Mediaboss Marketing

(Photo illustration by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Join us Thursday Sept. 9 at 3:30 pm for a very special Crucial Conversation:

Why progressives should be working to keep state-sponsored sports gambling out of North Carolina

Featuring Les Bernal, Executive Director of the national advocacy group, Stop Predatory Gambling.

Click here to register.

The North Carolina Senate recently took surprisingly swift action to advance legislation that would bring legalized sports betting to our state. In a break with precedent, Senate leader Phil Berger allowed the bill to come to a vote on the Senate floor despite the opposition of a majority of the Senate Republican caucus. The bill ultimately passed 26-19 and is now before the state House of Representatives.

Thus far, the main opposition to the legislation has come from religious conservatives, but as Les Bernal, the veteran executive director of the national advocacy group Stop Predatory Gambling, argues persuasively, this should also be a fight for progressives who care about tax fairness, racial justice, consumer protection and preventing the exploitation of children.

Prior to joining Stop Predatory Gambling, Bernal served as a Chief of Staff in the Massachusetts State Senate and worked as a campaign strategist for more than forty federal and state campaigns.

Please join us as Bernal provides an update on where this issue stands and why state-supported corporate gambling presents such a pernicious threat to community well-being in North Carolina.

Click here to register.

Dont miss this very special event.

When: Thursday September 9 at 3:30 p.m.

Where: Online; pre-register from the comfort of your home or office.

Suggested contribution: $10 (click here to support NC Policy Watch)

Questions?? Contact Rob Schofield at 919-861-2065 or [emailprotected]

Read this article:
September 9 Crucial Conversation: Why progressives should be working to keep state-sponsored sports gambling out of NC - ncpolicywatch.com

Welcome to Wednesdays Overnight Energy & Environment,your source for the latest news focused on energy, the environment and beyond. Subscribe here: thehill.com/newsletter-signup.

Today were looking at progressive advocates pushing to keep the gas industry out of a federal clean electricity program, OPECs response to U.S. calls for more production and a United Nations report on the future of the climate.

For The Hill, were Rachel Frazin and Zack Budryk. Write to us with tips: rfrazin@thehill.com and zbudryk@thehill.com. Follow us on Twitter: @RachelFrazin and @BudrykZack.

Lets jump in.

Dems face pressure over clean power program

Progressives are pushing to try to keep natural gas out of a Democratic proposal aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the electric sector.

A number of progressive and environmental groups on Wednesday launched what they called a no gas campaign to pressure Democrats not to include fossil fuel in their clean electricity payment program in which power providers would be incentivized to switch to clean sources.

The 15 organizations also got support from Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) in their push.

This is our moment to turbocharge the transition to a green, just economy, and the Clean Energy Standard can play a key role but it needs to be as ambitious as possible on renewables, and it needs to exclude gas, Bowman said in a statement.

The background: Natural gas is less carbon-intensive when burned than other fossil fuels like oil and coal, but it still contributes climate-warming emissions to the atmosphere.

The details behind the clean electricity payment program haven't been revealed yet. The program is modeled after a similar idea called a clean electricity standard that would have required a certain percentage of power to come from clean sources.

Democrats are banking on the program for a significant percentage of the emissions cuts from their infrastructure bills, saying that the policy and clean energy tax credits are together responsible for more than 40 percent of the emissions cuts they hope to achieve overall.

The package will have to be negotiated with both the left and right wings of the party, which hold razor-thin majorities in Congress, so its not clear how the debate will unfold.

Read more about the push here.

A MESSAGE FROM API

The American Petroleum Institute released a new analysis of the natural gas and oil industrys impact on the U.S. economy. Learn how the industry is powering each states economy here.

OPEC defies White House on oil output

A group of oil-producing countries known collectively as OPEC+ on Wednesday said it would move ahead with a previously planned increase in its output despite a call from the Biden administration to increase it even more.

In a statement, the coalition said it would reconfirm a plan approved in July to add 400,000 barrels per day to its monthly overall production until pandemic-related cuts are phased out.

The move comes in defiance of the U.S. which is not a party to the group as the Biden administration asked the group last month to add more oil to the market to temper prices.

The administrations request: "While OPEC+ recently agreed to production increases, these increases will not fully offset previous production cuts that OPEC+ imposed during the pandemic until well into 2022," national security adviser Jake SullivanJake SullivanOvernight Energy & Environment Presented by the American Petroleum Institute Progressives wage 'no gas' campaign OPEC moves ahead with planned production increase despite White House call for more Seven San Diego-area families evacuated from Afghanistan after summer trip abroad MORE said in a statement at the time. "At a critical moment in the global recovery, this is simply not enough."

The Biden administrations calldrew criticism from conservatives and progressives alike, with the former decrying the need to depend on foreign oil and the latter arguing that the country shouldnt encourage more fossil fuel production of any kind.

Read more about the announcement here.

DISASTERS UP, BUT GLOBAL DEATHS DOWN

Climate change is leading to more weather-related disasters but is resulting in fewer deaths, according to a report released by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) on Tuesday.

According to the WMO's report, a weather-related disaster occurred every day on average between 1970 and 2019, killing 2 million people and costing $3.64 trillion in losses.

"The number of disasters has increased by a factor of five over the 50-year period, driven by climate change, more extreme weather and improved reporting. But, thanks to improved early warnings and disaster management, the number of deaths decreased almost three-fold," the WMO said in apress release.

In the 50 years that the WMO observed, the hazards that resulted in the most human loss were droughts, storms, floods and extreme temperatures.

Storms and floods were responsible for the most economic loss. Three of the top 10 costliest storms hurricanes Harvey, Maria and Irma occurred in 2017. These three storms accounted for 35 percent of the total economic loss caused by the top 10 disasters observed from 1970 to 2019.

More than 91 percent of reported deaths occurred in developing countries.

The number of weather, climate and water extremes are increasing and will become more frequent and severe in many parts of the world as a result of climate change, WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas said.

Read more about the report here.

PRESIDENTIAL SURVEY

President BidenJoe BidenHouse panel advances 8B defense bill Democrats defeat GOP effort to declare 'lost confidence' in Biden after Afghanistan withdrawal House committee moves to block private funds for National Guard deployments MORE plans to travel to Louisiana on Friday to meet with state and local officials and view the destruction caused by Hurricane Ida.

The White House said in a statement that Biden will travel to New Orleans to survey storm damage from Hurricane Ida and meet with State and local leaders from impacted communities.

Plans for the visit were first reported byThe Advocate on Wednesday.

Up until now: Bidenhas received regular briefings on the storm. He met virtually with Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards (D) and other state and local officials Monday and led a call with energy sector leaders about restoring power following the storm Tuesday.

Timing the visit: White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiWarren to campaign for Newsom ahead of California recall Overnight Energy & Environment Presented by the American Petroleum Institute Progressives wage 'no gas' campaign Biden to travel to Louisiana Friday, survey Ida damage MORE told reporters Tuesday that Biden was open to traveling to the region to survey the damage of the hurricane, but added that he was mindful of not taking up resources on the ground.

Psaki added during a briefing Wednesday that Biden would not be making the trip if it would take away from relief efforts.

This is a trip that is being planned in close coordination with leaders on the ground to ensure its the right time together, Psaki said. We are not going to go to any part of the state or visit any community where we would take away from relief and restoration efforts.

POWERLESS

A Louisiana energy company said this week that restoring power to the thousands of households that have lost electricity due to Hurricane Ida could be a "weeks long process."

"Though we would love nothing more than to restore power to all members at this time, without repairs to transmission and transformer poles, that isn't possible. Also until damaged infrastructure is repaired, we cannot begin to replace distribution poles and lines and estimated times of restoration are not possible," the DEMCO energy company wrote on its Facebook page.

"Our message is that this will be a weeks long process and members should make plans now for their health, safety and comfort," the company said.

House panel to mark up reconciliation proposal

The House Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Rep. Ral Grijalva (D-Ariz.), will mark upits proposal for reconciliation spending on Thursday.

The bill, which comes from a $25.6 billion allocation, also contains revenue raisers, so its total spending is expected to be around $31 billion.

Key provisions include:

GOP response: As expected, Republicans are not pleased with the legislation.

Its a bad bill and its bad timing, Ranking Member Bruce WestermanBruce Eugene WestermanOvernight Energy & Environment Presented by the American Petroleum Institute Progressives wage 'no gas' campaign Push for Civilian Climate Corps highlights underlying obstacles to restoring public lands Honoring America's real VIPs MORE (R-Ark.) told reporters. With everything going on in the world today, I think the last thing the American people want to see is a congressional committee coming together to mark up a huge spending bill.

He specifically said that Republicans would propose amendments that remove Democratic provisions like one that provides money for a trust that preserves Presidio National Park in San Francisco and another that aims to prevent mining in an area of the Tonto National Forest called Oak Flat.

The GOP lawmaker also criticized the inclusion of funds for the Civilian Climate Corps, saying it would provide competition for the private sector and citing difficulties employers are having in hiring people.

Westerman noted a personal connection to the issue, saying his grandfather worked for theDepression-era Civilian Conservation Corps.

My grandfather worked for the CCC and he didnt have very good things to say about it but at the time it was the only job he could get, the lawmaker said.

WHAT WERE READING

A MESSAGE FROM API

The American Petroleum Institute released a new analysis of the natural gas and oil industrys impact on the U.S. economy. Learn how the industry is powering each states economy here.

FROM THE HILLS OPINION PAGES

Electric school bus investments could drive US vehicle electrification, writesWorld Resources Institutes' U.S. director Doug Lashof

ICYMI

Thats it for today, thanks for reading. Check out The Hills energy & environment page for the latest news and coverage. Well see you Thursday.

More here:
Overnight Energy & Environment Presented by the American Petroleum Institute Progressives wage 'no gas' campaign | TheHill - The Hill

Back in 2012, the US Service Employees International Union (SEIU) launched the Fight for $15, a national campaign to raise the minimum wage by organising fast-food workers. It began with a one-day strike in New York City, and by 2015, it had spread to 200 cities across the US and organised the largest low-wage worker protest in US history, with over 60,000 workers marching or walking off their jobs.

Then in 2016, two community organisers from Living United for Change in Arizona (Lucha), Toms and Alex, decided they wanted to bring the Fight for $15 campaign to Arizona. As Hahrie Han reports in Prisms of the People, they were told it was a bad idea: People would tell us, like, this is not an issue in Arizona. Why dont you do an immigrant one? Why arent you doing criminalisation, or voting? If you go for this, you will fail. You will set progressive politics in Arizona back at least 15 years.

Lucha began by focusing on small businesses, who they anticipated would object to a minimum wage increase, as they had in other states. After building relationships with small business owners through several months of one-to-one conversations, organisers persuaded 350 of them to back their campaign and endorse a policy that was bad for their bottom line because they cared about the greater good.

Instead of focusing on short-term mobilisation strategies, like social media outreach, advertising, direct mail and door-knocking, Lucha demonstrated the power of the slower process of building resilient, deep relationships through organising. Lucha approached the minimum wage fight not as a short-term issue campaign, but as an opportunity to build its organisational capacity and broaden its coalition.

By taking this longer-term, organisational approach, organisations such as Lucha and the Fight for $15 have transformed the progressive movement in the US. President Biden won in 2020 in part because he was a moderate candidate whom Obama-Trump switchers and anti-Trump Republicans could support. But he also won because voters across the country had spent years getting organised: Latinos and African Americans in Georgia, white women in the suburbs of Pennsylvania, and people in rural areas generally neglected by progressives. These voters recognised that building power in workplaces and communities was their most effective tool to create change everywhere from shop floors to town centres to Washington DC. And on election day, they showed they can deliver votes.

In the UK, there is much we can learn about how such organisations can improve the lives of working people, transform progressive politics, and reinvigorate democracy. We must start by breaking down the divisions between workplace and community organising. Too often we talk about the organisation of workers and of communities as if they dont intersect. Yet workers arent detached from other parts of the public sphere; they are the people who comprise communities. The lines that divide workplace and community organising obscure the fact that both often target the same people who share the same interests.

This week, Sharon Graham won the election to become the next general secretary of Unite, Britains largest trade union. Graham heads Unites organising arm: Unite organising for power. Her leadership campaign was tightly focused on ordinary Unite members, highlighting the benefits she has helped them secure as an organiser over several decades, and promising to concentrate on concrete wins around jobs, pay, and conditions, instead of engaging with the Westminster machine. Under her leadership, she promised, Unite would take back the workplace.

Graham appears to understand the kind of work UK progressives need to do. Too often we favour short-term wins over long-term organising. We focus on using digital tools and demonstrations to mobilise a large number of protesters, rejecting political institutions instead of using them to win and secure change. In part thats understandable, because we live in an overly centralised political system in which the opinions and votes of far too few people determine far too much.

But what the US experience shows is that slow-burn organising that approaches politics strategically, building power in the communities where people work and live, can have a huge effect on peoples lives, and the countrys politics. In the UK, the Labour party was originally formed to give workers a voice in parliament. It must now rediscover that role, and further embrace the organisations that represent modern Britain: traditional unionised workers, but also part-time gig workers, organised multi-racial communities, and workers whose jobs are threatened by the climate transition we urgently need.

A healthy democracy needs more than a voting public that sporadically engages in politics through elections or referendums, alongside political elites in parliament. It needs organisations that help people experience what collective power can accomplish, from community organising to strong trade unions that build workplace power. It is those organisations we badly need in Britain.

To generate a more successful and sustainable progressive politics, and to re-energise UK democracy, we should embrace and engage in organising up and down the country, in our communities and our workplaces. Perhaps Grahams victory will be the start.

More:
What UK progressives can learn from community organisers in the US - The Guardian

Shes proud of making climate change worse.

Queens Assembly Member Jenifer Rajkumar boasted to the media this week that she has devised a plan to create dozens of new parking spaces for her Woodhaven constituents a plan that would, by definition, make congestion, safety and pollution worse for her constituents.

Assemblywoman Jenifer Rajkumar To Meet With Queens DOT Commissioner on Lack of Parking in Woodhaven, read the headline on a press release Rajkumar, a former lawyer and CUNY professor, sent me late last week. The press release itself speaks volumes on Rajkumars priorities:

I am proud to announce that I will be meeting with Department of TransportationQueens Borough Commissioner Nicole Garcia on Monday, Aug. 30. I will lead Commissioner Garcia on a walkthrough of Woodhaven to demonstrate firsthand my plan for increased parking in the neighborhood. Lack of parking has been a longstanding problem in Woodhaven, including for the 1,200 families at the Forest Park Cooperative.

After extensive community input, I have developed a plan to convert to parking the vacant park space at the corner of 98th Street and Park Lane South, as well as the extended median striping on the Woodhaven Boulevard Service Road [pictured above]. I have also proposed locations for diagonal parking to open up more parking spots. I look forward to a productive meeting with Commissioner Garcia, and am hopeful that the City will work with us to resolve the parking scarcity once and for all.

Thats a weird bit of self-congratulations for a lawmaker whose own website boasts endorsements from a host of progressive groups (and Queens Borough President Donovan Richards), and talks about her support for long-suffering bus riders who have to wait long times for the transportation they need. (The website does not talk about road violence, even though in 2020, there were 1,516 reported crashes in her Assembly district, roughly four per day, injuring 73 cyclists, 88 pedestrians and 491 motorists, and killing two pedestrians and three motorists.)

Of course, scratch the surface of many outer-borough progressives and you quickly reach the core of their beliefs: car drivers must be served. Indeed, Rajkumar recently said she wants to delay congestion pricing, which is a tolling scheme that would generate revenue from drivers on behalf of the very transit users Rajkumar claims she supports. (Of course, she supported congestion pricing back in 2016, when she was seeking a Manhattan Assembly seat, but thats ancient history, right?)

After receiving the press release above, I immediately contacted Rajkumars legislative aide (whose number was on the press release) and asked to attend the walkthrough. I was told that media was not invited, so I asked to interview the Assembly Member by phone. This request repeated several times over the next few days was denied.

I wanted to ask her a few things about her concern for neighborhood drivers:

That last question is important because the city did not create parking scarcity. According to the Census bureau, the Woodhaven portion of Rajkumars 38th Assembly district added 42 households between 2010 and 2018 but at the same time, residents acquired roughly 520 more cars. So its not the citys fault that its difficult to find free car storage in Woodhaven its the residents fault.

Its unclear if the city is taking Rajkumars parking plan seriously. I reached out to Garcia several times and only got this response: This meeting was requested by the Assembly Member, so I defer to her and her office for comment.

So since Rajkumar isnt commenting, I will: This plan needs to end up in the dustbin of history where we will all end up if pollution-causing plans like this go forward.

Gersh Kuntzman is the editor of Streetsblog. Sometimes he writes the Cycle of Rage column, which are archived here.

Originally posted here:
CYCLE OF RAGE: Supposedly Progressive Assembly Member in Queens Wants More Cars in Her District - Streetsblog New York

Unimpressive "white guy" Dave Upthegrove. (Photo: King County Council Facebook)

Progressive King County Councilmember Dave Upthegrove has been abandoned and criticized by the woke, progressive activists he empowered. They are using the same identity politics he has embraced. Now, the woke mob is coming after him.

According to a new report, Upthegrove aggressively pushed back on far-left progressive groups who did not endorse him for his re-election. He questioned whether or not they went with his opponent because she is a Black, Muslim, female candidate, and hes a white guy. He once told a group of Democrats that he recognizes his white privilege, but now he wonders if hes being pushed aside from organizations that agree he benefits from privilege?

The organizations were absolutely influenced by his opponents identity, at least in part. Upthegrove pushed the very environment that allowed this to happen.

According toThe Stranger, Upthegrove threatened retribution against organizations that didnt endorse him. He accused one group of endorsing due to what the blog refers to as reverse racism. That has garnered significant pushback from the wokescolds in King County who dont believe reverse racism is real. They feel justified in their anti-white postures.

OneAmerica Votes, Sage Leaders, The Urbanist, and the Transit Riders Union endorse Upthegroves opponent, community organizer Dr. Shukri Olow.

Melissa Rubio, the senior political manager at OneAmerica Votes, claims in an interview with The Stranger that Upthegrove repeatedly accused the group of endorsing Olow because he is a white man. She denied that, according to the report, citing Olows experience in working with them on issues that matter to the group.

According to Rubio, Upthegrove reacted to the disappointment by telling her that the group would regret this and that they are disappointing the immigrants and refugees he currently represents in the district.

The councilmember denies the conversation took place the way Rubio recalled.

But the report cites several other instances in which he made similar comments about his whiteness to an unidentified union member. According to that union member, and a separate, unnamed nonprofit director cited in the story, Upthegrove warned there would be political retribution for not endorsing him should he win re-election.

He denies these conversations took place, too.

I have no clue if Upthegrove made these comments. But I certainly believe his boring white guy identity played a role.

In King County, identity politics plays a huge role in which candidate an organization will endorse.

Progressives routinely demean people by judging them almost solely on characteristics that have nothing to do with their ideas. They are taught to see identities first, then judge. They present this as a way to defeat white supremacy they pretend permeates every American institution. But its just demeaning and bigoted.

When all is relatively equal between candidates in this case, both Upthegrove and Olow are far-left progressives intersectionality comes into play.

Upthegrove is gay, which earns him identity points. But hes also a boring white guy. That loses him points, particularly in a district with so many minority communities. Olow is Black, Muslim, and female. She also is a Somali immigrant who immigrated here via a refugee camp in Kenya. That earns way more points than a boring white guy.

In this case, the endorsements make obvious sense. Olow identifies as a member of some of the very communities these nonprofits work to support. And the ones that dont are run by people who love to view themselves as literal white saviors.

Olow is quite capable of governing in ways as far to the left as Upthegrove. And she appears competent by left-wing standards. So its easy for identity-obsessed progressives to support her instead of him.

It seems like Upthegrove is shocked that the woke mob turned on him. He shouldnt be. He helped create and empower them. Indeed, the councilmember is obsessed with race, doing what he can to appease the left-wing activists in his district.

Claiming the criminal justice system suffers from systematic racism, Upthegrove pushed to dismantle and reimagine policing. He acknowledged that he failed to stand up against the very institutional racism he said he would tackle. He thought he was pandering in a way that would earn him support, but it just gave a Black candidate the opening she needed to challenge him.

He also closely allied with the countys anti-police oversight director (who was later pushed out of the county). That relationship helped reveal his disdain for the Burien City Council when he texted, You couldnt pay me to sit through an entire Burien council meeting.

Despite being an anti-racist, he still committed himself and his staff to undergo training to understand and combat institutional racism and implicit bias.

He says we live on land that should be returned to Indigenous people, though he doesnt really plan how to do that. And his campaign site is full of progressive buzzwords.

The problem with being so focused on race is that you may make the pitch for your opponent. Upthegrove is a good example of this.

He told the King County Democrats that, Everyone in the communityparticularly those who have historically faced systemic barriersmust be part of decision making. Like a Black, Muslim woman?

Upthegrove even bragged: Delivering justice means listening to the voices of those most impacted by injustice. Thats why staying connected to community has always been so important to me. Except when those same communities support your opponent?

I know first-hand how critical it is for voices that have historically been marginalized to be included in every policy making decision, Upthegrove notes on his website.

It sounds like hes pitching his opponent.

Did you like this opinion piece? Then listen to the Jason Rantz Show weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to thepodcast here. Follow@JasonRantz onTwitter,Instagram, andParler,and like me onFacebook.

See original here:
Rantz: Progressive councilmember angry the woke mob he helped create finally came for him - MyNorthwest.com