truthout--2020-12-21--The Ocean Floor Is Spewing Methane Due to Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells

The Global Methane Initiative , an international effort to reduce methane emissions , estimates about 20 percent of human-caused methane emissions come from the oil and gas sector .
That ’ s likely an underestimated figure , Yacovitch told EHN , “ because there ’ s really not that much data on offshore assets — the field of measuring emissions , particularly in the Gulf of Mexico , is fairly new.
” Yacovitch and her team randomly selected and studied 103 sites , looking at air quality from the platforms as seepage on the ocean floor is hard to measure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of both active and decommissioned , shallow and deep , and found platforms emitted methane at widely ranging rates : from zero to 190 kilograms per hour .
And the top 2 percent of emitters accounted for 20 percent of the total methane emissions .
The data show that not every well , orphaned or not , is guaranteed to leak .
But when a well does leak , there is huge variability in emissions .
They only surveyed 103 areas — so there is a chance that , though they randomly selected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be an accurate representation .
Nonetheless , the study points to an incredible problem .
The top 2 percent of emitters , so-called super-emitters , leak very high levels of methane , but are largely unidentified in a literal sea of sites .
While 2 percent may sound small , when the total is 55,292 wells in federal waters , that amounts to 1,104 super-emitters in national waters .
What ’ s more , “ a lot of wells are undocumented , ” Mary Kang , an environmental engineer at McGill University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of research experience looking at leaky , abandoned oil and gas wells .
“ You go out and you don ’ t find them .
And then you go somewhere else looking for one , but you find 10 others.
” An Environmental Science & Technology paper from earlier this year states that “ current U.S. government inventories overestimate the number of oil and gas platforms in federal waters while missing platforms located in state waters.
” Scientists found that more than 1,300 offshore facilities were missing from government documentation .
These facilities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with disproportionately high spikes of methane emissions , from early industry years when tracking measures were even less stringent .
The authors suggest that U.S. methane emissions for the country ’ s whole natural gas supply chain are as much as 60 percent greater than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Greenhouse Gas Inventory .
Industry reports show pretty consistent numbers of newly drilled or active wells in a given area of oil and gas production over time .
But if you read between the lines , that means that the numbers of abandoned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There are many wells that are active for just a few years , if at all , but once a well is abandoned , “ they ’ re going to be abandoned for decades and centuries , ” Kang said .
Kang also said there is no standard definition for what flow rate constitutes leakage across the industry .
If you look at just high emitters , depending on how you define “ high , ” then leaky wells are just 10 to 20 percent .
But depending on how you define that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaky wells could go up to 50 , maybe 80 percent .
“ The bigger questions are , how many wells are out there , and how long are they emitting for ?
” Kang added .
“ If you see no methane emissions on the ocean floor , or at the water ’ s surface , does that mean there was no leakage ?
No , it doesn ’ t , ” Kang said .
An absence of gas bubbles coming up to the ocean ’ s surface and low methane measurements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is zero gas escaping .
A lot of research in this area thus far has focused on measuring how much methane each well is emitting , said Kang , who has spent years researching abandoned oil and gas wells .
But , terms like “ leakage ” are poorly defined .
Yacovitch and her team experienced that challenge .
When trying to navigate to survey sites , the team found discrepancies between where government records said oil and gas platforms were versus where they are .
“ Sometimes we would say , ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out here , ’ but we ’ d go and there ’ s nothing there , ” Yacovitch said .
Individual states are responsible for sites in their own waters , but as far as monitoring and tracking their wells , “ different states definitely do it differently , and some do it almost not at all , ” Chris Konek told EHN .
Konek manages the oil and gas methane science studies at the Climate & Clean Air Coalition ( CCAC ) , which is part of the UN Environment Programme .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the vast ocean is a difficult undertaking .
There is an upcoming wave of wells that will be plugged and abandoned in the coming years — a surge that science and industry have long seen coming .
According to a June article in World Oil , “ In the U.S. Gulf of Mexico , which generates about 15 percent of the nation ’ s output , explorers are expected to spend about $ 1 billion a year over the next half decade to decommission hundreds of wells.
” A 2018 paper says that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ water region has witnessed record levels of decommissioning activity due to aging fields , sustained low oil and gas prices , and greater regulatory oversight and scrutiny.
” Moreover , “ more than 40 percent of all decommissioning activity to date has occurred over the past decade.
” “ From a strategic point of view , now is a very unique opportunity for us to admit there ’ s a problem , ” said Williams , the LSU engineer .
Every well ever drilled will need to be plugged .
With a cascade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imperative now more than ever to nail down proper methodology .
One 2019 paper reviewing plug and abandonment methods found that , despite many layers of cylindrical casings and cement barriers — the industry ’ s most-used technique for plugging , many wells still leak because of chemical stressors and the constant shifting tectonics of the Earth .
“ Just because you plug a well , that doesn ’ t mean it ’ s plugged forever , ” Williams said .
“ It ’ s plugged for as long as that piece of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a fallacy to think a company will clean up their mess once they no longer want to produce oil or gas , said Milliken Biven .
Evidence is mounting that the story for these wells rarely ends cleanly after plugging and abandonment .
In a recent study based on marine hydroacoustic imaging of plugged wells in the North Sea , scientists found that 926 wells out of the 1,792 observed ( 52 percent ) are likely to leak .
By their estimates , these supposedly plugged wells in the central North @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3.7 kilotons of methane a year .
These supposedly plugged wells are by no means leak proof , but the way leasing , contracting , and liability happens , companies technically aren ’ t liable for leaks post-plug and abandonment , Milliken Biven said .
“ Everything fails eventually , but there is no commitment on any one side to actually look at these leaks in perpetuity.
” The industry could find solutions , Williams said , but huge oil and gas companies are not dedicating money into finding them , though they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solutions out there that we could bring over and apply to this problem , ” he said .
“ But they ’ re in other industries , they ’ re in aerospace , they ’ re in medicine , they ’ re in all these other disciplines.
” These other industries have solved similar problems of leakage and degrading materials as far back as 30 years ago .
The barrier to finding better plugging and abandonment protocols , therefore , is not an issue of innovation , but one of willingness and initiative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s a feedback loop , Williams said : Companies don ’ t want to address the issue due to costs , and so the problems worsen and become more expensive — and more difficult — to fix over time .
When it comes to the per-well cost of plugging , “ there ’ s huge variation , ” said Kang .
She parsed U.S. government data to see how much they were spending on plugging — the government becomes responsible for plugging wells when operators go bankrupt and can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well is the same .
But the per well cost is anywhere from the high tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars , or even more than a million.
” Those figures are just based on government spending .
Data on corporate plug and abandonment spending is not available .
A BSEE document on Decommissioning Methodology and Cost Evaluation calculates the average cost of decommissioning an offshore well in the Gulf to be in the range of $ 340,000 to more than $ 420,000 for wells less than 400 feet deep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ older , soon-to-be decommissioned wells are .
For a well 5,000 feet deep that could go up to almost $ 1.5 million .
Wells in state waters may be all the more problematic , since they are usually older and probably did not have to adhere to modern safety and environmental standards .
“ I did an estimate , just a back-of-the-envelope calculation , and I think in Louisiana it ’ s easily a $ 2-5 billion-worth problem , ” said Williams .
“ And that is just Louisiana .
Nationwide , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Furthermore , Williams wants oil and gas to take a leaf out of nuclear ’ s book : Nuclear energy producers will often think in terms of life cycle costs , taking a small percentage of energy sales and saving that money for disposing nuclear waste .
The fossil fuel industry has no equivalent , he said , so by the time it is time to retire a site , “ there has been no money saved by the regulator or by the government or by anybody to help with those costs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up.
” Konek added that some of the most potentially effective strategies are mostly non-technical , like incentivizing methane storage : “ In certain places there ’ s a lack of infrastructure to get gas to market , and so you have companies that are letting that go.
” Finding more efficient ways to store and use that gas could convince companies to keep better track of the methane gas coming from their wells .
As it stands , letting methane pool and seep means letting all that methane get to the atmosphere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we estimated in total , probably about a third of the gases that is emitted at the sea floor will enter the atmosphere , ” Matthias Haeckel , a marine geochemist and an author of the North Sea hydroacoustic imaging study , told EHN .
At shallow water depths , around a hundred feet or less , all that emitted methane will get to the atmosphere in a few months , he added .
But even if methane doesn ’ t make its way from the sea floor to the atmosphere , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and pathways for gas to pool and accumulate in ways that it otherwise would not , potentially creating risk of blowout events , Christoph Böttner told EHN .
Böttner is a marine geoscientist at the University of Kiel and one of Haeckel ’ s co-authors .
In their study , Böttner and Haeckel ’ s team used hydroacoustic imaging to look at marine sediments and estimate where pools of methane lie in the ocean floor .
Using this technique in tandem with existing regional seismic data , they said , could guide industry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on satellite imaging and infrared spectroscopy , and you have a much better chance at getting an accurate idea of where gas flow exits .
Uncontrolled flow of natural gas , including methane is also a leading hazard for oil and gas workers .
The Deepwater Horizon blowout event is still salient a full decade later .
But measures to prevent future blowouts have actually decreased in the last decade .
According to the AP , “ inspections fell from 4,712 in 2013 to 3,717 in 2019 , ” and while in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blowout preventers every 14 days , “ the Trump Administration allows companies to test every 21 days , saying more frequent testing would risk equipment failure.
” Methane escaping the ocean floor can be a completely normal phenomenon , especially in the Gulf of Mexico , Jennifer Biddle , a biochemist at the University of Delaware , told EHN .
Biddle studies natural methane seeps at or under the ocean floor and assesses how that gas affects microbiota .
She said that the tectonic geography of the Gulf of Mexico makes it prone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the fossil fuel inside the sediments of the sea floor , the whole area is a natural methane emitter .
But microbes generally eat that gas before it reaches the surface .
Microflora and microfauna thrive off of this methane , providing the base for other organisms to come and enrich the habitat ecology .
At natural seep sights , Biddle said , “ a lot of estimates are that [ microbes ] can take up over 90 percent of the methane that is released.
” But when you add human activity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going up and the number of sites gas is released from , the balance is thrown off and the microbes have a hard time keeping up , she said .
Milito , the president of the National Ocean Industries Association , said in an email that methane emissions from oil and gas activity are unlikely , and that “ most data regarding methane leaks from the Gulf of Mexico actually point to natural seepage from the sea floor .
Some studies estimate that there are 20,000 natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Gulf of Mexico is very likely compounding the issue .
A 2011 paper in Annual Review of Marine Science says that “ the co-occurrence of oil with methane at the sea floor frequently leads to bubbles coated with oil , ” which prevents the methane in those bubbles from diffusing and allows more bubbles to reach the surface , intact .
“ We ’ ll go somewhere like the Gulf of California , where there ’ s definitely gas coming out of the sea floor , but there ’ s so much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see bubbles coming up at the surface , ” Biddle said.
” Versus in the Gulf of Mexico , the rate in some of these areas is so high that you see huge bubbles coming up to the surface .
And so that ’ s obviously the stuff that microbes aren ’ t able to eat.
” The ocean burping up pockets of gas is an indication that things are off-kilter .
Given the natural presence of seepage in the Gulf of Mexico , the microbes there are probably robust enough to handle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places , but unfortunately , Biddle said , we don ’ t really know what that threshold is .
In places like Finland and Canada , the governments are currently funding research to find those baseline microbial consumption abilities , she added , and those results “ might change how they prepare for industrial projects.
” Unfortunately , the Gulf of Mexico is beyond that point .

The Global Methane Initiative, an international effort to reduce methane emissions, estimates about 20 percent of human-caused methane emissions come from the oil and gas sector. That’s likely an underestimated figure, Yacovitch told EHN, “because there’s really not that much data on offshore assets — the field of measuring emissions, particularly in the Gulf of Mexico, is fairly new.”
Yacovitch and her team randomly selected and studied 103 sites, looking at air quality from the platforms as seepage on the ocean floor is hard to measure. The team looked at a mix of both active and decommissioned, shallow and deep, and found platforms emitted methane at widely ranging rates: from zero to 190 kilograms per hour. And the top 2 percent of emitters accounted for 20 percent of the total methane emissions.
The data show that not every well, orphaned or not, is guaranteed to leak. But when a well does leak, there is huge variability in emissions.
They only surveyed 103 areas — so there is a chance that, though they randomly selected their surveyed regions, their data may not be an accurate representation.
Nonetheless, the study points to an incredible problem. The top 2 percent of emitters, so-called super-emitters, leak very high levels of methane, but are largely unidentified in a literal sea of sites. While 2 percent may sound small, when the total is 55,292 wells in federal waters, that amounts to 1,104 super-emitters in national waters.
What’s more, “a lot of wells are undocumented,” Mary Kang, an environmental engineer at McGill University, told EHN. Kang has years of research experience looking at leaky, abandoned oil and gas wells. “You go out and you don’t find them. And then you go somewhere else looking for one, but you find 10 others.”
An Environmental Science & Technology paper from earlier this year states that “current U.S. government inventories overestimate the number of oil and gas platforms in federal waters while missing platforms located in state waters.” Scientists found that more than 1,300 offshore facilities were missing from government documentation.
These facilities are likely older and therefore larger, with disproportionately high spikes of methane emissions, from early industry years when tracking measures were even less stringent.
The authors suggest that U.S. methane emissions for the country’s whole natural gas supply chain are as much as 60 percent greater than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
Industry reports show pretty consistent numbers of newly drilled or active wells in a given area of oil and gas production over time. But if you read between the lines, that means that the numbers of abandoned and decommissioned wells are always growing.
There are many wells that are active for just a few years, if at all, but once a well is abandoned, “they’re going to be abandoned for decades and centuries,” Kang said.
Kang also said there is no standard definition for what flow rate constitutes leakage across the industry. If you look at just high emitters, depending on how you define “high,” then leaky wells are just 10 to 20 percent. But depending on how you define that threshold for leakage, the proportion of leaky wells could go up to 50, maybe 80 percent. “The bigger questions are, how many wells are out there, and how long are they emitting for?” Kang added.
“If you see no methane emissions on the ocean floor, or at the water’s surface, does that mean there was no leakage? No, it doesn’t,” Kang said. An absence of gas bubbles coming up to the ocean’s surface and low methane measurements in the air do not guarantee there is zero gas escaping.
A lot of research in this area thus far has focused on measuring how much methane each well is emitting, said Kang, who has spent years researching abandoned oil and gas wells. But, terms like “leakage” are poorly defined.
Yacovitch and her team experienced that challenge. When trying to navigate to survey sites, the team found discrepancies between where government records said oil and gas platforms were versus where they are. “Sometimes we would say, ‘We swear there’s a platform out here,’ but we’d go and there’s nothing there,” Yacovitch said.
Individual states are responsible for sites in their own waters, but as far as monitoring and tracking their wells, “different states definitely do it differently, and some do it almost not at all,” Chris Konek told EHN. Konek manages the oil and gas methane science studies at the Climate & Clean Air Coalition (CCAC), which is part of the UN Environment Programme. He said identifying where wells are in the vast ocean is a difficult undertaking.
“A Multi-Billion Dollar Issue”
There is an upcoming wave of wells that will be plugged and abandoned in the coming years — a surge that science and industry have long seen coming. According to a June article in World Oil, “In the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, which generates about 15 percent of the nation’s output, explorers are expected to spend about $1 billion a year over the next half decade to decommission hundreds of wells.”
A 2018 paper says that “in recent years, the shallow water region has witnessed record levels of decommissioning activity due to aging fields, sustained low oil and gas prices, and greater regulatory oversight and scrutiny.” Moreover, “more than 40 percent of all decommissioning activity to date has occurred over the past decade.”
“From a strategic point of view, now is a very unique opportunity for us to admit there’s a problem,” said Williams, the LSU engineer. Every well ever drilled will need to be plugged. With a cascade of plugging projects imminent, it is imperative now more than ever to nail down proper methodology.
One 2019 paper reviewing plug and abandonment methods found that, despite many layers of cylindrical casings and cement barriers — the industry’s most-used technique for plugging, many wells still leak because of chemical stressors and the constant shifting tectonics of the Earth.
“Just because you plug a well, that doesn’t mean it’s plugged forever,” Williams said. “It’s plugged for as long as that piece of material is going to last.”
It’s a fallacy to think a company will clean up their mess once they no longer want to produce oil or gas, said Milliken Biven.
Evidence is mounting that the story for these wells rarely ends cleanly after plugging and abandonment.
In a recent study based on marine hydroacoustic imaging of plugged wells in the North Sea, scientists found that 926 wells out of the 1,792 observed (52 percent) are likely to leak. By their estimates, these supposedly plugged wells in the central North Sea could emit anywhere from 0.9 to 3.7 kilotons of methane a year.
These supposedly plugged wells are by no means leak proof, but the way leasing, contracting, and liability happens, companies technically aren’t liable for leaks post-plug and abandonment, Milliken Biven said. “Everything fails eventually, but there is no commitment on any one side to actually look at these leaks in perpetuity.”
The industry could find solutions, Williams said, but huge oil and gas companies are not dedicating money into finding them, though they definitely could. “There are technological solutions out there that we could bring over and apply to this problem,” he said. “But they’re in other industries, they’re in aerospace, they’re in medicine, they’re in all these other disciplines.” These other industries have solved similar problems of leakage and degrading materials as far back as 30 years ago.
The barrier to finding better plugging and abandonment protocols, therefore, is not an issue of innovation, but one of willingness and initiative. And cost is a major deterrent. It’s a feedback loop, Williams said: Companies don’t want to address the issue due to costs, and so the problems worsen and become more expensive — and more difficult — to fix over time.
When it comes to the per-well cost of plugging, “there’s huge variation,” said Kang. She parsed U.S. government data to see how much they were spending on plugging — the government becomes responsible for plugging wells when operators go bankrupt and cannot shoulder their liabilities. “Not every well is the same. But the per well cost is anywhere from the high tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars, or even more than a million.” Those figures are just based on government spending. Data on corporate plug and abandonment spending is not available.
A BSEE document on Decommissioning Methodology and Cost Evaluation calculates the average cost of decommissioning an offshore well in the Gulf to be in the range of $340,000 to more than $420,000 for wells less than 400 feet deep, which is what the majority of older, soon-to-be decommissioned wells are. For a well 5,000 feet deep that could go up to almost $1.5 million.
Wells in state waters may be all the more problematic, since they are usually older and probably did not have to adhere to modern safety and environmental standards.
“I did an estimate, just a back-of-the-envelope calculation, and I think in Louisiana it’s easily a $2-5 billion-worth problem,” said Williams. “And that is just Louisiana. Nationwide, it’s definitely a multi-billion dollar issue.”
Furthermore, Williams wants oil and gas to take a leaf out of nuclear’s book: Nuclear energy producers will often think in terms of life cycle costs, taking a small percentage of energy sales and saving that money for disposing nuclear waste. The fossil fuel industry has no equivalent, he said, so by the time it is time to retire a site, “there has been no money saved by the regulator or by the government or by anybody to help with those costs of plugging and getting the areas cleaned up.”
Konek added that some of the most potentially effective strategies are mostly non-technical, like incentivizing methane storage: “In certain places there’s a lack of infrastructure to get gas to market, and so you have companies that are letting that go.” Finding more efficient ways to store and use that gas could convince companies to keep better track of the methane gas coming from their wells.
As it stands, letting methane pool and seep means letting all that methane get to the atmosphere. “Depending on the water depths, we estimated in total, probably about a third of the gases that is emitted at the sea floor will enter the atmosphere,” Matthias Haeckel, a marine geochemist and an author of the North Sea hydroacoustic imaging study, told EHN. At shallow water depths, around a hundred feet or less, all that emitted methane will get to the atmosphere in a few months, he added.
But even if methane doesn’t make its way from the sea floor to the atmosphere, the act of drilling results in fractures and pathways for gas to pool and accumulate in ways that it otherwise would not, potentially creating risk of blowout events, Christoph Böttner told EHN. Böttner is a marine geoscientist at the University of Kiel and one of Haeckel’s co-authors.
In their study, Böttner and Haeckel’s team used hydroacoustic imaging to look at marine sediments and estimate where pools of methane lie in the ocean floor. Using this technique in tandem with existing regional seismic data, they said, could guide industry away from potentially problematic areas. Layer on satellite imaging and infrared spectroscopy, and you have a much better chance at getting an accurate idea of where gas flow exits.
Uncontrolled flow of natural gas, including methane is also a leading hazard for oil and gas workers. The Deepwater Horizon blowout event is still salient a full decade later. But measures to prevent future blowouts have actually decreased in the last decade. According to the AP, “inspections fell from 4,712 in 2013 to 3,717 in 2019,” and while in 2016 the government required companies to test their blowout preventers every 14 days, “the Trump Administration allows companies to test every 21 days, saying more frequent testing would risk equipment failure.”
Microbes and Methane
Methane escaping the ocean floor can be a completely normal phenomenon, especially in the Gulf of Mexico, Jennifer Biddle, a biochemist at the University of Delaware, told EHN. Biddle studies natural methane seeps at or under the ocean floor and assesses how that gas affects microbiota. She said that the tectonic geography of the Gulf of Mexico makes it prone to frequent little earthquakes — combined with all the fossil fuel inside the sediments of the sea floor, the whole area is a natural methane emitter. But microbes generally eat that gas before it reaches the surface.
Microflora and microfauna thrive off of this methane, providing the base for other organisms to come and enrich the habitat ecology.
At natural seep sights, Biddle said, “a lot of estimates are that [microbes] can take up over 90 percent of the methane that is released.” But when you add human activity that increases both the rate of gas going up and the number of sites gas is released from, the balance is thrown off and the microbes have a hard time keeping up, she said.
Milito, the president of the National Ocean Industries Association, said in an email that methane emissions from oil and gas activity are unlikely, and that “most data regarding methane leaks from the Gulf of Mexico actually point to natural seepage from the sea floor. Some studies estimate that there are 20,000 natural seeps in the Gulf of Mexico.”
But the presence of oil in the Gulf of Mexico is very likely compounding the issue. A 2011 paper in Annual Review of Marine Science says that “the co-occurrence of oil with methane at the sea floor frequently leads to bubbles coated with oil,” which prevents the methane in those bubbles from diffusing and allows more bubbles to reach the surface, intact. “We’ll go somewhere like the Gulf of California, where there’s definitely gas coming out of the sea floor, but there’s so much microbial activity, that you hardly ever see bubbles coming up at the surface,” Biddle said.”Versus in the Gulf of Mexico, the rate in some of these areas is so high that you see huge bubbles coming up to the surface. And so that’s obviously the stuff that microbes aren’t able to eat.” The ocean burping up pockets of gas is an indication that things are off-kilter. Given the natural presence of seepage in the Gulf of Mexico, the microbes there are probably robust enough to handle a little more methane than in other places, but unfortunately, Biddle said, we don’t really know what that threshold is. In places like Finland and Canada, the governments are currently funding research to find those baseline microbial consumption abilities, she added, and those results “might change how they prepare for industrial projects.” Unfortunately, the Gulf of Mexico is beyond that point.


truthout--2020-12-21--Green Social Democracy Offers the Most Viable Path Toward a Sustainable Future

The coronavirus pandemic has created both a public health and an economic crisis in the United States .
More than 300,000 people have died of COVID-19 , with excess deaths highest among Black and Latinx populations .
Hospitals across the country have passed the breaking point .
And millions are struggling to eat and pay the rent .
Yet , the stock market is hitting record highs and the super-rich are getting even richer in the midst of the pandemic .
Yet , there is no talk among the elites of meaningful reforms , even while the climate change is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the interview that follows , David Kotz , economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst , argues that radical change is the only hope for a sustainable future and advocates a blueprint based on the vision of a “ green social democracy.
” Kotz is the author of scores of articles and books , including The Rise and Fall of Neoliberal Capitalism ( Harvard University Press ) .
C.J .
Polychroniou : David , we are again in the midst of yet another capitalist crisis , yet the stock market is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this be when the economy is weakening and so many Americans are struggling ?
David Kotz : The performance of the stock market is not a good indicator of the health of the economy .
It is driven by expected future profits of corporations and future dividend payouts , which can not be known with any certainty .
At times the stock market is affected by purely speculative factors ; that is , the belief that if stock prices have been rising recently then they will continue to rise in the future , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spiral in stock prices .
On March 1 , 2020 , just before the pandemic began to shut down the U.S. economy , the ratio of price to corporate earnings for the Standard and Poor ’ s 500 corporations was 22.80 , yet after some nine months of pandemic economic crisis , it had risen to 37.08 on December 11 , 2020 .
While the majority of the population has suffered financially during this period , the rich , who do most of the stock market investing , have been doing fine .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ boost their stock price , such as buying back their own shares at a historically high rate and making large dividend payouts — actions that do not indicate economic health of the economy .
While U.S. corporate profits fell by 20 percent in the second quarter of 2020 compared to six months earlier , dividends fell by only 5 percent .
The United States is the richest country in the world , but its distribution of wealth is more unequal than in any other country in the advanced industrialized world .
Why is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very high degree of inequality of income and wealth , as the owners of companies and other forms of property are able to take most of what is produced by working people .
However , inequality can be reduced when workers have strong trade unions through which they can claim a larger share of what they produce .
Inequality can also be reduced by several kinds of government interventions , including income maintenance programs , progressive tax systems , minimum wage regulations , provision of essential goods and services for free or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , fiscal and monetary policies that promote a low rate of unemployment .
A low unemployment rate increases labor ’ s bargaining power and particularly benefits workers who are at the low-wage end of the working class .
The labor movement in the U.S. historically has been weaker than in other developed capitalist countries .
Among the reasons for this are the following : 1 ) the ethnic and racial diversity of the U.S. working class , which has made it more difficult for all workers to combine in struggle against employers ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. in the period when capitalism was developing in the late 19th and early 20th centuries , which created significant opportunity for workers and their children to rise in the class structure ; 3 ) the U.S. capitalist class put up very determined resistance to labor unions , including the use of violence ; and 4 ) American culture is relatively individualistic , which makes it more difficult for workers to engage in collective action .
For the same reasons cited above , the U.S. is the only developed capitalist country in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has never achieved major party status .
In other countries such parties have played the major role in the enactment of government programs that reduce inequality .
In the U.S. , the Democratic Party has in some periods played a somewhat similar role , but that party is not a workers ’ party but rather represents parts of big business and parts of small business as well as working people .
The result has been much weaker government programs that reduce inequality .
You are an advocate of “ green social democracy.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” and what sort of policies can be expected from a green social democratic state with regard to addressing economic concerns and the environmental challenges facing the planet ?
Since around 1980 , a neoliberal form of capitalism has prevailed in the U.S. and in the global capitalist system .
Under that form of capitalism , capitalists have been left relatively “ free ” to pursue profit in any way they wish with few constraints from trade unions or government .
Neoliberalism has brought a whole series of retrograde trends .
Among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inequality ; lack of access to affordable housing and health care for a substantial part of the population ; the runaway cost of post-secondary education to students , who graduate with a burdensome level of educational debt ; the casualization of jobs as the number of stable , well-paying jobs with good benefits has shrunk rapidly ; and not least , the threat to the future from global climate change .
Neoliberalism has no longer been viable since the financial crisis and Great Recession of 2008 , as I argued in my book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As a result , a change in direction is likely in the near future .
A shift to green social democracy could potentially resolve the big economic problems we face at this time .
Social democracy refers to a form of capitalism in which government programs assure a comfortable life for all working people .
Specifically , social democracy would provide guaranteed access to affordable health care as a right ; programs to provide decent affordable housing for all ; free public higher education and free early childhood education ; a guarantee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ union ; generous sick leave , child care leave , and retirement pensions ; and a government program to provide a job to any worker who does not find one in the private sector .
The green part of green social democracy means going beyond what social democracy has meant in the past .
The deadly threat of global warming requires a very large public investment to rapidly move toward zero greenhouse gas emissions .
This would require major transformations in the systems of energy , transportation and production , as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make them energy efficient .
Such a program fits well with the traditional policies of social democracy , and it would create many well-paying jobs .
A transition to a period of green social democracy is possible in the near future in my view .
Several forces are pressing in that direction : the continuing stagnation of neoliberal capitalism , the pressing danger of global climate change which even threatens the bottom line of big corporations , the continuing radicalization of young people which could get “ out of control ” if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recognition of the need to combat institutional racism , the continuing anger of many working people at their worsening conditions .
If a period of green social democracy emerges in the next five or 10 years , we could see significant progress against global climate change and improvement in the lives of working people , young people and people of color .
However , green social democracy is not the only possible new direction at this time .
Another possible but not promising new direction is an authoritarian nationalist regime .
In my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ determined by struggles among various classes and groups in the coming period .
The word “ socialism ” has been something of a taboo in U.S. political culture , but millennials are drawn to socialism because of all the economic and social ills associated with the workings of neoliberal capitalism .
Does socialism have a future in the United States ?
A transition to socialism would mean a more thoroughgoing change than the modifications of capitalism that arise under social democracy .
A socialist system is one in which economic decisions are made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wants and needs of people , rather than economic decisions being made by wealthy owners of companies and wealthy investors whose aim is profit .
Social democracy would leave the ownership structure of capitalism in place , while taxing and regulating the capitalist class and removing some potentially profitable activities from the private to the public sector .
The rich would be less rich but still rich , and they would still be powerful .
Under socialism there is no class of wealthy and powerful owners of productive property .
Support for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people under capitalism .
It is not surprising that the particularly oppressive conditions brought by neoliberal capitalism have also renewed interest in socialism .
This has happened to the greatest extent among young people , who are usually the most open to previously taboo ideas and who also have suffered greatly from the trends of neoliberal capitalism .
A move to socialism is obviously not on the political agenda at this time , in the U.S. or elsewhere among the developed capitalist countries .
Socialism will move onto the agenda only if a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to move beyond capitalism .
While the leading socialist organization in the U.S. , the Democratic Socialists of America ( DSA ) , has grown from 8,000 members in 2016 to over 80,000 today , so it is not yet a mass organization in a country of some 330 million people .
A period of green social democracy , which is a possible near-future course , would provide favorable conditions for further expansion of the socialist movement .
Such an expansion is not out of the question given that about half of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positive view of socialism in several surveys in recent years .
Green social democracy might be able to slow global warming sufficiently to postpone disaster for a time .
However , capitalism , with its powerful drive to produce more and more commodities without limit , may in the end be incompatible with a natural environment with limited resources and a limited capacity to safely absorb the waste products of commodity production .
A transition to socialism — a system that can bring rapid growth in output but whose economic institutions do not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only way human society can survive and prosper in the long-run .
Also , history shows that no form of capitalism works effectively indefinitely .
Like the earlier institutional forms of capitalism , green social democracy has contradictions that will eventually bring a period of serious economic crisis .
Big business can accept a period of active government regulation for a time when it must , but it chafes under the restrictions on its drive to gain profit by any means necessary that are part of green social democracy .
In such a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fight for a turn toward a new version of neoliberalism , aided by the rediscovery of old works by Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek .
If a mass-based socialist movement develops by that point , it may be able to lead society in a move beyond capitalism .
If a future socialism does come to the U.S. , it would have to be informed by the lessons of the 20th century attempts to construct socialism , in the U.S.S.R. [ Soviet Union ] , China , and elsewhere .
The key lesson is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the vision of its founding theorists , must build democracy into its core institutions .
A socialist system is one in which working people , not a small ruling elite , have the power to make economic decisions .
A top-down , repressive version of socialism is not a viable or desirable model for the future , a version that in the end self-destructs as happened in the U.S.S.R. in 1991 when a majority of its ruling officials realized that a transition to capitalism was the best way to enlarge and legitimize their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system that can bring a satisfying and secure future for all in an environmentally sustainable manner and without the prospect of a future overthrow by a wealthy class waiting for its chance to bring back the past .
This article has been lightly edited for clarity .

The coronavirus pandemic has created both a public health and an economic crisis in the United States. More than 300,000 people have died of COVID-19, with excess deaths highest among Black and Latinx populations. Hospitals across the country have passed the breaking point. And millions are struggling to eat and pay the rent. Yet, the stock market is hitting record highs and the super-rich are getting even richer in the midst of the pandemic. Yet, there is no talk among the elites of meaningful reforms, even while the climate change is driving the planet to tipping points.
In the interview that follows, David Kotz, economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, argues that radical change is the only hope for a sustainable future and advocates a blueprint based on the vision of a “green social democracy.” Kotz is the author of scores of articles and books, including The Rise and Fall of Neoliberal Capitalism (Harvard University Press).
C.J. Polychroniou: David, we are again in the midst of yet another capitalist crisis, yet the stock market is at a record high. How could this be when the economy is weakening and so many Americans are struggling?
David Kotz: The performance of the stock market is not a good indicator of the health of the economy. It is driven by expected future profits of corporations and future dividend payouts, which cannot be known with any certainty. At times the stock market is affected by purely speculative factors; that is, the belief that if stock prices have been rising recently then they will continue to rise in the future, which can lead to a self-sustaining upward spiral in stock prices.
On March 1, 2020, just before the pandemic began to shut down the U.S. economy, the ratio of price to corporate earnings for the Standard and Poor’s 500 corporations was 22.80, yet after some nine months of pandemic economic crisis, it had risen to 37.08 on December 11, 2020. While the majority of the population has suffered financially during this period, the rich, who do most of the stock market investing, have been doing fine. Large corporations have been taking actions that boost their stock price, such as buying back their own shares at a historically high rate and making large dividend payouts — actions that do not indicate economic health of the economy. While U.S. corporate profits fell by 20 percent in the second quarter of 2020 compared to six months earlier, dividends fell by only 5 percent.
The United States is the richest country in the world, but its distribution of wealth is more unequal than in any other country in the advanced industrialized world. Why is that?
An unmodified capitalist economy generates a very high degree of inequality of income and wealth, as the owners of companies and other forms of property are able to take most of what is produced by working people. However, inequality can be reduced when workers have strong trade unions through which they can claim a larger share of what they produce. Inequality can also be reduced by several kinds of government interventions, including income maintenance programs, progressive tax systems, minimum wage regulations, provision of essential goods and services for free or at reduced cost, and not least, fiscal and monetary policies that promote a low rate of unemployment. A low unemployment rate increases labor’s bargaining power and particularly benefits workers who are at the low-wage end of the working class.
The U.S. is the only developed capitalist country in which a working class-based socialist political party has never achieved major party status.
The labor movement in the U.S. historically has been weaker than in other developed capitalist countries. Among the reasons for this are the following: 1) the ethnic and racial diversity of the U.S. working class, which has made it more difficult for all workers to combine in struggle against employers; 2) the rapid population growth in the U.S. in the period when capitalism was developing in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which created significant opportunity for workers and their children to rise in the class structure; 3) the U.S. capitalist class put up very determined resistance to labor unions, including the use of violence; and 4) American culture is relatively individualistic, which makes it more difficult for workers to engage in collective action.
For the same reasons cited above, the U.S. is the only developed capitalist country in which a working class-based socialist political party has never achieved major party status. In other countries such parties have played the major role in the enactment of government programs that reduce inequality. In the U.S., the Democratic Party has in some periods played a somewhat similar role, but that party is not a workers’ party but rather represents parts of big business and parts of small business as well as working people. The result has been much weaker government programs that reduce inequality.
You are an advocate of “green social democracy.” What exactly is “green social democracy,” and what sort of policies can be expected from a green social democratic state with regard to addressing economic concerns and the environmental challenges facing the planet?
Since around 1980, a neoliberal form of capitalism has prevailed in the U.S. and in the global capitalist system. Under that form of capitalism, capitalists have been left relatively “free” to pursue profit in any way they wish with few constraints from trade unions or government. Neoliberalism has brought a whole series of retrograde trends. Among them are a very high degree of inequality; lack of access to affordable housing and health care for a substantial part of the population; the runaway cost of post-secondary education to students, who graduate with a burdensome level of educational debt; the casualization of jobs as the number of stable, well-paying jobs with good benefits has shrunk rapidly; and not least, the threat to the future from global climate change.
Neoliberalism has no longer been viable since the financial crisis and Great Recession of 2008, as I argued in my book The Rise and Fall of Neoliberal Capitalism. As a result, a change in direction is likely in the near future. A shift to green social democracy could potentially resolve the big economic problems we face at this time. Social democracy refers to a form of capitalism in which government programs assure a comfortable life for all working people. Specifically, social democracy would provide guaranteed access to affordable health care as a right; programs to provide decent affordable housing for all; free public higher education and free early childhood education; a guarantee of workers’ right to join a union; generous sick leave, child care leave, and retirement pensions; and a government program to provide a job to any worker who does not find one in the private sector.
If a period of green social democracy emerges in the next five or 10 years, we could see significant progress against global climate change and improvement in the lives of working people, young people and people of color.
The green part of green social democracy means going beyond what social democracy has meant in the past. The deadly threat of global warming requires a very large public investment to rapidly move toward zero greenhouse gas emissions. This would require major transformations in the systems of energy, transportation and production, as well as the retrofitting of residential and commercial buildings to make them energy efficient. Such a program fits well with the traditional policies of social democracy, and it would create many well-paying jobs.
A transition to a period of green social democracy is possible in the near future in my view. Several forces are pressing in that direction: the continuing stagnation of neoliberal capitalism, the pressing danger of global climate change which even threatens the bottom line of big corporations, the continuing radicalization of young people which could get “out of control” if progressive reforms do not emerge, growing recognition of the need to combat institutional racism, the continuing anger of many working people at their worsening conditions. If a period of green social democracy emerges in the next five or 10 years, we could see significant progress against global climate change and improvement in the lives of working people, young people and people of color.
However, green social democracy is not the only possible new direction at this time. Another possible but not promising new direction is an authoritarian nationalist regime. In my view, which direction emerges will be determined by struggles among various classes and groups in the coming period.
The word “socialism” has been something of a taboo in U.S. political culture, but millennials are drawn to socialism because of all the economic and social ills associated with the workings of neoliberal capitalism. Does socialism have a future in the United States?
A transition to socialism would mean a more thoroughgoing change than the modifications of capitalism that arise under social democracy. A socialist system is one in which economic decisions are made by and for working people to satisfy the wants and needs of people, rather than economic decisions being made by wealthy owners of companies and wealthy investors whose aim is profit. Social democracy would leave the ownership structure of capitalism in place, while taxing and regulating the capitalist class and removing some potentially profitable activities from the private to the public sector. The rich would be less rich but still rich, and they would still be powerful. Under socialism there is no class of wealthy and powerful owners of productive property.
Support for socialism arises from the oppression of working people under capitalism. It is not surprising that the particularly oppressive conditions brought by neoliberal capitalism have also renewed interest in socialism. This has happened to the greatest extent among young people, who are usually the most open to previously taboo ideas and who also have suffered greatly from the trends of neoliberal capitalism.
A move to socialism is obviously not on the political agenda at this time, in the U.S. or elsewhere among the developed capitalist countries. Socialism will move onto the agenda only if a mass-based socialist movement arises that is determined to move beyond capitalism. While the leading socialist organization in the U.S., the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), has grown from 8,000 members in 2016 to over 80,000 today, so it is not yet a mass organization in a country of some 330 million people. A period of green social democracy, which is a possible near-future course, would provide favorable conditions for further expansion of the socialist movement. Such an expansion is not out of the question given that about half of people aged 18 to 39 have expressed a positive view of socialism in several surveys in recent years.
A system that can bring rapid growth in output but whose economic institutions do not compel ever-increasing production might be the only way human society can survive and prosper in the long-run.
Green social democracy might be able to slow global warming sufficiently to postpone disaster for a time. However, capitalism, with its powerful drive to produce more and more commodities without limit, may in the end be incompatible with a natural environment with limited resources and a limited capacity to safely absorb the waste products of commodity production. A transition to socialism — a system that can bring rapid growth in output but whose economic institutions do not compel ever-increasing production — might be the only way human society can survive and prosper in the long-run.
Also, history shows that no form of capitalism works effectively indefinitely. Like the earlier institutional forms of capitalism, green social democracy has contradictions that will eventually bring a period of serious economic crisis. Big business can accept a period of active government regulation for a time when it must, but it chafes under the restrictions on its drive to gain profit by any means necessary that are part of green social democracy.
In such a future crisis, big business would undoubtedly fight for a turn toward a new version of neoliberalism, aided by the rediscovery of old works by Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek. If a mass-based socialist movement develops by that point, it may be able to lead society in a move beyond capitalism.
If a future socialism does come to the U.S., it would have to be informed by the lessons of the 20th century attempts to construct socialism, in the U.S.S.R. [Soviet Union], China, and elsewhere. The key lesson is that socialism, to live up to the vision of its founding theorists, must build democracy into its core institutions. A socialist system is one in which working people, not a small ruling elite, have the power to make economic decisions. A top-down, repressive version of socialism is not a viable or desirable model for the future, a version that in the end self-destructs as happened in the U.S.S.R. in 1991 when a majority of its ruling officials realized that a transition to capitalism was the best way to enlarge and legitimize their privileges. Democratic socialism is the only system that can bring a satisfying and secure future for all in an environmentally sustainable manner and without the prospect of a future overthrow by a wealthy class waiting for its chance to bring back the past.
This article has been lightly edited for clarity.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-21--Mothers Are Pushing to Free Their Children From Prison During COVID

I could no longer breathe too good .
So I alerted the med tech .
I was tested for COVID-19 and it came back positive .
Right now , I ’ m in the south house in a cell by myself .
I love you guys very much.
” This is an email that no parent should ever have to read .
Matthew Echevarria — a survivor of Chicago police torture who was convicted of a crime he did not commit — sent this email to his parents Denise and Brian Bronis from Menard Correctional Center where he is currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people incarcerated in an Illinois prison in perpetual fear of dying in a cage from COVID-19 .
“ South House , ” as Matthew refers to it , is a portion of Menard that had deteriorated so much that it was closed down .
According to Matthew ’ s mother , Denise Joyce-Bronis , South House is a “ decrepit ” mice-infested area that is now being used as a quarantine space for inmates that test positive for COVID-19 .
Like many other sick inmates , Matthew ’ s health got to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical technician out of fear of being put in South House .
People incarcerated in Illinois prisons are disincentivized to report being sick due to a combination of quarantine conditions , fear of retaliation and apathy on the part of prison staff .
For example , Matthew experienced respiratory distress during a video visit , visibly gasping for air and coughing .
Because all video visits are surveilled , prison staff members were aware of his condition and did nothing .
“ Mom , they ’ re not going to take me to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , really bad .
I got to be flopping on the floor.
” Denise , scared for her son ’ s life , knew he wouldn ’ t get the medical attention he needed without a push .
She contacted Matthew ’ s legal team , who then contacted the warden to intervene .
Yet the staff interrogated Matthew for this intervention , threatening to put him in segregation for “ dangerous communication , ” which is the prison ’ s language for prisoners telling the truth .
The prison staff effectively silenced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the staff is primarily responsible for bringing the virus into the prison facility .
Each day , thousands of staff members come and go from prison facilities , potentially carrying COVID-19 asymptomatically .
Matthew is not an anomaly or outlier .
His case is a microcosm of what ’ s going on in Illinois prisons , and in human cages around the country .
Incarcerated people are disproportionately medically vulnerable relative to the rest of the U.S. population , essentially making COVID-19 a death sentence for many behind bars .
According to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individual plaintiffs incarcerated in Illinois prisons , the Illinois Department of Corrections has continued to fall short of — or completely ignore — CDC guidelines to mitigate the spread of the virus , from social distancing to rigorous hygiene , including regular and thorough handwashing with soap and water , the use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer , and frequent cleaning of all surfaces .
Most of the recommended measures for mitigating the spread of COVID-19 are not available for incarcerated people .
It ’ s virtually impossible to socially distance .
People share @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not cleaned regularly or thoroughly , and incarcerated people are not given adequate cleaning supplies or personal protective equipment .
Where is the mass outrage about this public health crisis ?
Denise has been fighting for her son and other survivors of police torture that remain incarcerated through a collective called Mamas Activating Movements for Abolition and Solidarity ( MAMAS ) .
MAMAS members , along with coalitions like End Illinois Prison Lockdown Coalition and the Campaign to Free Incarcerated Survivors of Police Torture have been calling and emailing Illinois Gov .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ they keep doing it because as COVID cases are spiking again , people behind bars continue to be rendered invisible .
These groups are demanding actions like more yard time , access to libraries , visitations and phone calls , and ultimately , for the Department of Corrections to follow state safety guidelines for COVID-19 .
MAMAS members want their sons to come home .
In addition to their desire to be reunited with their loved ones , they share a fundamental belief that prisons shouldn ’ t exist in the first place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of health experts who have deemed releasing prisoners as a necessary risk mitigation strategy , prioritizing the most medically vulnerable individuals .
A number of states , such as California and New York , have taken steps to protect people in prisons from COVID-19 by reducing populations — though they have not reduced them by nearly enough .
Other states , like Oklahoma and Wisconsin have taken even more moderate , and thus even less effective , steps to reduce the prison population by halting new admissions from county jails into state prison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic , Illinois made a cursory gesture toward decarceration , transferring home or releasing around 1,300 people from prisons by May .
The governor can do much more .
Many who qualify for release and are medically vulnerable remain in custody .
Releasing incarcerated people will not only slow the spread of the virus , but also lessen the public crisis of the prison itself .
Prisons don ’ t keep us safe to begin with ; they separate families and cause more violence than they prevent .
COVID-19 adds more sickness and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Public officials that have the power to take action won ’ t be responsive unless we raise our collective voices of righteous rage to acknowledge that actual human beings are dying in cages due to a COVID-19 death sentence imposed by state inaction .
We must demand to free them all .

Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
“Mom and Pop’s,
I could no longer breathe too good. So I alerted the med tech. I was tested for COVID-19 and it came back positive. Right now, I’m in the south house in a cell by myself. I love you guys very much.”
This is an email that no parent should ever have to read. Matthew Echevarria — a survivor of Chicago police torture who was convicted of a crime he did not commit — sent this email to his parents Denise and Brian Bronis from Menard Correctional Center where he is currently incarcerated.
Matthew is one of 30,888 people incarcerated in an Illinois prison in perpetual fear of dying in a cage from COVID-19. “South House,” as Matthew refers to it, is a portion of Menard that had deteriorated so much that it was closed down. According to Matthew’s mother, Denise Joyce-Bronis, South House is a “decrepit” mice-infested area that is now being used as a quarantine space for inmates that test positive for COVID-19. Like many other sick inmates, Matthew’s health got to a near fatal point before he alerted the medical technician out of fear of being put in South House.
People incarcerated in Illinois prisons are disincentivized to report being sick due to a combination of quarantine conditions, fear of retaliation and apathy on the part of prison staff. For example, Matthew experienced respiratory distress during a video visit, visibly gasping for air and coughing. Because all video visits are surveilled, prison staff members were aware of his condition and did nothing.
“Mom, they’re not going to take me to the hospital unless it’s really, really bad. I got to be flopping on the floor.”
Denise, scared for her son’s life, knew he wouldn’t get the medical attention he needed without a push. She contacted Matthew’s legal team, who then contacted the warden to intervene. Yet the staff interrogated Matthew for this intervention, threatening to put him in segregation for “dangerous communication,” which is the prison’s language for prisoners telling the truth. The prison staff effectively silenced him for being sick. Ironically, the staff is primarily responsible for bringing the virus into the prison facility. Each day, thousands of staff members come and go from prison facilities, potentially carrying COVID-19 asymptomatically.
Matthew is not an anomaly or outlier. His case is a microcosm of what’s going on in Illinois prisons, and in human cages around the country. Incarcerated people are disproportionately medically vulnerable relative to the rest of the U.S. population, essentially making COVID-19 a death sentence for many behind bars.
“Mom, they’re not going to take me to the hospital unless it’s really, really bad. I got to be flopping on the floor.”
According to a class action complaint on behalf of 10 individual plaintiffs incarcerated in Illinois prisons, the Illinois Department of Corrections has continued to fall short of — or completely ignore — CDC guidelines to mitigate the spread of the virus, from social distancing to rigorous hygiene, including regular and thorough handwashing with soap and water, the use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer, and frequent cleaning of all surfaces. Most of the recommended measures for mitigating the spread of COVID-19 are not available for incarcerated people. It’s virtually impossible to socially distance. People share toilets, sinks and showers. Surfaces are not cleaned regularly or thoroughly, and incarcerated people are not given adequate cleaning supplies or personal protective equipment. Where is the mass outrage about this public health crisis?
Denise has been fighting for her son and other survivors of police torture that remain incarcerated through a collective called Mamas Activating Movements for Abolition and Solidarity (MAMAS). MAMAS members, along with coalitions like End Illinois Prison Lockdown Coalition and the Campaign to Free Incarcerated Survivors of Police Torture have been calling and emailing Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker to no avail, but they keep doing it because as COVID cases are spiking again, people behind bars continue to be rendered invisible. These groups are demanding actions like more yard time, access to libraries, visitations and phone calls, and ultimately, for the Department of Corrections to follow state safety guidelines for COVID-19.
MAMAS members want their sons to come home. In addition to their desire to be reunited with their loved ones, they share a fundamental belief that prisons shouldn’t exist in the first place. And they point to the recommendations of health experts who have deemed releasing prisoners as a necessary risk mitigation strategy, prioritizing the most medically vulnerable individuals.
A number of states, such as California and New York, have taken steps to protect people in prisons from COVID-19 by reducing populations — though they have not reduced them by nearly enough. Other states, like Oklahoma and Wisconsin have taken even more moderate, and thus even less effective, steps to reduce the prison population by halting new admissions from county jails into state prison facilities. At the beginning of the pandemic, Illinois made a cursory gesture toward decarceration, transferring home or releasing around 1,300 people from prisons by May. The governor can do much more. Many who qualify for release and are medically vulnerable remain in custody. Releasing incarcerated people will not only slow the spread of the virus, but also lessen the public crisis of the prison itself.
Prisons don’t keep us safe to begin with; they separate families and cause more violence than they prevent. COVID-19 adds more sickness and death to an already unjust system. Public officials that have the power to take action won’t be responsive unless we raise our collective voices of righteous rage to acknowledge that actual human beings are dying in cages due to a COVID-19 death sentence imposed by state inaction. We must demand to free them all.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-22--GOP Senator Worth $39 Million Was Biggest Opponent of the $600 Stimulus Checks

For months , lawmakers negotiated the stimulus package that passed Monday night , and though most members of Congress don ’ t yet know the entirety of what ’ s included in the over 5,000-page bill , it ’ s clear from the last months of tense talks that one of the most contentious points was the $ 600 direct payments that ended up being squeezed in very late in the game .
These checks are half the amount that the government sent to individuals in March and have been a subject of much scrutiny among many on the left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearly enough .
According to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-New York ) , Democrats have pushed for $ 1,200 checks , but Republicans batted it down to $ 600 .
And still , they have been a sticking point for some lawmakers who think that $ 600 is still too much if an individual is already receiving unemployment benefits or that the government simply shouldn ’ t be spending to help the American people during a deadly global pandemic that has caused a recession with record unemployment levels .
All of this hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Senate who have a median net worth of $ 1.4 million , with much of the loudest opposition to the one-time $ 600 check coming from those personally worth tens of millions of dollars .
Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has been one such wealthy opponent of the direct relief payments , and last week twice blocked another round of checks , citing spurious deficit concerns .
“ I wasn ’ t supportive of the first round .
I don ’ t think I ’ d be supportive of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ This is not a classic recession that requires financial stimulus.
” His sudden concern about the deficit is charming , considering he led the charge in 2017 for special tax breaks which would net him about $ 205,000 .
Those same tax breaks , which mostly benefited wealthy individuals and corporations were funded by almost $ 2 trillion in added debt .
According to OpenSecrets , Johnson is worth an estimated $ 39.2 million .
Sen. Mitch McConnell , though not vocally against the checks , did not include them in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but did include his pet obsession , a liability shield from COVID-related lawsuits for businesses and schools .
It ’ s unclear when he changed his mind , though it was probably relatively recently , as The New York Times reports that he made the case for the inclusion of the checks last week , fearing that Republican opposition would hurt their chances in the Georgia Senate runoffs .
McConnell is worth an estimated $ 34.1 million .
Speaking of the Senate runoffs , Republican Sen. David Perdue , who is up for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the checks .
Perdue expressed direct opposition to the stimulus checks in the CARES act , saying he “ personally opposed ” them .
Earlier this month , Perdue and fellow runoff candidate Sen. Kelly Loeffler released a joint statement with no mention of the checks , saying that they support “ targeted relief , ” which is just another way that Republicans have been saying that they oppose the stimulus checks .
Perdue is worth an estimated $ 25.8 million , while Loeffler and her husband are worth a whopping $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sen. Pat Toomey ( R-Pennsylvania ) also joined the ranks of Republicans who are vocally opposed to the stimulus checks , saying , without evidence , that the “ vast majority ” of the checks have been sent to families that he assumes probably have not been financially hurt by the pandemic .
OpenSecrets estimates Toomey is worth $ 2 million .
Sen. Rand Paul ( R-Kentucky ) voted against Monday ’ s bill saying that , “ when [ conservatives ] vote to pass out free money , you lose your soul @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moral or fiscal integrity.
” Paul ’ s estimated worth is about $ 774,000 .
Congressional journalists have reported that the checks have divided Republicans ; last week , the number two ranking Republican Sen. John Thune ( R-South Dakota ) suggested that some lawmakers were trying to prevent those who were receiving unemployment benefits from getting the $ 600 check .
Despite their efforts , many polls have shown that the stimulus checks are actually quite popular among the American people .
Perhaps that ’ s why , though there is clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , many Republicans have not gone on the record to oppose the payments .
Many have , however , implied their opposition by broadly railing against adding to the deficit and rejecting the general idea of another stimulus .
Among Republicans who have recently railed against any additional stimulus of any size are : Sen. Marsha Blackburn ( R-Tennessee ) , worth $ 568,000 ; Sen. Rick Scott ( R-Florida ) , worth $ 259.7 million ; Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-Texas ) , worth $ 3.2 million ; and Sen. Ben Sasse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million .
And worth a special mention are the politicians who went on the record opposing the stimulus checks back in May , such as Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-South Carolina ) , worth $ 969,000 , and Sen. Mike Braun ( R-Indiana ) , worth $ 136.8 million , as well as Sen. Richard Shelby ( R-Alabama ) , who opposed stimulus payments during negotiations for the CARES Act .

Much of the loudest opposition to the $600 check has come from senators who are personally worth tens of millions.
For months, lawmakers negotiated the stimulus package that passed Monday night, and though most members of Congress don’t yet know the entirety of what’s included in the over 5,000-page bill, it’s clear from the last months of tense talks that one of the most contentious points was the $600 direct payments that ended up being squeezed in very late in the game.
These checks are half the amount that the government sent to individuals in March and have been a subject of much scrutiny among many on the left who say that $600 is not nearly enough. According to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York), Democrats have pushed for $1,200 checks, but Republicans batted it down to $600. And still, they have been a sticking point for some lawmakers who think that $600 is still too much if an individual is already receiving unemployment benefits or that the government simply shouldn’t be spending to help the American people during a deadly global pandemic that has caused a recession with record unemployment levels.
All of this hand wringing and austerity has come from Republicans in the Senate who have a median net worth of $1.4 million, with much of the loudest opposition to the one-time $600 check coming from those personally worth tens of millions of dollars.
Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has been one such wealthy opponent of the direct relief payments, and last week twice blocked another round of checks, citing spurious deficit concerns. “I wasn’t supportive of the first round. I don’t think I’d be supportive of the second,” he said in July. “This is not a classic recession that requires financial stimulus.” His sudden concern about the deficit is charming, considering he led the charge in 2017 for special tax breaks which would net him about $205,000. Those same tax breaks, which mostly benefited wealthy individuals and corporations were funded by almost $2 trillion in added debt.
According to OpenSecrets, Johnson is worth an estimated $39.2 million.
Sen. Mitch McConnell, though not vocally against the checks, did not include them in his September “skinny bill” — but did include his pet obsession, a liability shield from COVID-related lawsuits for businesses and schools. It’s unclear when he changed his mind, though it was probably relatively recently, as The New York Times reports that he made the case for the inclusion of the checks last week, fearing that Republican opposition would hurt their chances in the Georgia Senate runoffs. McConnell is worth an estimated $34.1 million.
Speaking of the Senate runoffs, Republican Sen. David Perdue, who is up for re-election in Georgia, has been vocally against the checks. Perdue expressed direct opposition to the stimulus checks in the CARES act, saying he “personally opposed” them. Earlier this month, Perdue and fellow runoff candidate Sen. Kelly Loeffler released a joint statement with no mention of the checks, saying that they support “targeted relief,” which is just another way that Republicans have been saying that they oppose the stimulus checks. Perdue is worth an estimated $25.8 million, while Loeffler and her husband are worth a whopping $800 million, according to Forbes.
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) also joined the ranks of Republicans who are vocally opposed to the stimulus checks, saying, without evidence, that the “vast majority” of the checks have been sent to families that he assumes probably have not been financially hurt by the pandemic. OpenSecrets estimates Toomey is worth $2 million. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) voted against Monday’s bill saying that, “when [conservatives] vote to pass out free money, you lose your soul and you abandon forever any semblance of moral or fiscal integrity.” Paul’s estimated worth is about $774,000.
Congressional journalists have reported that the checks have divided Republicans; last week, the number two ranking Republican Sen. John Thune (R-South Dakota) suggested that some lawmakers were trying to prevent those who were receiving unemployment benefits from getting the $600 check. Despite their efforts, many polls have shown that the stimulus checks are actually quite popular among the American people. Perhaps that’s why, though there is clear opposition to helping those most in need, many Republicans have not gone on the record to oppose the payments. Many have, however, implied their opposition by broadly railing against adding to the deficit and rejecting the general idea of another stimulus.
Among Republicans who have recently railed against any additional stimulus of any size are: Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), worth $568,000; Sen. Rick Scott (R-Florida), worth $259.7 million; Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), worth $3.2 million; and Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska), worth $2.8 million. And worth a special mention are the politicians who went on the record opposing the stimulus checks back in May, such as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), worth $969,000, and Sen. Mike Braun (R-Indiana), worth $136.8 million, as well as Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Alabama), who opposed stimulus payments during negotiations for the CARES Act.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-22--Climate Wins — Sort of — in a Largely Inadequate Stimulus Package

Late Monday night , after months of tense negotiations , Congress passed a $ 900 billion stimulus package — less than half the size of the $ 2.2 trillion stimulus bill passed nearly 10 months ago — that includes $ 600 in direct payments to individuals , more money for small businesses through the Paycheck Protection Program and , surprisingly , a few provisions to help address the climate crisis .
One of the most impactful lines in the bill for the climate is about phasing out the use of hydrofluorocarbons ( HFCs ) by 85 percent by 2035 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with guidelines set forth by the Kigali Amendment of the Montreal Protocol , an international agreement that addressed ozone layer depletion .
HFCs , used in refrigerators and air conditioners , are an extremely potent greenhouse gas — much more so than carbon dioxide — and one 2013 study found that limiting its usage under the guidelines set by the Montreal Protocol could help the world avoid 0.5 degrees of warming by 2100 .
Through a bipartisan effort , the bill also authorizes $ 35 billion for energy technology over the next five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for renewables and $ 1.1 billion for energy storage .
It also includes over $ 6 billion each for more controversial endeavors : nuclear energy , as well as carbon capture , use and storage ( CCUS ) , the latter of which is a favored strategy of the fossil fuel industry ( and Congressional Republicans ) to help greenwash their image .
Crucially , however , the bill does not appropriate the money for this research and development .
Getting the funding to put the policy into effect is another hurdle that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ H. Gillis , a contributing climate opinion writer for The New York Times , notes on Twitter , “ Getting money out of the United States Congress is a two-step procedure , and ‘ authorization ’ is only the first step .
It ’ s equivalent to Congress saying , ‘ We might spend this much , eventually.
’ Getting them to ACTUALLY SEND THE DOUGH is the harder part , by far.
” Senator Chuck Schumer , the Democratic Senate minority leader , called the climate provisions “ the single biggest victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pass this body in a decade.
” Though there are myriad important climate battles missing from the text — it skips out completely on climate justice , for instance — for a Congress that doesn ’ t have a history of creating any legislation on climate , it ’ s a start .
Schumer himself acknowledged as much : “ Let ’ s be clear : Are these provisions enough to meet the demands of the science ?
No , ” he said .
“ But are they a significant step in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill does not directly address climate justice issues , it does include $ 25 billion for emergency rental relief , which can be used to help pay for utilities .
Though many places have implemented shutoff moratoriums , many are still facing large debts and this assistance may be crucial for many families struggling with utility payments .
These provisions were all tucked into a relatively mixed bag of a bill .
The $ 600 checks are a small step , but not nearly enough for most Americans who have been struggling during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bernie Sanders have pointed out .
The bill also includes a bailout for airlines , something that was heavily criticized in March ’ s stimulus package , and a Donald Trump-favored “ three-martini lunch ” tax break for corporations to pay for business meal expenses .
Another point of contention was that the members of Congress only got about two hours to read the 5,593 page bill , which Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez described as “ hostage-taking .
”

Late Monday night, after months of tense negotiations, Congress passed a $900 billion stimulus package — less than half the size of the $2.2 trillion stimulus bill passed nearly 10 months ago — that includes $600 in direct payments to individuals, more money for small businesses through the Paycheck Protection Program and, surprisingly, a few provisions to help address the climate crisis.
One of the most impactful lines in the bill for the climate is about phasing out the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) by 85 percent by 2035, which would put the U.S. in alignment with guidelines set forth by the Kigali Amendment of the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement that addressed ozone layer depletion. HFCs, used in refrigerators and air conditioners, are an extremely potent greenhouse gas — much more so than carbon dioxide — and one 2013 study found that limiting its usage under the guidelines set by the Montreal Protocol could help the world avoid 0.5 degrees of warming by 2100.
Through a bipartisan effort, the bill also authorizes $35 billion for energy technology over the next five years. This includes $4.1 billion for renewables and $1.1 billion for energy storage. It also includes over $6 billion each for more controversial endeavors: nuclear energy, as well as carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS), the latter of which is a favored strategy of the fossil fuel industry (and Congressional Republicans) to help greenwash their image.
The bill includes $35.2 spending for energy:
– $4.1 bn: renewables
– $1.7 bn: reauthorization WAP + add renewables
– $2.6 bn: DOE sustainable transport
– $6.2 bn: CCUS
– $1.1 bn: energy storage
– $2.4 bn: smart grid
– $6.6 bn: advanced nuclear
– $4.7 bn: fusion
– $2.9 bn: ARPA-E — Dr. Leah Stokes (@leahstokes) December 21, 2020
Crucially, however, the bill does not appropriate the money for this research and development. Getting the funding to put the policy into effect is another hurdle that has to be crossed. As Justin H. Gillis, a contributing climate opinion writer for The New York Times, notes on Twitter, “Getting money out of the United States Congress is a two-step procedure, and ‘authorization’ is only the first step. It’s equivalent to Congress saying, ‘We might spend this much, eventually.’ Getting them to ACTUALLY SEND THE DOUGH is the harder part, by far.”
Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate minority leader, called the climate provisions “the single biggest victory in the fight against climate change to pass this body in a decade.” Though there are myriad important climate battles missing from the text — it skips out completely on climate justice, for instance — for a Congress that doesn’t have a history of creating any legislation on climate, it’s a start. Schumer himself acknowledged as much: “Let’s be clear: Are these provisions enough to meet the demands of the science? No,” he said. “But are they a significant step in the right direction? Yes.”
Though the bill does not directly address climate justice issues, it does include $25 billion for emergency rental relief, which can be used to help pay for utilities. Though many places have implemented shutoff moratoriums, many are still facing large debts and this assistance may be crucial for many families struggling with utility payments.
These provisions were all tucked into a relatively mixed bag of a bill. The $600 checks are a small step, but not nearly enough for most Americans who have been struggling during the pandemic, as many politicians like Bernie Sanders have pointed out. The bill also includes a bailout for airlines, something that was heavily criticized in March’s stimulus package, and a Donald Trump-favored “three-martini lunch” tax break for corporations to pay for business meal expenses.
Another point of contention was that the members of Congress only got about two hours to read the 5,593 page bill, which Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez described as “hostage-taking.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.