B and B

Conservative Supreme Court justices go "activist" against another discrimination law

The five conservative Supreme Court justices have gone all "activist" in undermining the clear intent of another discrimination law.  The previous example was in 2007 with gender discrimination -- a ruling that was remedied by the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.  This time, in a recent decision, it is with age discrimination.

Employment lawyer Ellen Simon describes what these justices have done in this post at Today's Workplace.  Their argument is rather legalistic, but the intent of the decision is clear -- to make it harder to bring those who discriminate to justice.  Hopefully Congress will remedy this bad decision soon.

Lost Maples State Natural Area is growing

From the San Antonio Express-News today:

For centuries, people have been drawn to the twisting limestone canyons that make up Lost Maples State Natural Area.

Lou Waters was one. Now 70, he can hop across white boulders to explore the grottos like a 10-year-old.

On Friday, he plans to sign paperwork to transfer more than 600 acres of his neighboring ranch to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to be added to Lost Maples. Another 100 acres will be transferred this fall.

Agency staff said the public should have access to trails on the new addition — which is a third of the park's current size — by 2012.

State appraisers valued the land at more than $2 million, but Waters is selling it for $1.5 million because he wants to see the land and its Can Creek watershed protected forever.

Land acquisition funds from the Parks and Wildlife Department and a $400,000 federal conservation grant will pay for it.

“You see it and you just want to take care of it,” Waters said.

In a memo explaining the sale, Waters said walking through the Can Creek canyons in the fall under the native big-tooth maples was like “hiking in a golden-red cathedral.”

His wife, Wanda Waters, said, “It just makes you feel so good that other people are going to be able to enjoy it.”

Lost Maples is about two hour drive west of here and a spectacular park as it is.  Excellent news that it will soon be about 30% larger.

Texas Parks and Wildlife offered land next to two state parks. Will they take it?

From the Hill Country Planning Association:

The Hill Country Planning Association asks that you please consider sending two e-mail letters (samples provided (below) to support Tx Parks & Wildlife Commission purchasing 732 acres adjacent to Lost Maples and accepting 3000 acres adjacent to Government Canyon.  My understanding is that the state needs to hear public support, or the default position would be to decline these opportunities to meet budget cuts.  With sufficient support, they have a good chance of being passed.   Thanks 

****************************************************************************

Land Purchase - Bandera County:  Lost Maples State Park
In a meeting on May 27, 2009, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission (the Commission) will consider the purchase of approximately 732 acres of land adjacent to Lost Maples State Park in Bandera County. At this meeting the public will have an opportunity to comment on the proposed transaction before the Commission takes action. The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. at the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Headquarters, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744. Prior to the meeting, public comment may be submitted to Ted Hollingsworth, Land Conservation, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744 or by email at:  ted.hollingsworth@tpwd.state.tx.us  or through the TPWD web site at www.tpwd.state.tx.us .

Dear Mr. Hollingsworth: 

I will not be able to attend the May 27, 2009 meeting described below.  I wish to submit my opinion for public comment.  I strongly support purchase of land adjacent to Lost Maples State Park in Bandera County.  Lost Maples is a popular destination and is at risk of having its natural resources decline through overuse.  Purchasing an additional 732 acres of land adjacent to Lost Maples will help protect more of this invaluable and rapidly vanishing habitat.

 

Sincerely,

(name and address)

****************************************************************************
Acceptance of Land Donation - Bexar County:  Government Canyon State Park

In a meeting on Ma7 27, 2009, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission (the Commission) will consider accepting a donation of approximately 3,000 acres adjacent to Government Canyon State Park in Bexar County.  At this meeting the public will have an opportunity to comment on the proposed transaction before the Commission takes action.  The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. at the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Headquarters, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744.  Prior to the meeting, public comment may be submitted to Ted Hollingsworth, Land Conservation, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744 or by email at:  ted.hollingsworth@tpwd.state.tx.us  or through the TPWD web site at www.tpwd.state.tx.us .

Dear Mr. Hollingsworth:

I will not be able to attend the May 27, 2009 meeting described below.  I wish to submit my opinion for public comment.  I strongly support TP&W Commission accepting donation of 3000 acres adjacent to Government Canyon State Park in Bexar County.  Government Canyon State Park is a wonderful asset that the public is just starting to utilize.   With such close proximity to San Antonio, it is expected the park will be heavily utilized.  The City of San Antonio Parks and Natural Areas are already over-utilized and crowded.  Accepting donation of additional land adjacent to Government Canyon will help protect more of this invaluable and rapidly vanishing habitat.

 

Sincerely,

(name and address)

Misleading headline of the day

New York Times headline today:

By Slim Margin, Senate Advances Stimulus Bill

A more accurate description:

Senate Advances Stimulus Bill 61 to 36

"Slim-margin" is of course referring to the Senate rules that allow any 40 Senators to block legislation.  But anywhere else a 61 to 36 margin would be considered decisive -- even perhaps a "landslide".

After 15 years, Congress returns to the job of protecting our public lands

I wasn't able to pay it much attention at the time due to all the excitement surrounding Obama's inauguration and the major concern over our economic downturn, but about ten days ago, the Senate passed a measure that purports to protect large areas of federal lands in numerous states. 

According to at least one news article (from ENN), it provides "the largest expansion of the National Wilderness Preservation System in 15 years."  The one 15 years ago must be the California Desert Protection Act, passed in October 1994 as one of the last acts of the Democratic-controlled Congress.  The Gingrich/DeLay GOP, and their antipathy to the very concept of land that belongs to everyone in the country, took over Congress a few weeks later.

Virtually ever since then, we've had to play defense in public lands protection, including numerous fights over preventing the Bush administration and the Republican-controlled Congress from selling off our lands to developers and other special interests.  It is nice to be on the offensive again.

Ledbetter Fair Pay Act passes Senate

Excellent news.  From The Hill:

The Senate on Thursday flexed its bolstered Democratic majority and passed an equal pay measure that Republicans blocked last year. The bill could be the first measure signed into law by President Obama.

Senators voted 61-36 for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, after a day of beating back eight GOP amendments by decisive margins.

“We have now overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan bill to correct an injustice that has been prevailing,” said Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), who led the floor debate on the bill.

All four female GOP senators crossed over to support the Democratic measure: Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas; Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine; and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) also approved the legislation.

Every voting Democrat backed the bill.

A New Era begins

Our shiny new train is departing. Where shall we take it?

Yesterday, Congress took a large step towards helping enforce fair pay for women

The Lilly Ledbetter Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act both passed the House resoundingly on Friday.  Unfortunately, the vast, vast majority of Republicans remain adamantly opposed to recognizing the problems with workplace discrimination that these bills are meant to address. 

Also, I've noticed a misleading representation of the Ledbetter Act being passed around, either by lazy journalists (NPR) or by conservative propagandists (CEI).  These people suggest that this act is meant to extend or abolish the status of limitations on filing discrimination lawsuits.  This is completely false.

For an accurate, short description of the Act, see this AP article by Jim Abrams from yesterday:

The Lilly Ledbetter Act would reverse a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that a worker must file claims of wage discrimination within 180 days of the first decision to pay that worker less, even if the person was unaware of the pay disparity.

The 180-day limit, for better or worse, is untouched by the Ledbetter Act.  But it will apply to the time since the issuance of the last discriminatory paycheck, as it had in legal interpretation for decades -- until 2007.

Later in the AP article, Rep. Rob Andrews of New Jersey concisely summarizes the impact of that Supreme Court Ruling and the situation that the Ledbetter Act is meant to rectify:

"It should not become the law of the land that if you are an employer and can hide discrimination for 180 days you can get away with it."

For more on these bills, which now await action in the Senate, see the National Committee on Pay Equity.

New Congress will quickly take up the Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act

One of the first acts to be taken up by the new Congress should be the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act.  Hopefully this time, thanks to the GOP's numerous defeats in the recent elections, it won't be filibustered to death by the Senate Republicans.

From the NY Times on Monday:

President-elect Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress are planning swift action to overturn a Supreme Court decision that made it much harder for people to challenge discrimination in employment, education, housing and other fields.

...

The decision, involving a woman named Lilly M. Ledbetter, who had accused her employer of sex-based pay discrimination, was issued in May 2007. Since then, courts around the country have gone far beyond the facts of that case and cited it as a reason for rejecting lawsuits claiming discrimination based on race, sex, age and disability.In some cases, after initially ruling for employees, judges have reversed themselves and ruled in favor of employers. The judges said they had to switch because of the Supreme Court decision.

Another 5K

It's been a few years, but I finally broke 24 minutes in a 5K race, finishing in 23:59 in a (hilly!) race on November 8.  In this post from February 2005, I suggested I would be running another race in "a month or so".  It turned out to be 45 months.  Once again, I aim to run another one in "a month or so", but now I need a new goal.

For those who prefer longer distances, the inaugural San Antonio Rock 'N Roll Marathon (and half-marathon) is tomorrow.  Good luck to everyone participating.

President-elect Barack Obama

It's been just over two days now since this interminable election season finally came to an end in virtually the best possible way.  I'm not sure the results have fully sunk in yet. 

Even so, with the economy going off the deep end, the next few months are likely not going to be fun for most of us who have worked so hard for this over so many years -- since the Gingrich/DeLay Republicans took over Congress in the 1994 mid-terms.  Thankfully we will finally have sane and competent leadership in the executive branch and in Congress. 

I plan to write more than I have the last few months.  The election may be over, but a lot of work needs to be done.  And now hopefully we can make forward progress instead of perpetually trying to save ourselves from falling into bigger and bigger holes.

This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change.
-- Barack Obama, Chicago, November 4, 2008

Lilly Ledbetter to address Dem convention on equal pay for women

More details from the convention website:

“We are honored that Lilly Ledbetter will address the Democratic Convention,” said Senator Barack Obama. “The fact that women are paid less than their male coworkers for doing the same job is unacceptable in the 21st century and counter to both the progress we've made and our shared values as Americans. Lilly Ledbetter's case before the Supreme Court has once again awakened the nation to this discrimination, and it's time we join together to right this wrong and pay women equal pay for equal work."

“The theme of Tuesday night’s program is Renewing America’s Promise, and there is no more critical promise that we can keep to American women than to ensure pay equity,” said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Permanent Chair of the 2008 Convention. “There is a clear difference between the parties when it comes to pay equity, and this election could not be more critical when it comes to garnering support for reversing the Supreme Court’s recent 5-4 decision in the Ledbetter v. Goodyear case.  As American women are called upon to do more and more for their families with less and less resources coming in, the least we can do is to ensure pay equity.”

Apparently she'll be speaking at around 8pm Central time.

Recently in "democratic" Georgia, its president "quashed" protests and "violently" shut opposition media

The sudden war in the Caucuses involving Russia and Georgia is quite disturbing.  It's inspired me to do a bit of reading on the recent history that led to this battle.  From this reading, it is clear that the tensions between Russian and Georgia over South Ossetia and Abkhazia have been building for quite a while.  What also seems clear to me is that these tensions have absolutely nothing to do with the interests of the American people, and so we, as a country, should stay far clear of this dispute. 

I don't see any obvious good guy in this fight based on what I know now, and the downside of major intervention is a war with Russia, which, needless to say given the huge nuclear arsenals on either side, would be very very very bad.  Where is the comparable upside?

For the Bush administration (and its annointed successor John McCain) to have encouraged Georgia in its quest for NATO membership seems extraordinarily foolhardy and I'm glad German chancellor Angela Merkel was able to put a halt to that earlier this year. 

I'd like to point out a few facts of recent history that I've discovered from my reading -- found through that obscure tool "Google News" -- facts that suggest that a lot of the rhetoric we see flying around about Georgia's allegedly "democratic" government is way overblown.

From the New York Times last November, less than nine months ago (emphasis added):

TBILISI, Georgia, Nov. 15 — Educated in America, fluent in four languages and in the values of free-market democracies, Mikheil Saakashvili was supposed to have been different. When he was elected president of Georgia after a bloodless revolution in 2003, he was deemed a savior for the post-Soviet landscape, as if he had been conjured by a committee of Washington think tanks and European human rights groups.

Yet this week, with Georgia under a state of emergency after his government quashed a large demonstration and violently shut an opposition television station, Mr. Saakashvili seemed, even in the eyes of some steadfast supporters, to be ruling with the willfulness of the very autocrats that he once so disdained. Was his true temperament showing, or had the burdens and realities of office somehow changed him?

After shutting down the opposition media, Saakashvili called for quick elections, in which he won a narrow majority.  Does an election under these circumstances deserve to be called "democratic"? 

From the International Herald-Tribune in January of this year, shortly after the elections:

"The president [Saaskashvili] has not behaved like a mature democrat, and many feel that he bought votes with promises and benefits," Swedish observer Birgitta Ohlsson was quoted by the newspaper Dagens Nyheter as saying. "We regard this with anxiety."

The head of the observer mission, Hastings, said the election revealed problems that must be addressed urgently. "The future holds immense challenges," he said.

The observers' report cited violations on election day, including cases of multiple voting. The most damning section was on the vote count, which they said was very slow in most polling stations they visited and basic procedures were often not followed.

Express-News exposes developer tricks to evade tree preservation law

From front page of the Sunday Express-News:

When the City Council approved San Antonio’s first tree-preservation ordinance in 1997, there was no question the rules applied to real estate developers.

But what happens when a property owner claims he’s not a developer, and hundreds of acres of trees are bulldozed on his land as part of a ranching operation?

In the case of Hugo Gutierrez Jr., the answer is: nothing. The tree ordinance didn’t apply to him — and it might not apply to developers who try the same thing.

The case highlights a potential loophole in the preservation standards that can be used by other real estate developers, many of whom criticize the city’s rules as excessive and expensive.

Environmentalists complain San Antonio’s tree canopy is rapidly disappearing. They said Gutierrez’s case illustrates a way around the city tree ordinance, which requires developers to save trees and pay mitigation costs.

As if the state legislature hasn't hobbled local communities enough with the vast loopholes that fit under "vested rights."  Read on for the gory details, and plenty of them.

The response today, from Mayor Phil Hardberger:

"My suggestion of what we'll do, and I intend to talk to our City Council about it, is that we create, by ordinance, a provision that when an agricultural property is cleared of trees, and then sold to a developer, then that becomes a taxable event. So that you have to pay the mitigation damages. Because it's no longer being used for agricultural land."

Hardberger acknowledged his proposal will be challenged in court by the real estate community.

"It's certainly possible it will be challenged," the mayor said. "I would anticipate it would be challenged because it's a pretty sweet deal now."

Hardberger said he will also ask Bexar County legislators to write a bill that would amend Texas law to help the city's cause.

"I doubt when the Legislature was trying to protect agricultural land, I doubt if they envisioned that (ranchers will) clear all the trees and sell it to a developer. That probably was not envisioned. I think there will be legislators who will be willing to close that loophole."

Hardberger said he will also direct lobbyists who represent the city to support such legislation.

"One thing I'm not going to do is just to sit here for the last year of office and watch trees be cleared on a grand scale and feel like there's nothing we can do but wring our hands," Hardberger said. "I'm not going to do that. I'm going to take action."

Will the Legislature block any attempts to rein in the bad practices of real estate developers yet again?

Ledbetter Fair Pay Act still in limbo

While we were traveling last week, we missed this news of a rally in support of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.  From Womenstake:

As the rally commenced, one by one the Congresswomen spoke to the crowd and explained why the passage of this Act is integral to closing the wage gap and guaranteeing pay equity. Following Senator Hillary Clinton’s address, Lilly Ledbetter shared her own story and gave a face to the unfortunate reality of pay discrimination. As the rally came to a close, the Congresswomen urged the crowd to contact their Senators and demand that they support this Act and demonstrate their commitment to equality.

Kay Steiger at RH Reality Check has more:

"My struggle today is about timing," Letbetter [sic] said when it was her turn to speak, "at least, on the surface." Women who lack the power to contest pay discrimination in court -- and many do because they discover their pay discrimination long after the legal six-month filing period has expired -- end up earning less over a lifetime. As Ledbetter noted, to this day it affects her pension and social security payments. "The only bill that would fix the problem created by the court is the Paycheck Fairness Act," Ledbetter said.