Earth Day: Environmentalism is now LOHAS

One-Environment Philippines Portal (www.one-environment.ph)

Barack Obama’s election as the 44th President of the United States has dramatically changed the discourse on the environment for the country and the world. As religious studies Prof. Ira Chenus noted in his three part article, a sitting president can set what topics are discussed, can prioritize the issues to be addressed, can choose what symbols to highlight, and can set the tone for the country. Prof. Chernus prophetically wrote a week before Obama was elected; “… the President of the United States does a lot more than make decisions about specific policies. He (or she) is an immensely powerful symbol, doing more than any other person to set the mood and tone of political life for the whole nation, as well as signaling to the whole world what the USA is really all about. Symbolism and mood-setting are a huge, though often overlooked, part of the president’s role…”

In just 100 days of office Barack Obama has radically changed the national discussion on the economy, scientific integrity, foreign policy on Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Cuba, among others, alternative energy, global warming, and climate change. Whether one agrees with his actions and policies or not, he has been inspirational to say the least.

For the environment, Obama is the welcome rain after an eight year drought.

Do remember that during the Bush years, vapid denials of climate change, an assault on scientific research and integrity, support for pollutive corporations, and environmental discrimination were the norm. Afterall, Bush and the Republicans were pro-business with their eyes closed. Further, corporations, legal and man-made creations, argued forcefully in court numerous times that they had the same rights as human beings and citizens of the United States. It is no surprise then that greed and profit-taking no matter what were virtues during the Reagan and Bush years.

For environmentalists, the years after the 1992 U.N. Conference of Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro were a steady decline in their influence and effectiveness. There was a lot of hand-wringing and introspection, best summarized in the article Death of Environmentalism.

Today, it seems we are hopeful. The economic and environmental crises have forced all of us to rethink how we do business, consume, and live our lives. It is simply more costly in terms of money, health, safety, and security to continue on a path of unsustainable energy and conspicuous consumption. In the United States, some of the biggest companies have disappeared because of a lack of foresight. Auto companies, for example, have long used their Washington connections and paid lobbyists to delay the updating of emissions standards and auto efficiency. They look pathetic these days begging for money just to survive. Agrochemical companies look like corporate bullies trying to pressure Michelle Obama to use agrochemicals in the White House organic garden she recently established.

With scientific paper after scientific paper coming out warning us of the dire effects of greenhouse gases and climate change, the climate change denialists have returned to their villages or rather caves and have wisely decided to keep quiet. Has their funding run out?

As a participant and witness to the surge of environmentalism in the 1980s and early 1990s, only to watch it wane with the rise of the go-go neoliberal years worldwide, I am amazed at the comeback of the global environmental movement. I look back at the hand wringing of the environmental activists and debate whether the analysis in Death of an Environmentalist was correct. There are differences and the following show why this time around, environmentalism is here to stay.

1. Mainstreaming of environmentalism

Environmental issues are now part of everyday language and debate. It is now neither esoteric nor the domain of specialists. Environmentalists are no longer the highly educated, snooty, and condescending experts they were perceived to be. Today, the urban gardener, the cancer survivor, the worried mother, the last of the farmers, and the fisherman are all environmentalists and rightly so. Protecting the environment and conserving our finite natural resources are a concern and responsibility of all. More people are now conversant and understand environmental issues. Public education and the mass media, of course, had important roles to play in the mainstreaming of the environment.

Take Earth Day for example. Celebrated every April 22, first held in 1970, and founded by then U.S. Senator Gaylord Nelson and Denis Hayes, and separately by peace activist John McConnell, the Earth Day Network has more than 17,000 partners and organizations in 174 countries. They estimate that over a billion people participated in Earth Day activities, possibly the largest non-religious event in the world. For 2009, Earth Day celebrations include the launch of the two-year Green Generation Campaign on carbon footprint reduction and the creation of a new green economy.

2. Rise of LOHAS

LOHAS

Affluence, access to better medical facilities and services, better nutrition, and hygiene have extended lifespans and improved quality of life indicators. Accessible information on the deleterious effects of unhealthy lifestyles such as smoking, chemical drug use, and alcohol as well as that of industrial pollution have forced individuals and communities to confront these challenges.

Today, demographic shifts are towards an increasing number of people have chosen lifestyles of health and sustainability (LOHAS). Not only is this healthy, but in many cases, cheaper and gentler on the environment. The LOHAS sector is a fast expanding market estimated at $209-400 billion.

Lastly, I am also of the view that most people, deep down, have values that are environmentally conscious and consistent with a sustainable, socially responsible, and/or healthier lifestyle.

3. Legislation and litigation have reigned in excesses

In the past 40 years, very public and decisive legal cases in numerous countries, both developing and developed, have forced legislatures to pass environmental laws. In the United States, there is the NEPA, Endangered Species, Clean Air Act, among many others. In the Philippines, which has similar a environmental regulatory framework, the EIA, air and water pollution control, mining, and wildlife laws among others have provided regulatory guidance to officials, corporations, and communities.

Civil society has been proactive and innovative in environmental actions. Governments, corporations, and civil society have been at the forefront and receiving end of legal action on environmental issues.

Thus, pollution and environmental degradation are now perpetrated by outliers. The first outliers are the very rich and powerful sectors, mostly corporations, who bribe and corrupt their way into exploiting natural resources and public goods. The second would be the very poor with limited options and access to environmental, social, and economic services and resources. For the former, their actions are illegal, criminal, and immoral and can be addressed with law enforcement. They can also be societally ostracized.  For the latter, it is addressing poverty and making them partners in development.  

4. Environmental and economic crises are pushing for a green economy.

As noted earlier, energy and fuel consumption has increased significantly worldwide. However, fossil fuels are a finite resource. With greater demand and limited supplies, fuel prices are bound to increase at worse, and fluctuate at best. Also, fossil fuels contribute to global warming with disastrous consequences. As New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said recently, it makes economic sense to invest in green technology, a green economy, and a green lifestyle.

A green economy that generates green jobs is what will start the economic recovery caused by an unregulated FIRE (finance, insurance, and real estate) economy.

FIRE economy (Figure from www.fireeconomy.com)

Obama has pledged $10-15 billion a year for the next decade to fund the green economy. This will have multiplier effects worldwide as other countries follow suit.

5. The environmental-LOHAS revolution will be digital

Information and communication technologies (ICT) and social networking media will support and expand the above four phenomena. ICT will facilitate information exchange and importantly, mobilizing and organizing for the environment- LOHAS. For those in the green economy, ICT will be important in not only branding and marketing, but in service provision. ICT will open up new opportunities and vistas for environmentalists.

Like the United States, the Philippines is in a unique position to ride this green wave. We have the demographics, a young, educated, and literate population that can harness the opportunities and technologies. We can organize and mobilize to the community level-Gawad Kalinga has shown this- to become environmental and green economy leaders.

The Philippines can leapfrog into a green economy uplifting itself from the morass of poverty, inequality, and social exclusion.

The dawn of LOHAS and the green economy has arrived.  What will you be doing?

BNPP-Bataan Nuclear Power Plant: Buy Nuclear, Poor Perish

NO to the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (from http://notobnpp.wordpress.com/resources/)

Once again, there are talks about operating the Marcos white elephant Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) with Pangasinan Rep. Mark Cojuangco filing a revised House Bill no. 4631 calling for the “rehabilitation, commissioning and commercial operation of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP)” after immediate and widespread opposition to the first draft of the bill. Rep. Cojuangco and the few pushing for nuclear power state that the country needs a cheap, reliable source of electricity before the energy shortage that is expected to occur in 2012.

Others have implied that nuclear power safety has improved in industrialized countries, including Japan as Inquirer columnist and economics professor Solita Collas-Monsod wrote recently. Therefore, the same standards can be applied to the Philippines. Third, having spent more than $2 billion dollars on initial investments and debt servicing, the BNPP should be put to good use to recoup these investments as Department of Energy Angelo Reyes was quoted earlier. These reasons are, to this writer, not enough to risk operating the BNPP. I have very, very strong reservations AGAINST nuclear power as a source of electricity.

Mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, Philippines (photo by I. Rotaru at IAEA website)

The research field of risk and society posits that the nuclear power sector is a “very tightly coupled” sector. That means that the operations are complex, require a very high degree of coordination and communication, and are very “unforgiving of error” as L.M Lidsky and M. M. Miller write in Science and Global Security. Nuclear power plants have catastrophic consequences when things go wrong. This is because of their complex, tightly coupled, and highly interactive systems of operation. Charles Perrow wrote about this in his best selling book Normal Accidents where he analyzed the Three Mile nuclear plant accident from a risk perspective.

Nuclear plants in particular require a high level of redundant safety and operating systems and procedures, highly trained operators, and up-to-date technology. It is interactive because all these need to be simply in sync with one another. Linear systems are best represented by an assembly line that is relatively loosely organized/coupled. Breakdowns are easily managed and the losses are in monetary and time parameters. Nuclear plants are complex systems and tightly coupled with varying and multiple consequences.

Coupling is a engineering concept wherein loosely coupled systems are flexible enough to address “shocks, failures, and pressure for change without destabilization”(Pickard 2005). Tightly coupled systems are more sensitive to changes and the response could be catastrophic if not handled properly. Nuclear power plants are time and sequential-dependent and leave little room for error because of the chemical reaction processes and safety procedures involved. There is little room for slack, error, and delay. Accidents and incidents occur not only in linear (cause-effect) but in complex ways (multiple causes-multiple effects and consequences over time and space). While redundant systems are possible, this is very expensive and does not fully address the human-error, human neglect, and human laziness aspects.

Assessing the risks, impacts, and costs of nuclear power has to include the nuclear fuel cycle. This includes uranium ore deposit exploration; mining of uranium ores; refining; enriching; processing and fabricating of fuel; construction of nuclear power plant; operation of reactor; re-processing of used fuel; fabricating new fuel; treatment of radioactive wastes; long-term storage of the wastes; and de-commissioning the reactor after its end-life. Emeritus professor at the University of Illinois and adjunct geology professor at the University of the Philippines Kelvin S. Rodolfo recently wrote a position paper on the risks of operating the BNPP.

Specifically for nuclear power, you will also have to create an institution similar to the church with its long lasting existence to take care of the wastes, which degrade only after thousands of years. All these have implications on cost, time, and effort, which make nuclear power generation a very expensive endeavor.

Is this the legacy we want to leave future generations?

Prof. Monsod raised the good nuclear safety record of Japan. On the contrary, Japan of recent times has had serious issues about its safety record. These are easily accessible on the Web. We found a number of serious accidents (systemic and involves multiple parts and processes of the operating system), incidents (localized accidents), including deaths and injuries. Further, Japan has entered an era of increased seismic activity as noted in Ishibashi Katsuhiko’s article.

Steam from the 2004 Mihama nuclear plant accident. Photo from Japan Focus website

Lastly, a significant number of Japan’s nuclear power plants are up for rehabilitation or decommissioning because of their age. While this presents a significant opportunity for new investments in nuclear technology in Japan, which is poor in natural resources; the investment and depreciation costs for operating a nuclear power plant for 40 years is prohibitive as it is risky. Apparently, there is no consensus in Japan on nuclear power.

One of the nuclear power boosters campaign pledges will be to maintain developed country standards in operating the BNPP. This has cost implications. In the United States, a new nuclear power plant will cost from $14 to $24 billion. The proposed Yucca Mountain radioactive waste storage has a projected cost as of August 2008 of $96.2 billion if ever the project overcomes opposition and pushes through.

Lastly, any elementary economist will state that the $2 billion (mis)spent on the BNPP is considered sunk costs. Sunk costs are unrecoverable. Only variable costs determine whether to continue investing or not in a business activity. As sunk costs, it has no bearing on whether we operate the BNPP even though we are spending PhP40 million annually to maintain it. The variable costs behoove us to decide on dismantling the BNPP and converting it to a safe and alternative energy power plant. It is NOT rational as the economists would say to consider sunk costs in deciding whether to continue a project or not.

These days of economic crisis and climate change present an opportunity for the Philippines to enter an era of sustainability. The investment cost for opening the BNPP can be better put to good use make the Philippines a global leader in alternative energy.

Re-opening the Bataan nuclear power plan is a step back to the stone age…after the mushroom cloud that can happen.

The BNPP is unBearable Nuclear Pain and Plight.

Tagging The Obama Generation (TOG)

Project Age-Population Pyramid from the New Politics Institute

“Change is the only constant;” so said Heraclitus, Isaac Asimov, Disraeli, Crosby, and many others. The only exception is from vending machines as R.C. Gallagher noted. Change, the transition from one state to something different, is no more evident than in the election of a person of color to the presidency of the world’s most powerful nation. What are the implications for his generation and for Filipinos?

First is that the United States and the whole world are in flux. While Tom Brokaw’s “Greatest Generation” was involved in a horrific war and its aftermath, Generation X dealt with issues of relevance, meaning, and identity. Today, there is a third generation, Generation Y or the Millennials; those born 1982 and after. All three generations number in the tens to hundreds of millions (worldwide) and have different ways of looking at the world, its problems and opportunities, and how to move forward. When one adds to this the diversity in terms of race and ethnicity, class, education, experience, skills, worldviews, health, and access to opportunities; the differences and tensions are quite significant. How do we communicate and relate with each other in ways that support and validate one another’s uniqueness and potentials? This was what Brokaw was probably referring to when he said something like, “With Obama’s election, we are in a post-modern era and I don’t know what post-modern means…”

Second, the U.S. and the world faces a “long-tail” of problems and challenges, which are products of change. Peace, order, and security are problematic in many areas of the world. These range from the nebulous Al Qaeda to African fratricides, secessionist movements, failed states, drug wars, piracy, human smuggling, etc. Also, after years of stalling and obfuscation, the environmental issues of climate change, deforestation, and habitat degradation have now come back to haunt us. Coupled with disasters of biblical scale in both developed and developing countries, we, the human species, will have to make difficult decisions on how we do business and conduct our own lifestyles. As Gandhi said, “Live simply, so others may simply live.”

The third serious challenge is the train wreck of the American economy that is on course to derail the world economy. Look at it as the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the 1998 Brazilian and Russian meltdown, the 2001 Argentinian crisis, Mexico in 1984 and 1994, among others, all rolled into one in the United States. Contrarian economic gurus such as Eric Janzen and Columbia professor Nouriel Roubini generally predict a two-step deflation-inflation, severe and L-type unemployment, recession, and depression era for the next few years. They’re looking at a minimum 10M unemployed in the U.S. alone in the coming months. Welcome to a world of constant economic crises. Will corporations still look and operate the same way as last month? Will they have to drastically modify their structures, practices, and outlook? Will we see mergers or a splintering to smaller, more manageable units?

We’ve discussed changing demographics and waves of crises and challenges. The flip side of this pessimistic aspect of this sea of change in the TOG era is the opportunities inherent. Obama’s landslide win proved that that there is a body out there that resonates with his vision of authentic change and progressive politics. Whether his administration will deliver on his rhetoric or not, major segments of the boomer, X, and most especially the millennial generations have been mobilized over the last 18 months on his plans for the environment, social justice, health care, peace, business reform, and human rights. It will be difficult to return the genie of “new politics” and social movements to her bottle. I expect these generations and individuals to be more proactive in extending the social energy generated to push forth their change agenda.

Because of his decisive electoral victory, Obama has set the tone and standard in two specific areas. The first is how he waged his campaign. By 2010, there will be many countries, including the Philippines, which will have national elections or political transitions. Expect politicians of every stripe from the national down to the local level and in democratic countries to study closely, adopt, and implement his strategy of movement style mobilization with a well-oiled and efficient organization. Look at more costly but more sophisticated mobilizations and campaigns in the Web 2.0/online and real worlds.

Along with electoral movements, expect to see and hear more initiatives from the following sectors: women, health, energy, environment, hunger, housing/shelter, mental health, prison, drugs, sustainability, animal rights, habitat protection, voting and campaign finance, pro-life/pro-choice, race relations, role of Church social action, LGBT, indigenous peoples, employment, social security, etc. sectors. Who will be able to best organize and mobilize the most? Which sector/movement will be able to articulate best their agenda and interest? It will be noisy as it will combative, but participation is essential if power is to be redistributed and social justice implemented.

Obviously, there are profitable solutions to today’s problems. Changing demographics indicate new needs. An aging population, many of whom are unhealthy, will require care giving, medical attention, a change in diet and lifestyle. I do not posit an increase in costs due to an aging population, as changing demographics will have to account for migration, fertility rates, and a greater push for a healthy lifestyle. The important thing to note is that there are needed services, products, and faciliteis. Aside from the government, civil society will increasingly be tasked to provide these services and products at cost and for profit.

The same goes for environmental rehabilitation. Climate change and habitat destruction are forcing us to develop new technologies, specifically renewable energy, new modes of transportation, and materials. Human society will have to fundamentally retool its resource and energy bases. The race is on for new technologies, new services, and new ways of thinking about these issues. Vision, initiative, perspective, knowledge, information, skills, and creativity will be needed. Who will be the technical, social, moral entrepreneurs of the TOG era? Green innovation is expected to be a $1,370 to $2040 BILLION sector by the years 2020 if the right policies and incentives are in place.

Solar Panels at the Vatican (from CatholicNews.com)

In the U.S. alone, the TriplePundit blog quoted a UC Berkeley study, which highlighted that for every $100 million invested in the renewable sector 2,700 new jobs are created. With Obama intending to invest $15Billion a year for the next 10 years, at least 400,000 new jobs will be created just in the renewable energy sector alone.

Electric car retrofit by ElectraDrive (Photo by ElectraDrive.com)

For developing countries, such as the Philippines, we have a golden opportunity to do three things. The first is to leapfrog into green technology and industrialization. Scientists and researchers in developing countries, hampered by lack of resources, have been creative and persistent in addressing energy and water shortages, inadequate infrastructure, and the need sewerage. The poorest of the poor or those in the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) will need and are willing to pay for these services and infrastructure if the price is right. This is a large market and coupled with the other income classes may be able to create the second important aspect of a sustainable economy: a domestic market built on green innovation. The third aspect is the tremendously profitable area of retrofitting. By retrofitting, I mean, modifying what we use today to make it greener and more efficient. Retrofitting is a good alternative if capital is scarce and expensive to access.

From EnviroFit.org\'s tricycle retrofitting project

Imagine a nascent auto sector fueled by biofuels and alternative fuels. I wrote previously of vegetable fuels and CNG powering vehicles in the Philippines. Check out the Colorado State University-EnviroFit.org’s initiative of retrofitting millions of polluting 2-stroke tricycles in the Philippines. They recently won the Rolex Award for environmental innovation, which will enable them to fund retrofitting of these tricycles at $300/unit. Other sources of funding will come from the monetization of carbon credits.

Imagine deforested mountains reforested for habitat restoration, biofuels, ecotourism, materials, and biotechnology. Imagine rehabilitated marine areas for ecotourism and sustainable fishing. Dare to use bamboo for a variety of things from clothing, to food, to bikes, skateboards, building materials, and furniture? How will developing countries transform wastes into resources? How do we make money out of hot air?

Grow Your Own Bike (from PedalPushersOnline.com)

Check out Eng Chan’s cutting edge furniture using recycled automotive engine parts.

Eng Chan's Transmission Table (engchan.multiply.com)

Metro Manila alone, a megalopolis of an estimated 20M, is in need of an infrastructure, housing, communication, transportation, and environmental quality upgrade if it is to compete in a multi-polar world of the new millennium.

There are lessons to be learned and perspectives to be gleaned from Obama’s election. Filipinos need to go beyond what neoconservative and progressive pundits have been spouting and forge a vision and roadmap for FilAm and Filipino progress.

Country First! But, whose country and who first?

The Republican National Convention (RNC) held last week did not fail to intrigue and pique the interest of Americans and the worldwide audience. They certainly did catch our attention. After the resounding debut of Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the Democratic National Convention (DNC), the RNC scuttled their first day because of Hurricane Gustav. The announcement of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as the vice-presidential nominee the Friday before carried them through though. Gov. Palin was a new and pretty face, a hockey mom, feisty, and charming. Pending further vetting of her, she is a fresh face for the Republicans beset by the chaos in Iraq and Afghanistan, the lingering tragedy of Hurricane Katrina, the housing implosion, the economic recession and accompanying “mental depression”, and the health crisis. Republicans, observed the New York Times’ columnist David Brooks, entered the RNC practically morose.

The Republicans, like the Democrats, promised change and reform. This they hope to accomplish via three primary strategies.

The first is a change of Republican and, hopefully, national leadership anchored on the man once called the “most trusted man in America” and now a “maverick,” Arizona Sen. John McCain. He will be backstopped by the charming, full of energy, and emerging symbol of the Republican woman, Gov. Sarah Palin.

The second is that, with a focus on the track record and character of both candidates, they will reform Washington and overhaul how politics is practiced.

The third is a renewed emphasis on patriotism and increased security. It is about confronting perceived American enemies anywhere in the world to ensure the country’s security from terrorism. In other words, the “war on terror” will continue.

If the objective of the RNC was to re-energize and rally its base (of supporters), this they accomplished. Sen. McCain attracts the security-conscious voter, while Gov. Palin brings to the table interest, intrigue, and an appeal to the woman vote. What we will see is a United States that will vote on the fault lines of race, gender, class, and socio-economic issues.

In deconstructing the Republican message and their policies based on the speeches over several days, the elements were similar. My comments and that of others follow below.

The focus on the biography and heroism of McCain was smart, because it detracts from the failings of the Bush administration of the last eight years. The goal was to put enough distance between him and the Bush administration. To further emphasize this gulf, they pulled a surprise in presenting a VP candidate out from literally nowhere, Wasilla, Alaska that is. It was a risky move characteristic of McCain the maverick.

After this spectacle of surprises, what comes next? Their message was that character and a track record of heroism is needed to reform Washington. I find this hard to believe, since the base of supporters and funders of the Republicans espouse policies that will ultimately and literally, fry all of us.

Rudy Giuliani’s “Drill baby drill”, his roguish laughter, and his cheerleading of the RNC participants as they repeated the chant were chilling. He, other speakers, Gov. Palin, and finally, Sen. McCain followed this up with a commitment to re-start the nuclear power program. They actually believe that the road to energy independence includes drilling for more oil and nuclear power.

I foresee global warming and a mushroom cloud.

Drilling for oil in the U.S. is full of myths and disinformation. See “Four offshore-drilling myths” by Eoin O’Carroll. Basically, there isn’t much oil left and what’s left is too deep and expensive to drill. Oil is a finite resource. In finance, oil is the equivalent to capital . You shouldn’t be using up the capital, just the interest. Where is energy and fuel conservation? Raising vehicle fuel standards? Where is government, in Thomas Friedman’s words, in reshaping the market to encourage renewable energy and alternative fuels?

The issue with nuclear power is nuclear wastes have a lifetime of thousands of years. Except for the Church, no institution has survived thousands of years to manage these nuclear wastes. Who would be reckless enough to leave to future generations the responsibility of taking care of wastes that can cause the extinction of the human species? All that for the privilege of consuming more, making the nuclear power industry rich, and avoiding conservation measures? Lastly, there are embedded risks in nuclear energy because of its complexity and life cycle (from mining to processing, use, and waste disposal) that have been expertly dissected in Charles Perrow’s classic Normal Accidents .

In a RNC dubbed “Country First” with an emphasis on veterans, McCain’s heroic war record,and patriotism, fighting was the code word. McCain himself used the word “fight” at least 25 times in his acceptance speech. Either his statements will vault him to the presidency or condemn him as the proponent of a culture of death and conflict. As he said; “Fight with me…Fight for what’s right for our country…Fight for the ideals and character of a free people…Fight for our children’s future….Fight for justice and opportunity for all…Stand up, stand up, stand up, and fight.”

Apparently, the police and authorities took his exhortation to fight literally. While there were anarchists who caused trouble, police brutality against varied protest groups were extensively documented. At least 400 were arrested for the flimsiest of reasons, journalists hurt, and scores of protesters maced and clubbed. The mainstream media hardly covered it, but the gory details can be found on-line. See Vital Source for a round up on the violence during the RNC. Photographers documented and wrote about police abuses. Journalist Amy Goodman, herself arrested and manhandled, recorded the Ramsey County Sheriff using infiltrators in the protest marches.

The last is on security and the never-ending “war on terrorism.” Despite the debacle in Iraq and Afghanistan with hundreds of thousands dead, including innocent civilians, thousands of dead and wounded American soldiers, a monthly $10 billion bill, what has the United States accomplished? Two failed states and millions of angry relatives of the dead and tortured. An American economy that is being bled dry because of military over-reach. The question still remains, who is the terrorist? If the terrorist is STATELESS, why engage in a conventional war?

This “war on terrorism” has proven profitable for those engaged in what former President Ike Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex. Only a few companies actually benefit, with the nation taking on a terrible burden. Growing the economy through endless conflicts doesn’t seem like good business sense.

Lastly, are Americans really being threatened by other nations? Iran, North Korea, Venezuela are touted as rising threats. This shows little faith in diplomacy and the American military. Did you know, the United States has 761 military bases across the planet? Really, is there a country willing to take on the vast American imperial military? If terrorism is a problem, use counter-intelligence, diplomacy, and police work. Development, not warfare, is the best strategy of “draining the swamp” of terrorism.

My observation is that all candidates have the character, integrity, and dedication to lead the nation. What separate the chaff from the grain are the policies.

Who presents a vision of the future of investments in renewable energy, education for all, affordable health care, safety nets for the poor, rebuilding of the economy, and those espousing sharing, caring, peace, and a concern for the environment? Who presents a vision of the USA as a moral leader, quoting Bill Clinton again, leveraging “…the power of our example than by the example of our power?”

The American people will be voting for their future this coming November. What kind of change will it be? Will it be one based on hope and values or one based on more of the same?

For Fil-Ams, they need to seriously reflect on who they support. Like the DNC, they were invisible. Worse the RNC was a pale affair. How can RNC hope to reform and change the course of this complex country with only one race? See Washington Post’s article on the lack of diversity in the RNC.

Many Fil-Ams or their parents fled the Philippines mainly because of the lack of economic opportunities. They need to support candidates who are sympathetic to economic migrants. Importantly, they need to support candidates who work for the reduction of income inequality, strengthening of the middle class, and engage minorities. To support candidates that DO NOT support these initiatives, Fil-Am voters only become like the politicians and caciques that they escaped from.

The future is in your hands.

Padyak

From Padyak.org

The UP Padyak Project

- a bicycling project for the University of the Philippines Diliman Campus, which aims to make a concrete contribution to the University on its Centennial celebration. Initiated by members and alumni of the UP Mountaineers in response to the imminent threat of global warming among many variants of the environmental crisis. This project aims to promote bicycling as means of transportation and lessen dependence on fossil fuel vehicles. It also aims to promote health and fitness in the campus community.

Students will be renting the bicycles at very affordable rates, which will cover rent of an easy-rider bicycle, training, access to bicycle racks and cable locks per semester.

The dry run of the project will start on April 11, 2008 (Summer 2008) through the help of volunteer bikers. Full implementation of the project is planned for June SY 2008-2009.

These brightly-painted bicycles with step-through frames are designed not for speed but for comfort, safety, visibility and function. Utility baskets will be mounted on the handlebars where students can place their belongings.

The UP Padyak Project is privately funded by the members, alumni and friends of the UP Mountaineers.