You read right, Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from our sister state, is not only planning to vote for climate change legislation, he's helping to draft it. No shit.

Why? Because the EPA's Administrator, Lisa Jackson, has proven that she's serious about moving on with climate change regulation -- with or without Congress. They can either get on board, or let her call the shots.

From GreenvilleOnline.com:

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina broke ranks with Republicans on Sunday, announcing that he is working with a Democratic colleague on climate change legislation.

Graham co-authored an op-ed in The New York Times with Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts that said they believe they have found a “framework for climate legislation” that can pass Congress, despite conventional wisdom to the contrary.

The senators warned that if Congress doesn’t act, the Obama administration will use the Environmental Protection Agency to impose new regulations that would likely be tougher and lack job protections.

Graham and Kerry called for an “aggressive” reduction of carbon gases, financial incentives for “clean coal,” a streamlined permit process for nuclear power plants and a border tax on items produced in countries that don’t accept environmental standards.

They would minimize the impact on major emitters through a “market-based system” that would give them time to comply with carbon-gas reductions.

The South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce threw its support behind Graham, saying his leadership on climate change is critical for success.

Chamber President Frank Knapp Jr. warned that rising sea levels due to global warming could hurt the state’s tourism industry, destroying beaches and barrier islands.

He said that EPA action would result in higher energy costs without the benefits of investments and regulatory changes protecting jobs.

Further reading: Climate Roulette

Remember the good ol' days, a year or two ago, when people would buy extra houses just so they could play landlord?

Take my suburban, middle class neighborhood in north west Charlotte: It has about 200 homes, all only five or six years old. Of those 200 homes, roughly a quarter of them are rental properties.

Let me tell you about just two of those rental properties, both a few doors down from my house. The owners of the homes have never, so far as the rest of the neighbors know, actually lived in Charlotte. One lives in Hawaii and the other in California. They pay a management company who-knows-how-much to make sure the lawn is cut, repairs are made and that a tenant always fills the space.

Sounds great, huh? Buy a house, sit back and let the money roll in. Sweet.

What the owners don't realize is the management company really doesn't do that great of a job taking care of the yard -- which looks like crap not only because it's not mowed regularly, but because the tenants park their cars on it. And, the people who live directly next door say the houses aren't all that well taken care of, either. No telling what the interior of the homes looks like.

Meh. The management company has to make a profit, too. It shouldn't be a huge surprise that they're cutting corners, this is America after all. No big deal, right? Wrong.

Our neighborhood, like many neighborhoods, has a homeowners association that makes rules and collects dues so that everyone who lives here can enjoy a nice, safe, well-kept place to live.

Not mowing your lawn? Against the rules. So is parking three cars on your lawn. But, being a jerk -- that's OK. The fact that their kids terrorize neighbors and the parents growl at everyone who waves at them is uncomfortable, but some people just don't want to get along. Can't do anything about that.

On the other side of the 'hood, however, there's a troubled young man who likes to do things like curse at neighbors walking their dogs, break into people's houses and, when he's feeling particularly frisky, steal cars. But, since he's a youth, he has yet to see the inside of a jail. Mom is admonished, the police give him a stern talking to and he's spent a little time in foster care.

Yeah, his family also rents from an absentee landlord.

Oh, and, good luck getting in touch with any of them. The impression the landlords leave with their houses' neighbors is that they could really care less about our community, so long as they're getting their monthly rent check.

The  bigger problem is that the landlords are leading by example. If they don't follow the rules, why should anyone else? In fact, there are people in the townhomes -- at the front of the 'hood -- who are two years behind in their monthly dues.

The dues are supposed to pay for water, trash pick-up, landscaping and maintenance on things like the retaining pond, the roads and the swimming pool. The dues also cover things like new roofs for the town homes and other types of structural maintenance. When homeowners don't pay everyone else has to pick up the slack, which ultimately means the neighborhood has to scale back its future plans for improvement and the entire community suffers.

Lawyers have sent threatening letters, but the rouge tenants continue to not pay -- or care. Of course, why should they? The other people don't. And, besides, what's the homeowner's association going to do? Replace the roof on three out of four town homes? Try to convince the garbage collectors to leave their trash on the street? Won't happen. Can't happen.

The homeowners association is now starting to throw around the f-word for the slack due-payers: Foreclosure. No neighborhood wants more foreclosures.

So, yeah, I take issue with the news that the city council is going to back down from their commitment to require all landlords to register with local officials so they can be in touch in the case of an emergency (like a fire or a major crime) or when their management company or tenants decide to shun the neighborhood and it's rules.