🧵 For the last 40 hours there has been no power in my home due to a winter storm. I live in San Mateo County: a very wealthy county but I live in its poorest community. If the future is electric what does this say about our future?
The power company has given no public estimate of when power will be restored, and remind us that the neighboring cities have no power either. What the neighboring cities do have that EPA doesn’t is wealth, and access to credit.
I have no: lights, heat (gas furnace- fan and thermostat are electric), heat pump, internet, home hub, smart devices, ignition on my gas stove, microwave or electric oven, and am watching about $750 in fresh and frozen goods spoil. Oh, and batteries are expensive as hell.
My security and defense are shredded with no power. Ring needs a power. My home hub and other security devices don’t work. Thank good my electric front lock has a battery. I don’t know if I know where the key is.
And good lord, what I had an EV? If you make this about a windstorm you miss the big picture. Our electrical infrastructure is fragile and we increasingly rely on it. The power company is moved by the complainants of our wealthy neighbors,
none of whom would blanch at a lost freezer of food, unlike a family in EPA where that kind of loss pushes you into food insecurity. As a quasi public institution power companies should have to think about the economic impact to the residents as they prepare their restoration
plans. EPA because of the low income and the devastation of unplanned loss should be first or near the top and Atherton should be near the bottom. They can afford to wait. But as a matter of public policy why does this dystopian hunger games on the power grid happen?
It happens when our elected officials set forward an incomplete plan. We can’t possibly have a bright electric future with criminal companies like @PGE4Me putting profits over people and wealth over the dignity of a warm: home, bath or shower and meal for the working class.
I have yet to see a public plan designed to ensure that an all electric future is possible for all Americans to have warm homes, the ability to make meals and take baths while powering their cars, irrespective of income. I fully embraced the electric future without fully grasping
that if it is based upon the current electrical infrastructure and cost structure the rich might like it but it will suck for everyone else. #ElectricityShutDown#FossilFuels#ClimateCrisis
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Saying it slow. Brown reversed case law either clearly wrong or wrongly decided.Before the war slaves had no rights. Dred Scott. Then the south lost the war. 14th Amendment. Then instead of hanging traitors we gave them their citizenship back. What did the traitors do? /1
They stole the citizenship of the newly freed blacks. They didn’t change the Constitution. They just conspired then like now to write a trashy opinion that is in the dustbin of history where it belongs (Plessy). But that trashy case lasted 50 years before it was overturned. /2
Roe made explicit what must be implicit in the constitution. Neither the word Woman nor girl appears in the Constitution. We know that women are people so the natural rights bestowed by God are their rights too. /3
SCOTUS has always been anti small d democratic. The most onerous decisions that undermine the Constitution have come from that institution. Only in the 20th Century was there a sustained period of SCOTUS rulings that uplifted the common man. /1
What coincided with that period? A 50 year run of Democratic supermajorities in both houses of Congress. In the early 20th Century SCOTUS produced a series of opinions that were anti-common man. They held that states don't have to uphold the Bill of Rights /2
They held that the Constitution does not guarantee economic rights. SCOTUS says that American citizens don't have the right to food, housing, medical care or education. However, most other countries in the world with constitutions do guarantee these rights for their citizens. /3
This is a long-term issue and a hard problem to solve. The stimulus should bring resources to the table, redistribute those resources as a means to solve the current health crisis. But we should not be satisfied with that limited view of a solution.
We are not just trying to bend the curve on the virus. We should also take this opportunity to bend the curve on wealth inequity. To that end, the stimulus should have the following principles.
1.Lift the cap on payroll taxes. It would raise about $500 billion over 5 years to strengthen Social Security. Lower the full retirement age from 66 to 60 to create more career opportunities for younger workers.