At Capital and Main of California, Gary Gohn writes—How Big Oil Spiked Jerry Brown’s Climate Change Agenda:

As Governor Jerry Brown touted California’s environmental initiatives and prodded world leaders in Paris to embrace tougher environmental policies during the United Nations summit on climate change, it was instructive to look back at how one of Brown’s top environmental priorities suffered a major defeat in the California Legislature this year. That priority was to establish a 50 percent reduction in petroleum usage in cars and trucks by 2030. Brown’s failure to win its passage in an overwhelmingly Democratic Legislature clearly illustrates not only the influence of the fossil fuel lobby, but also the continued rise of a new breed of Democrats who are exceedingly attentive to big business, while tone-deaf toward their party’s traditional progressive base. Petroleum reduction was a key part of a proposed law, introduced as Senate Bill 350, which also called for steps to increase energy efficiency in existing buildings and require that 50 percent of California’s energy come from renewable sources, such as solar and wind. By any definition SB 350 was a landmark piece of legislation. It had the rock-solid support of environmentalists, numerous health and physicians groups, and two Nobel Prize winners. In hindsight, however, it probably didn’t stand a chance, thanks to an intense, summer-long lobbying campaign and media blitz by Big Oil and others. State filings show that oil companies and their trade organizations opposed to the petroleum reduction measure spent $10.7 million in the third quarter of 2015 to lobby lawmakers and conduct a negative media assault. Of that, the Western States Petroleum Association, an influential industry trade group, spent $6.7 million, more than twice as much as it had spent in the previous two quarters. Individual oil companies, such as ExxonMobil and Valero, also spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in the third quarter, a significant increase over the amounts they spent on lobbying earlier this year. In contrast, among the bill’s supporters, NextGen Climate, an environmental group founded and headed by philanthropist Tom Steyer, spent nearly $1.2 million on lobbying in the third quarter. [...]

At Bleeding Heartland of Iowa, desmoines dem writes—Following up on the Iowa Utilities Board and funding for two energy research centers:

In the spirit of the Russian proverb "Trust, but verify," I checked last week to see whether funding the Iowa Utilities Board promised before Thanksgiving to release had reached energy centers housed at Iowa’s state universities. Good news: the Iowa Energy Center at Iowa State University and the Center for Global and Regional Environmental Research at the University of Iowa have both received all of the remittances the IUB collected on their behalf from gas and electric utilities. The centers do not appear to have in hand all of the interest payments to which they are entitled under Iowa Code, but IUB spokesperson Don Tormey assured me the agency "will forward the additional interest funds" to the energy centers, if any more interest accrues. Strange news: the IUB chose an unusual way to send this year’s funding to the energy centers, and I don’t fully understand why. I’ve enclosed what I learned below, along with details on the money sent to the Iowa Energy Center and the Center for Global and Regional Environmental Research so far, and what may yet be owed to them. Like most Iowans, I knew nothing about the IUB’s role as a middleman in funding the energy research centers until board chair Geri Huser decided to use the money as leverage to obtain more detailed financial reporting from the Iowa Energy Center in Ames. Ryan Foley broke this story for the Associated Press and followed up here and here. Bleeding Heartland included additional background and supporting documents in posts analyzing Huser’s power play and subsequent retreat. [...]

At Rural and Progressive of Georgia, Katherine Helms Cummings writes—Ted Nugent thinks I ought to be shot:

NRA board member Ted Nugent thinks I ought to be shot because I am a liberal, no, make that Liberal. Being a Liberal seems to be his only criteria. That’s right- Ted Nugent is now calling for law abiding Americans to be shot between the eyes like a rabid dog if they are Liberals. It sure does raise some hard questions. What if you’re kind of liberal about the environment but not so liberal on tax breaks for the middle class? If you might be leaning towards Liberal, would cutting an arm off be enough to get your thinking right, or would it have to be an all or nothing policy? Gee, before you know it, people would be afraid to question authority or speak out about anything for fear of being shot. To clarify his thoughts, Nugent told Alex Jones, host of The Alex Jones Show on Infowars, “America, you got to cleanse this country.” “Cleansing,” when referring to entire groups of people, is a scary scary idea.

At Cottonmouth of Mississippi, Brannon writes—At least we're not 50th...

In case you needed more proof of the failure of the Bryant-Reeves administration, WTVA reported today that 24/7 Wall St. ranked Mississippi as the 48th best run state in the country: To determine how well each state is managed, 24/7 Wall St. says it looked at key financial ratios and social and economic outcomes through information collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, The Pew Research Center, The National Association of State Budget Officers, the FBI, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and more. According to 24/7 Wall St.'s research, Mississippi has the ninth highest unemployment rate at 5.9 percent, the lowest median household income at $39,680 and the highest poverty rate at 21.5 percent. It also says the population shrank from 2010 to 2014 as the state's workforce shrank by 5.4 percent. This is not particularly shocking to anyone who has followed Mississippi's economic trajectory over the past few years. Nor will it be shocking when the legislature reconvenes next year and continues to push through policies that exacerbate all of these issues. In these inconsistent times, we can always count on our Republican leaders to keep the ship's wheel steady, no matter how close that iceberg gets.

At Louisiana Voice, tomaswell writes—More than $45,000 in campaign cash is funneled through Executive Director by Louisiana State Troopers Association:

LouisianaVoice has learned that The Louisiana State Troopers Association (LSTA) has funneled more than $45,000 in political campaign contributions through LSTA Executive Director David T. Young since 2003 without the knowledge of the organization’s rank and file membership. Much of that amount ($23,750) was given to Bobby Jindal ($10,250) and to three of the four major candidates for governor in the 2015 election ($13,500). This follows the LSTA’s endorsement of Governor-elect John Bel Edwards in his runoff election against U.S. Sen. David Vitter which also was done without consulting or polling LSTA membership. Following revelations by LouisianaVoice, the LSTA board has taken action to ensure that no future candidates will be endorsed by the organization without first polling its membership. The board also declined to forward a letter to Edwards asking that State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson be reappointed for another four-year term. Edmonson denied that he asked for the letter but LSTA Interim President Stephen LaFargue twice confirmed that Edmonson did make the request. It was LaFargue who made the motion at the board’s November 30 meeting to not send the letter. The 11-member board voted unanimously to not send it. The LSTA, according to information contained on its website, is “a fraternal organization representing the men and women of the Louisiana State Police” and represents approximately 97 percent of the commissioned officers “as well as a substantial portion of State Police Retirees.” […]

At Appalachian Voices, Ridge Graham writes—NC DEQ’s Blatant Bid For Control—State agency clashes with the EPA and Coal Ash Management Commission:

Over the past few months, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality has seemed determined to have complete environmental regulatory control of the state, showing little regard for federal or public input. In this endeavor, DEQ has taken every chance it can to highlight how external forces, including citizens groups and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are simply getting in its way. Upholding the best interests of North Carolina’s citizens and the environment only becomes a priority when the agency is threatened with losing power. Rejecting the Clean Power Plan DEQ joined a lawsuit with more than two dozen of the nation’s largest carbon-emitting states against the EPA’s Clean Power Plan. In October, DEQ submitted a proposal that would only address coal-based emissions because it believes the first component of the Clean Power Plan — improving coal fired power plant efficiency — is the only aspect the EPA has the legal authority to regulate under the Clean Air Act. But if the Clean Power Plan survives in court, and the EPA rejects North Carolina’s plan, federal regulators can intervene in North Carolina’s emission reductions process. So, in case their strategy fails, state officials plan to submit an alternate plan that aligns with the EPA’s proposal. [...]

At BlueNC, James writes—We need Dems to file in Congressional districts 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 11:

If you are anyone you know would consider putting their hat into the ring in anyone of these districts, now's the time to get on the stick. You can file and run without having to file reports with the FEC if you declare you won't spend more than $5000. A group of us will help to raise money for filing fees. Please consider running. We need to contest every seat, every time. And no one steps up, I'm going to have to do it, and I already have one false-start under my belt for this year. "Dibs on 11," he said, posting from his condo at Emerald Isle. [...]

At The Prairie Blog of North Dakota, Jim Fuglie writes—A Resting Place of Reverence as the North Dakota Sky Grows Dark:

Lillian had set the newspaper beside my coffee cup on the dining room table while I was at the Y the other morning. A big headline reading “Cemetery lighting project may seek $400,000” was circled and she had written across it in big black letters: “This is a bad idea.” She was right. The story said local boosters were requesting to put up 40 light poles with 93 lights all the way around the inside of the North Dakota Veterans Cemetery, lighting it up like the Dakota Speedway, a few miles up the road. Here’s a link to the story. The story read like it was pretty much a done deal, but Adjutant General David Sprynczynatyk, who’s been around government a long, long time, was astute enough to know that he better have some kind of a public meeting to at least give the appearance of seeking public input before authorizing such a dramatic change to one of our state’s most revered places. So last night, at the Raymond J. Bohn Armory, headquarters for the North Dakota National Guard, which oversees the operation of the cemetery, 40 or so people showed up to express their feelings about the project to General Sprynczynatyk, the man who will make the decision on whether to proceed with the project “within a few days,” according to one of his staff. Except that the General wasn’t there to hear them. He missed the meeting. [...]

At the Dakota Free Press, C.A. Heidelberger writes—Daugaard Medicaid Expansion Returns Federal Share of Budget to Rounds-Era Average:

Governor Daugaard is asking the Legislature to approve $373,644,565 in additional spending authority for the federal funds that would accompany Medicaid expansion, if the feds approve the Governor’s Medicaid-IHS swap. Without that budget item, the federal funding in the Governor’s FY2017 proposal would actually decrease by $8.85 million from FY2016. As it stands, Governor Daugaard relies on federal funding for 42.09% of his FY2017 budget. He had been showing some hint of weaning South Dakota back to self-reliance: after the Rounds-era stimulus peak of $1.723 billion in FY2010, federal funds had dropped to $1.348 billion in FY2015. That’s a decline from 46.52% of the budget to 34.99%. But Daugaard put 23.68% more federal dollars in the current budget and 21.88% more federal funds in the proposal for next year’s budget. As more than three quarters of the total FY2017 budget increase, $373 million to expand Medicaid looks like an enormous increase in South Dakota’s reliance on Uncle Sam. But that 42.08% federal share of the FY2017 budget is just a touch higher than the 41.72% average federal share of the eight budgets of his predecessor, Governor Mike Rounds. Santema may be nervous about how much money the state is relying on Uncle Sam for. Counting on the federal government for a quarter, a dime, a nickel, and a couple pennies out of every dollar in the state budget isn’t terribly self-reliant or Republican… but it’s pretty normal—and dare I say vital?—for South Dakota. [...]

At Bluestem Prairie of Minnesota, Sally Jo Sorensen writes—Gruenhagen pimps PragerU YouTube featuring guy who thrives off the fossil fuel industry:

Having taken the lede in City Pages' article, Meet the Minnesota Legislature's Top 5 Climate Change Deniers, but not actually having made the top five list of carbon-captured Minnesota House members, insurance salesman and state representative Glenn Gruenhagen, R-Glencoe, doubled down today. In a press release sent to his general email list Wednesday, Gruenhagen states: If you listen to our friends on the left, they may have lead you to believe that wind and solar energy are viable energy sources to provide the base-load power needed to power homes and businesses throughout the world. I wanted to share with you a video that explains why that's just not realistic at this point in time with current wind and solar technologies. Wind and solar simply can't produce enough energy to power our state efficiently, and a dramatic shift toward wind and solar with current technology would mean a more expensive and less reliable energy grid. [...] [Then there is a link.] That link leads to a PragerU YouTube featuring the Center For Industrial Progress head and fossil fuel darling Alex Epstein as totally reliable proof that dirty hippies touting clean energy only want to oppress poor energy consumers. What Gruenhagen doesn't provide is any context. He does want to know what people think, however, so we'll take him up on that.

At Texas Sharon’s Blue Daze, TxSharon writes—Irving Earthquakes Spawn New Irving Impact Community Group​:

From an Irving resident: