Divided Government Stupidity: Why Today's American Voters Need A Thorough Education in Political Science & Government

 "The results of this year’s election, with a solid Biden win but Republicans doing well down-ballot, tells us that American voters don’t fully understand what the modern G.O.P. is really about."  - Paul Krugman, NY Times, Tuesday

"The voters must understand that as long as Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is the Senate majority leader and the base of the Republican Party is dominated by the far right — including “Stop the Steal” Trumpists — a divided government is not a recipe for compromise. Instead, it’s a ticket to obstruction and the very sort of partisan brawling that moderate voters can’t stand.  The belief that divided government guarantees moderate outcomes might once have been true when there was a solid moderate bloc in the Republican Party. But it should now be clear that it’s a destructive myth."  - E. J. Dionne, Washington Post

The math didn't add up, to put it simply.  How the hell could Joe Biden beat Trump in the popular vote by some 7 million votes (at latest tally), and yet the Democrats lost so many down ballot seats in the House? As per an ABC News release yesterday:

"Republicans trimmed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's 35-seat majority to just 12. With an additional two races outstanding in Iowa and New York and a runoff in Louisiana, current ABC News projections put the partisan breakdown at 222-210 -- leaving Democrats with one of the smallest majorities in two decades."

This is incredible as well as disheartening as there is no way the Dems should have suffered such a loss of House seats given Biden's 7+ m  win. What it means is that millions "split" their votes, voting for Biden to oust Trump as president, but then kneecapping Biden by narrowing the House margins and not delivering the extra Senate seats (e.g. in Maine, NC, SC etc.) needed for effective governance.  

What were these "split vote"  (divided government) folks thinking? WHO were they anyway?  We still don't have all the exit vote assessments  to parse these voter backgrounds. But it seems a good many were independent moderates as well as Republicans who turned against Trump - didn't want to see 4 more years of the authoritarian demagogue.   

They also likely believed in the abstract concept of divided government, that at least one (or two) branches of congress will modulate Democratic aspirations and check overreach.  But they are operating under a delusion:  the delusion that the 'checkers'  are the same as the respectable GOP office holders of old.  They aren't.  They are obstructionist, traitor rats like Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell, Ron Johnson and others who even now are enabling the brat in the White House.  Daily encouraging  his tirades against the reality he will not get another term, e.g.

"WAAHH! Biden did not win! No! Bwahaha. Gimme my sippy cup!"

They are, in effect, engaging in an insurrection against democracy and the peaceful transition of power.  These are not the people any sane person wants checking the next incumbent or his party!  They are in fact the worst, so voting them in down ballot was a foolish expectation.  Worse, the split voting has played into Trump's rants about election fraud.  Such as Wednesday when the asswipe fool referred to the success of GOP House and Senate candidates down ballot and  suggested that the Republican presidential candidate  (Trump) should have had similar success.  That he didn’t was a "statistical impossibility", and hence there had to be fraud.   But as WaPo columnist Philip Bump has pointed out:

The term “statistically impossible” is a rhetorical one more than a statistical one. It’s often used to describe situations that are impossible and involve statistics, such as if a candidate trails his opponent by 40,000 votes with 10,000 votes left to count. At other times, it’s meant to suggest that something that is very, very unlikely almost certainly wouldn’t happen.

Say like a subnormal I.Q. crackpot elected to congress by subnormal I.Q. voters.  Such as transpired here in Colorado with the election of  Lauren Boebert, e.g. 

who believes her election was free and fair  but  has echoed Trump’s allegations of fraud for  his own. . Oh yeah, she also wants to be able to carry her Glock at the U.S. Capitol.    As recently as November 28, this idiot imp fired off a tweet asking Time if it was ready to name AOC as "communist of the year" instead of Person of the Year. How on earth could voters choose such a cretinous creature to represent them in Colorado's third congressional district?  Who knows?  At least one 3rd district Dem voter appalled at the choice wrote on Facebook:

"What is really concerning is the quality of people in the district who voted for this uneducated, crazy person to go to congress.  This is the best they've got?  That is pretty sad."

But say what you will,  this election of Boebert is in line with most of the other GOP choices as a result of voters' ignorance  and/or divided government delusions. 

Beyond the lack of proper voter education we know three factors contributed to the anomalous down ballot losses, which will ensure gridlock unless Dems pick off those two Georgia Senate seats.  These three factors include:1)  the virus of partisan polarization (which inaccurate polling obscured); 2) the illusory strength of the juiced pre-Covid-19 economy (based on tax cuts and deregulation); 3) and the success of Trump’s denialist, "open-everything-up" nonresponse to the pandemic.  

So in addition to lack of adequate political education, these mostly explain why Democrats didn’t fare better.

The shocking strategy embodied in the three factors worked for Republicans, even if it didn’t pan out for the Dotard himself. The fact it did work out, again shows the degree to which voter naivete played into their hands.  Thus, the belief the Repukes are a real party instead of a cult full of traitors doing Trump's bidding including taking a wrecking ball to the electoral process now.

Moreover,  this  Reep plan laid a trap that Democrats walked into,  based on the assumption most voters are rational beings and not gullible rubes who can be played by dazzling them with baloney. This is something the Democrats should understand and adjust for, as best they can, as they look ahead.  How far down the rabbit hole of ungovernability have we gone?  A lot!

In 2008, Republicans at least acknowledged that Obama had won the election. This time, Republican leaders have either refused to stand against Trump’s outright lies about a rigged election or are actually abetting his attack on our democracy (see: House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California).

An intelligent and rational electorate would not have been fooled by Trump’s relentless campaign to goose the economy by cutting taxes, running up enormous deficits and debt, and hectoring the Fed into not raising rates was working for millions of Americans.  They'd have caught onto the fact these were all expedient con man tactics. (Even Hitler boosted Germany's early 1930s economy for a time- but by vastly expanding its weapons systems and military)

No doubt another large part of so many voters being played is that we tend to notice when we’re personally more prosperous than we were a few years before.  Hence, tend to give credit to whoever is in power at the time of advanced prosperity - despite the fact that person was the benefactor of the president who came before - in this case, Obama.   

By all rights and reason Trump ought to have been blown out in this election - not just 306 to 232 electoral votes, but more like 432 to 106.  A margin so huge-  and  with 100,000+ margins in each swing state - so no attempt to overturn the election would even be attempted. Also, no loss in House seats, rather 3-4 pickups and at least 5 Senate seats snagged.   This didn't materialize mainly because voters punted and opted for divided government, or were too blinded by Trump's tricks to throw the hammer at him.  Am I exaggerating? No!

Trump's catastrophic response to Covid-19 threw the economy into a tailspin. He totally abdicated responsibility, lying and downplaying the virus then  shifting the burden onto states and municipalities with busted budgets. He then waged a war of words against governors and mayors — especially Democrats — who refused to risk their citizens’ lives by allowing economic and social activity to resume.

He spurred his supporters to make light of the danger of infection, made the churlish refusal to wear masks into an emblem of emancipation from the despotism of experts and turned public health restrictions on businesses, schools and social gatherings into a tyrannical conspiracy to steal power by damaging the economy and his re-election prospects.

He succeeded in putting Democrats on the defensive about economic restrictions and school closures. As months passed and with no new relief coming from Washington, financially straitened Democratic states and cities had little choice but to ease restrictions on businesses just to keep the lights on. That seemed to concede the economic wisdom of the more permissive approach in majority-Republican states and fed into Trump’s false narrative of victory over the virus and a triumphant return to normalcy.

Make no mistake, it was unforgivably cruel of the Repukes to force blue-collar and service workers to risk death for grocery money. Yet their disinformation campaign persuaded many millions of Americans that the risk was minimal and that Democrats were keeping their workplaces and schools closed, their customers and kids at home, and their wallets empty and cupboards bare for bogus reasons.  

To avoid another election like this, we have to educate voters to be smarter, and especially to stop trusting the GOP as a responsible political party.  They are not that any longer,  and  have merely proven themselves obstructionists and enablers of would -be authoritarians.  For now the GOP  has devolved into a cult based on Trump worship, obeisance and destruction of democracy.  Hence, unworthy of any kind of divided governance!

See Also:

Republicans

Who Needs Zombies When We Have Republicans?

And:

Economic Policy | Mitch McConnell

Mitch McConnell's Dark Pivot: Wreck the Economy — and Sabotage Biden's Presidency

by Amanda Marcotte | December 3, 2020 - 7:53am | permalink

— from Salon

And:

Joe Biden | Mitch McConnell

Biden Transition Team Races to Foil McConnell, Staff as Many Positions as Possible by Day One

And:

2020 Elections | Donald Trump

Trump Is Headed to Georgia to “Help” With the Runoffs. The GOP Is Terrified.

And:

Donald Trump

Trump's Outrageous Lies Used to Be Terrifying — Now They're Just Pathetic

by Amanda Marcotte | December 4, 2020 - 8:30am | permalink

— from Salon

The Role Of Eupraxophy (Part Of Secular Humanism) In Finding Self-Purpose

 In any era marked by a plague  we know faith is often the first thing tested, and then one's purpose is questioned.  What does it all mean, why am I here in the midst of all this death and chaos? In this environment  those of us in the unbelief mode are often given short shrift or looked upon with either pity or contempt.  That's because "without God" we are informed our lives "can have no meaning".  Why would we even wish to carry on in a pandemic, when we can't even be certain the various vaccines will provide relief?

Of course, this is gibberish, and a result of faulty logic governed more by emotion and supernaturalism than critical thinking.  So what shall we employ to fill the vacuum, assuming there's one to be filled? We know humans are an evolutionary species and also know individual humans have multifold needs.  We may also all agree those needs can be addressed in various ways,  say by volunteering as a tutor, or other charitable work. In effect, one replaces a vacuous purpose chasing a supernatural aspiration or entity with a concrete objective based upon collective worth and advocacy.

Acknowledging this, the late Sir Aruthur C. Clarke noted that "our role on this planet may not be to worship God, but to create Him".

We create him in our brains, the synaptic junctions therein, and in subsets of the ten billion or so neurons, see e.g.

• God is Found! Inside the Brain! (1)

 With this entity confirmed by our own brains, we are directed to the task of assisting our fellow man to attain some measure of dignity and security.  This surely trumps the narrow brand of reality subscribed to by the narrow faith adherent, or to put it in terms of the late Peter Ustinov in an interview with Free Inquiry magazine:

"I have always said that I have much more faith in an agnostic or atheist who helps an old lady across the road, than the man who is racing to church and pretends not to see her".

And, of course, that is the crux of the humanist theme. The humanist addresses real human issues and problems, while the churched supernaturalist pretends not to see them, by substituting his pie in the sky pseudo-reality. His fictitious "next life" means more to him than this life and the humans in it, even family.

Now what about meaning? I believe it was Paul Kurtz who pointed out the starting point for a coherent humanism is by providing a response to the question: What is the meaning of life?

As he also noted, the orthodox Christian is mired in the salvation myth by which he gives meaning to his life - his mortal existence, using something purported to occur in the distant future. He then sacrifices his life and contributions to a future myth and the belief he will someday sit at the right hand of his lord. Given this blindness, he will never comprehend how others can find meaning without subscribing to his fantasy.

But as Kurtz noted, the quest for a transcendent meaning in life is doomed to futility since there is absolutely no evidence at all that existent nature has some divinity locked or hidden away that will relieve us of the need to make our own choices. Life has no hidden or ulterior meaning per se, and thus humanism begins with the logical assertion that the universe is a vast impersonal system impervious to human ideations, desires or needs. Indeed, the very thought the cosmos or its putative "maker" would have any passing interest for a pathetic biped species on the rim of a galaxy amongst trillions of galaxies is the height of hubris.  Merely consider this image of Earth as a dot seen from the Voyager space craft on its trajectory out of our solar system:

Viewing that image how can anyone believe humans are that important in the  cosmic scheme of things?  See also:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVQI89v_2mA

To many humanists, the only reasons for positing a "Savior" myth at all is: a) to allay human existential insecurities, and b) to rationalize human exceptionalism on the basis that only one intelligent species in the cosmos could be "saved".  Hence NO aliens or other extraterrestrial species need apply for salvation.  That they could exist anywhere (since "God" ordained Man alone was the pinnacle of his creation) is preposterous. 

This is the height of poppycock. Because if the cosmos is an impersonal system, as all evidence to date shows (such as the preponderance of dark energy) this collapses. Humans must lean on each other to find their own meaning, and this is done by multifold constructive purposes. This is done, despite realizing the cold, hard fact that death is the end of all biological organisms - including humans.

Given this, it behooves us to try to make the most of this life and not pretend to live it for the next, which will never ever happen. Once this life is over, that's it, finito!

The constructive answer to living life as a cosmic orphan is not to look to some mythical heaven for divine deliverance, but to use the world as it is as positive framework to work out human self-purpose and solve human problems.

The framework for this, defined in Kurtz' Living without Religion, is called eupraxophy. As from the Greek (and recall we saw already Aristotle's definition of happiness) it means "the practical seeking of the good life through reason and good conduct - to attain the most effective end and the benefit for most people"

Aristotle could not have said it better, and indeed - he provided the basis in his Nichomachean Ethics:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2010/12/nichomachean-ethics-basis-for.html

As noted therein, Aristotle is very clear that humanity's primary purpose (Book I):"is to seek the Chief Good" (or happiness, i.e. that which all things aim at) in terms of attaining the highest usefulness and expression of all virtues - both moral and intellectual - in arriving at the most complete life"

A happy man then, is one who directs all his actions governed from reason, and performs all duties, tasks well and nobly - to the extent every deed is completed in the excellence that uniquely belongs to it. 

Further:

"If all this is so, then the Good of Man comes to be a working of the Soul in the way of Excellence"

In other words, whether a god exists or not is immaterial to the working out of excellence. A man, once he grounds his directions in terms of the "moral mean",  will attain that excellence by working toward a fulfilling life and end. One needs no supernatural entity to fill the vacuum of one's life or forge a purpose, especially given one has the asset of consciousness to ascertain the Good (via reason) and so can apply it to that designated end. The god -monger in this sense, comes off as a person needing a crutch to get by. Because he lacks the inner fortitude and moral compass to find his path to excellence and virtue, he must rely on the crutch of an imaginary deity.

This is important because it falls directly within the atheist purview. And while most atheists may not be familiar with Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, they will appreciate and be familiar with moral provisionalist ethics which can be arrived at from many of the same principles - especially of proportionate justice.

Paul Kurtz with his eupraxophy would wholeheartedly concur.

See Also:

George Yancy

Life (and Death) Without God

Looking At Fourier Transforms

 The Fourier transform is one of the most useful mathematical tools available to the physicist and we explore some basic aspects of it in this post.   Probably the most logical place to start is that these transforms can be used to represent a function.   Thus, a function f(x) may be represented by a power series of the form:

   å ^¥ _{n = 0}    a _n  (x)  ⁿ   

provided it satisfies the necessary conditions for this expansion.   If the set of coefficients ( a _n ) is given then the function f(x) can be constructed - at least within the radius of convergence.   In other words a function can be defined in terms of the coefficients  a _n  .   

Similarly if a function f(x)  is representable by a Fourier series:

f(x)  =    å^¥ _{n = - 0o}    c _n  exp [i(n p x/L) ]     (-L   <   x  <   L)

We can say that the set of coefficients  { c _n  }  also defines  f(x).    In effect, the set of numbers -  a _n   or  c  _n  - can be regarded as a function of the variable n written as c(n).   The particular function here is defined for a discrete set of values for the independent variable (x) but this is not essential.  

Indeed, in previous posts, i.e. for the Laplace transform of a function f(t),  e.g.

• Revisiting Basic Laplace Transforms In Solving Dif...

We saw cases such as:  F(s) =  £ {F(t) }

where the representation is over the continuous variable, t.  Thus, one can say that F(x) represents f(t) since f(t) can be defined uniquely if it is continuous by F(x), e.g.

f(t)  =   1/2 pi  ò _a ^b   F(s)  exp(is) ds 

where:  a = g   -   ia

    and   b =  g   +   ia
 

Hence, we don't regard F(x) as a different function from f(t) but we say rather than F(x) is f(t) in the Laplace transform representation.   Going back to the Fourier series case the function c(n) is often called the Fourier spectrum of f(x).  The simple plotting of this is left as an exercise for the energetic reader, i.e. using c(n) as the ordinate and n ('wave number') as the abscissa.    

A plot can also be made of c vs.  k =  n p / L.  In this case if L is large then the frequencies will be closely spaced given that:

 Δk  =  (p / L) Δn   =   p / L

Note then that if L is large,  Δk is  small  and the function more closely approaches a continuous spectrum, i.e.

Note we can multiply each term of the Fourier series by:            (L/p)Δk    and write:

f(x)  =    å ^¥ _{n = - 0o}   ( L/ p )  c _n  exp [i(n p x/L) ]  Δk

Where:

( L/ p )  c _n  = 1/2 pi  ò _-L  ^+L   f(x) exp [i(n p x/L) ] dx

We can switch here completely to k-notation and write:

( L/ p )  c _n    =   c _L  (k)

Then obtain:

 c _L  (k)  =  ò _-L  ^+L   f(x) exp (-ik x )  dx

 and:

f(x)  =  å^¥ _{Lk / p  = - 0o}     c _L  (k)   (k) exp (-ik x )   Δk

Now, let k  -> oo

Then the sum goes to an integral and we obtain:

c(k)  =    c _L  (k)  =  lim _{L ® oo}      1/2 pi  ò ^¥_-¥   f(x) exp (-ik x )  dx  

Whence:  f(x)  =  ò ^¥_-¥   c(k) exp (-ik x )  dx  

This set of formulas is known as the Fourier transformation.  For a more 'streamlined' update we define a function:

F(k)  =  Ö (2 p)   c(-k)   

Then the formulas now appear:

1) F(k)  =  1/ Ö 2 p     ò ^¥_-¥   f(x) exp (-ik x )  dx  

2) f(x) =  1/ Ö 2 p     ò ^¥_-¥   F(k)  exp (-ik x )  dx  

The function F(k)  is known as the Fourtier transform of the function f(x).   

Problem for the Math aficionado:

Find the Fourier transform of:  

f(x) =  exp(-  lx ²) cos  b x

Resolving The Payroll Tax Clusterfuck (Compliments of Con Man Trump) Will Not Be Easy

 

It would seem to be obvious that people who need Social Security in the future - as most of us do - would recognize that payroll taxes help "pay the freight". You remove or even reduce the amount of payroll taxes and you put Social Security in an even more precarious position by defunding it.  The alternative is that it comes up for budgetary review each year and that means potential major cuts, especially if a Repub House manifests again.   All this is germane now as the incoming Biden administration confronts the mess left behind by Trump's "payroll tax holiday" which he used as part of a bogus end around Covid aid package.  See e,g,

• A Reality Check: Trump's Covid Relief Exec Orders...

As I noted therein:

"Regarding the Trump  suspension of the payroll tax.....one aide admitted (Denver Post, today, p. 12A):  "Yeah, it's really an interest -free loan that would have to be repaid, not a freebie."

Trump, in his phony "relief" package - to jog memories - did an end run around congress to cut payroll taxes, to make it look like he was extending a helping hand to the hoi polloi.  Via executive action he invoked the ability to defer tax deadlines following a disaster (the Covid pandemic) to delay payments of the employees' portion of Social security taxes.  The imp then promised if he won re-election he would convert the delay into a "real tax cut".   

Well, Lordy be, it's a damned good thing he didn't win, because enough damage was done using this desperation con.   Why a con?  Here's the catch: The offer applied to workers making $104,000 or less who could then have as much as $2, 149 deferred.  BUT, most employers balked - wary of potential complexities - including their costs in deferring the tax.  Many more astute observers noted it amounted to little more than a short term, no interest loan, not a no strings relief.  Now, the piper may have to be paid.  

To wit, those employees who took advantage of the con and saw their payroll taxes temporarily shrink will now face double withholding starting in January.  Trump never told them about that little niggling detail, did he? Nope, rat that he is, and con man, he did not.  So now all the households that didn't plan for this hit will get clobbered.   

And what did Trump do?  Well, he barked to the taxpayers, 'Don't worry, it's no biggie!'  Like he said the coronavirus would disappear.  But that's the most corrupt president in American history for you, now in the midst of a "pay to pardon" bribery scandal.  Oh wait, sorry, I'm jumping to conclusions? Well, we'll see.  

In the meantime what's to be done to help the millions who fell for Trump's payroll tax cut con as the bills come due?  One solution that's been touted (WSJ,  Nov. 30, p. A5) is  "forgiving" the unpaid thousands of dollars in taxes for these unfortunates.  According to the Journal:

 "Forgiving the unpaid tax has some appeal,  because it would avoid the hardships of a sudden drop in paychecks and provide a boost for households."

Adding:

"The payback can be particularly messy if employees have left their jobs before it's complete and the government needs to find them or seek payment from their employers."

The main targets to help with this forgiveness would be federal employees including active military.  Further "allowing forgiveness at this point, after so many employers didn't participate  would give a windfall to federal employees and nothing to millions of other workers."

Of course, the other option is that congress could just do nothing which would "create burdens for federal workers and military service members who face a drop in take-home pay in January and didn't save the extra money" they got in 2020.

At the very least, all those employees deserve much more time to satisfy the debt that the scam artist Trump dumped on them.   In the words of Tony Reardon,  president of the National Treasury Employees Union, quoted in the WSJ piece: 

"The outgoing administration's executive order temporarily suspending payroll taxes for federal employees without their consent continues to be a threat to their personal finances."

Well, and also to millions of Social Security recipients if all that money doesn't get paid back!

As I've noted in previous posts, e.g.

• People Must Stop Whining About Higher Payroll Taxes!

tampering with payroll taxes - irrespective of the administration- is always a bad idea given they are what support Social Security.  The only alternative to that would be yearly budgetary allocations, and one can only imagine how that would play  out with a Repuke House and Senate.   

Again, thank Dotard Trump for this economic clusterfuck.

See Also:

Wealth Inequality

The Rich Are Cheering Wall Street's Latest Records. Americans of Modest Means Are Draining 401(k)s.

The Suncor Energy Saga Continues In Colorado With More Litigation Following Devastating Climate Effects

 

                  Suncor refinery during a pollution event  in May last year.

As reported by Denver news stations on the evening of Dec. 11 last year  there was trouble at the Suncor Energy oil refinery north of Denver.  The Wednesday morning incident triggered a “vapor release alarm,” prompting operators to place one of their units into “safe mode” and announce they’ll launch a full investigation as soon as possible.  Suncor officials called it “an opacity event” in a statement emailed to local officials and posted on the company’s Facebook page. They said the company’s tests showed air quality in surrounding neighborhoods “is within acceptable levels.”

Just before 11 a.m. Wednesday, South Adams County Fire Department got a call to investigate a strange odor at Adams City Middle School. People were also reporting they were seeing ash falling from the sky.  The kids at the middle school were told to shelter in place and not come outside.  Meanwhile, photos were being shared by residents all over Commerce City of cars covered by ash. Finally, late in the afternoon Suncor Energy admitted the ash was coming from their facility. 

The catastrophic environmental event at the end of last year was hoped by many to be the last. But that was not to be.  The refinery continued to malfunction, as reported in a Denver Post expose piece (Nov. 29.,  p. 8A).  Therein we learned that Suncor this year "reported 34 malfunctions  and 111 pollution spikes lasting from a few minutes to several days."  All of these spikes  violated permit limits and added to the more than 396 pollution spikes in 2019,  during 35 malfunctions.

Meanwhile, major breakdowns also occurred this year: on March 17,  May 17, June 19, August 13, and October 21.   Following each major incident company officials "issued statements of apology including free car washes to residents whose vehicles were covered in possibly toxic ash."   

In terms of litigation, Colorado health officials in March announced the latest settlement to resolve complaints concerning failures between 2017 and 2019.   These required Suncor to pay $1.4 million in penalties and $2.6 million to fund community environmental projects and spend up to $5 million on fixing problems.   Most of these involved excessive sulfur dioxide emissions and toxic ash events.   

Meanwhile, Colorado air quality commissioners have been directed by state lawmakers to cut pollution and meet clean air targets.  They have grappled with fossil fuel industrial pollutions along with vehicle emissions.  Two intolerable inputs as climate warming in our state engenders multiple impacts, including explosive wildfires and intense drought. 

 Commissioner Elise Jones nailed it when she told the Post (ibid.):  "It is hard to stare down the most powerful industry in the world and say, 'We need you to go away'. But we have to recognize that it is a global problem, and we cannot export the problem somewhere else and think we are solving anything.  We have a responsibility for all of the climate emissions that are enabled by our state."   

This dovetails with the stance of Gov. Jared Polis' administration who have declared they will shift the state off fossil fuels in favor of wind and solar energy, and electric vehicles.  Lawmakers last year "ordered 26 percent cuts in statewide emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gas pollution below 2005 levels before 2025.  Also, by 50 percent by 2030 and 90 percent by 2050."

That is a tall order to be sure and I'm skeptical it can be achieved as our state population keeps growing.  It more comports with a dramatic reduction in the population by the same proportions - for each of those deadline years.

For now, the biggest concern of environmental groups as well as state health officials, is the "lagging maintenance of the refinery infrastructure and facilities."  This lagging maintenance is probably responsible for 80- 90 % of all the pollution issues,  but the cost for upkeep of standards is likely well below what Suncor is willing to spend.   As Adams County commissioner Steven O'Dorisio put it (ibid.):  "If they cannot keep up now, how can we be sure they will keep up later?"

Pending further lawsuits filed by Earthjustice and WildEarth Guardians - apart from the state's - may help Suncor to make up its mind.  As one environmental activist among my FB friends put it: "They can go big or go home!"