PolicyBlog

You say that your funding this astroturf rally, which drew in a crowd for big musicians hired with dollars that Verizon helped provide, and then made it look like a political rally supporting mountaintop removal mining and opposing legislation to put a market-based cap-and-trade solution in for global warming pollution, "was not a statement of our position on any public policy issue, and it certainly was not an expression of support for mountaintop removal coal mining or in opposition to climate legislation." You can nuance the word "expression" all you like, but the fact is that Verizon money went to support the event, and the event was a clear effort of political slight-of-hand. At best, Verizon failed on due diligence, in which case it should clearly and explicitly put out a statement denouncing mountaintop removal mining and supporting strong climate legislation, rather than just saying you were "not making an expression" on the subject. At worst, Verizon is not living up to its rhetoric, but is actively undermining the health of people in mining communities and the sustainability of our civilization while talking 'green.' Which is it? Below is an email I sent directly to Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg (it bounced!) and COO Dennis Strigl (no reply) four days ago; I hope you will address this issue more seriously here. **** Dear Sirs, As a Verizon FiOS customer of some years' standing, I have been very pleased with the service I have received and have also been given a favorable view of the company's social responsibility because of its partnership with Environmental Defense and its sponsorship of "Green Initiatives" to save energy, support solar power and other clean energy sources, and lower the company's greenhouse gas emissions. So I was surprised and extremely disappointed to read that the company is sponsoring an event designed to use the attraction of big music stars to draw in crowds which can then be turned into an illusory, astroturf rally in "support" of the incredibly destructive practice of mountaintop removal mining and to oppose effective climate change legislation. My disillusionment and shock was double, after having only just read a recent feature in the New York Times specifically detailing the terrible consequences of irresponsible mining practices in the lives of people living in Charleston, W.Va, a town just an hour's drive south of the rally site, where mine tailings have terribly polluted the water with "arsenic, barium, lead, manganese and other chemicals at concentrations federal regulators say could contribute to cancer and damage the kidneys and nervous system" and features a local woman who lives in fear of the water and whose "youngest son has scabs on his arms, legs and chest where the bath water — polluted with lead, nickel and other heavy metals — caused painful rashes. Many of his brother's teeth were capped to replace enamel that had been eaten away." TOXIC WATERS Clean Water Laws Are Neglected, at a Cost in Suffering http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html According to an article in Advertising Age, a spokesperson for Verizon said that 'the sponsorship reflects a "local decision to support the community and sell our products at the event," and the company has no plans to pull out of the event. She added that its on-site presence at the rally does not reflect the company's policy on any public issue.' That can hardly be taken as either credible, or acceptable. Verizon's sponsorship is going to send a clear political message, filling the minds of good working people with climate-change denier propaganda and generate an astroturf crowd in opposition to action on dirty coal mining practices in the year when the fate of both climate change legislation *and* legislation to end the horrendous practice of mountaintop removal mining (the Appalachia Restoration Act, S. 696) hang in the balance. If Verizon wants to be taken seriously in its claims to responsible environmental stewardship, you must redeem this clear blight on the company's reputation by issuing a clear statement in support of a strong cap-and-trade bill and in rejection of dirty coal mining practices like mountaintop removal. A sorely disappointed customer, Verizon supports the goals of policy makers who are committed to reducing carbon emissions and protecting the environment.

Does verizon donate to projects that promote nuclear energy? It is the only viable alternative to evil fossil fuel. In TEN years one nuclear power plant produces almost one soft drink can volume of waste which can easily- and inexpensively be returned to the sun. > transformational energy efficiency progress What action has verizon taken to promote shifting the entire electric grid from wildly inefficient AC transmission to DC? > to facilitate major reduction of greenhouse gases. Has verizon mandated employees cease exhaling? When people exhale gasses allegedly harmful to the environment are released! > are committed to reducing carbon emissions Will verizon be ceasing to use non-nuclear generated electricity and cease condoning powered travel of employees? That is the only way to commit fully to eliminating carbon emissions. Verizon cannot possibly support solar power initiatives as: * the production of solar panels uses evil fossil fuels * solar panels per se are not only dangerous to the environment, but wildly toxic Verizon cannot possibly support wind power initiatives as: * blade motors require evil fossil fuel based lubricants * motor production uses evil fossil fuels itself damaging the environment * motors are constructed from substances which require evil smelting When did verizon policy become in league with envirofascism? Based on what evidence does verizon buy into the church of manmadeglobalwarming -- if at all?

WHY does policy blog NOT-respect use of whitespace in submitted comments? this is a new line. this is also a new line. If you do not see three lines this comment has been destroyed. This is UNACCEPTABLE.