Showing posts with label Debbie Stabenow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Debbie Stabenow. Show all posts
Wow, what a week it has been, so far, with still more left to go. It's been light on the blog for the last couple of days, but as a result, this is going to be a rare look into some of the things I've been doing. It's been fun.
On Tuesday Consequence flew in the winners of the Organize to be Heard challenge. Those who generated the most calls, wrote the most letters, held a rally, etc., and racked up points based on these tasks, were invited to Washington. In all, there are 13 of them, five from Michigan, but the rest stretching all over the country. Four made cross-country flights from the west coast.
When the Michigan delegation arrived, they were able to walk right into a little protest being staged at Senator Lisa Murkowski's office, ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) committee and author of what the environmental community calls the "Dirty Air Act."
The Murkowski amendment is actually a "Disapproval Resolution" which states that the science of climate change is still in question and therefore the EPA should not be able to regulate greenhouse gases. There's an important point of distinction here that no one I have ever talked to thinks the EPA should be doing this. This is the job of Congress because regulating GHG's without any consumer protections or investments in manufacturing or clean energy could hurt the economy. But the EPA doesn't have a choice. It is a bound by a Supreme Court ruling back in 2007 to regulate GHG's, as they are considered a public health hazard.
The problem is that Murkowski's amendment doesn't tell the EPA no, it denies climate change. One Senate staffer said yesterday in a meeting that they would support her resolution if it didn't deny climate change. Many probably would.
[More]
On Tuesday Consequence flew in the winners of the Organize to be Heard challenge. Those who generated the most calls, wrote the most letters, held a rally, etc., and racked up points based on these tasks, were invited to Washington. In all, there are 13 of them, five from Michigan, but the rest stretching all over the country. Four made cross-country flights from the west coast.
When the Michigan delegation arrived, they were able to walk right into a little protest being staged at Senator Lisa Murkowski's office, ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) committee and author of what the environmental community calls the "Dirty Air Act."
The Murkowski amendment is actually a "Disapproval Resolution" which states that the science of climate change is still in question and therefore the EPA should not be able to regulate greenhouse gases. There's an important point of distinction here that no one I have ever talked to thinks the EPA should be doing this. This is the job of Congress because regulating GHG's without any consumer protections or investments in manufacturing or clean energy could hurt the economy. But the EPA doesn't have a choice. It is a bound by a Supreme Court ruling back in 2007 to regulate GHG's, as they are considered a public health hazard.
The problem is that Murkowski's amendment doesn't tell the EPA no, it denies climate change. One Senate staffer said yesterday in a meeting that they would support her resolution if it didn't deny climate change. Many probably would.