…
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.
Her work predates the Build Back Better proposal; it started with her early advocacy for a Green New Deal and her legislative involvement continued through casting the tiebreaking vote in the Senate to pass the Inflation Reduction Act — literally using the one meaningful power the Vice President has to pass tiebreaking legislation.
If Harris gets credit for that, who gets credit for this?
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.
https://www.vox.com/climate/24098983/biden-oil-production-climate-fossil-fuel-renewables
Because despite anything else, we’re producing more fossil fuels than ever before.
Climate is a global problem, and shipping our fossil fuels literally to the other side of the globe (using fossil fuels btw) so it can be burnt in a place with practically zero regulations isn’t exactly a good thing…
The US is extracting a lot more oil, but sharply cut its use of coal; gas, wind, and solar have displaced much of it for electric generation in the US because they’re cheaper.
Oil use in the US has also been flat; the increased extraction is for export:
As to who: the bulk of it is from the fracking boom that’s happened on private land in the Permian basin. 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. (Drilling permits are another matter; there courts have generally ruled that the executive branch can’t just decline to issue them once a lease is issued)
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
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.
What?
You say he can’t do anything except approve them, but he’s literally canceled some existing ones.
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.
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.
CNN - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for CNN:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceThe Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/18/what-is-build-back-better-crash-course
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/16/politics/kamala-harris-inflation-reduction-act-climate-change?cid=ios_app
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/aug/05/kamala-harris-landmark-climate-change-lawCan someone explain to me why this bot keeps getting downvoted? I (perhaps naively) believe fact-checking to be a good thing… is this not what it appears to be?
