Russia, Russia, Russia

 Many posts have analyzed how foreign governments try to influence American politics and policy. Russia and China are  prominent influencers.

Julian E. Barnes, Dustin Volz and Steven Lee Myers at NYT:

Less than three weeks from elections that could shift the balance of power in Congress, more signs are emerging that Russia and other foreign governments are once again seeking to influence American voters.

An online influence operation backed by the Russian government has been stepping up its attempts to sow division in the United States and inflame tensions around Israel as a political wedge issue, according to a new study by an independent company that tracks digital threats and foreign propaganda campaigns.

The influence operation known as Doppelgänger has created a flood of social media posts pushing themes of how bipartisan support for Israel is collapsing, according to Alethea, the threat intelligence company.

Doppelgänger is run by Russia’s Social Design Agency, a public relations firm. Both the U.S. government and the European Union have imposed punitive sanctions upon it.

On Wednesday, X, the social media platform, announced it had banned 13,000 accounts linked to three separate influence operations connected to Iran, Russia and China. The platform said the fake accounts amplified “content about U.S. politics, targeting candidates and public figures across the political spectrum.”

Michael Sinkewicz FOXBusiness:

President Donald Trump's decision to waive new sanctions on Russia is drawing sharp criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike, with several prominent GOP figures warning that the move could embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin as Moscow continues its war against Ukraine.

Trump signed an executive order Friday waiving key Russia-related sanctions and tariffs under the Graham Act, legislation he signed into law last month aimed at increasing economic pressure on Moscow.

The law, backed by the late Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., authorized tariffs of up to 100% on certain goods imported into the United States from major buyers of Russian oil and gas.

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley reposted FOX Business' reporting on Trump's executive order, calling the president's decision a potentially defining moment.

There are certain decisions that will go down as history-defining moments. This is one of them. It's a terrible misjudgment of Putin, who has made it clear he wants to destroy the West. We shouldn't help him do it.

— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) October 17, 2026

Solar Power

 Many posts have discussed campaign finance.

TIMOTHY CAMA and JACOB WENDLER at POLITICO:

An aggressive new PAC backed by renewable energy supporters notched a major win last night by helping unseat Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) despite President Donald Trump’s vocal support, our colleague Timothy Cama reports.

— The Invest in Tomorrow Coalition PAC is now poised to be a force in future contests after spending $2 million opposing Ogles and boosting Republican primary opponent Charlie Hatcher. Ogles was the third Republican this year to lose a race after being targeted by the super PAC, which was launched by solar executives wanting to get back at Republicans who actively work against renewables.

— The group’s ads did not mention clean energy, instead targeting conservative voters with advertisements that boosted Hatcher’s right-wing credentials and chided Ogles for missing votes. The PAC deployed a similar playbook against Texas Rep. Chip Roy in his unsuccessful attorney general bid and South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman, who lost his campaign for governor.

— “The clean energy industry’s political muscle is only getting stronger and more intimidating,” said Invest in Tomorrow Coalition co-founder Michael Brune, who previously led the advocacy group the Sierra Club. “Our hope here is that clean energy will go back to being a bipartisan issue, and maybe one of the few issues that all Americans can agree on. But before we get there, we’ve got to continue our retribution tour and take out a few more members who have voted the wrong way.”

— Lawmakers like Ogles, Roy and Norman drew the ire of industry last year when they pushed Republican leaders in Congress for a quick phaseout of renewable energy incentives in what became the One Big Beautiful Bill act. Chris Larsen — the PAC’s top backer, who has contributed $6 million of its $6.8 million — has called its advocacy “political warfare.”

— The group has taken lessons learned from the crypto industry, where Larsen was the co-founder of Ripple Labs. Ripple helped fund Fairshake, a super PAC that has spent more than $200 million to unseat politicians it sees as unfriendly to the industry. Larsen also leads the environmental philanthropy Clean Break Fund with Brune.

Federalism and EVs

Three years after President Biden signed the bipartisan infrastructure law, it has resulted in only 58 ERV charging stations. Marc J. Dunkelman at WP:

[By] the time of the chaotic 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, progressives had soured on the establishment’s excesses. Men such as Lyndon B. Johnson and Robert McNamara had steered the nation into an unwinnable war in Vietnam. Local power brokers such as Richard J. Daley and Robert Moses decimated whole neighborhoods in the name of urban renewal.

And so, to protect ordinary people, reformers erected mechanisms to dilute public authority. Slowly, over the course of the next half-century, bureaucracies they deemed too powerful became, in effect, impotent.

By the point the Biden administration turned its attention to expanding the nation’s EV charging infrastructure, the approach that FDR might have taken during the 1930s — just hiring people to do it — was entirely off the table. Such a plan would immediately be labeled a “socialist” enterprise that posed a threat to private companies.
...

Instead, the Biden administration was left to rely in large part on the system that governs 90 percent of federal transportation spending: distributing the money to the states. This pattern, established during the Eisenhower administration, works by sending federal dollars to the state highway departments that maintain the nation’s infrastructure. Each state figures out how to implement the law, which in this case called for high-speed chargers at least every 50 miles on major highways.

The states, of course, had no experience with EV technology. And so it was up to the federal government to help them navigate their new responsibilities. The Transportation and Energy departments quickly established a “joint office” to guide the work. Within weeks of the infrastructure law’s signing — lightning speed, by modern standards — the administration had published a draft rule establishing the requirements:

• The chargers would have to work on all electric vehicles (as opposed to just Teslas).
• They would have to be reliable 97 percent of the time (so drivers wouldn’t encounter broken stalls).
• They would have to be located in remote areas where there would otherwise be gaps (as opposed to the busy corridors where private companies might choose to place them without subsidy).

Over the course of 2022, the government incorporated public feedback into the rule, as mandated by the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act. In the nearly 80 years since its passage, the APA has become the Magna Carta of bureaucratic governance, ensuring that agencies are fair and transparent. The attendant checks and balances, designed explicitly to prevent the bureaucracy from steamrolling opponents, almost inevitably slow things down.

American Strengths

Many posts have discussed energy, technology, and immigration.

Joel Kotkin:

Overall, natural resources account for more than half of all Canada’s exports and roughly one-quarter of those of the US. Together the US and Canada produce roughly twice as much oil as either Russia or Saudi Arabia. Fossil fuels, the demon rum of the green catastrophists, are not going away, even in Europe. They still account for a vast majority of all global power generation, and the demand for fossil fuels will remain high for the foreseeable future.

Europe, meanwhile, seems to be tilting towards ‘energy suicide’, thanks to the green-fuelled rush to shut down nuclear reactors, natural-gas plants and coal power plants. This has driven energy prices to unprecedented highs. In contrast, the US has been greatly empowered by the growing demand for fossil fuels. It became the world’s largest exporter of liquified natural gas (LNG) last year. Indeed, its LNG exports are expected to almost double by 2030 on already approved projects. And around two-thirds of those exports go to Europe.

...

Today, of the top 10 tech firms by market capitalisation, eight were located in the US, one in Taiwan and one in the Netherlands. Over time, the only substantive threat to North American tech dominance comes from China, where firms are shielded from competition with the likes of Google, Amazon and Meta. These protected firms could pose a challenge in artificial intelligence. But America’s firms, venture capitalists and universities maintain an enormous lead in developing cutting edge AI.

Over time, China’s authoritarian structures will likely stunt its technological rise. The Chinese Communist Party’s assault on property rights and the rule of law is making foreign companies reconsider their tech investments. Japanese firms, including Sony and Nintendo, have already moved operations out of China, as part of an exodus of over 1,700 companies in the past year alone. SoftBank, the giant Japan-based venture-capital firm, has seen its revenues crater as its Chinese investments fell due to government clampdowns. It has now suspended future investments in China.

Arguably the real ‘secret sauce’ of North American power lies in immigration. Of course, the recent surge in illegal migration at the southern border has brought many towns and cities to breaking point. But legal migration, on the other hand, has been a huge success story, enabling the US to attract some of the world’s brightest minds and best talent.

The US and Canada together have more foreign-born people than the next five countries combined. Migration has allowed the population to grow, if not rapidly, far more than any major European country. In fact, several European nations, like Italy, Germany, Poland, Russia and the Baltic states, are actually shrinking. China, Korea and Japan are all experiencing similar declines.

Earth Day and Net Zero

Many posts have discussed energy and the environment.

 On Earth Day, note Ruy Teixeira at The Liberal Patriot:

Is it really possible to hit net zero by 2050? Is it really possible to eliminate fossil fuels that fast? The answer is that, for both technical and political reasons, it is not possible (outside of edge “solutions” like crashing industrial civilization or world authoritarian government to ration energy usage).

The insistence on trying to do so anyway is why “be realistic—demand the impossible!” is, astonishingly, not so far from the guiding philosophy of much of today’s mainstream left, including dominant sectors of the Democratic Party.

Consider the technical feasibility of this program. As the polymath, Vaclav Smil, universally acknowledged to be one the world’s premier energy experts, has observed:

[W]e are a fossil-fueled civilization whose technical and scientific advances, quality of life and prosperity rest on the combustion of huge quantities of fossil carbon, and we cannot simply walk away from this critical determinant of our fortunes in a few decades, never mind years. Complete decarbonization of the global economy by 2050 is now conceivable only at the cost of unthinkable global economic retreat…

And as he tartly observes re the 2050 deadline:

People toss out these deadlines without any reflection on the scale and the complexity of the problem…What’s the point of setting goals which cannot be achieved? People call it aspirational. I call it delusional.

Smil backs his argument with a mountain of empirical evidence in a new and hugely important paper, “Halfway Between Kyoto and 2050: Zero Carbon Is a Highly Unlikely Outcome.” The paper is a gold mine of relevant and highly compelling data. Smil outlines the realities of the net zero 2050 challenge:

The goal of reaching net zero global anthropogenic CO2 emissions is to be achieved by an energy transition whose speed, scale, and modalities (technical, economic, social, and political) would be historically unprecedented…[T]he accomplishment of such a transformation, no matter how desirable it might be, is highly unlikely during the prescribed period….In terms of final energy uses and specific energy converters, the unfolding transition would have to replace more than 4 terawatts (TW) of electricity-generating capacity now installed in large coal- and gas-fired stations by converting to non-carbon sources; to substitute nearly 1.5 billion combustion (gasoline and diesel) engines in road and off-road vehicles; to convert all agricultural and crop processing machinery (including about 50 million tractors and more than 100 million irrigation pumps) to electric drive or to non-fossil fuels; to find new sources of heat, hot air, and hot water used in a wide variety of industrial processes (from iron smelting and cement and glass making to chemical syntheses and food preservation) that now consume close to 30 percent of all final uses of fossil fuels; to replace more than half a billion natural gas furnaces now heating houses and industrial, institutional, and commercial places with heat pumps or other sources of heat; and to find new ways to power nearly 120,000 merchant fleet vessels (bulk carriers of ores, cement, fertilizers, wood and grain, and container ships, the largest one with capacities of some 24,000 units, now running mostly on heavy fuel oil and diesel fuel) and nearly 25,000 active jetliners that form the foundation of global long-distance transportation (fueled by kerosene).

Domestic Violent Extremist Bomb Plot

Rachel Weiner and  Jasmine Hilton at WP:

A neo-Nazi leader recently released from prison has been arrested again and accused of plotting an attack on the Maryland power grid with a woman he met while incarcerated.

Brandon Russell, 27, and Sarah Clendaniel, 34, are expected to make their first appearance Monday in Baltimore and Florida federal courts on a charge of conspiring to destroy an energy facility, which carries up to 20 years in prison.

“If we can pull off what I’m hoping … this would be legendary,” Clendaniel said on Jan. 29, according to the court record. She was speaking to a federal informant, who was having similar discussions with Russell. 

According to prosecutors, their plan was to attack with gunfire five substations that serve the Baltimore area. The charges come after similar attacks on the power grid in North Carolina and Oregon that remain unsolved; the Department of Homeland Security recently warned that the United States is in a “heightened threat environment” and that critical infrastructure is among the “targets of potential violence.”

In conversations about the plot, according to court documents, Clendaniel “described how there was a ‘ring’ around Baltimore and if they hit a number of them all in the same day, they ‘would completely destroy this whole city.’”

 From a 2020 report by the Department of Homeland Security:

The primary terrorist threat inside the United States will stem from lone offenders and small cells of individuals, including Domestic Violent Extremists6 (DVEs) and foreign terrorist-inspired Homegrown Violent Extremists (HVEs). Some U.S.-based violent extremists have capitalized on increased social and political tensions in 2020, which will drive an elevated threat environment at least through early 2021. Violent extremists will continue to target individuals or institutions that represent symbols of their grievances, as well as grievances based on political affiliation or perceived policy positions. 

... 

Among DVEs, racially and ethnically motivatedviolent extremists—specifically white supremacistextremists (WSEs)—will remain the most persistent and lethal threat in the Homeland. Spikes in other DVE threats probably will depend on political or social issues that often mobilize other ideological actors to violence, such as immigration, environmental, and police-related policy issues.

Exxon Scientists Foresaw Global Warming, but Exxon Did Not Admit it

 G. Supran, S. Rahmstorf, N. Oreskes, "Assessing ExxonMobil’s global warming projections," Science, January 14, 2023. 

The abstract:

Climate projections by the fossil fuel industry have never been assessed. On the basis of company records, we quantitatively evaluated all available global warming projections documented by—and in many cases modeled by—Exxon and ExxonMobil Corp scientists between 1977 and 2003. We find that most of their projections accurately forecast warming that is consistent with subsequent observations. Their projections were also consistent with, and at least as skillful as, those of independent academic and government models. Exxon and ExxonMobil Corp also correctly rejected the prospect of a coming ice age, accurately predicted when human-caused global warming would first be detected, and reasonably estimated the “carbon budget” for holding warming below 2°C. On each of these points, however, the company’s public statements about climate science contradicted its own scientific data.

Saudi Oil and Influence Operations

 Hiroko Tabuchi at NYT:

Saudi Aramco has become a prolific funder of research into critical energy issues, financing almost 500 studies over the past five years, including research aimed at keeping gasoline cars competitive or casting doubt on electric vehicles, according to the Crossref database, which tracks academic publications. Aramco has collaborated with the United States Department of Energy on high-profile research projects including a six-year effort to develop more efficient gasoline and engines, as well as studies on enhanced oil recovery and other methods to bolster oil production.

Aramco also runs a global network of research centers including a lab near Detroit where it is developing a mobile “carbon capture” device — equipment designed to be attached to a gasoline-burning car, trapping greenhouse gases before they escape the tailpipe. More widely, Saudi Arabia has poured $2.5 billion into American universities over the past decade, making the kingdom one of the nation’s top contributors to higher education.

Saudi interests have spent close to $140 million since 2016 on lobbyists and others to influence American policy and public opinion, making it one of the top countries spending on U.S. lobbying, according to disclosures to the Department of Justice tallied by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Climate Change and September Heat

Natalie Jones and Jason Samenow at WP:

California and the western United States are immersed in a historically severe September heat wave that is predicted to intensify early this week. The record-breaking temperatures are stressing power grids, fueling fires and endangering health.

The prolonged heat wave began on Aug. 30 and is forecast to peak on Monday and Tuesday before gradually easing during the second half of the week. Dozens of high temperature records have already been broken from California to Montana and dozens more are forecast.

On Saturday, numerous cities in the Intermountain West endured their highest temperatures on record not only for Sept. 3 but for the entire month. Salt Lake City (which hit 103 degrees), Pocatello, Idaho, (102 degrees), and Great Falls, Mont. (102 degrees) were among them.

“This is the worst September heat wave in Western USA history no doubt,” tweeted Maximiliano Herrera, a world weather historian, on Saturday night.

In Death Valley, Calif., the temperature has topped 120 degrees on five straight days, and is predicted to come close to the world record September temperature of 126 degrees Tuesday.

Climate scientists have found human-caused climate change is increasing the intensity, frequency and duration of heat waves such as this one. Nearly 50 million people are under excessive heat warnings or heat advisories through the early part of the week from California to Idaho.

Employment Challenges

Many posts have discussed inequality in employment and income.

Byron Auguste at WP:

While companies scramble to find talent amid perceived “skills gaps” and “labor shortages,” their job postings exclude millions of qualified Americans. These applicants do not face this dispiriting experience because of race, ethnicity, gender, age or disability — these reasons would be illegal, and rightly so. Instead, they are excluded because they’re among the roughly two-thirds of U.S. workers who lack a bachelor’s degree.

...

College-degree discrimination has become so widespread that many take it for granted. Almost three-quarters of new jobs from 2007 to 2016 were roles in which most employers typically “require” bachelor’s degrees — but fewer than 4 in 10 American workers have that credential. Going to war against arithmetic is a bad idea, and our post-pandemic skilled-worker shortage is a wake-up call.

Requiring a medical degree to treat patients or a civil engineering degree to design a bridge is common sense. By contrast, requiring a generic college degree to be considered for jobs such as office manager, sales representative, digital marketer or data-center technician may be common, but it makes no sense.

Noam Scheiber at NYT:

Building an electricity plant powered by fossil fuels usually requires hundreds of electricians, pipe fitters, millwrights and boilermakers who typically earn more than $100,000 a year in wages and benefits when they are unionized.

But on solar farms, workers are often nonunion construction laborers who earn an hourly wage in the upper teens with modest benefits — even as the projects are backed by some of the largest investment firms in the world. In the case of Assembly Solar, the backer is D.E. Shaw, with more than $50 billion in assets under management, whose renewable energy arm owns and will operate the plant.\

While Mr. Biden has proposed higher wage floors for such work, the Senate prospects for this approach are murky. And absent such protections — or even with them — there’s a nagging concern among worker advocates that the shift to green jobs may reinforce inequality rather than alleviate it.

...

While some of the new green construction jobs, such as building new power lines, may pay well, many will pay less than traditional energy industry construction jobs. The construction of a new fossil fuel plant in Michigan employs hundreds of skilled tradespeople who typically make at least $60 an hour in wages and benefits, said Mike Barnwell, the head of the carpenters union in the state.

By contrast, about two-thirds of the roughly 250 workers employed on a typical utility-scale solar project are lower-skilled, according to Anthony Prisco, the head of the renewable energy practice for the staffing firm Aerotek. Mr. Prisco said his company pays “around $20” per hour for these positions, depending on the market, and that they are generally nonunion.

Chervon Climate Attack and a Revealing Tagline

Many posts have discussed the ways in which interest groups try to influence the government.

By Corbin Hiar, E&E News:

It was an audacious messaging campaign: White environmentalists are hurting black communities by pushing radical climate policies that would strip them of fossil fuel jobs.

The email to journalists, sent by a public affairs firm at the height of national protests over systemic racism earlier this month, accidentally contained the name of a high-profile client.

It was Chevron Corp.

The Virginia-based communications firm, named CRC Advisors, urged journalists to look at how green groups were "claiming solidarity" with black protesters while "backing policies which would hurt minority communities."

"Despite this claimed solidarity, environmental organizations, composed of predominantly white members, are backing radical policies like the Green New Deal which would bring particular harm to minority communities," wrote John Gage of CRC in an email sent to media outlets including E&E News.

The story pitch included an offer to connect journalists with black conservatives who oppose the Green New Deal, a sweeping government jobs program advanced by progressive lawmakers who champion environmental justice issues for communities of color.

The email ended with a revealing tagline.

"If you would rather not receive future communications from Chevron, let us know by clicking here."...

The email received by an E&E News journalist on June 3 included quotes from two black conservatives who oppose the Green New Deal.

They were Ken Blackwell, a Republican who served as Ohio's secretary of state in the late 1990s and has gone on to stump for a wide variety of conservative causes, and Derrick Hollie, a former advertising executive.

...
Blackwell's quote was partially featured in the headline of a June 4 story on the website of the conservative Daily Wire.

Hollie is the president of Reaching America, a nonprofit group whose tax-exempt status was revoked by the Internal Revenue Service in 2017 because it repeatedly failed to file required annual reports

This is so widespread that, if you’re a glib winger, it’s an easy way to make a living. You pull down a good salary with a make-believe organizational byline and the PR firm does the heavy lifting to get you in the media, thereby pleasing the corporate client. /2

— Jerry Taylor (@jerry_jtaylor) June 18, 2020

Earth Day is 50

A number of posts have involved environmental issues. Today is its 50th anniversary of Earth Day.

From the Census Bureau:

Stacking a Hearing with Actors

In New Orleans, Michael Isaac Stein  reports at The Lens:

Last October, about 50 people in bright orange shirts filed into City Hall for a public hearing on Entergy’s request to build a $210 million power plant in eastern New Orleans. Their shirts read, “Clean Energy. Good Jobs. Reliable Power.”

The purpose of the hearing was to gauge community support for the power plant. But for some of those in the crowd, it was just another acting gig.

At least four of the people in orange shirts were professional actors. One actor said he recognized 10 to 15 others who work in the local film industry.

They were paid $60 each time they wore the orange shirts to meetings in October and February. Some got $200 for a “speaking role,” which required them to deliver a prewritten speech, according to interviews with the actors and screenshots of Facebook messages provided to The Lens.
...

They were asked to sign non-disclosure agreements and were instructed not to speak to the media or tell anyone they were being paid.

....

In a Facebook message, [organizer Garrett] Wilkerson indicated he was working with Crowds on Demand, a Los Angeles-based company that does exactly what its name suggests. “If you need speakers to present at a council meeting, we can provide talented and well-spoken individuals to advocate for the cause,” the company says on its website.

 "Astroturfing" is the name for fake grassroots lobbying

However, astroturfing may be more common than you think. Crowds on Demand is one of the only companies that advertises this kind of work. But UCLA professor Edward Walker, who wrote a book about the phenomenon called “Grassroots for Hire,” said many other crowd services operate under the radar.

“There are hundreds of such firms across the country,” he told CNN in January. “By my estimate, around 40 percent of the Fortune 500 appears on the client list of at least one such firm.”

Interest Group Notes, Continued

The Washington swamp is bigger than ever.

Arden Farhi reports at CBS:

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt rented a bedroom in a Capitol Hill condo from the wife of a Washington lobbyist for $50 a day from mid-February through the end of July in 2017, CBS News has confirmed. Pruitt's daughter also lived in the condo while she was interning at the White House.

Pruitt's rent equates to about $1,500 a month, but the terms of the deal were favorable. The deal required Pruitt only to pay the nightly rate when he stayed there, and he was not charged for nights when he slept elsewhere. Pruitt traveled regularly, often returning to Oklahoma on the weekends. Documents released by the agency confirm that ethics officials at EPA signed off on the arrangement. Over the course of the five-and-a-half months, Pruitt paid $6100 in rent, about $2150 less than someone paying his rate every night.

Pruitt's landlord was Vicki Hart, the wife of Steven Hart, a Washington lobbyist whose firm represents a number of fossil fuel companies.

Juliet Eilperin at WP:

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has appointed 15 representatives of the outdoor recreation industry to advise him on how to operate public lands, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post, including three people whom department officials flagged as potentially having a conflict of interest on the matter.

The membership of the “Made in America” Outdoor Recreation Advisory Committee, which Zinke launchedin November, marks the third time the secretary has assembled panels dominated by industry players to help chart policies affecting their businesses.

Many of the members of the Royalty Policy Committee hail from the oil, gas and mining industries; the new International Wildlife Conservation Council is largely composed of people with ties to trophy hunting.

 A March 8 report from AP:

President Donald Trump and his appointees have stocked federal agencies with ex-lobbyists and corporate lawyers who now help regulate the very industries from which they previously collected paychecks, despite promising as a candidate to drain the swamp in Washington.

A week after his January 2017 inauguration, Mr. Trump signed an executive order that bars former lobbyists, lawyers and others from participating in any matter they lobbied or otherwise worked on for private clients within two years before going to work for the government.

But records reviewed by The Associated Press show Mr. Trump's top lawyer, White House counsel Don McGahn, has issued at least 24 ethics waivers to key administration officials at the White House and executive branch agencies.

Though the waivers were typically signed by McGahn months ago, the Office of Government Ethics disclosed several more on Wednesday.

"Just Do It"

Jonathan Swan at Axios:

In late June, President Trump hosted a group of Native American tribal leaders at the White House and urged them to "just do it" and extract whatever they want from the land they control.

The exchange turned out to be an unusually vivid window into the almost kingly power that Trump sees himself as holding, and which he has begun describing with increasing bluntness. The scene was recounted by a source in the room and confirmed by another.

The White House didn't dispute the story.

The chiefs explained to Trump that there were regulatory barriers preventing them from getting at their energy. Trump replied: "But now it's me. The government's different now. Obama's gone; and we're doing things differently here."

There was a pause in the room and the tribal leaders looked at each other.

"Chief, chief," Trump continued, addressing one of the tribal leaders, "what are they going to do? Once you get it out of the ground are they going to make you put it back in there? I mean, once it's out of the ground it can't go back in there. You've just got to do it. I'm telling you, chief, you've just got to do it."

Typos, Continued

Another day, another step backward for education. On his Facebook page, Trump misspelled miners.

a 

Left Behind in California

Joel Kotkin writes at The Orange County Register:

California may never secede, or divide into different states, but it has effectively split into entities that could not be more different. On one side is the much-celebrated, post-industrial, coastal California, beneficiary of both the Tech Boom 2.0 and a relentlessly inflating property market. The other California, located in the state’s interior, is still tied to basic industries like homebuilding, manufacturing, energy and agriculture. It is populated largely by working- and middle-class people who, overall, earn roughly half that of those on the coast.

Over the past decade or two, interior California has lost virtually all influence, as Silicon Valley and Bay Area progressives have come to dominate both state politics and state policy. “We don’t have seats at the table,” laments Richard Chapman, president and CEO of the Kern Economic Development Corporation. “We are a flyover state within a state.”

Virtually all the polices now embraced by Sacramento — from water and energy regulations to the embrace of sanctuary status and a $15-an-hour minimum wage — come right out of San Francisco central casting. Little consideration is given to the needs of the interior, and little respect is given to their economies.

This past week, the governor and legislature made things much worse by muscling through a huge increase in the gasoline tax.  Such consumption taxes are always regressive, and this one will have an especially deep impact in inland areas, where drive times are long and mass-transit options are scarce.

Ethanol Loses a Round

Timothy P. Carney reports at The Washington Examiner:

The ethanol lobby is a paper tiger, and Ted Cruz just tore it to shreds.

Cruz, the country's most famous enemy of the federal ethanol mandate, just won Iowa, winning more votes than any person in the history of the caucuses.

Cruz thus busted the myth that you can't mess with the ethanol lobby and still win Iowa. The lesson goes beyond ethanol: The only constituency for corporate welfare is on K Street.

Politicians are fooled into thinking corporate welfare is important to voters because politicians spend an inordinate amount of time with the powerful people to whom corporate welfare is vitally important. That's why every candidate who has tried to win Iowa has prostrated him or herself before ethanol.

They thought they had to. Cruz proved they didn't.

Cruz campaigned on a five-year wind-down of ethanol. Other candidates, like Jeb Bush, said they would consider winding down the mandate in 2022 — during a presumptive second term. Cruz's plan involves a 20 percent reduction of the mandate in his first year in office, and the same cut each year until it zeroes out.

Opinion on the Environment: Nine Flavors

A release from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research

Americans’ attitudes about environmental issues aren’t simply polarized into pro- and anti-environment, but rather are spread across a diverse spectrum. A new study from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and The Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies finds that attitudes about environmental issues are influenced by a combination of experience, interaction with natural environments, and religious and political views about the responsibilities of humankind as a whole, and government in particular.

The study identifies the following nine segments of the American population who each have a distinct set of environmental attitudes: “The broad labels of ‘pro-environment’ and ‘anti-environment’ don’t really apply to the vast majority of Americans,” said Trevor Tompson, director of The AP-NORC Center. “This study offers new insight into the American public’s perception of their environment, and how that perception is affected by a host of other factors including socioeconomic, political, and religious beliefs.”

Some of the key characteristics of each group include:

 Liberal Greens: Nine percent of the American public, of which 66 percent consider themselves environmentalists. Liberal Greens are very worried about, and highly interested in, environmental issues. Despite their engagement with these issues, however, they generally do not consider themselves to be outdoors people.
 Outdoor Greens: Ten percent of the American public, and a majority consider themselves to be environmentalists. Outdoor Greens are worried about environmental issues and feel strongly interconnected with nature. They tend to spend a lot of time outdoors.
 Religious Greens: Fourteen percent of the American public, and place a high importance on protecting the environment, many for religious reasons. Most think the environmental crisis is serious. They don’t tend to spend much time outdoors, however.
 Middle-of-the-Roaders: Ten percent of the American public hold a mixture of environmental opinions as they lean brown or green on various issues. Middle-of-the-Roaders are generally concerned about the environment but also like things the way they are, and tend to believe technology can solve our environmental problems.
 Homebodies: Twenty percent of the American public, Homebodies are the largest segment of the population. They do not consider themselves to be environmentalists and tend towards apathy when it comes to environmental issues.
 Disengaged: Six percent of the American public, and have few opinions on environmental issues, which do not resonate with them.
 Outdoor Browns: Fifteen percent of the American public, Outdoor Browns enjoy outdoor activities but tend to believe nature primarily serves a purpose for humans. They generally lean toward anti-environmental opinions, and don’t express interest in environmental issues.
 Religious Browns: Eight percent of the American public, are highly religious, and feel the most separated from nature of any group. Religious Browns do not enjoy outdoor activities, and express strongly anti-environmental views.
 Conservative Browns: Eight percent of the American public; Conservative Browns are adamantly anti-environmentalist. Although many engage in outdoor activities, few express interest in the environment and most do not believe there is an environmental crisis.

California Drivers Alliance

A number of posts have discussed Astroturf, i.e., artificial grassroots lobbying.
A new California mailer attacks Senate Bill 380, to restrict the use of gasoline and diesel fuel.  It comes from the "California Drivers Alliance." A small note in the left bottom of the last page -- click image to enlarge -- says that the "California Drivers Alliance" is a product of WSPA.  What is WSPA?  The Western States Petroleum Association.

Last year, Bloomberg published a leaked PowerPoint detailing WPSA strategy and listing its many front groups: