Getting Ready for a 100-Year Climate ‘Emergency’ – Frustrated with that?


Francis Menton

On March 13, 2020, then President Trump declares “national emergency” due to the outbreak of the new Covid-19 virus. Three days later, on March 16, Trump set out a program “15 days to slow the spread.” The program includes strong recommendations for anyone who feels sick, or has tested positive for the disease, to stay home for the time being. two weeks emergency window.

We are here now about two years and four months later. The 15-day “emergency” attributed to Covid-19 has been extended several times by Trump, first for the last ten months of his term, and then for an additional 18 months from January 2021 by President Donald Trump. President Biden. It’s been over two long years of lockdown, working from home, closing businesses, closing schools, mandating masks, mandating vaccinations, etc., with little or no evidence of any any of these activities have worked well.

On Monday, July 18 (2022) President Biden extends Covid-19 “state of emergency” in the next 90 days until mid-October. You might think that the whole concept of “emergency” has lost all meaning if it somehow managed to last for more than two and a half years, the time has passed. that ordinary people no longer pay attention to it. “Emergency” is used to mean something immediate, like a hurricane or tornado that ravages a town, or someone having a heart attack, or a gunman opening fire. . By any reasonable view of the word “urgent,” things related to Covid-19 could have fallen within that deadline that ended months if not years ago. But to an bureaucracy, the term “emergency” means the opportunity to issue orders that you cannot issue, and to move out money that you cannot move out. Now that you know the taste of powerful potions of “emergency” power, why would you give them up if you can avoid it? Years later, it remains an “emergency” if officials will. Or at least, that’s their point.

This brings us to the so-called “climate emergency”. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA On June 30, the administrative agencies in the “climate” space, along with all the environmental activists, were thrown into disarray. The Supreme Court has just stated that the bureaucracies do not have the power to fundamentally transform the use of energy in the economy without clear direction from Congress, which existing statutes cannot find. see climate issues. And it is clear that no other such legal direction is likely to emerge from Congress before the midterm elections in November. After November, changes in the composition of Congress are likely to make Such a law is even less than possibly, if not completely off the table for years if not decades. So what is a self-respecting climate alarmist to do?

To those on the left, the answer seems obvious: Ask for a declaration of a “climate emergency.” With that declaration, the statutory void could perhaps be filled by a whole other type of legislation that provides special powers in the event of a “state of emergency” declaration. Calls for President Biden to make such a statement have been widespread since the Supreme Court’s decision in late June. In the politicians category, the gathering of Democratic Senators (Edward Markey and Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts, Cory Booker in New Jersey, Sheldon Whitehouse in Rhode Island, Brian Schatz in Hawaii, Martin Heinrich in New Mexico, Alex Padilla in California, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Bernie Sanders of Vermont) sent a strong letter to Biden on July 20 make demand:

Declaring the climate crisis a national emergency under the NEA unlocks the power to rebuild a better economy with concrete, important actions. . . . Under the NEA, you can redirect spending to building renewable energy systems on military bases, implementing large-scale clean transportation solutions, and funding distributed energy projects to enhance climate resilience. All of these actions will employ Americans in new and emerging industries while ensuring America’s leadership position in the global market.

Environmental groups are even ahead of Senators with the same need. This is Green Peace on July 8:

Congress and the Courts are failing to protect our communities from the climate crisis, and it’s time for President Biden to be the leader we need. By declaring a climate emergency, President Biden expands a range of powers under the National Emergencies Act and other federal laws.

There are many, many other examples of the same demand from all the usual suspects.

Indeed, there has been a lot of talk that Biden will make a big statement on Wednesday, when he arrives in Massachusetts to give a speech at a closed coal-fired power plant. Somehow, he just stopped short of the official declaration of “emergency,” but took the opportunity to blast out the usual clichés about the impending climate apocalypse, including the use of natural due to the term “emergency”. Excerpts:

“Climate change is an existential threat to our nation and to the world,” Biden said. . . . “This is an emergency, an emergency, and I’ll look at it that way.”

It’s entirely possible that a climate “state of emergency” declaration could be issued literally any day.

What does the declaration of “emergency” mean? The idea is that there are plenty of statutes out there that grant these types of Executive powers in such “emergency” situations, provided that there is a formal declaration of that. Thus, it is conceivable that there would be a way to address the apparent lack of statutory authority that caused the EPA’s power plant regulations to come under fire. West Virginia case. The Nation on July 21 provides a summary of some of the powers the Executive may intend to exercise in the event of such a climate-related declaration:

[S]A statement that will allow the Biden administration to access funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency Buildings Resilient Community and Infrastructure program to combat the impact of the heatwave, extreme weather events and natural disasters and can enable faster implementation of severe mitigation strategies. A formal climate emergency announcement could also allow the Biden administration to cut crude exports and stop offshore drilling through laws and waivers related to national security and energy development. The Biden administration can access financial assistance for clean energy infrastructure through FEMA and the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, and can cut energy costs for families. by supporting offshore wind projects in the country, helping to facilitate an affordable clean energy transition.

This is the problem. Climate is by no means an “emergency” in the usual sense of the word in English. Predictions by climate models of a few degrees of temperature rise over the next century are in contrast to the “emergency situation”. Indeed, the various “emergency” legislations to the Executive have all addressed the problem of too short a time for Congress to enact legislation appropriate to the current situation. That situation is the opposite of what we have with climate.

But if you’re on the left, or a climate activist, this situation that’s too important to wait for congressional action may never come. How long must a “state of emergency” be declared? One hundred years? During that time, officials can issue whatever orders they want and spend whatever money they want, all with the aim of saving the planet. None of these will or can have any effect on 85% (and increasing) of world carbon emissions come from outside the US and which the US government cannot influence in any way. any way.

Read the full article here.


Rate Articles

Source link


News7g: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button