October, 06 2010, 04:10pm EDT
NRDC Sues Federal Housing Regulators for Blocking Affordable Clean Energy Projects for Homeowners
Federal housing regulators must stop obstructing programs that make
energy efficiency upgrades and renewable energy projects affordable for
American homeowners, according to a lawsuit filed today by the Natural
Resources Defense Council.
NEW YORK
Federal housing regulators must stop obstructing programs that make
energy efficiency upgrades and renewable energy projects affordable for
American homeowners, according to a lawsuit filed today by the Natural
Resources Defense Council.
"Federal housing regulators are standing in the way of
programs that make clean energy projects affordable for homeowners and
lower electricity bills," said Katherine Kennedy, Energy Counsel at
NRDC. "It defies common sense that the federal government is blocking
programs that could create jobs, jumpstart our economy, put money in
homeowners' pockets, and fight climate change at the same time. Instead
of shutting them down, the federal government should help these programs
grow."
NRDC filed the lawsuit in federal district court in the
Southern District of New York against the Federal Housing Finance
Agency, which regulates government sponsored mortgage buyers Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency,
which regulates national banks. The agencies have halted clean energy
financing programs--called Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)
programs-- that are already off the ground in California, Colorado and
New York, and have been adopted in 20 other states and the District of
Columbia.
With PACE programs, the upfront costs of property owners'
clean energy projects are financed by municipalities. Homeowners then
pay off the projects as an incremental charge on their property taxes
over an extended period of up to 20 years - with the savings on their
energy bills often exceeding the costs of the payments from the start.
The program is entirely voluntary and easily transferable to the next
property owner if the current resident decides to move. It can be used
to fund anything from small-scale renewable energy systems, like solar
panels, to energy efficiency upgrades, like better windows, insulation,
or heating and cooling systems.
The Obama Administration has supported PACE programs in the
past, with the Department of Energy awarding more than $150 million in
federal stimulus funds to support them last year. But federal housing
regulators have since halted the programs nationwide through a backdoor
administrative action. In July, FHFA and OCC issued statements to Fannie
Mae, Freddie Mac and the national banks that effectively halted PACE
efficiency programs nationwide. The result has been a freeze on nearly
all existing and planned PACE programs, leaving millions of dollars in
federal stimulus funds in question, and thousands of jobs implementing
the projects in limbo, in addition to putting climate change goals and
economic development plans across the country on hold.
NRDC is suing the agencies for halting the programs without
justification, and for doing so without following the proper protocol as
required by law. This includes failing to conduct a review of the
environmental impacts and to provide the public an opportunity to
comment before taking this action.
"Financing is a key barrier for property owners who are
interested in lowering their bills with clean energy improvements," said
Greg Hale, Senior Finance Specialist at NRDC's Center for Market
Innovation. "PACE programs provide a unique solution - allowing them to
overcome this roadblock without relying on public dollars, and with
virtually no risk to existing lenders. In fact, with PACE programs,
clean energy improvements can reduce the risk of mortgage default by
lowering energy bills and increasing property values."
In California, Attorney General Jerry Brown, Sonoma County,
the City of Palm Desert and the Sierra Club have filed similar federal
lawsuits. U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer and U.S. Representative Mike
Thompson have also introduced federal legislation that would require the
federal government to allow states and localities to move forward with
PACE programs.
New York State is one of the 23 states that have enacted PACE
legislation, and the state received $40 million of the DOE's stimulus
funds for PACE energy efficiency programs. In New York, at least 24
communities and three counties have implemented or are considering PACE
programs, including New York City, Babylon, Bedford, Binghamton, Ithaca,
Nassau County, Albany County and Tompkins County.
The full complaint can be found online here: https://docs.nrdc.org/energy/files/ene_10100601a.pdf.
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700LATEST NEWS
Billionaire Palantir Co-Founder Pushes Return of Public Hangings as Part of 'Masculine Leadership' Initiative
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," said one critic in response.
Dec 07, 2025
Venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale, a co-founder of data platform company Palantir, is calling for the return of public hangings as part of a broader push to restore what he describes as "masculine leadership" to the US.
In a statement posted on X Friday, Lonsdale said that he supported changing the so-called "three strikes" anti-crime law to ensure that anyone who is convicted of three violent crimes gets publicly executed, rather than simply sent to prison for life.
"If I’m in charge later, we won’t just have a three strikes law," he wrote. "We will quickly try and hang men after three violent crimes. And yes, we will do it in public to deter others."
Lonsdale then added that "our society needs balance," and said that "it's time to bring back masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable."
Lonsdale's views on public hangings being necessary to restore "masculine leadership" drew swift criticism.
Gil Durán, a journalist who documents the increasingly authoritarian politics of Silicon Valley in his newsletter "The Nerd Reich," argued in a Saturday post that Lonsdale's call for public hangings showed that US tech elites are "entering a more dangerous and desperate phase of radicalization."
"For months, Peter Thiel guru Curtis Yarvin has been squawking about the need for more severe measures to cement Trump's authoritarian rule," Durán explained. "Peter Thiel is ranting about the Antichrist in a global tour. And now Lonsdale—a Thiel protégé—is fantasizing about a future in which he will have the power to unleash state violence at mass scale."
Taulby Edmondson, an adjunct professor of history, religion, and culture at Virginia Tech, wrote in a post on Bluesky that the rhetoric Lonsdale uses to justify the return of public hangings has even darker intonations than calls for state-backed violence.
"A point of nuance here: 'masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable' is how lynch mobs are described, not state-sanctioned executions," he observed.
Theoretical physicist Sean Carroll argued that Lonsdale's remarks were symbolic of a kind of performative masculinity that has infected US culture.
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," he wrote.
Tech entrepreneur Anil Dash warned Lonsdale that his call for public hangings could have unintended consequences for members of the Silicon Valley elite.
"Well, Joe, Mark Zuckerberg has sole control over Facebook, which directly enabled the Rohingya genocide," he wrote. "So let’s have the conversation."
And Columbia Journalism School professor Bill Grueskin noted that Lonsdale has been a major backer of the University of Austin, an unaccredited liberal arts college that has been pitched as an alternative to left-wing university education with the goal of preparing "thoughtful and ethical innovators, builders, leaders, public servants and citizens through open inquiry and civil discourse."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hegseth Defends Boat Bombings as New Details Further Undermine Administration's Justifications
The boat targeted in the infamous September 2 "double-tap" strike was not even headed for the US, Adm. Frank Bradley revealed to lawmakers.
Dec 07, 2025
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Saturday defended the Trump administration's policy of bombing suspected drug-trafficking vessels even as new details further undermined the administration's stated justifications for the policy.
According to the Guardian, Hegseth told a gathering at the Ronald Reagan presidential library that the boat bombings, which so far have killed at least 87 people, are necessary to protect Americans from illegal drugs being shipped to the US.
"If you’re working for a designated terrorist organization and you bring drugs to this country in a boat, we will find you and we will sink you," Hegseth said. "Let there be no doubt about it."
However, leaked details about a classified briefing delivered to lawmakers last week by Adm. Frank Bradley about a September 2 boat strike cast new doubts on Hegseth's justifications.
CNN reported on Friday that Bradley told lawmakers that the boat taken out by the September 2 attack was not even headed toward the US, but was going "to link up with another, larger vessel that was bound for Suriname," a small nation in the northeast of South America.
While Bradley acknowledged that the boat was not heading toward the US, he told lawmakers that the strike on it was justified because the drugs it was carrying could have theoretically wound up in the US at some point.
Additionally, NBC News reported on Saturday that Bradley told lawmakers that Hegseth had ordered all 11 men who were on the boat targeted by the September 2 strike to be killed because "they were on an internal list of narco-terrorists who US intelligence and military officials determined could be lethally targeted."
This is relevant because the US military launched a second strike during the September 2 operation to kill two men who had survived the initial strike on their vessel, which many legal experts consider to be either a war crime or an act of murder under domestic law.
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, watched video of the September 2 double-tap attack last week, and he described the footage as “one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.”
“Any American who sees the video that I saw will see its military attacking shipwrecked sailors,” Himes explained. “Now, there’s a whole set of contextual items that the admiral explained. Yes, they were carrying drugs. They were not in position to continue their mission in any way... People will someday see this video and they will see that that video shows, if you don’t have the broader context, an attack on shipwrecked sailors.”
While there has been much discussion about the legality of the September 2 double-tap strike in recent days, some critics have warned that fixating on this particular aspect of the administration's policy risks taking the focus off the illegality of the boat-bombing campaign as a whole.
Daphne Eviatar, director for security and human rights for Amnesty International USA, said on Friday that the entire boat-bombing campaign has been "illegal under both domestic and international law."
"All of them constitute murder because none of the victims, whether or not they were smuggling illegal narcotics, posed an imminent threat to life," she said. "Congress must take action now to stop the US military from murdering more people in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked Memo Shows Pam Bondi Wants List of 'Domestic Terrorism' Groups Who Express 'Anti-American Sentiment'
"Millions of Americans like you and I could be the target," warned journalist Ken Klippenstein of the new memo.
Dec 07, 2025
A leaked memo written by US Attorney General Pam Bondi directs the Department of Justice to compile a list of potential "domestic terrorism" organizations that espouse "extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment."
The memo, which was obtained by journalist Ken Klippenstein, expands upon National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), a directive signed by President Donald Trump in late September that demanded a "national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts."
The new Bondi memo instructs law enforcement agencies to refer "suspected" domestic terrorism cases to the Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), which will then undertake an "exhaustive investigation contemplated by NSPM-7" that will incorporate "a focused strategy to root out all culpable participants—including organizers and funders—in all domestic terrorism activities."
The memo identifies the "domestic terrorism threat" as organizations that use "violence or the threat of violence" to advance political goals such as "opposition to law and immigration enforcement; extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality."
Commenting on the significance of the memo, Klippenstein criticized mainstream media organizations for largely ignoring the implications of NSPM-7, which was drafted and signed in the wake of the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
"For months, major media outlets have largely blown off the story of NSPM-7, thinking it was all just Trump bluster and too crazy to be serious," he wrote. "But a memo like this one shows you that the administration is absolutely taking this seriously—even if the media are not—and is actively working to operationalize NSPM-7."
Klippenstein also warned that NSPM-7 appeared to be the start of a new "war on terrorism," but "only this time, millions of Americans like you and I could be the target."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular