<![CDATA[ - Our Blog]]>

<![CDATA[ - Our Blog]]>Sat, 01 May 2010 06:10:15 -0800Weebly<![CDATA[Making East Campus a Beast Campus]]>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:40:44 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2010/03/making-east-campus-a-beast-campus.html

Rachel Hare, a loyal group member, writes in the Rethink College Park blog how "The East Campus project presents an opportunity for the University of Maryland to become the benchmark for sustainable development in Maryland." On April 5, "UMD for Clean Energy will host Green for College Park II: Making East Campus a Beast Campus, a panel discussion exploring green initiatives to make the East Campus project a pioneer in environmentally sound development."

http://rethinkcollegepark.net/blog/2010/2085/

]]><![CDATA[An Awesome Annapolis Afternoon ]]>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 20:15:50 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2010/02/an-awesome-annapolis-afternoon.html

Last week I had the opportunity to go to Annapolis with UMD for Clean Energy and attend a lobby meeting with some of our delegates. We also went to the 16th Annual Environmental Legislative Summit. The whole experience was enlightening and a lot of fun. I have never lobbied before or been able to meet with a state representative or important political figure and was a bit nervous. However, the lobby meeting was not intimidating like I had imagined. The delegates listened to what we had to say, were genuinely concerned about the issues we discussed, and even signed onto a bill that we were lobbying for in the midst of the meeting. I was pleasantly surprised with my first lobbying experience and would definitely like to be involved with lobbying in the future. The Environmental Legislative Summit was also a wonderful experience. Representatives from a wide variety of environmental groups were present to discuss specific environmental issues in Maryland and to seek support for their causes. I found the summit very informative and interesting. It helped me get a better grasp on the overall state of environmental affairs in Maryland. The trip to Annapolis was a new experience that I enjoyed because it helped me witness the inner workings of environmental policy and made me feel like it is absolutely possible for students to take an interest in an issue and be able to make a difference in how that issue is resolved.

- Melissa Etheridge, New Member

]]><![CDATA[The State of the Union: Clean Energy or Bust]]>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:19:21 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2010/01/the-state-of-the-union-clean-energy-or-bust.htmlHere's a summary of a recent post from the "Dernogalizer", a blog which Campaign Director Matt Dernoga maintains:

There’s a lot of chatter about what President Obama is going to say in his State of the Union address this Wednesday. There’s no doubt that President Obama’a agenda, along with that of the Democrats has taken a serious blow of recent with the loss in Massachusetts. Obama has had a much more fiery, populist tone to his speeches and remarks in the last week, and the two buzzwords I read him focusing on in his State of the Union speech is jobs creation, and policies for the middle class. While I’m sure there will be a nice paragraph or two dedicated to clean energy and green jobs, I think President Obama should make clean energy the centerpiece of his address.

For the entire post:
http://madrad2002.wordpress.com/2010/01/26/the-state-of-the-union-clean-energy-or-bust/
]]><![CDATA[AP Article "Vilsack calls for renewed emphasis on forests" debunked! ]]>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:19:32 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2009/12/ap-article-vilsack-calls-for-renewed-emphasis-on-forests-debunked.htmlSo this past summer I had an internship with the DC-based environmental non-profit group "Save America's Forests", an international forest protection organization. My boss, the founding director, came across an article that infuriated him. It described Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack's forest policy plans, which he said were a far cry from sound environmental policies. He asked me to debunk this problematic article and bring attention to a lot of the misinformation. Anyways, see the article and subsequent debunking below:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009664672_apusvilsackforests2ndldwritethru.html

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack recently shared his thoughts on how to manage our country’s forests in an AP article written on August 14th, entitled “Vilsack calls for renewed emphasis on forests”. The Secretary said he “placed a high priority on restoration to protect water resources and combat climate change”. He additionally said that restoration may include “improving or decommissioning unnecessary roads and rehabilitating wetlands and streams”. Unfortunately, the actions Vilsack seeks to take will cause significant forest and environmental destruction that will undermine the goals he lists above.
      First, Vilsack points to woody biomass production as a way “develop ‘green jobs’ that help restore forests while using them as ‘carbon sinks’ to help offset global warming” … wait, by cutting down the very trees that would, left untouched, sequester carbon dioxide and then in burning them in biomass production, release carbon dioxide into the air? Biomass may theoretically, over 100 years, release less net carbon in comparison to fossil fuels, but it is still worsening climate change now. I say if you want to “develop green jobs” and “restore forests as carbon sinks” you should allow natural forests to grow back, not to cut down the existing forests and burn them. Duh.
      Second, the article explains how Vilsack supports a “national roadless policy”, which is “an important step toward resolving the conflicts and patchwork approach that have hindered forest management for decades”. I think implementing the roadless rule in forests is a step in the right direction because it limits – with certain exceptions – the Forest Service or a timber company from building a road through many areas of our national forests for the purpose of logging. This is important because roads are permanent scars on the landscape that will never be fully restored to pristine condition. They break up a once completely connected ecosystem into sections, which causes soil disturbance or the siltation of the forests, rivers and streams – or harm to birds, fish, insects, and a multitude of other animals.
      This policy sounds like a definite environmentalist victory, but let’s take a step back. What the roadless rule does not do is preserve the 58 million acres of forest that Vilsack is looking to protect. It is not the same as making a wilderness area, which leaves the forests completely untouched. In wilderness areas, the trees continue to sequester carbon, the salmon continue to swim and spawn freely and provide us with food, and the 1210 threatened and/or endangered animals and 750 threatened and/or endangered plants can survive.
      The roadless rule, however, allows logging and roadlbuilding in roadless areas for the purpose of so-called “fire reduction” or “forest health”, which could amount to a giant loophole for major logging caused forest degradation in roadless areas that were supposed to be protected. Further, the roadless areas are largely made of land with no forests, or forests with trees not worth logging. What is very significant about the roadless rule is the larger portion of the national forests, over 100 million acres, which it allows to continue to be heavily logged.
      With 193 million acres of national public forest left in the United States (less than 20% of all original American forests), passing forest protection policies which do not go the whole nine yards does is not good enough.
      Third, Vilsack claims that “conservation work” will be done on forests – since more than 500 projects are aimed at creating jobs and promoting forest rehabilitation through projects such as removal of small trees and underbrush that serve as fuel for wildfires. If Vilsack believes this is a conservation policy, we are in big trouble. The idea that removing small trees and underbrush fire-proofs a forest is a recycled myth that just gives the Forest Service and its timber company friends the go to do more logging. According to Congressional testimony in 2003 by Arthur Partridge, Professor Emeritus of Forest Disease and Insect Problems who has 37 years of teaching, research, and administrative experience, this concept of ground “fuels” is “misguided because almost anything in a forest will burn, given the right conditions. Any fire specialist will tell you that the principal factors affecting fire are temperature and moisture, not fuels.” He continues, “No legislation will prevent or even reduce fires in the vast areas of the national forests and to pretend so is fraudulent.”
      He said this in response to Bush’s 2003 Healthy Forests Restoration Act, which aimed to thin forests in thousands of areas to supposedly reduce wildfire risk. But now Vilsack is trying to go unnoticed using the same rhetoric – but why? Well Big Timber could then legally make its way into the forests, and cut down more big trees under a false pretense while leaving more “fuel” debris on the ground in the act than beforehand. Great, just great.
      In sum, not only is “fuels reduction” or “tree thinning” then a stupid policy but it literally fuels biomass production, which we earlier concluded is a far cry from carbon neutral. Well, looking on the bright-side, at least the roadless rule is half-a-victory for conservationists because no other policy Vilsack outlines in the August 14th article will safeguard the well-being of America’s natural world. John Muir and Teddy Roosevelt must be turning over in their graves.
]]><![CDATA[Founding member Davey Rogner's tribute to the group ]]>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:16:54 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2009/10/davey-rogner-a-founding-member-tribute-to-the-group-its-beautiful.html Fresh on the heels of the developing youth environmental movement, Clean Energy for UMD held it's initial meeting on an awkwardly warm evening in February of 2007. The thirty students, as well as Dr. Bruce James--serving as the group's faculty sponsor-- present at the beginning of the meeting were just enough to fit into the room located on the first floor of Francis Scott Key Hall. The seven students that came late would have to squeeze in the room, either standing or sitting on the antiquated AC unit.

The mindset and agenda of the group initially were wide open. A group of students, including myself decided that something more had to be done to combat the effects of climate change at the University then what the campus chapter of MARYPIRG could provide. With the help of the SGA's current student group's adviser I drafted the group's constitution, found 25 University ID numbers and a faculty sponsor; thus Clean Energy for UMD was born. We held the kick-off meeting to garner interest from students who were frightened by the effects that climate change would have on their future livelihoods.

After a quick ice-breaker, that if I my memory serves me right was what is your favorite smell?, we gave a quick debrief as to where the University stood on energy issues. We discussed how students could further get involved to increase renewables in the University's portfolio and decrease the campus' energy use. Mainly this involvement would be the manifestation of the nationwide campaign known as the “Campus Climate Challenge” on our campus. Shortly after the debriefing, students began a dialogue of how they believed the University should be reacting to the burgeoning Climate Crisis. Observations varying from the obvious waste of energy occurring from the stadium lights being left on well into the night after football games, to the fact that we don't see any solar panels at our University, to the idea that we should be forcing our University to buy carbon offsets by 2010 to eliminate our campus' carbon footprint as soon as possible were thrown out into the ether.

The reaction from most in the room was of cautious optimism. After all, at that convergence of time, apathy and fear of social retribution for following one's own inhibitions were still burning at the culture of College Park. In 2007 a predominating thought and one that still runs through the minds of many, was that as an individual we act only if we can be effectual. That acting solely in accordance with one's own conscience is a wasted effort doomed to fail at the hands of this complicated social hierarchy humans have presently fit ourselves into. It is of the utmost importance to be effectual in accordance with your own social conscience especially when going up against the most socially, environmentally and spiritually unsustainable society the planet has ever seen. Given that we are a generation that has been bombarded by material insecurity since birth, we socially find it hard to act out of accordance to the present paradigm.

In those early days we were searching blindly as young people to find answers pressing people who were on payrolls, people who were of the old paradigm, but knew that something had to be done. The difference was that we were fresh-- I mean it like OUTKAST means it, but I also mean it like my vegetables don't rot. Jokes aside, the real difference was that as young people, we had not yet been as jaded by this disenfranchising society. We believed we would become the passionate reformers of a new generation. Be the positive part of the history books, you know.

Initially the movement and the group were in slight disarray. We were moving in the right direction, but with multiple vectors veering of center, distracting students from the ultimate end goal: a carbon neutral campus and College Park community. We were unsure of what the fastest route was and frankly every student had an idea of how to get there. The reverberations of the best way to organize the student group and the environmental movement at the University of Maryland would not become clear until nearly now. After returning to a UMD for Clean Energy on September 21st as an alumni I realized that this once semi-disoriented group of students with good intentions has now constructed themselves into a finely tuned political machine to be reckoned with in the state of Maryland.

Through countless hours of petitioning, event planning, campaign meetings, dead-end conversations, sleep deprivation, lobby meetings with state and federal officials, arguments over recruitment tactics, dirty looks for not doing that thing you promised you'd do at the last meeting, bus rides to Annapolis for rallies, metro rides to DC, global warming rally's that were ironically snowed upon, the building of 23 small, wooden turbines, making friends, our omnipresence in the campus community, and so many ice-breakers you'd think the glacier's were already melted the group has finally reached a plateau in which the member's are being effectual in accordance to their own conscience. An inspiring feat indeed.

Given the past accomplishments of the group and given their present campaign, there is no better time for a University of Maryland student to become involved in UMD for Clean Energy. While it may seem a bit discouraging to begin acting on someone else's campaign, if you become involved in the group you too might someday be running a campaign to directly impact the livelihood of all future generations. This not so far off campaign can be of your own inception, you must dream and not deny your creative inhibitions. It starts with small inspired steps and turns into leaps as the culture around you changes in accordance to your passion and ability to inspire.

This blog or thought is as much an homage to the hundreds of people that have loosely sifted through the membership of the group, to the thousands that have signed our petitions, as it is a call to action for students still remaining at the University of Maryland to not squelch that billowing voice telling you that your ideas can change the world. I have seen it happen. The past accomplishments of UMD for Clean Energy and the greater environmental movement stand as a testament. Since it's humble, disoriented beginnings this group has morphed into a moving giant acting in accordance to the demands of present and future generations, but without the present political dogma that would stifle creative aspiration. These successes have provided living proof that rational ideas will take hold in the hearts of others if you believe enough in yourself to put them forth.

Please act with diligence, love, peace, and what I like to call positive vibration in your endeavors. Keep your head up and believe more firmly with what is in your heart and in the hearts of those you recognize to be engorged with positive passion than what anyone else is telling you. With that you will first win your first campaign and eventually change the world.

Davey Rogner

Founding member of Clean Energy for UMD and treasurer from February 2007- May 2008

UMD Alumnus of Spring 2009

]]><![CDATA[Nike leaves Chamber of Commerce Board]]>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:18:51 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2009/10/nike-leaves-chamber-of-commerce-board.htmlCross-posted from the Dernogalizer blog:

“Nike believes US businesses must advocate for aggressive climate change legislation and that the United States needs to move rapidly into a sustainable economy to remain competitive and ensure continued economic growth."

As a result, they left the Chamber of Commerce! see below link for more details...

http://madrad2002.wordpress.com/2009/09/30/nike-leaves-chamber-of-commerce-board/
]]><![CDATA[Great NY Times Article about China's Green Investments]]>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:48:34 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2009/09/great-ny-times-article-about-chinas-green-investments.htmlDespite the fact that China has been developing coal-fired power plants quicker than anyone else in the world, China is now looking into leading on the low-cost solar and wind energy manufacturing front.

According to the below article, they are investing in green technologies at lighting speed relative to the US, if not for health reasons, for pragmatic reasons. 2.5 billion people are expected to join us on this planet in the next few decades, so they are intelligently investing in a growing energy market that is sure to be much more demanding when these new arrivals show up - a market which is sure to involve tons and tons of clean energy. Calling all Americans, are you there? Are you witnessing this?

Basically, there's a big difference between leading, and coming in second. No one remembers second. But let's drop the ego. Isn't it time we also cash in on all the green jobs and economic growth that is available through clean energy investment right now?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/opinion/27friedman.html
]]><![CDATA[The Power of Energy Efficiency Loans]]>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:00:00 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2009/09/the-power-of-energy-efficiency-loans.htmloriginally posted: http://madrad2002.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/the-power-of-energy-efficiency-loan-funds/

The University of Maryland student group I’m part of, UMD for Clean Energy, is getting involved in the city of College Park’s City Council Elections by pushing a green platform and mobilizing students to vote for candidates that support it. For an explanation of how much influence a student voting bloc can have in a local election, along with a description of the campaign, please see our FAQ here.

What I want to talk about here is the chief policy we are pushing in our platform, and how every part of the country should be finding ways to implement this financing mechanism. That policy is an energy efficiency loan fund which utilizes a limited amount of public funds in order to leverage far greater private investment in order to finance the upfront cost of energy efficiency improvements for homes and businesses. There are different ways these funds can be set up and structured, but the premise is the same. We all know energy efficiency is the fastest and cheapest way to address rising energy demand, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and create green jobs.

The problem is that the cost of the initial investment deters many homeowners and businesses from making improvements. At the same time, government money is limited, especially compared to the amount of money the private sector holds. This is where the loan fund comes in. The concept is pretty simple, where residents and businesses can borrow from this pool of money like they would a bank in order to pay for energy efficiency improvements in their home. Then, the loan can be repaid in payments roughly equal to the energy savings being realized by the improvements. We’ve been told in meetings with elected officials the best way to do this is through a modest property-tax surcharge. After the loan is paid back, residents will reap the benefits of substantially lower electricity bills. At the same time, labor will be needed to do the energy audits and retrofits necessary to reduce energy usage, which means jobs.

This concept has already taken hold in other parts of Maryland. The city of Annapolis has set up a loan fund where the funds and risk are all taken on by the private sector with no public money necessary. Montgomery County recently passed a bill which sets up a green loan fund. We think there’s no reason why this can’t be done in a way that works for a small city like College Park.

However, it appears this kind of financing can also be used at larger levels of government. The New York Senate just recently passed a groundbreaking measure which will leverage $112 million worth of public funds in order to drive $5 billion of private investment into one million weatherization for homeowners across the state! The article I linked also talks about how the legislation had bi-partisan support since it used free market solutions. Here are a couple of excerpts of how this would work…

“the measure will finance upfront costs for one million homeowners to weatherize their houses, and let them repay the loans from the energy savings realized over time. The act, which makes funding available for job training, is also expected to create up to 16,000 new jobs.”

“All a homeowner will need to do to save on energy costs and increase property values is to call a state certified contractor to perform a free or low-cost energy audit. The audit would identify the repairs and upgrades (like air sealing, insulation, new boilers) that can pay for themselves through the energy savings they create. The program’s Residential Retrofit Investment Fund would pay the full upfront costs, with consumers required to pay back the retrofit through future savings on their electricity bill. If the home is sold before the loan is paid off, the new homeowner takes over the loan agreement.

Currently, homeowners must expend a lot of time and money to accomplish energy retrofits. They have to proactively find contractors they can trust to perform the audits and recommend a plan, then pay the full upfront costs of the work which could easily total tens of thousands of dollars. Few homeowners bother. Most cannot afford to.”

Interestingly, the $112 million in public money is coming from revenues from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative(RGGI) in which 10 Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states participate in a regional cap and trade program for carbon dioxide emissions. The revenue comes from the purchase of pollution permits sold by the government to polluters. I know that in my state of Maryland, our government has squandered our revenues of $70 million, by just sending it back to consumers in rebates. Rebates that probably cover a months worth of electric bills. One can only hope we will be as smart as New York in the future, and use the next round of funds to do some real rate relief, while creating green jobs and reducing our carbon footprint.

For all its criticisms, the Waxman-Markey bill which passed the House this summer and is being considered by the Senate actually uses public money to leverage private investment pretty well. It has a clean energy bank, which will leverage $10 billion dollars in public money to drive an estimated $200 billion dollars for clean energy investment. At the same time, it contains Sherrod Brown’s IMPACT ACT, which “would provide resources for small- and medium-sized manufacturers through a 2-year, $30 billion manufacturing revolving loan fund, which will provide much needed liquidity for domestic manufacturers to improve manufacturing processes and to retool and expand production of clean energy products. The Apollo Alliance estimates that, once enacted, the bill will create 680,000 direct manufacturing jobs and nearly 2 million indirect jobs over five years.”

The bill will also provide $65 billion in allowances to local and state governments for energy efficiency programs across the county from 2012-2020. If local and state governments are smart, they will sey up energy efficiency programs like New York has set of theirs.

Yes, hating on the status of Federal climate legislation has become an environmental pastime, but it would actually be a good idea to advocate for these financing mechanisms and more like them that apply to energy efficiency at the local level to be in the Senate legislation, which is what my group told Senator Ben Cardin’s energy aide last Friday. As Mckinsey recently found…

“the U.S. economy has the potential to reduce annual non-transportation energy consumption by roughly 23 percent by 2020, eliminating more than $1.2 trillion in waste – well beyond the $520 billion upfront investment (not including program costs) that would be required. The reduction in energy use would also result in the abatement of 1.1 gigatons of greenhouse gas emissions annually – the equivalent of taking the entire U.S. fleet of passenger vehicles and light trucks off the roads.

Such energy savings will be possible, however, only if the United States can overcome significant sets of barriers. These barriers are widespread and persistent, and will require an integrated set of solutions to overcome them – including information and education, incentives and financing, codes and standards, and deployment resources well beyond current levels.”

That’s why my group is looking to get an energy efficiency loan fund going in our city of College Park. Won’t you join us?]]><![CDATA[Summary of the 9/12 Lobby Meeting w/ Cardin's energy aid]]>Sun, 13 Sep 2009 12:42:39 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2009/09/summary-of-the-912-lobby-meeting-w-cardins-energy-aid.html This past Friday three of our members (Hilary Staver, Matt Dernoga and Ethan Cowan along with MarylandPirg representative David Bransfield) held a lobby meeting in Washington, DC with Senator Ben Cardin’s aid on energy issues, Mr. Josh Klein. The discussion was centered on the development of the Senate version of the American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act passed by the House over the summer. We were able to both learn more about Senator Cardin’s stance on various aspects of the bill and bring attention to some potential improvements proffered by other members of the Senate.

Happily, Senator Cardin continues to be a reliable advocate for a strong Senate cap-and-trade bill. Mr. Klein informed us that Senator Cardin’s previously expressed goal of tightening the 2020 emissions target to 20% below 2005 levels instead of the 17% set the in the ACES bill is still in place. This is in part because he wants to make the initial target as strong as possible in case it has to be lowered in order to secure the necessary sixty votes to overcome an expected filibuster once the bill reaches the Senate floor.

With regards to the allocation of carbon permits, we learned that Senator Cardin is hoping to distribute a larger portion of them through auctions than the initial 15% found in the ACES bill. He has also cosponsored a potential clause in the Senate bill, the Clean, Low-Emission, Affordable New Transportation Efficiency Act (aka CLEAN TEA), that would auction 10% of the permits and use the revenue to set up a fund for new public and/or low-emission transportation projects around the nation. According to Mr. Klein, this amendment is still on the table and could well end up, at the least, in the version of the bill that passes out of the Committee on Environment and Public Works of which Senator Cardin is a member.

On the economic side, we also discussed a provision included in the ACES bill called the Investments for Manufacturing Progress and Clean Technology (IMPACT) Act. This provision would set up a $30 billion revolving loan fund to assist American manufacturing companies who want to either switch to producing clean energy technology or simply make their existing operations more energy efficient. Mr. Klein was unable to confirm whether a similar provision had been introduced for the Senate version of the cap-and-trade bill, but showed interest in the subject and promised to pursue it further.

Lastly, we learned that Senator Cardin has cosponsored the Udall Amendment to the latest version of the Renewable Energy Standard, which calls for 25% of the nations electricity to come from renewable sources by 2025. This would greatly strengthen the Standard, which was only 20% renewables by 2025 with a 5% efficiency reduction option included when the House version was passed as part of the ACES bill over the summer.

Overall Senator Cardin continues to be a champion for clean energy and the environment. Mr. Klein seemed happy to meet with us, and we were able to share with him an overview of UMD for Clean Energy’s planned local campaign for the semester. At present the cap-and-trade bill has not yet been introduced to the Committee on Environment and Public Works, but once it has passed through the committee and onto the Senate floor, we plan to arrange a similar meeting with Senator Barbara Mikulski’s office to encourage her to support strong cap-and-trade legislation as well.

Hilary Staver
Political Liaison

]]><![CDATA[Lobbying Meeting w/ Senator Ben Cardin's office this Friday!]]>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 20:07:24 -0800http://www.umdforcleanenergy.com/1/post/2009/09/post-title-click-and-type-to-edit.htmlThanks to great outreach work by our political liaison, Hilary Staver, we have set up a lobbying meeting with Senator Ben Cardin's energy aid Josh Kline this Friday!

This is fortuitous given how hard it is to schedule meetings with the hard-working and busy people of the senate offices. Now that we have the opportunity though, we can advocate for a stronger version of the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) from the senate. It is most appropriate to target Ben Cardin's office because the Maryland Senator sits on the Environment and Public Works committee, who is partaking in crafting the senate version.

In the meeting, we'll likely cover some talking points previously noted in Media Director Kenny Frankel's "Clean and Green" diamondback article, which can be found on our Media page.

Anyways, if you want to attend this meeting, which is an invaluable experience, contact Hilary at hstaver@umd.edu and she'll give you more details on how you can participate. It will be held this Friday, September 11, at 4:30pm in Cardin's office on Capitol Hill in DC! We hope we have a lot of people come out!

Kenny Frankel
Media Director
]]>