Dick Cheney Once Understood that an Iraq Occupation would be a "Quagmire"

THE WAR AT HOME: WHAT THE IRAQ WAR HAS COST MICHIGAN AND THE COUNTRY

MoveOn.org "Cost of War Report" Released Today

NEARLY A HALF-TRILLION DOLLARS SPENT ON AN UNWINNABLE CIVIL WAR COULD HAVE IMPROVED THE COMMUNITIES OF OUR 15TH DISTRICT IN MANY WAYS. READ THIS REPORT, SPONSORED BY MOVEON.ORG, FOR A SUMMARY OF THE EXPENSES OF THE WAR FOR OUR DISTRICT, THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND THE NATION.

All of the MoveOn State Congressional District Reports being released today may be found here.

THE WAR AT HOME: WHAT THE IRAQ WAR HAS COST MICHIGAN'S 15TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

Each and every day, it is becoming more evident that the Bush Administration is wasting billions of taxpayers' dollars on an endless, religious civil war that cannot be won.

On average, $275 million is spent every day on the war in Iraq—that is an average of $4,100 for every household in the United States over the course of the war. And those costs are continuing to rise with no end in sight.

Last month, Congress voted for an additional $100 billion in spending. That makes the total funding appropriated for the war in Iraq so far $456 billion. The cost to Michigan taxpayers alone is $12.12 billion. And taxpayers in the 15th congressional district alone are paying $872 million for the Iraq war. The money being spent in Iraq could be used to improve the lives of Americans instead of putting them at risk. Congress must act quickly to rein in this reckless president and bring an end to this war.

With the costs of the war expected to ultimately double, taxpayers in Michigan cannot afford another $872 million to keep our troops stuck in an unwinnable civil war in Iraq—especially when our communities are paying such a heavy price.

Impact on The Community
· The cost to Michigan taxpayers alone is $12.12 billion.
· Taxpayers in the 15th congressional district are paying $872 million for the Iraq war.

Trade Offs for Michigan's 15th District

Currently, 47 million Americans lack health insurance, Head Start is underfunded, college tuition is skyrocketing, our homeland is not secure with only one out of every 20 port containers getting inspected and our bridges and roads are aging. The $872 million being spent on the unwinnable civil war in Iraq should be put to better use for American taxpayers where we need it most—in our own backyard, fixing our aging bridges and roads or improving the lives of our residents.

What Citizens of Michigan's 15th District Could Have Gotten Instead:

· Health care coverage for 299,733 people—or 596,091 kids, or
· Head Start for 130,745 additional kids, or
· 12,163 new elementary school teachers, or
· 94,662 scholarships to make college more affordable, or
· Renewable electricity for 1,225,718 homes, or
· 7,030 affordable housing units, or
· 18,857 public safety officers to keep the streets safe

Promises Broken

President Bush Told Us the War Would Cost $50 billion...
In late 2002, President Bush's Budget Director estimated that the cost of the war with Iraq could be in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion. When Bush's chief economic adviser, Lawrence Lindsey, publicly estimated that the war in Iraq might cost $100 billion to $200 billion, he was fired. [New York Times, 12/31/02; Time Magazine, 12/23/02]
·
Nine Times That Amount Has Already Been Spent...
With Congress' recent vote for an additional $100 billion in war spending, Congress has so far appropriated more than $450 billion for the war in Iraq. [National Priorities Project, 8/07]
·
Ultimately, the War In Iraq May Cost Twenty Times What We Were Told...
According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the war in Iraq could ultimately cost twice as much as what has already been spent—more than $1 trillion. [Boston Globe, 8/1/07]
·
Failed Policies
Despite High Costs and Lost Lives, We Remain in an Unwinnable Religious Civil War...
According to the January 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, "... the term 'civil war' accurately describes key elements of the Iraqi conflict...." [Baltimore Sun, 2/3/07]
·
A quarterly Pentagon report said that last October through December was the most violent three-month period since 2003. The report concluded, "Some elements of the situation in Iraq are properly descriptive of a civil war,' including the hardening of ethno-sectarian identities and mobilization, the changing character of the violence and population displacements." [Sun Sentinel, 3/15/07]
·
Colin Powell, Former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joints Chiefs said of the Iraq war: "It is a civil war." [Meet the Press, 6/10/07]
·
· NBC News has branded the Iraq conflict a civil war. [Reuters, 11/27/06]

The Cost of War Has Been Dramatically Increasing and Hurting Communities...
Annual costs have risen every year since the war began. Fiscal Year 2007 appropriations for the Iraq War are almost twice as much as what they were three years ago in FY2004 and 2.5 times more than the costs in FY2003. [Congressional Research Service, 3/14/07]
·
The Iraq war has diverted U.S. government funding away from homeland security efforts (an estimated 9 percent of our FY2007 national security budget) and toward the war in Iraq (21 percent of the FY2007 budget). [Center for American Progress, 7/27/07]
·
The War in Iraq Has Made Us Less Safe At Home...
In July, the National Intelligence Estimate reported that al Qaeda will try to tap its allies and resources in Iraq in its efforts to exact another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. The report concluded: "We assess that its association with [al Qaeda in Iraq] helps al Qaeda to energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for homeland attacks." [CNN, 7/17/07]
·
A National Intelligence Estimate report released last September found that the war in Iraq has become a "cause célèbre" for Islamic extremists, breeding deep resentment of the U.S. that probably will get worse before it gets better. The report concluded: "If this trend continues, threats to U.S. interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide. The confluence of shared purpose and dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups."[Associated Press, 9/26/06]

Former Military Generals Believe War is a Failure...
Retired Major General John Batiste, who was commanding general of the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq from August 2002 to June 2005, called the war a "failed strategy that is breaking our great Army and Marine Corps." [Associated Press, 5/25/07]
·
Retired Lieutenant General William Odom on the Iraq War: "The worst strategic mistake in the history of the United States." [Pasadena Star News, 10/22/06]
·
Retired four-star Marine General Joseph Hoar, the former head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) which includes the Iraq theater of operations, urged a full pull-out of U.S. forces from Iraq. Hoar: "In the Marines, we say, 'When you're in a hole, stop digging.'" [UPI, 1/19/07]
·
The War's Cost in Each Michigan District:

1st $607 million
2nd $759 million
3rd $818 million
4th $695 million
5th $706 million
6th $729 million
7th $804 million
8th $935 million
9th $1.16 billion
10th $938 million
11th $1.05 billion
12th $833 million
13th $555 million
14th $642 million
15th $872 million
Total $12.12 billion

Data Sources for this Report

Unless otherwise indicated, the figures provided for the cost of the war for each district and specific tradeoffs are all from the National Priorities Project, available on the web here. The cost of war is based on an analysis of the legislation in which Congress has allocated money for war so far and research by the Congressional Research Service which has access to Department of Defense financial reports. The trade-offs are based on average cost per unit information for each state. More detailed information on the sources and the calculations of the averages can be obtained here.

If you wish to join efforts to bring the troops and the money back home where they belong, consider attending one of the local vigils to end the war being organized around the country for August 28. Information on the Ann Arbor event may be found here.

Even Cheney Knew the Truth about an Iraq Occupation in 1994: What Happened to the Truth When He Became VP?

What caused Dick Cheney to become such a denier and suppressor of the Truth about an Iraq Occupation and the costs it would inflict on American soldiers and families when he became VP?

Does Becoming a VP tranform you into a liar?

Watch Cheney declare the Truth about an Iraq Occupation in this clip posted on UTube from 1994, at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY

(If this UTube clip is not working when you try, come back to it later--it may be getting crashed right now because MOVEON.org just sent out information about it--the link may not be able to handle all the traffic. While you're waiting, you can check out the other clips below).

On how we got into this mess in Iraq, see also this video clip Preview from the Sundance Film Festival winner, "No End in Sight: The American Occupation of Iraq--the Inside Story from the Ultimate Insiders"--

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGPp-WhgEXE

For PBS NOW's coverage of the film, see (2 parts):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3jk4kJG1Sg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2XlEoiqX2U

84% of Voters In Michigan’s 15th Congressional District (of Rep. John Dingell) Demand Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards

TO: Pew Campaign For Fuel Efficiency
FROM: The Mellman Group, Inc. & Public Opinion Strategies
RE: Public Support For Stricter Fuel Efficiency Standards In Michigan’s 15th CD
DATE: July 23, 2007

Because Michigan’s 15th Congressional District is home to much of the auto industry, and because it is represented by Chairman John Dingell, many regard it as “ground zero” in the debate about fuel efficiency or CAFE standards.

Nevertheless, voters in this District voice overwhelming and unwavering support for increased fuel efficiency standards. Large majorities demand higher standards, even after being presented with the best arguments the opposition has to offer. In fact, voters reject opponents’ key arguments.

The people of Michigan’s 15th Congressional District are clear: they want standards that are higher, binding, come into force sooner and are not capped. Voters will think more highly of a Member of Congress who reflects their views on this issue.

Our just completed survey shows that over four in five (84%) voters in Michigan’s 15th CD favor requiring the auto industry to increase fuel efficiency for cars, trucks pickups and SUVs while only 15% oppose increases. Moreover, three quarters (69%) strongly favor requiring increases in fuel efficiency, while only 10% are strongly opposed.

To Read More of this Report, click here.
Full report posted on site of the Pew Campaign for Fuel Efficiency.

Environmental Community Response to Rep. Dingell, presented at Dingell "Town Hall" Meetings, August 7 & 8, 2007

Good afternoon.

My name is Hugh McDiarmid Jr., Communications Director for the Michigan Environmental Council, a coalition of more than 70 Michigan environmental, public health and faith-based organizations.

Today I speak on behalf of the co-sponsors of this Town Hall meeting, a coalition of the state’s leading environmental groups including mine, Clean Water Action, the Ecology Center, Environment Michigan, and the Michigan League of Conservation Voters.

On behalf of this coalition, I would like to thank Congressman Dingell and his staff for hosting this important forum.

It is now clear that manmade greenhouse gas emissions have accelerated Global Warming exponentially. We can not escape some of the disturbing effects that already have been set in motion.

But we can avoid the most devastating scenarios if we, as a country, act now to lead the world toward a new, responsible model that includes limits on carbon emissions, cleaner energy choices, smarter less polluting transportation options and aggressive energy efficiencies.

We are fortunate to have Mr. Dingell playing a pivotal role in an issue fraught with political minefields. As the father of many of the nation’s bedrock environmental laws and dean of the U.S. House, Mr. Dingell is positioned to substantially determine whether we succeed or fail. Making global warming a key priority for the powerful energy and Commerce Committee which he chairs, has been critical to moving this issue forward.

Given his leadership role, however, we are disappointed in Congressman Dingell’s recent positions on some key components of this transition so far – most notably on inadequate automobile fuel economy standards and most recently on a key amendment on renewable energy standards.

On any other issue, voting to stall good legislation on procedural grounds, or engaging in the crafty political calculus of constituent groups might be justified.

But Congress has stalled far too long on urgent changes needed to contain Global Warming impacts. Words, good intentions, and political games no longer count. Immediate action is needed. Playing politics with our climate is not acceptable, given the very real threats we face.

We are hopeful, however, that Mr. Dingell will work toward achieving the critical goals he himself has set. As chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Dingell has committed himself to passing legislation that will cut global warming emissions by 60 to 80 percent by mid-century. This amounts to about two percent per year, the rate which scientists say is needed to avoid the worst impacts of global warming.

This attainable goal can only be achieved with commitment of every sector of the American economy. But it is one that needn’t cripple the economy or erode the nation’s quality of life. In fact, the innovations, technology and vision necessary to achieve significant reductions in Global Warming pollution are catalysts for a modern, new American economy flush with clean energy jobs, energy-efficient industries and visionary transportation solutions.

But the devil, as they say, is in the details.

Here’s what we’d like to see:

1. Carbon Cap: We need a national program freezing greenhouse gas emissions before they grow any more, and then cuts them by 2 percent every year. Time is of the essence. Further delay will force businesses to make far steeper and more costly reductions in the future.

America can best achieve rapid, cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by implementing an economy-wide "cap and trade" system. The plan sets an overall national limit on carbon emissions by major emitters while allowing each to pick the most efficient way to reduce pollution. Emitters would buy and sell emissions permits, rewarding companies that innovate, and offering flexibility to everyone. It is no wonder that Ford and Chrysler recently joined General Motors in calling for a strong, mandatory national carbon reduction plan that includes cap-and-trade.

2. State Actions: Federal law should encourage, rather than prohibit state polices that are at least as ambitious as state mandates. States are both fertile laboratories for policy reform, and have varying capacities for alternative energy development.

In Michigan, we call on Gov. Jennifer Granholm to step up the fight against Global Warming emissions. Michigan needs an energy plan and renewable energy mandate to regain its competitive edge and attract new economy entrepreneurs.

3. Renewable Energy Standard: The nation needs an aggressive requirement to ensure a percentage of our energy comes from clean, homegrown renewable sources like wind, solar and biomass.

Congress just this weekend passed an energy standard, over Mr. Dingell’s significant procedural objections, calling for 15 percent renewable energy generation by the year 2020. That’s a good start. We support 20 percent by 2020. It’s hard to imagine reaching 60 to 80 percent reductions without this goal.

Michigan, with its vast, untapped wind energy potential and $20 billion in imported, dirty fuel expenditures annually, has much to gain from such a policy. Almost two-dozen other states have their own standards. Those are the states attracting clean-energy industries like wind turbine manufacturers and solar panel installers. Let’s create Michigan jobs in wind energy and other clean ventures, rather than sending that money to coal-mining states and Middle Eastern oil barons.

A Renewable standard must be coupled with new federal building and appliance standards for energy efficiency, which will create jobs, spark innovation and move the nation away from energy dependence and polluting fossil fuels.

4. Automobile mileage standards: Without dramatically increased vehicle mileage we can not hope to approach Mr. Dingell’s goal of a 60 to 80 percent carbon reduction by mid-century. The future of Detroit’s auto industry – and the jobs of the many union men and women in that industry – depends on innovation, new technology, and an efficient new generation of vehicles capable of competing in a new era of emissions caps.

Analyses by our colleagues at Environmental Defense, and others, indicate that we will need increases in vehicle fuel efficiency of closer to 5% per year in the near-term, along with similarly aggressive increases in the use of low-carbon fuels, in order to meet our desired mid-century carbon reduction targets. Of course, we also need to ensure that our domestic industry has the tools and financial resources it needs to meet these tough targets. We also support job-protections such as UAW’s “anti-backsliding” proposal, which guards against the offshoring of small car production under new fuel economy rules.

In fact, a poll released days ago by the Pew Campaign for Fuel Efficiency showed overwhelming support for strong fuel efficiency standards, including 84 percent in your 15th District, Congressman.

A word about nuclear energy: As guardians of the Great Lakes, we are understandably wary of a premature commitment to new nuclear energy generation. The Great Lakes shorelines are increasingly littered with waste deemed too dangerous to store in the Nevada desert. Generating more, especially before the low-hanging fruit of energy efficiency and renewable power are maximized, is reckless. It is also expensive. Without the massive subsidies of public money being proposed, nuclear does not compete financially with more responsible energy options. And, given the tremendous energy costs of building and maintaining nuclear plants, it is assuredly not deserving of the carbon-neutral happy face its proponents suggest.

The world is looking to America to set the standard for responsible, effective carbon reductions. We surely can not avert global catastrophe without the help of nations like China and other major carbon emitters. Nor can we expect them to reign in their own emissions unless we demonstrate that we are willing and able to lead by example. Only when the United States has in place sound and effective carbon control policies can we lobby, cajole and pressure other nations for their cooperation through diplomacy and trade agreements.

The threat is real. The time to act is now. We look to you, Mr. Dingell, to lead the way.

Thank you for the opportunity to express our views.

Contacts:
Hugh McDiarmid, Jr.
Communications Director
Michigan Environmental Council

Abby Rubley
Field Director
Environment Michigan
arubley@environmentmichigan.org

Auto Execs Declare War (Again) on Middle-Class Unionized Auto Jobs

Just after I had noted in writing my suspicion that the Big 3 auto execs would probably like to continue to use the threat of loss of auto jobs in order to gain concessions from the UAW, I heard this afternoon on NPR that this is literally happening NOW.

The message of the auto execs to the UAW for their upcoming negotiations is apparently that the UAW either needs to be prepared to give up more out of their own pockets, or face even more outsourcing of their jobs beyond US borders! How patriotic is that?!! Yet these are the auto execs that the Bush administration and various Democrats continue to champion and accept lobbying money from!

So this is the nature of the "patriotic" spirit of the US auto execs, who from their rich executive salaried chairs have declared war on the middle-class unionized workers who make their high executive salaries possible (since if there were no employees to make the cars, there could be no auto executive salaries!). Because of their terrible decision-making over the last decade in choosing to emphasize the production of gas-guzzling SUVs over investment in more fuel efficient autos, including electric technology (see the film, WHO KILLED the ELECTRIC CAR?), the auto execs now seem to be placing all the costs of their bad decision-making on UAW workers, who are now supposed to pay the price of these bad decisions (in loss of market share brought about by the bad investment and technology decisions of the auto execs), even while the execs continue to earn sky-high salaries and hound unionized workers to give up more of their wages so the execs can retain their over-priced salaries for making bad decisions.

Since this war on UAW jobs through outsourcing has already been going on for years, it seems the auto execs will not be happy until UAW workers have been reduced to the level of minimum-wage service workers (new Union employees are already down to $10 an hour in some places), which is why the execs now seem completely unashamed in their willingness to declare war on middle-class auto jobs by threatening to outsource UAW jobs if the UAW does not make more concessions in their next round of negotiations.

This is why I have been stressing in my open letters to Rep. Dingell (below) that it is time for Congressional Representatives like Dingell, who say they are friends of unions and auto workers, to NOW stand up and make clear where their loyalties are, and to act accordingly. With this kind of executive behavior toward auto workers, there is no way politically to be a pal of the auto execs, without betraying the interests of auto workers--that is, unless it is recognized that being a "true friend" to the auto execs means realizing that it is finally time to show the execs some tough love.

In the name of defending middle-class auto worker jobs, those who value middle-class auto worker jobs need to lay down the law to the auto execs by making clear that these execs and the Big 3 will NOT be allowed to make up for the mistakes of their previous bad judgments and investment decisions on the backs of their unionized auto workers.

If the auto execs want a true change of direction, they need to work with the UAW to figure out how they can invest and manage the technological resources of the Big 3 to recapture the technological edge they once held in the auto industry, by major investments in electric car technologies, which will allow them to begin to compete with Honda and Toyota where they should be competing--in fuel efficient electric car and hybrid plug-in technologies, rather than on how fast they can outsource unionized jobs!!

All Michiganders with family or friends in the auto industry or any other industry in the state, should be outraged at this declaration of war by the auto execs on the unionized workers of the UAW! And we should all be writing to Rep. Dingell and our other Michigan Reps. and Senators Levin and Stabenow to demand that they let the auto execs know clearly and loudly that the execs will not be allowed to maintain their own rich salaries on the outsourcing of UAW jobs.

If this is the approach the Big 3 auto execs want to take to the UAW, the auto execs are making clear that they have effectively declared war on the UAW and middle-class auto jobs in Michigan and elsewhere (and those familiar with Union struggle will know that many in the UAW feel that the auto execs have already been waging this war for some time now).

And if the auto execs are insistent on trying to solve their market share problems by waging war on their own workers, I believe they will be writing their own epitaph for the Big 3. The irony is that if the Big 3 all end up being bought out by private investment firms like Cerberus, many of these very execs may find their own jobs outsourced (which would be a poetic form of justice).

To avoid this, perhaps UAW leaders, along with national business, political, and community leaders, and those current auto execs who are still interested in preserving a productive and efficient US-based auto industry, need to think about more radical alternatives than are usually thinkable within the US-business model frame: Perhaps those who are interested in preserving both the US auto industry and unionized auto jobs need to begin thinking about taking away from the current auto execs (who wish to wage war against the UAW) their ability to continue to drive the US auto industry into the ground.

As Gregg Shotwell/UAW Local 1753 has written:

Bankruptcy in the US auto industry is not an accident, it’s a business plan. The government does not appear to have an industrial policy, but the transfer of labor’s legacy wealth to offshore accounts is the policy in practice.

When the economy crashes and the entire working class is impoverished we will understand the true “legacy cost”. The legacy of treachery and deceit. The legacy of union/management partnership. The legacy of war after war after war. The legacy of a government that stands down while corporations trash communities as surely as Hurricane Katrina trashed New Orleans.

Perhaps the power to outsource UAW jobs needs to be outlawed, and those who would wish to pursue such an unpatriotic course need to be replaced by those national business, political, and UAW leaders who value and are willing to work together with vision and ambition to preserve the great tradition of the unionized auto industry of the US.

If we could put men on the moon in ten years in the 1960s, and can put them there again by 2018, then we can also in the next ten years build the vision and find the way to bring the unionized US auto industry back from its current brink of self-inflicted decomposition, and make it the most technologically sophisticated and productive auto industry in the world by 2018 (with major reinvestments in electric and plug-in hybrid technologies).

It's high past the time for all citizens and national leaders in the UAW, Congress, and business who are concerned about the fate of middle-class industrial jobs to unite around a better way than declaring war on, and outsourcing UAW jobs in order to solve the crisis of the Big 3.

Climate Change is affecting Michigan and Great Lakes even More than Previously Thought

GLOBAL WARMING IMPACTS MICHIGAN AND ENTIRE GREAT LAKES REGION

In light of the fire in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, along with raging fires again this summer across the country, and in Europe, as well as today's flooding rains in New York City, and recently in England, Texas, and India, affecting tens of millions of people just within the last month, we need to be confronting the fact that we are already beginning to see the major impacts that global climate change (due to the growing amounts of global warming gasses in our atmosphere) will only continue to make much worse in the years ahead.

Since Rep. Dingell's Town Hall meetings have announced his relatively weak approach to the dramatic policy changes that are going to be needed to prevent the worst impacts of global warming from becoming reality within the next 50 years (including the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps, which would raise ocean levels high enough to put most major coastal cities under water), we need to look at how legislative failure to address the causes of global warming will impact Michigan and the Great Lakes--

A revised report published last year found that Michigan and the entire Great Lakes region may suffer from the effects of a changing climate more than previously thought. A team of leading scientists from Midwest universities and solutions experts at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) recently found that extreme heat events are occurring more frequently, heavy precipitation events, both rain and snow, are becoming more common, air quality may deteriorate due to harmful gases released during more frequent forest fires and the number of summer pollution days may be on the rise. These changes will bring challenges to residents in Great Lakes cities as well as in rural areas, highlighting the need for action to forestall many of the most severe impacts.

Report co-authors, Dr. George Kling, University of Michigan, Department of Ecology and Biology, and Dr. Donald Wuebbles, University of Illinois, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, found new evidence of the impacts of climate change on the region.

The report finds that a warming climate will also increase the severity, and potentially the number, of pollution/ozone episodes in the region. Lake-effect snow may increase as a result of warmer lake surface waters and decreased ice cover, burdening many cities with increased cost for snow removal. Increased drought and flood events in the spring and summer may also put a strain on municipal budgets for sewer infrastructure.

"A hotter, drier climate will create ideal conditions for the start and spread of wildfires," commented Kling. "And an increased number of forest fires can exacerbate drought episodes by reducing rainfall as smoke particles absorb solar heat and interfere with the cycle that generates rainfall in the region."

Fortunately, clean energy solutions are readily available to help curb global warming pollution while boosting Michigan's economy. A UCS analysis, Renewing America's Economy, found that a national standard requiring that 10 percent of U.S. electricity come from renewable resources by 2020 would reduce global warming emissions by 5.5 percent. Steve Clemmer of UCS says, "This would benefit Michigan with 2,700 new jobs, $715 million in new capital investment, and $205 million in payments for bioenergy and wind land leases."

The report, Confronting Climate Change in the Great Lakes Region can be found here.

Enviromental Action and Job Creation are Not Opposed: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions can Boost Michigan's Economy

Michigan can add $380 million a year and 3,400 fulltime jobs to the state's economy by 2025 while reducing emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases linked to global warming, according to a study released in May 2007 by the University of Michigan Center for Sustainable Systems.

The study, Michigan at a Climate Crossroads: Strategies for Guiding the State in a Carbon-Constrained World, evaluates emissions-reduction options and their likely effects on the state economy. Based on computer-modeling studies, the report concludes that Michigan can reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases 12 percent by 2025 while fueling job creation and economic growth.

Researchers presented their findings on May 23 in testimony before the House Energy and Technology committee of the Michigan Legislature.

"Our research demonstrates that the state can achieve environmental improvements at the same time that it creates positive economic outcomes," said project director Gregory Keoleian, co-director of the University of Michigan's Center for Sustainable Systems. "Policies such a Renewable Portfolio Standard could better position the state to thrive economically while addressing future energy challenges and anticipated carbon regulations."

Enacted separately, the examined policies could result in the following economic impacts by 2025:

• Renewable portfolio standard. Requiring state-regulated utilities to provide 20 percent of their power from renewable sources could add $64.6 million annually to the state's economy and create 881 jobs.

• Renewable motor fuel standard. Mandating that renewable sources such as ethanol supply 25 percent of the state's motor vehicle fuel could create 1,700 jobs and contribute $283 million annually to the state's economy.

• Building codes. Requiring higher insulation values for ceiling, walls, floors, windows and basements in all new single-family homes built in the state could create 644 jobs and contribute $54 million annually. This option would involve implementing a combination of the International Energy Conservation Code 2006 and U.S. Department of Energy insulation recommendations.

• Appliance standards. Setting efficiency standards for 15 common industrial and household appliances could create 437 jobs and contribute $38.3 million annually.

• Combined heat and power. Producing at least 180 megawatts using combined heat-and-power systems as replacement electricity and steam sources for industry would reduce greenhouse emissions. But 81 jobs and $13.6 million annually could be lost due to state government subsidies.

• Carbon sequestration. Planting conifers on 10 percent of the state's marginal agricultural lands could lead to a loss of 212 jobs and cost the state $46.7 million annually due to state government subsidies.
  

Of the policies analyzed, implementing a 20 percent renewable portfolio standard would result in the greatest reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions: 39.9 million metric tons of carbon equivalent by 2025.

"This study demonstrates that environmentally sound policy and economic growth are not mutually exclusive," said Rosina Bierbaum, dean of the University's School of Natural Resources and Environment.

The full University of Michigan report is available here (11MB).

CONTACT:
Jim Erickson
(734) 647-1841
ericksn@umich.edu

Japan's Average fleet fuel economy had already reached 46 mpg in 2002

Why are Honda and Toyota taking over an increasing percentage of the US auto market?

According to a 2004 Report from the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Japan's fuel economy average for its new fleet of vehicles in 2002 had already reached 46 mpg.

So it should be no big surprise to Americans, that as fuel efficiency becomes a major factor in the choice of new auto purchases, Toyota and Honda are going to be taking over increasing percentages of the US auto sales market, where the comparison average fuel economy for the new fleet of US-made vehicles in 2002 was a mere 24 mpg.

Report from Yesterday's Ann Arbor Town Hall Meeting with Dingell

I was glad to hear Rep. Dingell clearly indicate yesterday that he does see an increase in CAFE standards as a key part of any strategy to achieve the 60-80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that he agrees we need to achieve by 2050.

However, in order to address the loss of US auto manufacturing jobs by the Big 3, the weak increases in CAFE standards that Dingell is proposing will be next to useless. Dingell's proposed CAFE standards of 35 mpg for cars, and 30 for trucks, by 2022, if passed, would be far too little and too late to be of any use to help the Big 3 to close the gap in their production of fuel efficient vehicles with Honda and Toyota, who will probably have a car fleet averaging 35 mpg by 2012 or shortly thereafter.

A weak increase in CAFE standards may be even worse than useless because it will create a lot of debate over CAFE standards without achieving what is most important for the Big 3 US auto producers: pushing the Big 3 to dramatically shift their production to more fuel efficient cars in order to catch up to Toyota and Honda so they stop losing both market share and auto jobs in Michigan and elsewhere.

At their current rate of emphasizing the production of fuel efficient hybrids, and even more fuel efficient plug-ins by 2010 (when Toyota will probably release its plug-in Prius model), Honda and Toyota may quickly reach an average fuel economy of 35 mpg for their fleet of cars by early in the next decade (2011 or 2012).

If Honda and Toyota are already averaging 35 mpg in their fleet of cars by 2012, and American consumers continue to shift their buying pattern to these more fuel-efficient cars, what good will be Dingell's proposed CAFE standards requiring that the US Big 3 reach 35 mpg by 2022? If the Big 3 take until 2022 to reach an avg 35 mpg, the Big 3 will have largely ceased to exist by 2022!

Such a weak CAFE standard would be disastrous for the US auto industry and Big 3 unionized auto jobs, since it would do nothing to alter the current direction of loss of market share and Big 3 auto jobs (in Michigan and elsewhere) to Honda and Toyota.

Dingell says he cares about the jobs of Michigan autoworkers. But if he truly wants to work for unionized auto jobs, rather than for the bad decisions and foot-dragging of the Big 3 auto execs, it is time for Dingell to support much stronger CAFE standards that will have teeth in them, and that will push the footdragging Big 3 auto execs to abandon the path that has been causing them to lose both market share and jobs in Michigan and the rest of the country.

So the primary question for Dingell that arises from his Michigan home district 15 town hall meetings is this: WHAT WILL HE DO TO WORK FOR MUCH STRONGER CAFE STANDARDS THAT require at least 40 MPG FOR CARS BY 2018? And if he thinks such a goal for CAFE standards is too high for the Big 3, what does he think will keep the Big 3 from continuing to hemorrhage jobs to Toyota and Honda, since Toyota and Honda will probably reach an average of 40 mpg for their cars well before 2018?

The bottom line: If Dingell wishes to work for legislation that will save Michigan autoworker jobs, the best thing he can do is fight for greatly increased auto fuel efficiency (CAFE) standards (of at least 40 mpg for cars by 2018).

Anything less than this will not stem the tide of Big 3 losses of market share and jobs to Honda and Toyota. Anything less than this will also not be enough move us toward achieving the major goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050.

In spite of Dingell's opposition, the House passed landmark Energy Legislation on Saturday

Sierra Club Hails Passage of Renewable Electricity Standard in House

Speaker Pelosi Delivers Major Victory for Clean Energy!

Today the House of Representatives passed a landmark national Renewable Electricity Standard by a vote of 220 to 190. It then went on to pass the energy bill itself on a final vote of 241 to 172.

Statement of Carl Pope, Sierra Club Executive Director

“Last fall Americans voted for change and a new direction on energy issues and global warming. Today the House of Representatives began to deliver on this promise by passing a landmark national Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) for the first time—a major step toward kickstarting the clean energy economy. Twenty-three states have already demonstrated that Renewable Electricity Standards are a reasonable, achievable policy that brings clean, renewable energy and green jobs to America. The national RES passed today stands to save consumers billions on their electricity and natural gas bills; create billions in new income for ranchers, farmers, and rural landowners; and create tens of thousands of new good-paying manufacturing jobs.

“The rest of the House energy bill also contains numerous other important provisions that will help us begin to fight global warming and end our dangerous dependence on fossil fuels. I’m sure Speaker Pelosi would be the first to agree that Congress’ work on energy and global warming is not finished. But after years—if not decades—spent battling truly reprehensible energy legislation, it is extremely refreshing to be instead focused on just how many progressive policies can be added to an energy bill.

“Speaker Pelosi has delivered a new day on energy in Congress. Instead of determining how many billions in unnecessary subsidies will be shoveled to the coal, oil, and nuclear industries, the House energy bill marks the beginning of a dramatic reorientation of our energy policy toward one focused on renewable energy, energy efficiency, and a new energy economy designed to benefit the many, not the few. The fact that the debate has been so swiftly reoriented is truly a credit to the Speaker’s commitment and leadership.

“We now look forward to working with our allies in the House and the Senate to deliver a bill from conference that combines the best elements of both bills into a final bill that President Bush should feel compelled to sign.”

The Big Question is: Will Rep. Dingell begin working with, rather than against, the rest of the Democratic Party in his powerful position as Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee?

Whose Interests Do You Represent, Rep. Dingell?: Looking for an Answer at Your Town Hall Meetings

It's Time to Encourage Rep. Dingell to more strongly Represent the Interests of Michigan's Citizens, Auto Workers, and the Global Climate--not the narrow Interests of the Auto Executives

This week, on Tuesday and Wednesday in Ann Arbor and Dearborn, MI, Rep. Dingell, who is Chair of the powerful House Energy and Commerce committee, which has key decision-making power on issues related to global warming, is holding two town hall meetings to discuss his position on global warming.

Since Rep. Dingell's great experience and authority as a distinguished long-term member of Congress will be key to this Committee's ability to shape legislation to limit global warming and improve auto CAFE standards over the next year, it is time for all who are concerned about these issues to make sure Rep. Dingell hears your concerns this week in Ann Arbor and Dearborn.

Fostering jobs for Michigan auto workers, and responsible energy policy (including greatly increased fuel economy [CAFE] standards for autos) to reduce global warming are not opposed goals, as Dingell sometimes seems to suggest. In fact, the evidence, as a recent University of Michigan report has argued (see below), is quite the opposite: Michigan auto jobs and responsible action to raise fuel economy (CAFE) standards and address global warming are directly tied together!

To the extent the US auto companies continue to avoid their responsibility to produce much more fuel efficient cars, the US auto industry will continue to lose market share to those auto companies who have already recognized the writing on the wall: The most successful auto companies of the future will be the greenest and most fuel efficient auto companies. Actually, Last week's reports about the continuing fall in US auto market share in relation to Toyota and Honda (who just happen to be producing the most fuel efficient cars) only further underline this writing on the wall:

The most successful auto companies of the present will be the greenest and most fuel efficient auto companies!

If Rep. Dingell does not want to continue to support the US auto industry's addiction to fuel guzzling, greenhouse gas producing autos, which are causing Michigan to hemorrhage jobs, it's time for him to change his direction, and state his support for greatly increased CAFE standards for the US auto industry.

And if Rep. Dingell will not listen to the demands of his constituents on THIS MAJOR ISSUE, perhaps it is time for the voters of SE Michigan who voted him into office to begin thinking about recalling him and putting someone who will act more responsibly in his place.

The voters of Michigan should expect and demand that the Representative they have put into place in the US House of Representatives will truly and responsibly represent their interests NOW, when crucial decisions that will affect the environment for many years to come are being made.

Rep. Dingell, will you represent the interests of the people of Michigan in a sustainable climate and sustainable auto jobs, or will you declare your allegiance to a narrow group of oil and auto industry lobbyists and execs who have proven by their unwise decisions over the last decade that the only interests they have in mind are increasing the flow of money into their own fat pockets, while auto workers and Michigan's citizens continue to be asked to make ever greater sacrifices out of their own pockets?!

Who do you represent, Rep. Dingell? The fat-cat auto executives and lobbyists, or the citizens of Michigan and the auto workers who are suffering from the shortsighted policies and decisions of the auto execs?! We know and honor your past accomplishments in legislation for the sake of the environment and Michigan's auto workers, but we hope you will not rest on the laurels of your past accomplishments, and will continue to fight strongly for the jobs of Michigan's auto workers and the environment in which we, our children, and our grandchildren will have to live.

It's time to make your allegiance clear. We look forward to seeing where your allegiance lies as you address the concerns of your constituents at this week's town hall meetings.

Higher Fuel Economy Standards would BENEFIT BOTH the US Auto Companies and Jobs in Michigan!

A new University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) study provides clear evidence to support the point I have been arguing on this Blog over the last year: If the US Congress (and especially our local congressional Representative John Dingell) want to support the US auto industry and Michigan auto jobs, they need to require that the US auto industry raise its fuel economy standards!

This new University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute study finds that Detroit automakers would gain market share and increase profits under proposed new fuel economy standards. The study, "The Impact of Attribute-Based Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards on the Automotive Industry," is the first rigorous analysis of the economic impacts of current legislative proposals to raise CAFE under the reformed "attribute-based" structure.

Study findings include:

* Higher CAFE standards yield higher profits.
* An attribute-based CAFE yields greater gains in market share and profits for the Big Three than for the rest of the industry.


For more information:

* Read the full report
* Read the July 24, 2007 press release
* Contact the study author, Walter McManus