Monday, October 24, 2022

Cop 27: Uganda-Tanzania oil pipeline sparks climate row

  • Published

    Image caption,
    A sign in Chongoleani warns against trespassing on land set aside for the oil pipeline project

    Uganda and Tanzania are set to begin work on a massive crude oil pipeline a year after the International Energy Agency warned that the world risked not meeting its climate goals if new fossil fuel projects were not stopped. The two East African countries say their priority is economic development.

    Short presentational grey line

    Juma Hamisi, not his real name, keeps his distance, careful not to trespass, as he points to mounds of rubble spread across an open field. They are signs that a thriving community once lived here in a mix of concrete and grass-thatched mud houses.

    At this time of year, the surrounding fertile land would normally be covered with a variety of sprouting crops - enough to feed the village, along with a surplus to sell at local markets. But it too lies bare.

    "We used to be the source of cassava and lemons, now there's scarcity. We can't even harvest the coconuts you see over there because it's not our land any more," Mr Hamisi says.

    Several signs bearing the name Tanzania Petroleum Development Cooperation, a state agency, now claim ownership of the area where villagers once lived, farmed and played.

    Some of the inhabitants of the Chongoleani peninsula, some 18km (11 miles) north of Tanzania's port city of Tanga, sold their land for compensation two years ago, after the government signed a deal to construct a pipeline to transport crude oil from the shores of Lake Albert in western Uganda.

    Eighty percent of the 1,440km- (895 mile) pipeline, whose construction will begin in a few months, will be in Tanzania including a terminal-storage facility in Chongoleani.

    French energy giant Total Energies and Chinese energy firm CNOOC International also have a stake in the $5bn (£4bn) venture.

    Because of the waxy nature of Lake Albert's crude oil, it will be transported through a heated pipeline - the longest in the world. But only a third of the reserves of 6.5 billion barrels, first discovered in 2006, is deemed commercially viable.

    Despite the projected economic benefits, the timing of the project has divided opinion in Uganda and beyond.

    1px transparent line

    In September, the European Union waded into the controversy surrounding the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (Eacop), and called for it to be halted, citing human rights abuses and concern for the environment and the climate.

    The intervention was dismissed by the Ugandan and Tanzanian governments which see the pipeline as vital to turbo-charge their economies.

    "They are insufferable, so shallow, so egocentric, so wrong," Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni said of the EU lawmakers.

    His frustration is shared by some advocates of Africa's economic development who argue that the continent has the right to use its fossil fuel riches to develop, just like rich nations have done for hundreds of years.

    They point out that Africa has only emitted 3% of climate-warming gases compared to 17% from EU countries.

    Crucially, 92% of Uganda's energy already comes from renewable sources. In Tanzania, it is about 84%. Whereas for the EU it is 22%, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency.

    "It's hypocrisy," Elison Karuhanga, a member of Uganda's chamber of mines and petroleum, says of the EU's comments about the pipeline.

    "Unlike wealthy nations which will remain wealthy even when their oil and gas revenue is removed, we cannot afford to gamble the future of Ugandan generations on hypotheticals," Mr Karuhanga says.

    The first oil is expected to be tapped in three years with at least 230,000 barrels pumped out every day at its peak - projected to earn Uganda between $1.5bn-$3.5bn a year, 30-75% of its annual tax revenue. Tanzania will reportedly get at least $12 a barrel, close to $1bn a year.

    IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES
    Image caption,
    Protests denouncing the EU's stance on Eacop have been held in Uganda

    Despite the estimated windfall, campaign group Stop Eacop says the pipeline will produce 34 million tonnes of harmful carbon emissions each year. It passes near Murchison Falls National Park, an area rich in biodiversity, as well as farmlands.

    TotalEnergies, which has a 62% stake in Eacop, told the BBC that the project will have "one of the company's lowest carbon dioxide emission levels".

    "The pipeline route was designed to minimise its impact on the landscape and biodiversity" and "will significantly improve living conditions locally," the French oil giant said.

    However, Ugandan climate activist Brian says Eacop would only turn Uganda into a "petrol station" for Europe and China and says the windfall from the project will only benefit the country's elite. We are not giving Brian's full name for security reasons.

    IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES
    Image caption,
    Other Ugandans have called for the pipeline to be stopped

    Despite threats of arrest and harassment faced by Eacop opponents, Brian continues to campaign for the country to switch to green energy as it committed to by signing the Paris Climate agreement in 2015 - the global plan to prevent temperatures rising beyond 1.5C compared to pre-industrial levels.

    "You only use the oil and gas that's already developed. The moment you start developing new ones today, and tomorrow, and a month later and years from now, you're delaying the process of transition, and that will cause a tipping-point for the climate," Brian says.

    Tony Tiyou, the head of the company Renewables in Africa, disagrees with green energy purists.

    "I may be a renewable advocate, but I'm also a practical guy," he says.

    "I know we're still going to need some fossil fuel because at the moment people need power in Africa and if they don't have power, it will be a little bit difficult to lift people out of poverty," Mr Tiyou says.

    "Solar and wind could be intermittent. You don't have solar at night, for example, and wind doesn't always blow when you need it. But people talk about an energy mix - a combination of different sources."

    We have asked for comment from the Tanzania and Uganda governments.

    1px transparent line
    1px transparent line

    But despite the urgency for energy transition as set out in the Paris agreement, global investments in fossil fuels still outpace those in renewables.

    "Part of the reason is the fact that you need to look at who's going to benefit from the project, because you can't really export renewable at this stage, you most of the time, use it locally. You can export oil, and guess who's going to benefit from that?" Mr Tiyou says, referring to Western countries.

    It's a point that Faten Agaad, senior adviser on Climate Diplomacy and Geopolitics for the African Climate Foundation, agrees with.

    "African countries are not receiving financing required for the green transition. That's why we see countries turning to fossil fuels as a way to generate incomes. I mean as we speak, the financing of fossil fuels is three times higher than for green energy, that's $30bn to $9bn for renewables."

    She also accuses the EU of hypocrisy.

    Although Eacop plans to construct a refinery in Uganda for domestic consumption, its crude oil will mainly be for export, especially for Europe as a result of the ripple-effects of the war in Ukraine.

    While Uganda hopes to benefit from its oil well into the future, this may not prove to be the case.

    "What we're seeing is that Europe is working towards a transition, and in fact, not just in Europe. Even in Asia. China is currently the largest in terms of solar capacity, we also see other large economies like Indonesia also transitioning. So the risk for African countries is in 20, 30, 40 years they'll find themselves with assets that are not a good return on investment," Ms Aggad says.

    How to balance economic development as well as fight climate change will dominate discussions at next month's Cop 27 conference in Egypt.

    Activists from developing countries have been putting pressure on rich nations to honour their commitment at Cop 26 last year for urgent funding for climate adaptation and mitigation projects, as well as to compensate them for the loss and damage that they have wrought on the planet while building their own economies.

    Image caption,
    Some Chongoleani residents used their compensation to build new houses which remain unfinished

    Back in Chongoleani, several unfinished concrete houses dot an area near where villagers who sold their land were relocated. They complain that the compensation given was not enough. Some are said to have invested their money in new businesses which have since failed.

    Others said they had taken up fishing after farming became untenable.

    Meanwhile, newcomers from other parts of the country continue to arrive in the area hoping to benefit from the project.

    Mr Hamisi, like many in the community, hopes that the oil pipeline project will help replace his lost farming income, and bring prosperity to the village.

    Additional reporting by the BBC's Aboubakar Famau in Tanzania

    OUR BURNING PLANET

    CLIMATE CRISIS

    ‘Drill, baby, drill; gas, baby, gas’: African energy ministers solidify pro-fossil fuel position ahead of COP27


    From left: Ghana's Minister of Resources and Energy, Matthew Opoku Prempeh, Equatorial Guinea Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons Gabriel Mbaga Obiang, Executive Chairman of the African Energy Chamber Lima NJ Ayuk, Senegal Minister of Petroleum and Energies Sophie Gladima, founder and CEO of Egypt Oil & Gas Mohamed Fouad and Minister of Petroleum of Niger Mahamane Sani Mahamadou. (Photo: Ethan van Diemen)

    By Ethan van Diemen
    23 Oct 2022 

    At the closing event of Africa Energy Week, NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the African Energy Chamber summarised the positions of the four African energy ministers ahead of UN climate negotiations: ‘Drill, baby, drill; gas, baby, gas.’ His sentiments were echoed by a number of other African energy ministers during the conference.

    “From Cape to Cairo: A Common African Voice for COP27” was its title. It was the closing event of African Energy Week, held in Cape Town between 18 and 21 October 2022 just a few weeks before climate negotiations are to be held in Sharm El Sheikh in Egypt. One by one, ministers of energy and petroleum resources explicitly – and sometimes humorously – shared NJ Ayuk’s sentiments.

    Ayuk was joined on stage by Gabriel Mbaga Obiang Lima, Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons in Equatorial Guinea; Sophie Gladima, Senegal’s Minister of Petroleum and Energies, Mahamane Sani Mahamadou, Minister of Petroleum of Niger and Matthew Opoku Prempeh, the Ghanaian Minister for Energy. On the schedule but missing was their South African counterpart, Gwede Mantashe, as well as his Nambian and Nigerian counterparts.

    Together, this grouping of African ministers sought to answer questions such as: how can an African Just Transition be compatible with a global energy transition?; What does a victory in Egypt look like for Africa?; Will Africa be able to speak with one voice at COP27?

    Assuming the various ministers represent Africa’s voice and based on their statements, the answer to the final question is a resounding yes.



    Ahead of the discussion, Tarek El Molla, the Egyptian Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources, shared some prerecorded remarks via video link.

    In a speech entirely devoid of any mention of Africa’s rich renewable resource endowment, El Molla said “We are a few weeks away from COP27 that Egypt is hosting on behalf of the African continent, carrying and expressing the voices of the African countries. Although the African continent is not responsible for the climate change crisis, it is facing its most negative impacts.

    He continued that “This year, COP27 represents an opportunity to articulate Africa’s priorities for reducing emissions … transformative adaptation, accessing appropriate funding, and addressing climate repercussions. We certainly cannot ignore the fact that oil and gas resources still represent an essential source of energy globally, and will remain part of the global energy mix over the long term.

    “Our goal is to provide oil and gas sources in ways that are more responsible, environmentally friendly and with reduced impacts on the climate, including through CCUS [carbon capture use and storage], methane emissions reduction and carbon circular economy … as environmental concerns are now more prominent than ever, it is crucial to highlight the global role in providing the access to funding for gas projects, deployment of technologies and capacity building that are becoming increasingly necessary to provide these oil and gas resources in ways that are more responsible with reduced impacts on the climate.”

    The Egyptian minister continued that “I’m very optimistic about the Egyptian and African collaborative efforts to develop an initiative for energy access and a just transition in Africa. The African initiative will consider optimum monetisation of the continent’s energy resources – especially natural gas – to support the economic growth and sustainable development of African nations to fulfil the aspirations and welfare of the local societies.”



    His countryman Mohamed Fouad, Founder and CEO of Egypt Oil & Gas, moderated the panel discussion and sought to set out the context.

    “The reality as I frame today’s panel, is that my intention is to create the platform of the blueprint of success. Africa’s historical and current carbon emissions share is below 3% of global emissions and the burden of climate change on economies and livelihoods across the entire continent is disproportionately high.

    “A complete climate injustice,” said Fouad.

    “Africa’s high vulnerability to climate change and a low readiness for its impact is threatening to derail development goals and impose further economic costs and social disruption. True climate justice suggests that Africa is owed 10 times as much as the global climate finance that it received in the recent years… The principle of a just energy transition in Africa must consider past emissions and how these [have] shaped emissions trajectories. Africa contributed little to the buildup of historical emissions and share and therefore should not be denied ‘carbon space’ to develop its economies.”

    Professor Mark New, Pro-Vice Chancellor for Climate Change and Director of the African Climate and Development Initiative at the University of Cape Town told Our Burning Planet that the “carbon space” is “not available; it is pie in the sky.”

    He explained that any “carbon space” for Africa will “push emissions above the cap needed for 1.5 or 2°C of global warming, leading to extra warming, which will then hit African countries hardest, as these are the most vulnerable. It is a case of turkeys voting for Christmas.”

    Thresholds of 1.5°C and 2°C define “dangerous climate change.” The scientific consensus is resolute that further increases in global warming will result in further increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme events across the globe such as heatwaves, heavy precipitation, tropical cyclones and in some regions, the frequency and intensity of drought.


    Despite this, when asked what it could mean for Africa to have a more unified voice as it relates to matters of energy, Equatorial Guinea’s Obiang Lima said “I promise not to say [transition] any more… [this is] the last time I’m going to say energy transition. I’m not gonna say that any more. Anything regarding energy security, that’s really our priority. That’s what we will be talking… only energy security. Once we achieve the energy security… [then] we start talking about the transition or the transformation or any other things.

    I very strongly advocate for… when you say China (can use their fossil fuels) it’s okay, when you say America (can use their fossil fuels) it’s okay… only when you say Africa, it’s wrong. China’s resources for China, American resources for America… it has to be the same thing – African resources for Africa.”



    Our Burning Planet previously reported that energy ministers prevaricated on the definition of “energy transition”, saying that instead of meaning moving from a high-carbon economy to a low-carbon economy, in Africa it should mean “to transit from no energy to energy, to fill the energy access gap” – seemingly inferring that the two priorities were mutually exclusive.

    Obiang Lima’s Sengalese counterpart, Sophie Gladima, in response to a question about what role “developing countries in Africa should play to maximise oil and gas production for economic growth and energy security”, said in French that “the main issue that we all agree on is funding. Funding has been cut, and even though we have a gas-to-power strategy, the funding continues to be cut. This planet has given us natural resources and we have to exploit them. But we need to exploit them in a responsible manner and ensure that we do not make the same mistakes others have done in the past. Let us use our oil and gas and have the chance to grow. Ministers of energy must go and convince the ministers of environment. We need to decide together and find a way that is for the good of Africa.”

    Prempeh, her Ghanaian counterpart, to an alternating mixture of laughter and applause said “I do not want to talk in terms of victory, but in terms of responsibility and rights. I will be an irresponsible leader to sell my country on the altar of energy transition without talking about the significance of energy security or energy access or without talking about energy affordability. The ministers of energy have been meeting, building and developing a consensus. We should not allow ourselves to be divided between environment and development.”

    He went on to decry what he considered a double standard. Speaking about Africa being locked out of access to international markets if they develop their fossil fuel resources, he said “Russia earns more from their mineral resources, even as we speak … I’ve never heard anybody say we won’t buy from Russia; the worst I’ve heard is that they will cap the price … injustice will continue to exist about exploitation and about appropriate remuneration and price for a natural resource, for the whole of Africa … all the gas and oil we take, over 80% ends up in Europe, or China, or in India. It is not even used in the Africa continent.”



    “So it looks like some people have sat in a room and said ‘these people, the only thing that is good for us … is to produce for us so that we can grow big, and they can grow lean’. No. The African child has got a right to develop, to develop to its full talent capability. And the only way he or she can do that is the leaders present would exploit the resources God has given and given to all of us, including the sun, and the sea and the land and the forest … so that child will grow to become a productive citizen,” said Prempeh.

    He continued that “If we talk about the energy transition, we will talk about using what God has given us to use. We will continue to exploit our reserves for the socioeconomic development of the country.”

    Niger’s petroleum minister, Mahamadou made a few points. “When it comes to international oil companies (IOCs), in the same way that African countries and ministers have to stay united and speak with one voice, IOCs have to join that single narrative that we share. When it comes to Niger, we have three IOCs active, so we are working closely with them to ensure the full potential of the oil and gas is exploited. When it comes to the environment, in Niger 80% of the population lives in rural areas. They rely on biomass and have to do damage to the environment. The way we proceed is we provide them with access to clean cooking and prevent the damage being done to the environment.”

    Asked for his final thoughts, Ayuk said, to another burst of laughter and applause, that his message would be “drill, baby, drill”.

    “That should be Africa’s message to the world. If you want to solve energy poverty, gas baby gas. Europe wants to call gas green: it has always been green. If it is green gas for Europe, why is it not green gas for Africa? We can do better if we tone down the rhetoric that energy producers are evil people or bad people. We need to go to COP27 backing up our energy producers. We should not be apologising for our energy sector. That is the message we should take.”



    Speaking at an event on 21 October marking Vietnam’s 45th year in the organisation, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said that every country had a role to play in tackling the climate crisis.

    “The G20 economies together account for 80% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 80% of global GDP. They must lead. They must reduce their emissions this decade – in line with keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees – and fully pivot to renewable energy. Wealthier countries must keep their promise to provide $100-billion to support developing countries to build resilience.

    “Action on loss and damage is a moral imperative that must be front and centre at the upcoming UN Climate Conference – COP27 – in Egypt. All this is essential to rebuild trust between developed countries and the global south.

    “But every country has a role to play,” said the UN chief.

    “Because even if all developed countries were to reach net zero by 2030, we would still not be able to keep to 1.5 degrees of global warming without further action by the rest of the world. This means we cannot wait until after 2030 to move away from fossil fuels – particularly coal – or to peak global emissions. If the world does not cut emissions by 45% by 2030, then achieving net zero by 2050 will be a pipe dream. That will mean a climate nightmare for billions of people. We need all hands on deck now to realise an energy transition that is global, sustainable, just, inclusive and equitable.” 



    OBP/DM

    Mental health workers at Kaiser approve contract after 10-week strike


    Psychologists, therapists, social workers and chemical dependency counselors at Kaiser who are part of the National Union of Healthcare Workers voted 1,561 to 36 to approve the agreement reached between the company and the union.


    By AMANDA JAMES
     Oct 21, 2022 


    Mental health workers at Kaiser Permanente in Northern California have approved a four-year contract after a 10-week strike, according to a news release.

    Psychologists, therapists, social workers and chemical dependency counselors at Kaiser who are part of the National Union of Healthcare Workers voted 1,561 to 36 to approve the agreement reached between the company and the union.

    The mental health workers had been on a strike for 10 weeks that ended on Wednesday when a tentative agreement was reached.

    “This contract puts us on much stronger footing to work with Kaiser to help it become a great place to give and receive mental health care,” said Ilana Marcucci-Morris, a licensed clinical social worker for Kaiser in Oakland in a news release. “But any successful collaboration will require Kaiser’s total commitment to devote the resources necessary to meet California’s timely access to care requirements. We expect Kaiser to follow the law, and we expect the state to enforce it.”

    The agreement is retroactive to September 2021 and expires in September 2025.

    When the strike started in August, mental health workers going on strike said that the way the system was set up, they could not meet patient’s needs the same way non-mental health providers at Kaiser Permanente were able to do. They demanded more resources to provide patients better mental health treatment, and asked for mental health support for themselves, too, including less client-facing hours.


    In an interview, HLTH’s Head of Content Jody Tropeano shares how the annual conference has adopted a festival-like vibe with an innovative layout to maximize interaction, with content highlighting topics such as women’s health, wellness, and employer health.

    According to the news release, the mental health workers were able to get some of those demands met.

    In the approved contract, mental health workers will have about two additional hours weekly for non client-facing work, such as charting appointments. Also, Kaiser Permanente has agreed to hire more therapists to better meet the surge of clients.

    The company also agreed to work with therapists on a plan to expand crisis services to nearly all of its clinics and to follow through on wage increases agreed to before the strike started.

    The struggle to achieve parity for mental health care at Kaiser is far from over, NUHW said in the news release. In Hawaii, there is still no settlement to a strike by Kaiser therapists that is now in its eighth week.

    Longest Strike Ends: California Mental Health Care Workers Win Big

     
    COUNTERPUNCH
    OCTOBER 24, 2022
    Facebook

    Two thousand mental health clinicians have won; Kaiser Permanente has lost. The 10- week strike has ended in near total victory for the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW). The therapists, walked out on August 15; it became the longest mental health care workers’ strike recorded.

    Two issues dominated negotiations from the start: workload for Kaiser therapists and wait time for Kaiser patients. The strikers won on both, forcing concessions until now all but unheard of. The strikers won break through provisions to retain staff, reduce wait times for patients and a plan to collaborate on transforming Kaiser’s model for providing mental health care. The new four-year contract is retroactive to September 2021 and expires in September 2025. Darrell Steinberg, Mayor of Sacramento served as a mediator. Members of the NUHW voted 1561 to 36 to ratify it.

    Braving three- digit heat, strikers walked picket lines throughout Northern California and the Central Valley. They picketed, marched and rallied at Kaiser hospitals – in a strike that caught the attention of mental health care advocates everywhere. “Our strike was difficult and draining, but it was worth it,” said Natalie Rogers, a therapist for Kaiser in Santa Rosa. We stood up to the biggest nonprofit in the nation, and we made gains that will help better serve our patients and will advance the cause of mental health parity throughout the country.”

    The mental health clinicians I’ve met are almost universally modest and careful in their choice of words, and here is an example. To say that that Kaiser is “the biggest non-profit” is an understatement to say the least – its revenues are in the billions, and its managers make millions while this giant among giants, typically in the world of corporate health care, oversees its empire as if it were making cars and trucks.

    I’ve seen NUHW rallies well-attended by patients themselves, also family members and supporters who are angry, bitter. Where frequently they carry signs to the effect that the issues here are life and death, rallies where speakers break down in tears, where placards tell us that suicide can be the outcome of care denied – “Stop the Suicides!” It’s a wonder more therapists don’t move on. The world of pain of the mental health patient can be just as acute as that of the medical patient. Ask a therapist. It’s not that the clinicians don’t want to tell us this.; it’s that, in their own way, they are telling us. It’s why they fight so hard.

    “It was difficult getting up and going on the picket line, juggling other responsibilities. We don’t get paid when we’re on strike,” Natalie Rogers, a licensed marriage and family therapist who works in the emergency department. Rogers is also a member of the Santa Rosa City Council. “We knew it was worth it. We knew why we were out there.”

    NUHW, 16,000 strong, finds power in the fact that its members understand its mission and support it – building a worker led union, democratic and militant. Its therapists have been on strike a half dozen times with Kaiser, though this has been the first open-ended strike. Twenty working members represented the union in bargaining. Bargaining sessions were open.

    Here are some highlights from the union, more can be seen at NUHW.org (at the time of writing Kaiser has not commented):

    Nearly two additional hours per week for therapists to perform critical patient care duties such as responding to emails and voicemails, tailoring treatment plans, communicating with social service agencies and charting appointments A recent union survey found that lack of time to perform these duties has been the primary reason for Kaiser’s overall high turnover rates, which has doubled over the last year. Staff departures combined with overall understaffing has resulted in longer appointment wait times for patients.

    An increase in extra pay for bilingual therapists from $1 per hour to $1.50 an hour. This will help Kaiser recruit and retain therapists who can meet the needs of non-English speakers. This new rate is the highest differential for bilingual workers that Kaiser has agreed to in California.

    A commitment by Kaiser to hire more therapists and expand its new treatment track programs which allow certain patients better access to appointments over a shorter period of treatment.

    A commitment by Kaiser to work with therapists to expand crisis services to nearly all of its clinics.

    An agreement to increase from 60 to 90 minutes of time therapists have to conduct initial assessments of children seeking mental health care.

    Wage increases, including retroactive pay, will be as follows: Year 1: 4 percent. Year 2: 3 percent plus a 1 percent lump sum bonus. Year 3: 3 percent. Year 4: 3 percent plus a 1 percent lump sum bonus.

    “Model of Care” committees will be convened to see that Kaiser meets its contractual obligations as well as state regulations. Right now, SB221 requires all health insurers to provide therapy sessions within 10 business days. Currently Kaiser is not in compliance with state law.

    “It took much longer than it should have to reach this agreement, but, in the end, we succeeded in securing important improvements in patient care that Kaiser negotiators told us across the bargaining table that they’d never agree to,” said Jennifer Browning, a licensed clinical social worker for Kaiser in Roseville who served on the NUHW bargaining committee. “At a time when there are so few appointment cancellations because we’re seeing patients remotely, giving us enough time to perform all of our patient care duties is going to help keep a lot of us at Kaiser, and it’s going to help Kaiser hire more therapists.”

    Sal Rosselli, president of the National Union of Healthcare Workers, “I’m proud of Kaiser therapists for standing up for their patients and their profession,” and their union which represents Kaiser therapists in California and Hawaii. “Therapists, like other professionals, join unions so that they will have a voice on important professional issues along with leverage on wages, benefits and quality of life issues. Our members want to apply their professional judgment to better serve patients and they want to be treated with respect by their employer, rather than as cogs in a wheel.  They want to be given the time necessary to do their jobs properly. Kaiser wanted to give orders, but not listen. This contract will help reset that relationship.”

    As it is, patients can see conflicts, the turmoil that exists, that exist now in COVID time, time when caregivers truly are on the front lines, when hard work and short staffing is intensified by danger. Big banners praising “Our Heroes” don’t make up for the array of indignities our heroes endure. Patients, they see comforters and miracle workers, people on their side. We know that if we scratch the surface we will expose the dark side of the healthcare world, the huge place it occupies in our economy and society. These hospitals can be massive, the “campuses,” for example, of Orlando Health, Indiana University, Yale New Haven. The Cleveland Clinic has swallowed up great chunks of the historic back neighborhoods of the city’s East Side. These thousands of hospitals and clinics, almost all of which are violently anti-union, are bastions of the low paid and temporary – corporations just as brutal as Amazon. They send out the bills and the collection agencies; they bombard us with robo calls, the messages of mail order pharmacies and automated “surveys.” Bernie Sanders is right that we have to have the courage to stand up to them – all of them large and small.

    The struggle to achieve parity for mental health care at Kaiser is far from over. In Hawaii, there is still no settlement to the strike by Kaiser therapists. Kaiser has not only refused to provide similar terms for its Hawaii-based therapists as for its California-based therapists, it’s demanding that that they accept wage freezes and cuts to retirement benefits that would make it harder to recruit and retain therapists. There will be a fight to force Kaiser to live up to its bargain.

    Rosselli, “We won more than Kaiser executives ever imagined they’d have to offer, and we couldn’t have achieved that without the support of elected leaders, community allies and Kaiser patients, who bravely talked about their struggles to access mental health care. On behalf of our members thank you so much for your support”

    (Thanks to Matthew Artz)

    Cal Winslow is the author of Radical Seattle: the General Strike of 1919. He can be reached at cwinslow@mcn.org

    Sometimes the misogyny comes from inside the house.

    Abortion LegislationOctober is known for Halloween and spooky shenanigans. Gratuitous amounts of Snickers, your former CVS becoming a Spirit Costume Store, and cute Nightmare Before Christmas reruns are expected for these thirty or so days.  That said, some people are spending their October pursuing particularly ghoulish activities like trying to scare employers with fears of retaliation for providing healthcare access.

    A management-side law firm says a former Trump EEOC official is using her prior position to scare employers that are considering providing abortion travel benefits.

    The Littler Workplace Policy Institute sent a letter Friday requesting that the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s current legal counsel investigate its former General Counsel Sharon Fast Gustafson for warning employers that the commission would take enforcement action over employee abortion travel benefits.

    The first thing to know is that Ms. Gustafson currently has no EEOC authority. At the level of real risk, Gustafson’s warning carries about as much gravitas as phoning in threats to a department store manager that the department store manager has a bad attitude. However, it could be an actual threat it someone with actual authority was the one issuing the warning.

    Over 120 large employers in states where abortion is now illegal after the US Supreme Court’s June 24 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization have announced coverage of travel for abortion care, according to Rhia Ventures. That number is expected to double over the next few years in the wake of the decision, insurance advisory company Willis Towers Watson PLC reported this month.

    Given that many of the Justices failed to actually respect stare decisis like they said they would during their hearings, several law firms have taken it upon themselves to try and stabilize the otherwise precarious situation folks with uteruses are in so long as the Christian 6 are in power. Thankfully, Gustafson’s  behavior is being brought to light rather than being swept under the rug.

    “Ms. Gustafson is using her former position to intimidate employers who provide or are considering providing a benefit that is otherwise legal under Federal law in furtherance of her own law practice,” the firm said in the letter to the EEOC, “and personal beliefs misleading and intimidating employers who lawfully provide travel benefits under their health plans for those who need medical care that is not available in their own states.”

    Littler requested that the agency “formally investigate” whether Gustafson’s actions “constitute a breach of ethical rules or regulations.”

    I don’t know if using your former position as a government representative to intimidate others is a punishable offense, but if it is — and Gustafson rightly faces the consequences for doing so — we will be happy to keep you updated on the story’s developments\\

    Law Firm Calls Out Ex-EEOC Counsel’s Note on Abortion Travel (1) [Bloomberg Law]


    Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord™ in the Facebook group Law School Memes for Edgy T14s.  He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boatbuilder who cannot swim, a published author on critical race theory, philosophy, and humor, and has a love for cycling that occasionally annoys his peers. You can reach him by email at cwilliams@abovethelaw.com and by tweet at @WritesForRent.

    Feds say Huawei probe was at heart of Chinese bribery effort


    The government accuses two men of trying to bribe a U.S. government official for intel on the ongoing prosecution of the Chinese tech giant Huawei.

    EMILY ZANTOW / October 24, 2022
    U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland speaks at the Department of Justice headquarters in Washington on Oct. 24, 2022, regarding charges brought this afternoon by his office. (Emily Zantow/Courthouse News Service)

    WASHINGTON (CN) — The Department of Justice brought indictments Monday against 13 Chinese nationals, two of whom are said to be Chinese intelligence officers who paid bribes for information on the status of the Huawei prosecution.

    Guochun He, 45, and Zheng Wang, 37, are charged in the Eastern District of New York with plotting to steal documents and other information. The two men allegedly paid about $61,000 in bitcoin to a U.S. government employee who they thought was in the Chinese government's pocket. Speaking about the case and two others Monday at a press conference in Washington, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said the employee was actually a double agent working on behalf of the FBI.

    “This was an egregious attempt by PRC intelligence officers to shield a PRC-based company from accountability and to undermine the integrity of our judicial system,” Garland said.

    He faces up to 60 years in prison if convicted, and Wang faces up 20 years in prison. Both are still at large.

    Though references in the charging documents make clear that the Huawei case was the focus of the bribes, the company is not named in the charging papers. The Department of Justice brought bank fraud against Huawei in 2019 and added new counts a year later for conspiracy under federal anti-racketeering law and a plot to steal trade secrets.

    Neither Huawei nor the Chinese Embassy in Washington has commented on the new indictments. Huawei has previously called the federal investigation “political persecution, plain and simple."

    “Attacking Huawei will not help the U.S. stay ahead of the competition,” the company said in a 2020 statement.

    Garland also spoke Monday about an indictment unsealed in the District of New Jersey, charging four Chinese nationals with a long-running campaign to try to influence people in the U.S. to act as foreign agents for China. Yet another case that Garland described involved the recent arrests of two of seven people charged in a yearslong harassment campaign to force a U.S. resident to return to China.

    “As these cases demonstrate, the government of China sought to interfere with the rights and freedoms of individuals in the United States and to undermine our judicial system that protects those rights. They did not succeed,” he said.

    Garland was joined Monday by other top Justice Department brass, including Deputy Attorney General Lisa O. Monaco, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Assistant Attorney General for National Security Matthew G. Olsen.
    SCOTUS
    Justice Elena Kagan Tells It Like It Is When It Comes To Stare Decisis And The Politicization Of The Supreme Court

    She wants to be an optimist, but this Court might not let her.

    By STACI ZARETSKY
    October 24, 2022

    (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)

    Law should be stable. People depend on law; they order their lives, their conduct by it. You give people a right and then you take it away. They’ve understood their lives in a different way.

    It’s a doctrine of stability and a doctrine of humility. The way the law develops best is slowly and incrementally by many judges over time. It’s kind of hubris to say we’re throwing that out because we think we know better.

    [Stare decisis] prevents the court from becoming politicized. If we get judges who come onto a court and start throwing out the apparatus and rules, rather than law building in this incremental, minimalist way over time, there are all these jolts to the system. And it begins to look not like a court but more like a political institution.

    — Justice Elena Kagan, in comments given during an appearance at the University of Pennsylvania, commenting on her role as a frequent “dissenter” on the Supreme Court and the meaning of stare decisis, while indirectly referring to the high court’s often divisive rulings last term. “Time will tell whether this is a court that can get back to finding common ground, to ratcheting down the level of decision-making so we can reach compromises,” she said.


    Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.
    In segment with House candidate from Virginia, OAN panelist spreads conspiracy theory that the LGBTQ community seeks to normalize pedophilia

    Another panelist, Terry Schilling of the American Principles Project, promoted the dangerous falsehood that Democrats are “grooming” children in schools


    WRITTEN BY MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    PUBLISHED 10/24/22 4:53 PM EDT

    Citation
    From the October 22, 2022, edition of One America News Network's Weekly Briefing

    CHANEL RION (HOST): More than 30 House Republicans have signed on to the Stop The Sexualization Of Our Children Act; the bill would make it illegal to use federal funding to develop, implement, facilitate, or fund any sexually-oriented program, event or literature for children under the age of ten Terry, I direct this topic to you. Where is this bill at, and does it have a chance of actually becoming a law?

    TERRY SCHILLING (GUEST): So I think it's important to go back just a few elections, right? And that's really the center of all this. Just a few elections ago, 2016. We couldn't get Republicans to talk about protecting our daughters in their locker rooms and their private spaces. They were all saying, oh, we don't have a problem with bathrooms in my state.

    And now you fast forward after years of Democrats getting more and more extreme on these issues, pushing transgender surgeries on kids, grooming them in schools with these literally pornographic books and also in campaign investments and showing Republicans how to win on these issues and make their Democratic opponents pay a price. We're now at a point where Republicans are openly talking about protecting our kids again, so it's a very important moment.

    Where this bill goes from here is unclear. I think that this new crop of Republicans that are going into Congress, into the Senate and into our state legislatures, I think they're much more aggressive and much more willing to take on these types of social issues as they've been branded – the really family issues and they're family table issues to protect our kids and our parental rights.

    But I think it has a great chance of passing, once we get a new president in there, so it's really going to be up to President Trump to champion this like Ron DeSantis has done in Florida, and make it a real issue so that when he gets elected in 2024, he can go off running with it and sign it as one of his first priorities.

    ...

    RION: I mean, in your district, they were teaching things way beyond the scope of birds and bees to kindergartners, and they've been trying to inject that actually in your district because your district boasts some of the top schools in the nation. So it's almost like they're using your district as kind of an incubator to teach the other, the rest of the schools in the nation.

    KARINA LIPSMAN (CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE): That's exactly it. And then they completely shut out the parents, so the parents have no rights Delegate Guzmán went live talking about how parents would be criminally prosecuted if they weren't on board with children being able to go through these life-altering surgeries that would impact their whole life and children at that age – they're so confused. They're still learning themselves. There's going through puberty. They have so many emotions. And we should be encouraging them to learn basic skills, set them up for success in our world – because this is the future of our country.

    ...

    DARREN NELSON (GUEST): So the trans activists have taken things to a new toxic level. But what's coming now is the MAPs. The MAPs activists, which is the minor-attracted persons, which is pedophiles essentially. So this is – this may get far worse. Unless obviously, we stop it.
    Intentional disinvestment: EPA launches civil rights probe of water crisis in mostly-Black Jackson, Mississippi

    Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!
    October 24, 2022

    Child drinking water - Shutterstock

    The Environmental Protection Agency is launching a civil rights investigation into whether the state of Mississippi discriminated against the majority-Black capital of Jackson when it refused to use federal funds to address the city’s dangerous water crisis. Mississippi has received federal funds to address drinking water needs since 1996 but distributed funds to Jackson just three times over this 26-year span. “For years, Black communities have faced intentional disinvestment” in water infrastructure, says Abre’ Conner of the NAACP, which filed the complaint that led to the investigation. Conner says that through the creation of the EPA’s new civil rights office, the government now has “an opportunity to make right the wrongs that have happened to Black communities and to other historically disadvantaged communities for years.”



    Intentional Disinvestment: EPA Launches Civil Rights Probe of Water Crisis in Jackson,
     Mississippiwww.youtube.com


    This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.


    AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, the War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, as we turn now to Jackson, Mississippi, where the Environmental Protection Agency is launching a civil rights investigation into whether Mississippi officials discriminated against Jackson’s majority-Black residents when it refused to use federal funds to address the city’s dangerous water crisis. The EPA said Thursday it is probing Mississippi’s Department of Health and Department of Environmental Quality over their role in the crisis that left tens of thousands of mostly Black households without drinking water. Jackson’s main water treatment plant was damaged after flooding in August and viral videos showed brown liquid flowing from taps. In 2021, residents lost access to drinking water for weeks after a deep winter freeze. Even when the water is running, residents have faced months’ long boil-water orders. A complaint filed by the NAACP led to the EPA’s investigation. NAACP President Derrick Johnson lives in Jackson and called the state’s record of divestment “systemic neglect.” Mississippi has received federal funds to address drinking water needs since 1996 but gave Jackson funds just three times.

    For more, we’re joined from Jackson, Mississippi, by Abre’ Conner, Director of the NAACP’s Center for Environmental and Climate Justice. Welcome to Democracy Now!, Abre’. It’s great to have you with us. Why don’t you lay out the issue, including the Governor mocking Jackson for its water crisis and what Congress allocated for Jackson and yet it did not actually go there.

    ABRE’ CONNER: To your point earlier about Jackson only getting federal funds three of the last 25 years, that really kind of goes to the heart of what is the issue. The water in Jackson has been weaponized against them by the governor, by the state, because often times federal funding for water infrastructure, it flows to the state first. So even though we have the promise of Justice40, we have the promise of historically disadvantaged communities like Jackson, Mississippi, to be prioritized whenever it comes to federal funding, that’s not necessarily always the case.

    AMY GOODMAN: Last month, Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves came under criticism for disparaging his own capital city, Jackson. This is Reeves speaking during the groundbreaking ceremony for Jones Capital LLC headquarters.

    GOVERNOR TATE REEVES: I’ve gotta tell you, it is a great day to be in Hattiesburg. It’s also, as always, a great day to not be in Jackson.

    AUDIENCE: [laughter]

    AMY GOODMAN: “Always a great day to not be in Jackson.” Jackson is overwhelmingly African-American, over 80% of the city. Abre’, talk about this.

    ABRE’ CONNER: Governor Reeves has mocked Jackson residents. The governor at points it seems thinks that it’s a joke. That was one of the reasons why we felt like it was so important to file this Title VI complaint with the EPA. Because it’s not fair that Jackson residents for decades have seen the disinvestment in their city. It’s the state capital and it’s also 83% Black. But then you have a governor who is making comments like that and individuals don’t even trust their tap water, where they’re spending their tax dollars, where they should be able to have safe drinking water and that is not the case. But this Title VI complaint really demonstrates that we are not going to sit aside and allow for someone who is in an elected position in the state to be able to allocate federal funds to places like Jackson to get away with discriminating against a large Black city.

    But this is something that Governor Reeves has been doing for a while. Even in his previous positions, like lieutenant governor, when he was treasurer, he utilized positions to try to harm Jackson residents. So this has been a long time coming. You have had a number of Black mayors who have asked the governor, who have asked the state for funding to fix the water infrastructure issues in Jackson, Mississippi, and because there has been neglect, because there has been intentional disinvestment, quite frankly, for a number of years, the number keeps growing for how much it’s going to actually cost to fix water infrastructure issues in Jackson.

    This is also an issue because, again, there was supposed to have been a prioritization of funding, of federal funding, in places like Jackson, Mississippi, by the EPA, by other federal agencies, but because the money flows to the state first, then they get an opportunity to, quite frankly, weaponize these funds that are supposed to be utilized for Jackson against them.

    AMY GOODMAN: Last month, Abre’ Conner, you testified at the Hearing on Water Infrastructure. In your prepared remarks, you said “The effect of climate change on Black people has finally come into national focus because Black people experience the most horrific impacts from historic disinvestment in communities.” Can you elaborate on this?

    ABRE’ CONNER: What we have known is that for years, Black communities have faced intentional disinvestment. When you look at places like Allensworth that tried to build in California, in the Central Valley of California nearly 100 years ago, the reason that they weren’t able to actually move forward was because the company actually moved the wells that were supposed to be in Allensworth to Alpaugh. That was a majority non-Black neighboring city to Allensworth. We have seen this disinvestment in other Black communities. We’ve seen it in Flint. We saw the crumbling of Rosewood, for example, because the governor failed to respond in a timely manner.

    Now we’re finally getting to a place where we see what is happening in Jackson. We see Congress actually also opening up an investigation with Homeland Security as well. Then we have the EPA who is opening for the first time this new external civil rights office, an Office of Environmental Justice, with Administrator Regan. But there were for years a time where the EPA was not even opening up Title VI complaints. It’s not like the environmental justice issues weren’t happening during that time. It got to a place where, quite frankly, groups felt like they needed to actually sue the EPA to get them to do their job, to help historically disadvantaged communities.

    So, it is a time that we really have an opportunity to make right the wrongs that have happened to Black communities and to other historically disadvantaged communities for years. But this is really just a first step, because again, this is really an opportunity for the EPA to also demonstrate that through this complaint, it is going to prioritize the communities, it is going to prioritize community groups, who have been a part of this effort, and that we are able to actually get the resources to flow directly to Jackson, Mississippi.

    AMY GOODMAN: You have a letter that was written to the governor by Democratic Representatives Bennie Thompson of Mississippi and Carolyn Maloney of New York asking how Jackson’s water system is crumbling despite Congress authorizing hundreds of millions of dollars last year to Jackson, and compare that to the white suburbs right outside Jackson.

    ABRE’ CONNER: Yeah. It is shameful that the governor has not prioritized actually funding the water infrastructure that is needed in Jackson, Mississippi. In my conversations that I’ve had, not only with the current mayor but with former mayors as well, this is not something that the governor did not have notice of. There has been a long history of Black mayors actually asking the governor to fund the water infrastructure in Jackson, Mississippi.

    Just as recently as last year, the governor vetoed $47 million actually going to Jackson, Mississippi, and the funding that Jackson did end up getting ended up having additional strings attached to it. So for the American Rescue Plan funding that Jackson has, it’s the only city in the state that has two different approval processes that it has to go through in order to get projects approved. It has to go through the Department of Environmental Quality and also the Department of Finance and Administration. It’s the only city in the entire state that has to go through this process. There is no actual legislative history as to why specifically only Jackson has to go through this number of processes, but it actually goes to the disinvestment that Jackson has continued to see, the number of hurdles that Jackson has to go through in order to try to rebuild.

    It is not like people at the local level aren’t trying, but when they’re faced with a number of hurdles and obstacles over and over again, at the state level, again where they have hundreds of millions of dollars—with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, there were hundreds of millions of dollars that were placed into allocation for historically disadvantaged communities, for places like Jackson, Mississippi, and that has not happened. With the most recent Intended Use Plan that the state, for example, submitted to the EPA, it capped loan forgiveness for these infrastructure plans at $500,000, knowing that it’s going to take a lot more than that to fix the water issues in Jackson, Mississippi. The draft plan that the state actually intended to send to the EPA before [inaudible] would have completely removed Jackson from even being able to apply for the money in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

    So, when you see these kinds of games being played by the governor, by the state, when you have a Black community who is in the middle of a water crisis—and by the way, the most recent Intended Use Plan was submitted during the midst of this water crisis—then you know that there is a level of intentionality to every single step that Governor Reeves has taken.

    AMY GOODMAN: Obviously, this reeks of Flint. It sounds so similar to Flint. We did a Democracy Now! documentary called Thirsty for Democracy looking at Flint where the activists were saying, “This is not just an environmental problem, the lack of access to clean water in Flint, Michigan, another majority Black city. This is a problem of democracy.” How will your complaint, how will your—is it called a lawsuit?—affect cities like Flint?

    ABRE’ CONNER: It is an administrative complaint that you’re able to file directly with a federal agency. In this situation, we filed it with the Environmental Protection Agency, and we filed it under Title VI, for purposes of regulatory—oversee what is happening in the state.

    This complaint actually is representative of the number of years that historically disadvantaged communities, number one, could not utilize the EPA to help with issues related to discrimination and environmental hazards and environmental racism. This was really an opportunity for the EPA to demonstrate to these communities that it has been silent towards for a number of years that they are also going to prioritize historically disadvantaged communities like Jackson, that they’re going to prioritize the communities that it left behind for almost a decade, and that they’re going to try to come up with a solution that is going to center Jackson residents.

    We hope that this not only helps the residents in Jackson, because they have been dealing with this for years, but that it also can serve as a model for other governors who, quite frankly, have also been slow to respond to historically disadvantaged communities, to Black communities across the country, so they can understand that there is a mechanism that we can use to hold them accountable and say that we’re not going to allow for Black communities to be left behind when we understand that safe drinking water, that living in communities where we are bearing the brunt of all of this contamination, pollution, that there is going to be a mechanism that we can utilize and ensure that we are prioritized moving forward.

    AMY GOODMAN: Abre’ Conner, thank you so much for being with us, Director of the NAACP Center for Environmental and Climate Justice. Next up, we go to Little Rock. We will look at how the ACLU is asking the Supreme Court to overturn an Arkansas anti-BDS law that penalizes companies that support boycotts of Israel. We will speak to the publisher of The Arkansas Times who sued the state to overturn the law. We will also be joined by the ACLU attorney who appealed to the Supreme Court and the director of the documentary Boycott. Back in 30 seconds.