Slashdot Mirror
Congress Votes to Scrap Obama's Clean Power Plan (sciencemag.org)
sciencehabit writes with news that the House voted 242-180 to repeal the EPA's Clean Power Plan, and 235-188 to block EPA rules governing emissions from new power plants. Science reports: "Congress has voted, largely along party lines, to block a centerpiece of President Barack Obama's climate change agenda. The votes are largely symbolic, however, because Obama plans to veto the bills. Still, Congressional Republicans, and a few Democrats, say they want to send a message to global leaders who are meeting this week to negotiate a new climate agreement that the majority of U.S. lawmakers may not agree with any deal."
If they are symbolic bills, then all we'll get here is bullshit discussion about AGW or worse, politics. Must be a slow news day (well, other than the bigger-than-average daily shooting in San Bernardino)
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
"The votes are largely symbolic..." of what? How pigheaded and stupid people can be when they put their "minds" to it?
Can somebody please explain how it can be that the congress votes for "no change" and Obama can veto and make a change in the laws? A veto generally cancels changes, meaning we would be stuck with status quo, but not this time.
Once again we see that Congress is the opposite of Progress...
Hmm... 2/3rds majority is necessary to override a veto. For a full house, that's 290 votes 'needed' to override a veto. It's actually a bit less if only the same reps vote on the override - 281 for the first vote if the same representatives vote again(a few abstainers are usual).
Except for partisian solidarity, another 39 votes doesn't seem that much
I don't read AC A human right
India is moving away from coal and oil???? citation please. They have said they plan to TRIPLE emmisions as they invest heavily in coal and oil as they need cheap power to fuel their economic growth.
It will be different thanks to the honor of another institution, then. This matter is not a toy anymore, it is about severe consequences.
Greetings from Europe, that seems to feel moment so much better.
Servant of karma
Shouldn't they be recycling the environmental bill, rather than scrapping it?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
China and the US are the only countries that matter anymore, and they're gonna do what they want, kicking sand in the face of the 97 pound weaklings of the world.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Translation: The USA is using its 'world police' status to fuck-over the political agenda of other countries.
Nothing new there, the new twist is, this time includes US allies. In the aftermath of WW2, the USA assumed the office of world police (and assistant finance controller), which on one hand prevented another world war. OTOH, it allowed the USA to use its guns for profit, thus building a US hegemony. The cost of supporting a US hegemony is now greater than the benefit received by its allies.
It's time for US allies to act, not make plans, without the participation of the USA, and to punish the USA for ignoring (their share of) global problems. As always, the best way to punish someone, is via the hip pocket. All those trade agreements and kick-backs benefiting the USA can be replaced by several international military squads dealing with regional conflict.
In this case, the administration has used this power in ways congress doesn't like so it attempted to pass a law disallowing the changes in regulation.
The administration is using its power in ways specifically granted to it by congress. If they didn't like it then they shouldn't have delegated the authority in the first place. That's how our government has worked since the Constitution was ratified.
This is neither a constitutional or ordinary process.
Like hell it isn't. You yourself explain perfectly accurately how the system works. And it has (mostly) worked for 240 years. When congress wants to get specific in how it delegates power to the executive branch then they have that right, subject to the restrictions under the Constitution. If they cannot get enough votes to change their mind then that is how it is supposed to work.
Here's what they don't like.
Oil flows through the first half of Keystone pipeline, where it is then loaded on trains, mostly owned by Burlington Northern, aka Warren Buffet. That's the same Warren Buffett who financed Obama' s campaigns. The plan was to finish the pipeline, which would be more efficient than transferring it to Buffet's trains.
Obama asked the EPA to look into the plan and the EPA said the net effect of finishing the pipeline would probably be slightly positive for the environment overall. Obama's benefactor, Warren Buffet, had just spent $35 billion buying Burlington Northern, which carries the oil, and he really didn't want to lose that investment. So Obama asked the State Department to issue a report saying the pipeline shouldn't be finished. Unfortunately for him, the State Department said the finishing the pipeline wouldn't be a problem.
Of course that doesn't help Warren Buffet, who owns the railroad amd perhaps the White House, so Obama told EPA and State to start over, and this time say no. They didn't really want to do that, so eventually Obama just declared thay the oil had to stay on Buffet's railroad, just because he says so.
Of course that increases the price of gas slightly for everyone, it's slightly worse for the environment, but the extra penny per gallon you pay for the gas goes to Warren Buffet, who in turn kicks some of it to democrat campaigns.
That's Obama's environmental policy. How could anyone oppose that?
Of course there are dozens of other examples. A favorite method is to have the government give a few hundred million of taxpayer money to some donor who say they plan to start a green business, such as solar-electric. The donors take salaries of $10 million / year , the "green company" donates some of the taxpayer money to democrats, and after a few years the money is gone. At that point the company declares bankruptcy. The donors get paid, the politicians get paid, and not a single solar panel is made. You don't see a problem here? Obama spent hundreds of millions of your dollars amd mine running that same scheme repeatedly.
You want a source for the fact that Warren Buffet bought Burlington Northern for $35 billion? Okay:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=buffet+bu...
For the fact that Buffet is a huge Obama donor?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=buffet+ob...
For the fact that Buffet's trains carry the bulk of the oil from where the pipeline ends?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=keystone+...
For some of Obama's donors getting millions and millions of taxpayer money and never producing a single solar panel?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=solyndra
It's not that hard.
What does Congress do? Pass laws.
What does the Executive do? Enforce laws passed by Congress.
What is the EPA? A part of the Executive Branch.
What does the EPA do? Enforce laws passed by Congress. This is preschool-level civics, here.
EPA neither creates nor changes laws. Did the ice pick come with an ice pack to dull the pain?
... needs another reminder of how dysfunctional this Congress is.
This is why India is building a test reactor to see if Alvin Weinberg's research into molten salt nuclear reactors (MSR's) fueled by thorium-232 can be scaled up to commercial operation. If it works, India could within a generation scrap its coal-fired power plants as they are replaced by very safe MSR's, especially given India has some of the world's largest proven reserves of thorium-232.
I believe the slogan is "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" or something.
All in favor of air strikes, raise your hand.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Don't confuse research into nuclear with backing off from coal. An Indian company is attempting right now to get approval to dig the worlds biggest hole in Australia to suck more coal out for the motherland and their continued coal expansion.
If your idea turns out to be true (it won't be, but we can all hope), then India would cripple one of it's largest private enterprises a company with very VERY deep family and political ties, and who also happens to be the largest power provider in the country.
Just think how that will play out in real life.
If that family are smart they will jump onto whatever energy bandwagon happens to be rolling along the rails at the time.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
That family isn't smart, it's rich and well connected. What they will do is what all large resource companies do, lobby their mates. The environmentalists or emerging technologies aren't steamrolling any major corporation despite all their best efforts. Instead we get the likes of government officials declaring wind farms and uranium mines eyesores (I've heard both comes from the mouths of our federal ministers). Funny none of them mentioned coal, ... well the Greens did but who gives a crap about them, their vote barely counts in parliament.
Why is this marked troll? It's literally exactly the truth.