March, 30 2021, 12:00am EDT
![Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012677/origin.jpg)
More Than 1,000 Scientists Sign Letter Urging Pres. Biden to Cut Emissions in Half by 2030
Following its re-entry into the Paris climate agreement, the Biden administration is currently devising a national plan to reduce global warming emissions--also known as a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC)--over the next decade.
WASHINGTON
Following its re-entry into the Paris climate agreement, the Biden administration is currently devising a national plan to reduce global warming emissions--also known as a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC)--over the next decade. Today, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released a letter signed by over 1,000 scientists urging President Joe Biden and his administration to commit to reducing U.S. heat-trapping emissions by at least 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The number of letter signers could continue to grow as the letter remains open for additional signatories.
According to these experts, this ambitious goal is both scientifically feasible and necessary in order to limit the worst impacts of climate change and achieve the principal goal of the Paris Agreement--limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius, and as close to 1.5 degrees Celsius as possible. They also emphasized that emissions reductions from the transportation and power sectors, which are the two leading sources for U.S. global warming emissions, must be prioritized, along with investments and policies that create good-paying jobs and further climate resilience, environmental justice, and racial equity.
Scientists who have already signed onto the letter include: Dr. Joel Clement, senior fellow at Harvard Kennedy School and UCS; Dr. Lauren Edwards, executive director of 500 Women Scientists and director of Fellowship for the Future; Dr. Anne Kapuscinski, director of the Coastal Science and Policy Program at the University of California-Santa Cruz and board chair of UCS; Dr. Michael Mann, distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Pennsylvania State University and lead author of the IPCC Third Assessment Report; Dr. Benjamin D. Santer, climatologist and atmospheric scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a MacArthur Fellowship recipient and an author of the IPCC Second Assessment Report; and Dr. T. Jane Zelikova, research scientist at the University of Wyoming and co-founder of 500 Women Scientists.
UCS has the following experts, many of whom are letter signatories, available to speak about how the United States can reduce its emissions in half over the course of the decade:
- Dr. Dave Cooke, senior vehicles analyst in the Clean Transportation Program at UCS. He is based in Washington, D.C. Click here to view his full biography.
- Dr. Rachel Cleetus, policy director and lead economist in the Climate and Energy Program at UCS. She has attended the UN climate talks and partnered with the international community on climate and energy policies for more than 14 years. Dr. Cleetus is based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Click here to view her full biography.
- Dr. Marcia DeLonge, research director and senior scientist in the Food and Environment Program at UCS. She is based in Oakland, California. Click here to view her full biography.
- Dr. Brenda Ekwurzel, director of climate science and senior climate scientist at UCS. She is a co-author of the Fourth National Climate Assessment. Dr. Ekwurzel is based in Washington, D.C. Click here to view her full biography.
- Dr. Peter Frumhoff, director of science and policy and chief climate scientist at UCS. He is the lead author of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. Dr. Frumhoff is based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Click here to view his full biography.
- Jonna Hamilton, senior manager of government affairs for the Clean Transportation Program at UCS. She is based in Washington, D.C. Click here to view her full biography.
- Dr. Adrienne Hollis, senior climate justice and health scientist at UCS. She is based in Washington D.C. Click here to view full her biography.
If you would like to talk to an expert, please contact UCS Senior Communications Officer Ashley Siefert Nunes.
On March 8, UCS joined the World Resources Institute, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council and University of Maryland for a media briefing where experts put forth detailed scientific analyses showing how the United States could achieve such a target. To watch the recording of this media briefing featuring Dr. Cleetus, click here.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
LATEST NEWS
'Not in Our Name': Hundreds Arrested at Jewish-Led Protest Ahead of Netanyahu Speech
"The Israeli government is using U.S funding and weapons to slaughter and starve Palestinians in Gaza," said one peace advocate. "Americans—including Jewish Americans—are disgusted by our own government's complicity in this genocide."
Jul 24, 2024
Hundreds of demonstrators were arrested inside a U.S. House building on Tuesday while protesting the American government's continued support for Israel's assault on Gaza and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's forthcoming speech to Congress.
The protest was led by Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and joined by members of several other organizations, including IfNotNow, Democratic Socialists of America, and Shoresh, a group of anti-Zionist Israelis based in the U.S.
JVP said 400 protesters—including more than a dozen rabbis—were arrested at the peaceful sit-in at the Cannon House Office Building rotunda. Protesters wore shirts that read "Not in Our Name" and "Jews Say Stop Arming Israel."
"For nine months, we've watched in horror as the Israeli government has carried out a genocide, armed and funded by the U.S.," said Stefanie Fox, JVP's executive director. "Congress and the Biden administration have the power to end this horror today. Instead, our president is preparing to meet with Netanyahu and congressional leadership has honored him with an invitation to address Congress. Enough is enough."
President Joe Biden and Congress "must listen to the people," Fox added. "We need an arms embargo now to save lives."
Jane Hirschmann, a daughter of Holocaust survivors and member of JVP, said that "the Israeli government is using U.S. funding and weapons to slaughter and starve Palestinians in Gaza."
"Americans—including Jewish Americans—are disgusted by our own government's complicity in this genocide," said Hirschmann. "The only way to reach a cease-fire and build a just future is for the U.S. to stop sending weapons to Israel now."
"Instead of platforming a war criminal, Congress should be imposing an arms embargo and using its leverage to force Netanyahu to end the bombing and bloodshed."
Netanyahu's visit to Washington, D.C. comes as the death toll from Israel's large-scale assault on Gaza nears 40,000 after almost 10 months of relentless bombing that has decimated much of the enclave's infrastructure and displaced 90% of its population. Earlier this week, Israel's military ordered the evacuation of another area previously designated as a safe zone and killed dozens of Palestinians in a fresh round of attacks.
Netanyahu has addressed Congress more than any other world leader. As The Washington Post's Ishaan Tharoor noted Wednesday, "The first time Netanyahu addressed Congress was nearly three decades ago in 1996, when he and his right-wing allies had just come to power in the wake of the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, whose efforts toward forging peace with the Palestinians that Netanyahu had opposed."
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) formally invited Netanyahu to speak to a joint meeting of Congress in late May, just days after it became clear that Israeli forces used U.S.-made bombs in a devastating attack on a camp of displaced Palestinians.
"It is utterly shameful that U.S. lawmakers would invite war criminal Netanyahu to address Congress," JVP communications director Sonya Meyerson-Knox said in a statement after Tuesday's protest. "We are hundreds of American Jews calling on our elected leaders to stop funding and fueling this genocide."
In addition to grassroots protests against Netanyahu's visit—which are set to continue ahead of and during his speech—dozens of Democratic lawmakers are planning to boycott the prime minister's address, which is scheduled to begin at 2:00 pm ET. Following his speech to Congress, Netanyahu is planning to meet with President Joe Biden at the White House on Thursday before traveling to Mar-a-Lago to meet with Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee.
Vice President Kamala Harris, who is expected to become the Democratic presidential nominee following Biden's exit from the 2024 race, has opted to attend a previously scheduled event in Indianapolis instead of presiding over Netanyahu's remarks.
Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), one of the progressive lawmakers boycotting Netanyahu's speech, said in a statement Tuesday that "by bestowing Prime Minister Netanyahu with a joint address, Congress is not only continuing to green-light genocide; it is actively celebrating the man at the forefront of that genocide."
"Instead of platforming a war criminal, Congress should be imposing an arms embargo and using its leverage to force Netanyahu to end the bombing and bloodshed that has already killed over 39,000 Palestinians and failed to ensure the safe release of the vast majority of hostages, all while decimating schools, hospitals, homes, and humanitarian convoys," Bush added.
In remarks on the floor of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also called Netanyahu a war criminal and said it is a "disgrace" that he was invited to speak to Congress.
"Netanyahu is a right-wing extremist and a war criminal who has devoted his career to killing the prospects of a two-state solution and lasting peace in the region," said Sanders. "He should not be welcomed to the United States Congress. On the contrary, his policies in Gaza and the West Bank should be roundly condemned and his right-wing extremist government should not receive another nickel from U.S. taxpayers."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Tens of Thousands Call for Federal Marijuana Decriminalization
"When it comes to the DOJ's proposal to reschedule marijuana, public opinion could not be clearer," said a campaigner with Drug Policy Alliance, which analyzed public comments on the pending change.
Jul 23, 2024
Shortly after the public comment period for the Biden administration's proposed rule to reschedule marijuana closed, a reform group on Tuesday released an analysis showing that the majority of submissions advocate for federal decriminalization.
When President Joe Biden pardoned U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents convicted of simple federal marijuana possession in October 2022, he also ordered the departments of Justice (DOJ) and Health and Human Services to review how cannabis is treated under the Controlled Substances Act.
Marijuana is currently Schedule I, the federal law's most restrictive category, despite dozens of states allowing adult recreational or medicinal use. In May, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which is part of the DOJ, proposed a shift to Schedule III and initiated the public comment period that ended Monday.
"Participation in public comment processes gives the American public a chance to speak from personal experience and provide feedback on proposed legal changes—and it gives the federal government an opportunity to adjust their proposals to reflect public opinion," said Cat Packer of the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), which reviewed submissions.
"When it comes to the DOJ's proposal to reschedule marijuana, public opinion could not be clearer," added Packer, DPA's director of drug markets and legal regulation. "Rescheduling is simply not enough."
As DPA detailed in a statement, after analyzing the 42,910 public comments, the group found:
- 69.3% or 29,750 of comments support descheduling, decriminalizing, or legalizing marijuana at the federal level;
- 42.4% or 18,207 commentsmention the need for federal marijuana reform to advance racial justice or social equity; and
- 24% or 10,327 comments were submitted through a public comment tool hosted by United for Marijuana Decriminalization (UMD), a coalition that DPA convenes. These comments were the result of months of grassroots outreach to communities that have been impacted by marijuana criminalization.
"The people are demanding the Biden administration do more to deliver on the marijuana reforms that communities deserve," Packer said, pointing to previous promises from Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic nominee to face former Republican President Donald Trump and U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) in the November election.
Packer highlighted that nearly half of the comments "recognize that ending federal criminalization is key to achieving racial justice and social equity," and "this is something that the Biden administration has repeatedly identified as a priority in their marijuana reform efforts."
"However, under Schedule III, communities of color would still face disproportionate harms and lifelong consequences from federal marijuana criminalization," she explained. "Under Schedule III, people could still be jailed or deported for marijuana violations, even in states where it is legal. Under Schedule III, people could lose their jobs, their housing, their... food stamp benefits, or even lose custody of their children for marijuana violations."
Earlier this month, DPA and Human Rights Watch released a 91-page report detailing how the U.S. War on Drugs has impacted the lives of immigrants, "punishing people with deep connections to the United States, where they have formed families, attained education, and built their lives."
Packer argued Tuesday that "if the Biden administration wants to be responsive to public opinion and live up to their own stated values of racial justice and repair, marijuana must be federally decriminalized and additional actions must be taken to end the lifelong collateral consequences that result from marijuana criminalization."
"This is a galvanizing moment for our movement for drug policies grounded in health, equity, and reinvestment," she stressed. "Even if marijuana is ultimately rescheduled through this process, there are additional actions that President Biden and Congress can take. In the coming weeks and months, we will continue working with our allies to urge President Biden to take a whole government approach to advance equity in federal marijuana policy and mitigate the harms of criminalization."
"That means expanding pardons and commutations, protecting state marijuana programs, and directing federal agencies to cease punishing people for marijuana use," she said. "We know that the people and the evidence are on our side. It is time that our federal government listened."
Despite support from top figures including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), there is little hope that the current divided Congress would decriminalize marijuana. As Marijuana Momentreported shortly before House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) was voted into his role last year, he "has consistently voted against cannabis-related legislation."
The cannabis industry analytics firm Headset on Tuesday also reviewed public submissions for the new proposal and noted that "this comment period has shattered previous DEA records, surpassing even the highly contentious 2020 telemedicine rules that garnered approximately 38,000 comments."
"To put this into perspective, that's roughly equivalent to the entire population of Juneau, the capital city of Alaska," the firm highlighted. "It's as if every resident of a small state capital took the time to voice their opinion on this crucial issue."
Headset found that 92.45% of comments were in favor of changing cannabis' schedule, with 61.7% of them advocating for descheduling and 38.3% supporting a shift to a less restrictive category. Just 7.55% wanted to retain Schedule I.
"Those supporting rescheduling emphasized potential medical benefits, increased research opportunities, and alignment with state laws," Headset said. "Proponents of descheduling, the largest group, advocated for complete legalization, citing social justice concerns, economic opportunities, and personal liberty."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Woah!': FTC Applauded for Launching Inquiry Into Surveillance Pricing
"Firms that harvest Americans' personal data can put people's privacy at risk," FTC Chair Lina Khan said. "Now firms could be exploiting this vast trove of personal information to charge people higher prices."
Jul 23, 2024
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission on Tuesday launched an investigation into surveillance pricing and requested information from eight companies on the practice.
The FTC inquiry will look at the effect of surveillance pricing—using data on consumers' behavior or characteristics to manipulate the price for them as individuals—on privacy, competition, and consumer protection.
The agency asked Mastercard, JPMorgan Chase, Accenture, and McKinsey for information on the practice, as well as four less well-known companies that service major corporations.
"Firms that harvest Americans' personal data can put people's privacy at risk," FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a statement. "Now firms could be exploiting this vast trove of personal information to charge people higher prices."
"Americans deserve to know whether businesses are using detailed consumer data to deploy surveillance pricing, and the FTC's inquiry will shed light on this shadowy ecosystem of pricing middlemen," she added.
1. Firms harvest a trove of Americans’ personal data, from your browsing history to your biometrics. Now firms could be using this data to target you with an individualized price.
Today @FTC launched an inquiry into these surveillance pricing tactics. https://t.co/G4uc8lHWOV
— Lina Khan (@linakhanFTC) July 23, 2024
Progressive advocacy groups, which have long considered Khan to be one of their strongest allies in the Biden administration, and which argue that discriminatory pricing is unfair, celebrated the FTC's announcement.
"We're thrilled to see the FTC crack down on the dystopian practice of surveillance pricing," Lee Hepner, legal counsel at the American Economic Liberties Project, said in a statement. "It's chilling to think that companies have so much control over our lives that they can leverage personal data they've harvested—including your location, demographic, and shopping history—to turn our habits against us and hike up prices on essential goods. But it's already happening."
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens also praised the FTC move, warning that "a personalized price might sound nice, but it is actually a three-part corporate strategy to spy on you, isolate you, and overcharge you."
"Today's investigation is an important step in cracking down on the methods big corporations use to spy on consumers to rip them off," Owens said in a statement.
Emily Peterson-Cassin, a director at Demand Progress Education Fund, said in a statement that Tuesday's announcement was "another strong sign that the FTC is fighting for consumer power over corporate power."
Zephyr Teachout, a law professor at Fordham University who has helped lead the opposition to surveillance pricing, reacted with excitement on Tuesday.
"Woah!" she wrote on social media. "The FTC is going there! So excited to see the FTC launching a full study into how companies use data to serve different prices to different people. We know the incentive and capacity is there, but the reality of surveillance pricing has been a triple-locked black box!"
Advocates of surveillance pricing sometimes call it personalized pricing and argue that it efficiently allocates resources. Such pricing questions are the subject of great interest among business school academics, especially at elite institutions such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University, according to a detailed article in The American Prospect last month.
A crackdown on the practice could conceivably have support across the political spectrum. Stock guru Jim Cramer of CNBC—a frequent and vociferous critic of Khan—praised the FTC's announcement on air on Tuesday, while expressing disbelief that he was doing so.
7/ Even @jimcramer agrees that surveillance pricing is not an honest or ethical way to treat customers.
“How could you live with yourself?” if you’re a business that uses this strategy, he asked this morning.
“That is a great report. I agree with [@FTC].” pic.twitter.com/23HEDk8Yqf
— American Economic Liberties Project (@econliberties) July 23, 2024
All five FTC commissioners, including two Republicans, voted to move forward with the investigation, which will focus on intermediary firms—"the middlemen enabling firms to algorithmically tweak and target their prices," according to a blog post the FTC also published Tuesday.
The requests for information don't indicate that the eight firms engaged in wrongdoing, but rather that they can be useful sources of information, an unnamed FTC official toldThe Hill.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular