Archive for February, 2009

From Everyday Citizen

For any people to be able to exercise their rights effectively, they must have certain preconditions—a job, physical safety, education, adequate housing and medical care. Without those preconditions, those formal rights are a dead letter. They can’t be exercised. Labor unions have done more to provide those conditions for African Americans than any other social institution in the United States.

According to John Schmitt of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a higher percentage of African American workers (16.2 percent) belong to unions than the rest of the population (13.5 percent) for good reason. Unions serve the African American community well. It is true that unions, like the rest of American society, delayed opening their doors to African Americans for too long, but enormous progress has been made since it happened.

Union membership benefits both male and female African Americans. Black men earn more if they are in a union ($18.15 per hour) as opposed to only $13.50 for nonunion men. Unionized African American men are more likely to have health insurance (76.7 percent) than nonunion black men (65 percent). The same holds true for health insurance and pension coverage.
Black women in unions earn more ($17.20 an hour) than nonunion black women ($12.00),and are much more likely to have health care coverage and a pension.

For African American workers, the union advantage with respect to health insurance and pension coverage remains large, even after considering differences in workers’ characteristics. Unionized African American workers are about 16 percentage points more likely to have health insurance and about 19 percentage points more likely to have a pension than nonunion workers.
Even in low wage occupations, African Americans in unions earn more than nonunion African American workers in the same occupations and are more likely to have health insurance and a pension plan.

But African American workers also benefit the union movement. Dr. Everett Freeman, president of Albany State University in Albany, Ga., concluded in a study of blacks in leadership positions that there are more African Americans in leadership positions in labor unions than in any other social institution in America, except the black church.

That’s why the Employee Free Choice Act is important for African American workers. Union membership has been a passageway to the middle class for generations of African American workers. But the recession of the past decade has caused a depression in the black community. According to a 2007 study, 55 percent of the union jobs lost in 2004 were held by black workers, and African American women accounted for 70 percent of the union jobs lost by women in 2004.
Between 1983 and 2006, the percentage of African Americans represented by unions fell from 31.7 percent of all black workers to 16 percent, according to the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Yet, African Americans still are among the most likely to join unions. If the freedom to join unions is increased, African Americans, like many other struggling American workers, will be able to increase their union membership and make even greater economic strides in the future.

Edgar Moore is an instructor at the University of Nebraska—Omaha’s William Brennan Institute for Labor Studies.

From the Moultrie Observer

During the talks about the planned four-laning of Georgia Highway 133 from Valdosta through Moultrie to Albany, much has been said about the cost of the project. Less has been said about the economic impact such a thoroughfare would have on communities along the route.

And so, the Archway Project of Moultrie and Colquitt County plans to ask The University of Georgia to make such an economic impact study. It will cost about $14,000. The five counties that Highway 133 touches within this project will be asked to split the costs of the study.

“I think it will make a big difference when we meet and talk about this project to be able to show the economic benefits,” said Louie Perry, a member of the Archway executive committee.
Committee member Brooks Sheldon agreed, noting that it might also help to have UGA represented at some of the Highway 133 meetings after the study is done.

The cost impact study would encompass 65 miles of road. Not only would the four-lane connect Valdosta, Moultrie and Albany, but it would intersect other major thoroughfares such as a four-laned U.S. 319 as well a four-lane connecting to Columbus. Deemed as significant in the big picture is that three military bases (Fort Benning at Columbus, Moody Air Force Base, Hahira, and the Marine Supply Depot, Albany) would be connected with four-lanes.

Committee member Jimmy Jeter said while it might make more sense locally to immediately concentrate on a segment between Moultrie and Valdosta, he said he felt connecting the military installations would likely make looking at the entire route the most viable approach.
Perry said there’s little chance state money will go to this project any time soon.
“It will have to be federal money,” he said.

The latest federal stimulus plan from the Obama administration has roads projects included. However, the time element would most likely not include the Highway 133 project. That money would go to projects that are “shovel ready.”

Jeter said having the University of Georgia doing the economic impact study would give such a study more credibility as opposed to local entities coming up with estimates.

It is suggested that the study look at the impact on individual counties (Worth, Dougherty, Colquitt, Brooks and Lowndes). As well, it would look at the five counties combined as well as Congressional Districts 1, 2 and 8.
The economic impact numbers would be broken down into direct revenues, indirect revenues, induced economic returns (new spending created by the new income produced by the project), employment increases as well as additional government tax revenues.

At the moment, the estimated cost of the four-laning is put at $340 million. That number could escalate significantly over a nine-year completion of phases. It was initially posed that the section between Moultrie and Albany would get the first attention.

However, the entire project is way down on the DOT’s priority list.

From www.obamafoodorama.blogspot.com

Unbeknownst to most Americans, apparently we not only have the first Black/Bi-racial/Post- racial/African American president in our history, but we might also have the very first Black/Bi-racial/Post-racial/African American Secretary of Agriculture. On February 21, while giving a rambling, pandering speech to a group of black farmers at a conference in Albany, hosted by the Federation of Southern Cooperatives Land Assistance Fund, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack briefly touched on USDA’s long, troubled history of failing to promote people of color within its ranks, and failing to offer non-white and female farmers the equivalent assistance available to their white, male counter parts.

And then Vilsack made an excellent claim to close:…I’m frank to say I don’t know much about my roots. In fact, I’m pretty much a blank slate. What I know is that my mother was 23 years old – my birth mother was 23 years old – when I was born. She stayed for about a month in the orphanage and then she left and I’ve not had any contact with her since. I know I was fortunate enough to be adopted into a family and that my adopted Mom struggled with alcohol and prescription drug addiction and we went through some tough times. But I don’t know were I started. So I feel like I can claim I’m possibly connected to you folks. I know I don’t look that part. But I’ve watched my mother struggle with her addiction and I learned something about life from watching her overcome her addiction, that people of faith can literally move mountains….

Now, is Secretary Vilsack claiming he’s black because his birth mother might have been black, or is he claiming he’s black because his adopted mother, who apparently gave him a life-long eating disorder, was a liquor-happy pill head, and turned him into a person of faith, and by extension–black? Or–WTF?

Last year, a significant amount of coal-fired power plant proposals were shot down by regulators, and an increasing number of utilities are developing plans to convert to biomass. Is this a trend and, if so, will it continue?

By Anna Austin

The end of the coal era is perhaps not in the foreseeable future, but biomass power is becoming an increasingly popular option for power providers. Before biomass can overtake coal, however, a solid infrastructure to support the biomass power industry must be developed.

This effort would benefit from not only government support and tax incentives, but also the completion and evaluation of projects which will serve as forerunners in the nation’s energy transition.

Making the Switch According to the U.S. DOE, coal power plants account for 50 percent of power generation in the U.S., and more than 60 percent in the Southeast, which leads the nation in carbon dioxide emissions. In contrast, the U.S. Energy Information Administration says that wood and wood-derived fuels accounted for 39 million megawatt hours, or 0.9 percent of total net electricity generation for 2007 in the U.S. For the first time, these fuels were the largest sources of renewable electricity generation, accounting for 37.1 percent of total net renewable generation, excluding conventional hydroelectric generation.

Woody biomass power has caught the attention of Southern Co., one of the largest power companies in the U.S. The company is currently conducting technical and economic studies at multiple plants to evaluate the impact of converting to woody biomass power. These studies will provide a basic analysis to indicate whether these projects are economically feasible.

The Electric Power Research Institute is performing the studies and will compile data by investigating all relevant issues in full, including power conversion, unit operational changes, expected operation costs, new environmental controls, emissions, new fuel storage and handling equipment, required fuel supply, and local and regional fuel suppliers.

Southern Co.’s largest utilities provider Georgia Power has a massive project under way —o ne that may serve as a model for others — that will transform the 164 megawatt coal-fired Plant Mitchell, which is near Albany, to a 96 megawatt, 100 percent wood-fired plant. Pending approval from the Georgia Public Service Commission, the transformation will create the largest operating biomass power plant in the nation.

Meet Plant Mitchell

In recent years, Georgia Power has initiated a number of renewable action plans with Georgia Public Service Commission the state regulatory body.

“In general, we want to pursue the benefits that renewable energy resources have to offer,” says Kenny Smith, Georgia Power project manager. An obvious benefit biomass has over coal, which is notorious for its negative environmental effects, is that it is clean burning.

“This means significant reductions in certain emissions pollutants such as sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide and mercury, as well as being carbon neutral,” Smith says.

In addition, Smith points out the transition of Plant Mitchell will also allow the plant to embrace fuel diversity, and reap the cost benefits of using wood biomass as a fuel compared with coal.

“The cost of coal fuel has risen dramatically in the past year or so,” he says. “Not only that, but the projected cost for coal, natural gas and traditional fuels in 10, 20, 30 years has gone up substantially. That makes the idea of using wood chips as an alternative look more attractive than it did five or 10 years ago.”

According to the U.S. DOE, the price of coal has gone up from about $30 per ton in 2000 to $150 per ton in September 2008. “In a nutshell, when we looked at renewable fuels, particularly wood biomass, there are a lot more incentives than there used to be—and as time goes on, renewable generation technologies continue to advance and become potentially more affordable,” Smith says.

The incentives don’t end there. A project like this is also expected to result in a cost savings for customers, Smith points out, rather than a cost increase which many have been experiencing. In Georgia, although there are no renewable production tax credits in place, the purchase of biomass fuel is exempt from sales tax, whereas natural gas and coal aren’t.

“Over the life of this new biomass unit, fuel cost compared with coal cost would be roughly 30 percent less per year on a cost per kilowatt hour basis,” Smith says. “Operating and maintenance costs would be about 13 percent less.”

Cost, Sustainability and More

The costs of transitioning Plant Mitchell to biomass power have been carefully evaluated. Smith says capital costs will total $102.8 million, for 76 megawatts of net capacity.

“Those numbers are not the full project, but the portion of the project that will be put into the retail, or customer base,” he says. “A portion of the plant has been committed to wholesale and has different numbers, but those are the numbers that are in the public venue, although the total project is 96 megawatts.”

Although in terms of Plant Mitchell’s megawatt capacity, the number will drop significantly, Smith says in terms of energy—or kilowatt hours produced—it will produce more energy per year than the existing plant.

“This is because we have it running a lot more, because wood fuel is expected to be much more cost-effective than coal,” he says. As far as feedstock sustainability is concerned, Smith says that shouldn’t be an issue. “We’ve had two separate external studies done to find out how much wood and wood biomass material is available in the region around Plant Mitchell because we wanted to make sure there was enough for us, existing users of the wood and other proposed projects similar to ours.”

According to the sustainability studies there is a large amount of material available, somewhere in the neighborhood off 11 to 12 times what we would need for this project, according to Smith. “Georgia is rich in forestry and timberland resources, so there is more than enough available for this project.”

According to the Georgia Forestry Association, the state has 23.8 million acres of commercial forest land, more than any other state. When the project is able to move forward, it is expected to create 50 to 75 new jobs related to waste wood recovery. A logging crew would collect tops, limbs and unmerchantable timber, transform it into woodchips and haul it back to the plant to be unloaded.

Georgia Power expects to hear from the Public Service Commission by March 12, if it can go ahead with the project. Smith says he expects it will be a go.

“There has been a lot of strong support for the project from the PSC and other groups as well, he says. “The next big step is getting an air permit approved by the state Environmental Protection Division, which could take anywhere from 15 to 18 months.”

If the plan continues as scheduled, Georgia Power will receive an air permit between the spring and summer of 2010, begin the transition in 2011, and come on line prior to the summer of 2012. If the project succeeds, the company will look into converting more of its plants to biomass, Smith says.

“It’s unique,” he says. “It’s the first one of its kind for our company — so we want to get some experience under our belt and see how it goes before we initiate others like it.”

Combating Coal

More states are becoming aggressive in regulating emissions and approving proposals for building new coal plants. Washington currently prohibits coal plants with emissions exceeding those of natural gas plants. Maine has enacted a law requiring the Board of Environmental Protection to develop greenhouse gas emissions standards for coal gasification facilities, which has led to a moratorium on constructing any new coal gasification facilities until the standards are developed. Texas and California have implemented similar legislation.

The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, which has been an advocate for the Plant Mitchell project, believes that a federal renewable energy standard will be passed within the next two to five years. The U.S. House of Representatives passed a renewable energy standard last year, but it failed to pass in the Senate. In a speech at Virginia’s George Mason University in January, President Barack Obama said he supported a 25 percent by 2025 renewable energy standard.

The U.S. isn’t the only country trying to wean itself off coal. The province of Ontario, Canada, passed coal phase-out legislation, which calls for the end of coal-based power production by 2014. In Australia, the Australian Greens party is proposing to phase out coal power stations. Although slow, the dominance of clean, renewable energy seems to be coming.

It will be a long road full of challenges, but as the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said, “A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.”

Anna Austin is an Biomass Magazine staff writer. Reach her at aaustin@bbiinternational.com or (701) 738-4968.

By Gov. Sonny Perdue, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and House Speaker Glenn Richardson
Georgia Online News Service

Over the last six years, Georgia has invested heavily in transportation improvements, yet commuters are still stuck in traffic and economic development corridors still have not been expanded. As frustrating as it is to acknowledge, we have not achieved the value that we believe Georgians deserve because of a lack of focus, transparency and accountability at the Department of Transportation.

We share a commitment to do better. As the three people most accountable to Georgians, we announced a proposal last week that would completely transform the way we think about delivering transportation solutions in our state and dramatically improve the way transportation projects are planned, constructed and maintained.

The basic premise of this proposal is simple – transportation policy decisions should be made in a strategic manner by people who are representing the best interests of the entire state. And the decisions these people make should be executed in a manner that provides for transparency and accountability to the legislature and the people of Georgia.

The current structure of the DOT fails both of these. By relying on a board that represents congressional districts elected every few years by caucuses of legislators, the existing structure encourages parochial thinking and insulates the agency from those who are elected to serve our citizens. And the fact that this unaccountable board maintains sole discretion over a dedicated funding stream of over $2 billion provides very little transparency to the governor, the legislature and the people of this state that the money they receive is spent in an efficient and strategic manner.

Citizens and legislators alike have expressed their frustration with a lack of progress in transportation in Georgia, and a tangled web of bureaucracy that makes it virtually impossible to hold anyone accountable.

The proposal we have jointly developed will end that confusion.

Combining the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority and the State Road and Tollway Authority into the State Transportation Authority will create a lead organization responsible for implementing a clear, understandable plan to address Georgia’s statewide needs.

We are committed to standing up a system of transportation project delivery that is more transparent and more accountable. And it demands that a statewide, strategic plan is developed and a mechanism for budget appropriation, which is voted upon by every citizen’s state representative and senator, to ensure that plan is implemented.

But most of all, it places the burden of meeting our state’s transportation needs in the hands of those elected by and responsible to the people of Georgia. Given that responsibility, we are willing to continue to be accountable to the people of Georgia for the results.

By K. Patrick Jensen
Georgia Online News Service

The pleasure of some tobacco-fueled puffs is guaranteed to get a lot more expensive for the state’s smokers April 1 and perhaps even more so later if Georgia boosts the “sin tax” on cigarettes.

The Georgia Alliance for Tobacco Prevention, a coalition of anti-smoking groups, aims to continue with efforts to boost the state’s tax on cigarettes by $1 a pack even though a new federal law will raise taxes by 62 cents a pack on April 1.

Right now Georgia receives 37 cents a pack and the federal tax is 39 cents. With the new federal tax of $1.01 and a proposed $1.37 Georgia tax, smokers could end up paying $2.38 a pack in taxes to imbibe in their not-so-healthy habit.

Don’t expect a smoke-filled room as the issues surrounding the proposal light up a hearing Wednesday of the House Ways and Means Committees Subcommittee on Public Policy and Finance. The hearing is on House Bill 39, which also would boost the cost of smokeless tobacco to 25 percent of the wholesale price, up from 10 percent, but leaves cigars alone.

“I’m sure there will be fireworks going off left, right and center,” says Scott Mathews of the American Cancer Society of the hearing. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Ron Stephens (R-Savannah).

Republican legislative leaders earlier in the session spoke against any type of tax increases, including the cigarette tax. And retailers plan to testify against any state cigarette-tax increase.
An estimated one in five Georgia adults and 19 percent of high school-age youth are considered smokers despite four decades of research detailing the health detriments of smoking and second-hand smoke.

Two goals are at the heart of increases in taxes on tobacco – raising public funds and improving public health by reducing consumption, especially among young people. And they’re not necessarily in that order although bad economic times brought increased consideration of raising tobacco taxes for states and the federal government.

The feds struck first on the revenue front by boosting the tobacco tax to raise $32.8 billion in the next four years to give the states to cover minors under the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. That’s a good thing for the states.

But what’s bad for the states is at least 16 of them, including Georgia, Mississippi, Kentucky and South Carolina, were weighing significant cigarette-tax increases to fill budget holes. Georgia’s deficit was heading toward $3 billion-ish before the federal stimulus passed with help for finances of all states.

It’s uncertain how much the “pass the buck” legislation would raise in Georgia although an estimate from the Georgia State University Fiscal Research Center is $449.2 million. That’s a hunk of change for the $2.6 billion-ish hole in budget.

But how real is it?

That number is cited in a Feb. 11 Fiscal Note on House Bill 39. The report goes through the mathematical reasons for the amount but still notes that “there is a good amount of uncertainty.”

State Fiscal Economist Kenneth Heaghney said the Fiscal Note did not take into account the federal tax hike, so income would be short of the cited $449.2 million if the total tax boost of $1.62 is figured.

“Anything that raises prices would cause consumers to consume less or find ways to avoid” paying the increase, he said.

A Feb. 20 report by the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute on House Bill 39 doesn’t mention the federal cigarette tax rise in citing the $449.2 million figure.

Alan Essig, the institute’s executive director, said the report should be rewritten to mention the federal tax hike, but says the money’s not the main point anyway. “Basically, the movement to raise cigarette tax is a health issue more than a revenue issue,” he said.

Supporters of raising the tax say that every 10 percent increase in cigarette prices reduces the adult smoking rate by 2 percent to 5 percent and youth smoking by 6.5 percent or so, according to studies.

Figures compiled by the Georgia Alliance for Tobacco Prevention estimate the $1-a-pack tax would result in 82,300 fewer youth smokers, 49,500 fewer adult smokers, more than 39,400 lives saved from premature smoking-caused deaths, and $1.9 million in long-term health care savings.

The Alliance – which includes the American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, and American Heart Association – also points out 75 percent of Georgia voters support a $1 boost, especially if it goes to health care.

And certainly the $1.62 combo fed-state tax boost would discourage even more smoking and result in fewer health costs, experts agree.

The Feb. 20 report by the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute points out that raising revenue on tobacco is regressive in that the tax mainly hits those with low incomes who also tend to smoke more than those making more money.

The biggest rise in tobacco taxes came on July 1, 2003, when for the first time in 30 years it rose from 12 cents to 37 cents per pack and for the first time smokeless tobacco was taxed. From 2002 to 2006, cigarette sales dropped 7.8 percent, according to the institute’s report, and state revenues rose hitting $240 million in fiscal 2008.

Bruce A. Seaman, a Georgia State University economist who wrote an analysis of the tax hike, agrees the federal cigarette-tax boost to fund SCHIP “is a pretty big increase and would obviously eat into the revenue benefits to the state.”

He has not updated figures from his 2003 report but says one concern from a buck a pack increase could be some bootlegging from other states or increased Internet sales from Native American reservations, not even a major factor in 2003.

He points out even with the extra $1 increase, Georgia would still rank low in cigarette taxes. In 2007, its cigarette tax rate ranked 43rd among states.

One issue could be border sales since South Carolina now has a 7 cent sales tax on a pack, 51st in a ranking that includes Washington, DC. South Carolina is considering a 50-cent-a-pack hike.
Jim Tudor of the Georgia Association of Convenience Stores, says his group’s stores depend on 40 percent of business from sales of tobacco products.

Georgia is surrounded by states with most having lower tobacco taxes.

A rise in state taxes on top of the federal increase could drive stores and jobs across borders, particularly South Carolina’s, he said.

“We’ve never had such a double whammy before,” Tudor said of the federal and state proposals.
Seaman, Essig and others caution on relying on sin taxes to fund state government too much since the point of such a tax is to reduce use of the product. Economists speak of “price elasticity” or that some sales are lost when cigarette taxes are increased. In short, there’s a chance of overtaxing to at least get fewer eggs from the golden goose on subsequent tax hikes.

Have no doubt there’s still gold in raising the state tax on tobacco whether a dollar or less. But the stronger argument for a tax hike is a moral one preventing smoking and saving lives. The “double whammy” of the fed/state combo would accomplish this big time in a former tobacco-producing state. There would be an economic cost of some jobs and perhaps some trips to South Carolina or other border states.

But since the decision ultimately will be decided by the Republican majority who are in a party trying to regain its brand of being fiscally conservative, don’t expect an increase in the state sales tax on cigarettes. After all, the feds did the heavy lifting of raising tobacco taxes; the state will reap that reward with funding for child insurance; the tax rise will cut consumption saving lives anyway; and GOP candidates can point to those tax-and-spend Democrats in Washington as a campaign issue.

Meanwhile, Essig observes month after month while other Georgia revenues decline, the amounts raised by alcohol and tobacco continue to rise. “I guess it’s true that during rough times smoking and drinking go up,” he said.

K. Patrick Jensen is a former editor at The Atlanta Journal-Constitution who writes about faith and suburban issues.

Click to enlarge

Keep Albany-Dougherty Beautiful to Host
Free Electronic Recycling Collection Day

· Electronics account for 2 to 5% of landfill volumes, but they contribute up to 70% of the toxins found in landfills.

· Electronic waste is growing at three times the rate of other municipal waste.
· TV’s contain hazardous materials such as lead and mercury.

When: February 21, 2009

Where: Parking Lot Behind the Civic Center
Front Street and Mercer Avenue

Time: 9:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. / Rain or Shine

Why: To promote the proper disposal of unwanted electronic equipment