Introducing The American Square!

Comment by Bernardo Ferdman on April 12, 2011 at 4:55pm

Thanks to you, Carolyn, and to AmericaSpeaks for creating this much needed space. I look forward to learning and participating, and trust that it will help encourage more civil discourse and the formulation of better and more collaborative approaches to the common issues that we face.

Warm regards,

Bernardo

Comment by David M. Mog on April 13, 2011 at 10:25pm

Full disclosure:  I grew up before television and my only concession to modern communications technology is an e-mail account.  Joining this forum is going beyond my comfort zone; I do so because I know the excellent work that America Speaks did on the budget for which I happily served as a table facilitator.  I look forward to participating in this important experiment in civic engagement.

Comment by Jeff Harper on April 13, 2011 at 11:39pm

The American Square offers a great opportunity for civil and sensible dialogue. This comes at a time when some in Washington are stepping up to deal with our chronic budget deficits in politically courageous ways. Let's join with them and be part of a compassionate solution!

Jeff Harper

Author - Uncle Sam's Checkbook

 

 

Comment by Norman Hoffman on June 17, 2011 at 11:06am

I am always amazed by the rhetoric surrounding the budget & debt crisis.  Neither politicians, or press ever seem to ask the question of why don't our leaders lead?  If Congress is serious about cutting entitlements, they should start at home.  They should roll back their most recent raise in salary & benefits that gave themselves during a time of three wars.  Then all three branches of government should institute a 5% wage decrease across the board, followed by a freeze in all salaries until the deficit is done.  Next, whatever healthcare plan they decide on(I favor a single payer system) they should be included.  Pensions must be done away with, and set up a 403B, or IRA system with a government match of 3%, up to 5% of their annual salary.  However, the match will not take effect until the deficit is gone.  All these cuts to the truly most entitled of all Americans could then be done at State, County and City level. 

 It's government that's killing us.  By the time we finish paying all their salaries, expenses, health & pension there is little left for the taxpayer.  We need to wake up and stop these entitlements before we are faced with national bankruptcy.  So let the leaders lead and by cutting their own benefits, the rest of the country might follow in giving up some of their own.

Comment by WIllaim Brown on July 15, 2011 at 7:26am

NOW WE DO SO LETS GET TO DOING ..........WE SAY WE WANT THE NEXT GENERATION NOT TO HURT ........WELL LETS START DOING THE RIGHT THINGS ............

GET BACK TO ME IF YOU CANT THINK OF WAYS TO HELP !! THANKS BILL


Delay Will Impose Billions of Pollution-related Costs on Businesses and Delay Investment in New Generation Resources
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- A study issued today finds that the benefits of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed Utility Toxics Rule (also known as the Utility MACT) are even greater than found in the conservative analysis done by the Agency. The report, “Why EPA’s Mercury and Toxics Rule is Good for the Economy and America’s Workforce,” authored by Charles J. Cicchetti Ph.D, a senior advisor to Navigant Consulting, Inc., finds that the Utility Toxics Rule will produce net benefits of up to $139.5 billion and create 115,520 jobs. The report shows that while the EPA’s benefit-cost analysis made reasonable calculations of the benefits of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) reductions, the Rule brings additional benefits that EPA did not monetize but should be considered.
“Although the EPA’s Regulatory Impact Analysis already shows that the benefits of the proposed Toxics Rule dwarf its costs, I found that it also overestimates compliance costs, contrary to the claims of those calling for additional study and delay,” said Cicchetti. “In my analysis of both the Toxics Rule and what is now being called the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, I have identified a combined additional $16.5 billion in annual benefits to help the economy recover, including additional labor cost savings from avoided lost work days, reduced health and insurance costs, and increased employment.”
Report findings on the Utility Toxics Rule include:
Net annual benefits between $52.5 and $139.5 billion ($10.5 billion more than EPA’s analysis)
Net job increases of 115,520 (79,550 more than EPA’s analysis)
Healthcare savings of $4.513 billion (compared to EPA’s $3.445 billion)
Additionally, EPA’s analysis does not account for the $7.17 billion increase in gross domestic product and the $2.689 billion increase in tax revenues expected to result from the Utility Toxics Rule.
“The Clean Air Rules have been expected for almost 10 years and went through a detailed inter-agency review and cost-benefit analysis a few months ago. Now, under the guise of needing more analysis, some in Congress seek further delay to allow companies to continue to operate power plants without adequate pollution controls,” said Joseph Otis Minott, Esq. of the Clean Air Council. “Dr. Cicchetti’s study proves that additional analysis uncovers even more benefits and fewer costs than the EPA’s conservative analysis. It is time for Congress to look out for the American people first and not the minority of power plants owners that failed to install pollution controls. Delaying the Utility Toxics and Cross-State Air Pollution rules harms the economy and the public’s health.”
The proposed Toxics Rule would limit emissions of HAPs, including mercury; non-mercury metals such as lead and arsenic; and acid gases such as hydrogen chloride, from coal-fired power plants. The rule is designed to reduce toxic air pollution and safeguard the public from the premature deaths, asthma attacks, heart attacks, hospital admissions and other avoidable illnesses it causes. Most plants comply or are well positioned to timely comply with the rule, but some owners have yet to invest in pollution controls.
“For some population groups, particularly the disadvantaged communities most often in close proximity to coal-fired power plants, exposure to hazardous substances can be poisonous in a direct manner,” said Reverend Horace Strand from the Chester Environmental Partnerships (CEP) in Pennsylvania. “Lowering toxic emissions means fewer people dying early, more kids in school and more people able to go t

Comment