Harvey Wasserman: You Are Now Paying for the Next Three Mile Island
Last Updated on Monday, 29 March 2010 11:30 Written by Daisy Harley Monday, 29 March 2010 11:30
GET A FREE $250 Gas Card
As radiation poured from Three Mile Island 31 years ago this week, utility executives rested easy.
They knew that no matter how many people their errant nuke killed, and no matter how much property it destroyed, they would not be held liable.
Today this same class of executives demands untold taxpayer billions to build still more TMIs. No matter how many meltdowns they cause, and how much havoc they visit down on the public, they still believe they’re above the law.
Fueled with more than $600 million public relations slush money, they demand a risk-free “renaissance” financed by you and yours.
As if.
In 1980 I reported from central Pennsylvania on the dead and dying one year after. Dozens of interviews documented a horrifying range of radiation-related diseases including cancer, leukemia, birth defects, still births, malformations, sterility, heart attacks, strokes, emphysema, skin lesions, hair loss, a metallic taste and much more. As reported by the Baltimore News-American among others, such ailments also ripped through the animal population.
To this day no one knows how much radiation was released at the 1979 TMI accident, where it went or whom it harmed. The official line that “no one was killed” is arguably the biggest lie ever told in US industrial history. It is to public health what the promise of electricity “too cheap to meter” has been to utility finance.
It parallels Soviet lies about the 1986 catastrophe at Chernobyl, whose health effects continue to skyrocket. A devastating summary report issued by the New York Academy of Sciences (Yablokov, Nesterenko & Nesterenko: Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People & the Environment) says at least 980,000 people are likely to die from the fallout.
That would be a small fraction of the casualties had 9/11 terrorists dived into the two reactors at New York’s Indian Point instead of hitting the World Trade Center.
In a time of deep financial stress, it also counts that the TMI accident turned a $900 million asset into a $2 billion liability in a matter of minutes. Chernobyl has cost Belarus and Ukraine at least $500 billion and counting. And the price tag on a major meltdown anywhere in the US is virtually beyond calculation.
Thus those who think a flood of new nukes will flow unimpeded into the American pocketbook haven’t been paying attention:
1) Four northeastern nukes — in Vermont, New Jersey and the two at Indian Point — are under intense public pressure to shut within the next two years. Numerous other elderly reactors are likely to go down long before any new nukes could come on line.
2) French President Sarkozy is demanding that world financial institutions buy a bevy of new French-built reactors. But huge delays and cost-overruns at French projects in Finland and France itself have made the investment community wary to say the least, thus prompting his foot-stomping.
3) Documents leaked from inside France’s national utility EDF indicate cost-cutting has made the new French reactor design exceedingly prone to explosion, further unsettling potential investors.
4) The future of new US reactor construction hinges on massive loan guarantees and handouts. The public number is $54 billion, but the Nuclear Information & Resource Service says the real bill could top a trillion (http://nukefree.org/node/1844 ).
5) In the polarized, cost-conscious wake of the health care bill, and the apparent demise of cap and trade as a centerpiece of climate legislation, the idea of such huge sums flowing to a deeply polarizing energy source has become increasingly problematic. Without a clear trade-off for fossil/nuclear giveaways, and with stiffening resistance from the rightist National Taxpayers Union, Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation, the nuke bonanza is anything but certain. For those opposed to government subsidies, atomic power has become “too expensive to matter.”
6) An attempt by Entergy to shift six reactors into an asset-free corporate shell has been nixed by New York authorities, leaving liability for Vermont Yankee, Indian Point and other northeastern nukes in limbo.
7) As elderly nukes stumble toward oblivion, various funds allegedly set aside for decommissioning may be significantly under-funded, deeply exacerbating the financial battles that now the encircle the industry.
As a lame duck, George W. Bush signed agreements apparently obligating the Feds to assume responsibility for enough radioactive waste to fill two of the cancelled Yuccas. The complete lack of even one such facility means the potential taxpayer bill is beyond meaningful calculation.
9) Above all the exemption from liability for a major accident established in 1957 by a pro-nuke Congress remains the largest potential cost to us all. Renewed in 2005, some believe the statute is clearly unconstitutional.
To this day the families of those harmed by radiation at Three Mile Island have been denied the right to make their case in federal court.
But now the shoe is on the other foot.
Desperate for cash, the nuclear industry wants us all to pay hundreds of billions for the joy of living downwind from more 3 Mile Islands for which they intend to assume no liability.
They want our money and our lives.
From central Pennsylvania after 31 years, the message is clear: just Say NO!
GET A FREE $250 Gas Card
Article source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-wasserman/iyoui-are-now-paying-for_b_515692.html
Learn MoreHarvey Wasserman: You Are Now Paying for the Next Three Mile Island
Last Updated on Monday, 29 March 2010 11:30 Written by Daisy Harley Monday, 29 March 2010 11:30
GET A FREE $250 Gas Card
As radiation poured from Three Mile Island 31 years ago this week, utility executives rested easy.
They knew that no matter how many people their errant nuke killed, and no matter how much property it destroyed, they would not be held liable.
Today this same class of executives demands untold taxpayer billions to build still more TMIs. No matter how many meltdowns they cause, and how much havoc they visit down on the public, they still believe they’re above the law.
Fueled with more than $600 million public relations slush money, they demand a risk-free “renaissance” financed by you and yours.
As if.
In 1980 I reported from central Pennsylvania on the dead and dying one year after. Dozens of interviews documented a horrifying range of radiation-related diseases including cancer, leukemia, birth defects, still births, malformations, sterility, heart attacks, strokes, emphysema, skin lesions, hair loss, a metallic taste and much more. As reported by the Baltimore News-American among others, such ailments also ripped through the animal population.
To this day no one knows how much radiation was released at the 1979 TMI accident, where it went or whom it harmed. The official line that “no one was killed” is arguably the biggest lie ever told in US industrial history. It is to public health what the promise of electricity “too cheap to meter” has been to utility finance.
It parallels Soviet lies about the 1986 catastrophe at Chernobyl, whose health effects continue to skyrocket. A devastating summary report issued by the New York Academy of Sciences (Yablokov, Nesterenko & Nesterenko: Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People & the Environment) says at least 980,000 people are likely to die from the fallout.
That would be a small fraction of the casualties had 9/11 terrorists dived into the two reactors at New York’s Indian Point instead of hitting the World Trade Center.
In a time of deep financial stress, it also counts that the TMI accident turned a $900 million asset into a $2 billion liability in a matter of minutes. Chernobyl has cost Belarus and Ukraine at least $500 billion and counting. And the price tag on a major meltdown anywhere in the US is virtually beyond calculation.
Thus those who think a flood of new nukes will flow unimpeded into the American pocketbook haven’t been paying attention:
1) Four northeastern nukes — in Vermont, New Jersey and the two at Indian Point — are under intense public pressure to shut within the next two years. Numerous other elderly reactors are likely to go down long before any new nukes could come on line.
2) French President Sarkozy is demanding that world financial institutions buy a bevy of new French-built reactors. But huge delays and cost-overruns at French projects in Finland and France itself have made the investment community wary to say the least, thus prompting his foot-stomping.
3) Documents leaked from inside France’s national utility EDF indicate cost-cutting has made the new French reactor design exceedingly prone to explosion, further unsettling potential investors.
4) The future of new US reactor construction hinges on massive loan guarantees and handouts. The public number is $54 billion, but the Nuclear Information & Resource Service says the real bill could top a trillion (http://nukefree.org/node/1844 ).
5) In the polarized, cost-conscious wake of the health care bill, and the apparent demise of cap and trade as a centerpiece of climate legislation, the idea of such huge sums flowing to a deeply polarizing energy source has become increasingly problematic. Without a clear trade-off for fossil/nuclear giveaways, and with stiffening resistance from the rightist National Taxpayers Union, Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation, the nuke bonanza is anything but certain. For those opposed to government subsidies, atomic power has become “too expensive to matter.”
6) An attempt by Entergy to shift six reactors into an asset-free corporate shell has been nixed by New York authorities, leaving liability for Vermont Yankee, Indian Point and other northeastern nukes in limbo.
7) As elderly nukes stumble toward oblivion, various funds allegedly set aside for decommissioning may be significantly under-funded, deeply exacerbating the financial battles that now the encircle the industry.
As a lame duck, George W. Bush signed agreements apparently obligating the Feds to assume responsibility for enough radioactive waste to fill two of the cancelled Yuccas. The complete lack of even one such facility means the potential taxpayer bill is beyond meaningful calculation.
9) Above all the exemption from liability for a major accident established in 1957 by a pro-nuke Congress remains the largest potential cost to us all. Renewed in 2005, some believe the statute is clearly unconstitutional.
To this day the families of those harmed by radiation at Three Mile Island have been denied the right to make their case in federal court.
But now the shoe is on the other foot.
Desperate for cash, the nuclear industry wants us all to pay hundreds of billions for the joy of living downwind from more 3 Mile Islands for which they intend to assume no liability.
They want our money and our lives.
From central Pennsylvania after 31 years, the message is clear: just Say NO!
GET A FREE $250 Gas Card
Article source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-wasserman/iyoui-are-now-paying-for_b_515692.html
Learn MoreErica Boddie: SEIU-UHW vs. NUHW Trial Day 4: “The Secret Island”
Last Updated on Friday, 26 March 2010 11:00 Written by Daisy Harley Friday, 26 March 2010 11:00
The trial of SEIU-UHW (Service Employees International Union/United Healthcare Workers West) vs. NUHW (National Union of Healthcare Workers) brought out many hidden secrets during today’s trial.
As SEIU-UHW witness Myriam Escamilla was cross-examined by NUHW Attorney Dan Siegel, she would not be distracted from the fact that the date of the “strategy planning meeting” formed by Sal Rosselli happened on April 14, 2007. Federal Court Judge William Alsup wanted to know the reason that the attorney continued to question the witness – insisting that the date of the meeting was April 16, 2010. The fact remained, she testified, that the meeting was devised to have a strategy to secure funds outside of UHW books in case of a trusteeship, create a legal defense against the International, and was to create an outside undetectable lists of member information to be used to be used in the event of a trusteeship. The “secret meetings” were not to be discussed (per Sal Rosselli) with anyone outside of the chosen member group of approximately eight senior staff members. Ms. Escamilla explained how Sal was attempting to “build a bridge” with other locals to gain support against SEIU and find a way to “win his point.”
SEIU-UHW witness and Deputy Trustee Lisa Gude did not hesitate to take the stand with confidence. She testified how upon her initial arrival to California she communicated with nursing home employers who may have been confused to clarify that SEIU’s decision on jurisdiction did not change the fact that UHW members were still represented by UHW and that the employers still had to bargain with UHW. Ms. Gude stated that after the trusteeship she learned that expired contracts had been left open and not extended for both Evergreen as well as Foresight. This left workers unprotected, without any ability to arbitrate grievances, as well as without pay raises. As she attempted to obtain records for bargaining, she was able to receive some information from a colleague and limited information from employers – but union notes, memos and other pertinent information could not be obtained. Former UHW employee Mark Kipfer (now NUHW), upon resigning his position with UHW, did not respond to a meeting notice that was sent to UHW employees upon trusteeship which informed them of requested attendance to turn over any records or property that may have been in their possession. Mr. Kipfer claimed under oath on April 2, 2009 that he was not in possession of any files or property of UHW – and eventually SEIU trustees had to go to court to demand the files. On April 16th, Mr. Kipfer turned in six boxes of files which included the Evergreen and Foresight contracts.
Next was SEIU-UHW witness, Jackie Peppars who is a home care provider from Fresno and an SEIU-UHW member of 10 years. Her testimony explained how while attending the NUHW Launch at a church a few weeks after the trusteeship, she was given a list of SEIU-UHW member contact information and instructed by Kevin Hall (former UHW Director prior to trusteeship) to call members and ask them to resign their UHW “COPE” contributions (voluntary contribution for political action) and to turn the contributions over to the “new union’s trust fund.” After following instructions for about a week, Ms. Peppars stopped contacting members. She stated “it didn’t feel right” as she realized that Kevin Hall was no longer a UHW employee – but however was still in possession of UHW member contact lists. As NUHW Counsel speculated that many stewards probably had lists prior to trusteeship – Ms. Peppars explained that past practice was to go to the union office where lists were provided to phone bank. She stopped the assignment after she had made a few calls.
SEIU-UHW Witness Jennifer Castro, Admin. Asst./UHW gave testimony explaining how “Mega Meetings” were held at three locations (San Francisco, Sacramento, and Fresno) to figure out how to fight the trusteeship. At these meetings “yellow cards” were given out to members soliciting their personal information for contact. After delivering the cards to defendant Marti Garza, she later noticed that none of the information had been entered into the UHW database. Also, she stated that she was asked by defendant John Vellardita to shred documents prior to the trusteeship so that the International could not have easy access to any information. “We are unable to re-create any of that information now” she said. Shortly after, SEIU-UHW attorneys showed a video of the Sacramento meeting where many members attended, not realizing what was actually happening “behind the scenes.” They were not aware of the impact on members today as their union continues to be sabotaged by the very NUHW leaders who preach democracy to them while undermining SEIU-UHW’s ability to properly communicate, represent, and care for them.
Finally – SEIU-UHW witness: “Fearless” Leon Chow (SEIU-UHW Home Care Division Director) took the stand. Prior to trusteeship Mr. Chow was a member of a “secret group” called “Shakers and Makers”. These were senior leaders who met weekly and were instructed by Sal Rosselli that no information of meeting discussions and conference calls be given to outside of the group. They discussed how to fight the trusteeship and were instructed: “Only communicate by personal e-mail and do not talk about the personal e-mail account setup. They were also instructed to build a network outside of the database with assessments of members support against SEIU, and to instruct Admin Assistants and others to not put the information into UHW databases – but to instead give the information directly back to Mr. Chow or any member of the Shakers and Makers. Mr. Chow was told by defendant John Vellardita that “SEIU cannot fire all 400 employees, so its important that those who remain continue to support the fight against SEIU.” The month before the trusteeship, the group changed their name to “The Breakfast Club” and met in person in Chinatown, S.F. They would no longer do any conference calls and had to meet in person. With this they were told by defendant John Vellardita “do not carpool from the Oakland office because we are under surveillance…”
Well these are the highlights of today’s trial and there’s more to come tomorrow. Chat with you soon.
Erica Boddie
More on Labor
Article source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erica-boddie/seiu-uhw-vs-nuhw-trial-da_b_514656.html
Learn More