Big Government had a recent column on ClimateGate, offering that it wasn’t the only Progressive Science scam pushed on the public, and states that “Eugenics” is one major global Progressive-produced catastrophe, but there is another example of Progressive Left political maneuvering that crippled a nation and brought the weight of an oppressive centrally-controlled bureaucracy on the heads of honest and diligence scientists, now known as “Lysenkoism.”

The roots of ClimateGate, with falsifying date, suppressing data that didn’t’ support the theory, and intimidating scientists as “skeptics” or even the more blatant, “unbelievers,” is found in the Soviet Union’s past, their embrace of a junk science called “agro-biology” or as Elof Axel Carlson described it, “a toxic blend of politics and pseudo-science.”

Actor and non-scientist Ed Begley, Jr. had a micro-climate-change of overheating when arguing that the only climate authority was “peer-reviewed” scientific journals. He was quite adamant, repeating “peer-reviewed” as often that it seemed to be a talisman, but about two hours too late to have heard the “thud” of the next shoe to drop from what appears to be a ClimateGate centipede, that the supposedly independent and non-partisan peer-reviewed” journals were under heavy pressure and manipulation of editors and selection of papers to refuse to publish anything that countered in any way the ClimateChange narrative, a total usurpation of the scientific process of open review – the system of checks and balances.

“Peer-reviewed,” the world has just discovered, has been nothing of the sort when it comes to the pseudo-science of “global warming”.  Actor Begley’s position of “peer-reviewed” turned out to not have been spoken from standing on solid rock, but from a tree, a precarious perch on a dead limb that was being sawed off as he spoke. http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bighollywood/2009/11/24/ed-begley-jr-loses-it-on-fox-news/ 

But there is nothing new under the sun, and those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. This combination of politics, science and public policy machinations can be found in the career and wreckage left by one man, Trofim D. Lysenko of the Soviet Union.

T.D. Lysenko (1898-1976) was a half-educated man of science; he didn’t finish his studies and remained defensive through his life towards those with better credentials and experience than he. One might say he learned just enough to be dangerous, developing a new theory, “agro-biology” which mixed known processes of agronomy and plant genetics, with theoretical and unproven evolutionary concepts. His theory appealed to the Soviet “New Man” thinking, upending the old orders, a “political” view applied to agriculture.

The Soviets had a problem; most of Soviet agricultural land was more north than America – of the latitudes of Canada, not the reliable American breadbaskets of warmer Iowa or Illinois. They have a short growing season, with no room for error, therefore much of Soviet agricultural plant research was focused on developing hardier and more productive strains of wheat. Lysenko caught the attention of the Soviet central planners when he proposed a radical method that he claimed would shock wheat into developing new characteristics that appealingly would produce a sort of “revolutionary” wheat fit for the “revolutionary” Soviet Union. And, like Lysenko’s education, “agro-biology” had just enough grounding in proven science to be convincing, especially to people who didn’t know anything about agriculture, agronomy or plant genetics. Soviet scientists who worked in those fields took a look, did some of their own peer testing and began demurring.

Lysenko used his rising political power to enhance his data to promote his theory, reduce criticism, remove scientists from their positions, chase them from the field and in several cases, most notably Lysenko’s chief critic and professional competitor, Nikolai Vavilov, the man arrested, stripped of his position and literally sent to a Soviet prison where he died, a broken, innocent man. The rest of Soviet science took note, and shut up. They had to eat, after all. But there wasn’t much to eat after Soviet Central Planning decreed that the debate was over, “the science settled” and the “consensus” was that Lysenko’s methods were to be applied to all Soviet agriculture. Harvests dropped, the Lysenko-processed wheat didn’t produce the results Lysenko had predicted, had published and had promoted – a national, policy-contrived disaster.

The parallels between the Soviet centralized commitee promotion of Lysenko because his rhetoric fit the Soviet Progressive ideology, and “Climate Change” are ominous – the bullying, the falsification of data and the outright professional, political and bureaucratic smothering of dissenting opinions should be an important lesson to recall when presented with ClimateChange data, claims and computer modeling that fly in the face of observable reality. That the environmental movement has such luminaries as former Soviet President Gorbachev who after losing the free election for Russian president with an abysmal 3% of the vote, morphed into a “green” advocate, after stating that the “environmental movement was the last best hope of communism.”  A strategy of going “Green” that would lead to “Red,” should be a reason to closely examine the claims, the direction and the veracity of anything presented by people who have no backgrounds in science whatsoever. The mountain of emails discussing elimination of dissent, hijacking the peer-review process, collusion and obfuscation, and the exposure of the faulty computer codes written for climate modeling shouldn’t have been a surprise, but it’s welcome and concrete proof that “Global Warming” and “ClimateChange” are politics and power, not science or actual weather. This fraud as it still unravels with almost daily exposure of yet more admissions of hiding data, manipulation to produce desired outcomes, is becoming more and more suspicious as a way to create a basis on which massive taxation and redistribution of wealth was going to be justified, negatively affecting billions of people around the world, arguably the biggest single planned theft in human history.

“In other words, the primary task of the politics of science was to ensure that science served the political end of the people and its government.”     The Lysenko Effect, by Nils Roll-Hansen

Resources:  The Lysenko Effect, by Nils Roll-Hansen;    The Lysenko Affair, by David Joravsky
.

This was too much fun to pass up!  Thank you Kyle-Anne Shiver!! Who wrote this delightful piece…

http://bigjournalism.com/kashiver/2010/02/28/former-veep-goes-girly-man-has-hissy-fit-in-pages-of-new-york-times/

This piece of pure, dribbling, drooling emoting is going to either make you collapse in a torrent of tears or retch into the nearest barf bag.  The only human beings on the planet to whom this editorial would appeal are a bunch of 13-year-old girls without a single clue between them.

With hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, Al is going all out to save his massive investment in the Global Warming hysteria.  Here, he comes up with histrionics befitting the amount of personal loss he stands to suffer.

Ok, so this isn’t totally about Arizona … or is it?

How about the AzCC’s Residential Energy Standards?  Or the AzCC’s stepping out from their legal role as rate-payer watchdog and into making energy policy for Arizona that is; A) out of its pay-grade by the Arizona Constitution, and B) totally based on a outright fraud.

The RES and subsequent foray into “Green Energy” at all costs, without a thought to the real cost per Kwh for fantasy sources of reliable energy is a dangerous road for Arizona’s economic future.

Cost per on demand 24/7 available Kwh of “green electric generation” cannot compare with *clean coal* and *clean nuclear* power period.  Windmills and acres of solar panels dotting the landscape with miles of transmission towers and lines crisscrossing the environment altering the patterns of migratory birds and thunderstorms might be a Quixotic vision of an environmentalists utopia, but unfortunately reality bites.  The sun doesn’t shine 24 hours a day, so you need environmentally unfriendly Lithium batteries to store the energy for later use.  The wind doesn’t blow 24 hours a day in exactly the right velocity and direction to provide on demand electricity for job producing industrial small businesses in a cost effective way.

Time to debunk the Green Dream.   We’ve even heard that schools in Arizona are spending unrestricted amounts of money to “green” up their classrooms.  Shouldn’t that be money better spent with the teachers and kids on real learning?

Anyway, until someone politically stands up and says “Look Mommy!  The Emperor is wearing NO clothes!!”  we will continue down the path to an “Olive Drab Green” future rather than the pretty green that Al Gore would have us believe in.

What’s all this fuss about “snakes in Guam” that I’m hearing about on the radio?

The last few weeks, Senator John McCain has had some raspy-throated woman shilling for him in a political ad claiming that JD Hayworth voted for some snakes in Guam.

I decided to look into these “snakes” in Guam and instead of diving into the wealth of knowledge provided by the US Department of Agriculture and other scientific papers, I went to one of my favorite websites – YouTube! Here are a few clips about these “Brown Tree Snakes” that have invaded the island of Guam and devastated entire bird populations in addition to terrifying the citizens of Guam.

After viewing these videos, take a moment to read how these snakes are affecting the island of Guam and how they have even become a potential problem to Hawaii.

The Impact of Brown Tree Snakes on Guam’s Island Ecosystem

The spread of brown tree snakes throughout Guam is directly linked to changes in several animal populations. Eight species of forest birds, some found only on Guam, have disappeared from the island. Three other bird species are listed as threatened or endangered and remain in small numbers in the wild. Brown tree snakes eat young Mariana fruit bats (Pteropus mariannus mariannus), which are also listed as endangered on Guam. Small mammals are rare in forests and scrub habitat to begin with. Two gecko species once common on Guam are now considered rare, though they flourish on snake-free Cocos Island nearby. Indirectly, brown tree snakes may disrupt other aspects of Guam’s island ecosystem. Some native trees and plants that depend on birds and fruit bats for seed dispersal and pollination may not reproduce. Insects and spiders, normally controlled by forest birds, have become more abundant.

Economic Effects

Substantial economic losses are associated with brown tree snakes. Guam Power Authority reports millions of dollars in increased costs and lost revenue caused by brown-tree-snake power outages. Snakes climb on electrical transmission lines and short-circuit wires. After snake-induced power outages, electrical distribution equipment frequently needs replacement or repair. Thus, maintenance crew costs rise with overtime and night shifts, compensation must be paid to consumers for damages to electrical equipment, and the need for backup equipment increases. Island residents incur additional costs when food spoils during power outages and shops have to close.

The agricultural community also reports losses due to the brown tree snake. These snakes eat valuable pet birds, young chickens, and chicken eggs. Snakes will often kill prey too large to be eaten, including puppies, rabbits, and young goats. Medical expenses for treatment of bites by brown tree snakes are an additional cost. No human fatalities are known.

Here are a few other resources on the Brown Tree Snake problem in Guam:

USDA National Invasive Species Information Center: Brown Tree Snake

USDA: No Escape From Guam: Stopping the Spread of the Brown Tree Snake

United States Department of Defense Report to the Congress: Control of the Brown Tree Snake – August, 2008

FY04 Authorization for Guam Invasives Pilot Program

Finally, here’s the legislation related to the controlling “Snakes in Guam”  H.R. 1588 otherwise known as the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004

And the Roll Call Vote on the bill? Both Senator McCain and Kyl voted for the bill (H.R. 1588) as did 93 other US Senators.

For Immediate Release: February 9, 2010

Americans for Prosperity Applauds U.S. House Candidate Jesse Kelly

-Signs No Climate Tax Pledge-

PHOENIX—The Arizona chapter of the free-market grassroots group Americans for Prosperity (AFP-AZ) today applauded U.S. House candidate Jesse Kelly (8th District) for signing the group’s “No Climate Tax Pledge.” Kelly joins more than 350 lawmakers and candidates on the federal, state and local levels pledging to “oppose legislation relating to climate change that includes a net increase in government revenue.”

“The one thing elected officials should be able to agree on is that global warming shouldn’t be used as an excuse to hike taxes on citizens and businesses,” said AFP-AZ State Director Tom Jenney. “We encourage all of Arizona’s elected officials and candidates for elected office to sign the pledge.”

Other Arizona signers include U.S. Representatives Trent Franks, John Shadegg, and Jeff Flake, as well as numerous state senators and state representatives.

Cap-and-trade took its first step toward enactment last year when the U.S. House narrowly passed the Waxman-Markey energy tax bill, which escaped the lower chamber by a scant seven votes despite significant bipartisan opposition. The U.S. Senate has struggled to pass companion legislation, with several key Democratic senators expressing opposition to the energy tax bill.

President Obama has made no secret of his support for the bill, which would be the largest tax increase in American history. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office scored the House plan as an $846 billion increase in federal revenue, a burden that will be borne by taxpayers and consumers for decades to come.

“Using the guise of climate change to transfer dollars from hard-working citizens to bureaucratic big government is unacceptable,” said Jenney. “Regardless of their stance on global warming, this should be common ground for all of our elected officials at all levels of government.”

The pledge is available online at www.NoClimateTax.com. AFP does not endorse candidates. All elected officials and candidates are encouraged to sign the pledge and go on the record in opposition to using the climate change issue to increase taxes and grow the size of government.

Americans for Prosperity® (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. AFP has more than 900,000 members, including members in all 50 states, and 25 state chapters. More than 55,000 Americans in all 50 states have made a financial investment in AFP or AFP Foundation. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org

ARIZONA ENERGY FORUM PRAISES GOVERNOR JAN BREWER FOR OPPOSING EPA REGULATION OF GREEN HOUSE GASSES

PHOENIX, AZ – Feb. 2, 2010:  The Arizona Energy Forum (www.azenergyforum.com) praised Governor Jan Brewer this week for opposing President Obama’s attempt to regulate green house gasses (GHG) through the Environmental Protection Agency.

In a letter written January 27th to the EPA, Governor Brewer points out that “in the face of this gauntlet of regulatory activity conducted in one calendar year, Arizona is compelled to make its position clear and unequivocal: it is poor public policy for the US EPA to regulate GHGs using the blunt instrument of the Clean Air Act.”

The Arizona Energy Forum was formed to achieve energy security for the United States and hold the elected officials accountable for shaping energy policies.

Arizona Energy Forum Chairman Troy Hyde said, “We appreciate Governor Brewer’s opposition to the Obama administration’s effort to achieve more control and regulatory powers by using the EPA to regulate green house gasses.”

“Since the Cap & Trade bill has no future, it is a back-door approach to make rules through regulation instead of legislation.  At a time when the focus is on the economy, there could be no worse time to add costly, time-consuming and unfair regulations on Arizona business. Since this issue receives so little media attention, it would have been easy for the Governor to forego comment, so we applaud her courage on this subject.”

The Arizona Energy Forum encourages all who share their interest in energy security to contact their website www.azenergyforum.com

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 31, 2010

Congressional Candidate Rusty Bowers Reacts to Secretary’s Resolution Copper Visit

It was a great honor to have Secretary Vilsack come to Superior, and visit rural Arizona. It is important that he see first hand how badly we need the jobs created by this mine, and the true economic stimulus this will bring to all of Arizona. We the people support this mine, and it was vital the secretary see that.

As for Congresswoman Kirkpatrick, it is too little too late. She has been unenthusiastic at best about this land exchange, and it is demonstrated by her ineffectiveness at getting her land swap bill passed in the House of Representatives. Senators Kyl and McCain who are not even members of the majority party in the Senate have already succeeded in passing a land swap bill in the U.S. Senate.

This is not a Republican or Democrat issue. This is an issue of values. You’ll fight for the values you treasure. Hard work, jobs, and the families that need them. This mine represents the difference between the values that hold human life and prosperity first, instead of politics and radical environmentalism.

I treasure the values of life and earning an honest living. This land swap represents that; that is what I’ll fight for!

Rusty Bowers is a Republican candidate for Congress in district 1. Visit RustyCountry.com to learn more about his campaign, and the rural values it stands for.

Who could have predicted that Ernest Hemingway’s novel, “The Snows of Kilimanjaro” would be a victim of “Global Warming” decades after its publication? Al Gore, searching the planet for visual examples which would best warn the public about the deteriorations provoked by rising global temperatures, found one in the apparently shrinking ice cap of Mt. Kilimanjaro. How ironic, the snows of Kilimanjaro are melting from global warming, something that surely would render Hemingway’s book …well, sort of a relic of cooler days gone by.  But Al Gore and the “Global Warming” proponents are banking on the general public not knowing a thing about Kilimanjaro the actual mountain, or anything about the novel apart from the catchy title. Yet, fiction is not what we want to discuss, but fact. And the “fact” of anything “melting” at the top of Kilimanjaro is a “fact” that is totally dependent on an un-informed public not challenging it.

Mt. Kilimanjaro, a volcano rising just over 19,000 feet from sea level, located in the East African nation of Tanzania, is somewhat unique – a mountain on the equator with a glacier at its summit, rising above the hot savannah, a grassland game park with lions, elephants, zebras, and wildebeest, nibbling about under acacia and crimson-blossomed flame tree shade – with red-wrapped and colorful bead-adorned traditional Masai warriors strolling about, visiting, tending their cattle, minding the homesteads and families amidst the flora and fauna. There are glaciers on mountains near the tropical equator elsewhere in the world, so it’s not truly unique. What does make it more uniquely interesting is information that Al Gore didn’t offer when he claimed that “global warming” was melting the ice on Kilimanjaro. That would be an inconvenient fact – Kilimanjaro’s sister peak, Mt. Kenya.

Mt. Kenya, situated in the East African nation of Kenya, next door to Tanzania, is a volcano like Kilimanjaro, also just over 19,000 feet and is close by on the other side of the equator; the mountains are the two most distant points on the earth which can be seen from each other. And, what are the odds? … Mt. Kenya also has a glacier at its summit. But unlike Mt. Kilimanjaro, and despite the nearly identical circumstances, Mt. Kenya’s glacier doesn’t lend itself so well to photographic “evidence” of any sort of …“melting,” so it’s never mentioned. Logically, if “global warming” is melting the glacier on Mt. Kilimanjaro, then it must be melting the glacier on Mt. Kenya at a very similar rate.
Because the two mountains sit at the equator, their summit temperatures remain in a relatively constant range; days at the equator do not shift the way they do as in latitudes approaching the poles. Instead, they have a steady twelve hours of daylight, twelve hours of night with very little variation, 365 days a year. Literally, there can be more than a 100 degree decline in temperature as one ascends from the sultry bases to the frigid summits of both mountains. Mt. Kilimanjaro’s glacier doesn’t look like a flowing sort of glacier found in seasonally-affected mountains, it’s a big block of ice sitting at the rim, and temperatures there at 19,000 feet lurk at negative 3 degrees F and lower. That would be 35 degrees below freezing point. There is very little atmosphere at 19,000 feet, the air is very thin and has a very low capacity to hold any sort of heat or water vapor, so it’s extremely dry and cold, much too cold to “melt” anything.

But Al Gore showed photos of a once bigger ice cap than today. There are at least two factors. One, the snowfall has been measurably less as the region has been in a drought for over decade. There just hasn’t been any significant rainfall, and so, little snowpack added up top. But nearby Mt. Kenya has had closer to average rainfall, and its glacier isn’t showing much change in size, so the drought is a localized problem. Rains in that region resemble very much Arizonan rain patterns – produced by cells rather than comprehensive cloud cover. Two, at the summit, a different process is at work. In extremely cold, dry conditions, the ice/solid to water/liquid to water vapor/gas transformation skips a step. Under the right conditions, ice can “sublimate” or evaporate into the air without any melting. In the bitter cold and extremely dry environment of the summit at over 19,000 feet, it is simply too cold for melting. “Sublimation” is not a function of “warming” but of chilling.

 The snows of Kilimanjaro have not been “melting” from “global warming.” At 19,000 feet, the thin atmosphere will never be dense enough at that altitude to hold heat even with any potential rise in global temperatures at lower altitudes. The “fact” of the “melting” is not a fact, but a fraud or in today’s debate, a “trick” to hide the truth. 32 degrees F has a meaning and a significance that too many people today do not apply to real life.

Time to refresh ourselves of that old adage: “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”

An excellent article regarding extensive background and research into the conditions for sublimation, solar radiation and recorded temperatures is found in The American Scientist, Vol. 95, 2007 Sigma Xi, “The Shrinking Glaciers of Kilimanjaro.” Authors: Philip W. Mote and Georg Kaser http://uwnews.washington.edu/ni/relatedcontent/2007/June/rc_parentID34106_thisID34110.pdf

By Byron Schlomach, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute

Twenty years ago a biologist showed me a graph from a peer-reviewed scientific journal that showed an alarming increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. Then I noticed the graph’s scale was logarithmic and made even small increases look exaggerated. I’ve been skeptical of the science behind global warming ever since.

Now there’s ClimateGate. Somebody hacked the University of East Anglia’s e-mail server in England and downloaded e-mails to and from scientists in the Climate Research Unit, perhaps the world’s premier climate research center. The messages show scientists engaged in politics over science. One damaging e-mail includes this remark:

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

“Mike” is Michael Mann, made famous by the “hockey stick” temperature diagram Al Gore helped popularize. It first appeared in a UN report on global warming and purports to show that earth’s recent temperature is the highest in a thousand years, using tree ring data to reconstruct past temperatures. Mann apparently grafted in data from unrelated modern sources to get the desired result when ring data didn’t cooperate.

Add to this the recent confession that raw temperature data have long been destroyed. These data are the basis of the two main datasets used by the UN for its policy reports. Now nobody can actually check the methodology of the data that’s being used to dictate international policy.

Given the lack of reliable, replicable, scientific evidence of global warming, it calls into question the wisdom behind the Arizona Corporation Commission renewable energy standards that will cost Arizona utility customers billions in the coming years. The Commission should rely on more than questionable science before they strike a multi-billion dollar blow to Arizona’s already fragile economy. I’ve got plenty of raw data to back that up, by the way.

Byron Schlomach, Ph.D., is the director of the Goldwater Institute’s Center for Economic Prosperity.

by Nick Dranias
Goldwater Institute
 
Arizona’s consumption of electrical power has been growing at about three times the rate of the United States’ as a whole. Unless we open the market to let more suppliers in, Arizonans will be at risk of electricity shortages, spiraling prices and miss out on the benefits of innovation in renewable energy spurred by competition for their business. That’s why the Goldwater Institute recommends restructuring Arizona’s electricity markets for competition.

Restructuring would rewrite the regulations governing Arizona’s electricity market and allow for competition among generators, distributors and retailers of electricity. It would allow entrepreneurs to open new businesses to produce, distribute, and sell electricity. The competitive electricity market in Texas increased generation capacity by 35 percent from 1998 to 2006. In Britain, a similar expansion in capacity ultimately lowered rates 30 percent in 10 years.

Restructuring will also give customers who want to buy and use green energy the freedom to do so. Right now in Arizona, there are homebuilders who want to create green subdivisions which generate and supply their own renewable electricity. Restructuring would make this possible.

Today three experts on electricity restructuring will be at the state Capital to talk about how Arizona could begin a restructuring process and how restructuring could encourage the use of more renewable energy. The discussion is open to the public and we encourage you to join us:
 
Date:   Thursday, November 12, 2009
Time:   10:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m.
Location:   Arizona State House of Representatives, Hearing Room 3, 1700 W. Washington, Phoenix

A successful restructuring effort will unleash entrepreneurs to freely generate more electricity to meet demand and to innovate in developing energy sources of all types, especially green, while maintaining stable prices. Restructuring, when done right, has never failed, indeed it has been successful in Texas, Pennsylvania and Britain. It will succeed here too.

Nick Dranias holds the Goldwater Institute Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan chair for constitutional government and is the director of the Institute’s Dorothy D. and Joseph A. Moller Center for Constitutional Government.

Phoenix–Late yesterday the Goldwater Institute continued its legal challenge of the Arizona Corporation Commission’s authority to impose renewable energy mandates on utility companies and surcharges on consumers to pay for those mandates.

In 2006, the Arizona Corporation Commission passed a rule requiring electricity companies to produce an increasing amount of the power they supply to consumers from renewable energy sources, like solar and wind power. As part of the mandate, the ACC required electricity companies to impose a surcharge on each of their customers. This tax is expected to cost Arizona families and businesses $2.4 billion over the next 15 years.

“These regulations may be the largest intrusion into private business in Arizona’s history, and consumers are picking up the tab,” said Clint Bolick, director of the Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation at the Goldwater Institute.

The Goldwater Institute filed suit against the ACC because under the Arizona Constitution the Commission’s authority is limited to protecting consumers from excessive energy prices. It does not have the authority to set energy policy, which is the legislature’s role, and it doesn’t have the authority to require utilities to charge more.

The Institute also has weighed in on a related issue involving the Commission. Solar panel manufacturing companies like Tempe-based Solar City are working with school districts to finance solar panels that will provide power to the schools. But the ACC is considering regulating solar panel manufacturers as utility companies, which would increase their costs and add mountains of compliance red tape.

But solar firms do not meet any of the normal conditions that would allow the ACC to regulate them as utilities: solar firms do not produce energy–they are simply facilitators that enable private entities to generate their own energy; the firms are not a “natural monopoly”; and they are not required to provide service–customers choose whether or not they want to buy their service, unlike a traditional electricity company.

“The ACC is trying to impose a 20th Century regulatory structure on 21st Century technology,” continued Bolick. “Instead of command-and-control regulation, government needs to let technology flourish in a free economy. There are plenty of entrepreneurs who would relish the chance to supply green energy to customers who want to buy it.”

This appeal of a September 2009 Maricopa County Superior Court decision to the Arizona Court of Appeals is the latest round in Miller v. Arizona Corporation Commission, initially filed by the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation in June 2008.

For more information on this and other Goldwater Institute litigation, visit www.goldwaterinstitute.org/litigation. The Goldwater Institute is an independent government watchdog supported by people who are committed to expanding free enterprise and liberty.