---

Green Chemistry Alliance sounds warning on eco-activist pressure on regulators

Posted by Michael Heenan   on Aug. 24, 2010, 11:12 am

California's Green Chemistry Initiative is a bold move.  The state is on its way to implementing the most comprehensive and complex system of chemical management anywhere.  Regulators at the Department of Toxic Substance Control are right now finalizing the rules that will determine whether the green chemistry movement in California delivers enhanced consumer safety, innovation and new investment; or whether it is an extravagant and expensive failure.

It's critical that regulators get this right.  If they succumb to pressure from activists -- who would ban even the chemicals we're made of, given the chance -- consumers will see no improvement in safety.  What they will see instead is another body blow to an already reeling state economy, further strain on a $20 billion budget deficit and the exodus of still more jobs and innovators.

Dawn Koepke of the Green Chemistry Alliance sums it up neatly in a recent Sacramento Bee oped.  The piece is getting wide circulation, as it seems to speak to concerns many Californians are feeling. 

Read Ms. Koepke's piece here:  http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/21/2972951/activists-demands-threaten-to.html

Tags: dtsc, Environment, green chemistry, green chemistry alliance, koepke

0 comments  »Post your comment  »Permalink

---

Drivers Licenses for Illegal aliens

Posted by windy   on Aug. 17, 2010, 1:48 pm

How can I find out who voted for or against legislation that allows illegal aliens to get drivers licenses in the state of Washington?

0 comments  »Post your comment  »Permalink

---

Re: Reponse to Governor's Op-Ed in LA Times 8/10/10 - Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Misses Opportunity to Repair His Legacy and California's Budget

Posted by jvillela   on Aug. 10, 2010, 5:09 pm

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s job approval rating at the beginning of last year was 40%, but by December 2009 it dropped to a record low of only 27%. Furthermore, at the beginning  of this year 74% of Californians believe that our state is headed in the wrong direction. Governor Schwarzenegger faced this public sentiment as he entered his last year in office. As a candidate, he ran as an “outsider” and successful business man that “knew how to manage a budget.” And, at one point, he enjoyed a 65% approval rating.

Running a business is much different than governing one of the largest economies in the world. If Governor Schwarzenegger had been hired in 2003 as the CEO of a company, based on his current record it is fair to speculate that the Board of Directors would have fired him a long time ago. Since his election, California has faced a deficit. In fairness to Governor Schwarzenegger, California’s structural deficit was not created by his policies but is rooted in an outdated tax system, an initiative process that has limited the general fund, and a budget process that allows the minority party to hold the budget hostage. However, the Governor’s disastrous fiscal policies have contributed vastly to the deterioration of California’s economy. For instance, one of the first policies enacted by Governor Schwarzenegger was the rescission of the Vehicle License Fee (VLF), an annual tax on ownership of motor vehicles. Estimates have suggested that this action has cost the state $14 billion from the fiscal years 2003-04 through 2008-09. While the Governor does not admit that this was a mistake, recent actions speak louder than words. Last year, the Governor proposed an increase of .5% to the Vehicle License Fee.

In 2009, California faced more than a $60 billion deficit, and this year’s deficit is projected to be $20 billion. The Governor’s approach has lacked vision and is rooted in the same conservative view that favors deep cuts to public services as the only way to balance the budget. The Governor has encountered various opportunities to live up to his rhetoric as a reformist. Alas, he has decided to constantly propose myopic solutions that have dismantled the state’s safety net. The Governor has been constant in his vision, which includes elimination of public programs that provide services to lawfully residing immigrants such as the Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants, California Food Assistance Program, and Medi-Cal for legal immigrants. These programs were created under the Wilson Administration as a response to the Welfare Reform Act, which affected lawfully residing immigrants. In addition, the Governor throughout his tenure has sought to reduce funding for: In-Home Supportive Services that help seniors and disabled persons who need help to live independently; CalWORKs, which provides cash grants to about 1.3 million low-income families to assist them in becoming self sufficient; and Healthy Families Program, which provides low cost health coverage to about 1 million children.

Thus far, under the leadership of Governor Schwarzenegger it has become more difficult for students to attend college. Undergraduate tuition has increased for the CSU system from $1,427 in 2001-02 to $4,026 in 2009-10. Similarly, undergraduate fees for the UC system have doubled and graduate student fees have increased 145% since 2001. Furthermore, the cost of living continues to climb, but families who receive assistance from CalWORKs will no longer receive a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA). CalWORKs grants have also been reduced, and for the first time in the history of the program grants to children will be reduced if their parent(s) do not comply with the federal work requirements. Most of these cases are children who are U.S citizens but whose parents are undocumented. This will take effect in 2011. Medi-Cal patients have seen their ‘optional’ benefits disappear and shared cost increase. Lastly, although an immigrant himself, the Governor eliminated funding for the Naturalization Service Program, which helps community based organizations assist eligible legal immigrants to naturalize. Governor Schwarzenegger, these are your achievements.

Governor Schwarzenegger has missed an opportunity to amend his legacy and repair the current structural state’s deficit. He could have started by proposing a budget for all, in which the pain is truly shared across class sectors, including the elimination of tax loop holes and giveaways to big corporations; one that is compassionate and does not pose a threat to California’s future. However, the proposed budget released by the Governor this year is not only shortsighted but continues to target vulnerable communities.

0 comments  »Post your comment  »Permalink

---

The strange case of Dr. Hayes

Posted by Michael Heenan   on July 29, 2010, 10:43 am

Scratch the surface of any public affairs standoff and you'll find one side complaining that the other is backed by academic "experts" who are the opposite of the objective sources they claim to be.  It has become a matter of course that any decent campaign must include some effort to get your messages into the hands of a few PhDs.

It has also become standard practice to try to illustrate how biased your opponent's academic allies are.  You'll often hear complaints that the professor in question is bought and paid for, or an activist in academic attire, or just plain nuts.

But trying to explain this to wider audiences is usually a hopeless task. Most of the time, the strained cries about bias or nuttiness falls on deaf ears.  Even when you're dealing with a professor who has twisted logic and facts into hideous shapes, the cachet of his or her title often carries the day.

One PR battle underway today is going to provide an interesting test of this pattern.  The makers of a pesticide in common use for decades has been hounded by a vocal detractor from UC Berkeley, Dr. Tyrone Hayes.  I'll leave the details of the scientific argument to more capable hands, but the upshot is the agriculture lobby says the stuff is safe and Dr. Hayes says it isn't -- a perfectly normal situation.

Except this situation isn't so normal.  It seems that Dr. Hayes has ways of communicating his thoughts on the subject that are, um, unusual.  The pesticide's maker, Syngenta, has gone public with excerpts of emails Dr. Hayes has sent over the years to staff at the company. The excerpts suggest messages that are a bizarre cocktail of taunting and attempts at hard-core rap.  I'm not including any passages here, but you can see some on the Center For Global Food Issues' site: www.cgfi.org/2010/07/the-strange-case-of-dr-tyrone-hayes/

Will Hayes' emails make any ripples in a summer already featuring Mel Gibson's phone messages and Shirley Sherrod's edited speech video?  The public affairs question is whether Syngenta and its agribusiness allies can capitalize on this to discredit a key opponent.  If they think the revelations themselves are enough to do this for them, they're underestimating the public's capacity for overlooking weirdness.

Tags: food safety, Tyrone Hayes, UC Berekeley

0 comments  »Post your comment  »Permalink

---

The danger of too-rapid response

Posted by Michael Heenan   on July 23, 2010, 9:08 am

Communications strategists love to talk about "rapid response" as a way to quell unpleasant news and get their clients back in control of the message and debate. But we've seen this week that there is such a thing as a too-rapid response. 

Regardless of which political filter you apply to the Shirley Sherrod story, it seems clear that White House staff enjoyed a brief moment of believing they had applied the art of rapid response to great success.  As we all know now, that response was based on incomplete information and made a bad situation far, far worse.

Here's Ben Smith on Politico discussing an alleged celebration as the story was still unfolding: www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0710/In_meeting_Messina_praised_Sherrod_handling.html

It's quite against the fashion in communications circles, but each year I become a bigger believer in the tactic of taking a deep breath and giving the ground a moment to stop shaking before plunging into action.  There are times when you can't afford do this, but not as many as your consultant will lead you to believe.

After all, your communications team is getting paid to communicate... waiting and seeing might be the right move, but that doesn't look as good on an invoice.

In the face of a looming crisis, everything suggest the need for action.  Get out there with your message.  Hold a press conference.  Issue a statement.  Fire somebody. Fight back fast. But when these tactics are employed with incomplete information, it's like fighting in the dark. There's a good chance most of the damage you inflict will be on yourself.

Tags: crisis communications, obama, shirley sherrod, strategic communications

0 comments  »Post your comment  »Permalink

---

«Read older entries