On Sunday, tens of thousands of people took to the streets of Manhattan in a march against climate change. While previous protests have been directed at the government as a whole, the message of Sunday's march was more focused as according to NPR, “protesters [called] on Biden to stop federal approvals of new fossil fuel projects, phase out oil and gas drilling on public lands, and declare climate change a national emergency.” This protest comes a week before the UN General Assembly in New York City.
Climate change is undoubtedly a large issue as we’ve just experienced the hottest summer in recorded history and climate related disasters such as floods and fires have decimated countries all across the globe from Canada, to Libya, to China. It seems that every week, a new weather related record is broken and it's clear something needs to change to knock the world off its current trajectory.
The protest and similar protests in Germany, England, Senegal, South Korea and India are the largest since the start of Covid-19.
Protesters at Sunday’s event seemed to hold a common sentiment: the Biden administration has not done nearly enough for climate change. Moreover, representatives of the associated groups have warned that if Biden hopes to secure the young population’s vote, their climate demands must be met.
A large part of Biden’s presidential campaign related to his plans to end climate change. In general, the Biden administration has done well in working towards this goal; Biden has enacted numerous bills and executive orders designed to reduce carbon emissions and transition towards renewable energy. The Biden administration has also made significant progress in removal of carbon dioxide, both through natural (trees) and technological means (scrubbers). However, the Biden administration approved new oil drilling permits allowing expansion of operations in the Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere.
The group has threatened that without clear action against new fossil fuel drilling, they will not support Biden in the upcoming election. But that raises the question: if not Biden, then who else? Biden will likely be the democrat’s best shot at winning the 2024 presidential election and no republican candidates have made promises nearly as progressive as Biden’s. Moreover, Trump, the leading republican candidate, “scoffs entirely at the idea that the planet is warming” (New York Times).
In a polarized two party system, factions such as liberal climate change activists have no choice but to vote for “the best option” that most nearly represents their ideas. Although they believe that Biden has not followed through on his promises, realistically, they hold little negotiating power in regard to his actions since at the end of the day, they will likely have to choose between Biden and someone worse (in respect to progressive climate change promises).
Climate change related reforms are also an example of the government exercising power not explicitly mentioned in the constitution. While the constitution doesn’t directly give the National Government power to work on climate change, it is a necessary part of ensuring the future and current safety of the population and is thus within the scope of the national government.
Sources:
https://www.npr.org/2023/09/17/1200027693/thousands-expected-to-march-in-new-york-to-demand-that-biden-end-fossil-fuels https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/17/climate/climate-protests-new-york.html https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/sep/17/march-to-end-fossil-fuels-new-york-city https://www.dw.com/en/climate-change-thousands-march-in-nyc-ahead-of-un-summit/a-66839873 https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/19/opinion/climate-summit-2023-un.html
12 comments:
Reducing domestic oil and gas production is unlikely due to the high demand for the commodity and the imposed sanctions on imports from producing nations such as Russia, Iran, and Venezuela. While the Biden administration may support a transition away from fossil fuels, the current scale of green energy production cannot compensate for the demand of energy within the United States. At such a critical moment where Americans and our European allies depend on affordable gas prices, reducing production is an unrealistic possibility. Biden's apprehension to reduce production may result in decrease support among young voters, however there lacks another democratic candidate to challenge his nomination, and unless they intend on joining the Green party, it is likely that they will continue to support him in presidential election. In my opinion, the best way to reduce fossil fuel usage is not by imposing limits on there production, but rather further investing in renewable energy sources that will overtime become a more accessible and cost effective option.
I agree that Biden will probably be the best shot democrats have in winning the house again but it's mostly becuase it's be most reasonable and some what secure choice that younger generations have. I dont think that any candidate will ever fully support or have the same views as the poeple that are voting for them. Factions as we have learned tend to influnce some policy and push for policies to go through and the younger generations are fighting for president administrations to take serious actions agaisnt the increase of climate change and push for policies and laws to go through as well. Although policies and laws can happen and make things better, I don't think that a end to oil and/or gas production will ever happen becuase everyone in the world depends on all that. Not everyone can offrad electric cars and advanded tech that help agaisnt the increase of climate change and not everyone is willing to fight agasint it. Some people in the goverment oppose it, like previous President Trump, who doesnt believe in the increase of climate change or belives in it at all. As you said, the Constituiton doesn't give National gpverment direct power to work on Climate change but it does have power to give block and categorical funds to states/local governments. Those funds can influence/push states to fight agaisn't climate change.
I think the major issues with the manner in which climate change is being handled right now are education and timeline. Unfortunately, accepting scientific evidence has become a partisan issue, meaning that if the pro energy-reform party (currently the democrats) doesn't have both the house and the senate, legislation is tough to pass. I think a major step to avoid this is for more states to make some form of environmental science or at least basic literacy in climate issues required, which would help make the next generation less averse to accepting long-standing scientific evidence. However, it may seem that we don't have enough time for that, given that we are already spending billions on natural disaster relief, and that number will only increase as climate patterns become more erratic. An implication of our gerontocracy is that climate change is an issue that will not affect many of our law-makers, and certainly not our president (because they'll be dead by the time climate change gets exceedingly worse). Protests like these are a step in the right direction to make noise and make people aware, but unfortunately it doesn't attack the root of the issue. Biden has made progress on the climate front, and is at least in some part being held back by society as a whole. We need to first invest heavily in non-fossil fuels, fund scientific research into nuclear fusion energy and battery technology, and only then will people be willing to decrease the consumption of fossil fuels. Another huge part of climate change is not fossil fuels but agriculture and livestock, which is a different and even more complicated and controversial issue, even within liberal groups (which is likely why the protestors didn't address it as much).
Despite the fact that climate change advocates will most likely have to vote for Biden as the most progressive policy maker on this issue, I think that it is still important for them to voice their opinions. This non-violent activism is the kind that will eventually incite much needed change. While the protests will keep the topic of climate change on people's minds, I don't think it will have a significant effect in the near future, especially because the demand for oil production has risen dramatically since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, when the U.S. placed sanctions on any and all Russian oil. The expansion of the production of oil will be necessary in the short term in order to keep oil and fossil fuels at an affordable price. Once we have stabilized the price of oil, it should then by made a priority to reduce carbon emissions and the overall effect of climate change around the world. The new policies that come of this prioritization will most likely be very controversial and further polarize our two party system, especially with Trump, the republican presidential candidate for 2024, not even believing that the planet is warming.
It will be interesting to see what effect (or lack of) these protests will have on Biden's actual policy. Like others have mentioned, protesters' threats that they won't support Biden in future presidential elections seem hollow because our current strict two-party system leaves them with no other likely choice. With this in mind, candidates are forced to become more moderate in order to gain votes, knowing they don't risk losing the support of radicals, which then leaves important issues like climate change unaddressed. Additionally, short 4-year terms mean that Biden won't have to face the long-term consequences of his policies while in office (and maybe not at all).
It is unfortunate that the current system has become so polarized between the two parties the voting for one or the other in mandatory to create political changes. As a candidate that is seeking the nomination of the Green Party, Cornel West will likely never win the presidential race. However he provides a challenge for Biden to create a more progressive policy in order to maintian the votes of liberals: particularly younger liberal voters. As someone who is elgible to vote in the next election and identifies as a liberal, I am interested to see if Biden will take action and listen to the the protests such as these. Should he not, he may lose a substantial amount of disgruntled young voters.
I believe this protest is a microcosm of a larger issue that pervades the American political system nowadays: people are now attributing political change strictly to the executive branch of the government, both blaming and praising Biden for his role in limiting climate change. In reality, the American public's attention should be focused on the legislative branch. This issue is apparent in that popular election turnout rates are much higher for the presidential election than for the Senate and House of Representatives. I believe protests targeted towards building a legislative branch of climate-conscious representatives would be more effective at accomplishing the goals of climate change activists, as we learned in class that the legislative branch inherently holds more power over the actions of the United States, and they already have all the justification they need under the Consitution to "secure the blessings of liberty and our posterity."
-Evan Li
I agree that the issue has become higher and higher on the priority list for votes - now that the effects feel more tangible (for those who believe in global warming), activism is more widespread and prominent. Unfortunately, a lack of discussion about climate-endangering policies such as the Willow Project in Alaska means that even people who would care about increased reliance on fossil fuels aren't raising their voice. Similar to others who have already commented, it is disheartening to know that America's two-party system doesn't put enough pressure on Biden to act - his administration knows that Climate Change activists would never vote for a GOP candidate anyways (at least the current ones up for nomination). Further, it is possible that extremely progressive climate change legislation that actually regulate companies may be deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, which currently holds a strong majority of Republican-leaning justices. Until both parties agree that global warming is a real and preventable issue, it will be extremely difficult to pass any forward-thinking legislation.
Climate change plays a strange role in our Capitalist and Federalist systems, with science clear that for our planet's better health, we should cut CO2 emissions and do better to leave environments and our effects on the climate as they were before the industrial revolution. However, the consequences of such inaction are averages or an overall increase that is less noticeable to the general public. Hence, corporations' incentive to make changes is less due to its less direct impact on our society. That is not to say the impact is negligible, but that it is not so apparently devastating and easier to link to specific events like storms or heatwaves, despite that they happen more regularly. This means that, despite the direct power to do so, it has become the state and federal government's role to regulate climate policies. However, inevitably as the federal system works, some states are slower to adopt the policy than others, which means many call for the federal government to adopt a policy forcing it across all states. This interaction has been convoluted throughout climate policy but this direct call from protesters speaks directly to one power that could have a major impact, and that is asking the president to veto all bills that enable more emissions. Regardless of the government's response to this or their future climate policies, the way the climate as a whole has impacted the country is certainly one the constitution was not equipped to make rules on, and thus has been interesting to see how different branches interpret and affect climate policy.
The issue of climate change is becoming more and more prominent as time goes on, and the pressure on Biden has increased heavily as his voters are depending on him to own up to his promises. As he has made some changes to go to more renewable energy that have been highlighted in this blog, he has also in a way gone against his promises, allowing things like oil drilling. These protesters threatening Biden to lose his vote if he doesn't do more seems a little odd, considering there is a high chance that the other candidates, if Republican, won't make progressive changes for climate change and global warming either. But overall, I think this blog was very informative, and I thought the image included of the protests themselves were very captivating as you can see how many young people are participating, especially in the front. I think this can connect to how young people understand the severity of acting soon as they are the ones who have to live with the consequences of global warming.
It is absolutely necessary that people take action towards ending climate change right away. It's disheartening that climate scientists/activists have been ignored and even ridiculed for so many years by older generations, and the younger generations are the ones who are going to have to pay the price for this ignorance and lack of understanding. Science and data are not myths and they aren't fake. The evidence is crystal clear. Humans are entering a dangerous zone in terms of climate, biodiversity, natural resources, land configuration, nutrients, ocean acidification, novel entities, aerosols/air pollution, and the ozone layer. Not to mention that Biden has not only been doing as much as he said he would, but also enacted a pretty hugely harmful act for the environment. The Willow Project, an oil drilling project in Alaska, was approved by the Biden administration in March of this year and will have disastrous effects on the environment. This project will not only worsen climate change but will also hurt the biodiversity in the area, which has already been at high risk, and put another obstacle in the path towards turning to renewable/clean energy. I can see in the visuals of the post that a lot of the protesters look very young. That has been a massive trend in terms of the demographics of people who are actively trying to combat climate change. It's frustrating that the people who were the main cause of the issue seem to care the least, and this massive problem has been forced into the hands of all the younger people. Action must be taken immediately and only with loud enough voices - like those of climate activists Greta Thunberg, Haven Coleman, and Leah Namugerwa - will government officials be forced to take more action.
It's regrettable that the current political landscape is so divided between the two major parties, making it almost mandatory to choose between them to instigate political changes. While Cornel West, running for the Green Party nomination, is unlikely to secure a presidential victory, his candidacy poses a challenge for Biden to adopt more progressive policies to retain the support of liberals, especially younger voters. As an eligible voter in the upcoming election who identifies as a liberal, I'm curious to see if Biden will respond to such challenges and heed the calls from protests. Failure to do so might result in a significant loss of support from disenchanted young voters.
Post a Comment