jreilly19ahsgov-blog

[jreilly19ahsgov-blog]

Executive Action Assessment of Issue

White House website--

President Trump’s stance on CO2 Emissions and Global Warming—According to the White House website President Trump believes that America’s energy revolution has produced affordable, reliable energy and dropped the carbon emissions to their lowest level in 25 years.  President Trump has also said publicly he does not believe there is a global warming problem. None of the President’s statements or laws he has signed while in office supports the reduction of CO2 emissions. President Trump is more interested in promoting domestic energy production, creating jobs and improving economic growth and is directing the EPA and other agencies to replace or repeal regulations that he thinks get in the way of these goals. Regulation that are in to protect the environment and improve air quality.

I do not agree with the President’s position.  He needs to accept that there is a global warming problem and work to put into place regulations that will help reduce CO2 emissions even if it means fewer jobs and less energy production.

Executive Cabinet

U.S. Department of the Interior

Mission statement “The Department of the Interior manages public lands and minerals, national parks, and wildlife refuges and upholds Federal trust responsibilities to Indian tribes and Native Alaskans. Additionally, Interior is responsible for endangered species conservation and other environmental conservation efforts.”  It relates to my issue but unfortunately protecting the environment is not main focus of the department.

David Bernhardt is Acting Secretary of the Interior.  He has a degree in political science and business administration.  He also has a law degree.  He has held several positions in the Department of the Interior.  His expertise ranges from the Endangered Species Act to Outer-Continental leases, from mining royalties to Indian Affairs. He may be well qualified for the position but environmental protection and the reduction of CO2 emissions is not a priority for him.

The Department’s Priorities include:

Create a conservation stewardship legacy second only to Teddy Roosevelt.

Sustainably develop our energy and natural resources.

Restore trust and be a good neighbor.

Ensure tribal sovereignty means something.

Increase revenues to support the Department and national interests.

Protect our people and the border.

Strike a regulatory balance.

Modernize our infrastructure.

Reorganize the Department for the next 100 years.

Achieve our goals and lead our team forward.

There is nothing in the priorities specific to reducing CO2 emissions. “Sustainably develop energy” does not mean protect the environment. The President currently is taking no action to resolve my issue and is 

[jreilly19ahsgov-blog]

Legislative Action

1 a,b.

Congressman Desaulnier:

In March 2018 when the Trump Administration said it planned to lessen the standards on vehicle efficiency regulations that the Obama Administration had implemented to address global warming, Congressman Desaulnier called for a boycott of any vehicle company that fails to meet California’s standards on greenhouse gas and fuel efficiency.  Global warming is a major issue for the Congressman and he has fought for this important issue and environmental programs to reduce the impact of global warming.  He has not yet sponsored any specific bills addressing global warming.

Like the Congressman, Senator Feinstein is a vocal advocate of taking action to stop global warming.  As she said at the Global Warming Conference back in February 2007--”So we have to open our eyes to the danger.  We have to confront it.  And we have to make major changes.” The Senator has sponsored a series of 5 bills related to global warming.

Senator Kamala Harris has been a Senator for about a year.  She is a supporter of actions to reduce global warming.  She has not sponsored any specific global warming bills yet although as a member of the Subcommittee on Superfund, Waste Management, and Regulatory Oversight she has questioned witnesses on the impact of climate change on natural disasters.

2

a.  Yes, there are many different bills that pertain to the issue of CO2 emissions, one of the more current ones in HOUSE BILL H.R. 1119.

b.HOUSE BILL H.R. 1119 Do power plants that burn coal waste need leeway on emissions standards.

c. This bill would ease emissions regulations for facilities which generate electricity by burning coal refuse. It undermines CAA regulations to benefit coal-fired power plants at the expense of public health.

d. Burning the coal waste to generate power simply trades one type of pollution for another.  It gives coal refuse power plants an unfair advantage over other energy producers.

e. I would vote against this bill. It is not reducing CO2 emissions or reduce global warming.  It was proposed by a Republican Representative from Pennsylvania to save coal jobs.  He said it would clean up the environment but burning coal refuse still causes pollution.

f. It was introduced in February 2017. It originated in the House. It was reviewed by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Environment Committee. It passed the House in March 2018.  The Senate has not voted. It is with the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

g. I am not satisfied with the current Federal legislation on reducing CO2 emissions.  The President does not believe in global warming and thus is doing little about it. The Republican bill just discussed is not reducing CO2 emissions and in fact is adding to it.

[jreilly19ahsgov-blog]

State Action

Catherine Baker:

a: I enjoy the outdoors with my family, and fight to protect our environment for future generations to enjoy. We have a responsibility to preserve and enhance our parks and open space, protect biodiversity, and keep our air and water clean. That’s why I’ve voted to protect our open spaces, and voted to do our part in fighting climate change.

b: I agree with what she stands behind because it is to help improve the environment and lower emissions to fight climate change.

c: She has voted for 19 bills to fight climate change and emissions.

Steve Glazer:

a:  In the Bay Area, we sometimes take our beautiful environment for granted. This is risky, because environmental stewardship requires ongoing vigilance. Our clean air and water, bays, forests, grasslands, and creeks won't stay protected unless they are a part of every discussion.

b: I agree with what he says because he is not only talking about how he voted on environmental issues but also saying everyone needs to take a stand against global warming. 

c: He has voted on many bills to do with the environment, one of which is SB-32 which has to do with global warming solutions.

Bill that Pertains

a: AB-378.

b: The bill was introduced in February 9th 2017.

c:The last major action of the bill is that it died on inactive file.

d: I think that this bill would have been helpful because it set up a government group to lower greenhouse gasses by 40% at 2020. I would have encouraged representatives to support this bill because it would allow the government to more closely monitor and regulate CO2 emissions.

[jreilly19ahsgov-blog]

The 3 Ps Assessment: Parties, Political Interest Groups, and PACs

National Group

The Green Party US

The Green Platform presents an eco-social analysis and vision for our country. In contrast to the major political parties that create their platforms through back-room deals by insiders and power brokers, they have establish close connections with every local Green Party and every Green individual.

They do this by following ten main platform values: Grassroots Democracy, Social Justice And Equal Opportunity, Ecological Wisdom, Non-Violence, Decentralization, Community-Based Economics, Feminism, And Gender Equity, Respect For Diversity, Personal And Global Responsibility, and Future Focus And Sustainability. I personally agree with their platform on Personal And Global Responsibility, encouraging individuals to take a stand against environmental degradation to enhance ecological balance and social harmony, and Ecological Wisdom, trying to help people understand we are a part of nature and not apart from nature. They are committed to extending the greening of waste management by encouraging the spread of such practices as reduce, return, reuse, and recycle. The Greens call for a halt to the destruction of habitats, which are being sacrificed to unqualified economic expansion. The Green Party also supports the spread of organic agriculture and the careful tending of our nation's precious remaining topsoil.

They have a list of policies they believe in a right at the top is Ecological Sustainability, which is based around the idea that the environment is essential to all life on earth and we as humans are destroying it, not only for us but for all who live on this earth. We are now living through the painful consequences of that arrogant, ignorant perspective, but the Green Party hopes to change that. Just like us in Lafayette, they are appalled by our country's withdrawal from serious efforts to limit greenhouse gases that are contributing mightily to global climate disruption. The Green Party strongly urges the United States to adopt an actively responsible position in this crisis and to take significant action to address the problem.

Green Party of California, P.O. Box 2828, Sacramento, California 95812 916-448-3437. The 2016 meeting will be held in Newark, New Jersey, July 13-16, 2017. There are plenty of meetings where Californians could attend, for example in LA, Oakland, San Francisco, and Sacramento, all where the people have a chance to speak out their opinions.

There are many ways to volunteer with them, you can help them with social media post and also you can help with fundraising and many other things.

I think that it is interesting that on their website, there is no way to go and volunteer in the community, and all they have is social media, or helping with there party.

State Group

Save The Bay

Giving San Francisco Bay a voice, mobilizing thousands of area residents to protect and restore the Bay for future generations.

This local group is dedicated to restoring wetlands, stopping pollution, banning plastic bottles, preventing bay fill, and adapt to climate change.

YES on Proposition 3 Water Quality and Water Supply BondNO on Proposition 6 Cuts Transit, Road Safety and Bridge Repairs, YES on San Francisco Proposition A Embarcadero Seawall Earthquake Safety Bond, YES on San Mateo County Measure W Transit and Transportation Improvement Sales Tax, YES on East Bay Regional Parks District Measure FF Shoreline and Open Space Parcel Tax Extension, YES on San Jose Measure T 

Infrastructure Bond for Public Safety and Disaster PreparednessYES on San Jose Measure V Affordable Housing Bond

They are located at 1330 Broadway, Suite 1800Oakland, CA 94612-2519. I could not find any meetings that they have held or are planning to hold.

They have lots of different ways to volunteer, public programs, student programs, corporate sponsorship programs and many other ways to volunteer.

Restoring Wetlands is a key part of their process to a cleaner bay and cleaner world, and they pride them selfs in making the Bay a better place and make the issue of pollution well known, that way people will take action. 

Compare and Contrast

They both seem equally prepared in their own way because The Green Party was very organized and laid out to gain supporters and to raise money, whereas Save The Bay was very volunteer based and actually getting work done, not just raising money.

PAC That Pertains to my Issue

next gen america

Since it’s founding as NextGen Climate in 2013, they’ve worked to fight climate change by advancing the transition to a clean energy economy. they’ve supported candidates who support climate action, and have fought to halt the Keystone XL pipeline and registered more than a million voters nationwide.

Total Receipts:$51,789,339 Total Spent:$50,935,555 Begin Cash on Hand:$778,101 End Cash on Hand:$1,631,885 Debts:$3,078,107 Independent Expenditures:$4,136,804 Date of last report:October 17, 2018

Total For Democrats: $3,448,604 Total Against Democrats: $25,000 Total For Republicans: $0 Total Against Republicans: $663,200

No particular people stood out to me but most of the people were Democrats.

[jreilly19ahsgov-blog]

Constitutional Issues

What is the name of the case? Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency

The term it was decided? 16th Term

Briefly summarize the facts of the case. Massachusetts and several other states petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), asking EPA to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases that contribute to global warming from new motor vehicles, because of the Clean Air Act which states that the EPA is required to regulate emissions and gas pollutants. But the EPA denied saying that the Clean Air Act does not require them to regulate emissions.

What is the constitutional question the justices were deciding?        1) May the EPA decline to issue emission standards for motor vehicles based on policy considerations not enumerated in the Clean Air Act?     2) Does the Clean Air Act give the EPA authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases?

Which constitutional provisions or amendments are in question? Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7521(a)(1).

What was the decision? It was a 5-4 decision in favor of Massachusetts, the Court rejected the EPA's argument that the Clean Air Act was not meant to refer to carbon emissions saying that the Clean Air Act was written with loose wording to make sure it never would become obsolete.

What precedent does this decision establish? It solidified the Clean Air Act and also set the EPA to a higher standard to prevent Global Warming.

Do you agree or disagree with the court’s decision? Explain. I agree with the court's decision because if this didn’t happen then companies would not be as heavily regulated and CO2 emissions would be through the roof.

[jreilly19ahsgov-blog]

Media Assessment of Issue

Liberal:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/runaway-climate-change-2030-report_us_5b8ecba3e4b0162f4727a09f

The subject of this article is how we as a nation, and world, are reaching a tipping point point, where there is no return, within our many diverse environments. The author of the article, Arthur Neslen, has written multiple influential articles circling the same theme, global climate change. The intended audience is the readers of the Huffington Post, mainly leaning towards climate change believers and liberals. This writing is rather biased because it only focuses on the negative aspects of human impacts. However, the author does not talk about why we use such significant amounts to live, for example we have learned to depend on cars and public transportations for means of getting around due to our large cities and overpopulation. The author fails to see that not only do we depend on so many modern technologies for our everyday lives but that the drawbacks would be traumatic on the human population. The significance of this article sentiment is very important. The repeated mentions about what will happen if we do not take a stand to stop CO2 emissions before it is too late is inspiring.

Conservative:

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/403270-trumps-latest-energy-plan-leaves-american-energy-and

The basis of this opinion piece is how President Trump is making it easier for coal companies to emit more CO2 contributing to the already standing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The author of the article is Rep. Jerry McNerney and states his view on the negative repercussions of Trump’s decision. The intended audience is both sides of the spectrum, liberal and conservative, to share his opinion on the matter at hand and possibly convince those opposed, mainly conservatives, to see differently. Even though The Hill is considered more conservative I think that this article is not very biased because it states both sides and also states facts from both sides, one side being climate change does not exist the other being it does. It could be counted as a minimal bias, however, the author states more evidence and arguments for the conservative view. I agree with this article because it addresses that CO2 emissions is a large threit and also that green energy is possible and can give more jobs.

Minimal bias:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-45084144?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/cmj34zmwm1zt/climate-change&link_location=live-reporting-story

The author of this article, Matt McGrath, speaks his views on global climate change in a neutral opinion and states that if we do not cut back drastically on CO2 emissions, the temperatures around the world will rise by at least 2 degrees celsius within the next year. This article does not have any bias simply because it does not affiliate with any side of the issue but rather only states what will happen if we don't take action. I agree with the article based on recent evidence and support its simple statement of the facts as is.

The similarities of the three articles is that they all talk about how if we do not take action we will suffer major consequences. The differences I found is that the conservative article was the only one to start the other side, being that it talked about how some people think CO2 emissions are not completely bad.

Personally the source that I identify with the most is the conservative one since it also talks about not only how going green would lower CO2 emissions but also help increase job opportunities so it would a win-win scenario, one of the main points in the Principles of Sustainability.

[jreilly19ahsgov-blog]

Conceptualizing the Issue and Assessing Types of Action

1. I chose Co2 emissions and greenhouse gasses, because I believe that if we don’t start to cut back on our emissions and realize that global warming is a REAL thing.

2.The reason this is a issue is because water levels are starting to rise, water temperatures are rising, the summers are getting hotter and the winter are getting colder.

3.I think we as a country and a world need to work together to cut back on our emissions and convert to more green ways of getting power, like solar or hydro electric.

4. Mark Butler: Shadow Minister Climate Change and Energy.

Zero Carbon Project:  Tackling climate change using blockchain and carbon offsets.

Dean Harris:  Research and Strategy Consultant, Labor Candidate for Warringah.

Acting Administrator Wheeler:  Acting Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Energy Department: Building the new energy economy. Reducing nuclear dangers & environmental risks.

U.S. EPA:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.