this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024

190 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19087 readers

3542 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

190

Kamala Harris played a crucial role in passing one of the strongest climate laws in the world (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

…

When we spoke, Harris demonstrated a depth I didn’t expect – she geeked out over heat pumps, confessed her love of electric school buses and described the heavy burdens poorer communities face from air pollution. The more I learned about her background, the more I found a clear pattern: policy ideas that she championed became central to federal legislation. Our nation’s landmark climate law, which is turning two years old this month, has Harris’s signature all over it.

You can trace her influence by looking at her earliest days as a politician, then following the bills she sponsored as a senator, and finally examining her 2020 Presidential campaign platform. During the earliest days of the Biden-Harris administration, when the Build Back Better agenda was coming together, Harris made sure that her priorities stayed on the list: electric school buses, cleaner water and investments for communities.

While she hasn’t been given the credit, as vice-president, Harris has worked behind the scenes to champion her climate policies. And she’s managed to get a long list of her ideas signed into law.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There’s something of an overhang of federal leases as well, but there has been a sharp cut in the quantity of new leases issued

Nope, which is why I quoted my link already:

For the last six years, America has outstripped Russia, Saudi Arabia, and other OPEC countries in crude oil production. And it has picked up the pace under Biden, who had approved more permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands by last October than former President Donald Trump had by the same point in his presidency.

I've honestly lost count of how many times ives explained this exact thing to you bud...

I don't think it's going to start working

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

As I've said before, he has limited power to say 'no' to a drilling permit once a lease is issued. So what he has done is sharply reduce the issuance of new leases:

That's a very big deal, even if it isn't anywhere near enough.

Actually fixing the problem means:

Having a majority in the House
Having support in the Senate to overcome a filibuster and change the law (60% supermajority)
Having courts willing to go along with breaking something they've previously deemed a 'property right'

That requires power that neither Biden nor the climate movement has yet held.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What?

You say he can't do anything except approve them, but he's literally canceled some existing ones.

https://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2023/0907/Biden-cancels-remaining-Alaska-fossil-fuel-leases-amid-criticism

How can he do that, but he's forced to approve new ones?

Hell, at first he was very public about not approving them, until he did a 180.

Why do you think he is forced to approve them?

He's done some good things, but only do to vocal public criticisms of his actions. Luckily that's enough to show that if he wanted to, he could consistently be pro-climate.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

He was able to cancel those ones because they were issued without proper environmental review and because they'd only just been issued. Even so, actually making the cancelation stick required winning a subsequent lawsuit.

Most other cases aren't ones where lease cancelation would win in court.