March, 11 2022, 12:44pm EDT
Carbon Offset Legitimization Would Undermine Climate Progress, New Report Argues
The Revolving Door Project released a new "Industry Agenda" report today breaking down the systemic flaws and increasing relevance of the carbon offset industry as the favored greenwashing strategy for big industries and high-polluting nations. The report highlights the policies and executive branch agencies of interest to players in both voluntary and compliance carbon markets in the United States.
WASHINGTON
The Revolving Door Project released a new "Industry Agenda" report today breaking down the systemic flaws and increasing relevance of the carbon offset industry as the favored greenwashing strategy for big industries and high-polluting nations. The report highlights the policies and executive branch agencies of interest to players in both voluntary and compliance carbon markets in the United States.
The report also highlights some key Biden administration officials who have expressed support for carbon market-friendly policies. These include Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm, who has expressed support for carbon capture and offsets as climate solutions; John Morton, Climate Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury, who previously worked at a climate change investment firm heavily involved in carbon markets; and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, who has advocated for creating a carbon bank within the Department of Agriculture.
Report co-author Hannah Story Brown said: "As the calamities of climate change accelerate, high-polluting industries are lining up behind purported market solutions to the climate crisis, disguising business-as-usual behind a rash of 'net zero' pledges. The Biden administration must resist the siren call of the carbon market's false promises, and instead coordinate an executive plan that supports actual economy-wide decarbonization."
Read the Carbon Offset Industry Agenda report here.
The Revolving Door Project (RDP) scrutinizes executive branch appointees to ensure they use their office to serve the broad public interest, rather than to entrench corporate power or seek personal advancement.
LATEST NEWS
Supreme Court Urged to Reject 'Intolerable and Dangerous' Trump Immunity Claim
"Trump's legal theory defies common sense and would enable an almost limitless tyranny," warned Public Citizen's president.
Apr 08, 2024
Monday was the deadline for amicus briefs in Donald J. Trump v. United States, and several organizations and experts took the opportunity to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the former Republican president and current candidate's immunity claim.
Trump is claiming that because he was still in office when he engaged in actions that led to one of his federal indictments, he should be immune from criminal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 loss to Democratic President Joe Biden, which culminated in the January 6, 2021 insurrection.
Lower courts have rejected his argument. The nation's highest court—which has a right-wing supermajority that includes three Trump appointees and Justice Clarence Thomas, whose activist wife Ginni Thomas was involved in efforts to block Biden's win—agreed to take the case in February.
Ahead of arguments on April 25, the justices received friend-of-the-court briefs from the ACLU, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Common Cause, and Public Citizen as well as coalitions of law professors and constitutional scholars, former government and military officials, national security professionals, historians, and business leaders, among others.
"The former president seeks the power to engage in criminal activity and forever evade the accountability that all others must face."
"In this case, the former president seeks the power to engage in criminal activity and forever evade the accountability that all others must face," states the ACLU brief. "At root, it concerns nothing less than whether the United States is a government of laws in which all citizens, including the president, are subject to the nation's criminal laws, or one in which the president stands immune from criminal prosecution even for blatantly criminal conduct, and even after leaving office."
As one group of constitutional experts explained: "Trump argues that he enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions committed during his tenure as president, and that his acquittal at an impeachment trial bars his subsequent prosecution. Both arguments reflect a misreading of constitutional text and history as well as this court's precedent."
Public Citizen pointed out that "the president has no specific, constitutionally assigned role in the conduct of presidential elections. And any assertion that a president's authority empowers him to conspire to overturn the result of a valid election and retain power beyond his term in office would be absurd."
"Accepting a view of the outer limits of presidential authority that would sweep in a conspiracy to overturn an election and remain in office unlawfully would have exceptionally broad implications and threaten severe damage to our constitutional democracy," the watchdog warned. "Criminal prosecution... is the sole mechanism for holding an unscrupulous president accountable for unlawfully attempting to hold on to power."
As the group's president, Robert Weissman, summarized in a statement: "Trump's legal theory defies common sense and would enable an almost limitless tyranny. Nothing in the Constitution—which aims to prevent tyranny—supports Trump's theory."
The retired military leaders—including several admirals and generals—said that "the notion of such immunity, both as a general matter, and also specifically in the context of the potential negation of election results, threatens to jeopardize our nation's security and international leadership. Particularly in times like the present, when anti-democratic, authoritarian regimes are on the rise worldwide, such a threat is intolerable and dangerous."
The group of national security experts similarly stressed that Trump's "broad view of immunity would imperil U.S. national security, weaken the authority of the president, and throw confusion into the chain of command of the armed forces, which the president, as commander-in-chief, commands."
"This court must unequivocally reject the proposed doctrine of presidential immunity and leave no doubt in the minds of petitioner, the public, and all future occupants of the Oval Office that the president, like all individuals subject to the reach of the U.S. legal system, is not above the law," they continued.
Noting another global impact of the court's decision, the Leadership Now Project wrote that "American business leaders depend upon the rule of law as the anchor of stability and predictability in our economy."
"If criminal conduct by our highest officials goes unchecked and the rule of law is subverted, the conditions necessary to sustain the orderly free market that drives American prosperity and its economic competitiveness are destabilized," the group added. "If the challenged conduct was allegedly committed by a former president while in office, this fundamental threat is exacerbated. In this context, it is existentially important to uphold as unshakeable the sacrosanct American principle of equality and accountability under law."
In addition to the broad arguments and warnings, some groups highlighted specific issues that have come up. For example, CREW pointed out that Trump supporters are asking the high court to "find Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment invalid."
"This court lacks jurisdiction to consider that issue now and reaching it prematurely would compromise foundational public interests," said the organization. "Further, the special counsel's appointment is clearly valid."
After Trump confirmed he was running for president again, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden appointee, selected Smith to oversee the probes that led to the election interference case and another federal case involving classified documents.
Smith on Monday submitted a 66-page brief arguing that "a bedrock principle of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law—including the president. Nothing in constitutional text, history, precedent, or policy considerations supports the absolute immunity that petitioner seeks."
Along with the federal cases, Trump faces two state-level criminal cases: one in Georgia related to 2020 election interference and another in New York, resulting from hush money payments during the 2016 cycle. The trial for the latter is scheduled to begin April 15. He also has ongoing civil fraud and defamation cases in New York.
Throughout this election cycle, several groups and legal scholars have argued that Trump is disqualified from holding office again—under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—because he engaged in insurrection. After Colorado disqualified him from its primary ballot, the case reached the Supreme Court as Trump v. Anderson.
The justices last month ruled 9-0 that Congress is responsible for enforcing the relevant section of the amendment against federal officeholders and candidates—leaving a possibility of future legal challenges if Trump beats Biden in November.
Comparing that case with this one, Common Cause wrote Monday that "to date, the court has treated the two cases in dissimilar ways that seem to favor Mr. Trump. In Trump v. Anderson, where a state court had questioned Mr. Trump's eligibility for the ballot, the court acted decisively to reverse that decision and remove the cloud over his eligibility."
"In this case, however—where a criminal case against Mr. Trump, involving largely the same underlying facts as in Trump v. Anderson, has been stayed pending resolution of his appeals—the court has appeared to act much more slowly in its decision-making, with the potential effect of forcing Americans to vote on Election Day without knowing whether Mr. Trump is guilty or innocent," the group added, urging the justices to "decide this case rapidly" so a trial can occur before voters head to the polls.
"With barely six months between the date of oral argument and the election, this court is left with little margin for error," Common Cause emphasized. "But it does have a last, clear chance to prevent Mr. Trump's meritless immunity defense from derailing trial. The court should seize that opportunity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Big Deal': Progressives Applaud New Biden Plan to Provide Student Debt Relief for Millions
"Progressives have led the fight for student debt cancellation, and Joe Biden has responded," said one advocate.
Apr 08, 2024
Organizers who have tirelessly pushed for student debt cancellation applauded on Monday as President Joe Biden—who years ago dismissed the proposal as "unrealistic"—announced a plan to help tens of millions of Americans burdened with educational debt.
Biden announced his new plan at Madison Area Technical College in Madison, Wisconsin, less than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his previous program, which would have provided relief to 40 million borrowers by canceling up to $20,000 in debt per person.
Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director of the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) credited Biden with publicly resolving to find a solution for struggling Americans "only hours after the Supreme Court callously struck down his original debt relief program."
The president's new plan would wipe out the entire debt amount held by about 4 million people, give debt relief of at least $5,000 to 10 million borrowers, and reduce the undergraduate and graduate student debt of 23 million people whose interest would be eliminated.
The plan would allow millions of young people to "finally get on with their lives instead of their lives being put on hold," said the president.
Student debt is "not just a drag on them, it's a drag on our local economies," Biden said in Madison. "When you can't afford to buy a home, start that small business, chase that career that you'd been dreaming about for a long time."
I said I wouldn't back down from using every tool at our disposal to get student loan borrowers the relief they need.
That's why today we're announcing new plans that, if implemented, would cancel student debt for millions more. pic.twitter.com/rNiCxzzlU3
— President Biden (@POTUS) April 8, 2024
Bañez said in addition to bringing "tens of millions of borrowers one step closer to realizing the life-changing impact of student debt cancellation," Biden's announcement "also offers a roadmap for how this administration should deal with a hostile Supreme Court majority captured by right-wing special interests."
"Call the high court's bluff by aggressively using the full power of the law and delivering for working people," she said. "For too long, student debt has blocked homeownership, inhibited savings, limited career opportunities and economic mobility, and choked at the promise of entire generations. Taken together, the Biden administration's actions are setting a path to a debt-free, brighter economic future for more than 30 million Americans."
"Now, the president must move fast and finish the job," she added.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said pressure from "borrowers, activists, and progressives in Congress" pushed Biden to develop a new plan after his original program was struck down.
"Progressives were the earliest and loudest champions of student debt cancellation, and this president is delivering—despite Republican obstruction," she said. "We are proud to continue our partnership with the Biden administration on its implementation of this and other pathways to cancellation."
The Biden administration said it expected Republicans to file legal challenges, which could prevent the new provisions from going into effect by the time Americans choose between Biden and former President Donald Trump in November.
"President Biden will use every tool available to cancel student loan debt for as many borrowers as possible no matter how many Republican officials stand in his way," Karine Jean Pierre, the White House press secretary, told The New York Times.
"At a time when young people across the country are struggling economically, President Biden's decision to reduce the outrageous level of student debt they face will be extremely helpful."
Americans who now owe more in student debt than the amount that they originally borrowed due to interest would have up to $20,000 in interest wiped out. People who make less than $120,000 per year could have all of their interest canceled.
People who took out federal loans for undergraduate degrees and began repaying them more than 20 years ago would have their debt automatically canceled. The same would apply for people who began repaying their graduate degree loans more than 25 years ago.
People who attended colleges that have since lost their certification or their eligibility to participate in federal student aid would have their debt wiped out, and Americans who are particularly burdened with other necessary expenses could apply to have their debt canceled.
The program "will change lives," said U.S. Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) as she pledged to continue her push to "cancel student debt fully."
Andrew O'Neill, legislative director for progressive advocacy group Indivisible, noted that combined with the $146 billion in relief Biden has already provided to about 4 million borrowers through executive actions and other measures, "more than 30 million folks will now get relief from Biden's programs."
"Progressives have led the fight for student debt cancellation, and Joe Biden has responded," O'Neill told the Times.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a longtime advocate of student debt cancellation and tuition-free college, applauded Biden for "using every possible tool to reduce student debt."
Astra Taylor, a filmmaker and leading student debt cancellation activist, noted that Biden's plan falls short of complete debt relief, but said the power of economic justice campaigners' advocacy is undeniable, considering the president's decision to prioritize student debt.
"A reminder that a U.S. president leaning into debt cancellation like this was unimaginable not that many years ago," said Taylor. "Do we need to keep pushing so actions match words? Yes. Do we need to keep fighting to win not only debt relief but free college? Of course."
"Organizing," she added, "is everything."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressives Unveil 10-Point Agenda to 'Prevent Fascist Takeover' in 2024
"With our support and voice, progressives may persuade and enable President Biden to achieve more progressive policy objectives during his second term and prevent a fascist takeover."
Apr 08, 2024
A coalition of national progressive advocacy groups on Monday released a list of 10 policy objectives that it believes President Joe Biden should embrace to consolidate support for his high-stakes electoral rematch against presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump.
The platform—released by Our Revolution, Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), and the State Democratic Party Progressive Network—frontloads the threat that Trump and the fascist movement at his back pose to basic freedoms and democracy itself.
"The 2024 presidential election presents a challenge for progressives to preserve and amplify our voice while fighting the most dangerous threat to U.S. democracy in our nation's history," reads the platform's introduction. "Our best strategy to advance both goals is to become state and national Biden delegates at the state and national Democratic Party conventions, and to elect Joe Biden for a second term. Throughout this process, we must advocate for a progressive policy agenda that builds and expands upon progressive elements of President Biden’s original Build Back Better (BBB) plan."
"With our support and voice," the document adds, "progressives may persuade and enable President Biden to achieve more progressive policy objectives during his second term and prevent a fascist takeover."
The first plank of the agenda urges Biden and the Democratic Party to "develop and repetitively use more aggressive messaging against and educate the public about the dangers of fascism including exposing and condemning Project 2025, the fascist blueprint for a second Trump administration."
It also calls for more concrete policy changes such as filibuster reform, term limits for Supreme Court justices, and the passage of robust voting rights legislation in the face of l arge-scale Republican attacks on the franchise.
Other planks of the agenda include working to end the privatization of public goods such as housing and healthcare, using "all means available" to raise the long-stagnant federal minimum wage and slash poverty, raising taxes on billionaires and corporations, overturning the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, canceling student debt and establishing tuition-free public college, expanding Medicare benefits, declaring a climate emergency, and conditioning U.S. aid to Israel.
The groups said Monday that they plan to submit the policy agenda to the Democratic Party Platform Committee ahead of the Democratic National Convention in August.
"We intend this to be a unifying effort, urge the second Biden administration to fulfill the 10 policy objectives outlined in these proposals, and invite the Democratic presidential campaign to engage in dialogue with us to achieve unity and progressive electoral support around them," the progressive coalition said Monday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular