Special coverage in the Trump Era

From Public Citizen's Corporate Presidency site: "44 Trump administration officials have close ties to the Koch brothers and their network of political groups, particularly Vice President Mike Pence, White House Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and White House budget director Mick Mulvaney."

Dark Money author Jane Mayer on The Dangers of President Pence, New Yorker, Oct. 23 issue on-line

Can Time Inc. Survive the Kochs? November 28, 2017 By
..."This year, among the Kochs’ aims is to spend a projected four hundred million dollars in contributions from themselves and a small group of allied conservative donors they have assembled, to insure Republican victories in the 2018 midterm elections. Ordinarily, political reporters for Time magazine would chronicle this blatant attempt by the Kochs and their allies to buy political influence in the coming election cycle. Will they feel as free to do so now?"...

"Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for America" see: our site, and George Monbiot's essay on this key book by historian Nancy MacLean.

Full interview with The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer March 29, 2017, Democracy Now! about her article, "The Reclusive Hedge-Fund Tycoon Behind the Trump Presidency: How Robert Mercer Exploited America’s Populist Insurgency."

Democracy Now! Special Broadcast from the Women's March on Washington

The Economics of Happiness -- new version

Local Futures offers a free, shortened version of its award-winning documentary film The Economics of Happiness. This 19-minute abridged version "brings us voices of hope of in a time of crisis." www.localfutures.org.

What's New?

February 13, 2017

"On 22 April, empiricists around the country will march for science"

"The grassroots team coordinating the March for Science in Washington, D.C., have now set a date: 22 April. And they are inviting organizers in cities around the world to lead parallel demonstrations."

By Lindzi Wessel  Feb. 1, 2017 in Science Magazine

On 22 April, empiricists around the country will march for science

Photo: Sarah Wagner

... "Organizers have said they want to appeal to anyone who, as its mission statement puts it, “champions publicly funded and publicly communicated science as a pillar of human freedom and prosperity.” Organizers have emphasized that the march is not just for practicing scientists, but for “anyone who believes in empirical science.”

The event, at first just an idea bouncing around social media, gained real life last month after a website, Twitter account, and public Facebook page—now with more than 300,000 likes—sprang up over the course of a few days. An affiliated “secret” Facebook group attracted almost 800,000 members in less than a week, and more than 70 Twitter handles have popped up to promote sister marches across the country.

<form name="myForm" method="post" action="http://pages.aaas.sciencepubs.org/newsletters/signup" id="daily_news_sign_up" class="form-inline form-newsletter"></form>

Scientists began organizing only 3 days after President Donald Trump took office, as alarm—sparked by a campaign that in many ways appeared to dismiss the contributions of scientific research—ignited over Senate hearings on controversial cabinet picks and mandates curtailing public communication from scientific agencies. Many scientists took the administration’s promotion of “alternative facts” and continued shunning of scientific leaders as signs that science may come under attack.

It’s not the first time that Trump’s actions have triggered activism among scientists, a group that, as a whole, has traditionally couched itself as nonpartisan. At the December 2016 meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco, California, researchers rallied together to protest climate change doubters among Trump’s cabinet picks. And at the Women’s March on Washington, dozens of lab coat–clad scientists marched together, armed with pro-science signs.

But the march has spurred debate about how its message should be framed—and whether it is even a good idea. Some fear a demonstration led by researchers might only serve to paint scientists as an interest group, further politicizing scientific issues. And at least one veteran science lobbyist has urged organizers to make sure it’s a march for science, not scientists." ...
read full article here