In his second term, Obama becomes bolder on the environment
When Gina McCarthy first met with Obama in the Oval Office on Jan. 10 to discuss the prospect of heading the Environmental Protection Agency, she recalled, “the first words out of his mouth was the need for EPA to focus on climate.”
More from PostPolitics
Why ‘holding my nose’ is a problem for Mitch McConnell
The political match made in heaven was a political headache Thursday.
Anthony Weiner vs. a British reporter
The mayoral candidate feigns a British accent and jokes that he feels like he's in a Monty Python sketch.
What’s the situation with federal furlough appeals?
A Q&A with the chairwoman of the Merit Systems Protection Board, which has received 26,000 furlough appeals.
The Fix's top 10 Senate races of 2014
From No. 10 to No. 1, we look at the seats most likely to change control this cycle.
Cutting carbon emissions and preparing for the impacts of climate change are the biggest environmental policies the president is pursuing, but they are not the only ones. His deputies are laying the groundwork to manage public lands across broad regions, drawing on high-tech mapping to balance energy interests against conservation needs. They also are preparing to weigh in on a controversial mining proposal in Alaska.
In the administration’s first term, it framed climate initiatives as ways to promote energy independence or cut consumer costs. It also made modest concessions to business interests — such as rejecting a controversial smog rule, which would have affected a broad swath of industries, and delaying other regulations.
Agency heads were given very different guideposts for the second term as Obama deputized a new team of Cabinet members to enact a series of rules and policies aimed at tackling global warming.
In his chief of staff, Denis McDonough, Obama has a policy manager who has written and contributed to several pieces on climate change as a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress think tank in 2006 and 2007. He is a sharp contrast to former Obama chiefs of staff William Daley and Rahm Emanuel, who both privately saw global warming as a political liability for the president.
The shift has alarmed some industry officials, as well as coal allies. Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) described the administration as coal’s “adversary” and brought a state delegation headed by West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin (D) into the White House on Aug. 1 to meet with McCarthy and Michael Rodriguez, the White House legislative affairs director.
While Manchin called the nearly hour-long session “very respectful and productive,” he also said it exposed the “deep differences” between politicians like himself and Obama.
“You cannot describe this any differently than as a war on coal, and not just in West Virginia or the U.S. but on a global scale,” he said. “They’re using every tool they have to destroy the most abundant, reliable and affordable resource that we have.”
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who co-founded the “Safe Climate Caucus” with Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) and has pressed the White House for years to address the issue more aggressively, said he has sensed “a sea change” since Obama unveiled his climate plan in June.
“It does not appear to be ‘just make a speech and walk away,’ ” he said in an interview. “It appears to be a lasting and real policy shift.”
end quote from:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-his-second-term-obama-becomes-bolder-on-the-environment/2013/08/10/1e65239e-f9f5-11e2-a369-d1954abcb7e3_story.html
As I study the problems regarding Global Warming and Global Climate change more and more I realize we really do have a serious problem here on earth.
However, as I study more and more I'm less convinced what the actual problem is.
What I mean by this is that "Yes" it is possible that global warming is directly caused by the overpopulation of earth and burning carbon based fuels and pollution in general.
However, it is also possible the other factors are in the mix as well.
For example, if our magnetosphere is degrading as it appears to be, or if we are entering into a Geomagnetic Excursion or even possibly a Geomagnetic Pole shift (either of these take about 2000 to 10000 years to go through) we may be looking at something quite different indeed than 99% of the people of earth expect.
So, I'm wondering if what the people of earth are being told is the whole story, a partial story or just the fact that no one completely knows the causes and effects we are presently dealing with?
As I study this more and more it makes me concerned that the human race might be incapable of understanding what we are up against in time to actually do something useful about it.
So, my thought is what we are actually facing the next 10,000 years or so is likely completely different on multiple levels than what we expect to be dealing with as a human race here on earth.
So, whose genetics will actually survive all this?
I'm thinking that those studying this might see the problem and find a way for their children to survive this. And then there will be those who are just lucky enough to survive any way that they can.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-his-second-term-obama-becomes-bolder-on-the-environment/2013/08/10/1e65239e-f9f5-11e2-a369-d1954abcb7e3_story.html
As I study the problems regarding Global Warming and Global Climate change more and more I realize we really do have a serious problem here on earth.
However, as I study more and more I'm less convinced what the actual problem is.
What I mean by this is that "Yes" it is possible that global warming is directly caused by the overpopulation of earth and burning carbon based fuels and pollution in general.
However, it is also possible the other factors are in the mix as well.
For example, if our magnetosphere is degrading as it appears to be, or if we are entering into a Geomagnetic Excursion or even possibly a Geomagnetic Pole shift (either of these take about 2000 to 10000 years to go through) we may be looking at something quite different indeed than 99% of the people of earth expect.
So, I'm wondering if what the people of earth are being told is the whole story, a partial story or just the fact that no one completely knows the causes and effects we are presently dealing with?
As I study this more and more it makes me concerned that the human race might be incapable of understanding what we are up against in time to actually do something useful about it.
So, my thought is what we are actually facing the next 10,000 years or so is likely completely different on multiple levels than what we expect to be dealing with as a human race here on earth.
So, whose genetics will actually survive all this?
I'm thinking that those studying this might see the problem and find a way for their children to survive this. And then there will be those who are just lucky enough to survive any way that they can.
No comments:
Post a Comment