mcanonizado17ahs-blog - Tumblr blog

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #10: Final Infographic

Works Cited

Audet, Marye. "Effects of Oil Spills." LoveToKnow. LoveToKnow Corp, n.d. Web. 05 June 2017. 

Fulton, Dierdre. "The 'Told You So' Everyone Was Dreading-First DAPL Spill Reported."Common Dreams. N.p., 10 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. 

"Home Page - Dianne Feinstein." United States Senator for California. Dianne Feinstein, n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.

"HomePage | Senator Kamala D. Harris." HomePage | Senator Kamala D. Harris. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.

Myers, John. "State Lawmakers May Tell California Pension Funds to Divest from Dakota Pipeline Companies." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 6 Dec. 2016. Web. 05 June 2017.

"Research Guides: The Dakota Access Pipeline: Native American Perspectives: Home."Home - The Dakota Access Pipeline: Native American Perspectives - Research Guides at University of New Mexico. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #9: Civic Action Assessment of  Issue

1. My roles as a citizen are to make sure that my community is making fair decisions that keep in mind the health of us and the environment. We are responsible for voting for representatives that make important decisions which affect us locally, and for being good environmental stewards, and kind to each other. 

2. From this project, I have learned how incredibly important it is to keep tabs on current problems that I’m passionate about. I say this because the media updates and changes so quickly, and new effecting factions arise all the time. As civilians, we need to be informed at all times about what is happening in our community if we want even the slightest chance at making an impact.

3. I don’t feel like it’s my civic action to directly do something about this issue I chose because I don’t have the financial resources to fly myself out to North Dakota and protest alongside the other Native Americans in effected areas. Also, for someone like me, that might be pretty dangerous to do on my own. The only thing I can do is educate other people on why the pipeline is a bad thing and how it only causes trouble for others. Education is a very effective way to rally support for a specific idea.

4. I have not volunteered my time to respond directly to this issue.

5. I am willing to protest locally if we go into another period of civil unrest. That is, if the people of Standing Rock start needing country wide support. I will oppose any legislation that can affect people’s water sources, and support all legislation that protects the rights of Native Americans and their water. I am generally a very sympathetic person, and I always want peace between parties. But when it comes to human and environmental protection, I will always stand with the oppressed. Native Americans, as a minority, already have such a small voice in a country-wide sense. I would like to ensure that everyone has equal rights and that Native Americans are treated with the respect that they deserve.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #8: Interest Groups and PACs

1a. NRDC action fund 1b. "The NRDC Action Fund's mission is to build political support in the US for protecting the planet and its people. We mobilize constituencies, experts, community leader and others to directly advocate for clean air and water, public health, biodiversity, and a stable climate. We support candidates who stand up for environmental protection, and we expose those who side with polluters rather than the public good." 1c. - rallying constituents to attend the People's Climate March to send a clear message that we want a healthier world with renewable energy sources, not coal & oil - must speak up, so we don't allow the trump administration to cripple the EPA and eliminate our nations environmental laws and safeguards - tough enforcement of environmental safeguard and sensible efforts to fight climate change will protect the health of hundreds of thousands of Americans each year, protest Trump's repeal on Obama's Clean Power Plan - must protect all water sources from chemical spills of any kind, protest Trump's rollbacks on Obama's clean waterway acts - support and fund the EPA, they oppose Scott Pruitt and want to keep him in check 1d. Tim Kaine is endorsed by the NRDC Action fund. Hillary Clinton was endorsed by them to become president. 1e. They are located in New York, New York. They do not hold meetings. 1f. You have the option to become a press blogger for their website, this is the medium through which they lobby. 

2a. Sierra Club

2b. The mission of Sierra Club California is to promote the preservation, restoration, and enjoyment of California's environment, and enable chapters and grassroots activists to speak as one voice to promote California conservation

2c. -lobby at the capitol for good environmental legislation

- gather support for protesting events surrounding bad environmental legislation

-endorse legislation regarding to clean energy, conservation, wildlife preservation, etc.

-advocate for policies that propel the use of renewable energy

- help develop policies to make renewable energy more affordable for everyone

2d. Currently they are helping draft legislation to increase the renewable energy use in California by 2x within the next 20 years. Located in Sacramento, CA. Several volunteer opportunities, simply need to fill out a form. Jobs include helping lobby, need to have good critical thinking skills and a passion for the environment. The organization is heavily driven by interns and volunteers who raise the funds to support the politicians making big changes on their environmental issues.

3a. Independent Petroleum Association of America

3b.  "The Independent Petroleum Association of America is dedicated to ensuring a strong, viable domestic oil and natural gas industry, recognizing that an adequate and secure supply of energy is essential to the national economy."

3c. - develop 90 percent of the wells in the United States, accounting for 54 percent of America’s oil production and 85 percent of America’s natural gas production.

- very supportive of hydraulic fracking

- claims to produce over 40,000 job through the process of extracting coal/gas/oil

- supports Trump’s repeals on several of Obama’s acts

-  develop 90 percent of the wells in the United States, accounting for 54 percent of America’s oil production and 85 percent of America’s natural gas production.

-predominantly white men

3d. They applaud Trump for the work he did to make the first energy action plan of his first 100 days. He supports the extraction of gas and oil because it supports several jobs and is currently common practice. They endorse other republican organizations. Volunteer opportunities among request.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #7: Political Party Action

Republican:

“The American people overwhelmingly support this project [DAPL and Keystone XL]. It’s a job creator, it has virtually no impact on the environment, and would get us closer to North American energy independence”

I do not agree with their position because building the pipeline has several negative environmental and social impacts that outweigh the creation of jobs. Jobs can be created by developing new forms of energy technology that will be sustainable into the future.

Democrat:

“Democrats support ambitious public and private investments in science, technology, and research. They are focused on creating good jobs in clean energy. They will nurture the next generation of scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs, especially women and people of color...” Based on this information, they most definitely oppose the DAPL for environmental and social reasons.

The democratic party’s platform resonates with all of my opinions regarding the environment and getting jobs in the clean energy business. I also want to support the opportunities and rights for minorities to succeed within these fields.

Libertarian:

“Government has a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights and responsibilities regarding resources. Where damages can be proven and quantified in a court of law, restitution to the injured parties must be required. While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. We oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production” According to this statement, I would conclude that libertarians do not support the construction of the DAPL because of the potential environmental threats.

I agree with their position, and I also agree that any environmental damage should be fixed and compensated for. I do not agree that government should not subsidize forms of energy all together. I think they should subsidize clean energy.

Green Party:

“The United States has a high-energy-consumption economy based mainly on fossil energy. The extraction, refining, and combustion of fossil fuels have proved extremely harmful to the environment, and supplies are rapidly being depleted. The Green Party advocates a rapid reduction in energy consumption through energy efficiency and a decisive transition away from fossil and nuclear power toward cleaner, renewable, local energy sources.” Based on this information, the Green Party strongly opposes the DAPL. They believe we should greatly limit our oil consumption for energy.

I strongly agree with the methodology of the Green Party. Their ideas are identical to mine. They identify the severity of our environmental problems and want to provide innovative, environmentally-conscious solutions that can benefit our economy, foreign relations, overall health, and much more.

Peace and Freedom:

The Peace and Freedom demands that government “Honor treaty obligations with Native American nations and recognize California tribes, stop the theft of natural resources located on reservation lands, honor Native American water  rights, implements multi-source energy system, develop of solar technology and other renewable, non-polluting energy sources, eliminate nuclear power plants, and end fossil fuel dependence.” This party definitely opposes the DAPL.

I truly respect everything that this party stands for. They deeply respect the rights of the land and the native people.

2. I think that I identify most with the Peace and Freedom Caucus which is surprising to me because I would have expected to choose the Democratic Party. I feel as though the Peace and Freedom Caucus embodies everything I represent as an individual, and that they deeply value all the same issues that I do. They stand for women’s rights, native american’s rights, worker’s rights, environmental rights, and everything in between. I would definitely consider voting for their presidential candidate. I trust these people have the passion to make some serious changes, which is exactly what we need.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #6: Executive Action Assessment of Issue

1. President Trump strongly believes that in order to create a flourishing economy with more jobs, we must tap into the coal, natural gas, and oil of our own American land. He says that energy is an essential part to the everyday life of Americans and to the world economy. He wants to “eliminate harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule” because they get in the way of physical working men. The Climate Action Plan was created under President Obama’s administration and existed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by preserving forests, encouraging the use of alternate fuels, and increasing study of climate change. As contradictory as this sounds, at the end of the energy statement, there is a line that says “President Trump will refocus the EPA on its essential mission of protecting our air and water.” His stance is unclear.

2. I disagree with his opinion and believe that his cabinet is simply trying to put every idea together to please everyone from all backgrounds. The fact that a statement on the White House website is contradicting itself, is a signal to me that President Trump does not have his people in line, nor people educated enough to take on their positions. According to what Trump says in the media, defunding the EPA and investing more money in non-renewable resources does not display any interest he has in protecting our air and water.

3. The department of energy deals with my civic action issue, as well as the department of Interior if you look at the Native American oppression aspect.

4. Mission statement of Department of Energy: “ The mission of the Energy Department is to ensure America's security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” This mission statement relates to my issue in the sense that the Department of Energy would not allow the DAPL to be constructed if their focus is alternative, sustainable energy sources that secure our “prosperity.” Nonrenewable sources like coal and oil are not prosperous.

5. To alleviate the issues surrounding the DAPL, the Department of Energy is responsible for providing thousands of clean energy jobs. This includes installing more solar panels, analyzing energy systems, educating others on the forms of renewable energy, and consequently building the energy economy.

6. Despite actions done by President Obama and his administration (DOE) last year to cut off permission of DAPL, Trump actively supports the construction of the oil pipeline through Native American lands. He has eliminated specific environmental laws to pass the project through as quickly and smoothly as possible. His actions make me deeply concerned and worried that irreversible events will take place within our environment in the next fours years under his office. Trump wants to defund the DOE which is a terrible idea because this department and the Department of Interior are the only ones which consider the health of our environment. Unfortunately, the current secretary of the DOE thinks just like Trump, so even if it is defunded, the secretary probably will not know how to use the remanding money to make effective strides toward implementing more renewable energy (what it existed to do). With less budget and an knowledgeable secretary, I don’t foresee any advancements in this area.

7. SACAPS: The subject is the first oil spill since the building of the DAPL. The author’s name is not displayed. The article sheds light on people giving different perspectives, deciding whether the spill was serious or not. This article was provided by CBS Local Minnesota, and tried its best to not provide a clear and biased opinion, which is good, because local news stations tend to have a wide range of viewers. The significance of this article was to analyze the effects of the first spill of 84 gallons last month. I agree that it is up to the individual to form opinions on events like this. It says a lot about a person’s morality or selfishness considering which side they take.

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2017/05/10/dapl-leak/

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #5: Legislative Branch

1a. Mark Desaulnier cares for the health of the environment, for example, right now he’s working on a bill to expand the John Muir Site in Martinez, CA. Open space is really important to him. Kamala Harris is on a committee for the Environment and Public Works, so she does a lot of work to punish polluting oil companies and support sustainable energy uses. Diane Feinstein also does work to protect open space and promote more renewable sources of energy.

1b. Desaulnier and Harris both introduced the bill to expand the John Muir Site which shows their dedication to preserving open space.  Feinstein strongly supports the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, which proposes individual states’ goals to reduce emissions.

2a. There are 6 related bills.

2b. Bill number 1579, Secure and Resilient Water Systems Act.

2c. This bill will ensure that any source of drinking water be considered and protected against the harms of climate change and degradation.

2d. The impact of this bill will affect drinking water that could potentially be in danger of degradation in any form.

2e. I would vote yay because any bills to protect drinking water should be valued.

2f. This bill originated in the House and has been discussed in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Currently, it still needs to be voted on in the House.

2g. Honestly, I would be more impressed with legislation on my issue if it were actually enacted. We need more bills that will directly relate to the DAPL, not just related bills through the systems of water protection. 

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #4: State Action

1.) a. Catharine Baker cares deeply about the protection of our environment and has helped pass several bills regarding the preservation of open space, ensuring clean water, and combating climate change. Steve Glazer is also a strong environmental steward. He prides himself in passing legislation to protect and conserve clean water, and will firmly oppose any transportation of resources across far distances if it compromises the health of the environment (Delta Tunnels).

b. I definitely agree with the positions which Catherine and Steve have taken. They clearly care strongly about the protection of our environment and will pass any laws to preserve it. I was unable to find their specific stances for my case, but judging by their history with environmental protection, I would assume they too would be opposed to its construction. Nonetheless, I still emailed them both to clarify their position on the DAPL.

c. Catharine Baker voted to require pipelines in ecologically sensitive areas to be retrofitted with enhanced spill prevention technology (AB 864). Steve Glazer firmly stated that he will oppose the current plan to build massive tunnels to take Delta water to Southern California because it doesn’t make “environmental sense.”

d. I sent an email to both politicians as follows:

The Honorable_________________,

The issue I am concerned about is the implication of the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I am concerned about this issue because I care deeply about the environment and protecting the rights of Native Americans. I am currently a senior at Acalanes High School and I am researching this issue for my senior Government class.  Please clarify your stance on this issue. Thank you so much for your time.

Sincerely,

Maya Canonizado

e. Responses are yet to be determined.

2.) a. The bill number is AB 20.

b. It was introduced on December 6, 2016.

c. The last major action was on April 17, 2017 to edit the bill and strengthen their claim that the boards of administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System must make a specified report, on or before April 1, 2018, to the Legislature and the Governor regarding their investments in the Dakota Access Pipeline.

d. I am very much supportive of this bill because it’s basically a plead to these two specific organizations to pull their investments out of the DAPL. One line from the report states that “As Californians, we must hold ourselves to a high standard of conduct, including how we invest our pension funds. Both morally and fiscally, the millions of dollars that the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System have invested in the Dakota Access Pipeline can be better spent elsewhere. The time has come for us as a state to divest from fossil fuels and focus on emerging technologies and clean, renewable energy. Because water is life, the most immediate action we should take is to divest from the Dakota Access Pipeline.” It boggles my mind that Californians are this diligent to make the effort to pass bills like this one. It shows me how progressive a state we are (especially since the DAPL is not a California specific issue), and gives me hope that the fate of our environment can be improved with the will of people in power.

3. This article is about how U.S. Judge James Boasberg made a ruling that the Energy Transfer Partners (the company responsible for building the DAPL) are legally allowed to keep information about any of their spills in secret to prevent protesters from getting more wild and vandalizing property. This judge claims that “The asserted interest in limiting intentionally inflicted harm outweighs the tribes’ generalized interests in public disclosure and scrutiny.” The author of this article is named Natasha Geiling. The purpose of this article is to share more information regarding the current status of the DAPL. Since the name of this website is “Think Progress” I assume it’s a fairly progressive liberal site that provides information to other liberals. For this reason, there is a bias in favor of protecting the Native Americans and their single water source. Another big point within the article mentions that “Pipeline spills in North Dakota are not uncommon — according to analysis from the Center for Biological Diversity, North Dakota has averaged four pipeline spills a year since 1996, costing more than $40 million in property damage.” I agree completely with this article because it’s mainly factual. And I believe this is incredibly significant information to understand, whether you support the pipeline or not. The spills have serious moral and economical implications that some people overlook. These issues will only divide us further into the future, and it’s sickening.

https://thinkprogress.org/dakota-access-spill-details-secret-ad8b2c32cbfe

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

SACAPS: Blog Post #3

The name of this article is “COMPANY BEHIND DAPL HAS POLLUTED RIVERS IN FOUR STATES IN LAST TWO YEARS & REPORTED 69 ACCIDENTS” which provides more information about the Dakota Access Pipeline and the company involved with its construction. The author is Alexa Erickson. The context of this article is to describe the bad reputation of Energy Transfer Partners, the company building the DAPL. The article speaks to the Environmentalists and those who are opposed to the DAPL, and is intended to infuriate them further. The website this article is published on, Collective Evolution, is a very progressive group which aims to create change to support a brighter future. As a result, the author has bias in favor of the environmentalist’s point of view because the entire article has a sense of disgust about the situation, “According to the report, there were 42 known oil spills, 11 natural gas spills, nine gasoline spills, three propane spills, two “other” spills, and two “unknown” spills. Of these incidents, there were eight injuries reported, five evacuations, and $300,000 in damages.” The significance of this article is to share vital information about the people who are constructing the DAPL. The provided evidence supports the fact that the DAPL is a terrible investment and has the potential to greatly harm the clean water supply of Native Americans, and consequently, end their lives. I agree with the significance of the article because this investigation on the Energy Transfer Partners should be taken more into consideration. I don’t understand why our President would allow this company to construct the pipeline given their history with spills. There is a very high chance that another irreversible spill could occur and affect the lives of so many people.

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2017/04/06/company-behind-dapl-has-polluted-rivers-in-four-states-in-last-two-years-reported-69-accidents/

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Blog Post #3: Constitutional Issues

Winters v. United States was decided on January 6, 1908. This case was brought by the United States to restrain appellants and others from constructing dams or reservoirs on the Milk river in the state of Montana, or preventing the water of the river from flowing to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation. In other words, this case defined the water rights of Native American reserves, in times when these rights were unclear. Supreme Court Justices had to answer the question of whether or not Native Americans should have reserved rights to water. The constitutional amendment in question was the eminent domain clause of the 5th amendment, which limits the power of state and federal governments to negatively impact the riparian rights of landowners by prohibiting the enactment of any laws or regulations that equate to a "taking" of private property. The Supreme Court’s final majority decision was to grant the Native Americans access to water because the entire idea behind Native American reserves is to allow the people to be self-sufficient on their own land. A lot of this land is used for agricultural reasons which means the reserve would not even exist without the ample use of water. After the verdict had been reached, the United States government allocated $25,000 to extend the irrigation system on the Milk River for use by the Fort Belknap American Indian reservation. This case set a precedent for other cases to acknowledge the water rights of Native Americans across the country and ensure their reserves have access to clean, usable water. I completely agree with the court’s decision because I believe that Native Americans should have first priority when it comes to water rights, considering their lives and economy are dependent on access to water.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Economic Assessment of Issue: Blog Post #2

Individuals are mainly affected by the issue regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline, more specifically, the Native Americans. They feel violated because the government wants to destroy their sacred lands to carry out these plans, as well as risk the possibility of contaminating their only water source.

The resolution to this issue is a NEED. As an environmentalist, I strongly believe that the issue regarding the construction of this pipeline is devastating, fatal, and inhumane. So many Native Americans’ lives are at risk, but the government could care less. Money is more important than preserving human lives, to them. Unfortunately, the government seems to have the upper hand at the moment. As much protesting that has occurred, many non-believing of climate change conservatives are neglectful. 

There are no goods or services needed to deal with this issue. The best way to deal with this issue is to leave the idea alone and let the poor Native Americans live their lives peacefully. They have been oppressed for longer than anyone else, the government continues to make their land reserves smaller and smaller; their land must be left alone.

The only factor of production that could be loosely applied to this situation is labor. I believe that if the government wishes to create more jobs and pool in more revenue, they should consider building more windmills, more solar panels, more sources of renewable energy instead of focusing all their time and energy into a non-renewable source. There will be a time in the future when the pipeline will have nothing more to give, and the entire production will have been for nothing; a temporary fix.

There are political incentives to alleviate this issue. As Donald Trump signs executive orders to get his plan into action, a lot of environmentalists, liberals, civil rights groups, Native American tribes, etc. rapidly lose support for the President. The more he tries to damage our planet and future, the more people get angry, the more people protest and riot. By signing this executive order, he is basically taking away the Native Americans’ right to life; because ultimately, water is the source of all life. I agree with these incentives because I’m one of those people at my breaking point, we need to alleviate this civil unrest. People shouldn’t have to go to sleep at night wondering if their world will still be a safe place when they wake up. 

The two opportunity costs of addressing this issue is that Donald Trump won’t be able to create the “millions and millions” of jobs that he said he would with this specific project. Also, the people who need the oil transported to them may have a more difficult and dangerous method of doing so.

The opportunity costs listed above are not worth the civil unrest, political heat, or the widespread human oppression taking place at this moment in time. Nothing is worth it. Resolving this issue should be on the forefront of the government’s mind, it’s time to pull out. It’s time to do the right thing.

The big oil companies, the president, and the “potential workers” are the ones who would benefit from the Dakota Access Pipeline. It’s all about the money, 100% of the time. Donald Trump would hugely benefit from the fact of knowing that he could take America out of unemployment (which has already been greatly improved by the Obama Administration). Of course the oil companies would profit off of the consumption of this oil. And the individual workers would be happy to make their money. However, that same amount of money could be put toward more eco-friendly projects, such as building more sources of renewable energy.

The Native Americans would of course profit from the solution to this issue. They will have maintained their clean water and sacred land. They aren’t demanding or require much from the government. Their land is constantly shrinking. They would be more than happy to be left alone.

Yes, this issue is a result of an externality. There would be no problem with the building of this pipeline if there weren’t potential environmental risks, but unfortunately, that’s not the case. This entire issue surrounds the externality.

This issue doesn’t require government subsidies to be resolved. It simply requires the government to pull back their plans and put their money towards something else that won’t degrade the environment. Although, it would definitely help if the government subsidized environmental organizations like the EPA. 

The subject of this graph is to display other oil transferring pipelines in North Dakota and how efficient they were after four years of use. The author of this source is  Stephen Carr Hampton, the creator of a website that’s dedicated to the history of the indigenous people. This graph was posted with an article titled “The Dakota Access Pipeline doesn’t make economic sense anymore.” This article was intended for people who clearly respect the rights and history of the indigenous people. In that sense, yes it is bias, the author of the article wished to illustrate the Native Americans as an oppressed group of people over an issue that isn’t even economically beneficial in the long run.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Getting Started

The blog I chose led me to a link for an article called “What Trump's Latest Executive Order Means For Standing Rock.” It was mainly about the unjust executive approval that President Trump gave to advance the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline project. The author’s name is Andrea Gonzales-Ramirez, a writer for Refinery 29. This specific article was informational and also opinionated, even though anyone who knows about the conflict surrounding DAPL should be opposed to it (in my opinion). Refinery 29 is a news source mainly for women, citizens against Trump, or anyone else following the current issue. The author’s point of view is leaning left, as she sides more with the Native American Tribe in Standing Rock who’s home can potentially be destroyed and the environmentalists that have also fought to keep the water clean. On top of diminishing all the work these people have done, constructing the pipeline will also ruin the progress President Obama has made to mitigate climate change. This entire issue is extremely significant because if that pipe is put in place, it could cause major environmental and humanitarian degradation. I completely agree with the article because I know that the DAPL isn’t necessary if it puts people and the earth at risk. After reading this article, I am definitely inclined to follow the blog, it seems like a place for liberal women to speak their minds which is exactly what I like to hear. Here is the link to the article: http://www.refinery29.com/2017/01/137599/donald-trump-dakota-access-pipeline-executive-action?utm_source=tumblr.com&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=end&utm_campaign=h3

I started following several different accounts on twitter that I believe pertain to my subject of interest. These include: Donald Trump, CBS News, Huffington Post, NoDAPL, and Barack Obama. A lot of tweets include polls where people respond to whether or not they think Trump’s action on the DAPL was the right thing to do, and in every one I’ve seen, there is an overwhelming majority that votes “no.” This is true even for polls in which there is a bigger pro-Trump following. I thought that was very interesting. In another tweet I read, I found out that Malia Obama has joined the DAPL protest, which is pretty amazing. Her father supports her actions and most likely would join if possible, but it’s definitely more impactful when you see empowered youth fighting for justice.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

What Trump’s latest executive order actually means for the protestors at Standing Rock and the building of the pipeline

This would be a huge blow for the people who fought for more than seven years against the project, a transnational pipeline that would extend from Canada to the Gulf Coast. The venture was killed by President Obama in 2015 because it would contribute to climate change and deter American efforts to reach a global deal addressing this issue.

[mcanonizado17ahs-blog]

Time to get it into gear. Please read Standing Rock’s statement on President Trump’s reckless and vindictive decision to poison the water of 17 million people.