The Latest: Michael Moore returns to Flint amid water crisis
Source: Associated Press
The Latest: Michael Moore returns to Flint amid water crisis
The Associated Press
Updated 6:39 pm, Saturday, January 16, 2016
Documentary filmmaker and former Flint-area resident Michael Moore has returned to his hometown to call for President Barack Obama to come see the water crisis for himself.
Moore, surrounded on Saturday by dozens of flag-waving and sign-toting Flint residents in front of the city's municipal complex, said he must "insist" that Obama visit on Wednesday, the same day the president is scheduled to tour the North American International Auto Show in Detroit.
Moore also asked the U.S. attorney general to arrest and prosecute Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, because he "knew that toxins, pollutants, and eventually lead was leaching into the water and being sent into the taps of people's homes."
The U.S. Justice Department is helping the Environmental Protection Agency investigate events surrounding what's been declared a public health and federal emergency situation in Flint.
___
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/science/article/The-Latest-Obama-signs-emergency-order-over-6763962.php
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
KeepItReal
(7,769 posts)
haikugal
(6,476 posts)EriktheRedder
(17 posts)
EriktheRedder
(17 posts)even though they knew and did nothing??
BumRushDaShow
(128,766 posts)In general, the feds are only authorized to intervene in cases of "interstate commerce" (i.e., if something crosses a border) and/or to enforce federal law (which in this case was the apparent dispute - a particular law & rules related to it and who is responsible). Otherwise it's up to the states to handle... and in this case, the state WAS supposed to handle it. It's just like insurance - the feds have no say about insurance (car, home, life) in general - it's up to state regulators (although the ACA added some fed role related to health insurance).
One could say it's a flaw in the basic U.S. system of regulation as stated in the Constitution as a "republic" with multiple governmental entities (federal, state, local).
Of course when there is a health issue, there is always a debate of who is responsible and this is where the laws need to be updated to better clarify and provide stop-gap measures should a state refuse to comply for "political" reasons. There are sometimes triggers that involve the feds in state affairs and in this case, health emergencies which needed material proof to justify the intervention.
It's sad but our side has pushed so for dictatorial behavior when we are in charge... but guaranteed the minute this happens, we are on the road to a dystopian future during a time when the other side is in charge if such moves aren't carefully planned out. In Michigan, the fact that the state hijacked several local governments by completely neutralizing the authorities of their local elective officials and appointing new managers instead (with the result of that now coming to fruition), is a case in point of the downside of willy-nilly imposing control from higher up in the government chain.
EriktheRedder
(17 posts)The EPA can and does take direct action within a state and not because of interstate commerce, remember this...
http://www.epa.gov/goldkingmine
BumRushDaShow
(128,766 posts)I wrote -
In this case, when the emergency manager took over, there was nothing the EPA could do about that, and as time went on and the municipality changed water sources and treatment processes, then there had to be a build-up of scientific evidence to support the hazards of doing that given all the variables within the city infrastructure. And sadly by then, it was too late. It is squarely the fault of the state (having taken over that city).
And what you linked was an obvious "disaster" that was easily verifiable as to what the result would be - no different from the Duke coal ash spill, which aligns with what I wrote here -
And in the case of what you linked to (Silverton Gold Mine), the spill was caused by an EPA contractor.
But this case differs in terms of knowing of any immediate obvious impact given that there may have been treatment options to mitigate the heavy metal content that were apparently not used, etc. I.e., the feds can't just "bust in" without the scientific evidence and in this case, they were finally able to get enough of that to declare the health emergency.
The focus over the past couple decades has been "federal-state partnerships" where this sort of bad blood wouldn’t have manifested like it did in Flint. In the past decade, the GOP-controlled states have gone hog-wild with de-regulation, with multiple current (and past) GOP candidates threatening to get rid of the EPA altogether, so it's harder to get around the loons who want to eliminate their "problem" inhabitants by using these sort of "cost-saving" means to carry out that wish.
EriktheRedder
(17 posts)just saying the EPA is not doing the job they should be.
BumRushDaShow
(128,766 posts)And because of the very distinct roles between federal and state authority, many federal agencies have found themselves in the unfortunate position of always being "reactive" because of the many restrictions on being "proactive" (beyond working with states that are receptive). The state of Michigan like some other states, have not only been unresponsive, but outright hostile to any entity attempting to mitigate environmental issues - until it's too late.
What you seem to suggest is bringing in federal marshals (and to the GOP that = "jack-booted thugs"
to take over the water departments and clean up the mess... and legally, that cannot happen. But what can happen is what did happen - an emergency was declared - but only after the Governor requested one (or rather "two" - the emergency declaration and a disaster declaration, the latter which was declined because Flint's "disaster" was Snyder-made, not one by mother nature). The federal emergency allows for some funding to be allocated and for FEMA to come in and coordinate. To get more than the limited funding available, Congress would have to authorize it and in GOP quarters, they tend to be selfish and would let Snyder hang in a hot minute.
EriktheRedder
(17 posts)I realize that the EPA doesn't run water utilities, they set standards. They knew Flint water was fucked and did nothing. And not they don't need to send in federal marshals, just sound the alarm by publicly making a statement that the water utility is not in compliance with EPA standards. Is that too fucking hard? And the EPA has armed agents already if they want to enforce something...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/10/epa-spends-millions-on-military-style-weapons-repo/
BumRushDaShow
(128,766 posts)via regulation and actually having the data to show the standards were not met. And this was part of the problem - i.e., getting accurate data from the city & state in order to validate a problem.
And I'm afraid that linking to the moonie Washington Times article referencing a RW organization (the founder of the group cited is a Republican who attempted to run for Governor of IL after the Blago meltdown), does not help your argument.
This article better defines what needs to happen in situations such as this and this is the type of guidance that the EPA attempts to engage the states/municipalities with putting in place. There is no way that they have the funding to continuously monitor every water utility in the nation on their own - they rely on those state/local regulators to obtain the necessary (and unaltered) data that would be evaluated for next steps.
EriktheRedder
(17 posts)but the EPA knew and had over 200 heavily armed agents to do something. They did nothing. Somebody should have sounded the alarm, and the EPA knew and said nothing. I'm bitching about this because our federal government is not doing their job.
BumRushDaShow
(128,766 posts)We can agree to disagree but your suggestion would be perfect to start up a civil war here in the U.S. - particularly given the state of Michigan has one of the highest number of militia groups (according to the linked article) only 2nd behind Texas.
People have to understand that the federal government's "job" is very limited meaning that Democrats need to take back their states to get both the sanity and the safety back, as well as push their Congress critters to get the laws modified so that federal agencies can truly act in these types of instances. I had posted elsewhere that they should declare the city a superfund site.
But be aware that the RW talking points against the "federal government" such as what you have chosen to use are being done to absolve the state, its GOP governor, and his appointed emergency managers (and their staff) who not only made the decision to cheap-out on health and safety, but to purposely ignore every warning sign that was shown to them.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)rusty quoin
(6,133 posts)
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)That the government should not be involved in things such as regulating water quality. If you are harmed by the water, you -- the individual -- should sue the water company. My response was that this attitude shows that libertarians live in a fantasy world if they think that lawsuits brought by individuals are a swift and sure method of fixing such problems. I then gave them a quick overview of the history of tobacco lawsuits as an example of how things would work in the real world.
I also told them about the founding of the Food and Drug Administration.
When then-President Theodore Roosevelt read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, he sent a couple of men to Chicago to see if Sinclair was exaggerating about conditions in the meat packing industry. They reported that, if anything, Sinclair understated things. The Pure Food and Drug Act and the FDA followed shortly afterwards. BTW, during the Spanish-American War, TR had personal experience of seeing canned meat that was rotten in the can.
Now, the FDA is certainly not ideal, but someone has to ensure that food and drugs are at least minimally safe. I simply do not trust food or drug companies to police themselves.
raccoon
(31,109 posts)The signs and symptoms of lead poisoning in children may include:
... Developmental delay
Learning difficulties
Hearing loss
Lead poisoning symptoms in adults
Although children are primarily at risk, lead poisoning is also dangerous for adults. Signs and symptoms in adults may include:
... Declines in mental functioning
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/lead-poisoning/basics/symptoms/CON-20035487
rusty quoin
(6,133 posts)She's now a consultant. There are FDA regulations, but they are not followed to the point, in many companies, they are not compliant with those regs, and that's when she comes in, to help them become compliant.
The horror stories she tells me come down to mostly human things like laziness, bad management, and the people who make the drugs deciding certain steps are unnecessary, or even figuring they have better ways of doing things and doing them without the normal procedure of proving it, before it is approved by the FDA.
If they are not stopped now, and allowed to go on and do human nature things like, well ship this drug out, because if we don't we will lose money, it would be little comfort to me if a family member dies using the bad drug, but hey I can find comfort in suing.
I'm typing this stuff to you and thinking, you know this. It's common sense. But when I hear libertarians talk, I think of babies who know nothing of the world. They give these WTF arguments and I wonder if they were just dropped off on earth with no experience. A libertarian paradise would end up becoming a complete fuck up in which it will be decided government regulations are needed, with a lot of time waiting for these babies to realize it.
I use the tobacco industry too as an argument . The CEOs lied, each one of them, before Congress. Also there are other examples: Pinochet's Chile, Brownback's Kansas, and Somalia.
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)First, an ego so massive that the thought of giving a damn about others is utterly alien to you. Second, complete disinterest in how the real world works. This includes ignorance of history, economics and politics.
What is the libertarian paradise? Somalia. It has no nasty government regulations, because, to all intents and purposes, it has not government. What more could libertarians ask for?
I know, libertarians will claim that Somalia has nothing to do with libertarianism, and linking the two is a sore point with libertarians. They claim that it isn't true libertarianism, it's anarchy. True libertarians believe in just enough government to protect private property and personal safety; without those protections, they argue, anarchy ensues. The problem is that they cannot point to even one current or historical example of a government that functions as they imagine it should. They have no real world examples, so they ply their arguments as a theoretical construct.
Every example of places with little centralized government is dismissed by libertarians as an anarchistic situation, not a "true" libertarianism. It's the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, Ron Paul edition. The situation in Afghanistan is blamed on 30 years of war and tribal anarchy, rather than the lack of a central government. Somalia is blamed again on war, on American intervention, Russian intervention, and again on tribal anarchy. Historical examples of feudalism arising in the absence of a centralized state, or dark ages arising after civilization collapses, are dismissed as either irrelevant or invalid because of war and anarchy. The fact that corruption and the Mafia are more prevalent in southern Italy where tax collection and central government are weaker than in the North, is again dismissed as a cultural or anarchistic issue. It's always the same. Libertarianism is an infallible theory of the way things should be, just as Marxism is seen by its adherents. Wherever it fails, it does so because the people weren't ready for it, or there was too much violence to allow it to work, or because the government wasn't powerful enough to protect people from harm.
Libertarians fail to realize that there has never been -- and never will be -- a government that functions according to their principles because it runs entirely contrary to human nature. As any libertarian understands when it comes to authoritarians, power tends to corrupt; and absolute power corrupts absolutely. When you decentralize and remove the modern state, leaving only essentially a glorified police force in charge to protect private property and personal safety, one of two things happens: 1) The central police force turns into a right-wing military dictatorship invested in stamping out all leftist thinking, then appropriating the country's wealth for themselves and their friends (for example, Chile under Pinochet) or 2) All central authority and protection break down completely as power localizes into the hands of local criminals and feudal/tribal warlords with little compunction about abusing and terrorizing the local population (feudal France, Afghanistan, Somalia, western Pakistan, etc.)
The devolution of local authority and taxation into the hands of criminal groups willing to provide a safety net in exchange for their cut of the action is the inevitable result of the breakdown of the government-backed safety net. The people will want a safety net; they'll either get it from an accountable governmental authority, or from a non-governmental authority of shadowy legality. Both kinds of authority will levy their own form of taxation, be it legal and official, or part of an illegal protection scheme. In its own way, the "No True Libertarianism" argument is very similar to the "No True Communism" of the far left, who argue that the fault of Communism lies not with the idea, but with the practice -- despite the fact that no successful large-scale Communism has ever been implemented in the world. Neither ideology can fail its adherents. They can only be failed by imperfect practitioners. Both ideologies run counter to human nature for the same reason: power abhors a vacuum. The people with the money and guns will always abuse the people who don't have the money and guns, unless there are multiple levels of checks, balances, and legal and economic protections to ensure the existence of a middle-class with a stake in maintaining a stable society. The modern state didn't arise by accident or conspiracy; it evolved as a means of avoiding the failures of other models. Libertarianism is a philosophical game played by those without real-world experience of localized, non-state-actor tyranny, or enough awareness of history to understand the immaturity of their political worldview. It is based, like Marxism, on fantasy and rejection of the real world.
In fact, what libertarians really yearn for is oligarchy, plutocracy, corporatism, rule by warlords or some combination thereof. They are either to blind to see it or too dishonest to admit it.
rusty quoin
(6,133 posts)I simply called them babies. You articulated my thoughts. What you said should be a thread onto itself rather than just a response.
They also say the reason we came out of the Great Depression was because of WWII, and nothing to do with FDRs policies. That's a good one. War is good for the economy. I don't need to explain that one, nor does Britain post WWII. Of course Libertarians surely have their not of this world explanation for it.
If you do decide to do your own thread about what we've discussed, you could add the part about liking war. After all, the Iraq adventure was so good for the regular guy, I mean the regular Military-Industrial Complex guys.
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)What to produce during WWII. That there was a war going on cut no ice with him; apparently, he would rather lose the war than compromise his principles. He also claimed that companies with government contracts lost money, which demonstrated his ignorance of history -- profits for the companies were built in to government contracts, just as they are today. He specifically said that being forced to build trucks and other military vehicles by the government put Studebaker out of business, which ignores the fact that Studebaker's financial woes didn't arise until the mid-1950s, well after the war. But why should mere facts bother an ideologue?
And yes, it took Britain well over a decade to recover economically from WWII.
rusty quoin
(6,133 posts)what they would be willing to sell to the government. I never heard that one before. And gov contracts lose money? We produce weapons and other countries produce refrigerators. I think Halliburton should give back their profits as a gesture of how little they made off Iraq...here..take this back, we were doing great before the war.
I have to admire the right wing powerful people on how they were able to create 1-2 generations of people who think like this. They've always had the money to study and put into action the programs which worked so well, but good show guys. I wish we had thought long term like them.
The John Birchers were essentially were no longer welcome by conservatives because they were nuts. But post 20 years, we got Reagan, and now we have Trump.
A good friend of mine, during the 2004 election said he thought his views were mostly libertarian.
We were in complete agreement on most things since the late 70s. I don't know when the switch happened, but his guy I knew went to the dark side. He was a great father, always inclusive of people, never a bully..was the nicest friend I had.
I moved and things changed between us. I know I didn't change. I think the same way I did in the late 70s. Maybe he listened to Rush which is a form of brainwashing.
rusty quoin
(6,133 posts)
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
navarth
(5,927 posts)scottie55
(1,400 posts)Move along.
Nothing to see here.
Shiny something over there (media scrambles).
Michael, do a movie on what they knew and when, and then the last hour showing disabled victims.
Showcase RightWingism.
raccoon
(31,109 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,766 posts)One on January 8th and one that relates to the OP!
Regarding the first one (with his "please share" recommendation) -
Dear Governor Snyder:
Thanks to you, sir, and the premeditated actions of your administrators, you have effectively poisoned, not just some, but apparently ALL of the children in my hometown of Flint, Michigan.
And for that, you have to go to jail.
To poison all the children in an historic American city is no small feat. Even international terrorist organizations haven't figured out yet how to do something on a magnitude like this.
But you did. Your staff and others knew that the water in the Flint River was poison -- but you decided that taking over the city and "cutting costs" to "balance the budget" was more important than the people's health (not to mention their democratic rights to elect their own leaders). So you cut off the clean, fresh glacial lake water of Lake Huron that the citizens of Flint (including myself) had been drinking for decades and, instead, made them drink water from the industrial cesspool we call the Flint River -- a body of "water" where toxins from a dozen General Motors and DuPont factories have been dumped for over a hundred years. And then you decided to put a chemical in this water to "clean" it -- which only ended up stripping the lead off of Flint's aging water pipes, placing that lead in the water and sending it straight into people's taps. Your callous -- and reckless (btw, "reckless" doesn't get you a pass; a reckless driver who kills a child, still goes to jail) -- decision to do this has now, as revealed by the city's top medical facility, caused "irreversible brain damage" in Flint's children, not to mention other bodily damage to all of Flint's adults. Here's how bad it is: Even GM won't let the auto parts they use in building cars touch the Flint water because that water "corrodes" them (link). This is a company that won't even fix an ignition switch after they've discovered it's already killed dozens of people. THAT's how bad the situation is. Even GM thinks you're the devil.
Maybe you don't understand the science behind this. Lead, in water -- now, bear with me, this involves a science lesson and you belong to the anti-science party, the one that believes there's not a climate problem and that Adam and Eve rode on dinosaurs 6,000 years ago. Lead is toxic to the human body. There's no way to fully eliminate it once it's in your system, and children are the most damaged by it.
By taking away the city's clean drinking water in order to "cut costs," and then switching the city's water supply to Flint River water, you have allowed massively unsafe levels of pollutants and lead into the water that travels in to everyone's home. Every Flint resident is trapped by this environmental nightmare which you, Governor, have created.
Like any real criminal, when you were confronted with the truth (by the EPA and other leading water experts across America), you denied what you did. Even worse, you decided to mock your accusers and their findings. As I said, I know you don't like to believe in a lot of science (after all, you used to run Gateway Computers, and that, really, is all anyone needs to know about you), but this time the science has caught up with you -- and this time, I hope, it's going to convict you.
The facts are all there, Mr. Snyder. Every agency involved in this scheme reported directly to you. The children of Flint didn't have a choice as to whether or not they were going to get to drink clean water. But soon it will be your turn to not have that choice about which water you'll be drinking. Because by this time next year, if there is an ounce of justice left in this land, the water you'll be drinking will be served to you from a tap inside Jackson Prison.
I am calling upon my fellow Michiganders -- and seekers of justice everywhere -- to petition U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, asking her to arrest you for corruption and assault (i.e., the physical assault you committed against the children of Flint when you knowingly poisoned them).
Yesterday, the federal prosecutor in Flint, after many of us had called for months for this action, finally opened up an investigation into the matter (link). Now we need your arrest, prosecution and conviction.
And who will be cheering on that day when you are fitted with a bright orange jumpsuit? The poor and minority communities of Michigan who've endured your dictatorial firing of their mayors and school boards so you could place your business friends in charge of their mostly-black cities. They know you never would have done this to a wealthy white suburb.
I welcome all to look at the appalling facts of this case, which have been reported brilliantly here, here, and especially here by the great Rachel Maddow. Thank you, Rachel, for caring so deeply when the rest of the national television media didn't.
I'm asking everyone who agrees with me to sign on to this petition and call for your arrest, Governor Snyder. You are not allowed to run amok in my hometown like you have done. The children whom you have poisoned have to endure a life of pain and lower IQ's from your actions. You have destroyed a generation of children -- and for that, you must pay.
It is time for you to go to prison. Out of mercy, I'll ask that you have in your cell your own personal Gateway computer.
Sincerely,
Michael Moore
Flint native
Michigan resident and voter
P.S. For everyone wanting to sign on to this petition calling for the IMMEDIATE resignation of Governor Snyder AND for the FBI to arrest him, please sign the petition petition here: http://michaelmoore.com/ArrestGovSnyder
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Perp walk governor Snyder who would exchange lead poisoning of all Flint's children for $15 million dollars.
Homer Wells
(1,576 posts)scottie55
(1,400 posts)Poisoning poor children is one of a Republican's favorite things to do.
Can anyone name one single Republican that has complained about Snyder's actions?
I haven't hear any.
chapdrum
(930 posts)to the consortium of Owners who evidently are using Flint as a sacrifice zone, and carefully noting the results for future reference.
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed