New weapon being developed to blast drones out of sky with radio waves, says MoD

David Lynch,

 PA Political Staff
Wed, 15 May 2024

A cutting-edge new weapon which uses radio waves to blast drones out of the sky is under development for the UK’s armed forces.

The Radio Frequency Directed Energy Weapon (RFDEW) beams radio waves to disrupt or damage the critical electronic components of vehicles and drones used by enemy combatants, which can cause them to stop in their tracks or fall out of the sky.

It can be used across land, air and sea and has a range of up to 1km, which could be extended in the future.

Release of information about the new weapon comes after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak promised to hike UK defence spending to 2.5% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030.


The Radio Frequency Directed Energy Weapon (RFDEW) that beams radio waves to disrupt or damage the critical electronic components of vehicles and drones used by enemy combatants (MoD Crown Copyright/PA)

With an estimated cost of 10p per radio wave shot, the technology is also being billed as a cost-effective alternative to traditional missiles, and could be used to take down dangerous drone swarms.

The technology can be mounted on to a variety of military vehicles, and uses a mobile power source to produce pulses of a radio frequency energy in a beam that can fire sequenced shots at a single target or be broadened to hit a series of targets.

Minister for defence procurement James Cartlidge said: “We are already a force to be reckoned with on science and technology, and developments like RFDEW not only make our personnel more lethal and better protected on the battlefield, but also keep the UK a world leader on innovative military kit.

“The war in Ukraine has shown us the importance of deploying uncrewed systems, but we must be able to defend against them too. As we ramp up our defence spending in the coming years, our Defence Drone Strategy will ensure we are at the forefront of this warfighting evolution.”

The new weapons system will undergo extensive testing with British soldiers over the summer.

It is being developed by a joint team from the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) and Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S), working with UK industry under Project Hersa.

DSTL chief executive Paul Hollinshead said: “These game-changing systems will deliver decisive operational advantage to the UK armed forces, saving lives and defeating deadly threats.

“World-class capabilities such as this are only possible because of decades of research, expertise and investment in science and technology at DSTL and our partners in UK industry.”

China navy secretly built what could be world's first drone aircraft carrier: report

Thibault Spirlet

BUSINESS INSIDER
Wed, May 15, 2024 


China has secretly built what could be the world's first drone carrier, an analyst said.


The report pointed to the vessel's size to guess at its primary mission.


Having a drone carrier would allow China to use different types of drones to attack, an analyst told BI.

China's navy has secretly built what could be the world's first dedicated drone carrier ship, according to Naval News, a squat ship that looks like a mini-aircraft carrier.

The outlet used satellite imagery dated May 6, along with input from J. Michael Dahm, a senior resident fellow for aerospace and China studies at the Mitchell Institute.

"We are confident that this ship is the world's first dedicated fixed-wing drone carrier," it said. Other experts, however, cautioned that only time would tell its purpose.



The report cited the vessel's flight deck length, which it said is about one-third the length and half the width of a Chinese or US Navy aircraft carrier. It's also roughly half the length of China's amphibious assault ships that launch manned helicopters, suggesting that the new ship's flight deck is designed for fewer helicopters or smaller aircraft like drones.

Warships' flight decks have been bases for drones like the US's MQ-8B Fire Scout helicopter and the lightweight Scan Eagle drone. What appears new is that the Chinese ship's entire function may be to launch and land drones, although its purpose will only be confirmed by future observations of its testing and operations.

The report estimated that the flight deck was wide enough to allow aircraft or drones with a wingspan of roughly 65 feet, like the Chinese equivalents of the Reaper drone, to operate from it.

Citing satellite imagery, the report also said that the flight deck appears to be "very" low, suggesting there's no hangar below for aircraft storage and maintenance like those of assault ships and carriers. As seen, the ship appears to be well under the length of a Chinese frigate.

Alessio Patalano, a professor of war and strategy in East Asia at the Department of War Studies at King's College London, backed up the assessment.

He told BI that the platform's flattop and compact deck, together with the reportedly catamaran-like hull, suggest that it will be used for drones; the US has also experimented with launching drones from catamaran-style ferries, but the ship's flight deck is much smaller.

Patalano also said it would make sense for the Chinese navy to keep its trials largely hidden from international scrutiny.

But Lyle Goldstein, Director of Asia Engagement at the DC-based think tank Defense Priorities, said he would hesitate to call it a drone carrier based on just one satellite image.

Strategically, however, he said it would make a lot of sense.

Drones have a relatively small range, limiting their deployment away from the coastline, Goldstein told BI, so having a carrier would give the Chinese navy a "robust" network and allow drones of different types to attack.

"I spend a lot of time looking at Taiwan scenarios, and I think China would be looking to really deploy huge amounts of these exploding drones as its main weapon," he said.

The possible drone mothership was spotted only weeks after China's third carrier started sea trials.


Opinion

The US and Royal Navies have lost the ability to introduce new ships

Tom Sharpe
Wed, May 15, 2024 





The Royal Navy and the US Navy can fairly be described as the leading maritime forces of the Western world – though realistically, of course, the USN is in a class by itself.

Both services can deploy fifth-generation fighters from aircraft carriers. Both can launch Tomahawk cruise missiles at targets a thousand miles away. Both have now proven that they can shoot down incoming ballistic missiles, in historic engagements against the Iran-backed Houthis of Yemen. Though the USN is far bigger, both navies can do the rest of the top-tier missions: nuclear submarine deterrence, attack, and covert ops; effective anti-submarine warfare (an area in which the Royal Navy is sometimes, for once, a little ahead); and amphibious assault. Or anyway the USN can do amphibious assault and the Royal Navy – actually the Royal Fleet Auxiliary – will be able to soon.

But both services have their problems, in particular with introducing new ships.

Here in Britain, the problems are obscured because planned shipbuilding numbers are good. The new Dreadnought class deterrent submarines are in train as are the last of the Astute class attack submarines. The collaboration with the US and Australia for the next generation of attack submarines remains sound, although that is a long way away and many hurdles remain. The Type 26 and 31 Frigates are (finally) progressing nicely and the news that they will both have Mark 41 vertical launchers, able to carry effective American missiles of all kinds, is welcome.

The fact that, to my mind, takes a little bit of the gold leaf off ‘the golden age of shipbuilding’ here in the UK is the number of ships that are being asked to run on beyond their programmed lifespan because these projects all started too late. Resource constraints make getting programs across the line so difficult that we are now seemingly incapable of starting a complex build programme in time for it to be finished as the previous class pays off. Delays in build due to politics, shipyard capacity issues and design tinkering all compound this. Capability gaps are now the norm, sometimes huge ones.

The venerable Type 23 frigates typify this. They were built in the 1990s and Noughties and were designed to run reasonably low-intensity towed array patrols in the North Atlantic with a life span of 18 to 20 years. Even the very newest (and best) one, my old command HMS St Albans – just coming out of an extended maintenance period – is already 24 years old. They will all be in their late 30s by the time the T26s are ready to relieve them.

Running ships on past their designed life like this creates two problems. First is the cost of keeping them mechanically sound and safe to operate. The refits cost more than it cost to build them. Second, you are forced to throw money at what in technological terms is now an ‘old ship’. The latest advancements in weapons, sensors, AI, communications and satellite networks – all the things we are working so hard to develop to retain a technological edge – become increasingly incompatible with the ageing platforms.

The USN's futuristic Zumwalt class destroyer has not been a success. Only three will ever join the fleet - US Navy/Getty

Older ships also use more people, the reason I am confident we won’t see our two Royal Navy amphibious assault ships on operations anytime soon, despite the announcement that they will not be paid off early.

It’s doubly frustrating that we are in the middle of making the same mistake again with the replacement for the Type 45 destroyers. HMS Daring, first of class, was launched in 2006 and should therefore be expecting to retire in 2036 at the latest. If the Type 45 replacement is to be ready in time, designs need to be mature now and contracts awarded straight away.

To give an idea, steel was first cut on the Type 26 Frigate in July 2017 but that ship won’t reach initial operating capability until October 2028. But that was on the back of a further seven years of contract discussions and awards, i.e. it took 18 years from ‘concept’ to ‘operational’.

Meanwhile, over in the US, the Zumwalt class was a case study of what happens if you try to pack too much new and untested technology into one hull. The initial plan was to build 32 but as the costs skyrocketed, this reduced to 24, then to seven. The USN has ended up with three. A related case was the Seawolf submarines, which are powerful but horrendously costly. Again, the USN only got three, though in this case the more reasonably priced Virginia class successor project has been a great success.

With surface ships the USN did not recover as well – if at all. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is perhaps the exemplar of a programme that started with a confused concept of operations, was rushed into production, and got worse from there. It took about 12 years from launch before they were universally being referred to as ‘little crappy ships’. Needless to say, the US Navy hasn’t let the almost unarmed LCSs anywhere near the current littoral combat theatre in the Southern Red Sea.

And now the Constellation class frigate, the US answer to our Type 26, is also in a bit of a mess. On this occasion, the USN took the excellent and proven Fregata Europea Multi-Missione (FREMM) design and rather than modifying 15 per cent of it for US purposes as initially stated, modified 85 per cent. It’s basically a new ship. A combination of this meddling and workforce shortfalls in the yard where it is being built have caused delays and a price hike.

So ‘too expensive’, ‘unreliable’ and ‘fiddled with too much’ in sequential order. It’s almost as though the USN can’t build new surface combatant warships at all any more. Fortunately, in the long running Arleigh Burke destroyer programme, the US not only produced one of the best warships ever at the start, it is also one of the most modifiable. The latest ones, still coming off the line, physically resemble their forebears of 33 years ago but that’s about it: and the old ones still in service have been upgraded in line with the new ones.

Arleigh Burke class. When you get something right, keep doing it - MC3 Lasheba James/US Navy/AFP/Getty

Here in Britain our replacement air defence destroyer, the Type 83, will need to avoid all these traps. It will need to be advanced (but not too much), have what is meant to be inked in from the start and then not be tinkered with during build.

That’s not going to be easy, however. The things an air defence destroyer needs to be able to do are expanding and shifting at pace. The Future Air Dominance System (FADS) is the collective term for this and whilst accelerating fast, the concept is still in its infancy.

Whatever FADS ends up being, it will need to be advanced but not too expensive. It must be survivable and not have too many people onboard. It must carry lots of (reloadable at sea) missiles but not be too big and expensive. It will need to counter swarm attacks by cheap and simple drones or missiles (the forthcoming Dragonfire laser should be useful here). It will also need to shoot down ballistic missiles in space, supersonic or hypersonic missiles from the upper atmosphere to sea level, and defend against surface attack (also drones). It should be able to knock down targets below the horizon which are being tracked by something else such as an airborne radar aircraft.

The Red Sea has confirmed beyond doubt that warships need to be able to strike targets ashore – add this to the list, though most navies apart from the Royal Navy had already done so. The Type 83s will need to be able to conduct disaggregated operations thousands of miles from other ships but also in a task group next to the carrier (this is a key requirement).

These are complex and sometimes conflicting requirements to the point where some FADS concepts dispense with the idea of a large ship at all, relying instead on a fleet of smaller arsenal and uncrewed ships. This could work in wartime, and might even save money (never far away in the conversation) but solutions like this often overlook the 99 per cent of the time when a warship’s job is to prevent the war in the first place.

So, to my mind, peacetime operations, deterrence work, radar physics and probably a pinch of traditionalism means that FADS will still have a destroyer-looking ship at its core with the option to add remotely operated or heavily armed options down the line. It won’t be a vast cruiser (see Zumwalt) or small and under-armed (see the LCS).

But FADS needs to mature now because the equation is simple: no destroyers = no carriers = no conventional deterrent in far too much of the world. And if they’re not ready in time, we know from the Type 23s what it costs to run ships beyond their expected life and given the complexities (and difficulties) of the Type 45 power train, it will be worse if we have to do it again.

So I would question the notion that we are in a golden age of shipbuilding here in the UK. If we have entered a golden anything it should be the age of budget holders finally recognising how tight things have become in the Royal Navy, how this could compromise the defence of the nation in the face of increasing threats and the demands this continually places on the service’s excellent people.

In the States the problems are less ones of lacking money and vision – the US has long had clear ideas on a powerful navy and has provided ample funds. Problems in America are ones of execution, with at least three major ship classes failing to reach service in any numbers over the last three decades – leaving the USN, like the RN, with a lot of the same ships it had 30 years ago.

The good news is that in both nations the desire is there to meet the threats of the future. The two navies now just need to be given the resources and freedom to deliver. In the specific case of the Type 83 destroyer, that time for decisive action is now.

Tom Sharpe is a former Royal Navy officer and surface combatant captain

About 150 people testify at Texas Senate hearing on SB 17, college free speech. Here's why

Lily Kepner, Austin American-Statesman
Wed, May 15, 2024 

About 7:30 a.m. Tuesday, a small group of University of Texas students, staff and community members gathered in front of the warmly lit UT Tower. Unlike many other recent gatherings on campus, the group wasn't carrying signs, it wasn't chanting, and those in attendance weren't all from the same organizations.

But they were all set on the same mission: to march to the Texas Capitol ahead of the long-awaited 9 a.m. Senate Higher Education Subcommittee hearing on Senate Bill 17, antisemitism on college campuses and free speech, to express to lawmakers their experiences with what's happening at their institutions.

"It’s being used in ways that I think even the legislators didn’t expect,” Anne Lewis, a UT professor who was at the Tower with the Texas State Employees Union's executive board, said about SB 17, a bill that went into effect in January and banned diversity, equity and inclusion offices and initiatives at all Texas public universities and colleges.


“On the ground here, of course, they don't see what happens when they enforce these things," Lewis added.

More than 200 people signed up to give public testimony at the Senate subcommittee hearing, and 148 people did. The majority spoke about SB 17's consequences, but many also discussed their concern with the massive police response to the pro-Palestinian protests held at UT over the past few weeks and their worries over free speech.

From left, Aman Odeh, Jessica and Gracie I. in the overflow room Tuesday to watch the Texas Senate Higher Education Subcommittee discuss campus free speech and the implementation of the Senate Bill 17 ban on diversity initiatives.

The testimony was a stark difference from the subcommittee's agenda — which included invited panelists, including a Jewish UT student and a representative from the Anti-Defamation League, both of whom spoke about how the pro-Palestinian protests had antisemitic qualities and were threatening to Jewish students, and university chancellors who affirmed their full commitment to enforcing SB 17.

In his opening remarks and in a statement sent after the hearing, Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, who authored SB 17 and chairs the subcommittee, connected the pro-Palestinian protests — which in part called on universities to divest from Israeli weapons manufacturers — to the activism seen across the country in the summer of 2020 after George Floyd, a Black man who was murdered by a white cop in Philadelphia, when demonstrators advocated for more equity and improvements to DEI resources on campus. He said Texas would not stand to be told what to do.

"The rise of DEI and the actions of outside agitators are both examples of small groups of individuals who believe they can control Texas higher education and force institutions to bend to their demands," Creighton said. "But we will not tolerate this in Texas."

Creighton also said he supports equality and a merit-based system in higher education and that he is "encouraged" by creative programs that reach "students that reflect the diversity of our state."

Hanna Barakat leaves the lectern after speaking during the public comment section of Tuesday's Senate Higher Education Subcommittee meeting.
Texas university students, staff testify to Senate panel on SB 17?

Several UT staff members who had complied with SB 17 — but had formerly worked in DEI positions and suddenly lost their jobs April 2 — also gave public testimony of their losses to the subcommittee, as did several people who were arrested at the UT protests, some crying and explaining how difficult it was to return to campus.

One person, who spoke in the last hour of the 11-hour hearing, asked Creighton why no Palestinian or Pro-Palestinian person involved in the protests was invited to speak at the earlier panel about campus free speech. The subcommittee was not required to answer questions from those participating in the public comment portion of the hearing, and Creighton did not respond to the speaker.

"There was no representation from those who have really been impacted by these anti-free speech movements, which really has been the Palestinian community and their allies on campus," said Noor Saleh, a UT Law School student and a member of the new group Parents for Peace, who did not testify but attended the hearing and spoke to the American-Statesman. She said the panel felt "one-sided," which felt "irresponsible."

Saleh said it is devastating to hear about antisemitism at the protests, but she said it does not reflect the broader movement. At UT, she said, organizers "have been very clear that we do not endorse, nor do we support any sort of antisemitic behavior."


Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, the author of SB 17, listens to speakers Tuesday. Creighton said, "The rise of DEI and the actions of outside agitators are both examples of small groups of individuals who believe they can control Texas higher education and force institutions to bend to their demands."

Several Jewish individuals who are supportive of the protests also testified about the "weaponization" of antisemitism to suppress anti-Israel speech.

Sam Law, a UT graduate student, said in his testimony that he has not faced antisemitism at the protests. He said one of the most impactful moments for him over the past month was attending a Shabbat service on the South Lawn with Palestinian, Muslim, Christian and Jewish students praying for the people in Gaza, where more than 34,000 people have been reportedly killed as Israel continues bombarding the region in response to a deadly Oct. 7 attack on the Jewish state by Hamas, a militant Palestinian group.

Many students, professors, staff members and alums spoke about how SB 17 has been used in ways the law did not intend, such as affecting their ability to get grants or student support programs at UT like the Monarch Program, which helped immigrant students and those without documentation as well as confusing the grant application process for professors.

"Everything we told y'all we were scared of has happened," said Izabella de la Garza, a UT alum involved in Texas Students for DEI who testified against SB 17 at the Legislature last year when she was a senior.

Alicia Moreno, a UT staff member and UT alum who was laid off April 2, called on lawmakers to further clarify SB 17 to prevent overcompliance by universities and the unnecessary closing of programs, like those at UT.

"The bill has caused our students to feel unwanted and unsupported," Moreno said in her written testimony. "It has taken away our centers, programs, and necessary critical services."

Members of the UT campus community, including students, faculty and alumni, begin a march Tuesday from the UT Tower to the Capitol to attend the Texas Senate Higher Education Subcommittee hearing on campus free speech and SB 17.
How will SB 17 testimony be considered?

Creighton thanked everyone who spoke for their testimony and said the hearing "will lay the groundwork" for the next legislative session, set to begin in January. He expressed gratitude that he is able to hear from everyone, and other committee members thanked him for holding the hearing.

But Maria Unda and Jenna Doane, both of whom have doctorates in education policy from UT and marched from the Tower to the Capitol and stayed all day to testify about SB 17's far-reaching effects, said they don't know if the subcommittee will listen.

Unda and Doane have studied diversity within UT, and said they believe SB 17 will hurt recruitment and graduation rates. Doane also said there is a connection between SB 17 and the reaction to the protests in its impact on free speech.

"I think a lot of this centers around the suppression of freedom of speech, of academic freedom," Doane told the Statesman. "Now, faculty, staff are extremely afraid to share just about anything that they might get reported or fired for."

People march from the UT campus to the Capitol to attend Tuesday's hearing.

Unda said her hope is that grassroots organizing will give power to student voices and bring awareness to what's going on.

Kamyia Gibbs, who just finished her fourth year at UT, drove from Houston to the Capitol for the hearing. She said she wished the lawmakers had asked more questions of the students to help improve SB 17.

Sandra Isiguzo, who just graduated in neuroscience from UT, said she thinks the hearing date being held after UT's commencement ceremony, made it more difficult for people to testify.

"At the student level, (SB 17) is just a mess," Isiguzo said. "Because this bill is so vague that people are just closing things and not supporting students because they don't want to get in trouble."

Isiguzo attended Black Graduation, a UT cultural graduation that previously was funded by the university but now is paid for with money raised by students due to SB 17, which she said was incredibly emotional.

"The messaging is that they don't want us here," Isiguzo said.

Saleh said she went to law school to connect marginalized communities to lawmakers. Yesterday, she said, the significant public testimony felt like an embodiment of that goal.

"To see that happen yesterday was incredible," Saleh said, adding that she wants lawmakers to know that students will not stop advocating and organizing for what they believe in.

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas anti-DEI law draws testimony from people fearful of SB 17 effect

Texas Senate panel holds hearing on DEI, antisemitism. What UT chancellor said of protests

Lily Kepner, Austin American-Statesman
Updated Wed, May 15, 2024 

University of Texas System Chancellor J.B. Milliken said elements of the pro-Palestinian protests over the past few weeks at UT were antisemitic in response to a question from the Texas Senate Higher Education Subcommittee, citing testimony from a Jewish UT student who spoke to the panel of his experience.

The subcommittee on Tuesday held hearings with university system chancellors over their institutions' compliance with Senate Bill 17, a state law that went into effect in January and bans public universities from having diversity, equity and inclusion offices or related functions, and the hearing also focused on antisemitism on campuses and free speech policies born from Senate Bill 18, a 2019 law that made public universities' outdoor spaces traditional public forums.

Outside of the chancellors and counsels, the committee had three invited panelists — a UT student, a UT professor specializing in the First Amendment and the policy director of the Anti-Defamation League — with the student and league speakers discussing increasing antisemitism and fear affecting Jewish students due to recent pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses. No pro-Palestinian representatives were included in the subcommittee's agenda.

Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, the author of SB 17 and the subcommittee's chairman, asked Milliken and Texas A&M System Chancellor John Sharp, "If you both recognize, especially what happened on the UT campus and across the country, that these were anti-Jewish protests in their very nature?" referring to the pro-Palestinian demonstrations on campuses.

Milliken affirmed that elements of the protests were antisemitic, and said he'd agree that they were anti-Jewish.

“Not everybody involved is an antisemite and as you heard from the law professor, we value free speech, political speech, all of that," Milliken said. "It's when it crosses a line with threats, intimidation — creating an environment where students cannot pursue their education.”

Sharp said the protests at Texas A&M campuses have been less intense, but that he has no tolerance for antisemitism.

The protests at UT called on the university and the UT System to divest from Israeli weapons manufacturers. More than 130 people were arrested over two protests at UT — the first on April 24 and another on April 29 when demonstrators set up a surprise encampment that was quickly dismantled by police.

University of Texas graduate Jackie Compos, right, marches with others from the UT campus to the Capitol ahead of a Texas Senate Higher Education Subcommittee hearing Tuesday on campus free speech and Senate Bill 17, the bill banning diversity initiatives in Texas public colleges.
Antisemitism and campus free speech

UT sophomore Levi Fox testified to the panel about his experience with antisemitism on campus, including an encounter with a UT professor he said had approached him and verbally harassed him with an antisemitic threat.

"People ask how the Holocaust happened," Fox said. "Auschwitz wasn't built overnight. It was built as Jew hatred gradually became accepted and when society was desensitized to hate."

Fox said he knows people who have hidden their Judaism or are afraid of being seen going into Jewish spaces for fear of being targeted.

Courtney Toretto from the Anti-Defamation League said this year has had the greatest number of antisemitic incident reports since the group started collecting data decades ago. Toretto also spoke about the impact of chants like "From the river to the sea" and the "intifada," which she said call for the destruction of Jewish people in Israel.

"Many Jewish students report feeling isolated and targeted by these protests. While ADL vehemently supports the right to free speech and peaceful protest, we draw the line when conduct on campus crosses the line into harassment that threatens public safety and (students') well-being," Toretto said.

The Texas Senate Higher Education Subcommittee hears from UT student Levi Fox, center left, Anti-Defamation League Policy Director Courtney Toretto and First Amendment lawyer Steven T. Collis.

Fox told the American-Statesman after his testimony to the subcommittee that he is a staunch believer in free speech, and he hopes the Legislature guards free speech and protects Jewish students by encouraging more Holocaust education in schools. Asked when protests crossed the line, he said when there is violence and intimidation.

"There is no category of speech in United States law known as hate speech," Steven Collis, director of the Bech-Loughlin First Amendment Center and a professor at UT's Law School, told the subcommittee. But speech that incites violence or raises a "reasonable fear of imminent bodily harm" can be limited, he said.

Public universities are allowed to set reasonable restrictions and rules for protesting as long as they are implemented in a content-neutral way, he said.

"They try to conflate antisemitism with a student's right to protest and to free speech, which is wrong in and of itself," Rep. Ron Reynolds, D-Missouri City, told the Statesman after the Texas Legislative Black Caucus, which he chairs, held a news conference Tuesday over SB 17 and the right to protest.

Islamophobia was not mentioned as part of the subcommittee's agenda or at the panel. During the public testimony portion of the meeting Tuesday some speakers asked for there to be "equal protection of free speech."

UT System Chancellor J.B. Milliken said at Tuesday's hearing that he believed the pro-Palestinian protests at UT had been antisemitic.
SB 17 compliance, difficulties and successes

Milliken and Sharp asserted their commitments to following SB 17 exactly as written. But UT System's general counsel, Daniel Sharphorn, told the subcommittee that the system has struggled with the law's effects on grants.

"We've struggled mightily with how to handle the grants," Sharphorn said. "Part of it is talking to the granting agency to know what laws we're dealing with. ... Right now, I don't know that we've learned enough to know what the impact is going to be."

Brooks Moore, Texas A&M System's general counsel, said he thinks the accreditor's language is broad enough that he is not worried.

Milliken said the system has reallocated about $25 million that was previously used toward DEI, according to what the institutions have reported. The system closed 21 offices, eliminated 311 full- and part-time positions, and cut about 681 contracts, programs and trainings, Milliken said.

The 311 eliminated positions include the 49 former DEI staff positions that UT President Jay Hartzell cut April 2 as part of a reorganization after SB 17 that included the closing of the adapted Division of Campus and Community Engagement, a UT System spokesperson confirmed.

Also in April, four months after the compliance deadline, UT-Dallas announced that it would close a new office created to comply with SB 17 and eliminate about 20 staff positions that had been adapted.

Creighton said there's compliance as written, and then there's compliance "beyond the four corners of the document." He said UT seemed to take a "holistic approach," including finding other duplicative efforts and inefficiencies and making changes, and he asked how it came to those conclusions.

"Our board made a pretty strong statement about this last fall, that this is the law of the land, that we will fully commit to implement every element of it," Milliken said.

Sharp said the Texas A&M System had fewer DEI resources to start with, and only eight positions across the system had been eliminated, not including student positions.

Both systems asserted their ability to audit their institutions by this summer and work with state auditors.

Milliken initially said that all systems have worked together to ensure uniform compliance, but differences later emerged. In response to a question from Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas, Sharp said that Texas A&M has not changed its financial support of student groups because it is exempt from the law. At UT-Austin, sponsored student groups who had been under the now-closed Multicultural Engagement Center lost their university funding due to SB 17.

Milliken said the sponsored groups were different because they had their own university spaces and other privileges, and they are now registered organizations, which do not receive university funding.

West also asked if there is a reporting process for eliminated programs that people feel are overcompliant with the law. Milliken said the power to reinstate any programs would fall to the presidents of the institutions.

Creighton, Milliken and Sharp also stated their commitment to helping ensure access to all. Milliken pointed to the Promise Plus endowment at the UT-Rio Grande Valley campus, which covers all tuition for students whose families makes a combined income of less than $100,000.

Gary Bledsoe, president of the Texas Chapter of the NAACP, spoke at the news conference the Texas Legislative Black Caucus and other organizations held at the same time as the hearing. In an interview with the Statesman, he said DEI is intended to help all, and the absence of it has created a "hostile" environment at UT.

"If you think somebody's not included in DEI, change the definition and the scope and keep the existing people," Bledsoe said. "That shows again that it's a lie."

UT student Levi Fox answers questions from Sen. Brandon Creighton during the hearing. Fox said he had experienced antisemitism on campus.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with an additional quote from Milliken adding more context to his statements about the antisemitic elements of the pro-Palestine protests at UT.

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: How Texas is following anti-DEI compliance, free speech at colleges



UT System shuts down 21 DEI offices and cuts hundreds of positions to comply with law

Jala Washington

KZAN
Tue, May 14, 2024 at 10:30 AM MDT·3 min read

AUSTIN (KXAN) — On Tuesday, Texas senators reviewed progress to make sure public universities and colleges throughout the state are in compliance with Senate Bill 17, a law that requires Texas public universities to disband Diversity, Equity and Inclusion offices by 2024.

Groups monitor for compliance, overreach of new Texas anti-DEI law

According to a meeting agenda, the Senate Subcommittee on Higher Education began meeting at 9 a.m. to consider a few topics, including the monitoring of the DEI law.



State Senator Brandon Creigton opened the DEI discussion, a leading advocate to implement to ban of such practices in higher education. Creighton feels DEI practices did more to divide campuses, which is why he drafted legislation to end it.

Full Interview: State Senator Brandon Creighton talks DEI ban

“These ultimatums escalated, creating significant riffs on campus, targeting anyone who disagreed and many changes were demanded aiming to reshape the university into an institution focused on social justice and equality of outcome,” Creigton said. “This was when DEI bureaucracies grew out of control, replacing merit with equity for some.”

The senate received updates from both UT System Chancellor James B. Milliken and Texas A&M System Chancellor, John Sharp.

Milliken testified UT’s 14 institutions completed internal audits, which led to shutting down 21 DEI offices, getting rid of 311 positions and canceling 681 contracts. Milliken said the UT System reallocated over $25 million.

“I think through the audit process…we may in fact, learn that we haven’t addressed everything,” Milliken said.

Sharp testified Texas A&M system changes to comply with SB17, were less drastic as it was less involved in DEI efforts before the new law went into effect.

Ahead of the meeting, a group of protesters walked to the Texas State Capitol. Texas Rising, a project of the Texas Freedom Network that supports social justice work and young people of color, organized the walk.

UT employees linked to DEI to lose their jobs

Members from Texas Rising, TXS4DEI, Texas AFT, the Legal Defense Fund, and other youth advocacy organizations will testify in opposition to SB 17’s implementation.

“SB 17 was passed during the 2023 legislative session and prevents public colleges and universities in Texas from having diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) offices or policies. Since going into effect, campuses across Texas have laid off employees and closed departments potentially affected by the bill, with the University of Texas in Austin laying off 49 employees in April and UT Dallas completely shutting down the campus DEI office, laying off around 20 employees.

Texas Rising

DEI Rally, march to the Capitol building Tuesday, May 14, 2024

 (KXAN photo/Todd Bailey)

The Texas Legislative Black Caucus, the Texas State Conference of the American Association of University Professors and the Texas State Conference of NAACP Branches, the League of United Latin American Citizens, and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, along with other partner organizations, students and staff will also hold a press conference speaking out against the DEI law on Tuesday.

Posts Claim Students Walked Out of Duke Graduation Because Jerry Seinfeld is Jewish. Here's What We Found

Nur Ibrahim

SNOPES
Tue, May 14, 2024 

David Shankbone/Wikimedia Commons

On May 12, 2024, dozens of Duke University's graduating students staged a walkout as the ceremony's guest speaker, comedian Jerry Seinfeld, stepped up to the lectern. They chanted "Free, free Palestine" as other students appeared to jeer them. (Duke's student newspaper described the number of students walking out as about 100.)

The walkout prompted many people online to claim the students were protesting because Seinfeld is Jewish, and those who participated in the walkout were antisemitic. A post by former U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger, an Illinois Republican, stated, "So students at Drake [sic] walk out because the speaker, Jerry Seinfeld, is Jewish? This is antisemitism, cloaked in concern for Gaza."

Another post, from Democratic U.S. Rep Daniel Goldman of New York, said: "Jerry Seinfeld is a Jewish American who has nothing at all to do with Israel's foreign policy or military defense. Holding an American Jew responsible for the actions of the Israeli government is quintessential antisemitism."

However, the organizers of the walkout stated a number of reasons for their protest, and none of them had to do with Seinfeld's religious identity. They included Seinfeld's vocal support for Israel, protesters' calls for Duke University to disclose its investments in Israel as well as divest from companies with ties to Israel, and calls for a cease-fire.

Snopes found no documented evidence that the organizers were walking out due to the speaker's Jewish identity, nor did we come across footage or slogans in which protesters used antisemitic language. We also cannot fully determine the intentions of each and every student participating in the protest. We have reached out to a student organizer behind the walkout and will update this story if we receive more information.

Seinfeld and his wife expressed their support for Israel after the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks in which Hamas militants killed approximately 1,200 people in Israel and took hundreds of hostages. In December 2023, he visited hostages' families in Tel Aviv, and posted on his Instagram page, "I will always stand with Israel and the Jewish people."

His wife, Jessica Seinfeld, said she donated to support counterprotests to the pro-Palestine demonstrations at the University of California, Los Angeles. A group of counter-protesters swarmed the UCLA Palestine solidarity encampment, attacked the protesters, tried to break down barricades and shot fireworks into the camp, according to the Los Angeles Times. Jessica Seinfeld reportedly condemned that violence. (It is unknown whether the counter-protesters were affiliated with the fundraiser she contributed to.)

In 2018, Jerry Seinfeld and his family visited the so-called "Anti-terror Fantasy Camp" in the West Bank's Gush Etzion bloc — which is made up of numerous Israeli settlements, illegal under international law. At the camp, they experienced what Israeli news outlet Haaretz described as a counterterrorism and security training academy with programs for tourists seeking a taste of the Israeli military experience.

In their comments to the media, student protesters at Duke repeatedly drew attention to the crisis in Gaza, where Israeli military operations have killed around 35,000 people.

Skijler Hutson, one of the student organizers, told The Chronicle, Duke's student newspaper, that the university's decision to have Seinfeld as commencement speaker "only solidified what has long been obvious: Duke University is more concerned with the interests of its donors than with taking action against genocide."

Zella Hanson, another organizer described in the story as an anti-Zionist Jew, told The Chronicle that — in addition to the university's decision to invite Seinfeld to speak, despite him being "an avid supporter of the Israeli military … [that] is committing genocide in Gaza" — students were protesting how "every university in Gaza has been destroyed."

(In May 2024, Reuters reported, according to Palestinian data, all 12 of Gaza's higher-education institutions were damaged or destroyed. More than 350 teachers and academics have been killed, and around 90,000 students were left stranded without any educational institutions, according to the data.)

Shreya Joshi, another organizer of the protest, told The New York Times the students began to plan the walkout after Seinfeld was selected as the guest speaker. She said the pain of missing out on graduation paled in comparison to what people in Gaza were experiencing.

She added they tried to leave without creating disruption while Seinfeld received his honorary degree because "none of us particularly wanted to listen to Seinfeld."

Joshi told The Chronicle that the protesters felt an obligation to act as their class graduation "takes place as the genocide of the Palestinian people enters its eighth bloody month."

Other students said the walkout would have happened regardless of who was speaking. One senior, Jen Gobaira, said to The Chronicle that they left as Seinfeld began talking about how he was brought in for "light entertainment." Gobaira said they thought, "Actually, that's not what I need right now," and left.

In advance of the ceremony, the organizers distributed flyers with their demands to the university, which included Duke disclosing any investments in Israel, divesting from holdings in companies "profiting from the occupation of Palestine," boycotting academic partnerships with Israeli universities and demanding an immediate cease-fire.

Footage from the event showed protesting students leaving while holding up the Palestinian flag, with others wearing the kaffiyeh scarf, historically described as a symbol of solidarity with the Palestinians.

Some students who did not participate in the protest supported the walkout, saying it did not disrupt the event and allowed students to voice their opinions. Others said they simply wanted to enjoy graduation and did not support the protest.

Sources:

Alkas, Dawoud Abu, et al. "Gazans Strive to Study as War Shatters Education System." Reuters, 13 May 2024. www.reuters.com, https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gazans-strive-study-war-shatters-education-system-2024-05-13/. Accessed 13 May 2024.

Briquelet, Kate. "Jessica Seinfeld and Bill Ackman Fund Pro-Israel Counterprotests at Colleges." The Daily Beast, 1 May 2024. www.thedailybeast.com, https://www.thedailybeast.com/jessica-seinfeld-and-bill-ackman-fund-pro-israel-counterprotests-at-ucla. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"Duke Students Walk out of Jerry Seinfeld Graduation Speech in Gaza Protest." The Guardian, 13 May 2024. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/13/jerry-seinfeld-duke-university-graduation-protest. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"Duke Students Walk out of Jerry Seinfeld Graduation Speech in Gaza Protest." Guardian, 2024. YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aE7i22MiGY. Accessed 13 May 2024.

Flegenheimer, Matt, and Marc Tracy. "Jerry Seinfeld Can No Longer Be About Nothing." The New York Times, 4 May 2024. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/04/us/politics/jerry-seinfeld-antisemitism-jewish-identity.html. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"Gush Etzion Junction: The Deadly Roundabout." BBC News, 27 Apr. 2016. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36102449. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"Israel's Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law, Security Council Reaffirms." United Nations, 23 Dec. 2016. https://press.un.org/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"Jerry Seinfeld and Family Visit Anti-Terror Fantasy Camp in West Bank." Haaretz, 8 Jan. 2018. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2018-01-08/ty-article/.premium/jerry-seinfeld-and-family-visit-anti-terror-fantasy-camp-in-west-bank/0000017f-e56e-d97e-a37f-f76fe60f0000. Accessed 13 May 2024.

Medina, Eduardo, and Emily Cataneo. "As Seinfeld Receives Honorary Degree at Duke, Students Walk Out in Protest." The New York Times, 12 May 2024. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/12/us/jerry-seinfeld-duke-students-walk-out-protest.html. Accessed 13 May 2024.

PerryCook, Taija. "Timeline: The Oct. 7 Hamas Attack and Israel's Retaliatory War on Gaza." Snopes, 20 Nov. 2023, https://www.snopes.com//articles/465623/oct-7-hamas-attack-and-israeli-retaliation/. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"Pro-Palestinian Graduates Stage Walk-out during Commencement, Host Alternative Ceremony and Advocate for Divestment from Israel." The Chronicle, https://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2024/05/duke-university-class-of-2024-commencement-walk-out-jerry-seinfeld-genocide-in-gaza-pro-palestine-divest-boycott-sanction-speak-alternative-graduation-ceremony-covid-19-pandemic-october-7-attacks-pro-israel-chapel-languages-building-national-movement. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"'Unacceptable': Why It Took Hours for Police to Quell Attack at UCLA pro-Palestinian Camp." Los Angeles Times, 1 May 2024, https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-01/why-did-it-take-police-so-long-to-end-the-violent-clashes-at-ucla. Accessed 13 May 2024.

"Nearly Three Dozen Students Walk out on Jerry Seinfeld's Duke Graduation Speech." WRAL, 2024. YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2yBfrLlCcU. Accessed 13 May 2024.

Serbia leases ex-army HQ in Belgrade to Trump son-in-law's firm

Reuters
Wed, May 15, 2024 

U.S. President Donald Trump boards Air Force One beside first lady Melania Trump at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland

BELGRADE (Reuters) - The Serbian authorities and Jared Kushner's U.S.-based investment firm Affinity Global Development, signed a 99-year lease deal on Wednesday, allowing the company to overhaul two buildings which housed the headquarters of the former Yugoslav People's Army.

The Serbian construction ministry said in a statement that the "reputable American company" connected to Kushner, the son-in-law of U.S. former President Donald Trump, was chosen for the work it described as "revitalisation of the compound."

"Everything ... will be in line with the Serbian laws, in cooperation with the government and relevant institutions ... that are responsible for urban planning and the protection of cultural heritage," the statement said.

It did not specify the value of the investment, nor the deadline for its completion.

In March, Kushner announced that a wider investment by his Affinity Partners in the Balkans would include projects in Albania and in Belgrade at the site of the headquarters buildings, where it would include a hotel, apartments, shops and office spaces.

Kushner, a former top aide to Trump when he was president, set up the investment firm after stepping down from the job in 2021. Affinity did not immediately respond to request for comment.

The two buildings were damaged in 1999 during the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia launched to force the then strongman Slobodan Milosevic to end his bloody crackdown against Albanians in Kosovo.

The statement said that the investor agreed to return the land without compensation if it fails to complete the investment in time and to build a memorial center dedicated to all the victims of the NATO bombing.

The statement also quoted Asher Abershera, the CEO of the Affinity Global Development as saying that Serbian architects and designers would be invited to submit ideas for the memorial center.

Over 22,000 people in Serbia have so far signed a petition calling for the buildings to be preserved. The buildings designed by Serbian architect Nikola Dobrovic were built between 1957 and 1965.

Their design is meant to resemble a canyon of the Sutjeska river in Eastern Bosnia, where one of the major World War Two battles against the Germans in the Balkans was fought in 1943.

(Reporting by Aleksandar Vasovic; Editing by Diane Craft)

Gov. DeSantis signs bill cutting mentions of climate change from state law, bans wind turbines

William Clayton
Wed, May 15, 2024


Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis made waves on Wednesday as he signed into law a contentious energy bill that would remove mentions of the words “climate change” in state statutes, and ban power-generating wind turbines off the state’s coastline.

The proposed bill would remove over 50 lines in state law established in 2008 by then-Republican Gov. Charlie Crist addressing climate change and promoting renewable energy.

READ: Proposed Florida bill could remove majority of mentions to climate change from state law

The energy bill, HB 1645, includes provisions repealing parts of state law mentioning “the potential of global climate change” as a state and energy policy; banning offshore wind energy generation; easing regulations on natural gas pipelines; and eliminating the requirement for Florida state agencies to consider a list of “climate-friendly” products before making purchases.

In a social media statement, DeSantis stressed the bills’ significance, saying they would “keep windmills off our beaches, gas in our tanks, and China out of our state.”

“We’re restoring sanity in our approach to energy and rejecting the agenda of the radical green zealots,” DeSantis stated in a post on X (formerly Twitter).

The bill would also require the Florida Public Service Commission to develop a “cost-effective” energy infrastructure “resilient to natural and manmade threats.”

Currently, pipelines within Florida that are 15 miles or longer require certification under the Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Siting Act. The bill proposes to change this requirement so it applies to pipelines 100 miles or longer.

The Florida Natural Gas Association reportedly applauded the bill in a news release stating it will “maintain and encourage reliable fuel sources for public utilities, remove federal and international control over Florida’s energy policies, and allow consumers to choose their energy source.”

“This law strengthens natural gas infrastructure resiliency and reliability, which are critical to the state’s economy, the ability to recover from natural disasters and the health, safety, welfare and quality of life of Floridians,” Dale Calhoun, the association’s executive director, said in a prepared statement.

Florida utilities rely heavily on natural gas to fuel power plants, with nearly 74% reliant on power electric generation according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

However, the legislation has faced criticism from Democrats and environmental groups, particularly concerning its approach to greenhouse gas emissions.

For example, the bill would eliminate part of the current Florida law that states, “The Legislature finds that the state’s energy security can be increased by reducing dependence on foreign oil. The impacts of global climate change can be reduced through the decrease of greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the implementation of alternative energy technologies can create new jobs and employment opportunities for many Floridians.”

The information will be partially replaced by sentences stating, “The purpose of the state’s energy policy is to ensure an adequate, reliable, and cost-effective supply of energy for the state in a manner that promotes the health and welfare of the public and economic growth. The Legislature intends that governance of the state’s energy policy be efficiently directed toward achieving this purpose.”

Senator Tina Polsky (D-Boca Raton) raised concerns in February, highlighting Florida’s vulnerability to climate disasters due to its coastal geography.

“We are surrounded by water, and the effects are showing,” Polsky said.

Despite ongoing concerns about rising sea levels and flooding in Florida, DeSantis’ approach has shifted since he first took office, when Republicans began publicly addressing the effects of climate change.

While campaigning for president in 2023, DeSantis promoted the use of fossil fuels and criticized the “concerted effort to increase fear” of issues such as “global warming and climate change.”

“This is driven by ideology, it’s not driven by reality,” DeSantis said during a September appearance in Texas. “In reality, human beings are safer than ever from climate disasters.”

The DeSantis administration in 2023 additionally turned down over $350 million in federal funding for lowering the cost of making Florida homes more energy efficient.

Another part of the bill will prohibit the construction or operation of offshore wind turbines in Florida-controlled waters and on property within one mile of coastlines. Currently, it is not considered feasible to locate wind turbines in those areas and none currently exist.

Senate bill sponsor Jay Collins (R-Tampa) stated the ban on wind turbines was designed to help protect wildlife and ecosystems and to prevent additional noise.

“Overall, the risk to our flora and fauna, our whales, the ecosystem around there, that’s concerning,” Collins said. “And then the tourism and noise aspect as well is also concerning.”

The bill signing occurred one day after a poll of 1,400 Floridians revealed that 68% of respondents believe the state government should take more action to address climate change. Of those surveyed, 58% attributed climate change to human activity, a decrease from the previous year. The survey also indicated that only 40% of Republicans attributed climate change to human activity.

The governor was supposed to sign the bill in Clearwater Beach, Pinellas County. However, a spokesperson informed the assembled crowd 15 minutes before the scheduled appearance that he would not be there in person due to concerns about the weather.

As sea levels rise, DeSantis signs bill deleting climate change mentions from Florida state law

Ella Nilsen, CNN
Wed, May 15, 2024 

As Florida copes with rising seas and record temperatures, lawmakers are going to exceptional lengths to delete many mentions of climate change from state laws in a new bill that Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law on Wednesday, according to his official X account.

The wide-ranging law makes several changes to the state’s energy policy – in some cases deleting entire sections of state law that talk about the importance of cutting planet-warming pollution. The bill would also give preferential treatment to natural gas and ban offshore wind energy, even though there are no wind farms planned off Florida’s coast.

The bill deletes the phrase ‘climate’ eight times – often in reference to reducing the impacts of global climate change through its energy policy or directing state agencies to buy ‘climate friendly’ products when they are cost-effective and available. The bill also gets rid of a requirement that state-purchased vehicles should be fuel efficient.


“Florida rejects the designs of the left to weaken our energy grid, pursue a radical climate agenda, and promote foreign adversaries,” DeSantis said in a post on X, posting a graphic that said the law would protect the state from “green zealots.”

“What Florida is really doing is saying we’re going to deemphasize any policies that would help mitigate climate change,” said Emily Hammond, a professor of law at George Washington University.

It’s certainly not the first time Republican politicians have deleted the phrase ‘climate change’ – erasing the phrase from government websites was a commonplace activity during the Trump administration. But experts said few other states have passed bills to move away from clean energy and erase climate mentions from their laws.

“It goes further than any other state has gone in repealing its existing climate laws,” Michael Gerrard, founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, told CNN.

Last year was the hottest year on record for Florida, breaking yet another heat record in the state. South Florida in particular observed scorching heat index temperatures that reached as high as 113 degrees Fahrenheit. Sea levels have risen as much as eight inches higher than they were in 1950, already leading to increased flooding from storms and tides alike.

“Florida is one of the most vulnerable states in the country,” Gerrard said. “All of South Florida is at great peril from sea level rise. They should be the last state to stand in the way of fighting climate change.”

Even as Florida politicians are erasing mentions of climate change from their laws, they are also increasingly focused on helping a storm and flood-prone state withstand climate impacts.

DeSantis and state lawmakers have poured over $1.1 billion into increasing community resilience to flooding and storms, according to a 2023 news release from the governor’s office. In 2019, DeSantis appointed the state’s first chief resilience officer Julia Nesheiwat – who explicitly referenced climate change and sea level rise as a “significant challenge” to the state. (Nesheiwat has since left her post and replaced by the state’s current chief resilience officer Wesley Brooks).

Florida has also accepted millions of dollars in federal funding to help reconstruct a state highway in Miami Beach – elevating the pavement and installing new pump stations to help clear the road of water during flooding events.

When it comes to other federal climate and clean energy funding, however, the state hasn’t been eager to accept. DeSantis vetoed over $29 million dollars in federal energy rebates and energy efficiency grants from the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Florida was one of five states that declined to compete for $4.6 billion in federal climate grants, although numerous Florida metropolitan areas including Jacksonville, Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and Tampa have raised their hands for the funding instead.

Hammond and Gerrard said this approach from Florida politicians to fund programs dealing with climate impacts without acknowledging its root cause isn’t surprising. Hammond called focusing on adapting to climate change and hardening infrastructure without attribute it to a warming planet “consistent to the conservative approach.”

“They don’t want to acknowledge that climate change is happening; they acknowledge they have flooding,” Gerrard said. “If it’s about moving away from fossil fuels, they don’t like it.”



Opinion

Ron DeSantis Makes “Climate Change Isn’t Real” Official Florida Law

Hafiz Rashid
Wed, May 15, 2024 


Ron DeSantis thinks that if the words “climate change” are removed from Florida state law, nobody has to worry about it.


The Florida governor signed legislation Wednesday that would eliminate climate change as a priority in the state’s energy policies set to go into effect July 1. The legislation also takes out most of the references to climate change in Florida law, bans offshore wind, and weakens regulations on natural gas pipelines.


“The legislation I signed today [will] keep windmills off our beaches, gas in our tanks, and China out of our state,” DeSantis told Florida’s Voice, an outlet friendly to the Florida governor. “We’re restoring sanity in our approach to energy and rejecting the agenda of the radical green zealots.”

What’s the point of such a bill? Florida faces many threats from a warming climate, including severe hurricanes, higher temperatures, and rising sea levels and flooding. In many cases, the bill is largely symbolic: the state doesn’t have any offshore wind thanks to low wind speed and its severe hurricanes. Instead, it seems to be just the latest example of DeSantis attempting to gain attention from Republicans nationally through embracing the culture wars.


Previously, DeSantis has passed anti-LGBTQ legislation as well as book bans, and he even banned lab-grown meat despite the industry still being in its infancy. All the while, his popularity has waned in Florida, particularly after he dropped out of the presidential race. This latest bill could put Florida residents at risk from increased weather disasters, while also putting more pressure on the state’s already struggling insurance industry. But DeSantis seems more concerned about his image beyond Florida, and is likely thinking ahead to 2028.

DeSantis, amid criticism, signs Florida bill making climate change a lesser state priority

The Associated Press
Wed, May 15, 2024 

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Climate change will be a lesser priority in Florida and largely disappear from state statutes under legislation signed Wednesday by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis that also bans power-generating wind turbines offshore or near the state’s lengthy coastline.

Critics said the measure made law by the former Republican presidential hopeful ignores the reality of climate change threats in Florida, including projections of rising seas, extreme heat and flooding and increasingly severe storms.

Florida strip clubs: Gov. DeSantis signs bill requiring strippers to be at least 21

It takes effect July 1 and would also boost expansion of natural gas, reduce regulation on gas pipelines in the state and increase protections against bans on gas appliances such as stoves, according to a news release from the governor’s office.

DeSantis, who suspended his presidential campaign in January and later endorsed his bitter rival Donald Trump, called the bill a common-sense approach to energy policy.

“We’re restoring sanity in our approach to energy and rejecting the agenda of the radical green zealots,” DeSantis said in a post on the X social media platform.

Florida is already about 74% reliant on natural gas to power electric generation, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Opponents of the bill DeSantis signed say it removes the word “climate’ in nine different places, moves the state’s energy goals away from efficiency and the reduction of greenhouse gases blamed for a warming planet.

“This purposeful act of cognitive dissonance is proof that the governor and state Legislature are not acting in the best interests of Floridians, but rather to protect profits for the fossil fuel industry,” said Yoca Arditi-Rocha, executive director of the nonprofit Cleo Institute, which advocates for climate change education and engagement.

No rainbow lights: Sunshine Skyway Bridge goes dark for Pride 2024

The legislation also eliminates requirements that government agencies hold conferences and meetings in hotels certified by the state’s environmental agency as “green lodging” and that government agencies make fuel efficiency the top priority in buying new vehicles. It also ends a requirement that Florida state agencies look at a list of “climate-friendly” products before making purchases.

In 2008, a bill to address climate change and promote renewable energy passed unanimously in both legislative chambers and was signed into law by then-Gov. Charlie Crist, at the time a Republican. Former Gov. Rick Scott, now a Republican U.S. senator, took steps after taking the governor’s office in 2011 to undo some of that measure and this latest bill takes it even further.

The measure signed by DeSantis would also launch a study of small nuclear reactor technology, expand the use of vehicles powered by hydrogen and enhance electric grid security, according to the governor’s office.