Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
The statewide ballot initiative with the greatest environmental significance will be decided by voters in Washington state, which could signal a shift in climate change strategy.
From Mother Earth’s perspective, the most important ballots cast on November 6th could be in the 30 contests for state attorney general (AG). The role played by AGs in the nation’s transition to a low-carbon economy is easily ignored in the heat of this year’s Congressional elections.
In the past week or two Trumpsters gave climate defenders new reasons to take the Administration to court—of either the legal or public opinion variety.
The World Bank predicts we may see 140 million climate migrants before long, and given the chaos that even a million people fleeing the (partially drought-fueled) crisis in Syria created, we better come to grips.
Despite the Trump administration’s own prediction that by the end of this century, the world could warm “a disastrous” 7°F, or about 4°C, above pre-industrial levels, the president has decided not to curb greenhouse gas emissions, but instead to use the devastating findings to justify and intensify his pro-fossil fuel agenda.
Without compromise, the nation will continue to see years of politics at the extreme—periods of doing and undoing much as we see now in Trump’s dedication to erasing Obama’s environmental legacy. I ask you–is this any way to govern the greatest nation on earth?
From an environmental perspective, the Trump administration’s proposed replacement for the Clean Power Plan (CPP)—dubbed the Affordable Clean Energy plan (ACE)–stinks!
Since the US Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) July 30th denial of the federal government’s motions to dismiss the case of Juliana vs. US, the plaintiffs and their attorneys have been preparing for trial—the one the Trump administration had hoped to avoid and that others are calling the trial of the century.
For someone like me who believes we ultimately need to strengthen local economies but doesn’t believe heavy industry (like mining and aluminum extrusion) should form the heart of these economies, the issue of tariffs has no clear answer.
With the odds favoring a Blue Wave in November, it would seem a reasonable time for Democratic candidates and sitting Senators not up for reelection to follow in the footsteps of a political upstart who was courageous enough to take on a powerful incumbent with a message that included climate change and the need to act.
Both the rollback of the CAFE standards and the new asbestos rule are illustrations of what has become of US climate policies in the Hands of Trump—albeit in very different ways.
Three strikes and the Trump administration is now out—or more accurately “in.” Trump and company have now been told by the US Supreme Court in a very brief 5-4 decision that they must stand in open court and defend themselves against the charge they are denying the 21 youthful clients in the court their constitutional right to a habitable environment.
