EC June 2015

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

2 participants
3 discussions

Fwd: [Coal Volunteers List] Just released: New report on water toxics, coal plants, and health
by Paul Wilson 18 Jun '15

18 Jun '15

Check out this new report and fwd to others. fyi, paul w. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mary Anne Hitt <maryanne.hitt(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 12:25 PM Subject: [Coal Volunteers List] Just released: New report on water toxics, coal plants, and health To: #Coal <coal-list(a)sierraclub.org>, #Coal-Volunteers < coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org> Hello Beyond Coal team, Today, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Sierra Club, Environmental Integrity Project, Clean Water Action and Earthjustice are releasing a report entitled "Selling Our Health Down River." We're releasing the report in advance of EPA's September deadline to issue a final rule for coal water toxics, including mercury, arsenic, and lead. The report highlights the public health benefits of a strong final standard. It makes the case that EPA must finalize strong toxic water pollution safeguards to protect the rivers, lakes, and streams where Americans fish, swim, and get their drinking water. Our press release is here <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fcontent.sierraclub.org%2Fpress-r…>, and the report is attached. I'll have a blog up about the report shortly that Heather Moyer will circulate, which you can share on social media and with your networks. Casey Roberts from our Environmental Law Program was one of the authors of the report, and our federal policy and communications teams did a lot of work on the report as well. Thanks to everyone who helped get this over the finish line! I hope all of you will find it to be a valuable resource for your work. Our communications team in DC is working hard today to get this out through all their channels. If you have additional questions or ideas about how to use the report locally, please reach out to your campaign representative or your regional press secretary. My best, Mary Anne -- Mary Anne Hitt Director, Beyond Coal Campaign Sierra Club Blog <http://sierraclub.typepad.com/compass/coal-director/> | Twitter <http://twitter.com/#!/maryannehitt> (@maryannehitt) 304-876-7064 (w) | 540-239-0073 (c) www.beyondcoal.org -- To access the Beyond Coal Campaign Resource Portal, go to: https://sites.google.com/a/sierraclub.org/beyond-coal-resource-portal/ To sign up for this list, email neha.mathew(a)sierraclub.org with the subject and message "SUBSCRIBE #coal-volunteer" --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "#Coal-Volunteers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to coal-volunteers-list+unsubscribe(a)sierraclub.org. To post to this group, send email to coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club Military Outdoors Project Healing Waters Fly-fishing 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle JUSTICE, ONLY JUSTICE, SHALT THOU PURSUE. Deuteronomy 16:20

1 0

"misguided strategies of environmental funders"
by frank young 17 Jun '15

17 Jun '15

Why the Environmental Movement Is Not Winning A new report places the blame on misguided strategies of environmental funders. By Peter Montague <http://www.alternet.org/authors/peter-montague> February 24, 2012 A searing new report says the environmental movement is not winning and lays the blame squarely on the failed policies of environmental funders. The movement hasn't won any "significant policy changes at the federal level in the United States since the 1980s" because funders have favored top-down elite strategies and have neglected to support a robust grassroots infrastructure. Environmental funders spent a whopping $10 billion between 2000 and 2009 but achieved relatively little because they failed to underwrite grassroots groups that are essential for any large-scale change,the report <http://www.ncrp.org/files/publications/Cultivating_the_grassroots_final_low…> [3] says. Released in late February by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy <http://www.ncrp.org/> [4], Cultivating the Grassroots was written by Sarah Hansen, who served as executive director of the Environmental Grantmakers Association <http://ega.org/> [5] from 1998 to 2005. Environmental funders mainly support large, professionalized environmental organizations instead of the scrappy community-based groups that are most heavily impacted by environmental harms. Organizations with annual budgets greater than $5 million make up only 2 percent of all environmental groups, yet receive more than half of all environmental grants and donations. The report makes the simple but profound argument that the current environmental funding strategy is not working and that, without targeting philanthropy at communities most impacted by environmental harms, the movement will continue to fail. "Our funding strategy is misaligned with the great perils our planet and environment face," Hansen writes. "Environmental activists and funders all share a gnawing sense that something has to change. No sensible environmental activist would argue that we, as a field, have done what is needed to respond to environmental degradation," Hansen said in an interview. Instead of funding community-based groups to generate ideas, strategies and political support for transformative change, environmental donors have thrown their weight behind narrow lobbying campaigns in Washington, D.C. -- for example, the failed inside-the-beltway campaign in 2009-2010 to pass "cap and trade" legislation to curb global warming. For their part, mainstream environmental groups hang pleas for environmental change on the apolitical hook of rational appeals, expecting that decision-makers confronted with powerful evidence will do the right thing. But this strategy has not worked because "a vocal, organized, sustained grassroots base is vital to achieving sustained change," the report asserts. How Does Change Happen? "In movements throughout history, the core of leadership came from a nucleus of directly impacted or oppressed communities while also engaging a much broader range of justice-seeking supporters." In other words, successful movements for social change -- anti-slavery, women's suffrage, labor rights, and civil rights -- have always been inspired, energized, and led by those most directly affected. Yet these are the very groups within the environmental movement that are starved for funds. Analysis of environmental grantmaking, 2007-2009, reveals that only 15 percent of environmental grant dollars are classified as benefiting marginalized communities, and only 11 percent are classified as advancing "social justice" strategies, such as community organizing. The report makes a distinction between internet activism or getting your neighbor to sign a petition, and real community organizing. "Community organizing builds power by helping people understand the source of their social or political problems, connect with others facing the same challenges and, together, take action to win concrete change." Community organizing is messy and takes time. The report also distinguishes between "national organizations that might parachute into local communities for one-time policy campaigns versus authentic, local organizations that not only work on those same short- term campaigns but, just as importantly, build long-term leadership and capacity in the community to amplify change in the future." The report points out that the U.S. is growing racially and ethnically more diverse each year and by 2042 will be majority people of color. "New immigrants may come from countries with robust histories of social change movements that, combined with the increasing racial diversity of America's communities, provide an opportunity to diversify the ethnic composition of the environmental movement," the report says. And: "Unlike many of the professional advocates in Washington, D.C., people of color, immigrants, poor people and young people often are living face to face with the devastating impacts of environmental degradation. These growing communities have the self-interest to do something and, increasingly, the collective power to potentially make real change but may lack the support or resources to organize." "In this context, it is arguable that any push for environmental change which fails to prioritize communities of color is a losing strategy," the report says. And, "Until the broader concerns... of all communities are on the radar of environmentalists, it will be hard for environmentalists to be on the radar of all communities." In a stunning revelation, the report offers evidence that, compared to the average of all philanthropic donors, environmental funders avoid supporting disadvantaged people: "There is a seemingly contradictory correlation: analysis shows the greater a funder's commitment to the environment, the less likely it is to prioritize marginalized communities or advance social justice in its environmental grantmaking." Advice for Environmental Funders The report offers a four-point roadmap for "funding the grassroots to win:" 1. Fund work that benefits communities of the future Environmental funders should earmark somewhere between 20 and 50 percent of their total giving to underserved communities. Nearly half of all children in the United States today are black, Latino or Asian American and by 2042, a majority of Americans will be people of color. This is a powerful new constituency ready to take action on environmental issues, the report says. "Prioritizing funding for lower-income communities of color is not only strategic given that these communities are becoming the majority and support environmental change, but also because change that targets the most impacted populations has a multiplier effect for society as a whole," Hansen writes. 2. Invest 25 percent of grant dollars in grassroots action Speaking directly to environmental funders, the report says, "We recommend that you allocate at least 25 percent of your grant dollars for social justice purposes, specifically with a focus on grassroots advocacy, organizing and civic engagement led by the communities most affected by environmental ills and climate change." "The way to build a broad movement around environment and climate solutions is to mobilize diverse communities of people around issues that are much closer to their self-interest (such as stopping toxic pollution, creating viable new jobs and reducing energy bills) and then work intentionally to connect those individuals and campaigns to a larger understanding of communal and global interests. Grassroots groups need resources to be able to engage effectively at all levels (local, state, national and international)." 3. Build supportive infrastructure As the highly-successful right wing in the U.S. can tell you, social movements grow large and powerful only when they are served by a deep infrastructure of organizations offering technical assistance and know-how. Local groups need to be able to find each other, share strategies, develop leadership, communicate their message, identify allies, and gain a wide range of skills. Such an infrastructure requires sustained funding and without it no movement can succeed. 4. Take the long view, prepare for tipping points "Supporting grassroots organizing may require a paradigm shift in a foundation's grantmaking strategy. Depending on how your philanthropy currently supports grassroots organizations or does not, this can mean shedding expectations of microscopic, quick deliverables and embracing the slow, patient process of movement building. Legal work to overturn Jim Crow laws began in the early 1930s with Thurgood Marshall representing the NAACP lawsuits in Maryland. Imagine if early funders of the Civil Rights Movement had tried to "evaluate the impact" of their grants in the ensuing 20 years - before the popular movement took hold. Movement building takes time. "In his important monograph Just Another Emperor: The Myths and Realities of Philanthrocapitalism, former Ford Foundation director Michael Edwards cautions that one of the downsides of increasingly infusing the nonprofit world with business ideals is that social change organizations are expected to churn out good, quarterly metrics. Extreme advocates of these ideas expect social change organizations to report mounds of data and compete with one another for funding based on "numbers" and "deliverables." But on February 1, 1960, sitting at a "Whites Only" lunch counter at a Woolworth's in Greensboro, N.C., there were only four African American students from a local college. Although those may not appear to be impressive metrics, consider the scale and scope of the movement they helped launch." Peter Montague is a historian and journalist whose work has appeared in Counterpunch, Huffington Post, the Nation and many other publications. He has co-authored two books on toxic heavy metals. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mountain Party Executive Committee" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mountainpartyexcom+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to mountainpartyexcom(a)googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mountainpartyexcom. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

1 1

Interesting study out of Princeton: 20 Years Of Data Reveals That Congress Doesn't Care What You Think
by Paul Wilson 05 Jun '15

05 Jun '15

Makes you think about how far Birth Place of Rivers NM or Energy Efficiency goals will get in our current delegation.... *20 Years Of Data Reveals That Congress Doesn't Care What You Think* - For the last few years, I've had this sense that everything I learned as a kid about how America's government works is completely wrong. But I had no idea how bad things actually were until I saw one simple graph … more <http://listserv.steelworkers.org/t/257586/1028185/151336/17/> Here's the link if you want to go directly to the website: http://www.upworthy.com/20-years-of-data-reveals-that-congress-doesnt-care-… enjoy, paul -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club Military Outdoors Project Healing Waters Fly-fishing 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle JUSTICE, ONLY JUSTICE, SHALT THOU PURSUE. Deuteronomy 16:20

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC June 2015