As President Obama’s controversial climate-change plan revs into full gear this week, Republicans are seeking to paint it as a vast executive power grab that will cost taxpayers billions of dollars — all to address a problem many in the GOP say doesn’t exist.
With the Environmental Protection Agency scheduled Friday to release the first in a series of regulations reining in carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants, House Republicans are already on the attack. Wednesday, Rep. Ed Whitfield of Kentucky, a coal-state Republican and unabashed climate-science skeptic, chaired a House Energy and Power Subcommittee hearing called, he said, for the express purpose of examining “the scope of federal climate-change actions that have been tolling billions of dollars a year in spending and countless man-hours of work since the mid-1990s, reaching over $22 billion this year alone.” As soon as the agency puts out its draft rule, Whitfield plans to introduce a bill to block the regulation.
Together, the hearing and rule set the stage for a coming battle over climate change in the 2014 midterm elections. While Whitfield’s bill stands no chance of passage in the Democratically controlled Senate, Republican strategists hope that it will put House Democrats in a tough position: Democrats from coal-, rust-, and farm-belt states who vote against rolling back the rule will see that vote haunt them in campaign ads, said Jordan Davis, policy director for the National Republican Congressional Committee. At the same time, Organizing for Action, the advocacy group that grew out of President Obama’s 2012 campaign, is running online ads and holding demonstrations targeting Republican “climate deniers.”
Obama, who in his first term failed to push climate-change legislation through Congress, has in his second term directed every Cabinet agency to present plans to act on climate change within their existing executive authority. Republicans are now calling attention to that effort as a way to claim the president is abusing his executive power. Whitfield invited representatives of 13 agencies to testify at Wednesday’s hearing, including the departments of Defense, State, Interior, Health, Agriculture, and Transportation — and slammed the president for ultimately sending only EPA chief Gina McCarthy and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz to the hearing. “Eleven agencies requested to testify — twice, I might add — did not provide a witness or submit information about agency activity to the subcommittee. That does not send a positive message for increased public understanding of what this administration is doing on an economically consequential matter,” Whitfield said.
McCarthy and Moniz confronted the attacks head-on, reminding lawmakers that the science of climate change is clearly established, that their agencies have legal authority to tackle it, and that climate change is also wreaking havoc on the U.S. economy.
“The evidence is overwhelming, the science is clear, and the threat from climate change is real and urgent. This is my judgment, and it is the almost universal judgment of the scientific community,” said Moniz, who was previously head of the physics department at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “The threat of a warming planet to our communities, our infrastructure, and our way of life is also clear. Rising sea levels and increasingly severe droughts, heat waves, wildfires, and major storms are already costing our economy billions of dollars a year, and these impacts are only going to grow more severe. Common sense demands that we take action. This is the driving force behind the president’s climate-action plan.”
McCarthy, who was just confirmed to the EPA post in July, asserted that under the law — specifically, the 1970 Clean Air Act — her agency has the legal authority to regulate carbon pollution.
Republicans, particularly Whitfield and others from coal states, continued to push back at established climate science. Rep. David McKinley of West Virginia cited reports that the rate of climate change has slowed in recent years, and he called the climate rules “an abuse of the president’s executive authority.” Moniz retorted that despite the recently recorded slowdown in atmospheric global warming, the last 10 years are still the hottest decade in recorded history. “Changes in the rate of increase are expected,” he said. “This pattern of effects was predicted decades ago. This is not being made up”¦. The last several years have seen a slowdown of warming.”¦ It does not obviate the overwhelming conclusion that global warming is going on.”
A group of protesters from Greenpeace seemed to concur. Sitting quietly in the audience, the group, dressed discreetly in suits and ties, donned tinfoil tri-corner hats whenever a Republican questioned or denied the science of climate change.
What We're Following See More »
Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.
Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”
Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."
In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-expected primary battle behind her, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) is no longer going on the air in upcoming primary states. “Team Clinton hasn’t spent a single cent in … California, Indiana, Kentucky, Oregon and West Virginia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “campaign has spent a little more than $1 million in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone backer in the Senate, said the candidate should end his presidential campaign if he’s losing to Hillary Clinton after the primary season concludes in June, breaking sharply with the candidate who is vowing to take his insurgent bid to the party convention in Philadelphia.”
The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."