Currently viewing the tag: "house"
Our guest blogger is Nick Sundt , Director of Climate Change Communications at the World Wildlife Fund, and a longtime forest firefighter . Last Thursday, all but one of the Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives from Texas voted for H.R. 910 to reverse the Environmental Protection Agency’s endangerment finding that greenhouse gas pollution threatens the health and welfare of Americans with a wide range of impacts, including more frequent and severe droughts and wildfires
Read the rest here:
As record drought hits Texas, Congressional delegation votes to deny climate change
Climate Change: Senate blocks, House backs legislation to ban EPA controls on greenhouse gases. [DOI:10.1021/CEN040711153820]
View original post here:
Congress Splits On EPA CO2 Bill
In this CAP repost , Rebecca Lefton and Andrew explain why keeping international climate funding in the budget is so important. Lawmakers continue to debate the fiscal year 2011 budget. As we approach the next showdown this week over another temporary extension of the continuing resolution, a final resolution of the 2011 budget, or a government shutdown, the top climate issue in this debate is whether the Environmental Protection Agency should have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases.
Visit link:
The fight over international climate investments
Science is the foundation of progress. Rejecting science means in essence rejecting hope for Americans and indeed for all humankind: We live in complex times fraught with dangers, many of which are human-made and can be solved only by the application of science backed by resources that, sometimes, only government can mobilize. That is certainly the case with human-caused climate change. Sadly, tragically even, the US House of Representatives today voted down 240-184 an amendment from Henry Waxman (D-CA) that stated: Congress accepts the scientific findings of the Environmental Protection Agency that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for public health and welfare. The Hill put it this way: “The House rejected a Democratic amendment Wednesday that would have put the chamber on record backing the widely held scientific view that global warming is occurring and humans are a major cause.” We can make a stronger statement. Last year, the U.S. National Academy of Science, the equivalent of the Supreme Court of science — a body that is ultra-conservative from a scientific perspective — reviewed the scientific literature in a major report and concluded: A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems…. Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested , and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small . Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts . This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.
Go here to see the original:
GOP-led House rejects science, 240-184
“Happy talk” was not the approach taken by Lincoln confronting slavery, or by Franklin Roosevelt facing the grim realities after Pearl Harbor. Nor was it Winston Churchill’s message to the British people at the height of the London blitz. Instead, in these and similar cases transformative leaders told the truth honestly, with conviction and eloquence. Guest blogger David Orr is one of the true environmental visionaries. I’ve known him for years, and he sent me the new preface to the paperback edition of his book “Down to the Wire” after reading my post last night on why we need to talk about climate change . Here is an extended excerpt: I wrote Down to the Wire between 2007 and 2008 when many still believed that the United States was capable of making an effective national response to global climate destabilization. At the time I was involved with several dozen others in drafting “The President’s Climate Action Plan” (PCAP) a document that aimed to define the actions that the next U.S. President would have to take immediately in order to avoid the worst of what lies ahead. The numbers are stark.
Read the original here:
David Orr on confronting climate collapse