On a visit to the EU Parliament by Kanye West

You would think apparitions of an attention-hoarding rapper would be non-existent in Benelux. But sure enough, some version of Kanye West made an appearance, whether he liked it or not, on Wednesday when former UKIP leader Nigel Farage went on a lengthy tirade against the president of the EU, former Belgian prime minister Herman Van Rompuy. (The full tirade on YouTube, courtesy of UKIP.)

While evoking Kanye's crass, stage-crashing abilities, Farage compared the first president of the EU to a low-grade bank clerk and called him a quiet assassin of European nation-states. Included in his tirade was a slam on Belgium as a whole, saying that it was a non-country aimed to make all of Europe a place where nation-states ceased to exist. It is widely expected that Farage will be reprimanded for this speech, at most a 10-day suspension.

The Eurosceptic icon is no stranger to controversy in Belgium. Most notably in February 2008, when Prince Charles addressed the EU Parliament on Climate Change, Farage drew attention for refusing to applaud his future head of state at the end of his speech.

However, Farage's barrage on the 62-year-old Belgian wasn't just for the sake of getting free publicity in his campaign to unseat Commons Speaker John Bercow in his Buckinghamshire constituency this spring. Officials in France and Germany, the continent's two major economic engines, have complained about Van Rompuy over-stepping his authority in dealing with the economic crisis in Greece and declaring himself the point man for all European nations in discussions involving G20 nations.

Such a trampling, if accurate, coincides with Britain's Baroness Ashton, the EU's new number two role as High Representative, essentially letting the current president of the European Commission, Spain's José Manuel Barroso, impose himself as the EU's ambassador to the United States. All the while, Ashton, Barroso and Von Rompuy are suppose to represent the collective foreign interests of 27 nations, not just the establishments that not only meet in Brussels but also in Strasbourg once a year for the sake of appeasing the French.

This huge mess might make for an interesting rap by Kanye, if "Golddigger" isn't sufficient for Eurosceptics' tastes.

Lines being drawn & Washington's not part of it

As the newest dispute over control of the Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas) makes it way onto the floor of the United Nations, it's been made clear who won't have any part of it: the United States.

It will be reported in tomorrow's edition of The Times that the Obama Administration will not endorse British sovereignty over the contested islands off the coast of Argentina, instead saying that the US only recognises the current, de facto British administration. This, save Reagan's support for British forces to reclaim the Falklands during the 1982 conflict, reaffirms the position US administrations have stated since Britain first assumed control of the islands in 1832.

For those thinking that this position might help the US re-curry support from the nations of Central and South America: don't count on it. This past weekend, as members of the Rio Group met in Cancún, Mexico, to coalesce their support for Argentina's claim to sovereignty over the Falklands, South Georgian and Sandwich islands, that group announced plans to devise a stronger bloc that could possibly supplant the Organization of American States. This bloc, tentatively named La Comunidad de Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños, or Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, would include the membership of every member of the OAS except the US, Canada, and Suriname. This includes two members of the Commonwealth, Belize and Guyana. Although foreign affairs officials from both the Rio Group and the US say that this new bloc would not replace the OAS, rhetoric from certain leaders, including Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and Mexican president Felipe Calderon, might suggest otherwise.

As Rio Group leaders turn up the pressure on the UK to enter negotiations, initial drilling for oil continues 100 miles north of the Falklands. And the island's population, so say British ministers, are staunchly in favour of remaining under the Union Jack. All the while, all we're getting from the White House Press Secretary are his ruminations as a newbie to Twitter.

Coalition collapse sparks appreciation of another coalition

Much has been written about the missions and sacrifices made by American and British troops in Afghanistan the past eight years, making every strident effort to root out Taliban insurgents and bring peace between rival tribal factions. What hasn't been heralded in the English-speaking press as much are the same contributions and sacrifices other nations have made in Afghanistan, assisting the US & UK through NATO.

One nation's such contributions have just come to light as their government, asked by NATO commanders to extend their mission past July 2010, has collapsed over whether or not to do so.

Over the weekend, the coalition government of Netherlands, led by centre-right prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende, dissolved following the mass resignation of 12 ministers from the Dutch Labour Party. As a result, parliamentary elections are set to occur in June. This coalition government (Balkenende's fourth as prime minister) lasted three years, established when Balkenende's Christian Democratic Appeal aligned with Labour and the centre-left ChristianUnion over his previous, more conservative, coalition partners Democrats66 and People's Party for Freedom for Democracy.

The Dutch currently have about 1400 troops stations in the Afghan province of Uruzgan, bordered on the south by Kandahar. Along with 480 Australian soldiers and Afghan military and civilian officers, the Dutch-led task force has maintained peace in the central province for almost four years. In the process, they've lost 21 soldiers, most notably Dennis van Uhm, the son of the Chief of the Netherlands Defence Staff, General Peter van Uhm. Dennis' death occurred one day following Peter assuming his current post.

At least 25 nations are involved in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. For the US-led effort to root out terrorism, lay the groundwork for a more empowering life for all Afghans, and continue to win their hearts, it's important to not only build and maintain a coalition, but recognize all components of it when credit's due. I suspect most American and British readers aren't aware that hunkered down with British support teams in Helmand are 750 Danish and 150 Estonian troops, or that assisting the German-led reconstruction teams around the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif are 175 Latvians. Even the Republic of Georgia, just 18 months after Russian forces invaded the contested regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, plans to increase their numbers in Afghanistan from 150 to 1000. And Turkey, while hesitant to increase their troop levels alongside the US surge, maintains a force of 1700 troops training Afghan police officers in and around the capital Kabul.

For anyone who regularly includes the American and/or British soldier in their daily prayers, I would ask that soldiers from the various countries that make up this coalition be included as well. For the largest aspects of a coalition to succeed, its smaller components must too be supported and lauded.

As for Balkenende's future, while I do not profess to know a lot about Dutch politics, I find it doubtful that he will not be called on by Queen Beatrix to form a new coalition government this summer.

Chants of "Drill Baby Drill!" echo down Whitehall

Perhaps instead they're chanting "¡Perfore, bebé, perfore!"

British and Argentine officials are again butting heads over who controls the Falkland Islands, this time because of the prospect of considerable oil reserves off the coast of the two islands. As a British firm has established an oil rig about 100 miles north of the contested islands, Argentine president Cristina Fernandez has ordered checks on all ships approaching the Falkland Islands.

Argentina has claimed sovereignty over the islands, which they call Islas Malvinas, and held them for two months in 1982 before British forces drove them out in a highly anticipated and reported response, resulting in the combat deaths of 650 Argentinians and 250 Britons. Argentina has re-asserted its claims to sovereignty over the continental shelf area stretching from its shores, which would wholly encompass the 200-mile British claim around the Falklands as well as the South Georgia and Sandwich islands, 600 miles to the southeast. These claims will be brought up before a meeting of the United Nations next week.

Both Britain and Argentina have made claims to the islands for almost 200 years, claims which are both supported by key economic allies. While the status of the Falklands was included in the recently enacted Treaty of Lisbon, the new governing document of the European Union, Argentina's claim was renewed when they established a democratic constitution in 1994, claims which have been supported by their two continental unions, Mercosur and the Union of South American Nations.

And caught in the middle, potentially, is the US. During the last conflict, the US maintained an official stance of neutrality. While a NATO ally (led by Reagan's good friend Margaret Thatcher) was attacked, to openly support them would have gone in the face of the Monroe Doctrine and the Organization of American States, headquartered in Washington. (It was later revealed that the US provided tacit support for British intelligence operations.) More recently, the US joined the rest of the OAS in supporting Argentina's call for negotiations with the British over the status of the islands.

This is a sticky situation that does have the potential to make global economic recovery even tougher. Argentina's threats to bar British companies from doing business in their country, with the potential support from Hugo Chavez and other leftist leaders in South America, could further weaken the Sterling in international markets. There lies the risk, however absurd and self-defeating the concept, that if this becomes heavily politicised or even come down to military action, several South American nations may boycott the 2012 Olympics in London. (Ironic considering that the UK refused to withdraw from the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, instead competing under the Olympic flag.)

This is a foreign affairs powderkeg that cannot be taken lightly, and should be watched closely over the coming weeks.

Task force proposal could put grapevines on 18th & Vine

A bill with wide-ranging support in the Missouri House of Representatives would establish a task force that would explore the possibility of building vertical urban farms in Missouri's major cities.

House Bill 1848, introduced by Democrat Jason Holsman of Kansas City, aims to explore the viability of vertical urban farms in Missouri by way of establishing a 15-member task force.

“It’s really designed to take what we believe is going to be a very positive impact for the community and do the research and gather the information necessary so that way we’re not just saying that it’s going to have an impact,” Holsman said in an interview Tuesday.

The 15-member task force would include among its members the director of agriculture, agriculture committee chairmen from both the House and Senate, a representative from the University of Missouri extension service, and people who are actively involved in sustainable communities. This task force would meet over the course of two years to determine whether such farms could appear on the streets of Kansas City and St. Louis.

“We know this technology exists. We’ve seen the conceptual designs of what’s possible. We know the potential and the benefits associated with that potential,” Holsman said. “But what we don’t know is if we were to subsidize this, if we were to incentivize it, what is the impact to rural agriculture? What does it do to the locations around where we would put an urban farm?”

Holsman said he became interested in urban farms through two chance encounters. First, he received from a constituent a copy of an article in Popular Science magazine describing the technological advances and potential benefits of urban farms. More recently, Holsman and his family explored a conceptual urban farm when visiting Disney's EPCOT Center in Florida.

The 2008 Popular Science article reports that vertical urban farms can run on electricity generated from solar, wind, and sewage. Various fruits, vegetables, and even small animals such as chickens can be grown and harvested in such a strictly climate-controlled facility.

Smaller versions of urban farms already exist in inner cities and can include farmers’ markets and organic and horizontal farms. Holsman said that an urban farm could feed 50,000 people in a metropolitan area.

“The majority of food that’s consumed in Kansas City travels from the coasts. That’s 1400 miles of transit that your peas have to go through,” Holsman said. “They have to be preserved, they have to be put on a frozen truck, they have to be pre-packaged. There’s all sorts of carbon footprint associated with each step of that process to get that food to our table.”

For produce to be consumed locally, it would need to be sold locally.

Ruth Comer, assistant vice president for media relations with Hy-Vee Food Stores, said that each of their stores is granted leeway to stock shelves with local produce, as it is the Iowa company’s goal to source as much from local producers as possible.

She says urban farms would be something Hy-Vee would take a look at, but it would need to meet two criteria.

“The challenges that we run into for a company of our size is first, quantity and consistency of supply from local growers,” Comer said. “Do they on a large enough scale that they can meet our demands and do that on a consistent basis? The second is food safety assurances, just making sure that they have the protocol in place and the record-keeping that they can assure the safety of the food as it passes along the food chain.”

Comer said they are very interested in working with local growers that meet those two criteria.

Holsman adds that building urban farms would not only reduce environmental impact from transportation, but also reduce the use of pesticides and develop self-sustainable energy sources for the facility.

He said this also would create jobs in the inner city that can’t be outsourced.

“If you build a 12-story vertical farm, you're creating inner city jobs that don’t currently exist,” Holsman said. “You’re improving the property values around this farm because now it’s turning a blighted area, a vacant building that was sitting without any revenue in it at all, and now you’re producing food out of it, you’re creating jobs and you’re helping the surrounding areas around it.”

HB1848, which features 48 co-sponsors, has yet to be assigned to a committee. However, Holsman said he has verbal assurances from House Speaker Ron Richard (R-Joplin) that it will be assigned and from Majority Floor Leader Steve Tilley (R-Perryville) that should the bill pass through committee, it will receive time on the floor for debate.

Holsman says he looks forward to fighting hard for the bill and believes urban farms are the future of food production.

“The more we can learn about what that future looks like, the better prepared we are as decision makers to help create that future and make sure it goes in a direction that’s going to be beneficial for the environment, that’s going to be beneficial for the economy, and that’s going to be beneficial for the constituents we represent,” Holsman said. “Producing our own food and doing it in an energy efficient way is the right direction.”

The Orange Revolution Withers

It was the perfect culmination to an underdog story five years ago. Standing before a joint session of Congress, his face still showing the scars of dioxin poisoning but glowing amid surpassing the struggle he and his people faced just months earlier, the newly elected president of Ukraine, Viktor Yushchenko, commended his American hosts for supporting the development of democracy in the former Soviet nation.

“Citizens of Ukraine gained their freedom due to their courage and support of friends and proponents of democracy throughout the world,” Yushchenko said, closing out his speech to Congressmen, several of whom chanting his name. “In these days I want to recall one of them, Pope John Paul II, who said, ‘Following the path of truth is sometimes difficult, but never impossible.’ We have embarked upon this road and will never step away from it.

“Together, we are many. Together, we are not defeated.”

Last month, Yushchenko received only 5.46 percent of the popular vote in the first round of the Presidential vote. This left his two longtime antagonists—the charismatic centre-right Yulia Tymoshenko and pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovich—to face off in last week's runoff, which Yanukovich won by 3.5 percent despite Tymoshenko vowing to challenge the result.

Yushchenko, despite being hailed as the champion of democracy in the face of an overbearing outside power, placed fifth. His presidency, mired by squabbles with on-and-off colleague Tymoshenko, two dissolutions of Parliament, and even appointing Yanukovich as his prime minister briefly in 2006, had jaded his fellow Orange revolutionaries, tired of the continual infighting and Yushchenko's presidency not meeting the high expectations of five years ago.

When Yushchenko leaves office soon, he will do so with his approval rating under ten percent.

Might not have been a good idea for Kansas City Mayor Mark Funkhouser to invoke the Orange Revolution when he ran for mayor three years ago.

Seeking to mark a change in the way Missouri's most populous city conducted business, the city auditor wore orange ties on the campaign trail, creating a grassroots surge that allowed him to rise just above the crowded field in February 2007. With the endorsement of The Kansas City Star and rhetoric aimed at turning the recent rise of downtown tax abatements and neglect toward the city's neighborhoods, Funkhouser narrowly edged longtime city council member and community activist Alvin Brooks a month later.

But in near-similar fashion to the man whose campaign he idolized, Funkhouser has made his chances for re-election about as likely as snow sticking in Vancouver this month. From the get-go, his desire to run City Hall with ruthless efficiency was put into question with his decision to have his wife Gloria Squitiro serve as a "full-time volunteer" in an adjacent office. Squitiro would later be derided, and even sued on several occasions, as an obstruction to the city's operations. It didn't help Funkhouser either when he briefly accepted a hybrid car from a local Honda dealer, trading in the car he originally planed to use for city business in place of a private-hire contract that cost the city $160,000 annually.

Failing to vet Park board nominees, especially the only one from North of the River when his predecessor had three from that same region, and then joking about the nominee's controversial views on immigration behind her back after spending nearly seven months defending her place on the board. Squitiro's repeated media gaffes and so-so appearances on national television, two recall petitions squashed on technicalities, and now Kansas governor Mark Parkinson calling an increasing lack of citizen confidence in the city "a malaise of mediocrity", don't bode well for the Funk.

Although candidates for the 2011 mayoral election are slowly emerging, there lies a strong chance that no matter the size, the current incumbent will likely meet the same fate as his political idol: exiting the race after getting only five percent of the vote.

Tax-Subsidized TV Blackouts Targeted

If you want state funds, don’t get blacked out.

That’s the message Jason Holsman, (pictured at right) Democrat state representative from Kansas City, wants to send to professional sports teams across Missouri with House Bill 1986.

Holsman’s bill, which he proposed last week, would prohibit teams such as the NFL’s Chiefs or Rams from receiving state funds in future deals with the state in the event their home games are blacked out by the league’s TV policy.

Holsman, who described himself Tuesday as a die-hard Chiefs fan in a phone interview with The Missouri Expatriate, explains in this three-minute clip about how this bill targets the National Football League's blackout policy:

Rep. Holsman discusses the negative impact of TV blackout policies on state tax revenues

In 2006, Jackson County voters approved a new three-eighth cent sales tax to fund renovations to Arrowhead Stadium and neighboring Kauffman Stadium, the home of baseball's Royals. Holsman says that even as the Chiefs have only mustered nine wins in the last three seasons, ticket price increases and the recessed economy have priced many of his constituents out.

During this interview, Holsman referenced the Royals' increased revenue as a result of an expanded TV broadcast schedule as another reason why the NFL's policy is out of date. The Royals, as well as St. Louis' Cardinals and hockey Blues, are allowed by their respective leagues to pursue individual broadcast contracts for TV. While Major League Baseball prohibit broadcasts of games that conflict with national broadcasts on with Fox and ESPN, the National Hockey League only restrict Canadian broadcasters from interfering with CBC's iconic "Hockey Night in Canada" broadcasts on Saturday Nights.

Holsman's bill would only impact future deals between professional sports teams with the State of Missouri. Current deals, such as $25 million in tax credits for the Chiefs' new training camp facility on the campus of Missouri Western State University in St. Joseph, would not be affected. Holsman hopes that future deals, including sales tax initiatives, will address the issue of TV blackouts.

HB1986 has not yet been assigned to committee. Response to the bill has been generally positive by a nine-to-one margin, Holsman says, with those commenting in the negative suggesting that lawmakers focus more on pressing issues such as job creation.

The Missouri Expatriate did interview Holsman about another bill he's sponsoring, HB1848. That bill would establish a task force that would explore the viability of converting vacant buildings in Kansas City and St. Louis into vertical urban farms. That interview will appear here early next week.

One, two, three, four: rank them on the ballot so

The British House of Commons today passed a measure that would ask British voters whether they wish to switch voting systems for future Parliamentary elections.

Currently elections to the House of Commons, as well as most county and town councils, use "first past the post", where the candidate with the most votes wins, regardless of what percentage he or she received. This referendum measure would ask voters if they, starting with the election after next, wish to implement the alternate or "instant runoff" voting, where voters would rank candidates by preference rather than just vote for one. In that system, a candidate must have 50 percent of the vote to be named the winner. In the event no one has 50 percent, the candidate with the least number of votes is eliminated, and next preference votes on the affected ballots are counted. This continues until a candidate has a majority of combined votes. This system is already in place notably in the election for mayor of greater London as well as several nations' presidential elections.

However, with elections to occur in the next four months, this measure must clear all remaining hurdles before the current Parliament is dissolved. With fierce opposition expected in the House of Lords, namely from entrenched traditionalists convinced that first past the post keeps extremist candidates out of office, it is very unlikely that this bill will make it to Her Majesty's desk for her Royal Assent before the next election. And should the Tories, the vast majority of whom voted against this measure today, claim the majority in the next poll, it is very likely that they will scrap the vote.

The Liberal Democrats failed in an effort to amend the proposal altogether, wanting an earlier referendum on their preferred system, the Single Transferable Vote. In this system, constituencies would need redone altogether to establish multi-seat (likely by county or unitary authority) constituencies. STV is currently in use across Northern Ireland and in Scotland's local elections.

Not Supporting Cap & Trade = Supporting Terrorists?

A recent ad targeting opponents to last year's Clean Energy Act has drawn the ire of campaigns of those targeted.

Posted below is the ad from VoteVets.org, the political action committee composed of veterans from Iraq & Afghanistan generally opposed to further military action there as is, and their linking Missouri Congressman & GOP Senate candidate Roy Blunt to sympathizers of terrorism against American interests:


VoteVets.org also posted similar videos on YouTube attacking Wyoming's John Barrasso, Iowa's Chuck Grassley, Illinois's Mark Kirk, Kentucky's Mitch McConnell South Dakota's John Thune, and both of Indiana's senators, all of which were voiced by veterans from their respective states. With the exception of Dick Lugar, McConnell & Barrasso, all of VoteVets.org's targets are vying for the Senate this November.

At issue is Republican opposition to HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which passed the House last July and is awaiting debate in the Senate.

Already the spot has drawn criticism from Blunt's son Matt. The former governor tweeted disgust that his dad's picture was superimposed over footage from the 2000 terrorist attack on the USS Cole.

"Recently saw the offensive ad by [Robin] Carnahan supporters claiming my dad @Roy Blunt supports terrorists. Very offensive," Matt Blunt wrote. "It's one thing to use images to remind ourselves that we have enemies. It's another to use them to claim an American supports terrorists.

"The idea that opposition to cap & trade (a big tax most Missourians oppose) equals support for terrorists is as ludicrous as it is offensive."

Of course, VoteVets.org's ads (which, excepting Indiana and Wyoming, has an identical script) do not explicitly mention "cap-and-trade", opting to instead focus on the importation of foreign oil. And they happen to highlight countries on the background map (Egypt, Kuwait, and Lebanon) which don't appear on the list, which is identical throughout the ads. Given that it's a 30-second spot, chances are the list & map highlights are largely arbitrary.

And worse for the PAC: Mark Kirk was among eight Republicans that voted in favor of HR 2454, the eight bi-partisan votes needed to ensure the bill's narrow 219-212 passage in the House. None of the ads cited the roll call (in the case of Kirk and Blunt) or where they derived the current senators' opposition to the bill.

This comes two weeks after a certain terrorist on the FBI's Most Wanted list decided to weigh in on climate change. Last month, Osama bin Laden himself declared that global warming would be less of a problem if people stopped doing business with American companies, and dumped the dollar altogether. Now it seems that opposing cap & trade would help him too.

As important as it is to ensure a clean environment and attempt to ensure a self-sufficient and renewable energy supply, it would be helpful to not resort to invoking the War on Terror to get a point across, and better yet to not do it as sloppily and cookie-cutter as this is playing out.