All Illinois Democrats Have to Do for Re-Election Is...

My new blog at HuffPost. This may be the first Illinois election in years decided by downstate and the suburbs.

Quinn won 64.3% in Cook county, the same percentage he got in 2010. But with turnout down, he earned about 79,000 fewer votes out of Cook than last time. That's enough for a few Chicago-centric thinkers to claim, as they always do, that Cook county made the difference. But, even if Quinn had matched his 2010 turnout in Chicago, he still would have lost this election.

Also at Democrats for Progress and DailyKos.

Congressional candidate Mike Bost says fracking is safe but environmentalists want people to die

Illinois Republican Congressional candidate Mike Bost has some unusual beliefs about environmentalists and fracking. In a recent radio interview, Bost said about environmentalists:

"...if it was up to them, people should die and everything else should exist. Now, I know because I was in the negotiations with them."

Bost was referring to his role negotiating the law that will open Illinois to fracking. Several groups based in Chicago, including Faith-in-Place, NRDC, and the Environmental Law & Policy Center participated in negotiations and supported the law over the objection of environmentalists in areas that will be most impacted.

Now, I wasn't present for negotiations but I've never heard staff for any of those groups suggest anything remotely similar to the opinion that people should die and everything else should exist. In fact, most climate change and anti-fracking activists are involved to save human life.

Many of us noticed that fracking made North Dakota the deadliest state to work in.

We're bothered that fracking operations use chemicals known to cause cancer respiratory problems, birth defects and other health impacts.

We know the massive increase in trucks transporting dangerous chemicals is yet another unavoidable deadly hazard, especially since toxic spills shutting down I-57 in southern Illinois is already a regular story.

Since fracking contributes to climate change we're also working to reduce climate disasters like extreme flooding in southern Illinois.

But Mike Bost is excited about fracking because it will bring tax revenue and jobs. He's willing to sacrifice human life for the sake of transient temp jobs that will mostly go to out-of-state workers for the profit of out-of-state companies. And he has the balls to accuse environmentalists of not caring about human life?

Surprisingly, this is considered a competitive race. Fracking is highly controversial in the district. A poll taken last year showed southern Illinois evenly split on whether fracking should be allowed, with 54% of independents opposed. That's remarkable considering the same poll claims 80% support coal mining. Opposition is growing but there's a conspicuous absence of regional or statewide polls on the topic since then. His support for fracking will cost Bost support among moderates and independents.

Because I'm pretty certain no real-world environmentalist ever expressed to Bost the views he claims, I have to wonder what imaginary tree-huggers he was negotiating with. Do other people see them? Do they always take human form? Does he typically win arguments with his imaginary enemies or lose? Hopefully someone on his staff can help if these mysterious negotiators make more demands.

Congressman Shimkus faces backlash to deceptive fracking comments

Illinois' most embarrassing Congressman, John Shimkus, faced an outraged backlash for pro-fracking statements he made on facebook. He's already well known as a climate change denier and conspiracy theorist on the fringe of the energy debate. Although there's a long tradition of coal mining in his district, fracking is very controversial.

Shimkus has a steady stream of constituents who regularly respond to his misleading and foolish facebook posts. But several posts supporting fracking attracted unusually strong pushback.

The first recent post linked a radio interview in which Shimkus says fracking, "isn't really new. Its been around since the 40's." This is a common talking point industry propagandists use to confuse people.

Some forms of vertical fracking have been around for decades. Recent debates and regulation are focused on horizontal, high powered fracking, which people in the industry know was developed in the 90's. Shimkus then says with no irony that "it's difficult to separate what's fact from fiction these days." That's especially true when someone's Congressman is lying to them.

Shimkus then posted a picture of a fracking operation with the comment, "Looking forward to seeing this in Southern Illinois" that generated 85 mostly brutal responses from downstate residents.

• Great idea! Let's frack away our future! Goodbye geological stability. Hey...we're going to need more lawyers, doctors, and environmental remediation services in the area to deal with all of the negative impacts of fracking. What a short sighted plan.
  
• Southern Illinois has beauty beyond compare. Crystal clear water to drink. Clean air to breath. Why in the world do you think God would want you to do anymore to this area than has already been done by strip mining and underground mining? Piling shale on the ground making our highways nasty. Please rethink this highway of thinking. You've been there for us in the past, please think of our future.
  
  
• Proof we have the best congressman money can buy.
  
  
• I'm not looking forward to such ruin of our region. Ban fracking. Put your support behind wind, solar and energy efficient design please, Otherwise, you do not have my vote.
  
  
• Can we put one next to your house?
  
  
• Yeah, because that well is so much more beautiful than Shawnee National Forest and the surrounding land. Idiot.
  
  
• They are fracking in Central Illinois bypassing the Regulatory Act by staying under the volume that would cause them to wait for the rules to be finalized and by using fluids other than water to frack. See what they can get away with in this state! The Regulatory Act is going to be useless against these companies.
  
  
• In 2012 the State of Texas reported $1.5 billion in revenues from all fracking activities. That same year the Texas Department of Transportation determined that fracking truck traffic was causing $4 billion in roadway damages statewide annually. http://www.FrackingRoadDamage.com
  
• You support this you will condemn us all .It is your obligation too get the facts. Remember John we live on two fault lines.
  
  
• "this" should be NO where near Southern Illinois. Trashing the land, air and using precious water to frack the earth? Oh also fracking near New Madrid fault....are you so out of touch you don't see that?
  
  
• So, will the first "test" sites be in YOUR backyard, contamination affecting YOUR family? Most folks boosting southern Illinois look forward to seeing forests, rock formations, lakes, and... Wineries... This picture does none of those justice. It also makes me want to move for the sake of my baby boy!!!!!!!
  
  
• You are totally wrong about this issue; Illinois is one of the most beautiful states in the union with some of the best water anywhere. Now you want to ruin it? What the hell is wrong with you? We intend to fight this fight to the end!
  
  
• You can't restore ruined buildings from earthquakes, and you can't restore polluted water once it has made people sick. You are gambling with people's lives, to make a few dollars for a few people, most of whom don't need it. Shame on you.
  
  
• Fracking destroys. Fracking destroys wildlife. Fracking destroys tourism. Fracking destroys drinking water. Whoever is for Fracking has no empathy for our planet.
  
  
• You are either incredibly stupid, incredibly uncaring, or a combination of both if you look forward to seeing this in Southern Illinois. Do you also look forward to the earthquakes that will devastate Southern Illinois? Do you look forward to the land and water being destroyed? What is WRONG with you politicians? Is that almighty dollar that you're getting from all of these people destroying our planet going to be worth it when you also don't have decent air to breathe, water to drink, or constituents to vote for you? I hope all politicians supporting fracking are ousted from office as soon as possible. Fracking in Southern Illinois is a terrible, terrible thing and the fact that you don't know this makes me sick.
  
  
• With all due respect, Congressman: ABSOLUTELY NOT! No way are the people of southern Illinois prepared for the noise, traffic, and pollution this will create. Take fracking to Chicago!
  
  
• NO! This is *not* a sight I want to see in Southern Illinois, now or EVER! We live on two active faults. I have friends in many areas that have allowed fracking. They have constant earthquakes. No job, no income, is worth endangering millions of lives. Please re-think this.
  
• why weren't we considered for the Tesla Plant, you have any idea what 6500 decent jobs would mean to this district, well are you trying to bring long term development here? oh and talk to folks in Ohio about fracking jobs, transients living in hotels and apartments leaving on Friday, lots of work for restaurants, bars and gas stations and when the crews move on so do those crappy jobs...
  

I could copy dozens more.

Shimkus got cute with his response and posted a graphic of outdated and out of context quotes from former and current Obama administration officials. Then another of academics who have worked for the industry claiming there has been no water contamination from fracking.

I added my own comment this time that got 13 likes.

243 cases of drinking well water contaminated in Pennsylvania. Does it bother anyone else to have their Congressman lie to them?
http://triblive.com/mobile/6696428-96/wells-released-gas

Plenty of others chimed in with more stories, studies, and facts to correct Shimkus' attempt to mislead his constituents.

I understand this scientific compendium is not covered in money, and therefore you are not likely to read such things, but you might try reading a peer reviewed medical research that provides a significant body of evidence that fracking is inherently dangerous to people and their community.
http://concernedhealthny.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CHPNY-Fracking-Compendium.pdf

Why don't you ask these people! Dennis and Tamera Hagy and sons, Jackson County, WV (Equitable gas wells 1,080 feet away)
Exposure: Water – arsenic, lead, barium and Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, radon levels were 1,233 pCi/l with the maximum contaminant level set at 300.
Symptoms: Neurological symptoms, headaches, rashes, and vomiting, eyes burning, oddly tired; one son spitting up blood
or Danny and Sharon Kinney
Location: Salem, WV
Gas Facility: Antero Resources gas well
Exposure: Water – arsenic at .060
Symptoms: Unknown, replacement water or relocated; cracking house foundation
http://www.wboy.com/story/17114653/family-suffers-contaminated-water-well-from-oil-gas-industry-on-neighbors-property

Plus this powerful personal response:

My parents are ranchers. They have lost water pressure at their ranch for the first time in twenty years because three of their neighbors are selling off their water to fracking companies. They were also involved in an auto accident a few years ago because the traffic has gotten progressively worse on the little state highway they retired on. We don't have the cancer clusters mapped out yet, but we will in a few decades time, we'll have the epidemiological connections with silicosis understood to a greater degree too by then; cold comfort to the people who will be suffering from it, and silicosis is a pretty awful way to die. The companies won't disclose the contents of the chemicals they inject into the ground, but they do use known carcinogens. Local communities vote to keep fracking out, yet are over-ruled by state judges, like what transpired in Fort Collins, Co. earlier this year. You quoting EPA and Energy officials is probably not the most disingenuous thing you've done (how many of them are now working for energy companies I wonder?), but sincerely if it were your family, and their livelihood was at stake, would you still call fracking safe?

Shimkus has an incumbent protection district but he's facing a serious Democratic opponent for the first time in his new district, Eric Thorsland. Besides taking a reality-based position on climate change, Thorsland's family owns an organic farm. His website says he "believes food security and water quality issues are top priorities and has witnessed firsthand the effects of a changing climate on his farm."

There's a clear choice between Thorsland, who supports building a long-term sustainable economy, and Shimkus who would sacrifice the regions' future for a few years of transient temp jobs.

Illinois 13th Congressional District Democratic Candidates Answer My Questions on Climate Change, Green Jobs, Fracking

There's a three way Democratic primary to take on Rodney Davis in Illinois' 13th Congressional district. I asked the candidates questions about energy and climate change issues, and amazingly enough, they all responded. Their responses are up at Huffington Post blog.

All three accept the scientific consensus about climate change. Republican Rodney Davis continues to use the climate change denier talking point that there's still an ongoing debate about whether man-made pollutants are contributing to the problem.

All three candidates think federal oversight of fracking is too weak. One supports a fracking ban now, and another will support a ban if fracking can't be proven safe. They also spoke about how to tackle climate change and their position on fossil fuel subsidies.

Check out their full answers and please share!

Rodney Davis Peddles Debunked Tractor Dust Regulation Conspiracy Theory

The EPA wants to regulate tractor dust. Can you believe that? It's getting to the point where a man can't even drive his tractor down a dirt road without big government getting in the way!

That's what Congressman Rodney Davis wants you to believe anyway. It's a good soundbite and the fact that it's complete nonsense hasn't stopped some politicians from peddling this conspiracy theory no matter how many times it's debunked.

Davis sponsored an amendment to let the Department of Agriculture comment on EPA regulation. In speeches and press statements, he argued that EPA is out of touch with rural America by reviving the old yarn that they want to regulate tractor dust on dirt roads.

Congressman John Shimkus was telling this dusty story back when Rodney Davis was still on his staff. Since then, the EPA administrator has said several times that there's no plan to consider regulating tractor dust, and multiple news organizations have debunked the talking point. At this point it should be absolutely clear to everyone that it simply isn't true.

Undeterred by reality, there's even a bill called the "Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act." What it actually does is prevent EPA from enacting regulations of soot and particulate matter that are only applied to major sources of industrial pollution, not farms. These are pollutants, often from coal power plants, that cause lung disease, heart attacks, asthma attacks, and other deadly health problems.

In other words, this has nothing to do with protecting rural America. Politicians who talk about tractor dust regulation want rural Americans to fight for the coal industry's right to kill them a little faster.

Davis offered his amendment to the REINS Act, which was passed by the House with his support. This Tea Party bill is designed to kill new regulation that protects the environment, public health, or deal with climate change. One expert put it this way:

The REINS Act is a proposal that may seem benign and appealing on the surface, but in fact, it is radical in concept and would be perilous in execution.  The bill could, in effect, impose a slow-motion government shutdown, and it would replace a process based on expertise, rationality and openness with one characterized by political maneuvering, economic clout and secrecy.  The public would be less protected, and the political system would be more abused.  Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more far-reaching, fundamental and damaging shift in the way the government goes about its business of safeguarding the public.

Davis does his best to sound like a reasonable moderate in press interviews. But judging by his actions, he has the same extremist anti-environment, anti-health agenda as his mentor, John Shimkus.

Congressman Bill Enyart doesn't want help from environmentalists or Obama supporters

I received another fundraising email today from freshman Democratic Congressman Bill Enyart. As it turns out, he doesn't want my money after all. He made that very clear in his public statement promising to fight Obama's climate change agenda.

“As co-chairman of the Congressional Coal Caucus, I will work tirelessly against any proposed new federal mandates that will increase our energy costs, and decimate our Southern Illinois coal industry in the process. 

Do you know what actually caused a large electric rate increase in his district? The new Prairie State coal plant. New coal costs more than wind power. What's hurting the economy in his district lately? Record drought, extreme flooding, and not being able to move barge traffic along the Mississippi.

I understand the politics of Enyart's district in southern Illinois coal country. I also know that, despite the coal industry's dominance over local press and politicians, there are many voters who understand why relying on a coal economy keeps southern Illinois poor, just like West Virginia and eastern Kentucky. No region is going to prosper by waiting for the mines to re-open. Southern Illinois deserves a Congressman with the courage to help build a new energy economy instead of selling the empty promise of coal.

Clearly, Enyart believes the coal industry is more important to his re-election effort than environmentalists and Obama supporters. He doesn't need our donations or volunteer efforts. I'm going to reply to his fundraising email by letting him know that he should direct it to coal industry executives and hope they pull through for him.

If someone isn't willing to tackle a problem that threatens the homes, jobs and lives of millions of people then I don't understand why they're in public office. Organizing for America has been targeting Republicans who won't take action on climate change. But, it was fossil fuel Democrats who stopped the cap-and-trade bill from getting a vote in the Senate. This problem will be solved when Democrats are forced to accept that they can oppose action on climate change or they can get re-elected. But they can't do both.

Attack against Erika Harold a reminder of Rodney Davis' subtle appeal to prejudice

That didn't take long. An Illinois Republican party official made a racist and sexist attack against Erika Harold two weeks after she announced her campaign for Congress. The ugly comments by the chair of the Montgomery County Republican Party have gotten plenty of coverage so I won't repeat them here. Conservative talk show hosts are advised to wait a week before going back to arguing that racism is no longer a problem in America.

Her opponent in the Republican primary, freshman incumbent Rodney Davis, did the right thing by removing the official's name from a list of supporters on his website and asking him to resign as party chair.

The episode reminded me of a piece of Davis campaign literature I wrote about last year as an example of "othering" or as I like to call it, fill-in-the-blank-prejudice. A Davis campaign representative handed it out during a 9-12 & Take Back America event in Montgomery county, which is now looking for a new Republican chair.

During campaign season, 9-12 groups were usually careful not to make overtly racist slurs, but the movement includes plenty of appeals to a vague sense of America as they know it being under attack by this new socialist black President and his scary allies. So, it's no wonder that the Davis campaign would give the group literature claiming that he's one of them. It says Davis will represent "Our America" where people put in an honest day's work.

The card doesn't need to tell a 9-12 group in an overwhelmingly white small town who those other people are from somewhere else where they don't put in an honest days work and who aren't part of "our america." They can fill in the blanks. This the same crowd who claim that most of their state tax dollars are being taken from rural downstate and spent in Chicago because that's where most of the welfare recipients live. Of course, that belief is absurd since much of rural Illinois is poor and most of the state's millionaires and Fortune 500 companies are located in the Chicago area.

Apart from the racist and sexist remarks, it's worth noting the point made in the offensive email about Harold. The author feels that Davis represents him and conservatives in the district, despite suggestions that Harold might be a more conservative alternative. The reason for those conflicting perceptions about Davis is the result of a campaign strategy that carefully presented two different images of himself.

Davis mostly avoided forums where the public could ask questions during his '12 campaign. He made an art of avoiding specifics about where he stands on nearly every controversial issue. He spent most of the campaign speaking at private events held by Republicans and conservative groups, and went out of his way to make sure his comments weren't recorded. He talks about bipartisanship and working with Democrats in press interviews. But, he has a much more conservative and partisan message for the closed-door events where he spent most of his time campaigning.

Davis continues to promote his image in the press as someone who can be bipartisan. He needs to since a majority of voters chose another candidate in the last election. But, despite her buzz in the national press, I don't believe Harold will gain much traction with conservative groups in the district. The 9-12 crowd in Montgomery county and other conservative groups who hear Davis talk in private still believe he's one of them. They believe he'll represent their America.

Illinois drought and flooding isn't climate change. It's a Climate Clusterfuck.

Remember the stories about rivers in Illinois earlier this year? They were about a long drought so bad it was slowing barge traffic on the Mississippi River down to a halt.

And here we are in spring with our rivers and half the state flooded. In fact, heavy flooding forced the closure of about a dozen locks on the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers. Sections of both rivers have been closed to barge traffic.

I just took the train from Chicago to Springfield and I saw all kinds of water in places where it isn't supposed to be. It's bad.

(Photo Credit: Chris Young)

In the Quad Cities, WQAD TV news has a story about drought and flooding hitting a Christmas tree farm along the Rock River. Drought had killed 900 trees when they first covered the farm in July. Now, he has to visit his trees in a boat. He says he has never seen it go from one extreme to another this badly before.



As usual, almost no one in the press is pointing it out, but this is exactly what those nagging scientists told us would happen. They warned the Midwest would have more erratic, extreme and unpredictable weather, including more droughts, and more severe storms leading to flooding. A federal report on the impacts of climate change in the Midwest summarized:

The likely increase in precipitation in winter and spring, more heavy downpours, and greater evaporation in summer would lead to more periods of both floods and water deficits.

The 2009 report even warned that low river levels would cause problems for river traffic. It's like they could see into the future. That report was either written by clairvoyant fortune tellers, or a group of scientists who really knew what the hell they were talking about.

So yes, we get both more flooding and more droughts thanks to climate change. Barge traffic is interrupted in both winter and spring.

At this point it's more descriptive to go ahead and call it a Climate Clusterfuck. That's what we're dealing with from here on out.

More attention is given to the threat of rising sea levels on the coats, but the Mississippi River Valley is already being hit hard in ways that harm our regional economy, food supply, and safety. No one can say exactly what the weather would have looked like this year if climate change wasn't happening, but we do know that if we really want more seasons like this and worse, then we should keep burning fossil fuels.

That reminds me of two downstate Illinois Congressmen who see this problem and think we should keep promoting a major cause: coal. Freshmen Representatives Rodney Davis and Bill Enyart held a joint press conference promoting a bill giving the Corps of Engineers more power to keep barge traffic flowing down the Mississippi River.

Yet, Enyart also joined with Davis' mentor, BFF, and fellow coal lover John Shimkus, to form the Congressional Coal Caucus. In their joint statement both said their goal is to create jobs by promoting coal.

Jobs are good. But, when discussing rivers, both Enyart and Davis said keeping barge traffic moving is essential to the regional economy. Whether they realize it or not, they admitted that burning coal is harming the regional economy and costing us jobs due to the impacts of climate change on river traffic.

This is short term thinking. They're introducing a bill to deal with one immediate impact of climate change while simultaneously fighting to expand the industry that contributes most to the problem. Fighting for coal means each year climate change will do more damage to Illinois crops, rivers, cities, and our economy.

Politicians like to make everyone happy, but they have to make a choice. They can either continue to be servants of the coal industry, or they can serve every other industry and citizen in Illinois. They can no longer do both because climate change is the overwhelming threat to us all.

FaceMob floods Rodney Davis with climate change questions. Still no answer.

If you were watching Rodney Davis' campaign Facebook page Sunday afternoon you would have seen a flood of questions from citizens asking where he stands on climate change. They're still waiting for an answer.

I wrote about Davis ignoring my question and hurrying away when I asked if he thought floods and droughts are getting worse due to climate change. That's not the only question he's dodging. He attends very few public forums where he will have to answer questions from the public, and he won't get specific about where he stands on many major issues. Would he respond to citizens on his campaign Facebook page asking about climate change, the great challenge of our time?

I repeated my own question about floods and droughts.

Mr Davis, you didn't answer my question about whether you think floods and droughts in Illinois are getting worse because of climate change. It will be devastating to farmers, residents, and the regional economy if the extreme weather disasters we've had the last few years become the new normal. Do you acknowledge the scientific consensus that man-made pollutants are contributing to climate change and what would you do to solve the problem?

Dozens of questions by others were posted on his page.



My respectful questions were removed quickly and I was banned from commenting on his Facebook page again. That didn't surprise me. After a while, every mention of climate change by anyone was deleted as quickly as it was posted. Even the most politely worded questions were removed, like this one:

Thank you for putting forth an energy policy but I'm unclear about your stance regarding climate change. Since I will likely not be able to attend one of your appearances, might you be able to respond in this forum? Thanks so much.

That got deleted. As were these questions.



Many more excellent banned questions can be viewed at my Flickr set. I captured many, but not all, before they were removed by the Davis campaign. My favorite was posted under a photo of a campaign sign in a soy field.

Wonder where he stands on climate change? Rodney are you going to answer ever? It might help out the bean field?

Questions in response to the energy plan posted on his main campaign website haven't been removed yet. I'm sure they'll get to those after they read this blog post so catch them while you can. A couple of voters there let Davis know they aren't happy about their questions on Facebook being ignored and removed.

Congratulations, by not answering my question and blocking me from your Facebook page, you've just proven how you will not work with people who may disagree with you. When running on the spirit of working with others, you blatantly shut out a possible voter. I was a swing voter. I wasn't entirely decided on David Gill today. You've just changed my mind, and the mind of my husband, and the mind of my friend, all who were honestly considering a Davis vote. NEVER shut out a possible voter. Politics is about addition, not subtraction. Thank you.

The fact that he was able to hold a press conference on energy policy without any reporters pressing him for his stance on climate change is inexcusable. If record-setting heat waves, extended droughts, and extreme flooding year after year are front page news then climate change is important enough for journalists to ask questions and expect answers.

Davis did tell one reporter that his former boss, Congressman John Shimkus, has "lead the debate" on energy issues. What Shimkus has done is wage a war against science, spread misleading conspiracies about non-existent EPA regulations, and attempted to make climate change a religious issue. John Shimkus' unique interpretation of the Bible doesn't represent the many people of faith who understand that we must deal with the climate crisis. I'd like to know if Shimkus represents the kind of leadership Davis will follow.

Running for Congress in one of the nation's most competitive races takes a lot of work. But, there are only a few things most voters expect a candidate to do at minimum. One of them is to explain where you stand on the most important issues of the day. His opponent has no trouble saying on his website that, "David Gill is a man of science, someone who uses technical results in the ER to diagnose and treat illness and injuries. Our approach to addressing the growing problem of climate change and environmental damage needs to be scientific and fact-based, too."

If Rodney Davis is unwilling, or incapable, of answering questions, then he probably shouldn't be running for office.

Congressman Shimkus called energy loan guarantees "imperative" before voting against them

House Republicans continue to ignore the American Jobs Act, but they found plenty of time for their ongoing effort to gin up a phony scandal around Solyndra. Today they passed the "No More Solyndras Act," mostly along partly lines. They want to end the Department of Energy loan guarantee program because one solar project failed.

Next month I expect them to pass the "No More Restaurants Act" because O'Boys Bar-B-Q chain in central Florida just closed their final location. Also, the "No More Movies Act" will be voted on in response to "Think of the Cold Light of Day" earning far less at the box office than it cost to make. As long as we're irrationally overrating to minor setbacks, then why not?

Illinois Congressman John Shimkus has been making noise about Solyndra during the House's desperate search for a scandal. He voted for the bill today that would ban the Department of Energy from approving loan guarantee applications filed after 2011. That's an important deadline. It means the act won't apply to a loan guarantee Shimkus enthusiastically supported in 2010 that's five times bigger than Solyndra's.

Shimkus lent his support to a $2.5 Billion DOE loan guarantee for Tenaska's failed coal plant in Taylorville, Illinois. The Taylorville Energy Center is stalled indefinitely after failing to get the special subsidies and fixed rate increases they need from the Illinois legislature. In other words, it's a failed project the market can't support that's far, far more expensive and unrealistic than Solyndra. But, that doesn't register as a scandal to Shimkus and other House Republicans.

Shimkus went beyond giving tepid support for the loan guarantee. He sent a member of his staff, Rodney Davis, to speak in favor of Tenaska's application at a Department of Energy public hearing in Taylorville. In a message about the loan guarantee, he said it's "imperative that we move forward with policies and financial assistance to projects like" the Taylorville Energy Center.

Yes, that's right. Shimkus just voted to end a policy he called "imperative" two years ago when it might have helped a "clean coal" hoax in his district. That double standard is what he calls an "all of the above" energy policy.

Rodney Davis' copy-and-paste energy plan ducks climate change (IL-13)

Republican Congressional candidate Rodney Davis announced his energy plan in Springfield Tuesday. The campaign apparently forgot to send my invitation but you can see the plan posted online. The plan consists of several paragraphs in a press release filled with familiar talking points.

Davis supports an "all of the above" energy policy. If that sounds familiar it's because "all of the above" is also supported by Rodney Davis' former employer, Congressman John Shimkus, plus Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, David Gill's previous challenger in the Democratic primary, oil industry lobbyists, the US Chamber of Commerce and nearly everyone else with a consultant who reads polling data. It's used by so many politicians with vastly different energy policies that the phrase has become a meaningless cliche.

Like John Shimkus, Davis opposes new EPA regulation of coal, cap-and-trade, and any method of putting a price on carbon. He supports building the Keystone XL pipeline and subsidizing every energy source imaginable. That's known as the "now taking campaign donations from all sectors of the energy industry" subsidy policy.

Davis will also oppose what he calls "radical" international efforts to reduce carbon pollution that causes climate change, such as the Kyoto Protocol. One hundred ninety-three nations already signed the Kyoto Protocol and the United States is on target to meet Kyoto carbon levels thanks to the large drop in coal power generation.

Hint: When you oppose something accepted as a necessity by nearly every nation in the world, and we know it can be realistically achieved, then the radical you're looking for is in the mirror.

What the energy press release doesn't mention is climate change. That's something like holding a press conference about apple pie and refusing to talk about apples.

I understand his reluctance. Davis must pander to a Tea Party base who believe climate change is a U.N. socialist conspiracy to rule the world. At the same time, he's running in a very slightly Democratic district that includes at least a dozen colleges. The 13th Congressional district doesn't want a Congressman who's anti-science.

And so, the silence continues.

Rodney Davis ducks my question about climate change

Illinois Republican Congressional candidates Rodney Davis and Jason Plummer held a press conference in East St. Louis last week to talk about the flood levee system. Both candidates are running for open seats in two of the nation's most competitive Congressional races. I decided to tag along and see how it went.

After speaking at length on promoting federal spending for levees, they answered questions about how the current drought is impacting farmers. That's when I thought, "Hey, I have a relevant question" and asked Davis if he thinks the floods and droughts are getting worse because of climate change.

Davis responded by ignoring me, then asking a reporter if he had another question, and quickly walking away. The scene is caught near the end of a video posted to the IL13RawFootage YouTube page. You can hear me ask the question off-camera before it pans over.




I understand why Davis wanted to rush away. He knows who I am and since he has seen my blog, he knows I'm not likely to praise him. But, I was polite. I didn't interrupt the press conference. I only jumped in when I did because I could tell his staff wanted him to leave. I would have been more than happy to post any answer he gave. Instead, he walked away.

 

It's an important question directly related to the extreme weather events Davis and Plummer were talking about. He spent 15 years working for Congressman John Shimkus, who earned national attention for his extremist, anti-science views on climate change. People deserve to know before election day whether Davis believes the climate crisis is a hoax. So far, he's not telling anyone and he has attended very few forums where the public can ask questions.

We do know that the Rodney Davis campaign already took large donations from Exxon and the Koch brothers PAC. Both groups financed campaigns to cast doubt about the scientific consensus behind climate change.

I'll at least give Shimkus credit for the fact that no matter how many times I wrote critical blog posts (which was often) his office always responded. My questions were never ignored.

Dick Durbin: Are we ready for climate change disasters?

We're used to hearing about temperatures and sea levels rising as a result of climate change. Senator Dick Durbin put the focus on one aspect of what that means in practical terms.

Is the federal government financially prepared to handle the rising number of catastrophic weather disasters? It's an excellent question for Illinois in particular after this year's massive spring floods along the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers.

Think Progress blogged about Durbin's speech in an appropriations subcommittee hearing. His last comment reminds me why he's still my favorite member of the Senate.

“We’ve stopped talking about this on Capitol Hill,” Durbin concluded. “We’ve decided that the debate over global warming is too contentious. I think it’s a big mistake.”

He's absolutely right. We can't afford to ignore climate change even if some pundits and special interests have decided it's not a convenient time to tackle the issue.

Think Progress includes a short clip in their blog post but I strongly recommend watching this longer five minute video of Durbin's comments, especially if you've never heard a Senator start their speech by quoting Bob Dylan lyrics.





Polluting industries have tried to convince people that protecting the environment will cost jobs. The real question is how many homes, jobs and lives will be lost in weather disasters because we waited too long to deal with climate change.

Creating green jobs by building clean energy projects is the best plan anyone has come up with for reviving the economy. We can pay for clean energy projects that create jobs now, or we can pay much more later for disaster relief because we failed to slow climate change. I'm glad Dick Durbin understands that reality.

Proposed Congressional map provides opportunities for downstate Illinois Democrats

The legislature passed an incumbent-protection map for Illinois members of Congress in 2000. In contrast, the proposed map released this morning could mix things up. I found the google maps version at Capitol Fax. Let's take a look at the central and southern districts.

Unsurprisingly, Jerry Costello maintains his strongly Democratic district in Southwestern Illinois. The addition of Mt. Vernon looks like the most significant change.

The new 15th district includes most of the rural, Republican areas currently represented by Republicans Tim Johnson and John Shimkus. If either of them want to run in a safely Republican district then they'll have to fight over this one.

Most of Tim Johnson's home town of Urbana is drawn into the new 13th district with areas he hasn't represented before. It includes Decatur, most of Springfield (minus the Republican west end), Bloomington, Democratic Macoupin county, and John Shimkus' home in Collinsville. This area is currently represented by four Republican Congressmen but doesn't clearly belong to any of them. It also looks like a district Democrats can win.

Shimkus' hometown base of support in Madison county is split between three districts. He'll have to 1) Run in a rural Republican 15th district that includes little of his home base and much of Tim Johnson's territory, or 2) Run in what appears to be a Democratic-winnable 13th district that includes many voters who are new to him.

As was rumored, Peoria is drawn into a district with Rock Island/Moline that should be heavily Democratic. This virtually guarantees that tea party Republican Bobby Schilling becomes a one-term Congressman. The same 17th district includes parts of Rockford, the home town of Republican Don Manzullo, and most of Peoria, home of Aaron Schock.

Schock lives in the new 18th district that stretches across central and western Illinois from Bloomington/Normal to Quincy. It includes little of his old state representative district in the Peoria area but looks strongly Republican.

Illinois Democrats will have a good year in 2012 with Obama at the top of the ticket. There will almost certainly be a new Democrat from the Rock Island/Moline - Peoria - Rockford 17th district. There's a reasonable chance of a new Democrat from the Decatur - Springfield -Champaign/Urbana 13th district.

If Republicans Schock, Johnson, and Shimkus want to run in a heavily Republican district then they'll have to introduce themselves to new voters in a district that won't include most of their hometown base. It will be interesting to see how the Shimkus/Johnson face-off is resolved.

Illinois Congressmen spread EPA conspiracy theories

I enjoyed Kate Sheppard's article at Mother Jones, "The Right's Top 5 EPA Conspiracy Theories." It was less enjoyable to remember that I've heard several of these conspiracy theories spread by Illinois members of Congress and the Farm Bureau.

My favorite is that EPA will regulate dust from driving down dirt roads. John Shimkus spread this conspiracy during a House committee hearing, and in speeches to constituents, he even claims that EPA will require the paving of all rural dirt roads.



Illinois news outlets that covered Shimkus' fear-mongering didn't let their readers know about EPA administrator Lisa Jackson's statement that they have no plans to regulate dust. One reason why Shimkus always wins re-election is that local reporters don't challenge his misleading statements.

Another conspiracy theory that sounded familiar is EPA regulation of cow farts and human breathing. When I brought up pollution from coal power plants with Congressman Bobby Schilling after his forum he changed the subject to regulating methane from cows because that's another source of global warming pollutants. I'm not entirely sure what point he was trying to make.

In fact, regulation of CO2 is only being proposed for major sources, such as coal power plants.

Most of these conspiracy theories have a common theme. The actual proposed regulations would apply to major sources of pollution, mostly in the coal, oil and gas industries. What these conspiracies do is imagine far-fetched ways that regulation of major polluters will harm farmers and others in rural areas.

It's an attempt by the fossil fuel industry to use rural Americans as their pawns, even as those companies are polluting the air and water in rural areas. Farmers are already some of the first victims of climate change as unpredictable severe weather patterns, including heavier spring rains, delay the planting and harvesting seasons. The Illinois Farm Bureau isn't doing its members any favors by playing the fossil fuel industry's game.

Bobby Schilling forum sounded like tea party rally

I only caught the tail end of a public forum hosted by freshman Congressman Bobby Schilling. A screening of The Billionaires' Tea Party was the same night, so after the movie, I rushed over for the last 10 minutes of Schilling's forum.

It felt like the movie never stopped. Hearing Schilling was no different than clips of speakers at tea party rallies. Except that Schilling had a calm crowd of about 20 people, half of which were suit-and-tie clad staffers for various Republican politicians.

One audience member asked Schilling why he supports high speed-rail. Schilling responded that he doesn't favor it at this time because there's not enough money. He argued that Amtrak isn't profitable and that we should instead be spending money on bridge and highway projects.

That got a lively response from another audience member who asked if he opposed funding for a new Amtrak line from Chicago to Rock Island/Moline. Schilling became a little defensive and tried to engage the audience member in debate. "So, you're an Amtrak supporter? Why do you think we need it?"

The guy in the audience said it's a good economic development opportunity for the Quad Cities and asked if Schilling really favored walking away from the investment that has already been made on the rail line. Just when things started to get interesting a staffer said they were out of time (7 minutes early) and cut off discussion. In any case, it's clear that Schilling opposes any new spending on passenger rail, despite the jobs and economic development benefits it would bring to the two largest communities in his district.

Since I didn't get the chance to ask a question I decided to introduce myself afterward. I let him know that I had recently moved into his district from John Shimkus' territory, and that I hope he won't join Shimkus on the lunatic fringe of anti-environmentalists.

He started to talk about climate change he told me that "for every scientist who says it's a problem, you'll find another who..." I think he trailed off because he could see I wasn't buying it. I responded that it was something more like 1 scientist who claims it isn't a man-made problem for every 1,000 who do. Although it may be more like 10,000 to 1. Even the few prominent skeptics have been backtracking lately.

He next claimed that he was probably more green than me. We didn't get into the specifics of what makes his house green but he did brag about driving a car that uses E-85 ethanol. I didn't bother to tell him that no one other than ADM still claims that corn-based ethanol is green. When I mentioned pollution from coal power plants he deflected by bringing up methane from cow farts.

I was hoping to have a new Congressman who could at least carry on a reasonable discussion about environmental issues. It's not looking good.

Maybe he'll come around. For now, he sounds like he'll join Shimkus on the climate-denier fringe. A recent USA Today editorial put those who still deny the scientific evidence of the climate crisis, "in the same position as the "birthers," who continue to challenge President Obama's American citizenship — a vocal minority that refuses to accept overwhelming evidence."

I guess that's what makes the tea party so fascinating and frightening. Whether it's Obama's birth certificate, climate change science, or the imagined government takeover of health care, we have a very vocal group who holds onto irrational beliefs which cannot be swayed by any amount of evidence. How on earth do you deal with that, especially when news organizations give them nearly unlimited, uncritical coverage?

Aaron Schock praises bipartisanship while remaining partisan

A recent Gatehouse news headline declares, "Schock: Congressional bipartisanship a good omen for 2011."

That sounds like good news! We need more Republican Congressman who will set aside the past two years of obstruction.

But it started to sound less appealing when I read down the article.

"The president deserves credit for bringing his party along and getting them to move to the center," Schock said.

"I think this is a good sign for 2011," Schock said. "So long as the president continues to exhibit this kind of leadership, I believe the Republican House will want to continue to work with him to take up America's challenges."

Lame-duck accomplishments for Democrats included an arms reduction treaty with Russia and the repeal of the military's ban on gays serving openly, Schock said.

Yes, repealing the Don't Ask Don't Tell Policy is a good example of compromise since a few Republicans voted for it. Except that Schock wasn't one of them. He voted No. In fact, Schock has a reliably partisan voting record.

The funny thing about Schock's comment is that he praises Obama for moving Democrats, but gives no indication that Republicans might compromise as well. He gives a very conditional prediction of bipartisanship that depends on Obama moving to the right. Apparently, he thinks bipartisanship is something that's good for others to practice, but not for him.

Schock's position looks no different than that of his friend and fellow Congressman John Shimkus, who declared that the Republicans would "just say no" to Obama for two years. I have to admit that the strategy paid off for Republicans in the recent election. It hurt America, but it was an effective partisan tactic.

I'm interested to see if one of Schock's resolutions for the new year will be trying out bipartisanship for himself instead of expecting it only from others.

Pollution advocate running for Congress as a Democrat (IL-18)

There's a primary race between two Democrats seeking to unseat Aaron Schock in the Illinois 18th Congressional district. Whoever wins will have a very tough race in a gerrymandered Republican district. That's probably why there's so little media coverage of the primary.

A glaring gap in that press coverage needs to be filled. Democratic candidate Deirdre "DK" Hirner was, until recently, Executive Director of the Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group. The name certainly sounds environmental and a recent column blandly describes it as a group "which helps businesses work with the Illinois Environmental Protec­tion Agency."

The Peoria Journal Starr's first coverage of her campaign went further, describing it as an "environmental advocacy organization." It makes me wonder what she's telling reporters about her job.

The Environmental Regulatory Group is a Chamber of Commerce front group run by the worst polluters in Illinois. The Illinois Chamber website tells us that IERG was started for Chamber members to "represent business interests" in environmental regulation.

Their statement of purpose says they exist to "advance the interests of its Members, which include companies engaged in
industry, commerce, manufacturing, agriculture, trade, energy and transportation." It doesn't mention anything about protecting the environment.

The IERG membership list is a roster of names usually seen in the news for EPA violations and reports on extreme environmental hazards. It includes operators of the state's dirtiest coal plants like Dynegy Midwest Generation, along with friendly tree-hugging names like ADM, Peabody, ExxonMobil, and Dow Chemical. Small business owners are noticeably absent from the list.

The Chamber and IERG websites are full of the usual buzzwords about favoring "balanced" and "reasonable" regulation. But, even a casual glance at IERG's activity tells the real story of their working closely with the Chamber to fight environmental protections.

An Illinois Chamber update in 2006 argued against new mercury rules with the usual scare tactics about lost jobs. The mercury rule was a top priority of environmental groups and eventually became law. Hirner brags in the update that IERG, "as affiliate of the Illinois Chamber," pushed to weaken regulation of mercury by creating more exemptions. Similarly, their annual report includes a long list of proposed rules they helped to weaken or defeat while "advocating for industry."





Earlier this year, Hirner wrote a letter to the editor opposing clean energy legislation supported by many environmental groups. She argued that we should have federal, rather than state regulation. Her counterparts at the US Chamber in Washington argue against federal regulation by claiming it's better to have an international treaty. In every situation, the Chamber is always sure that some other governmental body is the right one to take action.

Hirner avoids talk of specific issues in news articles by saying that she simply wants to serve the interests of the public. The burden is on her to convince voters why she will serve the public interest after years of helping major corporate polluters fight against it.

My guess is that her nomination would give a huge boost to Green Party candidate Sheldon Schafer and offer no threat to Aaron Schock.

How Illinois voted on ACES

It passed! The most important energy and climate change legislation in American history passed the House and next stop is the Senate.

Everyone in Congress claims to care about clean energy. Here's how the Illinois delegation voted when it mattered most.

Yes -11
Bean
Davis
Gutierrez
Halverson
Hare
Jackson
Kirk
Lipinski
Quigley
Rush
Schakowsky

No -8
Costello
Biggert
Foster
Johnson
Manzullo
Roskam
Schock
Shimkus

Mark Kirk was the only Republican to vote in favor. Costello and Foster were the only Democrats to vote against.

Foster surprised me. The Sierra Club made a strong effort to help elect him. Any member of Congress who voted against this bill will have a very difficult time getting the support of any major environmental group.

Of course, the bill is imperfect. Compromises to the coal industry and other polluters were made to get it passed. The next step is getting a stronger version through the Senate.

Aaron Schock joins Shimkus fringe?

Aaron Schock is a new Congressman, so even though his previous environmental record isn't very impressive, I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. Soon we'll find out if he was serious about the windmills and promises to protect rivers that appeared in his campaign ads. It isn't looking good so far.

Although Schock appeals to some as the kind of reasonable Republican his district historically elects, like Ray LaHood and Bob Michael, on energy issues he's gravitating toward the Shimkus fringe of his party. I've read that Schock will likely oppose the ACES global warming bill.

Even worse, he's co-sponsoring the "American Energy Act" which comes from the Republican energy group co-chaired by John Shimkus. The bill is full of measures to weaken environmental regulations and increase corporate welfare for polluting industries.

Schock echoes Shimkus by bragging that the bill threatens ANWR. His press release admits he supports "lifting restrictions on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the Outer Continental Shelf, and oil shale in the Mountain West."

Schock is a politically ambitious freshman so I still hope that he'll choose a reasonable path to represent his constituents rather than following Shimkus and the polluting interests into national disgrace. That will only happen if he hears from people who live in his district.