Connect with us

Politics

After debate, input from Marla Maples, Senate panel advances Ileana Garcia’s anti-weather modification bill

Published

on


A measure by Miami Republican Sen. Ileana Garcia aimed at banning weather modification in Florida cleared its first committee hurdle after some debate, including comments in support of the proposal from the President’s second wife.

The Senate Environmental and Natural Resources Committee voted 6-3 along party lines to advance the bill (SB 56), which Garcia amended to impose far steeper punishments on those who violate its strictures.

Garcia faced questions from her three Democratic colleagues on the panel — Kristen Arrington, Carlos G. Smith and Tina Polsky — about what information she based her bill on, how the state and federal government would handle and divvy up enforcement, and what the cost would be to Floridians.

Garcia said there is ample evidence available online, including on the websites of the White House, World Economic Forum and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration showing that weather modification is a long-standing and ongoing practice.

There’s also no shortage of anecdotal evidence, she said, citing countless phone calls her office has received about the matter from residents complaining of unexplained weather phenomena and various health maladies.

Florida today has more than a dozen provisions on the licensing, regulation and control of weather modification meant to cause or disperse rain, snow, fog or other atmospheric conditions. But for the last decade, even though it’s still going on, Garcia said, the state hasn’t received a single license application.

That’s a problem, she said, and Florida needs better information about what’s going on and should provide residents with a way to report any suspicious activity they see.

“Some would call it concerns. Others would call it conspiracy theories. But I thought that perhaps this bill would allow us to start somewhere where we can start to separate fact from fiction,” she said.

“We don’t have a lot of regulations regarding airspace. We place a huge amount of emphasis on water quality control, and I think we should do the same with our air quality (because) not just anybody should be up there playing ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark.’”

If passed, SB 56 or its House companion (HB 477) by Dade City Republican Rep. Kevin Steele would repeal Florida’s existing statutes on weather modification and prohibit the practice outright.

Violators would face fines of $100,000, a sum far higher than the initial $10,000 penalty Garcia had in her bill to begin with. That was already considerably steeper than the usual $500 penalty associated with second-degree misdemeanors, which the violation would be classified as.

Money the state collects from penalizing unauthorized weather modifiers would go into Florida’s Air Pollution Control Trust Fund to establish and maintain a dedicated email, telephone line and online form to facilitate related complaints. The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) would be tasked with first investigating those complaints, which it then could relay as needed to the Department of Health or Division of Emergency Management.

Garcia said 32 other states have already passed similar legislation. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, 10 states have outlawed weather modification — known also as cloud seeding — or were considering such legislation by the end of 2024.

“I’ve been researching,” Garcia said, adding that she has been “tiptoeing” around the issue to avoid using “buzzwords” that trigger immediate skepticism.

“Yet many will complain — a lot of our constituents have — that there’s activity going on, aircrafts flying by, some type of condensation. And let’s call a spade a spade: chemtrails. That’s the term that the conspiracy theorists are coined with,” she said. “But think about what the concerns are: health risks … including respiratory issues. I get a lot of those complaints. Also allergies, environmental impact, concerns regarding possible soil and water contamination, harming wildlife, disrupting ecosystems, government transparency as a whole, government efficiency. It’s in question. It’s in play all the time.”

The concept of chemtrails is a decades-old, debunked belief that contrails, the white lines of condensed water vapor that jets leave behind in the sky, are in fact toxic chemicals that the government and other entities are using to alter the weather, sterilize people or control their minds.

Chemtrails conspiracy theories began circulating in the late ’90s after the U.S. Air Force published a report about weather modification. By 2001, federal bureaucracies had received thousands of communications about the fast-spreading concept, prompting numerous federal agencies and educational institutions to publish fact sheets to address public concerns.

More recently, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a measure in April banning the “intentional injection, release or dispersion” of airborne chemicals. Six months later, Republican U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia reignited the argument by declaring on X, “Yes they can control the weather. It’s ridiculous for anyone to lie and say it can’t be done.” Greene’s comments drew censure from both sides of the aisle.

And who is this “they” to which Greene referred? Polsky posed that question during a public comments portion of Tuesday’s meeting to Aimee Villella McBride, one of several speakers representing the Global Wellness Forum who urged skeptics to watch the documentary, “The Dimming,” about alleged efforts to reduce solar radiation through chemical aerosolization.

“I think that was the important (point) of this bill, so we can start to track and have transparency to find out how exactly that is. Is this a state-level contractor? Is this a federal contractor? I don’t think we actually know that,” McBride said.

McBride and others rattled off lists of metals supposedly being injected into the air, including aluminum, barium and silver iodine.

Another speaker, Greg Diehl, said he routinely saw “unusual trails and streaks in the sky left behind by planes” before hurricanes struck the state. No one asked whether the aircraft had possibly been there to monitor or track the approaching storm.

Diehl referenced a 2021 Forbes article detailing a project Bill Gates was backing to support sun-dimming technology to cool the Earth. That effort involved spraying non-toxic calcium carbonate. Diehl also noted that the late pop star Prince discussed chemtrails during a 2011 talk show appearance and that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has also promoted the idea.

Global Wellness Forum founder Marla Maples — an actress and TV personality who was once married to, and has one child with, Donald Trump — also spoke at Tuesday’s hearing. She lamented an increase in Alzheimer’s disease patients and a possible connection between them and weather modification.

Like McBride, she said the Stand for Health Freedom Foundation, which supports RFK Jr., received 18,000 emails in support of SB 56, and recommended watching “The Dimming,” which has more than 3 million views on YouTube.

“Let’s move this bill through so we can look deeper and find out the best solutions for all of us,” she said.

Asked by Polsky whether she knows anyone in the federal government who could help with the issue, Maples laughed and said, “I sure do.”

Republican Sens. Jason Brodeur of Lake Mary and Blaise Ingoglia of Spring Hill offered slightly different variations of the maxim, “It’s better to be safe than sorry.”

If putting heavy metals into the atmosphere “is good for us, somebody’s going to come tell us,” Brodeur said. “In the meantime, let’s not do that because it doesn’t sound very good.”

“I would rather act on the side of caution,” Ingoglia added.

Arrington, Polsky and Smith remained unconvinced that the measure had been sufficiently contemplated or vetted. Garcia admitted she hadn’t spoken in depth with DEP about her proposal, which could see a massive increase in calls, based on the 18,000 emails previously referenced.

“As a lawmaker, generally I think that before we legislate, we should investigate,” Smith said. “I don’t think it’s a good approach, public policywise, for us to pass the bill first and then see what happens after.”

SB 56, cosponsored by St. Augustine Republican Sen. Tom Leek, has two committee stops remaining. It is to next go before the Senate Criminal Justice Committee.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Ron DeSantis says Casey ‘not seeking’ term as Governor … but it’s ‘flattering’ people keep mentioning it.

Published

on


Is a DeSantis dynasty imminent?

Not so fast, says Florida’s Governor, though he notes it’s “flattering” that it’s being discussed after reportage that First Lady Casey DeSantis is being talked up as a “very real” possibility as the logical successor to her husband as Governor, there may not be fresh polling.

“She’s a force of nature. I think people look at it, they say, ‘Well, the Governor won by 20 points. Obviously Casey would do better because she’s so much better’, but it’s not something that she’s seeking out,” Gov. Ron DeSantis said on the Ingraham Angle.

He believes that “a lot of people are just concerned about the future of the state,” which drives speculation.

“But this is not anything new,” he added. “People have been asking her to do this for a long time, but she’s not seeking to do anything. But it’s flattering that people are asking her to do it.”

Fresh reporting from Matt Dixon of NBC News says differently, with a “source familiar with her thinking” suggesting it’s a possibility.

“I would say this: I have heard donors have been urging her to run and that while it’s not something she has wanted to do, they are causing her to at least stop and listen,” Dixon cites his source.

Gov. DeSantis paints his wife as more ideologically pure than he is, which won’t stifle speculation.

“She’s one of the rare political spouses,” he told Ingraham. “Even though I’m probably the most conservative Governor in the country, she may even be more conservative than me.

Give the Governor credit for consistency: He said in May that if he “had to hypothesize her interest in getting into the political thicket as a candidate,” he would “characterize it as zero.”

That said, polls show Florida Republicans have more than “zero” interest in the DeSantis family remaining in the Governor’s Mansion.

Per a June polling memo from Florida Atlantic University, she leads a field of candidates with 43% support, ahead of Byron Donalds at 19%, with Jimmy Patronis and Matt Gaetz further back still.

poll conducted in April by FAU showed 38% of 372 Florida Republicans polled would choose the First Lady in a head-to-head race against Gaetz, who would receive 16% support in that scenario.

University of North Florida Public Opinion Research Lab survey from November 2023 showed the First Lady with 22% support, a lead in a crowded field of potential candidates.

While she previously acknowledged the talk is “humbling,” she also maintains that the seeming enthusiasm for her running is due to her “rock star” husband and the job he’s done as the state’s Chief Executive.

However, the buzz isn’t quieting, and the race will start to get real after Sine Die, so decision time is nigh for the former newscaster in the Jacksonville market.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

4 FEMA employees are fired over payments to reimburse New York City for hotel costs for migrants

Published

on


Four federal employees were fired Tuesday over payments to reimburse New York City for hotel costs for migrants, Department of Homeland Security officials said.

The workers are accused of circumventing leadership to make the transactions, which have been standard for years through a program that helps with costs to care for a surge in migration. But officials did not give details on how the four had violated any policies.

On Monday, President Donald Trump’s aide Elon Musk posted on X that his team had discovered payments used to house migrants in “luxury hotels” with money intended for disaster relief. Musk blasted the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is part of Homeland Security, and called the payments “gross insubordination.”

FEMA’s Acting Administrator, Cameron Hamilton, later said the payments were suspended and the employees who authorized them would be held accountable.

The terminated employees were FEMA’s Chief Financial Officer, two program analysts and a grant specialist, a Homeland Security statement said.

The employees made “egregious payments for luxury NYC hotels for migrants,” the statement said. “DHS will not sit idly and allow deep state activists to undermine the will and safety of the American people.”

The statement gave no other details, and officials didn’t reply to emails seeking further comment.

Information from New York City indicated that money it has received to care for migrants was appropriated by Congress and allocated to the city last year by FEMA. The city has never paid luxury rates for hotels, spokeswoman Liz Garcia said.

The funds were likely sent via the Shelter and Services Program, which reimburses cities, towns or organizations for immigration-related expenses.

The money comes from Congress and is specifically for Customs and Border Protection, which also is part of Homeland Security. FEMA administers the payments.

The money is separate from the disaster relief fund, which is FEMA’s main funding stream to help people and governments affected by disasters.

The Shelter and Services Program has become a flashpoint for criticism by Republicans, who incorrectly claim it’s taking money from people hit by hurricanes or floods.

The firings come as Trump’s Republican administration ratchets up pressure on FEMA, suggesting it should be disbanded and money should be given directly to states to handle disasters.

___

Republished with permission of The Associated Press.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Plastic straws have come to symbolize a global pollution crisis. Donald Trump wants them to stay

Published

on


Straws might seem insignificant, inspiring jokes about the plastic vs. paper debate, but the plastic straw has come to symbolize a global pollution crisis over the past decade.

On Monday, President Donald Trump waded into the issue when he signed an executive order to reverse a federal push away from plastic straws, declaring that paper straws “don’t work” and don’t last very long. Trump said he thinks “it’s OK” to continue using plastic straws, although they’ve have been blamed for polluting oceans and harming marine life.

In 2015, video of a marine biologist pulling a plastic straw out of a turtle’s nose sparked outrage worldwide and countries and cities started banning them, starting with the Pacific Island nation Vanuatu and Seattle in 2018.

Here’s what to know about the larger fight over single-use plastics in the United States:

What happens to plastic straws?

More than 390 million plastic straws are used every day in the United States, most for 30 minutes or less, according to advocacy group Turtle Island Restoration Network.

Plastic straws are usually thrown away after one use, going on to litter beaches and waterways and potentially killing marine animals that mistake them for food.

The straws are not recyclable because they are so small. They take at least 200 years to decompose, the network said.

They break down into incredibly tiny bits of plastic smaller than a fraction of a grain of rice. These microplastics have been found in a wide range of body tissues. Though research is still limited overall, there are growing concerns that microplastics in the body could potentially be linked to heart disease, Alzheimer’s and dementia, and other problems.

Trump’s executive order claims that paper straws use chemicals that may carry risks to human health are more expensive to produce than plastic straws. Researchers from the University of Antwerp found forever chemicals known as PFAS to be present in paper, bamboo, glass and plastic straws, but not stainless steel ones, according to a 2023 study.

The advocacy group Beyond Plastics said that while plastics are often cheaper than paper products, the cheapest option is to skip the straw.

Judith Enck, a former Environmental Protection Agency regional administrator who now heads up Beyond Plastics, said she hopes that people react to the executive order by committing to using fewer plastic straws and that local and state governments do, too.

“It’s easy to just kind of almost poke fun of this, ignore it,” she said Tuesday. “But this is a moment that we as individuals and state and local policymakers can make a statement that they disagree with this executive order and are committed to using less plastic straws. It’s not that hard to do.”

Several states and cities have banned plastic straws and some restaurants no longer automatically give them to customers.

What is being done globally?

President Joe Biden’s administration had committed to phasing out federal purchases of single-use plastics, including straws, from food service operations, events and packaging by 2027, and from all federal operations by 2035.

The move was a way for the federal government to formally acknowledge the severity of the plastic pollution crisis and the scale of the response required to effectively confront it.

Erin Simon, an expert on plastics and packaging at the World Wildlife Fund, said at the time that it sent a message around the world: If we can make change happen at scale, so can you.

The declaration came in July, just a few months before negotiators met in South Korea to try to finish crafting a treaty to address the global crisis of plastic pollution. Negotiators didn’t reach an agreement late last year, but talks resume this year.

Under the Biden administration, the United States at first adopted a position viewed as favoring industry, stating that countries should largely develop their own plans instead of abiding by global rules. China, the United States and Germany are the biggest players in the global plastics trade.

The United States changed its position heading into South Korea. The delegation said it would support having an article in the treaty that addresses supply, or plastic production. More than 100 countries want an ambitious treaty that limits plastic production while tackling cleanup and recycling.

U.S. manufacturers have asked Trump to remain at the negotiating table but revert to the old position that focused on redesigning plastic products, recycling and reuse.

Aren’t other plastics a problem?

The environment is littered with single-use plastic food and beverage containers — water bottles, takeout containers, coffee lids, straws and shopping bags.

Every year, the world produces more than 400 million tons of new plastic. About 40% of all plastics are used in packaging, according to the United Nations.

In 2023, Ocean Conservancy volunteers collected more than 61,000 plastic straws and stirrers polluting beaches and waterways in the United States. There were even more cigarette butts, plastic bottles, bottle caps and food wrappers, the nonprofit said.

Most plastic is made from fossil fuels. Negotiators at the United Nations climate talks known as COP28 agreed in 2023 the world must transition away from planet-warming fossil fuels and triple the use of renewable energy.

As pressure to reduce fossil fuels has increased globally, oil and gas companies have been looking more to the plastics side of their business as a market that could grow. Trump strongly supports and gets support from the oil and gas industry.

___

Republished with permission of The Associated Press.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.