Tag Archives: Jane Harman

Blog Roundup, Environment, Health Care, Orange County, San Diego, San Francisco

November 3, 2007 Blog Roundup and Open Thread

10 Comments

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Let me know what I missed in comments, or just use this as an open thread.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

Read These

Dianne Feinstein is
Principle-Free or Actively Pro-Torture:  You make the call.
(With Bonus Jane Harman Posts)

Reflections on the SoCal
Fires

Local

Environment

All the Rest

Blog Roundup, Orange County, San Francisco

October 31, 2007 Blog Roundup and Open Thread

2 Comments

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. I’m experiencing some ennui this evening, so it’s just a link dump. Let me know what I missed in comments, or just use this as an open thread.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

Blog Roundup, Health Care, San Diego, San Francisco

October 14, 2007 Blog Roundup

3 Comments

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Let me know what I missed.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

Basic Fairness

Federal Representatives

Straight-up State-level
Stuff

Local News

All the Rest

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Harman Speaks to Westside Progressives in Los Angeles

2 Comments

My post about Jane Harman’s remarks at a town hall meeting yesterday about the secret “torture memos” revealed this week by the New York Times is up at Think Progress, submitted through their Blog Fellows Program, which I can’t recommend enough.  Let me contextualize those remarks a bit more, and add some of the other interesting things Rep. Harman had to say.

I asked the question to Harman about the secret memos.  Earlier this week, the White House claimed that all relevant members of Congress had been fully briefed on the classified program sanctioning harsh interrogation techniques by the CIA.  At the time of the memos, Harman was a member of the “Gang Of Eight” routinely briefed on intelligence matters.  Harman was shaking her head as I asked the question if she was fully briefed, chuckling almost in disbelief.  Her answer:

We were not fully briefed. We were told about operational details but not these memos. Jay Rockefeller said the same thing, and I associate myself with his remarks. And we want to see these memos.

over…

Harman is now the third member of the Gang of Eight, joining Jay Rockefeller and Nancy Pelosi, to reject the White House’s claim that they were fully briefed about these memos.  The Administration is lying, again, and it is now incumbent upon Congress to make every effort to obtain those memos and to enshrine into law a full repudiation of the arguments therein described.  The follow-up question I wanted to ask Rep. Harman, but could not, was how she would go about pressuring the White House to get those documents.  Obviously the vehicle for this is through the confirmation of Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey.  Considering that these memos came out of the Justice Department, there should simply be no movement on his confirmation without an exchange of the memos.

Let me add some additional information about the town hall.  I wrote in my Think Progress post this tidbit:

Harman later revealed that she was speaking with an unidentified Republican in her office, who told her that if President Bush were to attack Iran, then even he would vote for impeachment.

You have to understand the environment of this town hall meeting.  The audience included the hardcore progressives that made up the core of the Marcy Winograd primary challenge to Harman in 2006; in fact, Winograd was on a panel right before Harman’s arrival.  These people were SCREAMING for impeachment; the first two questions were about this issue.  And Harman could do nothing but reiterate that Nancy Pelosi, not her, had taken impeachment off the table.  She went on to describe her no votes against the Clinton impeachment and how MoveOn.org was born out of the impeachment debate (odd of her to approvingly cite MoveOn, considering she voted to condemn their remarks in the “General Betrayus” ad).  But when she brought up Iran, she said “this little anecdote should make you smile,” and mentioned the above exchange.

Here are some of the other notable tidbits in Harman’s meeting.

• She recommended Jack Goldsmith’s “The Terror Presidency” as the best source for understanding how the Bush Administration attempted to expand executive power through neutering the Office of Legal Counsel.  She had the book with her.

• She reiterated that “intelligence was politicized again” on the FISA bill, referring to the fake terror attack hyped by the White House designed to get wavering Democrats to sanction warrantless surveillance.  It was a cold-blooded tactic, and it should be heavily publicized.  I thanked Rep. Harman for speaking out on this, and I hope that she’ll continue as well as encourage other members to corroborate her allegations.  Harman said she is working to change the new FISA bill, which will “probably be introduced this week.”  The goals are that any surveillance must be done through the FISA court, with a warrant, and with minimization protocols if a US national is involved.

• Harman spoke about her legislation to close Guantanamo, restore habeas corpus, and end the use of national security letters outside their initial purpose.  She spoke glowingly about the vote this week to put Blackwater contractors under the auspices of US law, and thanked both Rep. Waxman and Rick Jacobs, who produced Iraq for Sale, with their efforts to get the word out about Blackwater’s numerous abuses and how they fell into the “legal black hole” regarding their activities.

• She recommended the Seymour Hersh article about developments with respect to Iran, and said that she has invited him to speak to the Congress.  Harman was adamant in saying that “targeted sanctions are working” with Iran, and that the government should “stop the saber rattling” that could lead us to another catastrophic war.

• She trumpeted her contribution to the House energy bill, a measure to retire the incandescent light bulb by 2012.

• On trade, she made a disappointing statement.  Despite voting against NAFTA and CAFTA and claiming that she was proven right on those votes, she said that some trade deals are admissable with proper labor and environmental standards as well as trade adjustment assistance, and referring to the current Peruvian Free Trade Agreement that will come up for vote in a couple weeks, she said that “It was approved by Charlie Rangel.”  Uh-oh.  We know that this bill, crafted in the dead of night to appease corporate interests, does not go nearly far enough to ensure labor and environmental standards, and would be nothing more than NAFTA-light.

• Someone asked Rep. Harman about the Walt-Mearshimer book “The Israel Lobby” and AIPAC’s support for endless war, including war with Iran.  Harman, who has been linked in the past to lobbies like AIPAC, said “I’m not a member of AIPAC… I support a two-state solution where Palestine can thrive economically with borders that are defensible to Israel.”  She pretty much dodged the question.

• On the still-unresolved EPA waiver that would allow California to make their own rules on tailpipe emissions that contribute to global warming, Harman said that she signed on to a letter protesting the slow-rolling from the EPA and the Department of Transportation, and she added that Gov. Schwarzenegger should work harder to get DoT to “back off” (they’ve been accused of lobbying lawmakers to pressure the EPA to block the California law).

• Finally, Harman asked for education activists to call her office and tell her about the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind.  While she said that Rep. Miller has claimed to her it has been improved, she said “I am prepared to oppose it” if the changes are not satisfactory.

Uncategorized

Progressive Punch: Jerry McNerney ranks 195th of 232

19 Comments

Woohoo! Jerry did it! Jerry McNerney has managed to become the most un-progressive Democrat of the entire California congressional delegation. For those keeping score at home, Jerry’s 82.45 was about a half point lower than the next CA Dem, Jim Costa, that progressive stalwart, at 82.97. And for all the talk of Harman changing her ways, she’s still worse than even Joe Baca, almost 7 points worse from a very safe Dem seat.

For all of you CA-45 fans, “moderate” Mary Bono came in with a stellar 4.42 Chips are Down score. So, for all the bluster of the SCHIP vote, she’s still dancing the same jig as the rest of her party.

On thing must be said, the Speaker has done an excellent job at preserving unity amongst the caucus. Whether that means she’s being too incremental and/or ineffective, or just laying down the law is the big question. The reason her approval rating, and the Congress in general, is down has a whole lot to do with the fact that little has changed on the Iraq front. So, would it be better to have a speaker who is more willing to take risks? Perhaps, but the impediment of the president always lingers over her head, veto pen in hand. So, whether the unity is really there, is an open question. Full data over the flip.








































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Rank Name 07-08 All-time ChipsAreDown Party State
1 Pelosi, Nancy 100.00 93.58 100.00 D CA
3 Sánchez, Linda T. 98.97 96.45 98.43 D CA
6 Lee, Barbara 98.45 96.99 97.18 D CA
9 Capps, Lois 98.28 88.95 97.49 D CA
13 Solis, Hilda L. 97.94 95.77 96.24 D CA
18 Richardson, Laura 97.83 97.83 96.43 D CA
23 Woolsey, Lynn C. 97.57 94.69 95.92 D CA
24 Filner, Bob 97.55 94.02 95.91 D CA
25 Matsui, Doris O. 97.42 94.46 95.30 D CA
26 Becerra, Xavier 97.33 92.41 95.19 D CA
37 Farr, Sam 96.72 90.66 94.98 D CA
39 Honda, Michael M. 96.63 94.39 94.67 D CA
51 Roybal-Allard, Lucille 96.39 92.79 94.03 D CA
55 Lofgren, Zoe 96.34 87.42 94.65 D CA
56 Tauscher, Ellen O. 96.23 83.14 93.10 D CA
58 Napolitano, Grace F. 96.17 90.68 93.42 D CA
63 Schiff, Adam B. 95.88 86.79 92.45 D CA
68 Waters, Maxine 95.77 93.38 93.31 D CA
71 Miller, George 95.72 93.67 93.20 D CA
73 Davis, Susan A. 95.70 87.53 93.10 D CA
77 Eshoo, Anna G. 95.64 88.63 93.38 D CA
82 Sherman, Brad 95.52 84.99 92.79 D CA
88 Berman, Howard L. 95.28 87.56 92.38 D CA
88 Watson, Diane E. 95.28 92.71 91.80 D CA
97 Thompson, Mike 95.01 85.33 93.42 D CA
102 Lantos, Tom 94.74 87.73 90.51 D CA
104 Sanchez, Loretta 94.49 84.58 90.19 D CA
114 Baca, Joe 94.16 82.91 90.28 D CA
127 Waxman, Henry A. 93.63 91.96 89.49 D CA
153 Stark, Fortney Pete 92.02 93.12 87.74 D CA
178 Cardoza, Dennis A. 90.09 77.80 84.86 D CA
179 Harman, Jane 89.82 76.91 83.86 D CA
187 Costa, Jim 89.22 78.46 82.97 D CA
195 McNerney, Jerry 87.63 87.63 82.45 D CA
274 Lewis, Jerry 18.40 10.68 4.73 R CA
283 Bono, Mary 16.01 11.32 4.42 R CA
295 Doolittle, John T. 12.72 4.44 1.57 R CA
313 Calvert, Ken 10.39 5.41 0.95 R CA
322 Hunter, Duncan 8.85 5.38 1.32 R CA
330 Gallegly, Elton 7.60 5.89 1.89 R CA
342 Rohrabacher, Dana 6.67 7.73 4.08 R CA
346 Dreier, David 6.38 5.19 2.51 R CA
352 Bilbray, Brian P. 6.07 13.85 3.77 R CA
356 McKeon, Howard P. “Buck” 5.91 3.87 1.27 R CA
370 Herger, Wally 4.92 3.30 0.95 R CA
373 Lungren, Daniel E. 4.81 4.43 1.25 R CA
376 Radanovich, George 4.60 3.65 1.27 R CA
378 Issa, Darrell E. 4.36 4.52 1.27 R CA
380 Miller, Gary G. 4.18 2.45 1.25 R CA
384 Nunes, Devin 4.01 3.30 0.31 R CA
385 McCarthy, Kevin 3.97 3.97 0.63 R CA
388 Royce, Edward R. 3.49 6.55 1.26 R CA
394 Campbell, John 3.12 3.77 2.85 R CA

Uncategorized

Chips are down scorecard

3 Comments

(I was working on a similar post, but I’ll still post my own, with all CA data and some other miscellany. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

The problem with most scorecards is that they are written by lobbyists concerned with always getting the votes of potential supporters. Thus, there is an equal weighting while in the real world not all votes are equal. In fact, regardless of everything else, some votes are dealbreakers and when they show up on scorecards as one of 12 votes or something, it looks silly. However, Progressive Punch has a new “when the chips are down” scorecard. After the flip is the ratings of CA’s congressional delegation, in descending order.

Senate:

92.86 Boxer, Barbara
90.45 Feinstein, Dianne

House:

100.00 Pelosi, Nancy
98.43 Sánchez, Linda T.
97.49 Capps, Lois
97.18 Lee, Barbara
96.43 Richardson, Laura
96.24 Solis, Hilda L.
95.92 Woolsey, Lynn C.
95.91 Filner, Bob
95.30 Matsui, Doris O.
95.19 Becerra, Xavier
94.98 Farr, Sam
94.67 Honda, Michael M.
94.65 Lofgren, Zoe
94.03 Roybal-Allard, Lucille
93.42 Napolitano, Grace F.
93.42 Thompson, Mike
93.38 Eshoo, Anna G.
93.31 Waters, Maxine
93.20 Miller, George
93.10 Davis, Susan A.
93.10 Tauscher, Ellen O.
92.79 Sherman, Brad
92.45 Schiff, Adam B.
92.38 Berman, Howard L.
91.80 Watson, Diane E.
90.51 Lantos, Tom
90.28 Baca, Joe
90.19 Sanchez, Loretta
89.49 Waxman, Henry A.
87.74 Stark, Fortney Pete
84.86 Cardoza, Dennis A.
83.86 Harman, Jane
82.97 Costa, Jim
82.45 McNerney, Jerry

Uncategorized

Vote to Condemn MoveOn Splits California’s DC Democrats in Half

19 Comments

I’m guessing that at tonight’s Calitics’ Actblue Celebrations there will be a lot of discussion about the votes to condemn MoveOn. The CA delegation split 50-50 in the senate and 16 yea and 17 nay in the house — wedged successfully by the GOP in half. After the flip is the scorecard.

Senate
Yea
Diane Feinstein

Nay
Barbara Boxer

House
Yea
Joe Baca (CA-43)
Dennis Cardoza (CA-18)
Jim Costa (CA-20)
Susan Davis (CA-53)
Anna Eshoo (CA-14)
Sam Farr (CA-17)
Jane Harman (CA-36)
Tom Lantos (CA-12)
Jerry McNerney (CA-11)
Grace Napolitano (CA-38)
Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Loretta Sanchez (CA-47)
Adam Schiff (CA-29)
Ellen Tauscher (CA-10)
Mike Thompson (CA-1)

Nay
Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Howard Berman (CA-28)
Lois Capps (CA-23)
Bob Filner (CA-51)
Mike Honda (CA-15)
Barbara Lee (CA-9)
Zoe Lofgren (CA-16)
Doris Matsui (CA-5)
George Miller (CA-7)
Linda Sanchez (CA-39)
Brad Sherman (CA-27)
Hilda Solis (CA-32)
Pete Stark (CA-13)
Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Diane Watson (CA-33)
Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Lynn Woolsey (CA-6)

Blog Roundup, education, Environment, Health Care, San Francisco

September 12, 2007 Blog Roundup

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Let me know what I missed.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

When I was a student, we
called this cramming — didn’t work very well then either

The Librul Academy: or
how the taxpayers of California still employ John Yoo as a law
professor at UC Berkeley

Big fish, smaller ponds

Candidates are people too

Everything else

Blog Roundup, education, Environment, Health Care

September 11, 2007 Blog Roundup

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Let me know what I missed.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

Things to Read Today

Health Care (AB 8)

Environment &
Energy

Reform Efforts and
“Reform” Efforts

Education

Republicans

Homes

Electoral Politics
Generally

All the Rest

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Environment

The Climate Action Team Has A Weak Link?

1 Comment

Last month at Florida’s “Serve to Preserve” global warming summit in Miami, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger lauded Florida Governor Charlie Crist for adopting California’s new Low Carbon Fuel Standard vehicle emissions standards. Florida is the 12th state to adopt California’s new standards for lowering carbon in fuels. In May Governor Schwarzenegger in Toronto, Ontario as part of a three-day trade mission to strengthen California’s political and economic ties with Canada signed an agreement with Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty joining California and Ontario in fighting global warming and committing Ontario to a low carbon fuel standard and emissions targets. In June these same standards were endorsed by Presidential contender Barack Obama.

Aside from driving his Hummer about town Schwarzenegger is generally lauded as an environmentalist.  He gets both positive and negative reviews for his efforts and has even received an award: the Australian Banksia International Award for his environmental work. So what is the Climate Action Team and why does it have a weak link?  And what does this group of super heroes have to do with the intrepid Governor Schwarzenegger?

On June 1st of 2005 Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order #S-3-05.  Touted far and wide as a landmark decision which set greenhouse gas targets for the state of California (By 2010, Reduce to 2000 Emission Levels – By 2020, Reduce to 1990 Emission Levels – By 2050, Reduce to 80 percent Below 1990 Levels).

To meet the targets, the Governor directed the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency to coordinate with the Secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, Secretary of the Department of Food and Agriculture, Secretary of the Resources Agency, Chairperson of the Air Resources Board, Chairperson of the Energy Commission and President of the Public Utilities Commission .

The Secretary of CalEPA will lead a Climate Action Team made up of representatives from the agencies listed above to implement global warming emission reduction programs and report on the progress made toward meeting the statewide greenhouse gas targets that were established in the executive order.

Per the Executive Order, the first report to the Governor and the Legislature was released in March 2006 and will be issued bi-annually thereafter.

If you read through the links above you’ll find that the Climate Action Team continues to meet and produce reports.  Pay special attention to the membership list of the Climate Action Team as it pertains to a letter to the editor of the Santa Monica Daily Breeze which Jane Harman (D-CA) recently wrote.

Let’s not invite terrorists to LAX
Proposed LNG terminal would make the already attractive LAX and even bigger target of terrorist ambitions.
By Jane Harman

The South Bay has many attractions that lure people here from all over the world. Whether it is our sun, sand, surf, celebrities or movie studios, the vast majority of visitors will enter through our region’s international gateway: Los Angeles International Airport.

The fifth-busiest passenger airport and sixth-busiest cargo airport in the world, since 1974, LAX has been the target of two bombings, two attempted bombings (including the Millennium Bomber) and a fatal handgun attack.

Although LAX officials have implemented some important security measures after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, such as creating an on-site bomb squad and screening all baggage, the airport is still considered the top terrorist target in California.

Unfortunately, a proposal before the city of Los Angeles would place a floating liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in Santa Monica Bay just off the coast of LAX. 

Natural gas would be transported from a submersible terminal through pipelines along the ocean floor to landfall along the airport’s edge. 

The proposal by Australian-owned Woodside Natural Gas, dubbed the OceanWay Secure Energy project, is just one of several for LNG terminals along the West Coast. Although LNG is likely an important part of California’s energy future, unlike the other proposed projects, this is the only one that would place a new natural gas supply adjacent to a major terrorist target.

Locating a natural gas terminal next to LAX when alternate sites exist brings to mind the David Bowie lyric “putting out fire with gasoline.”

To do so would make this already attractive target even more attractive, since such an attack could not only cause loss of life but also cripple air traffic nationally, interrupt fuel supplies for California and disrupt the regional economy.

In June, four men were indicted in New York on suspicion that they planned to blow up a system of jet fuel tanks that supply JFK airport through a network of pipelines. These pipelines are buried below the streets serving densely populated areas.

A similar underground network exists in Los Angeles to deliver natural gas to homes and businesses.

Although no explosives had been purchased to carry out the JFK plot, the suspects conducted extensive surveillance of the airport, and there is evidence that they attempted to reach out to other al Qaida-inspired terrorists.

Had their attack succeeded, the focus would now be on fuel supplies and pipelines in and around airports across America.

Thankfully, the plot was foiled.

But we must be vigilant about the threat of a similar plot at our largest airport.

In an era of loosely affiliated, horizontally connected terrorist groups, the possibility of an attack on U.S. soil is highly likely. We should be doing everything in our power to reduce risk – not adding lighter fluid to the barbecue.

Let’s not make the bull’s-eye on LAX’s back even bigger.

Now in her seventh term, South Bay Rep. Jane Harman leads the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing & Terrorism Risk Assessment.

I wasn’t aware when I read Jane Harman’s letter that this was a project in the planning.  Although I don’t know much about this I can certainly see how concern about a terrorist attack on a fuel facility might make authorities, such as Harman, think twice about such projects.  So I filed this away as a potentially useful and potentially dangerous project in the works locally and to keep my eyes open and ears peeled for more information.

Then a few days later I came across a response to Jane Harman by Steve Larson, the CEO of Woodside (the company behind the project) also published in the Daily Breeze.

Ocean gas plan is smart, safe
Natural gas supplier promises to ensure LNG operation is environmentally safe and secure.
By Steve Larson

As Southern California’s population continues to grow, it will be critical for us to secure the energy to heat and power our businesses and homes and run clean transportation. Most of us use natural gas every day. We cannot afford another energy crisis or skyrocketing prices for electricity and heating, so we need to look for new and better ways to address our growing energy demand.

California is an international leader in clean energy and has made an unparalleled commitment to using conservation, energy efficiency and renewables as the first source of supply, with support from clean natural gas to ensure a reliable electrical system and replace dirty coal generation.

California has chosen natural gas as the preferred energy source for heating, cooking and fueling critical industries, and as the preferred power source over nuclear, coal and dams. However, California produces only 15 percent of its needs today, and it is the last stop on the country’s natural gas pipeline system.

It relies on other states and Canada to provide the other 85 percent of its gas supply, and it faces unprecedented competition for that gas from Arizona, New Mexico and other fast-growing states as well as the Northeast and Canada. Meanwhile, the California Energy Commission reports that North American natural gas production is declining, and gas is becoming even more expensive.

Competition for limited natural gas supplies is not theoretical. Prices are twice what they were in 2001 with no end in sight – unless California can secure a new supply of natural gas.

Fortunately, good options do exist. One is OceanWay, a proposed offshore project that would safely import the liquefied natural gas we need to power California’s booming economy and hold down heating and electricity costs in the region. OceanWay has been designed to comply with all U.S. and international standards to protect public safety and our environment.

The project could supply 15 percent of California’s natural gas needs.

We know that safety is just as important as maintaining an affordable supply of natural gas. Though South Bay Rep. Jane Harman raised concerns about our project’s proximity to Los Angeles International Airport in a recent opinion piece in the Daily Breeze, the thorough public review process will demonstrate that the OceanWay project is safe, and Woodside Natural Gas is making further unprecedented commitments to satisfy community concerns.

Unique among proposed natural gas projects, OceanWay’s offshore delivery point would be 28 miles from Los Angeles and

5 miles beyond the shipping lanes – far from population centers and maritime traffic.

OceanWay’s specially designed ships would connect to two submerged buoys and would convert liquefied natural gas on board to natural gas – just like you use in your home – before delivering it to underwater pipelines to shore.

Woodside Natural Gas has worked closely with the Coast Guard to meet its requirements for security at the buoys and for ships in transit. Woodside recently committed to U.S. staffing and flagging of the OceanWay regasification ships.

Once the underwater pipelines cross the shore deep beneath the beach, they would continue a short distance under Westchester Parkway and connect with the existing network of the Southern California Gas Co., a safe pipeline system that has served millions of residents, businesses and industries for decades. OceanWay’s 4-mile buried pipeline would represent a small addition to the more than 90,000 miles of natural gas pipelines that already crisscross Southern California.

Unlike existing facilities elsewhere, OceanWay would have no storage facilities onshore.

Before OceanWay is approved, it will undergo a rigorous environmental and safety review process that mandates community input – a process we wholeheartedly support and welcome.

Government agencies and bipartisan elected leaders, like Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, have said California needs more natural gas, and they have stated their support for an offshore portal to provide a new source of supply.

OceanWay Secure Energy is the best proposal by far to import that gas. The project offers an unprecedented commitment to public safety, environmental protection and energy security. With ships located so far offshore most of us will never know they’re there, OceanWay represents the best opportunity for California to plan today for the energy we will need tomorrow.

Steve Larson is the former executive director of the California Public Utilities Commission and the California Energy Commission. He now serves as president of Woodside Natural Gas in Santa Monica.

I initially found this to be a very cogent response.  Impressive as his response may be though it still felt as though it was a bit lacking on a direct response to Harman’s safety concerns. 

For instance I recall during the JFK LNG plot which was foiled earlier in the year there was some argument over whether the plotters would have been able to ignite the entire LNG system or if such an attack would simply take out one portion of the system.  So for the OceanWay project it seems reasonable to ask the same question.  If there was an accident or terrorist attack on the facility 28 miles off the coast would it be localized or would the explosion rip through the entire pipeline onto the mainland?  I don’t know.

One thing I regularly do though is research the bios of people who write op-eds, letters to the editors etc.  I often find it a very useful exercise.  It’s amazing sometimes the whack jobs who get their stuff published in newspapers.

It turns out that Steve Larson, as noted in the letter he wrote, was formally the head of the California Public Utilities Commission but he’s also a member of the Climate Action Team delegated by the Governor to cut the state’s greenhouse gas emissions:

In the U.S., our greenhouse gas emissions come mostly from energy use. These are driven largely by economic growth, fuel used for electricity generation, and weather patterns affecting heating and cooling needs. Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, resulting from petroleum and natural gas, represent 82 percent of total U.S. human-made greenhouse gas emissions.

Here’s Mr. Larson’s bio from the Climate Action Team website:

Steve Larson currently serves as Executive Director of the California Public Utilities Commission. Under the direction of the President of the Commission, Mr. Larson is responsible for the overall administration of the 800 employees of the PUC. The five member Commission is responsible for private utility energy rate setting and regulation, as well as renewable energy and energy conservation/efficiency. Besides energy related rate setting, the Commission also sets the rates and regulates telecommunication utilities, water utilities, and safety aspects of the rail industry. The Commission also has principal responsibility for representing the state before FERC and the FCC.

Perhaps the maintainer of the Climate Action Team website is simply running 4 months behind in updating the site. 

On April 12, 2007, the PUC announced that Paul Clanon was named Executive Director, effective May 1, 2007.

 

Or perhaps Mr. Larson is actually wearing two hats and is working actively to bring greenhouse gases into the state through his OceanWay project while simultaneously serving as a member of the board delegated with the task of cutting greenhouse gases. 

I’d like to think the former.