something’s rotten

Remember the Fairness Doctrine? The one that the libtards in and out of Washington want to resurrect? The theory behind the Fairness Doctrine is:

radio stations could be regulated in this way due to the limited spectrum of the public airwaves.

Source: Wikipedia. The airwaves are held, by government, in trust for the public.

It was, in other words, a government-created scarcity that justified government regulation. Much like the government-created gasoline scarcities under Nixon and Carter.

Now a whacko Goremon named Mary Wood is asserting that the air is held in trust by the government.

University of Oregon law professor Mary Wood is tired of waiting for government officials to take action on global warming. So she’s devised a new legal tool to hurry them up.

Drawing on her background in both natural resources and property law, Wood has developed a theory that claims the atmosphere is an asset that belongs to all but is held in trust by the government. The government has a legal obligation to protect that trust from harm, she argues, just as financial managers have a legal obligation to protect the monetary assets in their care.

I’m sure that you readers have figured where this is going…

“The main problem with climate is that no government is taking responsibility for it and our government is sitting idle while this catastrophe is unfolding,” Wood said.

“There’s no other body of law that requires the government to act. But a trustee has to act to protect the body of the trust.”

Yep. And the laws are already on the books. No need to debate!

From theory to practice

Greg Costello is one of the public interest attorneys evaluating Wood’s proposal as the basis for potential lawsuits. He thinks it could be a successful legal strategy because it’s grounded in a widely accepted principle of common law.

“Public trust doctrine is a doctrine everybody learns in law school. It goes back to Roman times,” said Costello, executive director of the Eugene-based Western Environmental Law Center.

“It’s a theory that seems well-suited and perhaps ideal when you’re talking about who owns the atmosphere.”

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Here is a somewhat informative article from the Houston Chronicle. Amid all the factoids on consumer spending, consumer confidence, etc, was this throwaway line that got me just a bit angry.

The Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation, which excludes food and fuel costs, slowed in April, today’s Commerce report showed.

Emphasis added.

I wonder how the inflation number would change if those food and fuel costs were included? Why is this their preferred measure of inflation? I measure inflation by how much the price of things go up during a specified time period, especially food and fuel costs!

I’m a bit peeved. Maybe someone here can explain this to me.