Top Stories

Open letter to readers: Today and tomorrow

By Lynda Waddington | 11.17.11

Wednesday was a difficult day for The American Independent News Network, which is the larger entity that operates The Iowa Independent. Our chief executive and founder announced two of our sister sites would close and their content would be moved to The American Independent.

ACS lockout continues; plan emerges to repeal sugar protections

crystal_sugar_80
By Virginia Chamlee | 11.15.11

A recently introduced bill could have far-reaching impact on the U.S. sugar industry, including American Crystal Sugar, a farmer-owned cooperative that locked out 1,300 Midwest workers on Aug. 1.

Cain campaign: Farmers know more about regulations than EPA

hermancain_80x80
By Andrew Duffelmeyer | 11.15.11

The chairman for Herman Cain’s Iowa effort says the campaign “relied more on the word of farmers than Washington regulators” in deciding to run an ad containing claims the Environmental Protection Agency says are false.

Mathis wins, Democrats maintain Senate control

Liz Mathis
By Lynda Waddington | 11.08.11

The Iowa Senate will remain under the control of a slim 26-25 Democratic majority when it reconvenes in January 2012.

Press Release

PR: Nation should work to address veterans’ challenges

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

BRUCE BRALEY RELEASE — As US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan ends, it’s more important than ever that our nation works to address the challenges faced by the men and women who fought there.

PR: Honoring veterans, help in hiring

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

CHUCK GRASSLEY RELEASE — A difficult job market is challenging the soldiers, sailors and airmen who have protected America’s interests by serving in the Armed Forces.

PR: In honor of America’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

TOM LATHAM RELEASE — No one has done more to secure the freedom enjoyed by every single American than our veterans and those currently serving in the armed services.

PR: Honoring and supporting our nation’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

DAVE LOEBSACK RELEASE — Veterans Day is an opportunity to reflect on the service of generations of veterans and to honor the sacrifices they and their families have made so that we may live in peace and freedom here at home.

Vilsack: Copenhagen is about leadership, not just climate change

By Lynda Waddington | 12.02.09 | 2:09 pm

When American dignitaries arrive in Copenhagen next week to participate in the United Nations Climate Change Conference the nation will be signaling much more than its commitment to reduce greenhouse gases, said U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack makes remarks at the National Get Outdoors Day held at the Department of Agriculture in Washington, DC, June 11, 2009 (Photo: usda.gov)

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack speaks at an event in Washington, D.C., June 11, 2009. (Photo: usda.gov)

“This doesn’t just impact and affect climate change,” Vilsack noted during a teleconference Wednesday. “The discussions that are going to take place in Copenhagen aren’t just about climate change. They are about America’s leadership position internationally and the capacity of America to be competitive in the future.”

If the United States chooses to “punt” on climate change or signals that the country is not interested in dealing with the issue, Vilsack said that he guarantees agriculture ministers throughout the world would make economic hay of the decision, perhaps taking steps to discourage purchases of U.S. commodities.

“I can just hear some of my good friends … being able to say that they have addressed and are responding to climate change and that America is not,” he said. “That would be a persuasive thing for a lot of countries in terms of the decisions they make in purchasing commodities and livestock that they can’t produce themselves.

“This is about international leadership. It is about our capacity to remain competitive. It is so much broader than simply climate change. I think we have to be aware of that of that. I think we have to recognize that, and I think that is one of the reasons the President is insistent on this being a part of our domestic agenda. I think he also recognizes the capacity for this to unleash the innovation that has always been America’s advantage competitively is unprecedented.”

Vilsack, who visited China as governor of Iowa and recently returned from another trip to the country as secretary of Agriculture, said that the Chinese should be praised for their recent discussions regarding energy intensity as it relates to the growth of their economy. He also cautioned that if the U.S. doesn’t act quickly, the nation is in danger of losing its competitive edge.

“I can tell you that [China] is a nation that is very focused on being the leader in innovation,” he said. “They are making a commitment to renewable energy that is unprecedented for them and, in some circumstances, unprecedented globally. We cannot afford to let China get the edge on us in renewable energy, biofuels, new technologies, smart grids, energy efficiency — in all the issues that are involved in climate change and all of the economic opportunity that is involved. We cannot let them get the edge. We have always got to remain the Innovation Nation.”

Vilsack will join President Obama, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson, Council on Environmental Quality chairwoman Nancy Sutley and Carol Browner, assistant to the president for energy and climate change, in Copenhagen.

The trip has become more contentious in light of more than 1,000 leaked e-mails and documents, copied from the servers of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England. Climate skeptics have quoted portions of the documents as evidence that the case for global warming has been over-stated and that the research may have been biased. School officials have said that the quotations from the documents have been taken out of context and were brought forward now in an attempt to stain the conference before it begins.

U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican long known for his belief that global warming is “the greatest hoax every perpetuated on the American people,” has called for congressional hearings to determine if taxpayer-funded research was manipulated. He has also asked U.S. researchers to “secure” documents related to the British university.

The request for hearings comes as Phil Jones, the lead British researcher and author of many of the leaked documents, has stepped down from his post, pending a review of data security and how the scientist and university has responded to information requests. Because a professor in the meteorology department at Penn State University has also been implicated in the hacked documents, that school has also opened an investigation.

The controversy is disappointing, Vilsack said, because of the opportunities that lie ahead for rural America in conjunction with climate change legislation, including potential cap-and-trade legislation.

“I think this is the first time — when you look at all of what is going on in rural America with broadband expansion, with new energy opportunities, with climate change legislation, with our capacity to do a better job of linking local production to local consumption and creating additional markets, and our continued stress of trade and opening up markets — I think we are on the cusp of some real new opportunities in rural America that we haven’t seen in quite some time. I don’t think we should be fearful of it, I think we should embrace it,” he said.

Follow Lynda Waddington on Twitter


Comments

  • jrship

    Inhofe's conspiracy theory just keeps getting stranger and stranger. Now CRU somehow controls the minds of all the 800+ authors and 2500+ reviewers of the IPCC report. Give me a break.

    If there are any hearings there should be a full review of any and all alleged efforts to manipulate public opinion on climate science. I think that the IPCC scientific, peer-review process involving hundreds of PhD collaborators would hold up rather nicely compared to the industry funded, unpublished papers written by a two or three guys with predetermined conclusions at rightwing thinktanks that Inhofe relies on. Hearings would be just great, in fact. I'd love for Marc Moreno's emails to be subpoenaed. Let's get this all out in the open.

  • mas2

    “Now CRU somehow controls the minds of all the 800+ authors and 2500+ reviewers of the IPCC report.”

    Even if all 2500 agreed that “current climate change is dominated by anthropogenic CO2 emissions and, if not addressed, will lead to catastrophic consequences” – which they don't; there are still skeptics among the reviewers – there's no need to postulate that kind of fantasy. Only a few of those 2500 worked directly with the core scientific basis sections. The rest form their views based on the work of those few. They don't have to control minds, just the core data. Which they have.

    I do agree that full hearings would be great. I completely disagree on who would come out looking better. While the IPCC process does involve peer-reviewed papers, you are aware, aren't you, that clear corruption of the peer-review process is one of the things revealed in the leaked emails? And it can barely be called “scientific” since it was set up specifically to show anthropogenic influence on climate, not disinterestedly study climate change (look it up on IPCC's own site). On the other hand, the PUBLISHING skeptics number not two or three, but several hundreds, many with scientific credentials outshining their alarmist counterparts, and – marvel of marvels – a good number of their papers actually have made it into peer-reviewed publications (probably because the “gatekeepers” didn't figure out their implications until it was too late). Most haven't received a lousy dime from Exxon or any other “dirty” industry.

    Speaking of Exxon – over a 9-year period, they gave about $23 million total (~$2.5M/yr) to various groups which have ties to climate change skeptics (i.e., not all or even most of this went towards promoting AGW skepticism). In contrast, the U.S. Govt alone has spent an average of $1.6 BILLION per year over the last 20 years on climate research, with another $1.8 BILLION per year on climate-related technologies (which have no real use if AGW is debunked). So, poor little Exxon is corrupting the debate despite being outspent by well over 1,000-to-1? Give ME a break.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=604608391 facebook-604608391

    Not weather related but it is worth a read.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=604608391 facebook-604608391

    Not weather related but it is worth a read.

Switch to our mobile site