EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama's Climate Change Silence
The new report on the effects of global warming makes it clear we need to act. But a bill won't pass without a push from Obama
The top scientific advisers in the Obama administration on Tuesday unveiled a startling new report on what the latest climate science tells us is both already happening and likely to happen in the near future if planet-warming emissions continue unhindered. The report is astounding – in the foreseeable future, the United States could witness the submersion of the Florida Keys, up to 100 days of more-than-100-degree heat in places like Texas and the end of a domestic maple syrup industry.
For those who were paying attention, these were shocking findings. But it's not quite clear who, if anyone, is actually paying attention. Obama himself has been notably absent from the conversation, when his attention is likely the only voice that could move this issue forward.
The report was delivered not-so-coincidentally just one week before the House is expected to take up floor debate on the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the comprehensive climate and energy bill put forward by Democratic representatives Henry Waxman and Ed Markey. The bill's authors have been struggling to make a deal with representatives from agricultural states and moderates who have threatened to torpedo the bill if changes are not made.
Enter the White House – or at least Jane Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmostpheric Administration, and John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology. The two hosted a big roll out of the report on Tuesday in the Eisenhower Executive Office building, bringing the authors together to discuss their findings. It's clear that they hope this report will make a splash in Congress. The authors have held briefings on the Hill throughout the week.
"This report is a game-changer," said Lubchenco. "I think that much of the foot-dragging in addressing climate change is a reflection of the perception that climate change is way down the road, it's in the future and it only affects certain parts of the country. This report demonstrates in concrete scientific information that climate change happening now, and it's happening in our backyards."
They were clear though that the report isn't a policy prescription. "This report is not about a particular policy or a particular piece of legislation," said Holdren. "It is about the science telling us with ever greater clarity and persuasiveness why we need to act sooner rather than later." This is probably the right stance for Holdren and Lubchenco, who are tasked with guarding scientific integrity in the administration, and who are not in practice or by trade politicians.
The problem with this, though, is that the key political figure who should be out front on this has been absent. Obama, the single greatest spokesperson one could hope to have behind an issue, has been checked out when it comes to climate and energy policy, despite listing it as one of his top three concerns.
Instead, as Obama's science team was unveiling this major report, his fans received an e-mail dispatch via BarackObama.com rallying supporters on healthcare. And at that day's White House press briefing, climate change and energy did not come up a single time. There has been not a peep from Obama or other high-level officials to date on these findings. And while he hosted a meeting with swing Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee last month, it's been clear all along that he wants to let Congress hash out a deal on its own, rather than laying out his framework for action – entirely unlike healthcare, where the team has drawn clear bright lines on what Congress needs to do.
Meanwhile, what Congress has come up with on climate is a far cry from what Obama called for on the campaign trail. The target for 2020 emissions reductions in the bill currently under debate in the House is lower than what Obama called for on the campaign trail. His call for 100% auction of pollution permits has been almost completely disregarded, with the vast majority to be distributed free of charge under the House bill. He has also called for a doubling in the use of renewable energy – and the House bill includes a renewable electricity standard that industry representatives say won't get them anywhere near that goal.
And when Obama does talk about climate change, it's often in terms of a vague threat to the planet – with little discussion of the potential domestic consequences that the new report highlights so vividly. Most often, though, it's climate and energy policy is discussed simply as a way to grow a green economy, create new jobs and lessen dependence on foreign oil. There's little discussion of the actual environmental calamity that could occur in the absence of action, which at the heart of it is what these policies are supposed to address.
At the big unveiling of the climate report, I talked to Rick Piltz, who was a senior associate with the US Global Change Research Program for 10 years before leaving in March 2005 amid Bush-era censorship of climate reports. He raised exactly this point.
"So far the White House has adopted a messaging strategy on climate that very heavily emphasises green jobs and clean energy, which is crucial, but that doesn't have much of a vocabulary for impacts," said Piltz, who now runs Climate Science Watch. "It seems to me that you're really taking one of your weapons off the table if you never talk about why it's so important to do something [about climate change]. What are the consequences of not doing something?"
The reality is that the House bill is not as strong as the science says is needed to avert real crisis, though it's probably the best bill that they can come up with through the legislative process. Obama, however, could make use of his bully pulpit to affirm the need not just for action, but action that meets the crisis his science team has laid out. Without explicit discussion of these needs from the president himself, few are paying attention at all.
The White House is rumoured to be planning a week of events next week focused on the need for energy legislation, though there are no details on that yet. Let's hope that the week involves both participation from Obama himself, and some real discussion of climate change – for the sake of the Keys, Texas and maple syrup, not to mention all of us.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

12 Comments so far
Show AllOn the most important issues facing human kind: by my reckoning they include ever increasing war escalation, military spending that is disproportional to our human infrastructure, and - above all - climate issues.
Obama has demonstrated he is a pawn to forces larger than ourselves.
As this piece notes, any meaningful legislation will be torpedoed if it does not pass the corporate stink test rooted to profits, and outdated modes of awareness tied to entrenched corporate elites in various bio regions that are facing reforms.
Obama is trying to protect his constituency.
His constituency are the Corporations.
The group he opposes are the citizens.
Does Obama understand? He has the very best of science advisors. How come he doesn't seem to care enough to send the very best?
Obama clearly doesn't possess the vision, fearlessness and most importantly the desire to take on the forces that be and demand the building of a new green energy infrastructure for the country.
He's unquestionably more comfortable putting his head in the sand and "hoping" climate change isn't occurring as fast and ferociously as the folks with the pencil protectors and calculators are informing him.
Surely, in this country with a real unemployment rate around 18%, we can find enough people to build at least 500 windmills and install solar panels on at least 1000 roofs per day.
At this modest rate In less than a year, after building a grid to carry the new electrons, we could make a significant dent in our dependence on carbon based energy.
Obama's allegiance, whether offered or demanded, is now with Big Oil. His silence is proof.
Sadly the only CHANGE that'll occur under Obama's reign is CLIMATE.
Obama' has been very clear climate change: He opposes progressive action.
He has approved almost every plan for mountaintop mining that has come across his desk.
Will anyone mine that coal and not burn it?
He has extended and enlarged wars of petrochemical acquisition and control across the Middle East, making not just a huge investment in the hydrocarbon economy, but a huge gamble that it will extend for its generation or so.
American elites might take either of two largely incompatible strategies towards global warming, peak oil, and the rise of indigeneous economies--phenomena that, after all, all take place in the same world. They can streamline, reduce coercion, and move towards social and economic sustainability; or they can lever technological and hydrocarbon advantages to position individuals and classes advantageously as they sweep the world briskly into catastrophe.
Since he has come to public view, Obama has acted consistently with a very specific strategy. He supports military coercion and large-scale corporate control with sharply centralized hierarchy in almost every action. He arranges platitudes as precisely as he can so as to render his actions unclear to as many as possible for as long as possible.
Obama himself has been notably absent from the conversation, when his attention is likely the only voice that could move this issue forward.
He's down at The Cockpit watching the pole dancers shove $20 dollar bills down his crotch.
Climate "change we can believe in"?
Is this the best we've got??
Are there any truly genuine, honest, wise, loving, incorruptible leaders out there?? Who look out for humanity, not those who put profit before people??
The answer is....yes
In the late 1980's Maitreya forecast protecting the natural environment would become the "number one issue", after the saving of the millions of hungry and dispossessed humans.
His forecasts included everything from the release of Nelson Mandela (just prior to when it happened, after 29 yrs) to the downfall of Margaret Thatcher (when everyone least expected it, at the peak of her power), to the re-unification of East/West Germany.
Watch for the star-like luminary to appear in your skies. It's a rather grand entrance, for sure...but then again, this is no ordinary man!
www.WakeUpMankind.org
Kate Sheppard is an excellent journalist. Obama is an excellent politician (in the backyard of the Chicago School of Economics).
He recently said that ideas can not be suppressed. What about the idea that solar heat and power can be much cheaper than fossil fuels? Has this Administration adopted the ethics of business over reason? Will this President protect the corporation from the individual? Will global heating destroy civilization and the lives of billions?
Soon we will know more.
For 8 years, we were disgusted with W doing all this and then most who voted chose that "change you can believe in" ploop. Hey, there's plenty more climate change coming you can believe in.
Lest we forget, it is the duty of Congress to pass legislation, NOT THE PRESIDENT. The executive branch has the responsibility of 'enforcing' legislation. We as Americans, are skewing the perception of how our government is suppose to work. I for one, would appreciate it if the executive branch would remain silent on pending legislation and allow Congress to do it's job. We have had eight years of an executive branch proposing legislation and a "me too" legislature struting along behind. We need more Congressmen like Dr. Ron Paul, willing to actually READ the Constitution and try to get back to basics.
Run Ralph, run,
We've got your back!
snydly
Remember the bit about water mass changing position on the planet and tweaking the tectonic plates?
Check out USGS.gov/earthquake center/8-30days quake chart; compare at 1 and 2 years previous.
..."The direct influence of tides could influence the release of tectonic energy in the form of volcanism. Since there is considerable evidence that major volcanic eruptions have triggered periods of climatic cooling, this would enable small extraterrestrial effects to be amplified to produce more significant climate fluctuations."
---Weather Cycles-Real or Imaginary?, W.J. Burroughs, 1992, p.142.
It's a web of interlocking factors, forcings and the tricked-out states-changing of water. Only because of our technology do we have a chance to rectify our bad choices of energy production. We are literally throwing gas on a fire.
From the IPCC/Gore ice core data charts we see that we are at the top of a game-changing natural cycle that could be dealt with IF we stop ignoring it and stop adding fuel to the fire.
What will it be on the other side? HomoSapiens or the dead branch of HomoCleverass?
Do I buy a solar collector, ammo...or both?