Legislation Worthy of a Darwin Award

In North Carolina, a state-sponsored science panel warned sea levels could rise by more than 3 feet by 2100. So lawmakers supported by development interests responded with a bill to ban those figures. During their summer session, legislators moved to mandate that future trends be based solely upon historical data, which doesn’t account for the accelerated sea-level rise expected by many scientists. They said the move prevented the economic burdens of building farther from the coast or higher off the ground.

Are you kidding me?!?!   Don’t worry about building defenses against higher tides in NC because…taxpayers can deal with it when it happens so we can reduce taxes today.  

Dave Burton, science adviser for the development lobby NC-20, helped provide North Carolina lawmakers with a lower sea level estimate based on historical trends. He is hopeful that North Carolina and Virginia will set an example that other states will follow.

An example for other states to follow?  How many state legislators are so overwhelmingly arrogant or just plain stupid enough to think that they can vote to ban scientifically proven fact that even its Koch-backed supporters are walking away from. (See article here)

Does the following statement sound like it could have come from Cabal members:overregulation will harm coastal economies”

Or perhaps “There are a lot of folks who are very aware of the fact that there is a great divide between what the activists are claiming and the data.”

Could it be ALEC DNA?  Or is it just plain old stupid bat-sh*t from our legislators?

And, BTW,The Darwin Awards salute the improvement of
the human genome by honoring those who accidentally remove themselves from it…Reward yourself and click 

Justice Scalia must resign

by E,J. Dionne of the Washington Post

So often, Scalia has chosen to ignore the obligation of a Supreme Court justice to be, and appear to be, impartial. He’s turned “judicial restraint” into an oxymoronic phrase. But what he did this week, when the court announced its decision on the Arizona immigration law, should be the end of the line.

Not content with issuing a fiery written dissent, Scalia offered a bench statement questioning President Obama’s decision to allow some immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children to stay. Obama’s move had nothing to do with the case in question. Scalia just wanted you to know where he stood.

To read E.J. Dionne’s complete article at the Washington Post, please click here