Thursday, August 31, 2006

Towards a carbon-free CA ;)

So California is passing a law to put tighter restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions. The reason being that “We’d all like to see California one day be carbon free." according to Mr. Núñez, a Los Angeles Democrat. hmmm...


Blogger Qian said...

And in other California news, Caltech Physicists Successfully Split The Bill.

I hate to link to the Onion in every other post like I own stock in the damned thing, but this reminded me of our Clam floor outings too much. :)

9/05/2006 11:02:00 AM  
Blogger Eric said...

Those CA politicans are hard at work made a resolution...

California Assembly Bill HR 36 Relative to Pluto's planetary status (text via SpaceRef)

INTRODUCED BY Assembly Members Richman and Canciamilla (Coauthors: Assembly Members Aghazarian, Bass, Benoit, Berg, Bermudez, Blakeslee, Bogh, Calderon, Chan, Chavez, Cogdill, Cohn, Coto, Daucher, DeVore, Emmerson, Frommer, Garcia, Goldberg, Haynes, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton, Houston, Huff, Karnette, Keene, Koretz, La Malfa, Laird, Leno, Lieber, Liu, Matthews, Maze, Mountjoy, Mullin, Nakanishi, Nation, Negrete McLeod, Niello, Parra, Plescia, Ridley-Thomas, Sharon Runner, Ruskin, Salinas, Strickland, Tran, Walters, Wolk, Wyland, and Yee)

AUGUST 24, 2006

Relative to Pluto's planetary status.


WHEREAS, Recent astronomical discoveries, including Pluto's oblong orbit and the sighting of a slightly larger Kuiper Belt object, have led astronomers to question the planetary status of Pluto; and

WHEREAS, The mean-spirited International Astronomical Union decided on August 24, 2006, to disrespect Pluto by stripping Pluto of its planetary status and reclassifying it as a lowly dwarf planet; and

WHEREAS, Pluto was discovered in 1930 by an American, Clyde Tombaugh, at the Lowell Observatory in Arizona, and this discovery resulted in millions of Californians being taught that Pluto was the ninth planet in the solar system; and

WHEREAS, Pluto, named after the Roman God of the underworld and affectionately sharing the name of California's most famous animated dog, has a special connection to California history and culture; and

WHEREAS, Downgrading Pluto's status will cause psychological harm to some Californians who question their place in the universe and worry about the instability of universal constants; and

WHEREAS, The deletion of Pluto as a planet renders millions of text books, museum displays, and children's refrigerator art projects obsolete, and represents a substantial unfunded mandate that must be paid by dwindling Proposition 98 education funds, thereby harming California's children and widening its budget deficits; and

WHEREAS, The deletion of Pluto as a planet is a hasty, ill-considered scientific heresy similar to questioning the Copernican theory, drawing maps of a round world, and proving the existence of the time and space continuum; and

WHEREAS, The downgrading of Pluto reduces the number of planets available for legislative leaders to hide redistricting legislation and other inconvenient political reform measures; and

WHEREAS, The California Legislature, in the closing days of the 2005-06 session, has been considering few matters important to the future of California, and the status of Pluto takes precedence and is worthy of this body's immediate attention; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Assembly of the State of California, That the Assembly hereby condemns the International Astronomical Union's decision to strip Pluto of its planetary status for its tremendous impact on the people of California and the state's long term fiscal health; and be it further

Resolved, That the Assembly Clerk shall send a copy of the resolution to the International Astronomical Union and to any Californian who, believing that his or her legislator is addressing the problems that threaten the future of the Golden State, requests a copy of the resolution.

9/07/2006 05:01:00 AM  
Blogger Vincent said...

T-shirts!... especially this one.

9/08/2006 12:29:00 AM  
Blogger Mwal said...

One of the physicists in the Onion article picture is actually Paul Martin. His main claim to fame is that he was once a Prime Minister of some country or another.

9/08/2006 04:00:00 AM  
Blogger Vincent said...

Your comment crams an incredible amount of insight into that last sentence, mwal. :-)

9/09/2006 01:09:00 AM  
Blogger Mwal said...

Of course, I learned that from an email list I'm on... There's no way I would recognize Paul Martin on my own.

9/13/2006 04:56:00 PM  
Blogger Justin said...

Does Canada really count as a separate country? I thought it was going to be the 51st state one of these days :-)

Oh well, at least it's more independent than Great Britain :-P

9/14/2006 05:52:00 PM  
Blogger Vincent said...

Canada's still independent, but Harper is learning Bush/Rovian media techniques.

On a tangential topic, are you in ID-01 or ID-02, Justin? I've probably asked you before, but I can't remember what your answer was.

9/15/2006 12:25:00 AM  
Blogger Justin said...

I'm in MI at the moment. I'd have to look at my voter registration card to know which district I'm in, though. Are you thinking House or Senate?

9/15/2006 12:07:00 PM  
Blogger Vincent said...

House. I was wondering what the word on the street in Idaho is regarding Larry Grant.

9/16/2006 12:24:00 AM  
Blogger Justin said...

While Grant has a shot at the seat, I'm hard-pressed to believe that Sali is going anywhere but up after a bruising primary. I wouldn't put money on the race being close when the republican party decides that it has to, eventually, close ranks and support their candidate, despite the warts.

I'm also not sure that it's in the democrat's best interest to pick up a lot of seats in conservative districts (assuming it's in their best interest to win back the House). Whoever Idaho elects is going to vote conservatively-- a D-ID that joins the republicans periodically tends to increase the perception that the dems lack party loyalty, and plays up the republican's solidarity. That sort of thing is not exactly conducive to party building, since it constantly cuts the knees out from under the party leadership.

9/19/2006 03:32:00 AM  
Blogger Vincent said...

Yes, it would take a real Republican revolt against the candidate and/or leadership to elect a Democrat in ID-01. But with MT-Sen looking like a Dem pickup and WY-AL more competitive than one would have thought, it seems that there's something in the water in the upper mountain West.

I disagree with your second point. A phase change occurs at D +15 seats in the House, when majority status changes. Since the majority party sets the agenda (both in the House as a whole and in committees), many divisive votes would be avoided altogether. And even if the House stays in GOP hands, they've developed a really tin ear for what roll call votes to politicize. (Remember the minimum wage vote, which was a minimum wage cut in disguise for tipped wage earners and was bundled with a massive cut in the estate tax? Republicans at the time gloated about "outfoxing" Democrats on the vote, but that's not how it played in the sphere of public opinion.)

9/20/2006 11:57:00 PM  
Blogger Justin said...

Unless the magical Democratic voter fairy appears throughout the nation in November, there is no possible way that the Dems get to the D + 15 tipping point. Not a chance.

Given that the House is going to be close and the Senate is probably still going to be Republican, it's not obvious that getting a few Western dems helps as much as it hurts. Yes, the majority has some room to control the agenda, but the dems aren't going to control both houses, so that power is somewhat limited. Yes, there will be a few wing-nut votes that can be avoided, but that's going to cause the Republicans to focus on wedge issues that can separate Western democrats from the more liberal members of the party, particularly when doing so generates left-wing tantrums. Watch how quickly the environment gets to be a hot button issue, since Western dems will vote with the Republicans most of the time driving left-wing dems absolutely nutty, ensuring that every TV talking head can warmup the old chestnut of the disjointed, undisciplined Democrats. Given that nothing interesting ever passes in the last 2 years of a President's second term, do you really want to go into a wide-open '08 sharing blame for Congress's problems with little leverage to actually fix them?

9/24/2006 11:45:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home