I see that our recycling center has closed until further notice. International Paper, downsizing, has closed its recycling plant in Wichita, laying off all those employees, I saw on the newscast from the station I linked. Their story links a release from IP about all their closures and their plans for the year. The release is dated Feb. 13, of 2025. There’s another release from the Wichita Business Journal about the Wichita plant, but it says little to nothing. (No link from them; they’re mostly Kansans and Americans For Prosperity, anyway.)
Earlier, I got the idea to search if IP’s downsizing is due to recission of tax cuts and to tariffs. Gemini (who always volunteers though I never ask, preferring to find a link to a known source) says that while it cannot state that those things cause the downsizing in full, it also cannot state that those aren’t in the mix. (Because I do skim Gemini’s stuff.)
So, this hurts a bit: the closing of our recycling facility, as well as the Wichita one. During the first Trump admin, when POTUS began that trade war with China, China reciprocated by, possibly among other things, refusing anymore plastic recycling from the US. Our facility couldn’t find a place that did the recycling; no one else does it. China does it very economically though of course there is the question of what it’s really doing with the plastic, but another story for another time.
Anyway, in those days, I was an active BPW member. One of the things we worked hard on was getting a recycling collection facility here in town. We lobbied hard, both the public and the council, for use of an unused building (the former firehouse,) and possibly the use of a big truck for hauling the recycling collected to the recycler. We asked for no funding, we had willing volunteers; all the civic organizations set up volunteer schedules. We just needed the facility and a way to haul. Before the facility came about, I became a member of the city Planning Commission, so I couldn’t continue in that effort until after it was decided by the council. But, it was a happy circumstance that there was a plan for recycling in the existing Strategic Plan, even then! That’s always a big help, when something’s in the Strat Plan.
So, this was not a thing that came before the Planning Commission. I was not on Zoning Appeals at that time, so I have no idea if they got it, but as it came to reality, that wouldn’t have been necessary. It was decided that that firehouse building would become the collection facility, it would be staffed with volunteers but with a city worker or two there because it’s city property and insurance insists on that, and a city worker would do the hauling. Yay! It was open each Saturday from 9 until noon, and people needed to bring their recycling, preferably sorted, to the facility where volunteers then helped getting things where they went.
Eventually it grew, and there weren’t enough volunteers every Saturday to keep the lines moving reasonably. It went before the council to staff another one or two. There would still be volunteers there to keep things moving without too much staff. (People here in town like nice things, but don’t like paying for them.) The council approved, and the facility also opened on Mondays from 11 AM to 1 PM. That way, downtown business, who go through a lot of corrugated cardboard and bubble wrap, could get theirs done without as many of the public. Also, the staffers could actually get the stuff loaded in time for it to go to the recycler.
I just went there last week to drop recycling. We usually accrue enough corrugated cardboard and chipboard to unload at least once per month. We’ve cut paper back a lot, and again, plastic hasn’t been accepted since Trump p.o.’d China last term, so that’s not so much. Even so, where we usually have a single trash bag to go out for pickup, I think we’re going to have more that now has to go to the landfill.
I may be taking it too seriously, but I feel the way I did when the SCOTUS overturned their own decision in Roe v. Wade. We worked hard for it, we had it, it was good for all, and now it’s gone.
I hope this hasn’t bored anyone very much. It’s more sentimental than I usually am when posting such stuff. Still, our recycling collection facilities closing, or really, any big companies downsizing, is happening everywhere, and is affecting many, many people. I feel for all the Wichita workers who will have no jobs just in time for school shopping. So, I thought I’d post, because we all have to keep our eyes open for this happening around us everywhere. Thanks for your time! 🌞
Far from the front lines of the climate crisis, 100 men and women in air-conditioned offices, 61 of them millionaires, are making decisions that could increase United States carbon dioxide emissions, and the warming of the climate they are driving, for decades to come.
In the latest political wrangle over energy and climate policy, a group of Republican senators over the weekend added provisions to the US federal budget bill that, as currently written, would end clean energy tax credits at the personal level and at utility scale and increase taxes on foreign-made parts for solar power equipment.
Ending federal subsidies for most renewable energy projects, including residential heat pumps, for example, would affect thousands of projects that are already in planning or development and jeopardize future investments in manufacturing renewable energy equipment.
Friday, June 27, hours before the Senate released the latest draft of the reconciliation bill just after midnight, US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright claimed on the Department of Energy website that wind and solar are unreliable and that federal subsidies have made energy more expensive, although he did not cite any official reports or peer-reviewed studies to support that claim.
On the Department of Energy website, Wright wrote, “wind and solar brings us the worst of two worlds: less reliable energy delivery and higher electric bills …If sources are truly economically viable, let’s allow them to stand on their own,” he wrote, ignoring that the fossil fuel industry gets annual subsidies of about $20 billion annually, according to estimates by Oil Change International, a nonprofit watchdog group.
But hundreds of studies show that renewable energy is much less expensive and, in a well-planned grid, can make energy supplies more secure.
“The proposed GOP tax on wind and solar is a danger to the United States,” Mark Z. Jacobson, a Stanford University renewable energy researcher who has authored numerous studies on wind and solar power, wrote via email.
The new tax provisions “lock in death and illness to up to 100,000 Americans every year due to fossil-fuel and bioenergy-fuel air pollution that wind and solar help to eliminate,” he said.
An early evaluation shows the administration’s planned energy policies would result in the drilling of 50,000 new oil wells every year for the next few years, he said, adding that it “ensures the continuation of land devastation… the poisoning of soil and groundwater due to fossil fuels and the continuation of gas blowouts and fires.”
There is nothing beneficial about the tax, he said, “only guaranteed misery.”
An analysis by the Rhodium Group, and energy policy research institute, projected that the Republican regime’s proposed energy policies would result in about 4 billion tons more greenhouse gas emissions than a continuation of current policies—enough to raise the average global temperature by .0072° Fahrenheit.
The overall budget bill was also panned in a June 28 statement by the president of North America’s Building Trades Unions, Sean McGarvey.
McGarvey called it “a massive insult to the working men and women of North America’s Building Trades Unions and all construction workers.”
He said that, as written, the budget “stands to be the biggest job-killing bill in the history of this country,” potentially costing as many jobs as shutting down 1,000 Keystone X pipeline projects, threatening an estimated 1.75 million construction jobs and over 3 billion work hours, which translates to $148 billion in lost annual wages and benefits.
“These are staggering and unfathomable job loss numbers, and the bill throws yet another lifeline and competitive advantage to China in the race for global energy dominance,” he said.
Research in recent years shows how right-wing populist and nationalist ideologies have used anti-renewable energy arguments to win voters, in defiance of environmental logic and scientific fact, in part by using social media to spread misleading and false information about wind, solar and other emissions-free electricity sources.
The same forces now seem to be at work in the US, said Stephan Lewandowsky, a cognitive psychologist at the University of Bristol who studies how people respond to misinformation and propaganda, and why people reject well-established scientific facts, such as those regarding climate change.
“This is a bonus for fossil fuels at the expense of future generations and the future of the American economy,” he said. “Other countries will continue working towards renewable-energy economies, especially China. That competitive advantage will eventually pay out to the detriment of American businesses. You can’t negotiate with the laws of physics.”
July 11, 1905 The Niagara Movement, precursor of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), was formed in Buffalo, New York. Meeting at the home of Mary Burnett Talbert were W.E.B. DuBois, John Hope and 30 others who rejected the accommodationist approach of Booker T. Washington (“The wisest among my race understand that the agitation of questions of social equality is the extremest folly . . . .”) Founders of The Niagara Movement at Niagara Falls The Niagara Movement’s manifesto was, in the words of DuBois, “We want full manhood suffrage and we want it now . . . We are men! We want to be treated as men. And we shall win.“ The Niagara Movement and its founding principles
July 11, 1968 The American Indian Movement (AIM) was founded in Minneapolis, Minnesota, by George Mitchell, Dennis Banks, Clyde Bellecourt and 200 others. They gathered to organize in order to deal with widespread and persistent poverty among native Americans, and unjust treatment from all levels of government. American Indian Movement background
July 11, 1969 The federal appeals court in Boston reversed the convictions of Dr. Benjamin Spock and Michael Ferber who had been found guilty of conspiring to counsel evasion of the military draft in 1968. The judges considered their activities opposing the Vietnam War covered under the 1st Amendment right to free speech. Dr. Benjamin Spock and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Read “A Call to Resist Illegitimate Authority” co-authored by Dr. Spock (1967)
Cuban reggaeton artist Leamsy La Figura, arrested last week in Miami-Dade on assault charges, was transferred to South Florida’s new immigration detention facility known as Alligator Alcatraz in the Everglades, the singer confirmed in a phone call.
He and other detainees claim they are enduring inhumane conditions at the site, including lack of access to water, inadequate food and denial of religious rights.
Alligator Alcatraz was built in a matter of days on a rarely used municipal airport located about 50 miles west of the City of Miami. The first group of detainees arrived at the center on July 3, according to state Attorney General James Uthmeier.
La Figura, whose real name is Leamsy Isquierdo, was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and battery. He was initially held at the Turner Guilford Knight Correctional Center (TGK) before being transferred to Alligator Alcatraz.
“There’s no water to take a bath”
In a phone call from inside the facility, La Figura described what he called horrific conditions.
“I am Leamsy La Figura. We’ve been here at Alcatraz since Friday. There’s over 400 people here. There’s no water to take a bath, it’s been four days since I’ve taken a bath,” he said.
He claimed the food at the immigration facility is scarce and unsanitary.
“They only brought a meal once a day and it had maggots. They never take off the lights for 24 hours. The mosquitoes are as big as elephants,” La Figura said.
Detainees say rights are being violated
Other detainees echoed La Figura’s concerns, alleging violations of their basic rights.
“They’re not respecting our human rights,” one man said during the same call. “We’re human beings; we’re not dogs. We’re like rats in an experiment.”
“I don’t know their motive for doing this, if it’s a form of torture. A lot of us have our residency documents and we don’t understand why we’re here,” he added.
A third detainee, who said he is Colombian, described deteriorating mental health and lack of access to necessary medical care.
“I’m on the edge of losing my mind. I’ve gone three days without taking my medicine,” he said. “It’s impossible to sleep with this white light that’s on all day.”
He also claimed his Bible was confiscated.
“They took the Bible I had and they said here there is no right to religion. And my Bible is the one thing that keeps my faith, and now I’m losing my faith,” he said.
La Figura’s girlfriend said the couple shares a 4-year-old daughter.
Florida officials respond to inhumane conditions allegations
On Tuesday, state officials responded to the allegations made by detainees at the facility, saying they are “completely false.”
“The reporting on the conditions in the facility is completely false. The facility meets all required standards and is in good working order,” said Stephanie Hartman, director of communications for the Florida Division of Emergency Management.
FDEM was the engine behind Alligator Alcatraz, using the state’s emergency management tools and funding to build, staff and operate the detention facility.
Ohio Republicans split the Ohio Equal Rights Amendment into two separate ballot issues.
One issue addresses overturning Ohio’s same-sex marriage ban, while the other expands anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ individuals.
This move requires proponents to collect double the signatures or sue the Ohio Ballot Board.
Ohio Republicans added another hurdle for proponents of a measure to overturn Ohio’s dormant ban on same-sex marriage and expand anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ residents.
In a party-line vote, Ohio Ballot Board divided the Ohio Equal Rights Amendment into two issues: one to overturn a 2004 vote that defined marriage as between one man and one woman and another that would prohibit state and local government from discriminating against more than a dozen protected groups, including transgender Ohioans.
To make the ballot, proponents will either have to collect double the number of signatures to get both proposals approved or sue the Ohio Ballot Board to overturn its decision. Backers are eyeing the 2026 ballot at the earliest, said Lis Regula, a member of Ohio Equal Rights’ leadership committee.
During the July 9 meeting, the ballot campaign’s attorney Corey Colombo argued that the proposed constitutional amendment was one issue because it encompassed equal rights for all Ohioans.
But Republicans contended that transgender issues and marriage equality are two different things with two different levels of support from voters.
While Ohioans might support marriage between any two people in the Ohio Constitution, “they may not want to support creating 12 new protected classes under a bunch of different circumstances,” said Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a Republican who leads the Ohio Ballot Board.
Rep. Terrence Upchurch, D-Cleveland, said Republicans divided the measure because of politics. “It’s one issue. It’s cut and dry.”
“There’s definitely political will for using trans people to divide Ohioans,” Regula said. “The hopeful side of me appreciates that they are recognizing the support for same-sex marriage. That’s great. We’ve made progress. We still have progress to make.”
What is the Ohio Equal Rights Amendment?
If approved by voters, the Ohio Equal Rights Amendment would prohibit state and local government from discriminating based on: “race, color, creed or religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression regardless of sex assigned at birth, pregnancy status, genetic information, disease status, age, disability, recovery status, familial status, ancestry, national origin or military and veteran status.”
The sweeping measure would expand the list of protected individuals far beyond the national Equal Rights Amendment, which aims to prohibit discrimination based on sex. Ohio ratified that amendment in 1974, but it has not been recognized as part of the U.S. Constitution because of missed deadlines and other disputes.
The proposal would also overturn a 2004 vote that defined marriage as between one man and one woman.
This language has been dormant since a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision led by Ohioan Jim Obergefell legalized gay marriage in America. As of 2023, Ohio had 22,400 same-sex married couples, according to the most recent federal census data.
“Marriage equality has been going strong now for 10 years, and the sky hasn’t fallen. Society hasn’t collapsed,” said Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood. “What happened is you have families who have standing, whose children can feel good and talk about their families just like every other kid at school, no matter what the configuration of their family is.”
But proponents of marriage equality worry that the Obergefell decision could be overturned by an unfriendly U.S. Supreme Court. “I think it is reasonable to believe that it is under threat,” said Regula, citing the language used in the decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
What are the arguments for and against this measure?
“Those discriminatory laws make Ohio less of a welcoming place and make it a place where fewer people are interested in coming,” Regula said.
Opponents say these are losing issues at the ballot box.
“To bring such an unpopular constitutional amendment like this forward is one, shockingly appalling, but also really dumb after Sherrod Brown just lost his Senate seat over these issues,” said Aaron Baer, president of the Center for Christian Virtues.
Republicans crafted attack ads against Brown for voting against amendments that would have stripped funding from schools and colleges that allowed transgender girls to play in women’s sports.
“I have a hard time seeing them get a lot of traction with this,” Baer said. CCV was a driving force behind the 2004 constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage in Ohio.
What happens next?
The group looking to put the Ohio ERA before voters faces a tall task. If they want voters to approve both measures, they must collect an additional 1,000 valid signatures for each proposal, go before Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost for initial approval and return to the ballot board.
Then, proponents would have to collect at least 413,487 valid signatures, or 10% of votes cast in the most recent governor’s race, for each measure or 826,974 in total. Those signatures must meet a minimum threshold in half of Ohio’s 88 counties.
“While I applaud the spirit of the work that they are trying to do, I just think it’s a real uphill battle that they’re going to be faced with,” said Antonio, the state’s first and currently only openly gay lawmaker.
For more than a decade, Antonio has repeatedly introduced the Ohio Fairness Act to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The GOP-controlled Legislature has not moved forward on the fairness act.
Antonio said a legislative fix is still the right path for protections against LGBTQ discrimination.
“I struggle with asking the majority of people, the majority of the population, to grant equality by a vote to a marginalized group,” Antonio said. “I will continue to fight for the Ohio Fairness Act, because I think it’s the right thing to do.”
Reporter Laura A. Bischoff contributed to this article.
State government reporter Jessie Balmert can be reached at jbalmert@gannett.com or @jbalmert on X.
It isn’t timidity. It’s a complete reconstruction of what is acceptable rhetoric, and it makes gentler more collegial conversation and work impossible.
Whether it’s bloodshed at Glastonbury or starving people on benefits, their ‘irony poisoning’ seeps obscene ideas into the range of the possible
Illustration: Nate Kitch/The Guardian
Imagine the furore if a Guardian columnist suggested bombing, say, the Conservative party conference and the Tory stronghold of Arundel in Sussex. It would dominate public discussion for weeks. Despite protesting they were “only joking”, that person would never work in journalism again. Their editor would certainly be sacked. The police would probably come knocking. But when the Spectator columnist Rod Liddle speculates about bombing Glastonbury festival and Brighton, complaints are met with, “Calm down dear, can’t you take a joke?” The journalist keeps his job, as does his editor, the former justice secretary Michael Gove. There’s one rule for the left and another for the right.
The same applies to the recent comments on GB News by its regular guest Lewis Schaffer. He proposed that, to reduce the number of disabled people claiming benefits, he would “just starve them. I mean, that’s what people have to do, that’s what you’ve got to do to people, you just can’t give people money … What else can you do? Shoot them? I mean, I suggest that, but I think that’s maybe a bit strong.” The presenter, Patrick Christys replied, “Yeah, it’s just not allowed these days.”
You could call these jokes, if you think killing people is funny. Or you could call them thought experiments. Liddle suggested as much in his column: “I am merely hypothesising, in a slightly wistful kinda way.” This “humour” permits obscene ideas to seep into the range of the possible.
Academic researchers see the use of jokes to break taboos and reduce the thresholds of hate speech as a form of “strategic mainstreaming”. Far-right influencers use humour, irony and memes to inject ideas into public life that would otherwise be unacceptable. In doing so, they desensitise their audience and normalise extremism. A study of German Telegram channels found that far-right content presented seriously achieved limited reach, as did non-political humour. But when far-right extremism was presented humorously, it took off. (snip-MORE)
Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island gives 300th climate speech on the US Senate floor
Sheldon Whitehouse at a Senate confirmation hearing on 6 February 2025. Photograph: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images
The Democratic party and the climate movement have been “too cautious and polite” and should instead be denouncing the fossil fuel industry’s “huge denial operation”, the US senator Sheldon Whitehouse said.
“The fossil fuel industry has run the biggest and most malevolent propaganda operation the country has ever seen,” the Rhode Island Democrat said in an interview Monday with the global media collaboration Covering Climate Now. “It is defending a $700-plus billion [annual] subsidy” of not being charged for the health and environmental damages caused by burning fossil fuels. “I think the more people understand that, the more they’ll be irate [that] they’ve been lied to.” But, he added, “Democrats have not done a good job of calling that out.”
Whitehouse is among the most outspoken climate champions on Capitol Hill, and on Wednesday evening, he delivered his 300th Time to Wake Up climate speech on the floor of the Senate.
He began giving these speeches in 2012, when Barack Obama was in his first term, and has consistently criticized both political parties for their lackluster response to the climate emergency. The Obama White House, he complained, for years would not even “use the word ‘climate’ and ‘change’ in the same paragraph”.
While Whitehouse slams his fellow Democrats for timidity, he blasts Republicans for being in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry, an entity whose behavior “has been downright evil”, he said. “To deliberately ignore [the laws of physics] for short-term profits that set up people for huge, really bad impacts – if that’s not a good definition of evil, I don’t know what is.” (snip-MORE)
July 10, 1976 Ku Klux Klan (KKK) members near Georgetown, Illinois, gathered for an ill-fated cross-burning. The meeting started an hour late. When the Klansmen went to plant their cross, it was too heavy to move. Three hours later, after the cross was chopped down to a portable size, it was planted, but would not light. Finally, the Klan members gave up and went home. The ugly history of the KKK
July 10, 1985 The Rainbow Warrior then The Greenpeace flagship, Rainbow Warrior (named after a North American Indian legend), was blown up in Auckland Harbour, New Zealand, killing one and sinking the ship. The attack had been authorized by French President François Mitterand because the environmental organization had plans to protest France’s nuclear bomb tests in the South Pacific. The Rainbow Warrior today
An especially brutal incident occurred at an SF immigration courthouse Tuesday morning, as protesters attempted to block an ICE SUV that was apparently transporting an arrested immigrant, and the SUV simply plowed its way through the demonstrators.
After Monday’s ICE military-style sweep through a near-empty park in Los Angeles, we wondered this morning if this was a harbinger of things to come. It did not take long to get an answer.
The incident happened at about 11:15 am Tuesday morning at SF Immigration Court at 100 Montgomery Street, where some 20 protesters were attempting to block the transport of an apparent immigrant in custody who was thrown into a black SUV. The SUV drove through the group of protesters, and per Mission Local, federal officers also “pointed their rifles, deployed pepper spray, and shoved people to the ground.”
Warning: The video of this incident contains substantial profanity.
These events are captured in the video above from Mission Local. It begins as your typical SF protest scene, with demonstrators trying to blockade and prevent ICE agents from getting inside the building. There is much skirmishing and shouting between the ICE agents and the protesters, with agents using batons to keep the protesters at bay. Around the 1:14 mark it appears that agents do get their suspect out of the building and into the SUV, at which point, some eight to ten protesters attempt to block the SUV.
The SUV starts inching forward, slowly at first, often stopping as agents try to pull the protesters off the front of the vehicle. Once many of the protesters are off, the vehicle picks up speed. Only one protester still clings to the front of the SUV, and then it really picks up speed. The protester flies off the hood, fellow demonstrators come to aid that person, and there’s another unsuccessful attempt to block the vehicle the next block up, before it speeds away.
The SF Standard has their own video of the incident, albeit from several stories above, seemingly from a Financial District office window.
Bar Association of San Francisco immigration attorney Milli Atkinson confirmed to Mission Local that one immigrant was arrested and detained during the incident. So that is disturbing.
But most disturbingly, have you ever seen such a high percentage of law enforcement officers with their faces covered in masks, with no badges or identifying information, and mostly not wearing anything (other than their vests) that resembles a legitimate uniform? If these are all indeed sworn ICE officers, there seems to be a paramilitary push toward concealing their identities, and some strangely loose new decorum in their uniform standards under the Trump administration.
Mission Local adds that one demonstrator was pepper-sprayed at Market and Montgomery streets, though was then restrained by other agents. One demonstrator reportedly yelled at him, “Your parents were immigrants, asshole.” That site also adds that another ICE agent (or someone appearing to be one) “pointed a matte black rifle at protestors and press, including this reporter,” and that “An SFPD officer stood by and watched from a distance.”
In their own writeup of the incident, the SF Standard spoke to the protester who appears to be the person who held on to the moving SUV’s hood long enough to be jostled off. “I was bleeding everywhere,” said that person, identifying herself only as Sorin. “They were brutal to those of us trying to exercise our rights and protect our community.”
Jessie Balmert
Cincinnati Enquirer
Scottie's Playtime 