Loretto Earth Network News Elections 2012 — Vote for the Environment! Summer 2012
Vol. 20, No. 3
A Campaign Issue in Disguise in 2012:
The Environment By Maureen Fiedler SL
T
V pundits say that the 2012 election is all about the economy… jobs, jobs, jobs. You don’t hear much (directly) about the environment: clean air and water, renewable energy or endangered species (unless one political party is talking about the other!). But make no mistake about it… this election IS about the environment because environmental issues are intimately intertwined with the economy. The essential question is not economic growth… but what KIND of growth. The question isn’t just “jobs;” it’s what KIND of jobs. Green jobs? Or jobs mining coal and refining oil? These concerns touch more than the presidential election. We need public servants at all levels who are “ecoliterate,” i.e., who understand and are willing to act on the findings of climate science. That includes members of the House and Senate, governors and state legislators, as well as the president. But electoral discussions of the environment are usually disguised in other language. The first disguise is a discussion of “regulations.” We frequently hear something like this: “Governmental regulations are killing us…stifling business…holding back job creators!” Next time you hear this, ask yourself, “What regulations are they talking about?” Many of those “awful”
regulations are environmental rules to ensure clean air and water, keep toxins out of our food supply and take steps to curb climate change.
For example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a new regulation that would – for the first time – put limits on carbon pollution from coal producers, requiring some level of “carbon capture and storage.” The coal industry is furious; they call it a “war on coal.” Yet, this is the very pollution that must be cut if our planet is to deal adequately with the crisis of climate change. The second disguise is framed something like this: “We have to create more jobs…good jobs… in the energy sector.” One clever attempt to put out this message comes from the so-called “I am an Energy Voter” ads on TV, on buses… just about everywhere. A variety of ordinary looking Americans look you in the eye and say something like this:
“We will need more energy in coming decades, and energy promotes jobs. Join me. I am an energy voter.” What they don’t say is what KIND of energy they mean. But if you google “Energy Voter,” you discover that this campaign is funded by the American Petroleum Institute! They’re not talking about clean, renewable energy; they’re talking about oil! The question of “energy jobs” is also a way of pushing the infamous Keystone Pipeline which would bring oil from the tar sands of Canada to the United States. One of the leading climate scientists in the United States, James Hansen, says the Keystone Pipeline would mean “essentially game over” for the climate. It would mean extracting some of the dirtiest oil on the planet, transporting it to Texas for refining, and in the process, threatening the entire pipeline path with oil spills, including the Ogallala Aquifer which provides up to 30% of our nation’s agricultural water. But this discussion is usually framed in terms of “jobs,” not climate… and everyone wants more job creation. Even President Obama (who believes climate science) is in a tight political spot with this issue, since it is the president who must approve this pipeline. He has approved part of it, but the struggle continues as more demonstrations are planned at the White House in August and September. Continued on page 3
Editor’s Note Mary Ann Coyle SL
Element meditation - Air By JoAnn Gates CoL
C
H
ere we are in the midst of the Jubilee year looking for hope at a time of wondering about future days to come. Wherein does hope lie? In this issue Maureen Fiedler proposes the political system ought to be analyzed and it must be grassroots folks who can turn the political tide. Maureen’s name is familiar to LENNews readers and her questions lead us to think about new frontiers to visit. Libby Comeaux is ever careful that we adhere to a strict ethical code as we wonder about public ownership of the stream waters of Colorado. We are grateful for her honesty and challenge to our thinking. Emily Thenhaus, Loretto volunteer at the U.N. office tweaks our interest in Rio + 20 and recounts some disappointing moments in Brazil. Natalie Wing SL brings us back to reality in exploring mining violations at Gualemala’s Marlin Mine. Jane Blewett, through her lovely verse, relates the way change can happen. And JoAnn Gates provides us with a final meditation on the Earth Element Air. As with it all, sometimes it is a cartoon that tells a story better than words. The New Yorker’s cartoonist, Mick Stevens, lets his drawing give us time to quietly think and actually smile a bit.
all to mind the air element. Air is the only one of the four elements that is invisible. While air lacks any discernible form or color or texture, it makes everything else come alive, both literally and figuratively. Externally, we measure the air by the effect it has on other things: the sail of a boat billowing, a cool breeze on a warm day, drifts of snow across an open field, a force that takes down trees and demolishes buildings within seconds, fallen leaves dancing in a circle, newly washed clothes that dry on the line. Air is the medium of sound-waves. Bird-song depends on air, as does the sound made by every animal. Internally, and likely with no conscious effort, we’re taking in and giving out the air element right now. As air enters our bodies, oxygen is taken into the bloodstream, providing nourishment for every organ and system in the body, and then exhaled in the form of carbon dioxide. The involuntary system of breathing is celebrated with the first wail of every newly-born infant. Air is what allows us to communicate, to teach, to sing, to laugh aloud, and watching its slow ebbing is how we keep vigil as someone nears death. There is no boundary between inner air and outer air. Air cannot be divided, and what’s within us is there simply for a few moments before it becomes one, again, with the air that is outside of us. Each time we breathe in, we inhale molecules that have been a part of another person, plant, animal. Every one of our 17,000 breaths per day could be a reminder that we are connected with every being. The carbon dioxide we exhale as waste is what plants need to convert sunlight to energy, and the oxygen they give off as waste is exactly what we need to live. The 300 acres of trees on Motherhouse land alone offer about 1200 tons of oxygen per year and absorb about 1800 tons of carbon dioxide. The air that cycles through us connects us intimately with everything else that lives. We can neither create air nor contain it, for to hold onto it is to die. In fact, we can only live by continually letting go of the air element. And so we reflect that the air element, like the others, is not “us.” It never was “us.” At the very basis of things—not just spiritually or metaphorically speaking, but at the verymost basic level of our physical existence—our lives are not our own. With gratitude to Wildmind Buddhist Meditation, www.wildmind.org, for some of these statements; and to Elaine Prevallet, who often reminds us that our lives are not our own.
Page 2
LENN Summer 2012
Election 2012
Continued from page 1
The third disguise is the budget, or the deficit. Deficit hawks love to criticize the Obama Administration for subsidizing Solyndra, a solar panel company that (unfortunately) went out of business. But it’s also a not-so-subtle way of slamming alternative energy industries. We need more solar, wind, geothermal energy, and some may need subsidies to compete with oil, coal and gas. Moreover, these same deficit hawks rarely mention the generous government subsidies for oil, gas and coal. These industries are the leading sources of carbon pollution, and eliminating these subsidies could save up to $113 billion over 10 years. Sounds like a plan to reduce the deficit. But deficit hawks? — they’d rather cut food stamps. Now and then, the disguise disappears. Occasionally, we will hear an open discussion of “climate science.” Do various candidates believe the scientific evidence of global warming and the fact that it’s caused largely by human activity, or not? We saw this discussion in the Republican primaries, in which most candidates revealed themselves as “climate deniers” or at least “climate skeptics.” (Romney, for the record, is considered a “climate skeptic.”) This belief in climate science is, of course, basic— very basic. If an elected official is to act on the most critical issue of the 21st century, she or he has to believe the science is real. If someone doesn’t believe that human activity is the major cause, they have no reason to act to change it.
Questions to ask candidates for public office: If you attend campaign events for federal or state candidates, and have a chance to ask a question, here are a few environmental questions you might ask: 1. Do you believe in climate science? Do you believe that human activity is a major cause of global warming? 2. Do you favor eliminating subsidies for fossil fuel industries like oil, gas and coal? 3. Would you favor government subsidies for renewable energy industries? 4. Do you favor completion of the Keystone Oil Pipeline? 5. Do you believe that “fracking” should be strictly regulated, or even forbidden? 6. Do you favor international agreements in which the United States would work together with other nations to stop global warming?
Finally, at the state level, there are often debates about “fracking”: a method of extracting natural gas from shale rock using powerful chemicals. This is a dangerous process which has dirtied drinking water in areas where it is being done. Some say it has caused small earthquakes in those areas. But, whether it’s disguised or occasionally in the open, the environment is an issue in the 2012 elections. If we are to save the planet, we need eco-literate and eco-friendly public servants. It’s up to us to lift the disguises and figure out what candidates are really talking about! LENN Summer 2012 Page 3
Rio+20: The Future We Want? By Emily Thenhaus, Loretto intern at UN
O
n June 15 I set out for Brazil to attend the U.N.’s Rio+20 Conference as a Loretto volunteer for our UN office. I thought back to my first international adventure when I traveled to El Salvador on a service immersion trip with Nerinx Hall. Then my worldview was a bit smaller. This time I travelled with my fellow Nerinx alumna, Sally Dunne, to this very large country. There remained one similarity between these two trips. Both were made possible by the Loretto Community’s generosity and commitment to peace and justice. This opportunity to attend Rio+20 allowed me not only to share the work of the Loretto UN office but also to learn from global peoples and join with them in the attempt to impact the outcomes of this historic gathering. Sharing the outcomes of the Central Appalachia and Chicago Women and Climate Justice Tribunals hosted in partnership with Rosa Lizarde CoL of the Feminist Task Force and numerous grassroots organizations, was one of the primary motivations in our trip to Rio. At these events, grassroots women from areas of historic poverty were given a platform to testify to the ways in which
Loretto Earth Network News
A publication of the Loretto Community
Editor: Mary Ann Coyle SL 3126 S Osceola Street Denver, CO 80236-2332
Email: macoyle303@comcast.net
www.lorettocommunity.org
Layout: Nancy Wittwer SL
they and their communities have been impacted by climate issues and are seeking climate justice. In Central Appalachia, women spoke about the impact of mountaintop removal mining and in Chicago, the consequences of coal-fired power plants and toxic waste disposal in the metropolitan area. In Rio we presented the outcomes of these Tribunals in two ways. On June 21, the Feminist Task Force hosted a Rio+20 side event: Organizing for Change: Women’s Tribunals as Civil Society Advocacy. At this event, co-sponsored by Loretto, women from Asia, Africa, Latin America and the U.S. gave voice to the impact of climate change and climaterelated issues on their lives and communities. We also were able to share the short videos and reports created to summarize the testimony and recommendations of each U.S. Tribunal. Our Rio delegation sought out other opportunities to learn more about and address the issues raised. Throughout the week, we attended sessions at the People’s Summit, a civil society mobilization that took place outside of the official negotiations. At these meetings, women from around the world testified to the impact of extractive industries in the communities of Latin America and West Africa. We joined with the women in their march. We worked with the Women’s Caucus at official Rio+20 sessions, reporting on Twitter about the statements by governments and stood with women from around the world as they demonstrated, waving scarves and signs during the negotiations denouncing the weak and/or absent protections for women’s rights in the outcome document. At the end of the conference, I left with mixed emotions over Rio+20’s
outcomes. I find myself in agreement with those who deem Rio’s outcome document, entitled The Future We Want to be an utter disappointment. In the months leading up to Rio, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon declared that this conference was a once-in-a-generation opportunity, that the summit was too important to fail, and that the world could not wait another 20 years to make the changes necessary to ensure its sustainable future. And yet, this historic conference came to a close with next to no concrete commitments, but what is seen by many to be a rollback on rights previously affirmed in other UN conferences, specifically women’s reproductive rights. As I departed Rio, the hope that I found was not in “The Future We Want” but in the future being made in the powerful actions by grassroots women and men, leading sustainable development projects at the local level despite the lack of leadership by heads of state. While small advancements may come about as a result of the official Rio+20 process, this conference has nonetheless affirmed my belief in the well-known words of Margaret Mead. “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” For more information, photos, and video material, visit our Rio blog: lorettoinrio.tumblr.com
Page 4
LENN Summer 2012
Maudilia Lopez Cardona: The Story of an Indigenous Woman and the impact of Marlin Mine (Goldcorp, Inc) in San Miguel, Guatemala By Natalie Wing SL
M
audilia, age 38, was born in a rural community near a town called Comitancillo in the department of San Marcos, Guatemala. She is an indigen of the Mam culture. Her childhood memories are of hunger and poverty as well as domestic violence. She watched her mother suffer. At a very young age she was determined to help her mother escape from her situation. Early on Maudilia and her family worked as seasonal laborers in coffee plantations in the coastal region. She recalls a difficult time in her childhood when she had to leave her home at 7:00 a.m. to beg food from neighbors. She wandered throughout the pueblo until late in the afternoon when someone finally gave her 5 pounds of corn. Returning to her house, dizzy and weak, she collapsed in the kitchen while her mother began making tortillas as her brothers and sisters waited hungrily. When 13, she left home to work in the house of another family. At the same time, she took the opportunity to study in school. Both her employer and the students in the school ridiculed Maudilia. People made fun of her because she was indigenous. Even so, she learned quickly and proved to be a bright student. In the pueblo, Maudilia encountered religious sisters and decided to enter their community. She describes her spiritual formation in the novitiate as being rigid and fearbased. After seven years, Maudilia left and embraced her Mayan-based spirituality. She recovered her cultural identity in connection with the cosmos, mother earth and the vision of liberation. Around the same time, her mother earned her GED and a diploma as a nursing assistant. Her mother also began the legal process of separation from her husband.
At the invitation of Father Eric, a Belgian priest, Maudilia began pastoral work in the pueblo of San Miguel. While working in the parish, she and her mother took advantage of personal growth workshops. Both made a marked improvement in their self-esteem and considered these workshops to have been lifechanging. As part of her life-long dream, Maudilia began pursuing advanced studies in theology with scholarship money from the Loretto Community. Her thesis, now in process, is about Mam women’s spirituality.
In San Miguel, Maudilia began working as a human rights activist in response to the serious abuses by Marlin Mine. Her role is to defend the land rights of the people and to protect the environment as well as the Mam culture and way of life. She has received death threats and faces many conflicts. In spite of all her difficulties, she maintains her course in humble service to marginalized people of her pueblo. As a priority, she continues her own personal development while deepening her spirituality. Marlin Mine bought land from the indigenous campesinos through deceptive tactics. Representatives from the mine told the people that they were going to begin a
community development project of hothouse nurseries for flowers and vegetables. The people willingly sold their land to the mining company for a very low price. The majority of the indigenous people who sold the land were illiterate, so they agreed to all the terms of agreement that were presented in the contract. Then, to the people’s great dismay, the mining company began clearing the forest and leveling the mountains. Their water sources were diverted and in some areas depleted. As the company began dumping toxic materials, the water became contaminated and people began to get sick. Jobs at the mine were offered; many people from out of town assumed these positions. Meanwhile, new businesses of bars and prostitution began to spring up. The indigenous people saw their land, their culture and way of life disregarded. Many conflicts ensued as the town became divided between those in favor and those against the mining company. A group of indigenous women began protesting in defense of their rights. They participated in non-violent acts of disobedience by refusing to relinquish their land, blocking roadways, cutting electrical cables, and staging public demonstrations. Many of these women received death threats. Some were imprisoned and tortured. Over time, this group of women began to gain media attention and, in response, several international environmental groups came to their assistance. Maudilia Lopez Cardona is one of the leading organizers. She serves as a local contact person for the international network of environmental organizations. She has denounced Marlin Mine publicly in the Guatemalan Constitutional Court and in the Guatemalan Ministry of Human Rights. Maudilia is also a friend of Mary Peter Bruce SL and Natalie Wing SL. One day she may become a comember of Loretto.
LENN Summer 2012 Page 5
Initiatives Would Bring Public Trust Doctrine Back to Colorado By Libby Comeaux CoL
I
f petitioners collect the required 86,000 signatures by August 6, the Colorado ballot in November will offer two citizen initiatives that would change the state’s highly complex water rights system. I first learned about them the evening of January 28, 2012 and have been trying to figure them out ever since. Just what is going on here? In one respect, it seems to be about the enclosure of the commons. The commons refers to an aspect of nature that is essential to the life of all and to which all should have access. Over time it has been necessary to try various methods to curtail the effects of individual greed on public access to the commons. With water in Colorado, the established method is “first in time, first in right” – adjudicated priority rights to use water based on who first put the water to beneficial use. In a drought, you might say that LIFO applies (“last in, first out”), as the most junior water rights holders must go without. The Colorado Constitution acknowledges public ownership of the stream waters of Colorado, dedicated to the use of the people of the state – “subject to appropriation.” Currently, the waters in Colorado are “over-appropriated” – more water is adjudicated for beneficial use than there is water! This is what is meant by enclosure of the commons. It’s originally there to benefit everyone, but after a while it’s gated off and no one can get in. Now that’s an overstatement. Municipalities in Colorado do a responsible job of securing water rights, planning and managing them to provide for the needs of humans and encouraging water conservation. And the law does allow them to bump up in the priority order during a drought if really necessary to provide for the survival needs of people.
Did I mention this system is all about people? Well, until recently. When it comes to creatures like fish, a new Colorado law empowers one (and only one) Colorado agency to secure water rights for them – to the extent water rights are available for purchase, donation, or loan. These rights take their place in the priority order and generally get the LIFO treatment in a drought.
As to the requirement of “beneficial use,” this term is mostly about the economy. Industrial hog farms and horizontal fracking, for example, are “beneficial use.” Water rights usually go to the highest bidder, and the most senior rights command the highest price. People cannot sue to prevent a proposed water use on the basis that it would harm public health or be unwise in a semi-desert ecosystem facing an unprecedented water crisis. Readers of this newsletter are aware that the consequences and costs of this impending global emergency go unrecognized in mainstream media and can probably not be calculated. When the Colorado Supreme Court disavowed the public trust doctrine, it left Colorado without a typical feature of the common law that treats government as trustee of nature for the benefit of future generations. So
these citizens have proposed a bold solution, which I attempt to describe in the rest of this article, as I have struggled to understand its words and the statements made by its proponents in official documents. Taking Initiatives #3 and #45 together, they would reinforce the state constitution to reiterate the simple baseline of public ownership of water for the use of the people – “subject to” legitimate use by those with adjudicated water rights. To clarify, a water right is not like full title to a house, but more like a deed with deed restrictions. Use would be beneficial only if it were for the common good – a term broader than commerce. The public trust doctrine would return, meaning for example that the people would have access to enjoy any stream in Colorado. And public officials could not sell to private parties any water use rights held by Colorado. Public officials would be accountable to the public as Colorado trustees of the hydrologic cycle for the benefit of future generations and ecosystems. People could sue to enforce these provisions. To unify water administration, rights to use ground water would be adjudicated just like the right to use water in streams. So the Colorado practice of giving landowners title to the underlying ground water would be overturned to the extent that the landowners would have to get these use rights adjudicated like users of stream water have to do. Anyone with a water use right would have to return water unimpaired to the public after use, without doing it irreparable harm, to protect the natural elements of the public’s water estate, the natural environment, and the public’s use and enjoyment of the water. Returning every drop does not seem to be the intent, as for example it is natural for irrigation to end up in vegetables that Continued on page 7
Page 6
LENN Summer 2012
Public Trust
Continued from p 6 benefit the public and remain in the natural hydrologic cycle. And current law allows transmountain diversions and ground water to be totally used up. The interpretation might need to limit the prohibition of irreparable harm to water quality and/or permanent unnatural removal of significant quantities from the hydrologic cycle. There’s no guarantee that any of the proposed language, if passed, would be interpreted in ways described above. No one really understands what changes the citizen initiative would ultimately make or what the full consequences and costs would be. The many intricacies in the proposals present unique challenges to Colorado water law that will take a long time to come clear. Debate in the legislature and complex litigation can leave the status of currently held water rights in question for years. Will a crisis in commerce or water stability ensue? Will future generations benefit from just-in-time measures to address a catastrophic water crisis? Only time will tell. But you can see why they are trying. Perhaps they can even manage to foster a public conversation that respects the integrity of the global water cycle, ecological justice, and Colorado’s responsibility as the recipient of waters graciously offered us from the sky. For more information on the petition drive, go to protectcoloradowater. org/ For the position of the mainstream Colorado water community, go to www.cowatercongress.org and click Public Trust Initiatives in the left column. For a Citizens Guide to Colorado Water Law, go to www.cfwe. org and click Online Store in the horizontal blue bar at the top.
What Will It Take To Renew The Earth? It Will Take People! By Jane Blewett prophet-people who dare to lay bare the fallacies that blind and choke us even when we cannot hear their words or dream their dreams; parent-people who look with love on the work of their creation and refuse to leave their children only a heritage of destruction; nurture-people who grow plants and feed birds and pick up dirt from the earth and love what is green, fresh and growing; healing-people whose hands touch others into life and well-being struggling always against the forces of death and devastation; poet-people who call us beyond where we are, point to the lastingness of life, the folly of choosing death ever; fun-people who lift up and lighten and laugh others into fruitfulness and courage for the long haul; women-people whose role through time has been to nurture, to empower others, to make grow, to make clean, to make new again; nature-people whose eyes are clear and open, inviting trust and close bonding with the total Earth Community, trees and toads, fish and feathered friends, dogs and cats, water, wind and stars; science-people who have shown us our tiny, blue-green “Christmas tree ornament” in space and helped us call it “home”; young-people who have nothing to gain by destruction and death but death itself; old-people who have tasted the fruits of the earth and know them to be good, luscious and lasting; justice and peace people who cry out against the oppressors of people, the destroyers of the earth, those who would bomb and burn and obliterate; little-people who don’t know themselves to be special but who are in truth the ‘salt of the earth,’ feeding and clothing and housing the human family, tending the soil, growing the food, blessing the land by their very presence from one end of the day to the next; THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO “RENEW THE FACE OF THE EARTH.” JOIN THEM!
LENN Summer 2012 Page 7
In Their Own Words The most telling and profound way of describing the evolution of the universe would undoubtedly be to trace the evolution of love. Teilhard de Chardin When we tug at a single thing in nature we find it attached to the rest of the world. John Muir All creation beckons us. Our planet is crying out to hear the voices of love. Judy Cannato Prayer is nothing but the inhaling and exhaling of the one breath of the Universe. Hildegard of Bingen
Those who dwell among the beauties and mysteries of Earth are never alone or weary of life. Rachel Carson Few people change alone. We must choose friends and colleagues who will push us to what we thought we could not do. Frances Moore LappĂŠ
TO ORDER