Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
Whatever one thinks of the GND, it has succeeded in making climate change a hot topic of discussion throughout much of the nation. Given climate is on the agenda of every Democratic presidential contender and a popular topic of derision by many conservative politicians and cable pundits, the climate discussion will not be going away anytime soon.
Under ordinary circumstances, a prudent president—one loyal to the rule of law and accepting of science—would not likely want to find himself challenged in court. Trump, of course, is no ordinary president and values chaos and delay almost as much as he does himself.
The challenge lies in organizing against the growth of far-right and authoritarian politics while simultaneously highlighting the continuities they share with the political center — the overlap between the “exception” and the “norm.”
The principal catalyst for this sudden turn-around in climate chatter is the Green New Deal (GND) that was proposed by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) in her successful Congressional bid.
It’s very clear that conservatives have one plan for dealing with the popularity of the Green New Deal: scaring the hell out of people. And it’s very clear that they have one big problem: The hell they’re building through inaction is a lot scarier than “upgrading all existing buildings.”
Before discussing the content of the Green New Deal, and in particular the environmental measures it proposes, it is important to understand the aims of the document, which is primarily a political manifesto.
John Dingell has had a hand—a hugely constructive hand—in nearly every major advance in social policy over the past five-plus decades, including civil and voting rights, health, and the environment.
In lay terms, the plaintiffs are pushing back on the government’s continued efforts to prevent the case from going to trial. The Administration’s strategy these days is to go around trial and appellate court rulings by directly seeking relief from an increasingly conservative Supreme Court.
The now older, wiser, and even more motivated Juliana plaintiffs have already taken their case to the court of public opinion where it will continue to be joined by millions more climate defenders. The fight for climate justice has only just begun.
After two years in office, the president is still learning that politics—whether in the District of Columbia or Albian, Iowa—isn’t played like real estate or the casino business.
I am hopeful that new Democratic House majority will use its leadership of both standing and select House committees to present to all Americans well-grounded evidence-based reasons why their rising confidence in climate science is justified.
Deniers—particularly those in political circles—are intuitively sensing just what the surveys seem to be suggesting—people’s increasing confidence in mainstream climate science based on their own experiences.
