The U.S. government has determined that poor/minority women are the biggest victims of global warming because they have lower incomes, less access to credit and decision-making authority and limited control over resources.
This increases their “vulnerability to many climate impacts,” according to a State Department assessment posted on a web site dedicated to releasing all sorts of interesting government documents. In this case the information is outlined in a Gender and Climate Change Fact Sheet complied by USAID, the government agency that provides economic and humanitarian assistance worldwide.
The fact sheet mostly focuses on women in developing countries such as Africa, Bangladesh, Mexico, Peru and Ecuador. “Development experts,” presumably working for the U.S. government agency found, for instance, that in Africa men have greater access to radios. This puts women at a disadvantage because they’re more likely to hear forecasts and early warnings when delivered through extension workers. This is deep stuff.
Here is another example of how global warming hurts poor women more than any other demographic; in many societies women have the primary responsibility for collecting water and firewood and climate change exacerbates resource scarcity, forcing women and girls to travel farther to collect the supplies. This increases threats to their safety and negatively impacts other areas such as farming productivity and child care.
Uncle Sam’s gender disparity assessment also found this; because women are already vulnerable to “under nutrition” and have less access to medical services, they will suffer more because “changing temperatures alter vectors for diseases like malaria, higher sea-surface temperatures are correlated with cholera epidemics and more frequent droughts and floods will worsen sanitation and hygiene.”
Among the recommendations to help remedy this crisis is to “involve women in vulnerability assessments” and “incorporate gender considerations into national climate change strategies and regulations.” The government fact sheet doesn’t elaborate on what exactly this means or, more importantly, how much this will cost U.S. taxpayers.
This is simply the latest of many government alerts on the ills of global warming since Barack Obama became president. In the last few years the administration has released alarming reports saying that global warming could lead to a worldwide increase in mental illness, cancer and even sexual dysfunction and that it will make food “dangerous.” This, of course, will add to the malnourishment of millions worldwide.
Just a few months ago the taxpayer-funded National Science Foundation revealed that global warming is much worse than previously imagined because the ocean actually masks the true rate of damage for periods as long as a decade. Under this theory, the crisis is way more severe than what it appears because the sea is storing the heat that damages the earth, making it appear as if there is a sort of hiatus in climate change when there really isn’t.
An Obama fundraiser awarded a cushy European ambassadorship after bundling more than half a million dollars for his presidential campaign ran her U.S. embassy like a hostile dictator, spent government funds on booze and bullied staff.Here comes the good part. State Department leadership (that includes Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) knew all about it but took no action, presumably because the wealthy donor—a Seattle philanthropist named Cynthia Stroum—is untouchable. At least that’s what an internal State Department investigation seems to indicate.Made public this week, a scathing report of the probe says that during her year-long tenure as U.S. ambassador to Luxembourg Stroum brought the embassy “to a state of dysfunction” with her “confrontational management style” and an “absence of a sense of direction.” Things got so out of control that career staffers requested transfers to less than desirable locations such as Iraq and Afghanistan.Stroum was seen by most employees as “aggressive, bullying, hostile and intimidating,” according to investigators, who recommended that Uncle Sam deploy medical professionals to Luxembourg to treat high stress levels among embassy employees. Stroum also did unscrupulous things like spend $3,400 on alcohol, even though it’s against regulations.In short, Obama’s cherished money lady left the otherwise quaint embassy in the tiny European country a disaster. She quit abruptly a few weeks ago because the inspector general’s report—prepared last fall—was becoming public. The State Department has made no official announcement and clearly prefers to pretend the scandal never happened.It appears that those who donate enough money to the right politician can get away with anything at the agency responsible for America’s international relations. At least that’s what its internal watchdog has concluded, that Stroum’s behavior is not unique among “non-career ambassadors” (wealthy donors rewarded with plum foreign posts) but routinely tolerated by State Department leadership.
A few months after launching a multi million-dollar campaign to help minorities get green, the Obama Administration is dedicating an additional $7 million to study how pollution, stress and social factors affect “poor and underserved communities.”It’s all part of the administration’s effort to bring environmental justice to low-income populations by helping them obtain the same degree of protection from health and environmental hazards as wealthy communities. Here’s how it works; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gives money to leftwing groups—including some dedicated to helping illegal immigrants—that teach black, Latino and indigenous folks how to recycle, reduce carbon emissions through “weatherization” and participate in “green jobs” training.To carry out that phase of the environmental justice crusade, some 80 community organizations have received about $2 million. Among the recipients is a New Jersey group (Lazos America Unida) that advocates on behalf of the “Mexican immigrant community” and a Missouri farm workers’ group that will use the money to increase awareness about the dangers of sun and heat exposure in migrant populations.As if that weren’t bad enough, this week the EPA announced that it’s giving scientists at several universities $7 million to study how pollution, combined with stress and other social factors, affects people in “poor and underserved communities.” The agency refers to it as cumulative human health risk assessment research and the goal is to rid underserved communities of extensive pollution-based problems.“This ground-breaking research will focus on environments where people are exposed to multiple stressors such as chemicals, anxiety, and poor nutrition,” according to the EPA announcement. “When these stressors are combined, they can lead to a much higher risk of health issues.” The agency is committed to addressing these sorts of contributors to “disproportionate environmental health impacts,” according to a top official.EPA Chief Lisa Jackson launched her agency’s costly justice campaign because she claims poor and minority communities have little voice in environmental decisions while they suffer living in the shadow of the worst pollution.