It started on a sultry day in Houston when hundreds of protesters, mostly oil company employees, were bused to a concert hall in their lunch hour to rally against a historic first step by Congress to reduce the pollution that causes climate change.
The event marked the start of a backlash by wealthy industry owners and conservative activists against US President Barack Obama’s green agenda. Now it has snowballed into what green campaigners say is the greatest assault on environmental protection that the US has ever seen.
Eighteen months after that Houston rally, the green agenda is under assault on multiple fronts, from cutbacks in recycling in Wisconsin to the loosening of regulations governing coal mining in West Virginia and a challenge to the authority of the White House and federal government to act on climate change.
“This is almost unprecedented in environmental history, in that they are moving in so many directions and in so many ways to effect the same results that even if they are only partly successful, it will still have a serious outcome,” said Bill Becker, secretary of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, which monitors air pollution.
“It is as if they are trying to throw as much slop against a wall as they can and hoping some of it sticks in the end. The more they throw, the more they feel may stick, and they are throwing quite a bit,” he said.
On Thursday Republicans introduced bills in both houses of Congress to strip the Obama administration of its powers to act on climate change. The bill introduced in the House of Representatives and the Senate would bar the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from using existing air pollution laws to reduce carbon dioxide.
It would stop the EPA from regulating carbon emissions from power plants and factories. It would not strike down a deal, reached between the White House and car makers, to reduce car emissions, but, it would allow no further reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from cars once that deal runs out in 2016.
“The energy tax prevention act stops cap-and-trade regulations from taking effect once and for all,” said James Inhofe, the Republican who is the Senate’s most vocal climate change denier.
The bill is expected to pass easily in the House — where the Republicans are the majority, and where the bill has already gained support from a number of Democratic leaders. It will have a harder time in the Senate, where Democrats have a narrow majority.
However, the bill represents only one line of attack. Last month’s Republican spending proposal, which set out US$61 billion in cuts, reserved the biggest cut of any government agency for the EPA: US$3 billion, or 30 percent of its budget.
The brunt of the cuts are intended to starve the EPA of the funds it would need to begin regulating carbon dioxide.
However, the proposals would also do away with funds for protecting salmon in San Francisco bay, or treating sewage going into Florida’s lakes. It would weaken rules for mercury pollution from cement kilns, and allow wolf hunting once again. The proposals would also redirect US$900 million, raised from the proceeds of oil leases, which traditionally has been used to maintain state parks.
Campaigners say the cuts go far deeper than any enacted under former US president George W. Bush, who was notorious for blocking action on global warming and for a more general opposition to government regulation.
The cuts have even invaded the White House. The Republican proposal cut off funding for the post of Obama’s energy and climate adviser and the State Department envoy to the UN climate negotiations.
The White House downgraded the post of climate adviser this week, transferring the job to a section of the domestic policy council.
A number of Democratic senators are quietly complaining that — without a strong push back from Obama — the anti--environment campaign is in danger of doing lasting damage.
The anti-environment measures have spread beyond Washington. New Hampshire last week voted to leave a greenhouse gas reduction initiative, with several members of its house of representatives doubting climate science.
“Neither man nor cow is responsible for global warming,” said Shawn Jasper, a member of the state Republican leadership.
Tea Party governors in New Mexico and Maine have also moved to reverse air and water pollution laws, and efforts to promote alternative energy. In Pennsylvania the authorities have removed restrictions on natural gas drilling in state parks.
In Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker, says he is cutting off funds to local recycling programs. City councils told reporters they would no longer be able to offer kerbside pick-up of newspapers and glass for recycling.
Florida and other states have taken aim at Obama’s pet project, the creation of a high-speed rail network, and shut down rail building projects in their areas.
“What we have seen most recently is folks just basically taking the debate over the budget and the financial situation and using it as cover to attack core environmental protections,” said Joe Mendelson, director of global warming policy at the National Wildlife Federation. “They are using the budget process as a costume to hide what they are doing — which is a full-on assault against our fundamental environmental protections.”
Much of the momentum for the anti-environment agenda was provided by the success of extremist Tea Party candidates in last November’s elections.
“Everything is about the next elections,” said Doug Scott, director of the Illinois environmental protection agency. “You have people voting against things they supported for years because it is on the talking points just now.”
Then there was the large infusion of cash from the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. The Kochs bankrolled the Tea Party group, Americans for Prosperity, which has said it spent US$40 million in the elections. Koch Industries and its employees donated US$2.2 million to candidates in last year’s elections, more than corporations like Exxon Mobil, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Their interest has not waned. Americans for Prosperity sees cutting environmental regulation — especially that related to climate change, which would cost the oil industry — as a key area.
“Energy policy is one of our top three priorities,” said Phil Kerpen, policy director of Americans for Prosperity. “For me personally it’s a top concern and major focus.”
“It is not that we are totally against environmental protection, but in the hierarchy of values, it has taken a back seat,” he said.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS