New Quest City Cabot,Arkansas - Cabot Real Estate
Join the discussion on our Forum. Click Here!  

Infignos Radio

Information for Cabot, Arkansas

Cabot, AR

Homes - Schools - Census Data - Jobs - Maps

Latitude: 34.972647 -- Longitude: -92.022329

To have your business displayed on this page, visit
Premium Listings only will appear at the top of this page.

As of the census of 2000, there were 9,764 people, 3,601 households, and 2,823 families residing in the city. The population density was 415.6/km² (1,076.4/mi²). There were 3,762 housing units at an average density of 160.1/km² (414.7/mi²). The racial makeup of the city was 95.87% White, 1.53% Black or African American, 0.34% Native American, 1.05% Asian, 0.37% from other races, and 0.84% from two or more races. 1.05% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race. There were 3,601 households out of which 42.6% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 63.9% were married couples living together, 11.1% had a female householder with no husband present, and 21.6% were non-families. 19.1% of all households were made up of individuals and 7.0% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.65 and the average family size was 3.03. -- Source:

What to do in NewQuestCity.comTM: Learn about Cabot. See Cabot photos. Join our Discussion Forums.

Enter our Photo Sweepstakes and Win $200 for your Cabot photos!

To see random photos for other cities Click Here.

Submit your photos of Cabot and become eligible to win $200. Click Here for details.

A great place to find local homes for sale in Cabot Arkansas, including new homes, condos and foreclosures. Custom FREE relocation packets available for homebuyers moving to Cabot Arkansas, News from newspapers, both Arkansas and national newspapers. Search for Cabot Arkansas jobs and help wanted. Cabot Arkansas movie listings along with local weather. Find a Realtor licensed in Cabot Arkansas who is experienced in helping homebuyers move to Cabot Arkansas. Find census data or local information about Cabot Arkansas or on other Arkansas cities.

To ask a question or make a comment about Cabot, Arkansas Click Here.
See the AskMe Feature Below.

ASKME a Question About Cabot, Arkansas

To ask a question or make a comment about Cabot, Arkansas

Click Here.

Census Data for Cabot, Arkansas

Arkansas 2000 Census Population Profile Map

Cabot Arkansas United States
Population 15,261 2,673,400 281,421,906
Median age 32.3 36 35.3
Median age for Male 31.1 34.6 34
Median age for Female 33.4 37.4 36.5
Households 5,432 1,042,696 105,480,101
Household population 15,077 2,599,492 273,643,273
Average household size 2.78 2.49 2.59
Families 4,327 732,261 71,787,347
Average family size 3.14 2.99 3.14
Housing units 5,712 1,173,043 115,904,641
Occupied units 5,432 1,042,696 105,480,101
Vacant units 280 130,347 10,424,540

Visit US Census



Other Area Cities:   Jacksonville  Little Rock  North Little Rock  Cabot  Sherwood 

Other Popular Arkansas Cities:  Bentonville  Cabot  Conway  Fayetteville  Fort Smith  Hot Springs  Little Rock  Mountain Home  Rogers  Springdale  

Return to Arkansas
Go to the Home Page

Business Cards | Car Rentals | Colleges | Credit Repair Services | Dogs for Sale | Health Insurance | House Plans | Marketing | Music Lyrics | Newspapers | Radio Stations | Spirituality Information | World Map | Yellow Pages

If you are planning a relocation to Cabot Arkansas and are interested in existing homes in Cabot Arkansas or new homes in Cabot Arkansas, please click on the graphic above. If you are relocating to Cabot you can receive a FREE “Relocation to Cabot Arkansas” relocation package, which may include a map of Cabot, a Cabot newspaper, information about homes in Cabot Arkansas and more. This is an ideal, worry free way to ease the stress of relocation to Cabot Arkansas by giving you a Cabot Relocation expert to help coordinate your move to Cabot Arkansas. We want to help you make your search for Cabot Arkansas Real Estate as easy and as pleasant as possible. Real Estate in Cabot Arkansas is probably very different from your current location – trust your Cabot Arkansas Relocation to an expert – click on the link today!

Topics on this site include: Cabot homes, Cabot new homes, Cabot real estate and Cabot newspaper including homes Cabot real estate, Cabot AR real estate and check Cabot MLS homes for sale and houses for sale, find realtors and real estate agents, get new houses plus Cabot new homes and homebuilders, find Cabot foreclosures, Cabot houses for sale, condominiums and Cabot Condos, and Cabot AR newspaper reports, lofts and Cabot lofts homes, look for apartments townhomes townhouses, search jobs and help wanted, movies, bars, restaurants and events, Cabot luxury homes.

- Cabot Arkansas Real Estate Relocation Home Page - Cabot Arkansas Real Estate - Homebuying in Cabot Arkansas - Finding a Realtor in Cabot Arkansas - Successful Move to a New Home in Cabot Arkansas - Cabot Arkansas Real Estate Mortgage Lenders - Successful Relocation to Cabot Arkansas - Buying a For Sale By Owner in Cabot Arkansas - Real Estate Industry in Cabot Arkansas - Buying a Fixer-Upper in Cabot Arkansas - Best Deal on a home in Cabot Arkansas - Home Inspections for Real Estate in Cabot Arkansas - Realtor Agency in Cabot Arkansas - Buying a Foreclosure in Cabot Arkansas - Buying or Renting Homes in Cabot Arkansas - Buidling or Buying in Cabot Arkansas

Check out what's happening in the NewQuestCity Forums for Arkansas .

The Observer's guide to reporting

Even if you're smart enough to have chosen a profession other than Reporter, you might find something here of use.

We've got summer interns at the Fortress of Employment right now, eager young folks who, for some reason or another, want to be reporters. None of them are old enough to drink, as far as we know, which is too bad, as drinking and reporting have been married longer than steak and taters. We'll not say that too loud, lest the mother of one of our young charges overhears and insists they make a course correction as to their career.

In addition to the young and barely paid running around, we've also got a couple of promising new folks just starting their sentence as scribblers, among them Will Stephenson, whose recent story on the Jacksonville power line vandal we really admired. The Observer is nearly the oldest of old hands on the AT Ranch, and we've seen folks come and go through the bunkhouse. It always warms our shriveled heart to see new faces around.

The Observer has been a reporter for a long time. We've reported in the snow. We've reported in the driving rain. We've reported in churches so silent we could hear the echo of our breathing, and we've reported on street corners where sirens wailed. We've reported under conditions that required a dust mask and a towel wrapped around the head, and in hollows so far back in the mountains they have sunlight delivered parcel post. We've yet to do any underwater reporting, but give us time.

Over the years, we've managed to accumulate some advice that we wish we'd known back when we started. Nothing too high-handed, you understand. Nothing in the ass-backward syntax of Yoda, or that's ever going to wind up on one of those gatdamn inspirational posters at the dentist's office, featuring photos shot through Vaseline of people fly-fishing and breaking marathon tape over the word "PERSISTENCE." No, this is just nuts-and -bolts stuff.

Even if you're smart enough to have chosen a profession other than Reporter, you might find something here of use.

1) They can cuss you, but they can't eat you.

2) Follow the money.

3) Follow the condescension.

4) About 85 percent of the time, you can find a phone number for any person in America by Googling their name in quotes, followed by the area code, in parentheses — (501) for example — of where they live.

5) When reporting in a small town, talk to the woman at the laundromat. They've got nothing but time, and they seem to know everything. Some of the most insightful quotes The Observer has ever published were collected while socks and boxer shorts spun in a nearby dryer.

6) The story is not about you, stupid. Shut up and listen.

7) At the end of the answer to a particularly hard question, count to five, medium-slow, before you ask the next one. If it's a REALLY hard question, count to eight. Sometimes the whole truth gets stuck behind a person's teeth, and it takes a little silence to coax it out.

8) Record the interview, or take good notes. Sometimes a sentence that doesn't seem important enough to bother writing down turns out to be the key to a person's whole life when you step back and look at them in full.

9) Even if the guy's name is Dave Johnson, get him to spell it. There aren't many D'havf Geonsaans floating around out there, but if you're a reporter, you will eventually find one.

10) When they offer, accept the glass of water. Water's close enough to free for gubmint work, and besides: It's not really about the water.

11) Don't take that smartphone in your pocket as an excuse to avoid stopping for directions. You can get a lot of good stuff while asking for directions.

12) When reporting on something that seems unfathomably big, the trick is to focus on something very small. Few people want to read long, War College dissertations on troop movements. Lots of people, on the other hand, want to read about a soldier praying in a foxhole — how he survived, why he stayed, how he found the thread of his life again once the war was over.

13) Buy your photographer breakfast every once in awhile, and keep your ass out of the shot.

14) Even crazy people are right sometimes. Resist the urge to hang up when they start talking about conspiracies.

15) Write the correction, get drunk and move on, penitent.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

The Arkansas legislature punts

I wrote this before the Arkansas legislature convened Monday for a three-day session to do something about school employee insurance, provide money for prisons and halt, at least temporarily, an expansion by the Arkansas Lottery into video games like keno. by Max Brantley

I wrote this before the Arkansas legislature convened Monday for a three-day session to do something about school employee insurance, provide money for prisons and halt, at least temporarily, an expansion by the Arkansas Lottery into video games like keno.

School insurance was the driving force behind the special session. The session need not have begun, however, to pronounce the certain valedictory on the pre-agreed agenda. The legislature intended to apply a patch, and not much of one.

The legislature's "fix" for already overpriced school insurance was to limit yet another huge rate increase by these means: 1) tap school districts for almost $5 million that they'd rather spend on something else; 2) throw spouses off the plan; 3) throw 4,000 part-time workers off the plan; 4) stop coverage of most bariatric surgery.

These steps are supposed to hold a premium increase for school employees to 3 percent on popular coverage. But premiums aren't the whole story. Increases in deductibles and co-pays mean medical attention will cost still more for school employees who require it. (One barebones policy mentioned in pre-session discussions reportedly has a $13,000 limit on out-of-pocket medical costs. That's self-insurance.)

The legislature wants to produce something for nothing. It won't put an additional dime into school employee insurance. What's worse, some legislators are talking about future privatizing of school employee coverage (though not that of other state employees, including legislators). It will take a magic feat to give school employees the same or better coverage at lower rates after insurance companies take a 15 percent rake of the money.

Here's all you need to know about the lack of fairness. Consider two state employees.

You are a part-time state legislator: You qualify for health insurance. Next year, you will still qualify for health insurance. The coverage for you and your family in 2014, on the Cadillac, no-deductible gold plan costs $423.60 a month. The state contributes, between direct contributions and support from reserves, $928.51 a month to cover the rest.

You are a part-time school cafeteria worker. You qualify for health insurance this year. Next year, you won't. This year, that Cadillac gold plan costs you $1,132.96 a month. The state and school districts contribute $708.64 to cover the rest. Sound fair to you? Of course it isn't. Teachers are unhappy that legislative proposals don't close the gap. Yes, some richer school districts contribute additional amounts to help employees. But many don't. To say school districts could pay more is to misunderstand the vast disparity in district wealth and to ignore the requirement for spending sufficient to deliver equal and adequate education.

School districts are creatures of the state, as much as public agencies. The first 25 mills of school property tax are considered a state millage and thus it is state money, along with additional state foundation funding, tapped for employees.

In the name of economy, the legislature is favoring themselves and other state employees over another class of state workers, teachers.

There is a touch of fairness in one terrible legislative "fix."

The legislature intends to prevent spouses of either state insurance plan from receiving coverage if they have insurance at their own jobs, no matter if it's skimpy coverage or much more costly (such as the school employees' insurance).

A merged system would mean more participants and broader sharing of catastrophic costs. No legislator seems interested in the impact of a merger on overall expenses or what the impact would be of equalization of state contributions to public and school employees.

The Republican majority will do anything for teachers except spend money on them.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Arkansas begins to grapple with climate change

New proposed EPA rule could dramatically impact state. by Benjamin Hardy

Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a proposed rule that will require a 30 percent reduction nationally in carbon emissions produced by power plants, phased in over the coming decades. The feds will tailor reduction targets to individual states, but it's up to the states themselves to come up with plans that address those targets. On June 25, the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the state's Public Service Commission (PSC) held a public meeting to solicit preliminary input from stakeholders, including utility companies, environmental groups and consumer advocates.

The EPA provides four "building blocks" as suggestions for states to design their carbon-cutting plan, said Stuart Spencer, a legal policy adviser for ADEQ. The state can do all, some or none of these things, just as long as it meets EPA's requirements. (If Arkansas fails to come up with a feasible plan at all, the federal authorities will step in and give us one.) The four suggestions: 1) Make existing coal plants more efficient; 2) increase the use of existing natural gas plants; 3) increase power supplied by renewables and nuclear; 4) increase end-use efficiency (for example, by making homes and buildings more efficient).

Note that one option is conspicuously absent from the above list: retiring coal-fired plants altogether. Glen Hooks, director of the Arkansas Sierra Club, said that should be on the table as well. "About 85 percent of the CO2 emissions generated by the state's power plants come from five coal-burning facilities," he said. "That really is the meat of this discussion."

Arkansas is in an unusual position, in terms of coal. The state's carbon emissions aren't the highest in the nation, nor are its per-capita emissions. But, according to the PSC, the state's reliance on coal for its energy means the rate of emissions per megawatt hour has increased significantly in recent years. Arkansas has allowed new investment in coal-fired plants at a time when most of the rest of the nation, including other Southern states, has moved in the opposite direction. The carbon intensity of Arkansas's power sector emissions increased a dramatic 37 percent from 2005 to 2013, the fourth highest rise in the nation for this period. (During the same period, our power consumption rose by only 1 percent. The rest was exported to other states.)

It's exactly this measure that the EPA rule targets: The rate of carbon released per megawatt hour (MWh). So, Arkansas has some major changes to make. To comply with the rule, our rate of CO2 produced per MWh must decline 44 percent by 2030.

Unsurprisingly, power companies and most business interests aren't thrilled. They say implementing the EPA rule will raise rates for consumers. There is truth to this. Coal power is cheap, and both households and businesses will probably see costs rise if the state does indeed prod utilities into using less and less of it. A representative from the Arkansas Chamber of Commerce said that it was "just an economic fact" that the state's remaining manufacturing jobs would be threatened by higher rates.

Talk of hurting business through costlier energy doesn't take into account the economic activity that would result from weaning the state away from coal. A representative from the Arkansas Advanced Energy Association (a business group) enumerated the benefits: increased job opportunities in energy efficiency, investment in new renewable plants, a better market for the state's rich reserves of natural gas and the possibility of creating a market for carbon credits in a multistate partnership.

Then there are the economic costs exacted by a continued reliance on coal. Burning dirtier fuels in Arkansas makes for unhealthier Arkansans. Dr. William Mason of the Arkansas Department of Health said there was "unequivocal scientific evidence" that the particulate matter released by coal-fired plants causes an increase in asthma and other respiratory disorders among children and the elderly.

Though poorer local air quality is a big deal, it pales in comparison to a larger economic and public safety threat over the long run: potentially devastating climate change. A recent report co-authored by Henry Paulson, secretary of the Treasury under former President George W. Bush, highlighted the multibillion-dollar economic danger posed by a destabilizing climate. Droughts and floods are predicted to increase in severity, destroying crops and damaging property; rising sea levels could displace millions. Paulson is a fiscally conservative Republican, but he sees the scientific writing on the wall.

"If there's one thing I've learned throughout my work in finance, government and conservation," he wrote in a New York Times op-ed in June, "it is to act before problems become too big to manage. For too many years, we failed to rein in the excesses building up in the nation's financial markets. When the credit bubble burst in 2008, the damage was devastating. Millions suffered. Many still do. We're making the same mistake today with climate change. The warning signs are clear and growing more urgent as the risks go unchecked."

Still, in the short term, costs to consumers matter. There are at least two distinct government interests at play, as represented by the two state agency heads who hosted the meeting. ADEQ Director Teresa Marks is charged with enforcing environmental law. The chair of the PSC, Colette Honorable, is supposed to ensure that utilities keep consumer rates affordable and the power grid reliable and safe. After the meeting, Honorable acknowledged that those two mandates aren't always identical, but said the agencies were committed to working more closely than ever before.

"At the end of the day, Teresa's focus may be apart from ours, but this is a great opportunity to collaborate and cooperate," she said.

Wednesday's meeting was only the first step in a long process. EPA won't issue its final guidelines until next June at the earliest, and states have at least another year after that to submit their compliance plans. That's all assuming the rule even survives; legal challenges are inevitable, said Chuck Barlow, Entergy's vice president for environmental policy. One of many disadvantages to taking major action on climate (or anything else) via an executive agency rather than legislation is that it creates a readymade argument for legal challenge — that the EPA, and the Obama administration, has overstepped its bounds.

"Our questions about the rule — our uncertainties — run to pages and pages," he said. "We're very concerned about legal defensibility of the rule."

When asked if Entergy itself might challenge EPA over the rule's legality, Barlow replied, "I don't know that there's going to be a legal challenge from us ... but there will be from somebody." However, he also said that the electric giant will be taking steps to shape the new regulation and comply with its mandates even as it contemplates fighting it in court.

"You can't bank on winning a legal challenge," he explained. That's something proponents of regulating carbon have said all along: If tough emissions standards cut into the bottom line, power companies will adapt.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Sprint, shoot, kill, hoot

Little more than mindless action in 'Transformers: Age of Extinction.' by Sam Eifling

"Transformers: Age of Extinction" is not the title of a movie so much as the tag of a natural disaster we knew was coming, sort of like the schedule of names (Arthur, Bertha, Cristobal, Dolly, etc., in 2014) we prepare for hurricane season. The next cacophonous, disorienting, exhausting installment in this series will be the fifth, a development that children of the '80s should have embraced with a fervor. Instead, what is there to say about these things other than to reach for aspirin?

Director Michael Bay has distilled his formula down to a lightly scripted series of flash grenade explosions set to the occasional dialogue of digital monster robots and their human buddies. It's a 165-minute gantlet. Then you're left to stagger back into the world, and if anyone asked you what the movie was about, you'd stammer a moment. What did happen?

Something something alien ships that destroy things, a steel dinosaur head in the arctic, and then we're in Texas, right? Mark Wahlberg is a down-on-his-luck inventor single father who buys a beat-up truck that his teenaged daughter (Nicola Peltz) thinks is dumb. Then we learn it's Optimus Prime and a bunch of U.S. black ops types, steered by Kelsey Grammer, show up to confiscate the Transformer because they're on a nationwide Autobot hunt. There's a big car chase when the daughter's heretofore secret Irish professional rally car driver boyfriend (Jack Reynor) shows up just in the nick of time, and now the humans are on the lam.

Meanwhile a power-driven billionaire inventor (Stanley Tucci) runs a defense contractor in Chicago where they're melting down Autobot corpses for its constituent metal, an endlessly pliable substance they call Transformium. The scientists are using it to build their own Transformers, but because they're also downloading the know-how from leftover Decepticon parts, they keep winding up with less control over the machines' design (and, subsequently, behavior) than they were expecting.

Then, the aliens want to take Optimus Prime prisoner. They're working with the CIA. Chicago got the worst of it in the previous "Transformers" and the city doesn't escape this film unscathed. Later everyone goes to China for some reason and there are Dinobots, who, to give the movie props wherein they are due, are fairly awesome. In fact, the visuals throughout are more or less mind-bending. In all, this is a highly ogleable bit of moviemaking. Were but there an Academy Award for mayhem.

But on the whole, this is a disheartening slog of a movie. Used to be my parents would sniff that the cartoons I watched as a tyke were little more than toy commercials. Of course, when kids get the toys, a good cartoon vaults them toward scripting their own impromptu versions of stories. Movies like the "Transformers" franchise, done right, help kids propel their toys, these characters, through adventures and perils of their own imaginations.

These Transformers don't get enough personality, don't display enough thoughts, to evince much in the way of inner lives. They mostly just sprint, shoot, kill, hoot. What to make of Bay, other than to see an oversized child swinging action figures with both hands? He does the voices, makes up one-liners and smashes the figures together, clackity-smackity, again and again and again, as he trills laser sounds at himself. This is a lot of pew-pew-pew! you can just imagine for yourself.

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Hobby Lobby ruling politically crafted

There are legal decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court that have big political dimensions and then there are just big political decisions. The narrow decision allowing certain corporations to deny birth-control coverage for their women employees as required by federal law is one of the latter. by Ernest Dumas

There are legal decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court that have big political dimensions and then there are just big political decisions. The narrow decision allowing certain corporations to deny birth-control coverage for their women employees as required by federal law is one of the latter.

You can find a few other instances where the court ignored its constitutional precedents and issued an order that gave one of the political parties an election-year boost. The big one was Bush v. Gore in 2000 when the Republican majority stopped a vote recount in Florida and ordered that George W. Bush be certified as president with no better constitutional grounding than that the country just needed to move on rather than see what the recount showed.

In the Hobby Lobby case, the justices ruled 5-4, as everyone knew they would, that the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, could not require closely held corporations to insure contraceptive medicine for their female workers if the company's religious beliefs were that those forms of birth control were sinful. The law requires employer-based insurance to cover preventive care, including contraceptive medicine, without cost to the patient.

The decision was exactly the opposite of what the Republican majority had held some years earlier for individuals. The justices had ruled that individuals did not enjoy the religious protection that they handed to corporations on Monday. A person, the court said then, could not use his or her religious beliefs to get around a law that was generally applicable to people.

What the court set out to do in the Hobby Lobby case, and did, was to strike a blow against Obamacare and the president, the Republicans' big issues for the 2014 elections. The justices had failed the party two years ago when the chief justice caved on them and they could not strike down the whole insurance reform. It allowed the president to get re-elected and more than 8 million Americans to get insurance for the first time.

Chastened, the chief was back in the fold for this one.

The whole political apparatus was ready for the anticipated decision. Instantly, the House speaker, John Boehner, cheered the court for handing a defeat to the president, who he said had "repeatedly crossed constitutional lines," although the court did not exactly say the president or the health care law had crossed constitutional lines but an act of Congress.

All five Republicans in the Arkansas delegation, like those from sea to shining sea, had statements ready praising the court for delivering a blow against Obama and the health care law. Attack ads against Democrats for being associated with a president who is against religious freedom will hit the tube in days.

Sen. Mark Pryor, bashed by his opponent, Rep. Tom Cotton, for joining with the hated Obama in this infamous deed against the devout, issued his own statement attacking Cotton for wanting to throw 220,000 Arkansans off the insurance rolls and for wanting women to pay more for their insurance than men.

The decision carries a payload for Democrats, too, potentially an even better one. It is that the decision reflects the Republican Party's animus against women. When polls asked people if employers who had insurance plans for their workers should be able to deny birth-control coverage for women based on the employer's, not the workers', religious beliefs, they overwhelmingly said no. Among women, it was even more lopsided.

The opinions in the contraception case will pose a dilemma for scholars tracing the development of First Amendment rights. How do you make sense of the conservative majority's conflicting opinions on the religion clause?

Let's go back to 1989 and the court's opinions in Employment Division v. Smith, in which two Native Americans in Oregon who were drug counselors were fired for ingesting peyote, a cactus used by Indians and some other peoples around the world for medicinal and religious purposes because its hallucinogenic qualities promote meditation. They had consumed it as part of religious ceremonies of the Native American Church and claimed that Oregon laws making it an illegal drug violated their church's doctrine.

That makes no difference, the Supreme Court's 6-3 majority said. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that an individual's religious beliefs could not excuse him from complying with an otherwise valid law. Allowing people to excuse themselves from laws that somehow affect some religious belief, he wrote, "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind," and he mentioned compulsory military service, payment of taxes, vaccinations and child neglect.

But Oregon's law was not an important Democratic law, like Obamacare. Scalia and his Republican colleagues went the other way on this one by standing behind an act passed in the first days of the Clinton administration that was a thinly veiled effort to overrule Scalia's holding in the peyote case, which Congress of course cannot do. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act said a government could deny a person's religious exceptions to a law only by meeting a stern test. So Scalia and his colleagues said the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was a perfectly acceptable statute and that exemption from a law should be given to a corporation if so few people owned it that you could discern a common religious belief and it applied that belief consistently.

Hobby Lobby's owners, one magazine reported, profit from investing in businesses that reap huge profits from expensive contraceptives. But what higher religion is there than profits?

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Reaganomics and climate change

At long last the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finally decided what it wants to do about the carbon issue! The EPA has successfully regulated emissions of mercury and sulfur dioxide, but never before has it regulated carbon dioxide, and we've known about its greenhouse effects for over 30 years.

Reaganomics and climate change

At long last the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finally decided what it wants to do about the carbon issue! The EPA has successfully regulated emissions of mercury and sulfur dioxide, but never before has it regulated carbon dioxide, and we've known about its greenhouse effects for over 30 years. Coal-fired power plants are the greatest polluters, and Arkansas has several of them.

The EPA and Obama administration hope to reduce carbon emissions nationwide to 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. What's taken them, or previous administrations, so long? Maybe it was necessary to wait for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that the Clean Air Act gave the EPA the authority to regulate carbon emissions, but they did that in 2007. So maybe it was necessary to wait for the recent climate change reports to conclude that we have only a 15-year window before it's too late to prevent the global average temperature from rising beyond 2 degrees centigrade.

My explanation for our procrastination and unwillingness to act has been the success of the Lewis Powell Memorandum of 1971 and the Reagan Revolution of the 1980s. Powell laid out the mapwork that was needed to re-educate the voters so that they would vote against their own best interests. In the affable Ronald Reagan, the plutocracy (the upper 1 percent or upper .1 percent) found a spokesman who could change the public's opinion about them: Instead of their being "robber barons," they would become "job creators." The result has not only been devastating for our middle class and our national infrastructure but also for our environment.

Reagan persuaded a large number of voters that the restoration of the plutocracy and a New Gilded Age would solve all our problems. All we had to do was "return to normalcy" — return to the Gilded Age that existed between the end of Reconstruction in 1877 and the beginning of the Progressive Era in 1901. Get rid of those pesky union workers who expect fair wages and benefits and safe working conditions; get rid of those costly safety regulations on products like food, toys and automobiles; get rid of those progressive income tax rates in which the wealthy pay a higher percentage than those with lower incomes; and get rid of those absurd environmental regulations that cut into profits for ridiculous reasons like clean air, clean water and better health.

Reagan reminded voters that it was the inventors and industrialists who had made America great. Every American could become a millionaire like railroad builder Cornelius Vanderbilt, financier J.P. Morgan, steel magnate Andrew Carnegie, and oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller. (In the mid-1800s, English essayist Thomas Carlyle called people like them the "captains of industry.") All we had to do was get our constitutional government out of the way. Let developers once again have unlimited access to natural resources and labor with no regulations. Let's return to laissez-faire economics where the government gives support to Big Business, keeps its hands off the economy's ups and downs, and lets the buyers beware.

It's important to remember that the corporate welfare system of the Gilded Age led to such a wide income gap between the plutocracy and everyone else and created such unpleasant working conditions that many victims were considering alternatives to capitalism: socialism or communism. As the 20th century began, President Theodore Roosevelt became the leader of the Progressive Era. His goal was to reform the abuses of capitalism to save the system from itself. A lifetime hunter, he became a champion of the environment; and a Republican, he offered the working class and consumers a "Square Deal."

The disillusionment of World War I's failure to "make the world safe for democracy" brought a halt to our progressivism. During the "Roaring Twenties," Americans elected to return to the plutocracy of the Gilded Age. Laissez-faire was restored as "trickle-down" economics and the income inequality gap between the haves and have-nots widened again. The Great Depression that resulted brought a return to progressivism and a renaming of the "captains of industry" to the "robber barons." Capitalism had virtually collapsed, and another Roosevelt had to save it again.

Progressivism lasted for nearly 40 years.

The breaking point for the "robber barons" was probably Earth Day 1970 that led to the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and creation of the EPA. The fact that these occurred while a Republican — Richard Nixon — was president was more than they could take. It was corporate lawyer and lobbyist Lewis Powell, a lifelong corporate Democrat, who provided the guide rules as to how the plutocracy could regain control .

Months before Nixon appointed him to the U.S. Supreme Court, Powell's 1971 memo outlined several steps the plutocrats needed to influence government policy — and they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. Right-wing "think tanks," lobbying organizations, and radio and TV propaganda networks emerged to change voters' perceptions of government and corporations: the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, Fox "News," Americans for Prosperity, Club for Growth, et al. Corporations even created the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to write laws for their extremist lawmakers to present as their own to promote the interests of the plutocracy.

So, for more than 30 years, we've been stuck with Reaganomics (A.K.A. laissez-faire and trickle down). The income inequality gap has returned to Gilded Age and Roaring Twenties levels. The middle class is in rapid decline, and the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet. The plutocracy, through its "think tanks" and politicians and pundits, has succeeded in convincing many voters than none of this is actually happening and, even if it were, nothing can be done about it.

Plutocratic Reaganomics and climate change denial go hand in hand — and that's the problem. Voters who bought into the first in 1980, and continue to do so, are stuck with accepting the other no matter what the scientific evidence indicates. The EPA and Mr. Obama want to do the right thing at great political risk. Big money, their politicians and their voters will continue to do everything possible to stop them — regardless of the consequences for planet Earth.

David Offutt

El Dorado

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

ArkLaTex Chief Met Signing Off

This from the tip jar:

 Today will be Stephen Parr's last weathercast at KSLA, Shreveport.  He is starting a political talk radio show with  someone else and doing marketing in LA-TEX marketing.

KSLA named Parr's replacement a couple of weeks ago.  Jeff Castle comes to the ArkLaTex from Huntsville, Alabama where he was the morning met at Raycom's WAFF.

Little Rock Station hires New Reporter

KTHV/Channel 11/Little Rock has hired a new reporter.  TV Spy reports Astrid Solorzano has been hired by the Little Rock station. 

 Soloraznao begins work Monday. She comes to Little Rock from the Annenberg TV News where she was an anchor/reporter/producer. 

Shreveport Station Hires New Chief Met

TV Spy reports KSLA/Channel 12 Shreveport has hired a new chief meteorologist.  Jeff Castle comes to the ArkLaTex from Huntsville, Alabama where he was the morning met at Raycom's WAFF. 

As reported here first in January Steve Parr is leaving the station. Parr has been with KSLA since 2012.

Severe Weather Coverage MIA Sunday as Storms Blow Through...

I guess regular programming was just to more important to covere severe weather Sunday night.  Tornado warnings were in effect during the early evening for the Texarkana area..and yet not one station covered the warnings. An emailer says KMSS/Shreveport did cover it.....  Channel 12/KSLA/Shreveport did in the last minutes of the storm as it was moving out of the Texarkana area.  Channel 6/KTAL and KTBS/Channel were both MIA..even on the internet.  I was surprised as KTAL in the past had done a great job covering storms on the internet.

And should we talk about the Little Rock stations?  Everyone except KTHV/Channel 11 missed the boat.  Tornado warnings were issued for the metro area around 9 or so...Channel 11 broke in with coverage and stayed with it until their newscast time.  I had to wonder where Channel 4's "Arkansas' Weather Team" was...they surely weren't on the air.  I will say I can't speak about what KLRT did as I don't receive KLRT.  I guess a pageant and a basketball game I think it was, was more important than giving out tornado warnings...

I stand corrected that some of the above mentioned stations did break in for a mention or two.  Was just spotty coverage.

Nexstar Unloads Shreveport Station

Nexstar Broadcasting announced today it is selling its Shreveport Fox station KMSS/Channel 33. TV Spy reports Marshall Broadcasting Group will buy KMSS along with 2 other Nexstar stations in Odessa-Midland, Texas and Quad Cities, Iowa for $58.5 million. 

 Marshall Broadcasting Group, Inc. is a newly formed minority owned media entity owned 100% by Pluria Marshall Jr. Marshall is currently the president and chief executive officer of Equal Access Media Inc., which owns several newspapers serving African-American and minority communities, including The Texas Freeman and Houston Informer Newspapers, The Los Angeles Wave Newspaper Group, and the Los Angeles Independent Publications Group. In 2011, Mr. Marshall founded Integrated Multicultural Media Solutions, a media rep firm that assists advertisers and agencies in marketing products and services to multicultural audiences by providing marketing services, including promotions, grassroots marketing, advertising placement and custom content creation.

Nexstar purchased KMSS from CCA Stations in April 2013

Shreveport Reporter Moving to Memphis

This from the tip jar:

Sasha Jones is leaving KSLA TV Shreveport to join WMC TV Memphis (also a Raycom station).

Sinclair/Allbritton Deal Nearly Complete

The sale of Allbritton stations to Sinclair Broadcasting could be final by the end June.  TV Spy reports with the recent deal for Sinclair to surrender the licenses of  ABC affiliates in Charleston, SC, and Birmingham, AL, because of the FCC’s recent restrictions on joint sales agreements will make the purchase of the Allbritton properties complete by either the end of June or July.  

It has been nearly a year since the potential sale of the Allbritton properties were first announced on July 29, 2013.  The deal will include KATV/Channel 7/Little Rock.

KATV Reporter Becomes Sales Account Exec

KATV reporter Justin Lewis is moving to the advertising department at the station.  Lewis made the announcement on his facebook page:

New Anchor Named for NWA Newscast

This from the tip jar:

Laine Baker will be the new host of the FOX24 News Edge on KFTA/Channel 24/Fort Smith-Fayetteville after the recent departure of long time host Brad Reed. She will anchor the weeknight newscasts at 5:30 and 9:00. Laine previously was a co-host on KNWA Today.

National News Organizations Challege Ban On Drones

Well this story is hitting home as with all the talk about KATV photographer Brian Emfinger's of a drone to get footage of tornado devastation in central Arkansas last week.  At least a dozen national news organizations have filed a brief with the FAA challenging the decision to ban the use of drones by commercial news gatherers.  

"The FAA's position is untenable as it rests on a fundamental misunderstanding about journalism. News gathering is not a 'business purpose.' It is a First Amendment right," the brief said.  

The FAA said in a statement late Tuesday it was concerned that the NTSB judge's decision "could impact the safe operation of the national airspace system and the safety of people and property on the ground."

What I wonder is, is Brian Emfinger "off the clock" when he is operating his news gathering drone.  If he is acting as a freelancer that maybe within being legal BUT if he is on the clock and wearing his KATV hat he could be in HOT water.  Is he selling the video to KATV?  Does he give the other stations equal opportunity to "purchase" the video...or does he give KATV the exclusive?...Just some questions to think about.  

And then comes this story today of a drone with a camera slamming into a skyscaper in St Louis.

2013 Arkansas Associated Press Winners Announced

Winners of the Associated Press news awards have been announced.  Arkansas reports the following results:

KATV won first-place awards in the categories of spot news, enterprise or investigative, elections and politics, documentary, continuing coverage, sports coverage, sportscast, weather segment, non-spot photography and website.

 KTHV-TV, Channel 11, took the rest of the TV first-place awards in the categories of non-spot news, feature and spot photography

KHBS/KHOG-TV, Channels 40/29 of Fort Smith and Fayetteville took a first-place award for newscast.
And this year's AP television sweepstakes winner was KATV/Channel 7/Little Rock.

KATV Photog Hocks Drone Tornado Destruction Video

Hmmmm....did anyone else pickup on this?  Seems KATV photographer Brian Emfinger is hocking his drone shot video for sale.  A comment on TV Spy pointed this out.

Channel 7 Reporter's Drone Use Being "Looked Into" by FAA

Well it seems the use of a drone to get overhead views of tornado damage over the weekend has come to the attention of the FAA.  Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reports today KATV photographer Brian Emfinger's use of his own private drone to cover the aftermath of the storm is being investigated by the FAA.  

“It’s always in the back of my head, ‘How could I use the drone to get shots that other people don’t have?’” said Emfinger, who had been chasing the storm from the moment it touched down. “The thing about the aerial is, for people who have been impacted, it’s one thing to have ground shots but it really gives a sense of perspective about how bad it is. And if people know how bad it is, people can help.”

What does KATV news director Nick Gentry have to say:

“Brian went out to use it last night because we knew we needed some pictures to show the damage,” Gentry said. “It gave great perspective of how bad the damage was in Mayflower.”

The paper reports KLRT used drone services provided by Tim Trieschmann, owner of The Shot Above to get aerial footage of the devastation.  

KTHV Lone Little Rock Station Left in Wall-to-Wall Coverage

As of 1pm KTHV/Channel 11/Little Rock is the only Little Rock station still in wall-to-wall coverage.  KARK and KATV have both transitioned back into regular programming.  Channel 11 has anchors Denise Middleton and Alyse Eady at the anchor desk along with all the station's reporters, in addition to others from 11's sister stations. 

Just making an observation, Denise and Alyse seem to be handling the anchoring duties pretty well.  I have not seen Alyse miss a beat all morning. 

Sister Stations Assist With Coverage

Gannett has brought in sister stations to help with coverage.  Sebastian Robertson from WFAA/Dallas/Fort Worth has been brought in to help out KTHV with its wall-to-wall coverage of the aftermath of Sunday's tornadoes. UPDATE:  A reporter from Gannett's Atlanta, GA stations WXIA is also in the state assisting with coverage. A reporter from KHOU is also in town assisting. 

Just a little tidbit when I was looking on WFAA's webpage for info I found  a couple of former Little Rock and Shreveport reporters/anchors working for the Dallas station.  Former KATV'er Carla Wade and formerKSLA/KTBS/Shreveport sports anchor Ted Madden work for WFAA.

Viewers Upset Over Video of Reporter Returning Photo to Storm Victim

KARK/Channel 4/Little Rock seems to be catching some flack on its facebook page for a report it aired this morning while on the scene in the tornado ravaged area of Arkansas.  Earlier today KARK/KLRT reporter Susanne Brunner and her photographer came across a picture of what wound up being of the daughter of a Mayflower resident.  Brunner and the photographer returned the photo to the owner who was very grateful for the discovery.   
Watch the video below

LR Stations Provide Wall-to-Wall Storm News

Little Rock tv stations have been wall-to-wall tornado aftermath coverage this morning.  I am not sure if they all waited til their morning programs began at 430 this morning to begin the coverage of the devastation of yesterday's storms. 

 KTHV had evening anchor Dawn Scott up and at'em this morning in the storm damaged area along with other reporters from the station.  KATV had a number of their morning show people in the area as well, as did KARK.  As of 9am wall-to-wall coverage continues as more information becomes available concerning the overnight storms.

KATV Sues Another LR Network After Hiring Former Reporter

Little Rock is becoming quite the city with media lawsuits.  Arkansas reports KATV/Channel 7/Little Rock is sueing the Soul of the South Network for hiring former reporter Katherina Yancy. reports Yancy left her job at KATV April 1st.  The article says the station met with Soul of the South executives concerning their hiring of Yancy.  According to the lawsuit Soul of the South execs told KATV GM Mark Rose the reporter's return to KATV wasn't going to happen.   

Yancy was under contract with KATV through January 2015.  Seems KATV is anticipating her return as the station hasn't hired a reporter to replace her. 

And the Thunder Rolls.....

This isn't a night tv sales people like but wall-to-wall coverage was warranted.  All stations in Little Rock went, and currently are in wall-to-wall coverage what seems to be a massive tornado is moving from just north of the Little Rock are to the northeast.  

Meanwhile, in the ArkLaTex both Channel's 3..6...and 12 went into LIVE coverage when a tornado developed in the Mount Pleasant, Texas area.  Once again I relied mainly on online coverage. 

I found again KTAL/Channel 6 offered the best coverage online with Chief Met Todd Warren live on the web with radar describing what's happening and answering questions from online viewers.  I switched over to KSLA's online coverage..once again found found the chief met providing what seemed a behind the scenes look.  At one point it was quite amusing as he was wanting to go LIVE on TV to give a Tornado warning but couldn't find the cameraman, producer or anybody to put him on the air.  The weekend met came back in and said they were all outside smoking.

Update:   Been wqtching the Little Rock stations for the last few hours.  On KARK I found it seem like the weather folks competing for time on the air.  Of course I think they are simulcasting with KLRT and utilizing its weather mets also.  KATV had all the weather crew in to help with coverage.  Along with the mets it was showing storms reports of the devastation in NE Arkansas/the Mayflower area.  KTHV had Ed Buckner and Sarah Fortner covering the storms.  KTHV had the radar up on the screen the entire time tracking the storms.   

I nearly forgot to mention The Weather Channel was tracking the storms as well.  TWC had Jim Cantore in Norman, Oklahoma at the National Weather Service Storm Prediction Center and he was communicating with tornado chasers chasing the storms moving across northeast Arkansas.  Yea, you read correctly, The Weather Channel was covering weather!!

Top Blog Story

Your romantic relationships can sizzle

Visit our Blog

Subscribe to Our Blog
Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Official U.S. Time
Affiliate Program