Finding Ulysses » climate change

80 Degrees At Noon

Jonathan Cook — Sun, 02 May 2010 16:15:34 +0000

At noontime today, the air temperature had already reached 80 degrees. We had similar heat yesterday. Area farmers and horticulturalists say that plants are growing something like three weeks ahead of schedule.

I grew up in Central New York, and in my memory, a day in early May where the temperatures reached the high 80s was extremely rare. I’m wondering what the memories of Trumansburg natives are, and how they’re living differently in warm years like this one has proven to be.

Arcuri Sold Out The Earth For 19 Cents

Jonathan Cook — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:28:37 +0000

On Sunday, I wrote about the astounding lack of sense in the justifications by our U.S. Representative, Michael Arcuri, for his vote on Friday against the American Clean Energy and Security Act. Arcuri had attempted to cast his vote as a defense of the Upstate New York economy, though the average American household expense resulting from the legislation would be just 48 cents per day, according to the Congressional Budget office.

Upon reading an analysis of the cost of the legislation by political site FiveThirtyEight, I find out this morning that Arcuri’s statements were even more off base. It seems that the average household expense from the legislation in New York State would be much lower than the national average: 19 cents a day – an amount easily offset by replacing an inefficient lightbulb. New York’s expense would be the second lowest in the United States, behind only Florida.

If New York’s energy expenses would be increased at a lower rate than any other state than Florida, wouldn’t that make our state more attractive to businesses and individuals looking to relocate? Once again, Mike Arcuri doesn’t seem to have been able to think things through. He’s thrown away for both environmental and economic improvement for our region.

Trumansburg’s Congressman Votes To Do Nothing About Climate Change

Jonathan Cook — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 23:47:27 +0000

When Trumansburg Democrats voted for Congressman Mike Arcuri in 2006 and 2008, did they think they were voting for someone who would help Republican politicians block action on climate change? That’s just what happened yesterday, as Representative Arcuri voted with the Republicans yet again. This time, Arcuri was trying to prevent H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which would establish a cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over the next generation.

Congressman Arcuri made the following argument in defense of his opposition to the Obama-backed climate legislation: “We all know that New York state already has some of the highest electricity rates in the country, and if those rates were to dramatically increase as a result of this legislation, it would almost certainly cost jobs in Upstate New York and discourage new businesses from locating here.”

To anyone with a scrap of critical thinking skills, this argument is plain nonsense. A national bill that creates a national cap-and-trade system won’t discriminate against Upstate New York unless industries here decide to continue to pollute the atmosphere. That’s not a regime under which new businesses would be discouraged from locating in our region.

Besides that, our expenses won’t be significantly affected by the American Clean Energy and Security Act, if it passes the Senate. That’s not my opinion. It’s the judgment of the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which has calculated that the American American will only have an increase in expenses of 48 cents per day resulting from the legislation. Furthermore, that judgment does not take into account the increasing economic burden created by climate change.

Michael Arcuri’s claims just don’t match the facts. Either Arcuri isn’t aware of the facts, or he doesn’t care about them, and doesn’t think that we’ll be able to tell the difference. Whichever is the case, Arcuri’s actions in opposition of the American Clean Energy and Security Act demonstrate that he is unsuited to the responsibilities of representing our district in the U.S. House of Representatives. He has repeatedly voted against the progressive values of our community, and merits a progressive challenge for the 2010 election, either from within the Democratic Party, or from without.