as a policy aide for Inhofe. Herrgott led negotiations on the FAST ACT while working for Inhofe.
In a June 1 letter provided to The Real News, the group Food & Water Action wrote to senators advocating for the USE IT Act not to be included in the NDAA.
“The USE IT Act seeks to streamline investment in carbon capture sequestration and utilization (CCSU), under the guise of a climate solution. This expensive technology will increase costs for ratepayers, while providing a steady stream of CO2 that oil drillers use to increase oil production in a process known as enhanced oil recovery,” wrote the group’s policy director, Mitch Jones. “Carbon capture technology also increases energy usage by 10% to 15%, which can also mean more pollution in areas near power plants when that energy comes from fossil fuels.”
The letter also expressed concerns about the potential for carbon dioxide leakage either from the underground injection storage wells or from the CO2 pipeline network, pointing to the 2015 mass leakage from the underground storage cavern owned by SoCalGas—a Sempra Energy subsidiary—in Southern California.
Fossil-Fueled McMansions
A new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal by University of Michigan researchers, the first comprehensive data mapping project of its sort, has concluded that how American housing gets built and where it gets built is a fundamental aspect of tackling the climate crisis. The study, titled “The carbon footprint of household energy use in the United States,” scoured data from 93 million homes (78% of the national total) from 8,858 zip codes nationwide and concluded what sustainable urbanism advocates have said for years: Sprawl housing and single-family home units are likely not fit for the climate crisis era.
And that’s the case even if these homes are fueled by non-fossil fuel energy. Put more bluntly, those with affluence and the ability to purchase such homes are far bigger contributors to climate change than those who cannot. Think of the homes as akin to a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV, or something urban and suburban theorists call “McMansions.”
“Wealthier Americans have per capita footprints ∼25% higher than those of lower-income residents, primarily due to larger homes. In especially affluent suburbs, these emissions can be 15 times higher than nearby neighborhoods,” the study concludes. It adds that “grid decarbonization will be insufficient to meet the [global housing sector] 80% emissions reduction target for 2050 due to a growing housing stock and continued use of fossil fuels (natural gas, propane, and fuel oil) in homes.”
If housing in the United States were a country, it would be the sixth largest global emitter of greenhouse gases—comparable to Brazil, and larger than Germany—at 20% of United States’ emissions, the study quantifies. It also points to the sprawl pattern of housing created in the post-World War II era as the mechanism and socio-historical structure which built such a globally distinct housing pattern.
As a correction to the current housing pattern, the study calls for retrofitting of homes, outfitting those homes with non-fossil fuel energy. It adds that urban and suburban areas should transition to “reducing per capita floor space and zoning denser settlement patterns.”
The study does not examine vehicle miles traveled and this housing pattern’s impact in spewing additional greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. In California, one of the sprawl epicenters of the United States, 41% of all emissions are generated through vehicle miles traveled. Nationally that number is about 30%. So, even though California ranks as the greenest for housing stock emissions, that does not take into account any of its vehicular greenhouse gas emissions.
Even with that data in mind, another recent article points out work from home setups—a hallmark of many affluent white collar workers who have a greater ability to work from home than service-sector and blue-collar workers—offer far less of a benefit than it would seem at face value, even though these people are driving less. Data suggests, in fact, that it may even cancel out the greenhouse gas benefit of driving less.
Biden’s campaign links these issues together. His campaign pledged to pump “additional capital into low-income communities to spur the development of affordable housing and small business creation” and to create affordable homes with modern, energy efficient materials.
“And, he’ll incentivize smart regional planning that connects housing, transit, and jobs, improving quality of life by cutting commute times,” the campaign further details in its energy and climate plan.
Similarly, the Select Committee calls for passage of the Build More Housing Near Transit Act, stating “Housing policy becomes climate policy when it limits households to one choice—cars—to commute and access services.”
“Congress should provide grants, technical assistance, and other incentives to encourage the development of affordable housing near proposed transit projects,” the Select Committee continued.
That’s all a long way of saying that this study has huge implications for policymaking in the years ahead. David Victor, a professor at University of California-San Diego, told the Associated Press that “it raises fundamental justice questions in a society that has huge income inequality.”
Benjamin Goldstein, a co-author of the study, used a literary metaphor for the current situation. “This is like a tale of two cities in carbon form,” he told CNN. “Income and greenhouse gases rise together.”
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-07-27--Elizabeth Warren On Why We Must Stop Utility Shutoffs During The Pandemic

All donations in the US and Canada are tax deductible .
To make a secure donation by credit or debit @ @ @ @ @ location , or select PayPal .

With unemployment at record levels and an economy teetering on the edge, utility shutoffs threaten to compound the existing public health disaster unfolding in the US. The Real News is highlighting voices from a national campaign that is trying to do something to prevent this by demanding a national moratorium on shutoffs during the COVID crisis.
In this first video in this series, Senator Elizabeth Warren speaks with Maria Bellen of Chelsea Green Roots about the impact of utility shutoffs on the low-income communities of color already disproportionately affected by the pandemic.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-07-28--Portland Dispatch: What Is the role of white people in the uprising?

Stir Crazy! Episode 72: Today we are joined by Maryland based consultant and organizer Brittny Baxter, Portland resident and activist Darren Golden, and environmental and climate justice organizer Anthony Rogers Wright. Hosted by Charles Lenchner.
If you have comments/questions/suggestions email us at stircrazy@therealnews.com
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.